Welcome to the AARoads thread for NFL discussion since 2020!
For the 2021 season >> click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2571129#msg2571129)
For the 2022 season >> click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2708526#msg2708526)
For the 2023 season >> click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2818975#msg2818975)
For the 2024 season >> click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2908307#msg2908307)
Original title: NFL (2020 Season)
Because the dust has hardly settled from Super Bowl 54, it's time to start talking about the offseason and looking ahead to the 2020 NFL season!
There are plenty of draft and free agency narratives in the NFL this year: Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Tom Brady, and Drew Brees, just to name a few.
Can teams that had unexpected success this year replicate that next year? (SF 49ers, Buffalo Bills, Tennessee Titans...) Can teams that underperformed make a playoff run next year? (Dallas Cowboys, LA Rams, Cleveland Browns...)
Will the Patriots extend their dynasty? Can the Ravens supplant the Chiefs as the team to beat in the AFC?
Will the 2020 NFC West be the greatest division of all time? Can the Saints overcome their run of postseason woes?
I'm excited to see all that and more unfurl over the next 12 months! :coffee:
My way-to-early Super Bowl matchup for next year: Ravens vs. Saints! :nod:
Justin Herbert will have the best overall stats of any rookie next year. (Helps he'll be picked later in the draft for a better team)
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
You forgot the XFL
Quote from: Rothman on February 04, 2020, 05:20:46 PM
You forgot the XFL
That's going to require a separate thread.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 08:17:50 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
From ESPN:
QuoteThe games will be held on back-to-back Sundays; dates and opponents will be announced in April when the league reveals the schedule. However, the Jaguars did protect home games against Pittsburgh and Chicago, so the opponents will come from this list: Houston, Indianapolis, Tennessee, Cleveland, Detroit and Miami.
It's likely to be between mid-October and mid-November because the annual Florida-Georgia game is being played at TIAA Bank Field on Oct. 31 and the Jaguars have either played their London game that week or had a bye week at that time.
(A practical note: The NFL traditionally aims to have a London game the last Saturday of October because the time difference is one hour less due to the US remaining on DST a week longer than Western Europe does. Who knows whether that would influence the timing for the Jaguars' games.)
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:05:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 04, 2020, 05:20:46 PM
You forgot the XFL
So will most of America
I might have considered going to the XFL game at Audi Field this Saturday except the weather is supposed to be atrocious. I made it to one soccer game last season and it seemed like a nice little stadium, though we didn't get to look around a whole lot.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 08:17:50 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
What are you talking about? Of course they're playing the Bears and Steelers. Just not in London.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 05, 2020, 09:02:59 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 08:17:50 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
What are you talking about? Of course they're playing the Bears and Steelers. Just not in London.
That's what I meant. I thought you were saying the London games would be the Bears or Steelers and I was pointing out that they will not.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 05, 2020, 08:57:40 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 08:17:50 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
From ESPN:
QuoteThe games will be held on back-to-back Sundays; dates and opponents will be announced in April when the league reveals the schedule. However, the Jaguars did protect home games against Pittsburgh and Chicago, so the opponents will come from this list: Houston, Indianapolis, Tennessee, Cleveland, Detroit and Miami.
It's likely to be between mid-October and mid-November because the annual Florida-Georgia game is being played at TIAA Bank Field on Oct. 31 and the Jaguars have either played their London game that week or had a bye week at that time.
(A practical note: The NFL traditionally aims to have a London game the last Saturday of October because the time difference is one hour less due to the US remaining on DST a week longer than Western Europe does. Who knows whether that would influence the timing for the Jaguars' games.)
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 09:05:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 04, 2020, 05:20:46 PM
You forgot the XFL
So will most of America
I might have considered going to the XFL game at Audi Field this Saturday except the weather is supposed to be atrocious. I made it to one soccer game last season and it seemed like a nice little stadium, though we didn't get to look around a whole lot.
Thanks for the ESPN link Mr. Hoo (or should I say...Dr. Hoo ;))! It seems there was a misunderstanding there for a little while. I guess not having the info in front of me didn't help much LOL
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 09:04:19 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 05, 2020, 09:02:59 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 08:17:50 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on February 04, 2020, 05:14:21 PM
There is reporting of the Jags playing two games in London which is apparently driving down the cost of tickets.
They will be playing the Bears and Steelers.
They will NOT be playing the Bears or Steelers. The Jaguars asked to keep those games in Jacksonville because they can actually sell out those games.
What are you talking about? Of course they're playing the Bears and Steelers. Just not in London.
That's what I meant. I thought you were saying the London games would be the Bears or Steelers and I was pointing out that they will not.
No I wasn't. It does appear that my sentence spacing failed to do the trick. I should mention that I have had issues with formatting via my iPhone thanks to the small as heck keyboard and I am due for a newer and bigger phone and in fact this particular iPhone (SE) was discontinued by Apple in September of 2018, so I could use a new phone already since I have had mine for over two years now. I am already decided on moving back to Android, which Android phone that will be is still a little up in the air but I have a good idea of what brand to switch to once I make my final decision which should be soon. I was, until September of last year, using my iPad to type and format my posts, but my thought process was inspired to ship my old iPad to Apple via FedEx and then use credits towards a new one...but I got distracted and failed to meet the shipping deadline but that wasn't really my fault as the shipping material was sent to my house a little late which made it practically impossible for me to meet the deadline...way to go Apple! I do still have a need for a proper computing device but whether that will be a new iPad or a Chromebook Pixelbook Go by Google. So that needs to be figured out as well.
Predicting a winner in the NFL is a real crapshoot. Parity + injuries + poor playoff performance when it counts = Throw a dart at the dartboard.
That being said, at least we can easily select teams who are potential contenders. Let's look at who is not predicted to be in the race and see if any of them can be the darkhorse. Las Vegas Raiders anyone? That team would lead my list. Who's on yours?
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on February 05, 2020, 12:45:52 PM
Predicting a winner in the NFL is a real crapshoot. Parity + injuries + poor playoff performance when it counts = Throw a dart at the dartboard.
That being said, at least we can easily select teams who are potential contenders. Let's look at who is not predicted to be in the race and see if any of them can be the darkhorse. Las Vegas Raiders anyone? That team would lead my list. Who's on yours?
Rick
Barring injuries, teams with elite QBs can be counted on to be contenders every year. This would include Chiefs, Ravens, Packers, Saints, Seahawks, Steelers and Texans
Teams without elite QBs can contend with a strong defense and running game. Candidates for 2020 would include 49ers, Titans, Bills, Raiders, Colts, Vikings, Bears and Patriots
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2020, 12:54:28 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on February 05, 2020, 12:45:52 PM
Predicting a winner in the NFL is a real crapshoot. Parity + injuries + poor playoff performance when it counts = Throw a dart at the dartboard.
That being said, at least we can easily select teams who are potential contenders. Let's look at who is not predicted to be in the race and see if any of them can be the darkhorse. Las Vegas Raiders anyone? That team would lead my list. Who's on yours?
Rick
Barring injuries, teams with elite QBs can be counted on to be contenders every year. This would include Chiefs, Ravens, Packers, Saints, Seahawks, Steelers and Texans
Teams without elite QBs can contend with a strong defense and running game. Candidates for 2020 would include 49ers, Titans, Bills, Raiders, Colts, Vikings, Bears and Patriots
And then you have the Redskins. :-D :banghead: :-D :banghead:
Quote from: nexus73 on February 05, 2020, 12:45:52 PM
Predicting a winner in the NFL is a real crapshoot. Parity + injuries + poor playoff performance when it counts = Throw a dart at the dartboard.
It's not too big of a challenge to correctly predict more than half of games correctly. 538's NFL predictions (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2019-nfl-predictions/games/) went 164-86-6 (0.656) this past season. But, there is always some upsets, usually between 2 and 8 per week. So, getting above 2/3 - 3/4 of games correct presents some major challenges, because there is a certain degree of randomness. Sometimes you can feel it, sometimes you just can't, and stuff happens seemingly out of the blue.
The Bills, after facing on of the easiest schedules this past season (AFC North, NFC East), face a much tougher one next season.
It gets harder in terms of both travel (AFC West and NFC West - yikes!) and opponents (Chiefs, Niners, Seahawks, Rams, Steelers, Titans).
I believe they are also, along with the Texans and Saints, one of the only teams to face 3 or more of this year's championship contenders:
-Obviously this year's SB matchup hailed from the divisions the Bills play, and they also get the Titans since they both finished 2nd in their division.
-The Texans get the Titans (obviously) plus the Chiefs, who also finished first, and the Packers, since they play the NFC North next year.
-The Saints get the other 1st place finishers Niners and Packers, plus the Chiefs since they play the AFC West.
I couldn't find any other teams that drew 3 or more championship teams. The Ravens are the only other team to get both the Chiefs and Titans, but they get the NFC East (so no Niners or Packers), while the Eagles get both of those, but no Chiefs or Titans.
And then of course the entire AFC East and the Saints are the only ones that get both Super Bowl teams.
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
As for the England games, I believe that Miami will be "home" with theirs. They host Kansas City this coming season. I can't see that one going overseas. Miami is playing the NFC West and will host Seattle and the L.A. Rams.
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2020, 10:17:23 PM
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
A small part of me wants to exorcise that part of you.
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2020, 10:17:23 PM
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
"Superb owl"...LOL! Sometimes typos can turn out so funny!
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on February 06, 2020, 11:54:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2020, 10:17:23 PM
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
"Superb owl"...LOL! Sometimes typos can turn out so funny!
Rick
Last year in Jeopardy, the Jeopardy round had a category of Super Bowl(dealing with football), then in Double Jeopardy there came the category of Superb Owl (dealing with owls).
Yeah. Superb Owl is common now.
Quote from: nexus73 on February 06, 2020, 11:54:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2020, 10:17:23 PM
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
"Superb owl"...LOL! Sometimes typos can turn out so funny!
Rick
That's not a typo, that's common parlance. 🦉
Quote from: Alps on February 07, 2020, 12:30:04 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on February 06, 2020, 11:54:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2020, 10:17:23 PM
A small part of me wants to see Brady re sign with the Pats, and then throw for 5000 yards, 45 touchdowns, and win a superb owl. As crazy as it sounds it's not completely out of the question.
"Superb owl"...LOL! Sometimes typos can turn out so funny!
Rick
That's not a typo, that's common parlance.
Thanks for letting me know! Superb Owl it is!
Rick
Super Bowl™ is a trademark that cannot be used without permission
Superb owl is not.
This Forum's superb owl will not be commenting on this.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 07, 2020, 05:41:49 PM
This Forum's superb owl will not be commenting on this.
Who is that? (sorry)
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2020, 05:49:01 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 07, 2020, 05:41:49 PM
This Forum's superb owl will not be commenting on this.
Who is that? (sorry)
The one usually on the fritz I bet.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 07, 2020, 05:32:59 PM
Super Bowl™ is a trademark that cannot be used without permission
Superb owl is not.
What if they are referring to minutia about that 48 lane bowling center on Appleton, WI's northeast side?
(Appleton's Super Bowl predates the NFL's version by about four years and, under a very basic tenet of USA federal trademark law, can keep right on using that name.)
:spin:
Mike
That sounds like that Burger King in Mattoon, Illinois that is totally unrelated to the Florida chain. That also explains why there are no locations of the Florida chain within 20 miles of Mattoon.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 07, 2020, 05:32:59 PM
Super Bowl™ is a trademark that cannot be used without permission
Superb owl is not.
Only in the USA. I, in Spain, can use the term "Super Bowl" freely :sombrero:.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on February 08, 2020, 07:32:29 AM
That sounds like that Burger King in Mattoon, Illinois that is totally unrelated to the Florida chain. That also explains why there are no locations of the Florida chain within 20 miles of Mattoon.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 07, 2020, 05:32:59 PM
Super Bowl™ is a trademark that cannot be used without permission
Superb owl is not.
Only in the USA. I, in Spain, can use the term "Super Bowl" freely :sombrero:.
The 'keep back' radius from their 1968 settlement is 30 miles/50 km. The family restaurant in Mattoon recently struck a deal with the chain to allow a franchised chain location to be opened at I-70/IL 130 (interchange 119) in Greenup, IL, which is at the very edge of that radius and a location that is completely inconsequential to them.
Mike
There's a good chance that the playoffs will be changed in 2020, and the regular season expanded in 2021. The NFL doesn't get very many things right when it comes to logistics, but it nailed the 16 game regular season (and its scheduling format), and the 6 team/conference playoffs. This is a classic example of fixing something that is not broken. Come on, NFL.
I like the premise of expanding the playoffs, but not the premise of the #7 seed potentially ousting the #2 seed.
The only thing worse than what happened to the Ravens this year, would be going 14-2, getting no bye, and losing in the wild card round.
It would be cool to see a #3 or #4 seed - or even a #5 seed!! - host the divisional round. This year, for example, say the #2 Packers lost to the #7 Rams in the wild card (very possible). #3 Saints and #4 Eagles also lost, so the #5 Seahawks would be hosting the divisional round!
Quote from: thspfc on February 20, 2020, 04:58:54 PM
There's a good chance that the playoffs will be changed in 2020, and the regular season expanded in 2021. The NFL doesn't get very many things right when it comes to logistics, but it nailed the 16 game regular season (and its scheduling format), and the 6 team/conference playoffs. This is a classic example of fixing something that is not broken. Come on, NFL.
– You know, Mr. Burns, you're the richest guy I know. Way richer than Lenny.
– Yes, but I'd trade it all for a little more.
Not that I never mind talking football, why was this thread separated from the main football thread?
Quote from: ET21 on February 25, 2020, 12:13:38 AM
Not that I never mind talking football, why was this thread separated from the main football thread?
Good question.
Quote from: ET21 on February 25, 2020, 12:13:38 AM
Not that I never mind talking football, why was this thread separated from the main football thread?
I figured why not?
With all the narratives surrounding the season, it may well end up being a fairly lengthy sub-topic.
Also, it's specific to the NFL, for those of us that don't care about the other leagues. ;-)
As the events of the past few weeks have unfolded, I am now genuinely curious about whether an NFL team is likely to sign Colin Kaepernick this season, and if so, which team would it be?
(I'm hoping that we, the forum users, can be trusted with a chance to have this discussion if we keep it civil and sports-related, so please don't squander it or get this thread locked.)
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 04:56:54 PM
As the events of the past few weeks have unfolded, I am now genuinely curious about whether an NFL team is likely to sign Colin Kaepernick this season, and if so, which team would it be?
(I'm hoping that we, the forum users, can be trusted with a chance to have this discussion if we keep it civil and sports-related, so please don't squander it or get this thread locked.)
I don't know, he hasn't played football for like 4 years.
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 04:56:54 PM
As the events of the past few weeks have unfolded, I am now genuinely curious about whether an NFL team is likely to sign Colin Kaepernick this season, and if so, which team would it be?
(I'm hoping that we, the forum users, can be trusted with a chance to have this discussion if we keep it civil and sports-related, so please don't squander it or get this thread locked.)
I'm surprised no one had signed him by now even with his history. A lot of teams have had far worse backups on hand and could have used the veteran presence. They were probably concerned with him being an "instigator." On the other hand, picking him up now only proves that that's why a team was blackballing him before, so there's probably >50% chance he stays unemployed.
Teams feared the political reaction. That's the sole reason he wasn't signed by anyone.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 12, 2020, 02:26:55 PM
Teams feared the political reaction. That's the sole reason he wasn't signed by anyone.
I don't know why sports leagues would fear political reaction. It might cause a media storm at the outset, but long term, large numbers of people don't stop watching sports for political reasons. I know a lot of very liberal people who never even thought about giving up their Cubs season tickets when the family of Trump's campaign finance manager bought the team. There were never going to be large numbers of people turning on a team if they signed Kapernick.
Quote from: cabiness42 on June 12, 2020, 02:34:10 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 12, 2020, 02:26:55 PM
Teams feared the political reaction. That's the sole reason he wasn't signed by anyone.
I don't know why sports leagues would fear political reaction. It might cause a media storm at the outset, but long term, large numbers of people don't stop watching sports for political reasons. I know a lot of very liberal people who never even thought about giving up their Cubs season tickets when the family of Trump's campaign finance manager bought the team. There were never going to be large numbers of people turning on a team if they signed Kapernick.
I think teams worried about the "distraction" of the political reaction his signing would bring. I mean, did you see what happened when Trump called out the NFL?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 12, 2020, 03:32:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on June 12, 2020, 02:34:10 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 12, 2020, 02:26:55 PM
Teams feared the political reaction. That's the sole reason he wasn't signed by anyone.
I don't know why sports leagues would fear political reaction. It might cause a media storm at the outset, but long term, large numbers of people don't stop watching sports for political reasons. I know a lot of very liberal people who never even thought about giving up their Cubs season tickets when the family of Trump's campaign finance manager bought the team. There were never going to be large numbers of people turning on a team if they signed Kapernick.
I think teams worried about the "distraction" of the political reaction his signing would bring. I mean, did you see what happened when Trump called out the NFL?
The general view on kneeling and the like has drastically shifted recently. Drew Brees got ripped for saying something that would have been the consensus two years ago. There's no reason for him not to at least be on a roster, though it'll be tough for him to make much of an impact after two seasons away from football.
Quote from: Alps on June 12, 2020, 01:50:25 AM
On the other hand, picking him up now only proves that that's why a team was blackballing him before, so there's probably >50% chance he stays unemployed.
That's a good point, but I guess I'm not sure anything is gained by not just owning up to it. Everyone knows that he was blackballed anyways at this point. And the NFL has walked back on other aspects of their 2017 stance, so this seems like the right time for a team to just do it if they're on the fence.
I can think of at least a dozen or so teams where he would be a major improvement as backup, even despite his years off. I wouldn't even be mad if the Bills signed him, although it wouldn't have really make any sense to pick up Jake Fromm in the draft if that was in the cards.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 12, 2020, 03:32:52 PM
I think teams worried about the "distraction" of the political reaction his signing would bring. I mean, did you see what happened when Trump called out the NFL?
Ahem. I mean, I agree - although when you say "teams", it's really the owners that we're talking about. Clearly most of the owners tend to align more with Trump than not, while the majority of fans and players probably wouldn't really care that much. But please, this is exactly where threads like this get off the rails, so let's keep it to Kaepernick.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29314127/cowboys-texans-players-test-positive-covid-19-sources-say
Cowboys and Texan players are tested positive for COVID-19.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/19/report-49ers-player-tests-positive-for-covid-19-player-among-group-working-out-in-nashville/A member of the 49ers has been tested positive for COVID-19.
Quote from: bing101 on June 19, 2020, 08:38:45 PM
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/19/report-49ers-player-tests-positive-for-covid-19-player-among-group-working-out-in-nashville/A member of the 49ers has been tested positive for COVID-19.
And his likelihood of developing ANY symptoms beyond those of the mildest of colds?
Mike
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/19/donald-trump-anthony-fauci-football-return-329645
Now COVID-19 and Football has become a political issue as seen here.
Quote from: mgk920 on June 19, 2020, 10:35:39 PM
Quote from: bing101 on June 19, 2020, 08:38:45 PM
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/19/report-49ers-player-tests-positive-for-covid-19-player-among-group-working-out-in-nashville/A member of the 49ers has been tested positive for COVID-19.
And his likelihood of developing ANY symptoms beyond those of the mildest of colds?
Mike
Somewhere around 10% of at least having a fever, maybe 5% severe illness and 2% hospitalization. Do you want to infect an entire league and find out? I personally do not.
Quote from: bing101 on June 19, 2020, 10:57:26 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/19/donald-trump-anthony-fauci-football-return-329645
Now COVID-19 and Football has become a political issue as seen here.
and we are not to discuss politics in this thread thanks
https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/06/around-10-nfl-teams-have-covid-19-cases (https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/06/around-10-nfl-teams-have-covid-19-cases)
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29339696/nflpa-advises-players-not-work-together-due-coronavirus (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29339696/nflpa-advises-players-not-work-together-due-coronavirus)
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-during-covid-19-pandemic-revisiting-disrupted-and-shortened-seasons-in-league-history/
Here is how the NFL is responding to COVID-19.
Quote from: bing101 on June 24, 2020, 12:13:47 PM
https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/06/around-10-nfl-teams-have-covid-19-cases (https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/06/around-10-nfl-teams-have-covid-19-cases)
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29339696/nflpa-advises-players-not-work-together-due-coronavirus (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29339696/nflpa-advises-players-not-work-together-due-coronavirus)
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-during-covid-19-pandemic-revisiting-disrupted-and-shortened-seasons-in-league-history/
Here is how the NFL is responding to COVID-19.
just don't read the comments section
Quote from: Alps on June 24, 2020, 04:44:37 PMQuote from: bing101 on June 24, 2020, 12:13:47 PM
https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/06/around-10-nfl-teams-have-covid-19-cases
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29339696/nflpa-advises-players-not-work-together-due-coronavirus
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-during-covid-19-pandemic-revisiting-disrupted-and-shortened-seasons-in-league-history/ (https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-during-covid-19-pandemic-revisiting-disrupted-and-shortened-seasons-in-league-history/)
Here is how the NFL is responding to COVID-19.
just don't read the comments section
Great Point here given the situation.
Only 2 days left until the NFL season begins!
https://www.nfl.com/news/2020-nfl-kickoff-to-celebrate-start-of-101st-season
I didn't have much optimism for this season for most of the summer, but things have really started to shape up in the past few weeks. I think it really helped the NFL to have the other leagues restart first.
Let's just hope it can last for more than a month
It wouldn't be surprising if all four leagues were playing on the same day, with MLB playing a truncated season, and the NBA and NHL seasons ending later than usual, at a time when they'd normally have their training camps by now. But webny99 is right, it helped the NFL to have the other three leagues restart first, because it was the only one already in offseason mode when the first COVID cases hit back in March.
Quote from: Henry on September 09, 2020, 10:12:54 AM
It wouldn't be surprising if all four leagues were playing on the same day, with MLB playing a truncated season, and the NBA and NHL seasons ending later than usual, at a time when they'd normally have their training camps by now. But webny99 is right, it helped the NFL to have the other three leagues restart first, because it was the only one already in offseason mode when the first COVID cases hit back in March.
Tomorrow is the first of what might be several days.
1 NFL regular season game
1 NHL playoff game
1 NBA playoff game
12 MLB regular season games
Also, 1 regular season MLS game and 3 regular season WNBA games.
Normally I believe this is only possible in late October and early November. Something about a "sports equinox" I think?
Chiefs win 34-20! Wasn't even that close until the Texans caught up some in the fourth quarter.
KC dominated. They've got a really good team again this year.
Reduced crowd was odd to look at. Not as odd as it'll be to see the empty seats on Sunday for other games. But still; strange times.
Makes me wonder how much those fans paid for those seats with the reduced supply. I have to imagine season ticket holders made bank on the secondary market.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 11, 2020, 09:24:02 AM
KC dominated. They've got a really good team again this year.
Reduced crowd was odd to look at. Not as odd as it'll be to see the empty seats on Sunday for other games. But still; strange times.
Makes me wonder how much those fans paid for those seats with the reduced supply. I have to imagine season ticket holders made bank on the secondary market.
They've got a really good team if Mahomes can stay healthy. Last year they missed out on the no. 1 seed because Mahomes was dealing with injuries for a good chunk of the year, and they needed the upset of the season to get a first round bye at all. This year nobody but the top seed gets a bye, and the last seven Super Bowl winners all had first round byes. It doesn't help that Baltimore has the league's easiest schedule and a roster that rivals KC's.
So the point is, nothing is a forgone conclusion.
My goodness, the Lions simply cannot close out games against the Bears. That was last year's Thanksgiving game all over again. :meh: :coffee:
In Bills news, Josh Allen delivered the first 300-yard game in regulation since... Kyle Orton in 2014. Yikes. But I'll take the 10-point win over the Jets. No better way to start the season than 1-0!
Week 1 has been very interesting. Quite a few upsets and surprises. Maybe that's to be expected with all the offseason drama from both COVID and the countless major trades/free agent signings. With two and half games still to go, here are my thoughts:
- Packers look extremely good on offense. Aaron Rodgers must be out to prove that all the drama surrounding their first round draft choice is a joke. If they play like that all year, they will be as tough as anyone to beat. The Vikings are not an easy opponent either.
- Eagles suck. All I heard from the media all offseason was how great Carson Wentz is. You would've thought he built the pyramids of Giza alone while carrying 52 men on his back from the way they were talking. I've never wanted to see a team lose as badly as I wanted to see the overrated, injury-prone, directionless Eagles lose today. Thank you Washington Football Team for doing something positive for once.
- Patriots look decent, but it's too early to tell, and it's not like they played the '85 Bears. The Dolphins are young and still rebuilding.
- Buccaneers looked tired and in over their heads. I'm not sure why anyone expected a team with so many new players and no preseason to flourish immediately, especially against possibly the best team in the NFC in the Saints. They will get better as the season goes on.
- Cardinals over Niners was easily the upset of the week. The Super Bowl hangover is a real thing. If this game is any indication, the Kyler Murray/DeAndre Hopkins connection will be one of the best in the league.
Quote from: thspfc on September 13, 2020, 09:55:53 PM
Week 1 has been very interesting. Quite a few upsets and surprises. Maybe that's to be expected with all the offseason drama from both COVID and the countless major trades/free agent signings. With two and half games still to go, here are my thoughts:
- Packers look extremely good on offense. Aaron Rodgers must be out to prove that all the drama surrounding their first round draft choice is a joke. If they play like that all year, they will be as tough as anyone to beat. The Vikings are not an easy opponent either.
- Eagles suck. All I heard from the media all offseason was how great Carson Wentz is. You would've thought he built the pyramids of Giza alone while carrying 52 men on his back from the way they were talking. I've never wanted to see a team lose as badly as I wanted to see the overrated, injury-prone, directionless Eagles lose today. Thank you Washington Football Team for doing something positive for once.
- Patriots look decent, but it's too early to tell, and it's not like they played the '85 Bears. The Dolphins are young and still rebuilding.
- Buccaneers looked tired and in over their heads. I'm not sure why anyone expected a team with so many new players and no preseason to flourish immediately, especially against possibly the best team in the NFC in the Saints. They will get better as the season goes on.
- Cardinals over Niners was easily the upset of the week. The Super Bowl hangover is a real thing. If this game is any indication, the Kyler Murray/DeAndre Hopkins connection will be one of the best in the league.
I followed along with the Jets for amusement, and they appear to be waiting for the preseason to begin.
Vikings have a lot of new defensive personnel so it was probably going to be tough to expect them to be ready for this game. It's also Week 1. But it's disheartening to find that Green Bay kicked out ass in every facet on a "neutral field" . I think that Week 16 matchup from last season and the nasty taste it left was still fresh in a lot of Vikings fans minds. This game actually went on a similar trajectory where it was close for a while but the Packers steadily just took control of the game and the Vikings had no answer. It's frustrating because I hate losing to this frickin team so much.
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
Quote from: thspfc on September 13, 2020, 09:55:53 PM
Week 1 has been very interesting. Quite a few upsets and surprises. Maybe that's to be expected with all the offseason drama from both COVID and the countless major trades/free agent signings. With two and half games still to go, here are my thoughts:
- Eagles suck. All I heard from the media all offseason was how great Carson Wentz is. You would've thought he built the pyramids of Giza alone while carrying 52 men on his back from the way they were talking. I've never wanted to see a team lose as badly as I wanted to see the overrated, injury-prone, directionless Eagles lose today. Thank you Washington Football Team for doing something positive for once.
When I checked partway through the second quarter the Eagles were shutting down the Football Team. However now I see they did turn the scoreboard back.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
Quote from: thspfc on September 13, 2020, 09:55:53 PM
Week 1 has been very interesting. Quite a few upsets and surprises. Maybe that's to be expected with all the offseason drama from both COVID and the countless major trades/free agent signings. With two and half games still to go, here are my thoughts:
- Eagles suck. All I heard from the media all offseason was how great Carson Wentz is. You would've thought he built the pyramids of Giza alone while carrying 52 men on his back from the way they were talking. I've never wanted to see a team lose as badly as I wanted to see the overrated, injury-prone, directionless Eagles lose today. Thank you Washington Football Team for doing something positive for once.
When I checked partway through the second quarter the Eagles were shutting down the Football Team. However now I see they did turn the scoreboard back.
Yep. An interception before halftime eventually got Football Team a TD. Some bad coaching during that series, along with ineptitude during the 2nd half, cost the Eagles what should've been an easy Week 1 win.
In other news: Rain is wet, sun rises in the east, Lions blow a 17-point fourth quarter lead, head coach says "We've just got to coach better."
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Why are you freaking out over a team changing its mascot?
And I thought the Death Star was an ugly stadium. That monstrosity in LA looks like it was designed by an over-produced sci-fi movie. They'll add the hologram screens in post-production, so just randomly point at the air in front of you while inside.
Also, how do they keep pigeons from just flying in and pooping on everything? They love hanging out underneath things like a giant stadium roof with no walls.
And in 15 years when both their teams have skipped town again... :-D
Kudos to La Rams for holding on to that slim lead for so long in the 4th, tho. Looks like another year of lofty expectations in Big D that will end in a first round playoff loss again, at best.
Brady should've just retired. What's he trying to prove down there in Tampa? As much delight as I may find in seeing his eminently punchable face lose like that, this all seems like one giant ego stroke attempt. All that "GOAT" shit is in his head.
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2020, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Why are you freaking out over a team changing its mascot?
Who's freaking out? Sounds like you're freaking out in response to my comment.
Edited to add: With that said, nice one here by some AP hack.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eh01Id5WAAE9cqO?format=jpg&name=small)
Quote from: wanderer2575 on September 14, 2020, 07:55:43 AM
In other news: Rain is wet, sun rises in the east, Lions blow a 17-point fourth quarter lead, head coach says "We've just got to coach better."
I'm torn between the Bengals missed field goal or the Lions missed catch as the most inexplicable loss of the week. They were both
so bad, like head-in-hands bad.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 14, 2020, 09:39:32 AM
Looks like another year of lofty expectations in Big D that will end in a first round playoff loss again, at best.
Expectations are certainly lofty, but at this point it would take an absolute meltdown/disaster/sub-.500 season to lose the division, so I'd say a first-round playoff loss is pretty much the worst-case scenario.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 10:47:11 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2020, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Why are you freaking out over a team changing its mascot?
Who's freaking out? Sounds like you're freaking out in response to my comment.
Edited to add: With that said, nice one here by some AP hack.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eh01Id5WAAE9cqO?format=jpg&name=small)
I'm not freaking out, I'm asking a question.
Quote from: webny99 on September 14, 2020, 11:35:48 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on September 14, 2020, 07:55:43 AM
In other news: Rain is wet, sun rises in the east, Lions blow a 17-point fourth quarter lead, head coach says "We've just got to coach better."
I'm torn between the Bengals missed field goal or the Lions missed catch as the most inexplicable loss of the week. They were both so bad, like head-in-hands bad.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 14, 2020, 09:39:32 AM
Looks like another year of lofty expectations in Big D that will end in a first round playoff loss again, at best.
Expectations are certainly lofty, but at this point it would take an absolute meltdown/disaster/sub-.500 season to lose the division, so I'd say a first-round playoff loss is pretty much the worst-case scenario.
The Rams are no joke. I think people are underestimating them because they declined last year compared to 2018, but they still went 9-7 in the league's best division last year. They are a good team. No shame in losing to them by 3 points, especially with it being Dallas' first game with a new head coach and no preseason.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 10:47:11 AM
With that said, nice one here by some AP hack.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eh01Id5WAAE9cqO?format=jpg&name=small)
hashtag: dad jokes
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
I kind of like that. I may have to borrow this. That might be an even more fun way to troll people than what I said above (which obviously succeeded in pushing thspfc's buttons).
Quote from: Alps on September 14, 2020, 01:18:58 AM
I followed along with the Jets for amusement, and they appear to be waiting for the preseason to begin.
I take it 2:03 PM every Monday on WFAN is appointment radio. OH THE PAIN!!
And why not Washington FC?
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 15, 2020, 10:20:52 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
I kind of like that. I may have to borrow this.
Same here! I'll definitely have to track that as the season goes on. Of course, it requires an Eagles win, so we'll see how that goes.
I tweeted that idea at a local transportation reporter who happens to be a big Philadelphia Football Team fan and he just retweeted it with the comment "Oh this is excellent."
Someone else replied to express concern that a team that fails to qualify for the playoffs might have the "Football Team" moniker at the end of the year. My thought is, so what?
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 15, 2020, 12:27:57 PM
I tweeted that idea at a local transportation reporter who happens to be a big Philadelphia Football Team fan and he just retweeted it with the comment "Oh this is excellent."
Someone else replied to express concern that a team that fails to qualify for the playoffs might have the "Football Team" moniker at the end of the year. My thought is, so what?
It will most likely be a team that doesn't qualify. At latest it will be a team that is eliminated in the first round of the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on September 15, 2020, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 15, 2020, 12:27:57 PM
I tweeted that idea at a local transportation reporter who happens to be a big Philadelphia Football Team fan and he just retweeted it with the comment "Oh this is excellent."
Someone else replied to express concern that a team that fails to qualify for the playoffs might have the "Football Team" moniker at the end of the year. My thought is, so what?
It will most likely be a team that doesn't qualify. At latest it will be a team that is eliminated in the first round of the playoffs.
It very likely trickles down to a team like Miami, Detroit, Cincinnati, or the New Yorks, and stays there, but one example of another possibility is that Chicago could pick it up from Jacksonville in Week 16 and then in Week 17 Green Bay is resting Aaron Rodgers having already locked in their playoff seed and they take it into the playoffs.
Yeah, I mean given that the whole point is that it's transferred between losing teams, wouldn't you expect it to end up with a non-playoff team? I don't see why that would matter; it would only reinforce the negative connotation.
Quote from: webny99 on September 15, 2020, 03:51:35 PM
Yeah, I mean given that the whole point is that it's transferred between losing teams, wouldn't you expect it to end up with a non-playoff team? I don't see why that would matter; it would only reinforce the negative connotation.
Just award the Jets the name of New York Football Team and be done with it.
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2020, 07:20:30 PM
Just award the Jets the name of Not in New York Football Team and be done with it.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2020, 07:22:02 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2020, 07:20:30 PM
Just award the Jets the name of Not in New York AFC Football Team and be done with it.
Nicely done, although that could also be the G-men, so we better specify AFC :)
I was really, really hoping that FiveThirtyEight's NFL forecasting game (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2019-nfl-forecasting-game/results/) would return this year, but with week 1 in the books and no sign of it, I have to assume it's not coming back. I know they're focused on other things (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/) this year, so I get it, but after I had so much fun with it last year, I was pretty bummed out, so I decided to play me against their forecast the old-fashioned way this season.
It's pretty simple: you pick a percentage chance of winning for each matchup, and gain points if they win, and lose points if they lose. The catch is that you can gain up to 25, but lose up to 75, so it's costly to be over-confident. There's a full scale for calculating points which I can post if anyone is interested. And if anyone else wants to play, I'm happy to figure out a way for us to do it here.
Their model earned 32.8 points this week, and I earned 10.5 points.
Quote from: webny99 on September 15, 2020, 07:28:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2020, 07:22:02 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2020, 07:20:30 PM
Just award the Jets the name of Not in New York AFC Football Team and be done with it.
Nicely done, although that could also be the G-men, so we better specify AFC :)
Hey, the Giants at least played regular season football. And they're already the New York Football Giants.
Quote from: Alps on September 16, 2020, 12:57:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 15, 2020, 07:28:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2020, 07:22:02 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 15, 2020, 07:20:30 PM
Just award the Jets the name of Not in New York AFC Football Team and be done with it.
Nicely done, although that could also be the G-men, so we better specify AFC :)
Hey, the Giants at least played regular season football. And they're already the New York Football Giants.
On paper, losing by 10 to the Bills ≈ losing by 10 to the Steelers.
The difference is the Bills would have had 40+ points if not for missed field goals and Josh Allen fumbles, and the Jets would have had 10 if not for a garbage time touchdown.
Don't know why people were complaining about Browns-Bengals being on TNF. Two mediocre teams from the same state, a division rivalry, two interesting QB's including this year's #1 draft pick, both after their first W of the season. What's not to like?
Quote from: webny99 on September 17, 2020, 09:23:25 PM
Don't know why people were complaining about Browns-Bengals being on TNF. Two mediocre teams from the same state, a division rivalry, two interesting QB's including this year's #1 draft pick, both after their first W of the season. What's not to like?
TNF is all about two mediocre teams.
Quote from: Alps on September 18, 2020, 12:49:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 17, 2020, 09:23:25 PM
Don't know why people were complaining about Browns-Bengals being on TNF. Two mediocre teams from the same state, a division rivalry, two interesting QB's including this year's #1 draft pick, both after their first W of the season. What's not to like?
TNF is all about two mediocre teams.
Calling the Bengals mediocre is generous.
I think the main reason the two Ohio teams were chosen for last night is symbolic: September 17, 1920, was the date of the meeting in Canton at which the APFA (which later changed its name to the NFL) was founded.
Quote from: thspfc on September 18, 2020, 10:50:34 AM
Quote from: Alps on September 18, 2020, 12:49:52 AM
TNF is all about two mediocre teams.
Calling the Bengals mediocre is generous.
But calling Burrow mediocre is anti-generous.
Burrow had 61 (!) pass attempts last night. That's the most by a rookie since '01 and the second-most of all time!
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2020, 12:07:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 18, 2020, 10:50:34 AM
Quote from: Alps on September 18, 2020, 12:49:52 AM
TNF is all about two mediocre teams.
Calling the Bengals mediocre is generous.
But calling Burrow mediocre is anti-generous.
Burrow had 61 (!) pass attempts last night. That's the most by a rookie since '01 and the second-most of all time!
Right. Burrow looks really good, the Bengals are bad.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 18, 2020, 11:06:25 AM
I think the main reason the two Ohio teams were chosen for last night is symbolic: September 17, 1920, was the date of the meeting in Canton at which the APFA (which later changed its name to the NFL) was founded.
Interesting fact, thanks for pointing that out. That would certainly makes sense.
Anyway, I enjoyed watching the Browns win the game last night. Our next game is against the Football Team.
Burrow isn't going to last if he keeps getting hit like he did last night.
Quote from: Buck87 on September 18, 2020, 01:07:59 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 18, 2020, 11:06:25 AM
I think the main reason the two Ohio teams were chosen for last night is symbolic: September 17, 1920, was the date of the meeting in Canton at which the APFA (which later changed its name to the NFL) was founded.
Interesting fact, thanks for pointing that out. That would certainly makes sense.
Anyway, I enjoyed watching the Browns win the game last night. Our next game is against the Football Team.
No, it's against the Eagles!
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Snakes alive, that Falcons-Cowboys ending was something. Cowboys win 40-39 after holding a lead for literally zero seconds the entire game. The Falcons are truly cursed on Texas soil.
Quote from: webny99 on September 20, 2020, 05:24:10 PM
Snakes alive, that Falcons-Cowboys ending was something. Cowboys win 40-39 after holding a lead for literally zero seconds the entire game. The Falcons are truly cursed on Texas soil.
And the Jags are truly cursed on Tennessee soil. T For Texas, T For Tennessee (with apologies to Jimmie Rodgers).
Still digesting the Bills somewhat wild 31-28 win in Miami. The offense looks much improved - that was the best game by a Bills QB in my lifetime, easily. Now if only the defense can step up and look like it did last year (they only allowed 28 or more points once the entire 2019 season), then we can legitimately talk Super Bowl or at least deep playoff run.
How bout dem Cowboys! I never lost confidence in Dak Prescott to at least make it a nervous ending for Atlanta. Anyone who still says Prescott isn't a franchise QB is legally insane. Based off last year and the first two weeks of this year he's easily top 10, maybe top 5. The Eagles also suck, again. Surprise! :rolleyes:
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Philadelphia lost again, so they reamain "Football Team" for another week.
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2020, 05:47:59 PM
How bout dem Cowboys! I never lost confidence in Dak Prescott to at least make it a nervous ending for Atlanta.
There was a stat going around that entering yesterday, teams since 1933 with at least 39 points and 0 turnovers are
440-0!!!
With the inexplicable Falcons loss, that record falls to 440-1. :rofl:
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 06:52:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2020, 05:47:59 PM
How bout dem Cowboys! I never lost confidence in Dak Prescott to at least make it a nervous ending for Atlanta.
There was a stat going around that entering yesterday, teams since 1933 with at least 39 points and 0 turnovers are 440-0!!!
With the inexplicable Falcons loss, that record falls to 440-1. :rofl:
Prescott also became the first player in NFL history to throw for at least 300 yards and run for at least 3 touchdowns in a game. If that's not remarkable enough, consider that he threw for 450 yards and one touchdown, giving him 4 TD's total.
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 06:52:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2020, 05:47:59 PM
How bout dem Cowboys! I never lost confidence in Dak Prescott to at least make it a nervous ending for Atlanta.
There was a stat going around that entering yesterday, teams since 1933 with at least 39 points and 0 turnovers are 440-0!!!
With the inexplicable Falcons loss, that record falls to 440-1. :rofl:
Prescott also became the first player in NFL history to throw for at least 300 yards and run for at least 3 touchdowns in a game. If that's not remarkable enough, consider that he threw for 450 yards and one touchdown, giving him 4 TD's total.
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 06:58:09 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 06:52:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2020, 05:47:59 PM
How bout dem Cowboys! I never lost confidence in Dak Prescott to at least make it a nervous ending for Atlanta.
There was a stat going around that entering yesterday, teams since 1933 with at least 39 points and 0 turnovers are 440-0!!!
With the inexplicable Falcons loss, that record falls to 440-1. :rofl:
Prescott also became the first player in NFL history to throw for at least 300 yards and run for at least 3 touchdowns in a game. If that's not remarkable enough, consider that he threw for 450 yards and one touchdown, giving him 4 TD's total.
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
They certainly did yesterday. Game of the season so far, and it could end up being the game of the season period.
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
They certainly did yesterday. Game of the season so far, and it could end up being the game of the season period.
Definitely the wildest finish, but not the best game, period.
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 11:03:40 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
They certainly did yesterday. Game of the season so far, and it could end up being the game of the season period.
Definitely the wildest finish, but not the best game, period.
What game was better in your opinion? Patriots/Seahawks is the only one that really compares.
Quote from: thspfc on September 22, 2020, 09:02:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 11:03:40 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
They certainly did yesterday. Game of the season so far, and it could end up being the game of the season period.
Definitely the wildest finish, but not the best game, period.
What game was better in your opinion? Patriots/Seahawks is the only one that really compares.
Chiefs/Chargers and Bengals/Browns were both a lot of fun.
Falcons/Cowboys looked like a blowout early and there was not a lot of suspense/excitement until the very end, which makes it harder to see it as a great game.
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2020, 09:46:24 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 22, 2020, 09:02:15 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2020, 11:03:40 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2020, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
When the Falcons lose, they make it memorable.
They certainly did yesterday. Game of the season so far, and it could end up being the game of the season period.
Definitely the wildest finish, but not the best game, period.
What game was better in your opinion? Patriots/Seahawks is the only one that really compares.
Chiefs/Chargers and Bengals/Browns were both a lot of fun.
Falcons/Cowboys looked like a blowout early and there was not a lot of suspense/excitement until the very end, which makes it harder to see it as a great game.
Chiefs/Chargers was good if you like a lot of field goals. Otherwise, not so much. Bengals/Browns was two bad teams.
I don't think increased scoring makes a game more exciting. The Falcons built a lead on Cowboy turnovers, then lost it due to general incompetence. That's not all that interesting to me.
The Chiefs / Chargers was a close game throughout, with a rookie quarterback looking good in his first start. Much more interesting IMO.
Here's an interesting thought to ponder: With an extra wild-card team this season, could the entire NFC West make the playoffs?
That's the only division I could see potentially pulling it off: they've got the reigning NFC champ and the other three teams are all 2-0, plus two of the usual runners up, Vikings and Eagles, haven't looked good. Even so, Bucs, Bears, or someone else will probably play spoiler, but it's certainly still a possibility.
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2020, 07:51:51 PM
Here's an interesting thought to ponder: With an extra wild-card team this season, could the entire NFC West make the playoffs?
That's the only division I could see potentially pulling it off: they've got the reigning NFC champ and the other three teams are all 2-0, plus two of the usual runners up, Vikings and Eagles, haven't looked good. Even so, Bucs, Bears, or someone else will probably play spoiler, but it's certainly still a possibility.
Not really a possibility. Do they have four of the seven best teams in the NFC? You could argue they do. But each team in that division has to play each other twice. Not everyone can do well within the division - there will be at least one team that ends up with 4-6 divisional losses. At that point there's very little room for error on the rest of your schedule. At most I could see three teams from that division making it. Maybe Seahawks, Rams, Cardinals, in that order.
Raiders new stadium looks like a giant plug-in air freshener.
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 20, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Philadelphia lost again, so they reamain "Football Team" for another week.
Philadelphia didn't lose today, but they didn't win either–they tied Cincinnati 23—23 and thus continue to be "Football Team."
In Bills news:
My goodness. My blood pressure is never going to be the same after that Bills-Rams game. The Bills blew a 28-3 lead - yes, exactly like the Falcons did in the infamous Super Bowl - went down 32-28 after giving up four straight TD's, marched down the field and squeaked in a touchdown on 4th down - after a controversial PI call - to finish 35-32 with 15 seconds remaining.
Happy to be 3-0, but I have serious, serious questions about this defense. The Bills went the entire 2019 season without allowing 32 points, and now they allow 28 to the Dolphins and 32 to the Rams in back-to-back weeks.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2020, 04:53:11 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 20, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Philadelphia lost again, so they reamain "Football Team" for another week.
Philadelphia didn't lose today, but they didn't win either–they tied Cincinnati 23—23 and thus continue to be "Football Team."
In light of the bizarre event, I say the Bengals also absorb the Football Team nickname. So there will now be two Football Teams. What does everyone else think?
The Falcons simply cannot play with a lead. They just can't. I feel bad for all their fans.
Cowboys/Seahawks is about halfway through the second quarter and looks to be a good game. I get the feeling that the Cowboys this year are one of those teams that can beat anybody, and can also lose to anybody.
The entire town of South Park attended the Denver Football Team's game:
https://dailysnark.com/2020/09/27/denver-broncos-have-the-entire-town-of-south-park-in-the-stands-during-todays-game/
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2020, 05:35:17 PM
The Falcons simply cannot play with a lead. They just can't. I feel bad for all their fans.
Cowboys/Seahawks is about halfway through the second quarter and looks to be a good game. I get the feeling that the Cowboys this year are one of those teams that can beat anybody, and can also lose to anybody.
They need to get the Jets on their schedule.
Dak Prescott has just set the NFL record for most total passing yards in back-to-back games, with 922 (!) over the last two games. He broke Jared Goff's record of 912, set in weeks 4 and 5 of 2019. He also becomes the first Cowboys QB, and one of the first NFL QB's, to throw for over 400 yards twice in a row. This guy is unreal.
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2020, 05:32:36 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2020, 04:53:11 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 20, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 15, 2020, 10:15:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 14, 2020, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 14, 2020, 03:37:55 AM
This season I'm following "the" Football Team just because :sombrero:.
....
I've decided I think I'll call every team by "[City Name] Football Team" (or, for New York and LA, "[City Name] [NFC or AFC] Football Team" except for continuing to call the local team the Washington Redskins.
Let's spice things up a bit. "Football Team" gets to take an opponent's nickname when they win.
Washington beat Philadelphia in Week 1, so Washington is now the Eagles and Philadelphia is "Football Team." When Philadelphia wins their next game, they get to take the opponent's nickname and "Football Team" passes to them. See who gets stuck as "Football Team" at the end of the season.
Philadelphia lost again, so they reamain "Football Team" for another week.
Philadelphia didn't lose today, but they didn't win either–they tied Cincinnati 23—23 and thus continue to be "Football Team."
In light of the bizarre event, I say the Bengals also absorb the Football Team nickname. So there will now be two Football Teams. What does everyone else think?
No, the nickname is like a cup, in case of a tie the team that has it retains it.
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 28, 2020, 07:23:19 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2020, 05:32:36 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2020, 04:53:11 PM
Philadelphia didn't lose today, but they didn't win either–they tied Cincinnati 23—23 and thus continue to be "Football Team."
In light of the bizarre event, I say the Bengals also absorb the Football Team nickname. So there will now be two Football Teams. What does everyone else think?
No, the nickname is like a cup, in case of a tie the team that has it retains it.
I agree. I think Football Team needs a clear cut win, and their opponent a clear cut loss, in order for the name to be transferred.
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2020, 09:13:05 PM
Dak Prescott has just set the NFL record for most total passing yards in back-to-back games, with 922 (!) over the last two games. He broke Jared Goff's record of 912, set in weeks 4 and 5 of 2019. He also becomes the first Cowboys QB, and one of the first NFL QB's, to throw for over 400 yards twice in a row. This guy is unreal.
Not immune to mistakes though. He absolutely should not have thrown the ball where he did on that last play (especially after doing such a good job to stay on his feet). There's no reason to go for the end zone on 3rd down with less than 10 seconds left after the rest of the original play has already fallen apart. He should have thrown it away...but instead, he threw a Hail Mary pass that was pretty much a guaranteed interception.
Yeah, I'm not sure I would describe him as "unreal." His team got caught up in a shootout for the second straight game so he threw the ball a lot.
Quote from: US 89 on September 28, 2020, 09:17:55 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2020, 09:13:05 PM
Dak Prescott has just set the NFL record for most total passing yards in back-to-back games, with 922 (!) over the last two games. He broke Jared Goff's record of 912, set in weeks 4 and 5 of 2019. He also becomes the first Cowboys QB, and one of the first NFL QB's, to throw for over 400 yards twice in a row. This guy is unreal.
Not immune to mistakes though. He absolutely should not have thrown the ball where he did on that last play (especially after doing such a good job to stay on his feet). There's no reason to go for the end zone on 3rd down with less than 10 seconds left after the rest of the original play has already fallen apart. He should have thrown it away...but instead, he threw a Hail Mary pass that was pretty much a guaranteed interception.
All quarterbacks make mistakes. Some (ahem, Wentz) make a lot more than others. It's just about impossible to throw 57 passes and not make a mistake or two.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 28, 2020, 09:50:09 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I would describe him as "unreal." His team got caught up in a shootout for the second straight game so he threw the ball a lot.
Trailing by 15-20 points is not a shootout.
Quote from: thspfc on September 28, 2020, 08:06:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 28, 2020, 09:50:09 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I would describe him as "unreal." His team got caught up in a shootout for the second straight game so he threw the ball a lot.
Trailing by 15-20 points is not a shootout.
Playing a couple games where you have to score 30+ points is a shootout. Coming from behind only means he had to pass the ball.
Decent quarterback. Hardly "unreal."
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 28, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 28, 2020, 08:06:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 28, 2020, 09:50:09 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I would describe him as "unreal." His team got caught up in a shootout for the second straight game so he threw the ball a lot.
Trailing by 15-20 points is not a shootout.
Playing a couple games where you have to score 30+ points is a shootout. Coming from behind only means he had to pass the ball.
Decent quarterback. Hardly "unreal."
Ok
One word to describe my feelings about the Ravens: Distaste.
They get so much (IMO too much) respect because they can be so dominant, and dominance can get you to 14-2, but it can't beat the best teams. I don't care how dominant you are against the Browns and Texans of the world: You have to be able to overcome deficits and put up points quickly to be taken seriously as a Super Bowl contender, and they proved again last night that they're not there yet.
Quote from: webny99 on September 29, 2020, 07:58:31 PM
One word to describe my feelings about the Ravens: Distaste.
They get so much (IMO too much) respect because they can be so dominant, and dominance can get you to 14-2, but it can't beat the best teams. I don't care how dominant you are against the Browns and Texans of the world: You have to be able to overcome deficits and put up points quickly to be taken seriously as a Super Bowl contender, and they proved again last night that they're not there yet.
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast. I've always had questions about his intelligence - he scored a 13 from 50 on the Wonderlic. Josh Allen, who was drafted the same year, scored 37.
Bills are somehow first in the AFC in points scored so far this year with 93, only narrowly ahead of the Chiefs and Ravens who both have 91. Packers and Seahawks are atop the NFC with 122 and 111 respectively.
Now here's a weird stat: the Giants have allowed 79 points, the fewest in the NFC East, and they're 0-3! Just goes to show how terrible that division really is.
Bucs and Bears have allowed the fewest points overall, with just 61 each.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 29, 2020, 07:58:31 PM
One word to describe my feelings about the Ravens: Distaste.
They get so much (IMO too much) respect because they can be so dominant, and dominance can get you to 14-2, but it can't beat the best teams. I don't care how dominant you are against the Browns and Texans of the world: You have to be able to overcome deficits and put up points quickly to be taken seriously as a Super Bowl contender, and they proved again last night that they're not there yet.
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast. I've always had questions about his intelligence - he scored a 13 from 50 on the Wonderlic. Josh Allen, who was drafted the same year, scored 37.
That is lazy. He was top ten last year in numerous passing categories, including passer rating, which incorporates none of what he brings to the game with his running ability.
Calling him "fake" and "stupid" while comparing him to Josh Allen is hilarious. I've seen both play plenty in their careers, and there is nothing to suggest that he plays dumber than Allen. In fact, up until this year, I thought Allen wasn't very intelligent in his decision making.
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 30, 2020, 12:31:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 29, 2020, 07:58:31 PM
One word to describe my feelings about the Ravens: Distaste.
They get so much (IMO too much) respect because they can be so dominant, and dominance can get you to 14-2, but it can't beat the best teams. I don't care how dominant you are against the Browns and Texans of the world: You have to be able to overcome deficits and put up points quickly to be taken seriously as a Super Bowl contender, and they proved again last night that they're not there yet.
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast. I've always had questions about his intelligence - he scored a 13 from 50 on the Wonderlic. Josh Allen, who was drafted the same year, scored 37.
That is lazy. He was top ten last year in numerous passing categories, including passer rating, which incorporates none of what he brings to the game with his running ability.
But it does incorporate what he brings with his running ability. Do you know anything about the present-day NFL? Most defenses are scared of Jackson running all over them, so they sell out against the run and basically let him throw the ball. The Chiefs, for whatever reason, did not do that on Monday, and it worked. Jackson is 0-3 against the Chiefs and 21-3 against the rest of the NFL. They have his number. Whatever he is doing is not good enough. If he wants to win a conference title, he'll need to get past the Chiefs, as well as one or two other quality teams who will pose a real threat to how he wants to play. We've already seen two teams - Chargers in '18 and Titans in '19 - completely humiliate him on his home field in the playoffs. Going 14-2 is impressive. Winning MVP is extremely impressive. But you know some other quarterbacks who have gone 12-4, or 13-3, or 14-2? Mitch Trubisky, Jared Goff, Dak Prescott, Matt Ryan . . .
Quote
Calling him "fake" and "stupid" while comparing him to Josh Allen is hilarious. I've seen both play plenty in their careers, and there is nothing to suggest that he plays dumber than Allen. In fact, up until this year, I thought Allen wasn't very intelligent in his decision making.
For one, I was not comparing his talent or ability to Allen. I was merely comparing his intelligence to Allen. Anyone with eyes can see that Jackson is the superior athlete. If you put me in charge of redrafting the NFL, I would pick Jackson long before Allen. I also did not call him stupid. I said I have questions about his intelligence. Maybe he's very smart, but math is not his strong suit. I don't know.
Quote from: ET21 on September 30, 2020, 12:44:39 PM
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
They went 12-4 two years ago. I'm more surprised by the Steelers and Bills being 3-0 than I am by the Bears being 3-0.
Quote from: ET21 on September 30, 2020, 12:44:39 PM
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
Only team in NFL history to overcome multiple 16-point 4th quarter deficits in a single season, and it's only Week 3!
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:56:54 PM
They went 12-4 two years ago. I'm more surprised by the Steelers and Bills being 3-0 than I am by the Bears being 3-0.
But the Bills and Steelers are actually 3-0 type teams. The Bears are, well... not. They're a defense-first team that's been lucky and had two improbable comebacks, plus a narrow win against the winless Giants. I think they're a fradulent 3-0, and I bet the Colts prove it this weekend.
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 01:12:17 PM
Quote from: ET21 on September 30, 2020, 12:44:39 PM
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
Only team in NFL history to overcome multiple 16-point 4th quarter deficits in a single season, and it's only Week 3!
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:56:54 PM
They went 12-4 two years ago. I'm more surprised by the Steelers and Bills being 3-0 than I am by the Bears being 3-0.
But the Bills and Steelers are actually 3-0 type teams. The Bears are, well... not. They're a defense-first team that's been lucky and had two improbable comebacks, plus a narrow win against the winless Giants. I think they're a fradulent 3-0, and I bet the Colts prove it this weekend.
Yes, they're a bad 3-0. Maybe the worst 3-0 team in five years.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 01:15:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 01:12:17 PM
Quote from: ET21 on September 30, 2020, 12:44:39 PM
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
Only team in NFL history to overcome multiple 16-point 4th quarter deficits in a single season, and it's only Week 3!
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:56:54 PM
They went 12-4 two years ago. I'm more surprised by the Steelers and Bills being 3-0 than I am by the Bears being 3-0.
But the Bills and Steelers are actually 3-0 type teams. The Bears are, well... not. They're a defense-first team that's been lucky and had two improbable comebacks, plus a narrow win against the winless Giants. I think they're a fradulent 3-0, and I bet the Colts prove it this weekend.
Yes, they're a bad 3-0. Maybe the worst 3-0 team in five years.
Speaking as a Bears fan, I have to agree. They would be 0-3 right now if not for:
-D'Andre Swift's drop on the 2nd-to-last play week 1
-Golden Tate's OPI on the last play week 2
-Tashaun Gipson's INT with a minute left week 3
It definitely felt like the Falcons were exposing the Bears before #BigDickNick did his thing yet again. I'm curious to see how the Colts gameplan on defense now that he's officially the starter moving forward. Playing zone and daring Mitch to complete a deep ball won't work anymore :spin:
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 01:15:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 01:12:17 PM
Quote from: ET21 on September 30, 2020, 12:44:39 PM
Somehow Bears are 3-0, only in 2020 :-D :D :pan:
Only team in NFL history to overcome multiple 16-point 4th quarter deficits in a single season, and it's only Week 3!
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:56:54 PM
They went 12-4 two years ago. I'm more surprised by the Steelers and Bills being 3-0 than I am by the Bears being 3-0.
But the Bills and Steelers are actually 3-0 type teams. The Bears are, well... not. They're a defense-first team that's been lucky and had two improbable comebacks, plus a narrow win against the winless Giants. I think they're a fradulent 3-0, and I bet the Colts prove it this weekend.
Yes, they're a bad 3-0. Maybe the worst 3-0 team in five years.
The Bears have a shit offensive line. They've had a shit offensive line since about 1995. A QB change can only do so much with an OL this bad. It's incomprehensible that they drafted a TE with one of their two 2nd round picks when they have an OL this bad. Patrick Mahomes couldn't win more than 10 games behind this OL.
There was discussion about Lamar Jackson and the reason his stats are so much better than his talent is his OL. Same with Garoppolo.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:55:27 PM
Jackson is 0-3 against the Chiefs and 21-3 against the rest of the NFL. ...
We've already seen two teams - Chargers in '18 and Titans in '19 - completely humiliate him on his home field in the playoffs.
Right, which means his regular season record is
21-1 against non-Chiefs teams. The one loss? A 40-25 loss to the Browns exactly one year ago yesterday.
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 01:59:31 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 12:55:27 PM
Jackson is 0-3 against the Chiefs and 21-3 against the rest of the NFL. ...
We've already seen two teams - Chargers in '18 and Titans in '19 - completely humiliate him on his home field in the playoffs.
Right, which means his regular season record is 21-1 against non-Chiefs teams. The one loss? A 40-25 loss to the Browns exactly one year ago yesterday.
Yes, but we're not talking about only the regular season.
Here's the latest Titans COVID update: https://www.nfl.com/news/pittsburgh-steelers-tennessee-titans-game-postponed-until-monday-or-tuesday
It was always just a matter of time before positive COVID tests occured in-season, and here we are.
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 04:52:28 PM
Here's the latest Titans COVID update: https://www.nfl.com/news/pittsburgh-steelers-tennessee-titans-game-postponed-until-monday-or-tuesday
It was always just a matter of time before positive COVID tests occured in-season, and here we are.
Steelers/Titans will not be played W4. Officially postponed indefinately
The "simplest" solution will be to move the Ravens Bye and Play Steelers/Titans to W7 (Originally Titans Bye Week; Steelers/Ravens scheduled), and move Steelers/Ravens to W8 (Originally Steelers and Ravens Bye Week). Titans and Steelers Bye becomes W4
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 01, 2020, 12:01:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 30, 2020, 04:52:28 PM
Here's the latest Titans COVID update: https://www.nfl.com/news/pittsburgh-steelers-tennessee-titans-game-postponed-until-monday-or-tuesday
It was always just a matter of time before positive COVID tests occured in-season, and here we are.
Steelers/Titans will not be played W4. Officially postponed indefinately
The "simplest" solution will be to move the Ravens Bye and Play Steelers/Titans to W7 (Originally Titans Bye Week; Steelers/Ravens scheduled), and move Steelers/Ravens to W8 (Originally Steelers and Ravens Bye Week). Titans and Steelers Bye becomes W4
Email the commish. I don't trust anyone in the NFL to have
good ideas.
Dak Prescott over his last three games . . .
112 completions on 162 attempts
1,424 yards
8 passing touchdowns, 3 rushing touchdowns
If he kept up those stats for the entire season, he would break just about every single season passing record ever set, other than touchdowns, which he would lose out on to a handful of other quarterbacks.
Quote from: thspfc on October 04, 2020, 04:35:48 PM
Dak Prescott over his last three games . . .
112 completions on 162 attempts
1,424 yards
8 passing touchdowns, 3 rushing touchdowns
If he kept up those stats for the entire season, he would break just about every single season passing record ever set, other than touchdowns, which he would lose out on to a handful of other quarterbacks.
Impressive, but his team is 1-3. His team has gotten behind by large margins early in games, forcing them to throw every down. The Cowboys should try playing better earlier in games, or find a defense.
And they got their only win due the other team imploding.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on October 04, 2020, 05:44:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 04, 2020, 04:35:48 PM
Dak Prescott over his last three games . . .
112 completions on 162 attempts
1,424 yards
8 passing touchdowns, 3 rushing touchdowns
If he kept up those stats for the entire season, he would break just about every single season passing record ever set, other than touchdowns, which he would lose out on to a handful of other quarterbacks.
Impressive, but his team is 1-3. His team has gotten behind by large margins early in games, forcing them to throw every down. The Cowboys should try playing better earlier in games, or find a defense.
Did I say anything about the Cowboys? I'm talking about Dak Prescott. The Cowboys are mediocre, but Dak is really good. Why is the concept of a really good QB playing for a not-so-good team so hard to grasp?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:03 PM
And they got their only win due the other team imploding.
If we're going to play that game, one of their losses featured a crucial and very controversial call. In another one of their losses they were one play away from overtime.
Today was the first time Cleveland has beaten Dallas since 1994
Quote from: thspfc on October 04, 2020, 07:37:41 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:03 PM
And they got their only win due the other team imploding.
If we're going to play that game, one of their losses featured a crucial and very controversial call. In another one of their losses they were one play away from overtime.
Cool.
They still lost.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 04, 2020, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 04, 2020, 07:37:41 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:03 PM
And they got their only win due the other team imploding.
If we're going to play that game, one of their losses featured a crucial and very controversial call. In another one of their losses they were one play away from overtime.
Cool.
They still lost.
They still beat the Falcons. All I'm asking for is consistency. If you're allowing some what-ifs, then you need to allow all the what-ifs. It's much easier to just look at the result and see it for what it is. The Cowboys are 1-3. They are not lucky to not be 0-4, they are not unlucky to not be 3-1. They are 1-3.
Things aren't great for football in Texas these days. Houston is 0-4 after the Vikings beat them today. Texans had a chance to tie but Fuller couldn't complete a late TD catch.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 04, 2020, 10:06:00 PM
Things aren't great for football in Texas these days. Houston is 0-4 after the Vikings beat them today. Texans had a chance to tie but Fuller couldn't complete a late TD catch.
I had a very clear rooting interest in that one. Still bitter about that playoff game the Bills lost to the Texans this (yes, THIS!) January, and wanted to see the Vikings get their first win after the Diggs trade, which has been great for Buffalo so far.
Quote from: thspfc on October 04, 2020, 07:34:08 PM
The Cowboys are mediocre, but Dak is really good.
I agree. The offense is good, the defense is terrible. Average those together and you get mediocre.
They've been competitive all four weeks, but opposing offenses have gone wild against that defense.
And... with a 25-20 win over the 49ers, their first win of the season (!), the Eagles are now in first place in the NFC East at 1-2-1.
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
This has got to be a record...the Eagles in Week 4 finally get their first win, and immediately take sole possession of first place!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 04, 2020, 11:50:18 PM
This has got to be a record...the Eagles in Week 4 finally get their first win, and immediately take sole possession of first place!
Everyone laughed at them for playing to tie against the Bengals... but the NFC East is so terrible that the non-loss actually paid off! :-D
A tie can make the difference come playoff-clinching time. I recall a year in which some team won its division because of a tie, going 9—6—1 and thus finishing half a game ahead of a 9—7—0 team.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 05, 2020, 07:32:35 AM
A tie can make the difference come playoff-clinching time. I recall a year in which some team won its division because of a tie, going 9–6–1 and thus finishing half a game ahead of a 9–7–0 team.
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2020, 11:52:09 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 04, 2020, 11:50:18 PM
This has got to be a record...the Eagles in Week 4 finally get their first win, and immediately take sole possession of first place!
Everyone laughed at them for playing to tie against the Bengals... but the NFC East is so terrible that the non-loss actually paid off! :-D
Exactly. Anyone who thinks that ties aren't much better than losses is out of their mind. In 2018 the Colts chose to lose instead of tying against the Texans, and that costed them a division title. Now the Eagles are on top of the NFC East after choosing to tie instead of throwing the game away. There's no telling how important that tie might be, especially in a division where the odds are that only one team is making the playoffs.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 05, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 05, 2020, 07:32:35 AM
A tie can make the difference come playoff-clinching time. I recall a year in which some team won its division because of a tie, going 9—6—1 and thus finishing half a game ahead of a 9—7—0 team.
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
For another example, the 2014 Carolina Panthers made the postseason as NFC South champions with a 7-8-1 record. That tie let them edge out the Saints' 7-9 record.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 05, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 05, 2020, 07:32:35 AM
A tie can make the difference come playoff-clinching time. I recall a year in which some team won its division because of a tie, going 9–6–1 and thus finishing half a game ahead of a 9–7–0 team.
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
I just looked up the standings. It was 2008 and the tie got them in as a wild-card, rather than winning the division, but the principle is the same, and certainly Oscar noted another example.
The first pandemic disruptions to the schedule were this week.
Still trying to understand why the normal Monday night game was bumped back half an hour. The games are going to overlap anyway and they're on different networks, so what is the point of a half hour delay?
It also doesn't matter to me, but it just seems like one of those stupid things that comes up because some bean counter thinks it'll mean more eyeballs for light beer, boner pill, and pickup truck commercials.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 05, 2020, 01:36:12 PM
The first pandemic disruptions to the schedule were this week.
Still trying to understand why the normal Monday night game was bumped back half an hour. The games are going to overlap anyway and they're on different networks, so what is the point of a half hour delay?
It also doesn't matter to me, but it just seems like one of those stupid things that comes up because some bean counter thinks it'll mean more eyeballs for light beer, boner pill, and pickup truck commercials.
The NFL and ESPN have pushed the scheduled MNF game of Falcons/Packers another 10 minutes, to Kickoff at 9 PM EDT/8 PM CDT. Why another 10 minutes, or better yet, why the NFL didn't announce that as the start time yesterday, who knows. I thought 8:50/7:50 was goofy anyway
Quote from: oscar on October 05, 2020, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 05, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
For another example, the 2014 Carolina Panthers made the postseason as NFC South champions with a 7-8-1 record. That tie let them edge out the Saints' 7-9 record.
Quite by coincidence, the Panthers' tie that year also was with the Bengals, who seem to be a magnet for ties.
Quote from: oscar on October 05, 2020, 07:23:56 PM
Quote from: oscar on October 05, 2020, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 05, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
For another example, the 2014 Carolina Panthers made the postseason as NFC South champions with a 7-8-1 record. That tie let them edge out the Saints' 7-9 record.
Quite by coincidence, the Panthers' tie that year also was with the Bengals, who seem to be a magnet for ties.
Careful, someone at ESPN is going to link the Bengals' tendency to tie often with the fact that they haven't won any Super Bowls.
Seriously though, ties are so rare yet they happen in the same matchups a disporportionate amount of times. The Packers and Vikings have tied twice at Lambeau in the last eight years, in 2013 and 2018.
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
Quote from: 1 on October 05, 2020, 08:26:08 PM
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
No, there cannot be. There are tiebreakers down to "coin flip."
Quote from: 1 on October 05, 2020, 08:26:08 PM
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
Sarcastic answer: Yes, any time two teams that have already clinched playoff berths play each other.
Serious answer: Not in a very long time, if ever. But a similar thing I can remember was on the final day of the 2018 regular season, when the Steelers, who had just lost out on their division title, needed the Colts and Titans to tie to advance to the playoffs.
I'm so happy right now.
The Texans FINALLY fired Bill O'Brien!!!!! :sombrero: :sombrero: :sombrero:
Quote from: thspfc on October 05, 2020, 10:26:40 PM
Quote from: 1 on October 05, 2020, 08:26:08 PM
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
Sarcastic answer: Yes, any time two teams that have already clinched playoff berths play each other.
Serious answer: Not in a very long time, if ever. But a similar thing I can remember was on the final day of the 2018 regular season, when the Steelers, who had just lost out on their division title, needed the Colts and Titans to tie to advance to the playoffs.
I think he's referring to a scenario like this:
(Note: this is under the old format of two wild cards, since a third was added for 2020)
We'll have Teams A, B, and C. Let's say C has beaten both A and B and has the head to head tiebreakers over both.
Teams A and B are 9-6 heading into Week 17 leading the Wild Card positions and are playing. Team C is 8-7 and can get into the playoffs with a win as they'll overtake the loser of A vs. B. Teams A and B can play for a tie because no matter what C does, C can't have a better win percentage than either A or B (9-6-1 vs. 9-7).
Quote from: oscar on October 05, 2020, 07:23:56 PM
Quote from: oscar on October 05, 2020, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on October 05, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
That 9-6-1 team was the Eagles.
That tie was with the Bengals.
For another example, the 2014 Carolina Panthers made the postseason as NFC South champions with a 7-8-1 record. That tie let them edge out the Saints' 7-9 record.
Quite by coincidence, the Panthers' tie that year also was with the Bengals, who seem to be a magnet for ties.
Yes, now. From their inception in 1968 through 2007, the Bengals played in exactly
one tie game (in 1969 vs. the Houston Oilers). Since 2008, they have played in four tie games (vs. the Eagles in 2008, vs. the Panthers in 2014, vs. the Redskins in 2016, and again vs. the Eagles this year). And this is with the old sudden death/new overtime rules!
As far as teams that have tied the most since the OT rule was introduced for the 1974 NFL season, Green Bay has had 6 ties, Philadelphia has had 5 ties, and Cincinnati, Arizona, and Minnesota have had 4 ties. Minnesota and Green Bay have tied three times since 1974 in games played against one another (1978, 2013, and 2018).
For purists, a tie is like "kissing your sister". However, since 1972, tie games have counted in the standings. Before, tie games were not counted. For example, in 1971, Kansas City finished the season with a 10-3-1 record and a .769 winning percentage. In 1972, the NFL decreed that ties would be counted as "a half-game win and a half-game loss". So, in that year, Oakland finished the season 10-3-1 with a .750 winning percentage.
So, using a hypothetical scenario, using the old system, team A finishes 9-2-3 (San Diego's record in 1965) and team B finishes 10-3-1 in the same division. Team A would advance to the playoffs with a .818 winning percentage and team B would have been left out or have been a wild card with a .769 winning percentage. Under the "tie counts" system, both team A and team B would have .750 winning percentages and then would have to go to the NFL tiebreaker procedures to determine the division champion.
In other words, it is always better to play for a tie, if you must, because it is a half-win rather than chancing a win, falling short, and having an "L" on your record.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 05, 2020, 11:05:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 05, 2020, 10:26:40 PM
Quote from: 1 on October 05, 2020, 08:26:08 PM
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
Sarcastic answer: Yes, any time two teams that have already clinched playoff berths play each other.
Serious answer: Not in a very long time, if ever. But a similar thing I can remember was on the final day of the 2018 regular season, when the Steelers, who had just lost out on their division title, needed the Colts and Titans to tie to advance to the playoffs.
I think he's referring to a scenario like this:
(Note: this is under the old format of two wild cards, since a third was added for 2020)
We'll have Teams A, B, and C. Let's say C has beaten both A and B and has the head to head tiebreakers over both.
Teams A and B are 9-6 heading into Week 17 leading the Wild Card positions and are playing. Team C is 8-7 and can get into the playoffs with a win as they'll overtake the loser of A vs. B. Teams A and B can play for a tie because no matter what C does, C can't have a better win percentage than either A or B (9-6-1 vs. 9-7).
Could you imagine what the conspiracy theorists would say if that situation ever did happen? Especially if New England was involved? :nod:
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 05, 2020, 11:05:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 05, 2020, 10:26:40 PM
Quote from: 1 on October 05, 2020, 08:26:08 PM
Has there ever been an "if we tie we both advance to playoffs" situation in American football or hockey? (Baseball and basketball can't end in ties except for unusual circumstances, and I know the answer is yes for association football.)
Sarcastic answer: Yes, any time two teams that have already clinched playoff berths play each other.
Serious answer: Not in a very long time, if ever. But a similar thing I can remember was on the final day of the 2018 regular season, when the Steelers, who had just lost out on their division title, needed the Colts and Titans to tie to advance to the playoffs.
I think he's referring to a scenario like this:
(Note: this is under the old format of two wild cards, since a third was added for 2020)
We'll have Teams A, B, and C. Let's say C has beaten both A and B and has the head to head tiebreakers over both.
Teams A and B are 9-6 heading into Week 17 leading the Wild Card positions and are playing. Team C is 8-7 and can get into the playoffs with a win as they'll overtake the loser of A vs. B. Teams A and B can play for a tie because no matter what C does, C can't have a better win percentage than either A or B (9-6-1 vs. 9-7).
Great explanation. I was trying to think of a good way to explain that it
could happen, even though it's unlikely. It could also still happen if you took Team C is out of the picture (Teams A and B tie and both make the playoffs at 9-6-1), there just wouldn't be the same
incentive to tie unless Team C was involved.
The same situation could also happen under the new format, say if another team had already clinched the #5 seed with an 11-5 record.
The Bears are maddening. I convince myself they're going to lose, and then they win. And yet, I'm not mad at myself for picking their opponents. I'm not mad at their opponents for losing, either. I'm just mad at them for winning, because they're 4-1 and should be more like 1-4.
Quote from: webny99 on October 09, 2020, 08:21:05 AM
The Bears are maddening. I convince myself they're going to lose, and then they win. And yet, I'm not mad at myself for picking their opponents. I'm not mad at their opponents for losing, either. I'm just mad at them for winning, because they're 4-1 and should be more like 1-4.
The Bears need to stop doing this to me on a weekly basis, all 4 wins have come with heart attacks down the stretch :crazy:
But it's definitely a very strange 4-1...I also said this in this thread after the Falcons game but they could very easily be 0-5 right now (this time courtesy of a few questionable calls against the Bucs, and Tom Brady apparently thinking it was 3rd down on the failed 4th down).
Also, this was hands down my favorite moment from the game (low-key surprised unnecessary roughness wasn't called, TBH):
https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1314390101087133698
Quote from: webny99 on October 09, 2020, 08:21:05 AM
The Bears are maddening. I convince myself they're going to lose, and then they win. And yet, I'm not mad at myself for picking their opponents. I'm not mad at their opponents for losing, either. I'm just mad at them for winning, because they're 4-1 and should be more like 1-4.
Not really. They've played five close games. Basic probability says you would expect them to win 2-3 of those games. So them being 1-4 would be just as unlikely as them being 4-1.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 09, 2020, 10:15:05 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 09, 2020, 08:21:05 AM
The Bears are maddening. I convince myself they're going to lose, and then they win. And yet, I'm not mad at myself for picking their opponents. I'm not mad at their opponents for losing, either. I'm just mad at them for winning, because they're 4-1 and should be more like 1-4.
The Bears need to stop doing this to me on a weekly basis, all 4 wins have come with heart attacks down the stretch :crazy:
But it's definitely a very strange 4-1...I also said this in this thread after the Falcons game but they could very easily be 0-5 right now (this time courtesy of a few questionable calls against the Bucs, and Tom Brady apparently thinking it was 3rd down on the failed 4th down).
Also, this was hands down my favorite moment from the game (low-key surprised unnecessary roughness wasn't called, TBH):
https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1314390101087133698
Mack used Wirf's momentum against him.
Quote from: thspfc on October 09, 2020, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 09, 2020, 08:21:05 AM
The Bears are maddening. I convince myself they're going to lose, and then they win. And yet, I'm not mad at myself for picking their opponents. I'm not mad at their opponents for losing, either. I'm just mad at them for winning, because they're 4-1 and should be more like 1-4.
Not really. They've played five close games. Basic probability says you would expect them to win 2-3 of those games. So them being 1-4 would be just as unlikely as them being 4-1.
But when you look at the games, that's not really the case. All four wins came down to one or two decisive plays in their favor, it's really more like they've been lucky and pulled several wins out of the fire.
Just for fun, I decided to try to rank the toughness of the NFL divisions heading into Week 5.
Here's what I came up with, starting with toughest and ending with easiest:
1. NFC West
2. AFC North
3. NFC South
4. NFC North
5. AFC West
6. AFC East
7. AFC South
8. NFC East
Then I ran FiveThirtyEight's Elo ratings (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-nfl-predictions/) to obtain an average Elo for each division. I was surprised to find that I got 6 of 8 in the exact same order. The only difference was that my #3 NFC South and #5 AFC West were flipped, with the NFC South falling to #5 and the AFC West rising to #3. I guess the Chiefs are just that good.
Kyle Allen out of the game after a helmet-to-helmet hit, so Alex Smith is playing quarterback for the Redskins.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 03:14:30 PM
Kyle Allen out of the game after a helmet-to-helmet hit, so Alex Smith is playing quarterback for the Redskins.
No, it's the Washington Eagles
Keeping up with all the NFL schedule changes is becoming a bit complicated, so here's a guide:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-schedule-changes-team-by-team-adjustments-after-patriots-vs-broncos-is-postponed-to-week-6/
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 11, 2020, 05:31:09 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 03:14:30 PM
Kyle Allen out of the game after a helmet-to-helmet hit, so Alex Smith is playing quarterback for the Redskins.
No, it's the Washington Eagles
He's throwing a fit over a team changing their nickname so don't pay any attention to him.
Anyways, Cowboys win. Search "Dak Prescott injury" at your own risk.
Heartbreaking loss for both the Cowboys and the Giants.
Quote from: thspfc on October 11, 2020, 07:46:37 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 11, 2020, 05:31:09 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 03:14:30 PM
Kyle Allen out of the game after a helmet-to-helmet hit, so Alex Smith is playing quarterback for the Redskins.
No, it's the Washington Eagles
He's throwing a fit over a team changing their nickname so don't pay any attention to him.
Anyways, Cowboys win. Search "Dak Prescott injury" at your own risk.
Honestly, shut up. You're the guy who criticizes me every time I say "Redskins." I just use the name and I don't engage in commentary about it (until this post, because I've had enough of your whining). If anyone's "throwing a fit," it's you–you feel the need to cry about it every time I use that name, apparently because you have no sense of humor. It's a joke! If you don't like it, put me on ignore. Even one of the TV commentators said "Redskins" today. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL!!!! Heck, I remember a few years ago when one of the referees came out for the coin toss and called what is now known as the Las Vegas Football Team "Los Angeles" (which they haven't been since 1994).
If it makes you feel any better, I call the NBA team the Bullets, too.
Besides, if you didn't get the joke CoreySamson was making, then you need to reread the thread. I also note you don't whine about the European member who goes on about coming up with different names for every arena.
BTW, rather creepy for Prescott to suffer that injury on the same day Alex Smith returned.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 11, 2020, 07:46:37 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 11, 2020, 05:31:09 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 03:14:30 PM
Kyle Allen out of the game after a helmet-to-helmet hit, so Alex Smith is playing quarterback for the Redskins.
No, it's the Washington Eagles
He's throwing a fit over a team changing their nickname so don't pay any attention to him.
Anyways, Cowboys win. Search "Dak Prescott injury" at your own risk.
Honestly, shut the fuck up. You're the jackass who criticizes me every time I say "Redskins." If anyone's "pitching a fit," it's you–you feel the need to cry about it every time I use that name. If you don't like it, put me on ignore. Even one of the TV commentators said "Redskins" today. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL!!!! Heck, I remember a few years ago when one of the referees came out for the coin toss and called what is now known as the Las Vegas Football Team "Los Angeles" (which they haven't been since 1994).
If it makes you feel any better, I call the NBA team the Bullets, too.
Besides, if you didn't get the joke CoreySamson was making, then you need to reread the thread. I also note you don't whine about the European member who goes on about coming up with different names for every arena.
Wow. Can you, in good standing with basic logic, continue to insist that I'm the one who needs to be quiet when you just used language that quite obviously potrays anger? It wouldn't be a big deal if you just casually said the old name, but instead you have to go on and say you are calling every other team the "Football Team". Do you see where you come across as the disgruntled one?
And by the way, I do understand what "Washington Eagles" means.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 08:57:38 PM
BTW, rather creepy for Prescott to suffer that injury on the same day Alex Smith returned.
Continuity of a quarterback out of service due to a major leg injury. You know the deal.
(Dak was heading to Fort Worth but his foot wanted to visit Dallas. Too soon?)
Quote from: Alps on October 11, 2020, 09:16:28 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 08:57:38 PM
BTW, rather creepy for Prescott to suffer that injury on the same day Alex Smith returned.
Continuity of a quarterback out of service due to a major leg injury. You know the deal.
(Dak was heading to Fort Worth but his foot wanted to visit Dallas. Too soon?)
My wife was in the other room and heard me make a grimacing sort of noise and wanted to know what was wrong. When I said Prescott's leg did something that reminded me of Theismann and Smith, she immediately said she didn't need to see the video. I saw the play live and the replay once. That's plenty.
Quote from: Alps on October 11, 2020, 09:16:28 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 08:57:38 PM
BTW, rather creepy for Prescott to suffer that injury on the same day Alex Smith returned.
Continuity of a quarterback out of service due to a major leg injury. You know the deal.
(Dak was heading to Fort Worth but his foot wanted to visit Dallas. Too soon?)
Oof. A little too soon. That was tough, and I even got a bit emotional watching the footage. Wishing him a speedy recovery.
Those fluorescent green jerseys the Seattle Football Team are wearing tonight are hideous. They remind me of the old Orlando Thunder of the WLAF almost 30 years ago, though I seem to recall the Thunder's jerseys seeming to be an even more cloyingly bright color. Whether that was because of the lousier TV picture back then, stadium lighting issues, or just the mental cobwebs that accumulate over 30 years, I have no idea.
As an aside, turning to this game and seeing Kirk Cousins playing was sort of striking. Recall the Redskins (clearly the right name in the time period I'm about to mention) had Robert Griffin anointed as the quarterback of the future only to see him lose his job to Cousins, who wore jersey #8 (same as he does in Minnesota). They now have Dwayne Haskins, who just lost his job to Kyle Allen, who wears jersey #8. Obviously, if you're going to start in Washington, you need to insist your backup not wear #8. :-D
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 10:12:32 PM
Those fluorescent green jerseys the Seattle Football Team are wearing tonight are hideous. They remind me of the old Orlando Thunder of the WLAF almost 30 years ago, though I seem to recall the Thunder's jerseys seeming to be an even more cloyingly bright color. Whether that was because of the lousier TV picture back then, stadium lighting issues, or just the mental cobwebs that accumulate over 30 years, I have no idea.
As an aside, turning to this game and seeing Kirk Cousins playing was sort of striking. Recall the Redskins (clearly the right name in the time period I'm about to mention) had Robert Griffin anointed as the quarterback of the future only to see him lose his job to Cousins, who wore jersey #8 (same as he does in Minnesota). They now have Dwayne Haskins, who just lost his job to Kyle Allen, who wears jersey #8. Obviously, if you're going to start in Washington, you need to insist your backup not wear #8. :-D
I don't care if you want to refer to any given team as any particular name. Football Team or otherwise. Please stop posting about it. I will start issuing warnings after this. Thanks.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 10:12:32 PM
Those fluorescent green jerseys the Seattle Football Team are wearing tonight are hideous. They remind me of the old Orlando Thunder of the WLAF almost 30 years ago, though I seem to recall the Thunder's jerseys seeming to be an even more cloyingly bright color. Whether that was because of the lousier TV picture back then, stadium lighting issues, or just the mental cobwebs that accumulate over 30 years, I have no idea.
As an aside, turning to this game and seeing Kirk Cousins playing was sort of striking. Recall the Redskins (clearly the right name in the time period I'm about to mention) had Robert Griffin anointed as the quarterback of the future only to see him lose his job to Cousins, who wore jersey #8 (same as he does in Minnesota). They now have Dwayne Haskins, who just lost his job to Kyle Allen, who wears jersey #8. Obviously, if you're going to start in Washington, you need to insist your backup not wear #8. :-D
It didn't work for Bob Holly back in 1983. Maybe if he stuck around through 1985...
It was great to see Alex Smith back on the field. And hoping for a total recovery for Dak.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 11, 2020, 11:07:23 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 11, 2020, 10:12:32 PM
Those fluorescent green jerseys the Seattle Football Team are wearing tonight are hideous. They remind me of the old Orlando Thunder of the WLAF almost 30 years ago, though I seem to recall the Thunder's jerseys seeming to be an even more cloyingly bright color. Whether that was because of the lousier TV picture back then, stadium lighting issues, or just the mental cobwebs that accumulate over 30 years, I have no idea.
As an aside, turning to this game and seeing Kirk Cousins playing was sort of striking. Recall the Redskins (clearly the right name in the time period I'm about to mention) had Robert Griffin anointed as the quarterback of the future only to see him lose his job to Cousins, who wore jersey #8 (same as he does in Minnesota). They now have Dwayne Haskins, who just lost his job to Kyle Allen, who wears jersey #8. Obviously, if you're going to start in Washington, you need to insist your backup not wear #8. :-D
It didn't work for Bob Holly back in 1983. Maybe if he stuck around through 1985...
It was great to see Alex Smith back on the field. And hoping for a total recovery for Dak.
Heh, and Bob Holly was backing up Joe Theismann, who wore #7 (as Haskins does as well). Maybe it's Dan Snyder—related. Certainly people here blame Snyder for just about everything that's wrong with that franchise. For those of us who grew up during their glory years in the 1980s, it's been sad to see how largely irrelevant they've become, even on the local sports scene.
I will agree with you on the lessening importance of the Redskins/Football Team in Washington and the surrounding areas which were Redskin strongholds. There used to be an incredible waiting list for tickets to the games--now, I don't believe there is much of one now. Snyder has plenty to do with the current state of the team, however, the demise began the day after Joe Gibbs retired the first time after the 1992 season. The Redskins were still important throughout the rest of the 1990's but as long as Snyder owns the team, us long-term Redskins fans will probably never sniff anything like the glory days of the Gibbs era.
Throughout the 1980's and early 1990's I would try to watch or listen to every Redskins game--even on dates with my now wife. It did help that she was a devout Redskins fan also. Of course, if I did watch the games, the TV sound was off and the radio broadcast was on my stereo system (yes, an 80's system complete with semi-large speakers). There was nothing like hearing Frank Herzog, Sam Huff, and Sonny Jurgensen doing the broadcast, punctuated by Frank's call after every Redskins touchdown, "Touchdown! Washington Redskins!". I, just like 1995hoo, miss those days--when Washington Redskins football was fun and meaningful.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 12, 2020, 12:02:02 AM
I will agree with you on the lessening importance of the Redskins/Football Team in Washington and the surrounding areas which were Redskin strongholds. There used to be an incredible waiting list for tickets to the games--now, I don't believe there is much of one now. Snyder has plenty to do with the current state of the team, however, the demise began the day after Joe Gibbs retired the first time after the 1992 season. The Redskins were still important throughout the rest of the 1990's but as long as Snyder owns the team, us long-term Redskins fans will probably never sniff anything like the glory days of the Gibbs era.
Can vouch up here that PSL's killed off Jets and Giants fandoms. Growing up, they said to get your name on the Jets list when you're born, and maybe you'll get on it before you retire. PSL's come, suddenly no waiting list. They realized how badly they had done it, but it was too late.
I don't think the Redskins sold PSLs when Jack Kent Cooke built what is now FedEx Field, although the suites, club seats, and loge seats (none of which count towards sellouts per NFL rules) are subject to multiple-year contracts, and that's proved to be its own source of bad publicity for Snyder, especially during the 2008 recession–when people encountered hard times and had trouble paying the contractual prices on schedule, the Redskins sued some of them.
We have a friend who used to have Caps season tickets down the row from our seats. She and her husband were also long-standing Redskins season ticket holders. She had to give up the Caps tickets because attending became too much of a burden as her husband suffered from Alzheimer's. No problem there with the Caps at all, although it's fair to recognize those are sold year-by-year. He died about five years ago and she wanted to give up the Redskins tickets as well, in part because she didn't want to attend games alone, but the Redskins said no dice–you committed to buying these tickets and you, or your estate if you die too, will keep paying for them. (They didn't have premium tickets, either, but apparently the tickets were still sold on a multi-year basis. I don't know all the details.) Stuff like that is a real turnoff to dealing with that franchise. I mean, I understand the principle of a contract being a binding contract, but on the other hand, there's something reasonable to the idea of working with your customers, especially someone like her who had been a customer for over 50 years.
I've never bought Redskins season tickets for several reasons, including (but not necessarily limited to) the franchise's reputation for suing customers if they can't pay, the nuisance of getting to games at FedEx Field, my own declining interest in football compared to hockey, the fact that we have Caps season tickets (enough of a cost and time commitment without football), the fact that we gave up our UVA football season tickets after the 2009 season, and the general bad reputation the FedEx Field game day atmosphere has in terms of a lot of drunken fighting going on (no doubt not helped by the increasing hordes of opposing fans who attend games there as local fans lose interest).
Not sure what the correct smiley to use with this one is!
https://twitter.com/NickiJhabvala/status/1316124881029824512?s=20
I'm not sure what to think about "Tuesday Night Football". It just feels so wrong. NFL football is supposed to be many games on Sunday and one game on Monday only! Thursday Night Football to open the season is cool when it's the reigning champion, but other than that it feels forced and gimmicky. :-|
I have never understood why people fork over tons of cash to be told, "yeah, hopefully you'll get the return product before you die". If you want to go to games that bad and have that kind of money to throw around, why not just buy tickets to each upcoming game individually?
Quote from: thspfc on October 13, 2020, 07:36:31 PM
I'm not sure what to think about "Tuesday Night Football". It just feels so wrong. NFL football is supposed to be many games on Sunday and one game on Monday only! Thursday Night Football to open the season is cool when it's the reigning champion, but other than that it feels forced and gimmicky. :-|
What about the Saturday games in December?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 13, 2020, 07:41:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 13, 2020, 07:36:31 PM
I'm not sure what to think about "Tuesday Night Football". It just feels so wrong. NFL football is supposed to be many games on Sunday and one game on Monday only! Thursday Night Football to open the season is cool when it's the reigning champion, but other than that it feels forced and gimmicky. :-|
What about the Saturday games in December?
I don't like them either. Or the Saturday playoff games.
Whereas I've thought for several years that having the Super Bowl on Saturday would be useful. Lets everyone stay up late, eat what they want, etc., and have all day Sunday to deal with the hangovers and digestive distress that may accompany the sorts of things a lot of people eat at those sorts of events, rather than disrupting the work day Monday.
Football on Tuesday is a little bit weird, but they had a good reason for it under the circumstances. Hockey in August was pretty weird too, after all. I expect the NFL will wind up playing the season over 18 weeks, but it makes sense to try to get games in as early as possible so as to leave room for slippage later if more games need to be postponed. (It would have been funny if the Tuesday night game had been played on November 3, though!)
Well, I've been here when the Bills are good, so I might as well be here when they're bad, too.
In a terrible 42-16 loss to the Titans, Tre White was badly missed on defense, which allowed 40 points for the first time since Nathan Peterman.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 13, 2020, 07:41:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 13, 2020, 07:36:31 PM
I'm not sure what to think about "Tuesday Night Football". It just feels so wrong. NFL football is supposed to be many games on Sunday and one game on Monday only! Thursday Night Football to open the season is cool when it's the reigning champion, but other than that it feels forced and gimmicky. :-|
What about the Saturday games in December?
Saturday games are OK when there are no college games, and Thursday games on Thanksgiving and the season opener are fine, but the rest of the Thursday slate needs to go. Players hate them. I get that we had to have games on Tuesday because this is 2020, but let's not explore that as a permanent idea. I don't mind having Monday doubleheaders. If we shift all those Thursday games to extra Monday games that would be great.
I seem to recall once upon a time, when Thursday night games were rare, they used to air on ABC as a "Monday Night Football Special Thursday Edition" or something like that.
I feel like the combination of Thursday games with the "Color Rush" uniform thing has made it a little bit gimmicky. The uniforms can look rather overdone or garish at times. It's sort of like they don't know when to leave well enough alone–reminds me a bit of how the NHL decided that because the Winter Classic was successful, in the 2013—14 season they would have six outdoor games.
Since every team now plays a Thursday night game, it seems like it should be feasible to schedule a team's "bye week" prior to the Thursday night game, which in theory would resolve some of the players' complaints.
Ah yes, I forgot about the Thanksgiving games. Those are cool too. So it would look like this:
Week 1: TNF with defending champion hosting, one MNF game, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 2-11/12: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 12 or 13 depending on where Thanksgiving falls: three Thursday games, one MNF, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 12/13-16: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 17 and playoffs: all on Sunday
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 11:16:37 AM
Ah yes, I forgot about the Thanksgiving games. Those are cool too. So it would look like this:
Week 1: TNF with defending champion hosting, one MNF game, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 2-11/12: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 12 or 13 depending on where Thanksgiving falls: three Thursday games, one MNF, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 12/13-16: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 17 and playoffs: all on Sunday
One clarificatory question: How do you feel about years when Christmas falls on Sunday? That will next happen in 2022. Usually the NFL moves the majority of that week's slate to Saturday. For many years they avoided playing any games at all on Christmas, no doubt due to all the negative publicity and feedback they got from the 1971 AFC playoff game between the Chiefs and Dolphins on Christmas Day that went to double overtime and is still the longest NFL game ever played (not the longest pro football game, but the longest NFL game), but more recently they've played two games on Christmas Day when it falls on Sunday or Monday.
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 11:16:37 AM
Ah yes, I forgot about the Thanksgiving games. Those are cool too. So it would look like this:
Week 1: TNF with defending champion hosting, one MNF game, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 2-11/12: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 12 or 13 depending on where Thanksgiving falls: three Thursday games, one MNF, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 12/13-16: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 17 and playoffs: all on Sunday
One clarificatory question: How do you feel about years when Christmas falls on Sunday? That will next happen in 2022. Usually the NFL moves the majority of that week's slate to Saturday. For many years they avoided playing any games at all on Christmas, no doubt due to all the negative publicity and feedback they got from the 1971 AFC playoff game between the Chiefs and Dolphins on Christmas Day that went to double overtime and is still the longest NFL game ever played (not the longest pro football game, but the longest NFL game), but more recently they've played two games on Christmas Day when it falls on Sunday or Monday.
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
I usually don't even notice when the NFL moves games away from Christmas, since all the days of that part of the year sort of blend together. But yes, I agree that there is no need to play games on Christmas, especially since some teams are already playing on Thanksgiving.
IIRC, the final day of the regular season is in January two out every five years. In 2015 it was the 3rd, in 2016 it was the 1st, in 2017 it was the 31st of December, in 2018 it was the 30th, and in 2019 it was the 29th. This year it will be the 3rd of January again.
No Pro Bowl this year. It was scheduled to be held in Las Vegas the weekend before the Super Bowl, but today the league cancelled it. Given all the speculation that the regular season may run a week longer than planned, that arguably gives them more flexibility to play the Super Bowl as scheduled by just eliminating the week off after the conference championships (which they have done in the past; the 1982 season is a notable example in my mind when they expanded the playoffs after the strike-shortened season).
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 04:18:18 PM
No Pro Bowl this year. It was scheduled to be held in Las Vegas the weekend before the Super Bowl, but today the league cancelled it. Given all the speculation that the regular season may run a week longer than planned, that arguably gives them more flexibility to play the Super Bowl as scheduled by just eliminating the week off after the conference championships (which they have done in the past; the 1982 season is a notable example in my mind when they expanded the playoffs after the strike-shortened season).
Can't help but wonder if this is the end of the Pro Bowl.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 11:16:37 AM
Ah yes, I forgot about the Thanksgiving games. Those are cool too. So it would look like this:
Week 1: TNF with defending champion hosting, one MNF game, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 2-11/12: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 12 or 13 depending on where Thanksgiving falls: three Thursday games, one MNF, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 12/13-16: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 17 and playoffs: all on Sunday
One clarificatory question: How do you feel about years when Christmas falls on Sunday? That will next happen in 2022. Usually the NFL moves the majority of that week's slate to Saturday. For many years they avoided playing any games at all on Christmas, no doubt due to all the negative publicity and feedback they got from the 1971 AFC playoff game between the Chiefs and Dolphins on Christmas Day that went to double overtime and is still the longest NFL game ever played (not the longest pro football game, but the longest NFL game), but more recently they've played two games on Christmas Day when it falls on Sunday or Monday.
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
They are adding a game and two weeks to the schedule beginning in 2021, so I have no idea how that is going to work, but as it has been until this year, the earliest W1 Sunday is 9/7 and the latest is 9/13 (as it was this year). That puts the earliest W17 Sunday at 12/28 and the latest at 1/3. On any potential game date, Christmas would be part of week 16.
The NFL moved week 1 off Labor Day weekend several years ago due to poor TV ratings, so my guess is that Week 1 stays where it is and what used to be the Wild Card and Divisional rounds will become weeks 18 and 19. This would mean that no more Super Bowls on my birthday but there would be conference championship games.
Fun trivia: Rex Grossman and Tom Brady are currently the only quarterbacks ever to lose games on my birthday.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 11:16:37 AM
Ah yes, I forgot about the Thanksgiving games. Those are cool too. So it would look like this:
Week 1: TNF with defending champion hosting, one MNF game, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 2-11/12: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 12 or 13 depending on where Thanksgiving falls: three Thursday games, one MNF, the rest on Sunday
Weeks 12/13-16: all on Sunday except for one MNF
Week 17 and playoffs: all on Sunday
One clarificatory question: How do you feel about years when Christmas falls on Sunday? That will next happen in 2022. Usually the NFL moves the majority of that week's slate to Saturday. For many years they avoided playing any games at all on Christmas, no doubt due to all the negative publicity and feedback they got from the 1971 AFC playoff game between the Chiefs and Dolphins on Christmas Day that went to double overtime and is still the longest NFL game ever played (not the longest pro football game, but the longest NFL game), but more recently they've played two games on Christmas Day when it falls on Sunday or Monday.
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
I remember watching that game. It was a real dandy! The outcome led to the Chiefs not seeing the playoffs for a very long time while the Dolphins had a nice little dynasty going with three straight Super Bowl appearances, going 2-1 with one of those seasons being the Perfect Season.
Rick
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 04:41:50 PM
Can't help but wonder if this is the end of the Pro Bowl.
I won't shed a tear.
Now you don't even get a trip to Hawaii, so what's the point? Any degen with a SouthWest ticket can go to Vegas for 89 bucks. It's a shit city unworthy of pro sports.
The Orlando of the West.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
The NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
It's irrelevant, because the NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
There is no TNF Week 17.
All Week 17 games are played on Sunday, and every team plays a Divisional Opponent
If Divisional Title game and/or Playoff games depend on other games results, those games are all placed in the same timeslot/either 1 ET or 4:25 ET. Also both FOX and CBS have Doubleheaders Week 17. SNF on NBC takes a "Win and you're in" game that does not depend on the other game results, whenever possible. Even better if it is a "Win and In" game for both teams, typically a Division Title game scenario
All of this is within the 16 game schedule. When it goes to 17 games, that remains to be seen. Also this schedule formula came about with the realignment to 8 Divisions and with Flex Scheduling for SNF on NBC
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2020, 10:35:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
It's irrelevant, because the NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
There is no TNF Week 17.
All Week 17 games are played on Sunday, and every team plays a Divisional Opponent
If Divisional Title game and/or Playoff games depend on other games results, those games are all placed in the same timeslot/either 1 ET or 4:25 ET. Also both FOX and CBS have Doubleheaders Week 17. SNF on NBC takes a "Win and you're in" game that does not depend on the other game results, whenever possible. Even better if it is a "Win and In" game for both teams, typically a Division Title game scenario
All of this is within the 16 game schedule. When it goes to 17 games, that remains to be seen. Also this schedule formula came about with the realignment to 8 Divisions and with Flex Scheduling for SNF on NBC
Generally the games between two already eliminated teams or one eliminated team and team that has clinched a playoff berth are in the early slate. The games with playoff berth implications are all in the afternoon slate, as well as the meaningless west coast games that they can't put anywhere else.
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2020, 10:37:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
The NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
Y'all can't get your facts straight. There is no Thursday or Monday night game in week 17. If you're going to make a fact-checking post, at least make sure you know what you're talking about.
Yeah, I realized that after i posted it.
Anyway, the purpose is to make it as even as possible going into the Wildcard playoff weekend, where no team would have had significantly more or less rest time prior to those games.
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2020, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2020, 10:35:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
It's irrelevant, because the NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
There is no TNF Week 17.
All Week 17 games are played on Sunday, and every team plays a Divisional Opponent
If Divisional Title game and/or Playoff games depend on other games results, those games are all placed in the same timeslot/either 1 ET or 4:25 ET. Also both FOX and CBS have Doubleheaders Week 17. SNF on NBC takes a "Win and you're in" game that does not depend on the other game results, whenever possible. Even better if it is a "Win and In" game for both teams, typically a Division Title game scenario
All of this is within the 16 game schedule. When it goes to 17 games, that remains to be seen. Also this schedule formula came about with the realignment to 8 Divisions and with Flex Scheduling for SNF on NBC
Generally the games between two already eliminated teams or one eliminated team and team that has clinched a playoff berth are in the early slate. The games with playoff berth implications are all in the afternoon slate, as well as the meaningless west coast games that they can't put anywhere else.
Y'all get your facts straight before you post. The earlier games are one group of teams whose fates are tied (e.g. AFC playoff contenders) and the later games are the other (e.g. NFC playoff contenders).
I remember a Bears-Packers game a few years ago in the Early window of Week 17 for an NFC North Title game - but that result did not depend on the Lions-Vikings result at all, because the Bears and Packers were already 1-2 in the Division. But since it did not depend on any other games, it was not included in the "Late Game" collection that year, where more of the games were dependent on each other
Of course, any WC scenarios that involve MT/PT teams, then all those WC contention games must be played in the 4:25 Late Window. NFC/AFC West Title Scenarios (unless it is a Chiefs vs other AFC West team for the AFC West Title, Head-to-head, played in KC) also are played at 4:25
And then usually the NFC East Title game gets flexed to SNF on NBC, but not always. They do occasionally take a game from another division for Game 256.
Quote from: Alps on October 16, 2020, 10:54:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2020, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 16, 2020, 10:35:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
It's irrelevant, because the NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. Even a Sunday night game isn't guaranteed, and they decide after Week 16 whether there will be one. Otherwise for Week 17, there's 1 game on Thursday night, with the remainder played Sunday at 1 & 4:25pm (ET).
There is no TNF Week 17.
All Week 17 games are played on Sunday, and every team plays a Divisional Opponent
If Divisional Title game and/or Playoff games depend on other games results, those games are all placed in the same timeslot/either 1 ET or 4:25 ET. Also both FOX and CBS have Doubleheaders Week 17. SNF on NBC takes a "Win and you're in" game that does not depend on the other game results, whenever possible. Even better if it is a "Win and In" game for both teams, typically a Division Title game scenario
All of this is within the 16 game schedule. When it goes to 17 games, that remains to be seen. Also this schedule formula came about with the realignment to 8 Divisions and with Flex Scheduling for SNF on NBC
Generally the games between two already eliminated teams or one eliminated team and team that has clinched a playoff berth are in the early slate. The games with playoff berth implications are all in the afternoon slate, as well as the meaningless west coast games that they can't put anywhere else.
Y'all get your facts straight before you post. The earlier games are one group of teams whose fates are tied (e.g. AFC playoff contenders) and the later games are the other (e.g. NFC playoff contenders).
Are you trolling me now? Because that's wrong also.
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 17, 2020, 12:01:34 AM
I remember a Bears-Packers game a few years ago in the Early window of Week 17 for an NFC North Title game - but that result did not depend on the Lions-Vikings result at all, because the Bears and Packers were already 1-2 in the Division. But since it did not depend on any other games, it was not included in the "Late Game" collection that year, where more of the games were dependent on each other
Of course, any WC scenarios that involve MT/PT teams, then all those WC contention games must be played in the 4:25 Late Window. NFC/AFC West Title Scenarios (unless it is a Chiefs vs other AFC West team for the AFC West Title, Head-to-head, played in KC) also are played at 4:25
And then usually the NFC East Title game gets flexed to SNF on NBC, but not always. They do occasionally take a game from another division for Game 256.
When was this Bears/Packers game that you speak of? It wasn't in 2013, which was the last time they played for the division in week 17. And the NFC East hasn't been on week 17 SNF since 2013.
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 17, 2020, 12:01:34 AM
I remember a Bears-Packers game a few years ago in the Early window of Week 17 for an NFC North Title game - but that result did not depend on the Lions-Vikings result at all, because the Bears and Packers were already 1-2 in the Division. But since it did not depend on any other games, it was not included in the "Late Game" collection that year, where more of the games were dependent on each other
Of course, any WC scenarios that involve MT/PT teams, then all those WC contention games must be played in the 4:25 Late Window. NFC/AFC West Title Scenarios (unless it is a Chiefs vs other AFC West team for the AFC West Title, Head-to-head, played in KC) also are played at 4:25
And then usually the NFC East Title game gets flexed to SNF on NBC, but not always. They do occasionally take a game from another division for Game 256.
In 2013, the Packers beat the Bears in Week 17 to win the division with a 8-7-1 record, with the Bears missing the playoffs at 8-8.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 17, 2020, 08:32:08 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 17, 2020, 12:01:34 AM
I remember a Bears-Packers game a few years ago in the Early window of Week 17 for an NFC North Title game - but that result did not depend on the Lions-Vikings result at all, because the Bears and Packers were already 1-2 in the Division. But since it did not depend on any other games, it was not included in the "Late Game" collection that year, where more of the games were dependent on each other
Of course, any WC scenarios that involve MT/PT teams, then all those WC contention games must be played in the 4:25 Late Window. NFC/AFC West Title Scenarios (unless it is a Chiefs vs other AFC West team for the AFC West Title, Head-to-head, played in KC) also are played at 4:25
And then usually the NFC East Title game gets flexed to SNF on NBC, but not always. They do occasionally take a game from another division for Game 256.
In 2013, the Packers beat the Bears in Week 17 to win the division with a 8-7-1 record, with the Bears missing the playoffs at 8-8.
And looking it up, that game was a 4:25 game. Huh. I mis-remembered. I thought that was a "high noon" kickoff
Regarding the NFC East bit, yes 2013 was the last time. And that was the end of a 3-year stretch, from 2011-2013 of All NFC East. No other Division has been shown more than twice since the Divisional Game Final schedule format was introduced in 2010.
The AFC East and NFC South have yet to be featured on Game 256 - AFC East because it hasn't been competitive with the Pats during the Brady-Belichick Era, and NFC South because (I assume) Ratings, and the two South Divisions are the 2 newest Divisions. AFC South was first featured in 2018 for Game 256
Of course, one could argue that the current NFC West is the newest NFC Division, and the NFC South is the more legitimate child of the old NFC West, since 3 former NFC West teams make up the current NFC South, and only 2 former NFC West teams are in the current NFC West, but I digress
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 16, 2020, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 14, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
I don't know whether it's mathematically possible for Christmas Day to fall on a Monday of Week 17, in which case there would be no Monday night game. I suspect not, seeing as how the regular season invariably seems to end the first weekend of January since the league moved the first week of the season to the weekend after Labor Day.
The NFL doesn't play a Monday night game the final week of the season. ...
See boldface.
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 16, 2020, 10:54:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2020, 10:40:21 PM
Generally the games between two already eliminated teams or one eliminated team and team that has clinched a playoff berth are in the early slate. The games with playoff berth implications are all in the afternoon slate, as well as the meaningless west coast games that they can't put anywhere else.
Y'all get your facts straight before you post. The earlier games are one group of teams whose fates are tied (e.g. AFC playoff contenders) and the later games are the other (e.g. NFC playoff contenders).
Are you trolling me now? Because that's wrong also.
As currently scheduled:
All Week 17 games played in EST and CST (13 games) are scheduled for 1PM EST.
All Week 17 games played in MST and PST (3 games) are scheduled for 4:25 PM EST.
I believe some of these, likely the ones with the biggest playoff implications, will be flexed.
Last year, for example, 49ers-Seahawks was flexed to SNF because the division was on the line.
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 17, 2020, 11:41:46 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 17, 2020, 08:32:08 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 17, 2020, 12:01:34 AM
I remember a Bears-Packers game a few years ago in the Early window of Week 17 for an NFC North Title game - but that result did not depend on the Lions-Vikings result at all, because the Bears and Packers were already 1-2 in the Division. But since it did not depend on any other games, it was not included in the "Late Game" collection that year, where more of the games were dependent on each other
Of course, any WC scenarios that involve MT/PT teams, then all those WC contention games must be played in the 4:25 Late Window. NFC/AFC West Title Scenarios (unless it is a Chiefs vs other AFC West team for the AFC West Title, Head-to-head, played in KC) also are played at 4:25
And then usually the NFC East Title game gets flexed to SNF on NBC, but not always. They do occasionally take a game from another division for Game 256.
In 2013, the Packers beat the Bears in Week 17 to win the division with a 8-7-1 record, with the Bears missing the playoffs at 8-8.
And looking it up, that game was a 4:25 game. Huh. I mis-remembered. I thought that was a "high noon" kickoff
Regarding the NFC East bit, yes 2013 was the last time. And that was the end of a 3-year stretch, from 2011-2013 of All NFC East. No other Division has been shown more than twice since the Divisional Game Final schedule format was introduced in 2010.
The AFC East and NFC South have yet to be featured on Game 256 - AFC East because it hasn't been competitive with the Pats during the Brady-Belichick Era, and NFC South because (I assume) Ratings, and the two South Divisions are the 2 newest Divisions. AFC South was first featured in 2018 for Game 256
Of course, one could argue that the current NFC West is the newest NFC Division, and the NFC South is the more legitimate child of the old NFC West, since 3 former NFC West teams make up the current NFC South, and only 2 former NFC West teams are in the current NFC West, but I digress
I was at a night game in Green Bay in week 17 of the 2010 season where the Packers backed into the playoffs as the second wild card by beating the Bears. They went on to storm through the playoffs entirely on the road, beating the Bears again in Chicago to go to and then win the Super Bowl.
An aside, is there any other instance of one NFL team defeating another NFL team four times in one calendar year (Packers over the Bears four times in calendar year 2011)?
Mike
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
And the Bears are now at risk of becoming Football Team next Monday.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 19, 2020, 08:03:01 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
And the Bears are now at risk of becoming Football Team next Monday.
High risk, you could say. :paranoid:
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 16, 2020, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 04:41:50 PM
Can't help but wonder if this is the end of the Pro Bowl.
I won't shed a tear.
Now you don't even get a trip to Hawaii, so what's the point? Any degen with a SouthWest ticket can go to Vegas for 89 bucks. It's a shit city unworthy of pro sports.
The Orlando of the West.
Try telling that to Mark Davis (the Raiders' owner) and the Golden Knights! The Magic would also be offended by your description of their own city too.
Quote from: Henry on October 19, 2020, 10:26:17 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 16, 2020, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 04:41:50 PM
Can't help but wonder if this is the end of the Pro Bowl.
I won't shed a tear.
Now you don't even get a trip to Hawaii, so what's the point? Any degen with a SouthWest ticket can go to Vegas for 89 bucks. It's a shit city unworthy of pro sports.
The Orlando of the West.
Try telling that to Mark Davis (the Raiders' owner) and the Golden Knights! The Magic would also be offended by your description of their own city too.
Football, with only 8 home games per year, can easily be supported by Vegas. Realistically there's enough support for 40+ NFL teams, but not the talent to have a competitive league bigger than the current 32.
I worry that hockey and its 41 home dates will hit on hard times in Vegas once the novelty wears off.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 19, 2020, 11:02:43 AM
Quote from: Henry on October 19, 2020, 10:26:17 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 16, 2020, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2020, 04:41:50 PM
Can't help but wonder if this is the end of the Pro Bowl.
I won't shed a tear.
Now you don't even get a trip to Hawaii, so what's the point? Any degen with a SouthWest ticket can go to Vegas for 89 bucks. It's a shit city unworthy of pro sports.
The Orlando of the West.
Try telling that to Mark Davis (the Raiders' owner) and the Golden Knights! The Magic would also be offended by your description of their own city too.
Football, with only 8 home games per year, can easily be supported by Vegas. Realistically there's enough support for 40+ NFL teams, but not the talent to have a competitive league bigger than the current 32.
I worry that hockey and its 41 home dates will hit on hard times in Vegas once the novelty wears off.
Vegas has a bigger and better team now in a sport that most would consider more exciting. I think the Golden Knights will be fine because the sports market there is still relatively uncompetitive compared to other hockey markets like Dallas, LA, Miami, and DC.
The Cowboys looked straight awful last night. I can't remember the last time I saw a team so uninspired. Punts, turnovers, more turnovers, a porous defense, once again doing nothing on offense until they were down by a million. Even then it wasn't much. Andy Dalton was less than impressive, but I expect that he will improve once he plays more with the Cowboys. As for the defense, there's no sign of improvement in sight.
The Cowboys 218 points allowed (average 36.3 per game) is by far the highest in the league, and it's not even close. Vikings are next at 192, followed by Jets at 185 and Falcons at 184. But it just goes to show how uninspired defenses as a whole have been this year when six teams have allowed 180+, but no teams have even scored 180: Ravens are first in points scored at 179, Bucs second at 177.
... and yet, there the Cowboys sit atop the NFC East, which is a jarring 5-18-1 through six weeks, with only two wins outside the division (Eagles over 49ers and Cowboys over Falcons)
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 09:20:53 AM
The Cowboys 218 points allowed (average 36.3 per game) is by far the highest in the league, and it's not even close. Vikings are next at 192, followed by Jets at 185 and Falcons at 184. But it just goes to show how uninspired defenses as a whole have been this year when six teams have allowed 180+, but no teams have even scored 180: Ravens are first in points scored at 179, Bucs second at 177.
... and yet, there the Cowboys sit atop the NFC East, which is a jarring 5-18-1 through six weeks, with only two wins outside the division (Eagles over 49ers and Cowboys over Falcons)
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
Quote from: thspfc on October 20, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
I dunno, I think I would take the Eagles to win the division if I had to pick. Both teams *should* win this week, in which case the winner of the week 8 game would take the lead.
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Both teams *should* win this week
After watching the Cowboys' abysmal play last night, I don't think I would be comfortable making a statement like that even if it is against Washington. Their defense sucks - we knew that already. But the offense certainly didn't do them any favors last night either. NFL teams should not be having five turnovers in one game - especially when two of them are coming from your three-time Pro Bowl running back. Andy Dalton's play should improve once he finds a rhythm, but if the running backs can't hold onto the ball until he does that...it's going to be a looooong season.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2020, 01:28:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 16, 2020, 10:54:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2020, 10:40:21 PM
Generally the games between two already eliminated teams or one eliminated team and team that has clinched a playoff berth are in the early slate. The games with playoff berth implications are all in the afternoon slate, as well as the meaningless west coast games that they can't put anywhere else.
Y'all get your facts straight before you post. The earlier games are one group of teams whose fates are tied (e.g. AFC playoff contenders) and the later games are the other (e.g. NFC playoff contenders).
Are you trolling me now? Because that's wrong also.
As currently scheduled:
All Week 17 games played in EST and CST (13 games) are scheduled for 1PM EST.
All Week 17 games played in MST and PST (3 games) are scheduled for 4:25 PM EST.
I believe some of these, likely the ones with the biggest playoff implications, will be flexed.
Last year, for example, 49ers-Seahawks was flexed to SNF because the division was on the line.
It will all depend on ratings, how many games matter, and who they matter to. Ideally there are meaningful games in all five slots. Late afternoon is the preferred slot for teams whose fates are tied together and are do-or-die where the winners make the playoffs and the losers go home. Early meaningful games are generally for teams in the playoffs but can move up or down in seeding. Sunday night is for a game independent of all others, but a couple years ago it happened where no such game existed and the NFL elected not to play a Sunday night game.
Quote from: US 89 on October 20, 2020, 11:32:03 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Both teams *should* win this week
After watching the Cowboys' abysmal play last night, I don't think I would be comfortable making a statement like that even if it is against Washington. ...
We'll see what happens, but since Week 1, Washington hasn't done anything to convince me they're actually trying to win games (last week's failed 2 point conversion to win notwithstanding). My thought process about the upcoming game is basically the same as it was about the Giants game: Sure, they're bad, maybe even verging on terrible, but not bad enough to lose a division game to The Football Team, especially one like this that would let them back in to the thick of the race for the division title.
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 20, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
I dunno, I think I would take the Eagles to win the division if I had to pick. Both teams *should* win this week, in which case the winner of the week 8 game would take the lead.
Considering that the Bengals have had 5 games decided by 1 possession, I think they could beat Dallas. They've demonstrated that they can play they just haven't finished games well.
Quote from: I-55 on October 20, 2020, 04:54:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 20, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
I dunno, I think I would take the Eagles to win the division if I had to pick. Both teams *should* win this week, in which case the winner of the week 8 game would take the lead.
Considering that the Bengals have had 5 games decided by 1 possession, I think they could beat Dallas. They've demonstrated that they can play they just haven't finished games well.
Considering that the Cowboys have had four games decided by one possession, that claim is irrelevant.
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 20, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
I dunno, I think I would take the Eagles to win the division if I had to pick. Both teams *should* win this week, in which case the winner of the week 8 game would take the lead.
Update: with the Eagles' win over the Giants last night, the winner of Cowboys-Eagles next week is a lock to have the division lead, regardless of Sunday's Cowboys/Washington outcome.
If the Cowboys beat Washington, they'll be in the lead at 3-4, but Philly can take the lead at 3-4-1 with a win.
If the Cowboys lose to Washington, they'll be in second at 2-5, but they can take the lead at 3-5 with a win.
Washington isn't in the mix even if they beat the Cowboys, because they have a Week 8 bye.
(Yes, I'm having way too much fun with this. The NFC East is so terrible that it has ironically become the most entertaining division race to track. :-D)
(https://www.ssoworld.org/pics/boyz4.jpg)
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2020, 11:09:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 20, 2020, 10:24:10 AM
I predict the Cowboys will win that division at 7-9, with five wins coming inside the division and the other two being the Bengals and Niners/Vikings.
I dunno, I think I would take the Eagles to win the division if I had to pick. Both teams *should* win this week, in which case the winner of the week 8 game would take the lead.
Update: with the Eagles' win over the Giants last night, the winner of Cowboys-Eagles next week is a lock to have the division lead, regardless of Sunday's Cowboys/Washington outcome.
If the Cowboys beat Washington, they'll be in the lead at 3-4, but Philly can take the lead at 3-4-1 with a win.
If the Cowboys lose to Washington, they'll be in second at 2-5, but they can take the lead at 3-5 with a win.
Washington isn't in the mix even if they beat the Cowboys, because they have a Week 8 bye.
(Yes, I'm having way too much fun with this. The NFC East is so terrible that it has ironically become the most entertaining division race to track. :-D)
Thanks for the in-depth statistical analysis. Couldn't have figured that out. Also, Philly does not play on Sunday, meaning the division lead is mercifully all Dallas's if they don't screw up against Washington.
Can't wait to see what happens when the NFC East winner is 8-8 or 9-7 (or 8-7-1 etc.) instead of 2-14 like you would figure if you only listened to this guy. The NFC East is bad. There is not a quality team in the division. But it is unlikely that the winner of the division will be worse than the 2010 Seahawks, who were 7-9.
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 24, 2020, 08:35:21 AM
(https://www.ssoworld.org/pics/boyz4.jpg)
I know that Mayfield is in a position to talk after consecutive multi-intercpetion games. Would be a better meme if it was one of the Browns' running backs.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
... Can't wait to see what happens when the NFC East winner is 8-8 or 9-7 (or 8-7-1 etc.) instead of 2-14 like you would figure if you only listened to this guy.
This guy being... me?
I think that since every team has six division games, and the Cowboys and Eagles already have a win outside the division, the winner could be 7-9 or 6-10, but anything lower than that is probably infeasible.
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2020, 05:19:31 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
... Can't wait to see what happens when the NFC East winner is 8-8 or 9-7 (or 8-7-1 etc.) instead of 2-14 like you would figure if you only listened to this guy.
This guy being... me?
I think that since every team has six division games, and the Cowboys and Eagles already have a win outside the division, the winner could be 7-9 or 6-10, but anything lower than that is probably infeasible.
I was exxagerating. So long as there are no more ties, it's not mathematically possible anymore for the division winner to be worse than 5-11. I was just saying that if you only listened to webny99 about the 2020 NFC East, you would think the '60 Cowboys, '76 Buccaneers, '08 Lions, and '17 Browns got stuck in the same division. Really, it's just two meh teams (PHI and DAL), and two worse than meh, but not super bad, teams (NYG and WAS).
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2020, 06:47:32 PM
... I was just saying that if you only listened to webny99 about the 2020 NFC East, you would think the '60 Cowboys, '76 Buccaneers, '08 Lions, and '17 Browns got stuck in the same division. Really, it's just two meh teams (PHI and DAL), and two worse than meh, but not super bad, teams (NYG and WAS).
I'm not saying they're the four worst teams in the league, but 6-19-1 (with 4 of those wins being against each other) is a pathetic record, and it is a historically bad division (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfc-east-is-historically-bad-how-much-worse-can-it-get/). And the Giants and Washington are "super bad" no matter how you cut it. The Jags and Jets are the only other teams that might be as bad or worse.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2020, 04:30:48 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 24, 2020, 08:35:21 AM
...
I know that Mayfield is in a position to talk after consecutive multi-intercpetion games. Would be a better meme if it was one of the Browns' running backs.
They used the QBs for this meme since last year.
Dallas QB knocked out on an ugly helmet-to-helmet hit when he was already sliding to give himself up. The Redskin player who did that should be suspended. Totally unnecessary and dangerous play. (If the league doesn't suspend him, Ron Rivera should because without the penalty, Dallas would have had to punt.)
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 20, 2020, 11:32:03 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Both teams *should* win this week
After watching the Cowboys' abysmal play last night, I don't think I would be comfortable making a statement like that even if it is against Washington. ...
We'll see what happens, but since Week 1, Washington hasn't done anything to convince me they're actually trying to win games (last week's failed 2 point conversion to win notwithstanding). My thought process about the upcoming game is basically the same as it was about the Giants game: Sure, they're bad, maybe even verging on terrible, but not bad enough to lose a division game to The Football Team, especially one like this that would let them back in to the thick of the race for the division title.
... and congratulations to the Washington Football Team on your second win!
Don't thank me: all I did was hit "post" to clinch the win for you. :-|
Quote from: webny99 on October 25, 2020, 04:59:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 20, 2020, 11:32:03 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2020, 10:44:28 AM
Both teams *should* win this week
After watching the Cowboys' abysmal play last night, I don't think I would be comfortable making a statement like that even if it is against Washington. ...
We'll see what happens, but since Week 1, Washington hasn't done anything to convince me they're actually trying to win games (last week's failed 2 point conversion to win notwithstanding). My thought process about the upcoming game is basically the same as it was about the Giants game: Sure, they're bad, maybe even verging on terrible, but not bad enough to lose a division game to The Football Team, especially one like this that would let them back in to the thick of the race for the division title.
... and congratulations to the Washington Football Team on your second win!
Don't thank me: all I did was hit "post" to clinch the win for you. :-|
I think we all knew that Dak is a good quarterback, even before he got hurt. But if you look at where this team was with him at QB (averaging 32.6 points per game) versus where they are now without him (averaging 6.5 points per game), I don't know that one could say with a straight face that he's not at least a top 7-8 QB.
(https://www.ssoworld.org/pics/boysweek6.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Los Angeles Bears
Chicago Football Team (next Sunday: home against New Orleans)
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 27, 2020, 07:51:08 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Los Angeles Bears
Chicago Football Team (next Sunday: home against New Orleans)
As a lifelong Bears fan, I'm beyond frustrated by the team's inability for 25+ years to put together a quality offensive line. They keep trading for and drafting quarterbacks when it's been long past the point that the team should have figured out that quarterback is not the biggest problem.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 27, 2020, 08:10:14 AM
As a lifelong Bears fan, I'm beyond frustrated by the team's inability for 25+ years to put together a quality offensive line. They keep trading for and drafting quarterbacks when it's been long past the point that the team should have figured out that quarterback is not the biggest problem.
Yup. With each passing season, I better understand the pessimistic attitude my dad has that the Bears will ever field a competent offense. (And of course during the brief interval that the Bears actually had a high-powered offense under Trestman, the defense completely imploded :banghead:)
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 27, 2020, 08:10:14 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 27, 2020, 07:51:08 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Los Angeles Bears
Chicago Football Team (next Sunday: home against New Orleans)
As a lifelong Bears fan, I'm beyond frustrated by the team's inability for 25+ years to put together a quality offensive line. They keep trading for and drafting quarterbacks when it's been long past the point that the team should have figured out that quarterback is not the biggest problem.
Over the past two-ish years, I have never understood why Trubisky has gotten blamed for literally everything that has gone wrong for the Bears. He is not a high-caliber starting QB by any stretch, but with how much criticism he gets, you would think he is DeShone Kizer or Nathan Peterman. That team has always had bigger problems than the quarterback, and they still do with Foles.
Unfortunately for how the draft played out, Trubisky basically would've had to be better than Mahomes to not be blamed for all the problems and considered a huge bust.
Quote from: webny99 on October 27, 2020, 01:11:18 PM
Unfortunately for how the draft played out, Trubisky basically would've had to be better than Mahomes to not be blamed for all the problems and considered a huge bust.
That is true.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2020, 04:28:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Someone watched the Steelers game?
Cincy finally won again, if they won all of their 1 possession games the Bungles would be 7-1 and one game behind the lead of the AFC North. Cincy ain't as bad as people think, they just haven't been able to finish games.
Bills squeak out a win over the Pats for the first time since 2016! Wow, that feels good. This team has tortured the Bills for two full decades, and I don't say that lightly: Bills were 5-35, now 6-35, against the Pats since 2000.
It was also Sean McDermott's first win over Bill Belichick.
Vikings upset Green Bay in a game the Packers clearly had no interest in given their Thursday night game in San Francisco this week. Love beating those (bleeps) especially when they think they're just going to cruise past us.
That's the kind of loss that hurts at playoff time when you're fighting for seeding.
Speaking of which, I'm still a little miffed the Packers stole the #2 seed last year when the Saints were clearly much more deserving, so I was glad to see the Vikings show up today and notch their second win.
The Niners/Packers game should be interesting: Niners blew them out twice last year, once in the regular season and once in the playoffs. Will be interesting to see which Packers team shows up in what is now a very important game for the Niners.
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2020, 10:41:16 PM
Speaking of which, I'm still a little miffed the Packers stole the #2 seed last year when the Saints were clearly much more deserving, so I was glad to see the Vikings show up today and notch their second win.
The Niners/Packers game should be interesting: Niners blew them out twice last year, once in the regular season and once in the playoffs. Will be interesting to see which Packers team shows up in what is now a very important game for the Niners.
Wow, you love to whine about teams winning close games, don’t you.
The Saints lost in the wild card round. To the Vikings. The Packers beat the Vikings twice that season. The Packers made the NFC Championship. If you wanted to say that the Saints should have gotten then second seed before the wild card round last year, fine, but after the fact, it’s very clear who the better team was. Don’t say wElL tHe PaCkErS gOt DeStRoYeD bY tHe 49ErS. That doesn’t matter in this context since the Saints couldn’t even make the second round, much less the conference championship game.
Quote from: I-55 on November 01, 2020, 04:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2020, 04:28:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Someone watched the Steelers game?
Cincy finally won again, if they won all of their 1 possession games the Bungles would be 7-1 and one game behind the lead of the AFC North. Cincy ain't as bad as people think, they just haven't been able to finish games.
But, if they won all their one possession games, you would say they are terrible because they're only winning by one possession . . . to me it literally seems like you think losing is better than winning. :-D :-D Or does that just apply for the teams that you don't like? The Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks have won most of their games by one possession. Do you think they are overrated too? Because all I hear from you is trash about the Packers and Bears.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 07:46:49 AM
Wow, you love to whine about teams winning close games, don't you.
What? I never said that. I think the Saints were the better team, and it was pure bad luck they missed the bye. That's not necessarily the Packers fault, but it is pretty clear the Packers weren't a 13-3 team.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 07:46:49 AM
The Saints lost in the wild card round. To the Vikings. The Packers beat the Vikings twice that season. The Packers made the NFC Championship. If you wanted to say that the Saints should have gotten then second seed before the wild card round last year, fine, but after the fact, it's very clear who the better team was. Don't say wElL tHe PaCkErS gOt DeStRoYeD bY tHe 49ErS. That doesn't matter in this context since the Saints couldn't even make the second round, much less the conference championship game.
Of course the Saints should've been able to beat the Vikings, but that's one of the wilder NFL rivalries, and it's not like hanging on by a thread against the Seahawks and getting blown out by the Niners is somehow more convincing than losing to the Vikings in overtime.
The Packers did enough to get a playoff win, which is to their credit, but, let's be honest, the Saints had a much more viable path to the Super Bowl if they had gotten the bye. Remember, they dropped 46 points on the Niners in the regular season last year - which is more than the Packers did in
two games.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 07:54:23 AM
Quote from: I-55 on November 01, 2020, 04:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2020, 04:28:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Someone watched the Steelers game?
Cincy finally won again, if they won all of their 1 possession games the Bungles would be 7-1 and one game behind the lead of the AFC North. Cincy ain't as bad as people think, they just haven't been able to finish games.
But, if they won all their won possession games, you would say they are terrible because they're only winning by one possession . . . to me it literally seems like you think losing is better than winning. :-D :-D Or does that just apply for the teams that you don't like? The Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks have won most of their games by one possession. Do you think they are overrated too? Because all I hear from you is trash about the Packers and Bears.
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
I don't follow sports much, but I will say this: in American football and basketball, trying to win is not always the same as trying to get the most points. In American football, you can play in a way that you barely beat your opponent. In basketball, strategies are different in the last minute depending on score difference. In both cases, trying to beat your opponent when you're slightly behind is part of the skill of the game.
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 07:54:23 AM
Quote from: I-55 on November 01, 2020, 04:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2020, 04:28:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Someone watched the Steelers game?
Cincy finally won again, if they won all of their 1 possession games the Bungles would be 7-1 and one game behind the lead of the AFC North. Cincy ain't as bad as people think, they just haven't been able to finish games.
But, if they won all their won possession games, you would say they are terrible because they're only winning by one possession . . . to me it literally seems like you think losing is better than winning. :-D :-D Or does that just apply for the teams that you don't like? The Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks have won most of their games by one possession. Do you think they are overrated too? Because all I hear from you is trash about the Packers and Bears.
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
Oops. The point still stands, though. Do you think of the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks the same way you think of the Bears and last year's Packers?
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
In Hockey, there is definitely a point in the 3rd period where it becomes more of a defensive game for the team with a 1 or 2 goal lead. They will certainly attack the net if given the opportunity, but the overall strategy is defense late in the game.
For baseball, there's some more subtle differences. Baseball is also a little different than the other sports. In most other sports, a takeaway can happen at any moment. In baseball, once a team is at bat, there's nothing the defensive team can do to go on the offensive again until the 3rd out is made.
A batter generally won't intentionally sit there and strike out. He'll still swing. He'll still run. But they won't be as aggressive on the basepaths if they have a sizeable lead. A runner on base won't steal. The manager won't change pitchers late in the game as often. They'll try to prevent running up the score as a show of being a good sport, but they won't stop playing completely.
(One memorable game where a player did intentionally strike out...it was a Phillies playoff game, and the pitcher was batting. It was later in the game, a runner on 1st, and 1 out. The announcers, fairly keen on what was going on, figured the batter wasn't going to swing and possibly hit into a double play. Sure enough, that entire at bat, the batter never swung. He very intentionally struck out. And that brings up the whole DH versus no-DH argument, which I won't go into in a NFL thread.)
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:00:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
Oops. The point still stands, though. Do you think of the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks the same way you think of the Bears and last year's Packers?
Not necessarily, no. There is something to be said for teams like the Seahawks that can consistently get the win in close games. Some of it is skill, some of it is luck.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
I can think of a few situations where teams' strategies have changed based on the score. One of the ones I remember the best was the Redskins' first game of the 1991 season when they were beating the Lions 45—0 late in the fourth quarter. They had all the backups in the game (even the third-string quarterback), kept the ball on the ground instead of passing, and the Lions still couldn't stop them. They got down to first and goal on the Lions' one-yard line and Joe Gibbs ordered the quarterback (Jeff Rutledge, IIRC) to take a knee on four straight plays rather than running up the score further. Of course in theory point differential is a tiebreaker, such that there might be some incentive to run up the score, but it's way down the list of tiebreakers to the point where it's unlikely to come up. (I don't remember exactly what the hierarchy of tiebreakers was back then, just too long ago.)
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 10:00:45 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:00:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
Oops. The point still stands, though. Do you think of the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks the same way you think of the Bears and last year's Packers?
Not necessarily, no. There is something to be said for teams like the Seahawks that can consistently get the win in close games. Some of it is skill, some of it is luck.
So that applies to the Bears and '19 Packers as well, correct?
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
They are more situational, but to say like he did that soccer, baseball, and hockey are not situational is a comment that reeks of trying to be an expert on something that you don't know much about.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 10:18:59 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 10:00:45 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:00:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
Oops. The point still stands, though. Do you think of the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks the same way you think of the Bears and last year's Packers?
Not necessarily, no. There is something to be said for teams like the Seahawks that can consistently get the win in close games. Some of it is skill, some of it is luck.
So that applies to the Bears and '19 Packers as well, correct?
Let's see if they can do it consistently for consecutive seasons. The Packers had an easy schedule last year, and I'm not sure the Bears can keep pulling out close wins - yesterday's Saints game suggests maybe not unless their offense can improve.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
Baseball is pretty situational (maybe less so that they instituted the three-batter minimum for pitchers). Let's say there are two outs, you have two runners on base. A good hitter at the plate and a weak one on deck. You might pinch hit for the weak hitter if the guy batting reaches, but you probably don't if he makes an out and the inning ends. Also have seen it countless times where a team has a closer warming in their bullpen but immediately sits him down for a weaker pitcher when they add a couple more runs on and put the lead outside the margin of a save situation.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 10:23:04 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 10:18:59 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 10:00:45 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:00:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
You know it wasn't me that posted that, right?
Just double checking. :)
Oops. The point still stands, though. Do you think of the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks the same way you think of the Bears and last year's Packers?
Not necessarily, no. There is something to be said for teams like the Seahawks that can consistently get the win in close games. Some of it is skill, some of it is luck.
So that applies to the Bears and '19 Packers as well, correct?
Let's see if they can do it consistently for consecutive seasons. The Packers had an easy schedule last year, and I'm not sure the Bears can keep pulling out close wins - yesterday's Saints game suggests maybe not unless their offense can improve.
The Packers did not have a particularly easy schedule last year. They went 7-3 against teams with a record of .500 or better. They played three games against Super Bowl teams. And the Titans, Steelers, and Seahawks have all played relatively weak schedules as well. For what it's worth, the Bears have played a difficult schedule, especially over the last five weeks (5-2 Colts, 5-2 Bucs, 5-3 Rams, 5-2 Saints).
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 02, 2020, 10:23:08 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
Baseball is pretty situational (maybe less so that they instituted the three-batter minimum for pitchers). Let's say there are two outs, you have two runners on base. A good hitter at the plate and a weak one on deck. You might pinch hit for the weak hitter if the guy batting reaches, but you probably don't if he makes an out and the inning ends. Also have seen it countless times where a team has a closer warming in their bullpen but immediately sits him down for a weaker pitcher when they add a couple more runs on and put the lead outside the margin of a save situation.
Baseball is very situational, yes, and the rules allow for it as well. Soccer is highly situational. Teams often play with a completely different style or organization when leading compared to when trailing, especially in the second half. Some of that involves bending the rules or "playing dirty" (i.e. taking several extra seconds to inbound the ball while you have the lead). From what I understand about hockey, there are many rules (such as icing) to prevent teams from playing conservatively, but there is still room to change your style of play depending on the score.
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2020, 10:41:16 PM
Speaking of which, I'm still a little miffed the Packers stole the #2 seed last year when the Saints were clearly much more deserving, so I was glad to see the Vikings show up today and notch their second win.
The Niners/Packers game should be interesting: Niners blew them out twice last year, once in the regular season and once in the playoffs. Will be interesting to see which Packers team shows up in what is now a very important game for the Niners.
If the Packers win, critics will just say the 49ers were hobbled by injuries.
Quote from: Big John on November 02, 2020, 08:07:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2020, 10:41:16 PM
Speaking of which, I'm still a little miffed the Packers stole the #2 seed last year when the Saints were clearly much more deserving, so I was glad to see the Vikings show up today and notch their second win.
The Niners/Packers game should be interesting: Niners blew them out twice last year, once in the regular season and once in the playoffs. Will be interesting to see which Packers team shows up in what is now a very important game for the Niners.
If the Packers win, critics will just say the 49ers were hobbled by injuries.
And if they win by eight or fewer points, webny99 will say that the Packers should be 0-8 instead of 6-2.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 02, 2020, 10:08:10 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 09:03:45 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 02, 2020, 08:41:25 AM
In baseball, hockey, and association football, trying to win and trying to get the most points are pretty much the same thing. Your strategy doesn't change much if at all based on the current score. Judging skill by point differential works better in these games.
That is simply not true.
QuoteI don't follow sports much
Clearly.
His point, which is valid, is that basketball and football are more situational than other sports. Like when the Pats allowed the Giants a touchdown in the Super Bowl, or when the Lions allowed the Falcons a touchdown last week.
I can think of a few situations where teams' strategies have changed based on the score. One of the ones I remember the best was the Redskins' first game of the 1991 season when they were beating the Lions 45—0 late in the fourth quarter. They had all the backups in the game (even the third-string quarterback), kept the ball on the ground instead of passing, and the Lions still couldn't stop them. They got down to first and goal on the Lions' one-yard line and Joe Gibbs ordered the quarterback (Jeff Rutledge, IIRC) to take a knee on four straight plays rather than running up the score further. Of course in theory point differential is a tiebreaker, such that there might be some incentive to run up the score, but it's way down the list of tiebreakers to the point where it's unlikely to come up. (I don't remember exactly what the hierarchy of tiebreakers was back then, just too long ago.)
Back in 1991, point differential in conference games was the fifth tiebreaker (I believe). So, if the Redskins had tied another team, say the 49ers, at 14-2, did not play each other that season, and had the same conference record (use 10-2), then net point differential in conference games would be the next tiebreaker step. When the NFL realigned in to the current setup of four divisions of four teams in each conference with the addition of the Houston Texans in 2002, the tiebreaker steps were changed where point differential is farther down the list (9-11, net points common games, net points all games, net touchdowns all games). Strength of victory and strength of schedule are now 5 and 6 with a best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed (7) and best combined ranking among all games in points scored and points allowed (8). Record in common games were given a boost up to 3, having this be more important than conference games.
In effect, it is not so imperative to run up the score anymore. More weight is given to just wins and losses, no matter what the score is. The way the current tiebreaker procedure is set up, it would take a lot of steps before points scored and points allowed are taken into consideration.
Under the previous tiebreaker procedure, the Redskins did not make the playoffs in 1979 with a 10-6 record. They did lose to Dallas 35-34 in Roger Staubach's final regular season game along with his last comeback from a 34-21 deficit. However, they still could have make the playoffs over the Chicago Bears, also 10-6, assuming the Bears would not beat the St. Louis Cardinals by more than 33 points. Well, on the morning of the game, George Halas (the general face of the Bears for 40 years) passed away. The Bears came out and played spirited football, winning the game 42-6, and knocking the Redskins out of the playoffs. If the current tiebreaker procedure was in effect then, I believe the Redskins would have made the playoffs based on better record in common games, minimum of four (had four common games--Dallas, St. Louis, Green Bay, and Detroit). Redskins would have been 5-1 vs. the Bears 4-2 record in common games.
Just using an example to show the difference in the tiebreaker procedure from 1976-2001 vs the one in effect since 2002.
BTW, that 1991 Redskins team was
the best Redskins team I had ever seen, if not one of the top 10 best of all-time.
It was a shame that they moved point differential down. Week 17 of 1999 had a crazy scenario where the Packers and Panthers were trying to outscore each other in separate games and keep their opponents from mitigating their differentials. I think the Packers came out ahead, but ultimately neither made the playoffs as the Cowboys snagged the last berth late that afternoon.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 08:28:20 PM
... the Packers should be 0-8 instead of 6-2.
I'd say you're right, but that was a nice win last night against the Niners. They should be 1-7.
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2020, 09:56:52 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2020, 08:28:20 PM
... the Packers should be 0-8 instead of 6-2.
I'd say you're right, but that was a nice win last night against the Niners. They should be 1-7.
Yeah, true.
As long as we're talking about the Packers, there is one thing that really impresses me about them: they are very good coming off a loss, and have been throughout the LaFleur era. One of the biggest differences between great coaches and average/a little above average coaches is games following a bad performance. Say what you will about their run defense or recieving corps or margin by which they win games, but that is a well coached team.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2020, 09:31:29 PM
Fun fact: as Week 8 draws to a close, the Dolphins (!) lead the NFL in fewest points allowed with 130.
They've usually been quietly good at defense in the post-Marino era, though never spectacular enough to be in the national conversation, with such mediocre records.
But they're 5-3 now...I forgot what it's like to be above .500 this "late" in the season.
The Seahawks have allowed the second most yards in NFL history through eight games. They are going nowhere in the postseason if they keep that up.
Quote from: formulanone on November 09, 2020, 07:28:50 AM
But they're 5-3 now...I forgot what it's like to be above .500 this "late" in the season.
And not only that... they're currently in the #7 spot! Not many people saw that coming, but hats off to them: with the Pats two-decade reign of terror in the rearview, I'm happy to see success for Bills, Fins and (maybe someday) Jets alike!
At this moment, with the Ravens at 6-2 almost certain to make the playoffs, it looks like it'll be Colts, Browns, Raiders and Dolphins battling it out for the final two wild card slots.
The NFC picture is considerably more muddled, with the Cardinals (!) actually looking like the most likely Wild Card team, along with the loser of the NFC South, but last night's blowout did little to clarify that picture, as the Saints handed Brady not only the most lopsided loss of his career but also completed a
season sweep of Brady, the first time any team has done so in Brady's career. WOW.
The NFC really is a mess. The Bucs were loooking like the team to beat until last night. The Saints have beaten the Bucs twice, but they also lost to the Packers, who lost to the Bucs by 28. :confused: :confused: Then you have Seattle who isn't going to win their division if they keep playing the way they have over their last four games. I think you have the Saints, Packers, and Bucs as obvious playoff teams, and the Seahawks and Eagles (sadly) as probable playoff teams. The last spots will probably go to the Rams and Cardinals, but they are inconsistent and have played weak schedules so far. Maybe the Bears will turn it around as their schedule gets more manageable (their last six opponents have a combined 28-13 record), but they are definitely trending in the wrong direction.
Also, don't look now but there are a couple of forgotten teams that are still fighting in the NFC. Vikings have won two in a row, one of which was against the 6-2 Packers. Falcons have won three out of four, despite their best efforts to squander a big fourth quarter lead against the Broncos. If the Cardinals or Rams slip up, and the Bears continue to struggle, one or both of those teams could be in the mix of things by the end of this month.
I don't know if such a proposition exists, but I'd be willing to bet AFC -6 in the Super Bowl right now.
Imagine being told a year or two ago that the Jets would be only 2 games in back of the Pats at mid-season (with a good chance to pick up a game head to head). But another finger on the monkey's paw uncurls (or curls, I forget).
I've kind of thought all season that the NFC has all the big names (Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson...), while the AFC has the superpower-type teams (for sure Chiefs and probably Steelers, and you could debate which other teams are in that category).
But then, there's only 2 teams that haven't notched 2 wins yet, and they're both from the AFC: Jets and Jaguars. So the AFC has definitely got the extremes; at least every NFC team has managed 2 wins, even though in the case of the NFC East 7 of their combined 9 wins have been against each other!
Quote from: kurumi on November 09, 2020, 09:42:27 PM
Imagine being told a year or two ago that the Jets would be only 2 games in back of the Pats at mid-season (with a good chance to pick up a game head to head). But another finger on the monkey's paw uncurls (or curls, I forget).
The finger curls when the wish is used, per Simpsons.
Quote from: webny99 on November 09, 2020, 10:53:53 PM
I've kind of thought all season that the NFC has all the big names (Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson...), while the AFC has the superpower-type teams (for sure Chiefs and probably Steelers, and you could debate which other teams are in that category).
But then, there's only 2 teams that haven't notched 2 wins yet, and they're both from the AFC: Jets and Jaguars. So the AFC has definitely got the extremes; at least every NFC team has managed 2 wins, even though in the case of the NFC East 7 of their combined 9 wins have been against each other!
Mahomes, Jackson, Roethlisberger . . . any of those ring a bell?
Quote from: thspfc on November 10, 2020, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 09, 2020, 10:53:53 PM
I've kind of thought all season that the NFC has all the big names (Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson...), while the AFC has the superpower-type teams (for sure Chiefs and probably Steelers, and you could debate which other teams are in that category).
But then, there's only 2 teams that haven't notched 2 wins yet, and they're both from the AFC: Jets and Jaguars. So the AFC has definitely got the extremes; at least every NFC team has managed 2 wins, even though in the case of the NFC East 7 of their combined 9 wins have been against each other!
Mahomes, Jackson, Roethlisberger . . . any of those ring a bell?
Pardon me for not clarifying: I meant big names that have been established as such by virtue of being around around for many years. That leaves Roethlisberger... who's had a great career and been decent this year, but he's not quite on the level of any of the four NFC players I mentioned.
Wait a second, the media told me that the Buccaneers suck because they had one bad game. You mean to tell me that a 7-3 team is good? :-o
Bills get walked off by Arizona on an incredible Hail Mary play.
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 15, 2020, 08:25:35 PM
Bills get walked off by Arizona on an incredible Hail Mary play.
My goodness. That wild finish is the talk of Western New York - and honestly probably most of the country - this morning.
And all the jokes about the Hopkins trade only rub salt in the wound because we LOST to the Texans in the playoffs this January. :-(
Two of the most excruciating losses in NFL history to two different franchises in a span of 10 months, and Hopkins was on the other side of the ball for BOTH.
And yet, you still have to love the Cardinals, who are the perfect underdog story and wildly entertaining, having now scored 30+ points in 5 straight games. Not to mention they're now first in the NFC West with tiebreakers over the Rams and Seahawks.
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2020, 05:49:44 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
This was his first game back after missing several weeks to injury. While I agree staying inbounds would have been better regarding the clock (as it would have meant just 1 kneel down instead of 2), I'm fine with what he did as it avoided the risk of re injuring himself by trying to slide or possibly getting nailed from behind by a defender if he slowed down to take a knee.
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
Apparently the line started at -2.5 and went to -3, so those betters either won or pushed. It was fairly late when the line went to -3.5.
I don't see too many people betting on the Browns anyway due to their non-popularity, and sports gambling within Ohio isn't legal to add to the "home team effect", so there probably want much win/loss to speak of.
I don't get why people are so astounded when players go down/out of bounds intentionally. It's not a new tactic, and it doesn't take a football genius to understand that it's better to keep the clock moving than score in some situations. And obviously players aren't thinking about bettors or their fantasy stock while playing.
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2020, 05:49:44 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
This brings to mind a recent game I saw. Just before the end of the game, I believe the score was tied. The team with the ball threw an interception to the other team. They then quickly tackled the guy. That enabled there to be one or two more plays that resulted in a FG and lost the game for the first team. If they hadn't touched the other guy, let him run around for a bit, time would have run out and it would have gone to OT.
Quote from: Alps on November 16, 2020, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2020, 05:49:44 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
This brings to mind a recent game I saw. Just before the end of the game, I believe the score was tied. The team with the ball threw an interception to the other team. They then quickly tackled the guy. That enabled there to be one or two more plays that resulted in a FG and lost the game for the first team. If they hadn't touched the other guy, let him run around for a bit, time would have run out and it would have gone to OT.
On tonight's C'Mon Man, they showed an Arkansas high school game from last week where one team was leading by one point and had 4th and 32 from around their own 10-yard line with six seconds left in the game. All the quarterback had to do was run around for six seconds to kill the clock. Instead, he immediately took a knee. Of course, on fourth down that means a turnover and the clock stops. The other team promptly kicked the game-winning field goal.
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2020, 05:49:44 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
It didn't matter. Houston had no timeouts, so it would only have been the difference between two Cleveland kneels and one. Going out of bounds was probably the smarter choice actually. Falling intentionally, especially in a small space, can be awkward and dangerous if you don't do it correctly.
Quote from: Alps on November 16, 2020, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2020, 05:49:44 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 15, 2020, 09:04:28 PM
I loved the smart and unselfish play by Nick Chubb today running out of bounds at the 1 at the end of a breakaway run instead of scoring, enabling the Browns to simply kneel out the clock for a 10-7 win rather than giving Houston the ball back.
Fantasy football players who started Chubb must have hated it, as well as anyone who bet on Cleveland -3.5.
He could have taken a knee or slid at the 1 so the clock would continue running.
This brings to mind a recent game I saw. Just before the end of the game, I believe the score was tied. The team with the ball threw an interception to the other team. They then quickly tackled the guy. That enabled there to be one or two more plays that resulted in a FG and lost the game for the first team. If they hadn't touched the other guy, let him run around for a bit, time would have run out and it would have gone to OT.
This happens because the offense is immediately out of the element they're familiar with...and their one and only instant is to tackle the defender who intercepted the ball. In the meantime, the defender who caught the ball should immediately go down anyway instead of trying to do too much. Even if he isn't touched, they'll stop the clock within a second or two as his forward progress is considered stopped.
Theres a lot of situational awareness that takes place during certain moments of the game. When it's done wrong....you're on the wrong highlight reel on ESPN.
Vikings win in Chicago, which they never do going back the last 20 years.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 17, 2020, 09:22:13 AM
Vikings win in Chicago, which they never do going back the last 20 years.
I joked that the Bears beat the Vikings to a 5-5 record, ironic given that the Bears started 5-1 while the Vikings started 1-5! :)
Quote from: webny99 on November 17, 2020, 10:12:12 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 17, 2020, 09:22:13 AM
Vikings win in Chicago, which they never do going back the last 20 years.
I joked that the Bears beat the Vikings to a 5-5 record, ironic given that the Bears started 5-1 while the Vikings started 1-5! :)
Yeah, the Bears were fake. I'll give credit where credit is due. Looking at their remaining schedule I only see one surefire win - Jacksonville in week 16. Detroit has won four of their last seven, Minnesota has won three in a row, Houston is better than their record says, and we know what Green Bay is. Chicago could end up losing nine of their last ten games when the season is over. I can only remember a few comparable collapses. Carolina last year started 5-3 and finished 5-11. Indianapolis last year started 5-2 and finished 7-9. Carolina in 2018 started 6-2 and finished 7-9. Minnesota in 2016 started 5-0 and finished 8-8. Atlanta in 2015 started 6-1 and finished 8-8. One thing that all those teams had in common was injuries, and lots of them, but you can't really say that about Chicago right now, which is what makes them different.
My 2 cents from someone who's watched > 90% of Bears games dating back to the early 1980s:
The Bears have a very strange dynamic in that they are Top 5 in the league in terms of defensive talent and at the same time Bottom 5 in the league in terms of offensive talent, and it's been this way to varying degrees for going on 30 years. What makes this really unusual is that it has persisted through a variety of GMs and coaches. I don't know if there is some weird nostalgia about the 1985 team or if coincidentally they've all been really bad at identifying offensive talent.
To be more specific, the offensive line, which is the most underrated position group in the game in terms of importance. With an elite offensive line, you can have a productive offense with less than elite skill players. An elite offensive line forces you to put 8 defenders in the box to be able to stop the run, which opens up the passing game, and it forces you to rush 5+ defenders in order to get pressure on the QB, which makes covering the receivers much harder.
For a converse example, consider my college alma mater, Notre Dame. They have, hands down, the best offensive line in college football. If you look at QB, RB, and WR, they don't come close to matching Clemson but that line gave them the ability to take them down.
The Bears as an organization just don't get it.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 17, 2020, 01:02:49 PM
My 2 cents from someone who's watched > 90% of Bears games dating back to the early 1980s:
The Bears have a very strange dynamic in that they are Top 5 in the league in terms of defensive talent and at the same time Bottom 5 in the league in terms of offensive talent, and it's been this way to varying degrees for going on 30 years. What makes this really unusual is that it has persisted through a variety of GMs and coaches. I don't know if there is some weird nostalgia about the 1985 team or if coincidentally they've all been really bad at identifying offensive talent.
To be more specific, the offensive line, which is the most underrated position group in the game in terms of importance. With an elite offensive line, you can have a productive offense with less than elite skill players. An elite offensive line forces you to put 8 defenders in the box to be able to stop the run, which opens up the passing game, and it forces you to rush 5+ defenders in order to get pressure on the QB, which makes covering the receivers much harder.
For a converse example, consider my college alma mater, Notre Dame. They have, hands down, the best offensive line in college football. If you look at QB, RB, and WR, they don't come close to matching Clemson but that line gave them the ability to take them down.
The Bears as an organization just don't get it.
Almost makes you wonder if Virginia McCaskey and her children/Halas's grandchildren are more involved in Football Ops than we are often lead to believe. Ownership is the constant, over varying GMs and Coaching Staffs
Quote from: ilpt4u on November 17, 2020, 01:29:15 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 17, 2020, 01:02:49 PM
My 2 cents from someone who's watched > 90% of Bears games dating back to the early 1980s:
The Bears have a very strange dynamic in that they are Top 5 in the league in terms of defensive talent and at the same time Bottom 5 in the league in terms of offensive talent, and it's been this way to varying degrees for going on 30 years. What makes this really unusual is that it has persisted through a variety of GMs and coaches. I don't know if there is some weird nostalgia about the 1985 team or if coincidentally they've all been really bad at identifying offensive talent.
To be more specific, the offensive line, which is the most underrated position group in the game in terms of importance. With an elite offensive line, you can have a productive offense with less than elite skill players. An elite offensive line forces you to put 8 defenders in the box to be able to stop the run, which opens up the passing game, and it forces you to rush 5+ defenders in order to get pressure on the QB, which makes covering the receivers much harder.
For a converse example, consider my college alma mater, Notre Dame. They have, hands down, the best offensive line in college football. If you look at QB, RB, and WR, they don't come close to matching Clemson but that line gave them the ability to take them down.
The Bears as an organization just don't get it.
Almost makes you wonder if Virginia McCaskey and her children/Halas's grandchildren are more involved in Football Ops than we are often lead to believe. Ownership is the constant, over varying GMs and Coaching Staffs
That's definitely part of it. Sooner or later the old timers need to come to reality and realize that defense doesn't always win championships. The only real defensive teams to win the Super Bowl recently were the Legion of Boom Seahawks and the No Fly Zone Broncos. Those defenses were arguably better than the '85 Bears.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2020, 07:44:40 PM
I don't get why people are so astounded when players go down/out of bounds intentionally. It's not a new tactic, and it doesn't take a football genius to understand that it's better to keep the clock moving than score in some situations. And obviously players aren't thinking about bettors or their fantasy stock while playing.
Fantasy football and sports betting are addictive and obsessive
Quote from: SSOWorld on November 20, 2020, 09:05:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2020, 07:44:40 PM
I don't get why people are so astounded when players go down/out of bounds intentionally. It's not a new tactic, and it doesn't take a football genius to understand that it's better to keep the clock moving than score in some situations. And obviously players aren't thinking about bettors or their fantasy stock while playing.
Fantasy football and sports betting are addictive and obsessive
Absolutely. But the point is that people shouldn't be acting like intentionally not scoring is some revolutionary 500 IQ Belichickian tactic.
Sick of the Cardinals hype. They started 4-2 against a pillowfight schedule (4-6 Niners, 2-7 WFT, 4-5 Lions, 3-7 Panthers, 0-9 Jets, 2-7 Cowboys post-injury). Then they beat Seattle, who was highly overrated in hindsight, in overtime, and everyone lost their minds. Since? Lost to a QB making his second career start, needed a hail mary to beat Buffalo, and lost to the Seahawks, who played like garbage last night and still won. Now this is not to say that I am not excited to see what they can do. They have a very good young quarterback, arguably the league's best WR, and an interesting head coach. But this year is not their year, and that's okay. They were 3-13 two years ago and 5-10-1 last year. A rebuild is a rebuild, and they're headed in the right direction, but the media has gone absoultely bonkers over a team that is really nothing special.
Also, Ravens lost to the mediocre Patriots (mediocre Patriots still feels weird to say) on Sunday night. I forgot to dunk on everyone who called me stupid or other things for saying this in September.
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2020, 04:28:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2020, 08:37:50 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that Lamar Fakeson won the MVP on athletic ability, not football knowledge or leadership qualities. Put him against a defense that can figure him out, and he's toast.
Is all.
Is all.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 17, 2020, 09:22:13 AM
Vikings win in Chicago, which they never do going back the last 20 years.
What? They did in 2017.
The "Hail Murray" play, as it's been dubbed, already has it's own Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Murray
Hopkins tweeted that the best meme of his catch gets a signed jersey, which led to some great entertainment, although painful at times for Bills fans.
Say what you will about the caliber of the teams in the NFC East but that is going to be a really exciting division race. Everyone within a half game of each other. Right now the Eagles are on top but they've shown me abosultely nothing positive for most of the season. Giants have played five of their six divisional games, so they are going to need to find wins elsewhere if they want to take the crown. Daniel Jones has one career win against out of division teams so I don't think they're going to do that. That leaves Washington, who seemingly has new life with Alex Smith, and Dallas, who is hopefully done with their quarterback revolving door and still has three more divisional games to play.
The New York NFC Football Team do, however, hold the tiebreaker over the Redskins by virtue of having swept the season series. The division could conceivably come down to the Redskins—Philadelphia game on the final day of the season, depending on how the next few weeks go.
I would have laughed had today's game ended in a tie. The Cincinnati Football Team and Redskins tied 27—27 in London the last time they had played before today. The real lesson, though, is–if you're a quarterback, try to avoid playing in Washington the two weekends before Thanksgiving. Joe Theismann, Alex Smith, and now Joe Burrow. Ouch.
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
My goodness the NFC East is a bloodbath, with three 3-7 teams plus the 3-6-1 Eagles.
The funniest thing is that the division as a whole had just two (!) wins outside the division entering today, and with Washington and the Cowboys both winning today, they've doubled it - in Week 11!
This is going to sound ridiculous, but I'm picking the Cowboys to win it.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 22, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
Not like there are an abundance of opportunities. Colts arrived in Indy in 1984. The AFC vs NFC scheduling formulas have changed, especially as the NFL went from 6 total Divisions to 8 total Divisions, but inter-conference games are not common. Under the current NFL schedule formula, inter-conference teams play each other every 4 years, and they alternate at which site. So GB-IND was in Indy this year; in 2024 will be in Green Bay; in 2028 will be back in Indy, depending on what the NFL does for the 17th game when it is added to the schedule. Most theories I have read on that imply it will be in intra-conference game added
So, once every 8 years they get to play a regular season game in Indiana. The only other chances to play in IN then become Superbowls hosted at Lucas Oil Stadium (I looked up if the Hoosier/RCA Dome ever hosted a SB - answer is no). The only SB played at Lucas Oil was XLVI, where the Giants beat the Patriots
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 22, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
I had to check this. The Evansville Crimson Giants played in Wisconsin, but Green Bay never returned the favor. Hammond Pros were a traveling team. They never played the Muncie Flyers. And that was every non-Colts team in Indiana.
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2020, 09:26:09 PM
My goodness the NFC East is a bloodbath, with three 3-7 teams plus the 3-6-1 Eagles.
The funniest thing is that the division as a whole had just two (!) wins outside the division entering today, and with Washington and the Cowboys both winning today, they've doubled it - in Week 11!
This is going to sound ridiculous, but I'm picking the Cowboys to win it.
It's guaranteed Washington or Dallas will take the lead in the Division Thursday, as they play against each other...unless somehow that game ends in a tie.
Have there ever been two divisions in a conference (North and West, NFC) completely ahead of another (East) ten or more weeks into the season? (Specifically, last place north and west teams have a better record than first place east)
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 22, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
I don't believe they've ever won in New Hampshire either.
Quote from: thspfc on November 23, 2020, 01:00:17 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 22, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
I don't believe they've ever won in New Hampshire either.
I'm going to guess they've never played there either. Are there any other state where the Packers have actually played games but never won?
Quote from: kurumi on November 23, 2020, 12:13:02 PM
Have there ever been two divisions in a conference (North and West, NFC) completely ahead of another (East) ten or more weeks into the season? (Specifically, last place north and west teams have a better record than first place east)
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say No, certainly not in Week 11, certainly not with two other divisions, and maybe not ever in
any week aside from some flukey examples in the first couple weeks of the season.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 23, 2020, 01:52:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 23, 2020, 01:00:17 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 22, 2020, 08:59:01 PM
The Packers have never won a game in the state of Indiana (excluding preseason)
I don't believe they've ever won in New Hampshire either.
I'm going to guess they've never played there either. Are there any other state where the Packers have actually played games but never won?
Not the Packers, but the Jets have never beaten Philadelphia anywhere.
Packers never won in Buffalo.
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2020, 05:05:55 PM
Packers never won in Buffalo.
But they've almost certainly won in New York state before, given that the Giants played there until 1975.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 23, 2020, 05:43:40 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2020, 05:05:55 PM
Packers never won in Buffalo.
But they've almost certainly won in New York state before, given that the Giants played there until 1975.
Yes, they won the 1961 NFL championship at Yankee Stadium.
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2020, 05:52:07 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 23, 2020, 05:43:40 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2020, 05:05:55 PM
Packers never won in Buffalo.
But they've almost certainly won in New York state before, given that the Giants played there until 1975.
Yes, they won the 1961 NFL championship at Yankee Stadium.
They beat the Giants multiple times in New York State, at the Polo Grounds and Yankee Stadium
They beat the NFL Brooklyn Dodgers at Ebbets Field
They even beat the Staten Island Stapletons, during the Staples short existance in the NFL, on Staten Island
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan.
Oh come on, the Pats are only 4-6. Just because for once they aren't at the top of the division winning nearly every game doesn't make their season "rough" . For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Well as mediocre as the Patriots are, both NJ teams are worse.
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan.
Oh come on, the Pats are only 4-6. Just because for once they aren't at the top of the division winning nearly every game doesn't make their season "rough" . For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
It's rough in comparison to steamrolling the entire rest of the division and cruising to a first round bye.
And seriously RGT, your team hasn't had a bad year since the turn of the century. I think you can put up with one season of mediocrity before you jump "ship" (get it?)
I've been rooting for the Cowboys for the last couple years and it's been nothing but disappointment, but I'm not abandoning them.
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Most NFL fans don't care for the Patriots. Even out west with completely unassociated fan bases there is a lot of statements of discontent that go around. There was a similar phenomenon with the Cowboys in the 1990s and 49ers in the 1980s.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2020, 12:05:15 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Most NFL fans don't care for the Patriots. Even out west with completely unassociated fan bases there is a lot of statements of discontent that go around. There was a similar phenomenon with the Cowboys in the 1990s and 49ers in the 1980s.
Did those teams face multiple allegations and proven instances of cheating?
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
You seem like a hit at parties.
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:00:11 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2020, 12:05:15 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Most NFL fans don't care for the Patriots. Even out west with completely unassociated fan bases there is a lot of statements of discontent that go around. There was a similar phenomenon with the Cowboys in the 1990s and 49ers in the 1980s.
Did those teams face multiple allegations and proven instances of cheating?
No, but I would argue they were about as equally as unliked nonetheless. There was even a "49ers suck" chant that we would do on the bus in suburban to Detroit which upset the driver.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2020, 12:05:15 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Most NFL fans don't care for the Patriots. Even out west with completely unassociated fan bases there is a lot of statements of discontent that go around. There was a similar phenomenon with the Cowboys in the 1990s and 49ers in the 1980s.
The rest of the NFC East still hate the Cowboys. Many around the country hate Jerry Jones. But since they haven't won a Superbowl in a generation, they aren't the America's Team they once were.
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
The NFC East, however, belongs in a category of their own, because while all four teams are historically bad, all four teams are also historically
relevant, because one of them will make the playoffs, and all four have a realistic shot. A chaotic bloodbath if I've ever seen one.
Put another way, you'd rather be any NFC East team than the Lions, Panthers, Pats, or Broncos, because none of those teams have a realistic chance to make the postseason despite a better record than the every NFC East team.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2020, 01:49:00 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
The NFC East, however, belongs in a category of their own, because while all four teams are historically bad, all four teams are also historically relevant, because one of them will make the playoffs, and all four have a realistic shot. A chaotic bloodbath if I've ever seen one.
Put another way, you'd rather be any NFC East team than the Lions, Panthers, Pats, or Broncos, because none of those teams have a realistic chance to make the postseason despite a better record than the every NFC East team.
And none of those four NFC teams realistically have a shot in any playoff matchup.
It wouldn't shock me if an NFC East team won a playoff game, though. After all, this is 2020; it would be fitting if one of them ended up in the NFC championship.
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:26:45 AM
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan.
Oh come on, the Pats are only 4-6. Just because for once they aren't at the top of the division winning nearly every game doesn't make their season "rough" . For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
It's rough in comparison to steamrolling the entire rest of the division and cruising to a first round bye.
And seriously RGT, your team hasn't had a bad year since the turn of the century. I think you can put up with one season of mediocrity before you jump "ship" (get it?)
I've been rooting for the Cowboys for the last couple years and it's been nothing but disappointment, but I'm not abandoning them.
I'm not jumping ship, I'm still a Pat's fan just rooting for the Bucs on the side this year
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2020, 02:37:58 PM
It wouldn't shock me if an NFC East team won a playoff game, though. After all, this is 2020; it would be fitting if one of them ended up in the NFC championship.
...by which time it will be 2021
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 02:42:04 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2020, 02:37:58 PM
It wouldn't shock me if an NFC East team won a playoff game, though. After all, this is 2020; it would be fitting if one of them ended up in the NFC championship.
...by which time it will be 2021
... which, if you expect 2021 to be a byproduct of 2020, makes it all the more fitting.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2020, 12:05:15 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2020, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2020, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 26, 2020, 01:36:13 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan. Go Bucs I guess.
Good. I hope you have many, many rough years for both of those teams.
Here we go again with Alps and his hate towards teams that win. No wonder he's a Jets fan and a Michigan fan
Alps is one of 80% of the country that hate the Pats. The other 20% are Pats fans that still whine they only won 6 Superbowls, or people that don't care about foosball.
Most NFL fans don't care for the Patriots. Even out west with completely unassociated fan bases there is a lot of statements of discontent that go around. There was a similar phenomenon with the Cowboys in the 1990s and 49ers in the 1980s.
The rest of the NFC East still hate the Cowboys. Many around the country hate Jerry Jones. But since they haven't won a Superbowl in a generation, they aren't the America's Team they once were.
They still draw bigger ratings than any other team.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2020, 02:37:58 PM
It wouldn't shock me if an NFC East team won a playoff game, though. After all, this is 2020; it would be fitting if one of them ended up in the NFC championship.
The winner of the NFC East is most likely going to get either the Seahawks or Rams. Barring a massive turnaround I give them little chance in that matchup. Rams have already beaten all four NFCE teams, and that was early in the season when the losing teams were healthy. Seahawks still have to play three of the four though.
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan.
Oh come on, the Pats are only 4-6. Just because for once they aren't at the top of the division winning nearly every game doesn't make their season "rough" . For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
Yeah, hey, whatareyou whining about? You could be rooting for the 3-6-1 Eagles!
:-o
Mike
Texans improved to 4-7 with a win over the Lions today, and I dare say Romeo Crennel has done a heck of a job with this team over the last couple weeks, considering their flaws. Deshaun Watson is playing lights out and hasn't thrown an interception in weeks. Sadly, I don't think the future is that bright for the Texans considering their lack of future draft picks.
Quote from: CoreySamson on November 26, 2020, 04:16:45 PM
Texans improved to 4-7 with a win over the Lions today, and I dare say Romeo Crennel has done a heck of a job with this team over the last couple weeks, considering their flaws. Deshaun Watson is playing lights out and hasn't thrown an interception in weeks. Sadly, I don't think the future is that bright for the Texans considering their lack of future draft picks.
Watson has been quitely playing like a top 5 QB this season. He just isn't winning because Houston's defense is useless.
Quote from: mgk920 on November 26, 2020, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2020, 01:45:38 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 26, 2020, 12:32:40 AM
This has been a rough year to be a Patriots fan.
Oh come on, the Pats are only 4-6. Just because for once they aren't at the top of the division winning nearly every game doesn't make their season "rough" . For an idea of what a rough season looks like, look at the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or any NFC East team...
Yeah, hey, whatareyou whining about? You could be rooting for the 3-6-1 Eagles!
:-o
Mike
You mean the second-place Eagles.
:bigass:
(My autocorrect recognizes "bigass" by now!)
Lions fire Head Coach Patrica(sp?) and GM Quinn today.
Quote from: Big John on November 28, 2020, 03:22:14 PM
Lions fire Head Coach Patrica(sp?) and GM Quinn today.
It's about time. Patricia is right up there with Freddie Kitchens and Ben McAdoo in terms of the worst coaching hires recently.
For the first time since 2007, the Cleveland Browns will not have a losing record.
Due to QB Jeff Driskel's recent COVID diagnosis, all three other Broncos quarterbacks - Drew Lock, Brett Rypien, and Blake Bortles - have been contact-traced and are required to quarantine. As a result, the Broncos have zero available QBs for their game against the Saints today.
But they're still playing. Kendall Hinton, a wide receiver on the practice squad, apparently played QB for a few years at Wake Forest, and he will start at that position today for the Broncos. RB Royce Freeman will serve as the emergency backup.
Quote from: US 89 on November 29, 2020, 05:13:34 PM
Due to QB Jeff Driskel's recent COVID diagnosis, all three other Broncos quarterbacks - Drew Lock, Brett Rypien, and Blake Bortles - have been contact-traced and are required to quarantine. As a result, the Broncos have zero available QBs for their game against the Saints today.
But they're still playing. Kendall Hinton, a wide receiver on the practice squad, apparently played QB for a few years at Wake Forest, and he will start at that position today for the Broncos. RB Royce Freeman will serve as the emergency backup.
No big deal. The Bears have been playing with zero available QBs all season.
With Patrick Mahomes' 462 yard performance against Tampa, Dak Prescott no longer holds the top three games in terms of passing yards this season (502, 472, 450). If that isn't impressive enough, Dak has played less than half as many games as most of the other starting QBs. I know people will say "garbage time" or "they were behind", but Dallas is far from the only team who gets behind, yet Dak is the only QB to put up those kinds of numbers. He's a top 5-7 QB. Mahomes, Rodgers, Wilson, Watson, possibly Allen, and possibly Brady are the only guys I would put ahead of him.
Vikings stole a game against Carolina where they did all kinds of Vikings shit like allow two consecutive fumble return scores by the same guy, muffing a punt in a critical moment, and giving up a huge completion to give the Panthers a field goal try to win. He missed it badly which is also very un-Vikings.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 29, 2020, 08:31:55 PM
He missed it badly which is also very un-Vikings.
Very on-brand for the Panthers, though. That's the third time they've lost on a long field goal miss this season.
That fourth quarter was wild, definitely among the best so far this season.
Quote from: Big John on November 28, 2020, 03:22:14 PM
Lions fire Head Coach Patrica(sp?) and GM Quinn today.
Like with Wayne Fontes and Matt Millen, one year too late for the Lions.
I'm just happy to see the Vikings on the right side of a one-point loss, because I honestly think that loss to the Seahawks was the most excruciating loss of the season... yes, even worse than the "Hail Murray" Bills-Cardinals game, because the Vikings thoroughly outplayed the Seahawks for nearly the entire game. It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. Bills 30, Cardinals 32
4. Chargers 30, Broncos 31
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Chargers-Raiders and Bears-Falcons are up there too.
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
https://twitter.com/CapitalsHill/status/1333533419205226496?s=20
https://twitter.com/CamaroWRX/status/1333533873771261954?s=20
Nick Folk! Pats need to win out to maintain their 10 win streak that started literally when I was born.
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
I'm just happy to see the Vikings on the right side of a one-point loss, because I honestly think that loss to the Seahawks was the most excruciating loss of the season... yes, even worse than the "Hail Murray" Bills-Cardinals game, because the Vikings thoroughly outplayed the Seahawks for nearly the entire game. It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. Bills 30, Cardinals 32
4. Chargers 30, Broncos 31
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Chargers-Raiders and Bears-Falcons are up there too.
Next game the Jets win is on this list by default.
Quote from: Alps on November 30, 2020, 07:05:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
... It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. Bills 30, Cardinals 32
4. Chargers 30, Broncos 31
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Chargers-Raiders and Bears-Falcons are up there too.
Next game the Jets win is on this list by default.
If it's this season, then yes. :)
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
I'm just happy to see the Vikings on the right side of a one-point loss, because I honestly think that loss to the Seahawks was the most excruciating loss of the season... yes, even worse than the "Hail Murray" Bills-Cardinals game, because the Vikings thoroughly outplayed the Seahawks for nearly the entire game. It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. Bills 30, Cardinals 32
4. Chargers 30, Broncos 31
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Chargers-Raiders and Bears-Falcons are up there too.
I disagree with putting Bills-Cardinals on the list, unless you're ranking by most emotional. Choking away a double digit second half lead, like the Chargers do every week, is much worse than giving up one fluke play at the very end.
Quote from: thspfc on December 01, 2020, 12:42:22 PM
I disagree with putting Bills-Cardinals on the list, unless you're ranking by most emotional. Choking away a double digit second half lead, like the Chargers do every week, is much worse than giving up one fluke play at the very end.
I don't know. The Bills blew a double-digit second-half lead too; they were up 23-9 in the third quarter before completely unraveling and allowing three straight Cardinals scores. It looked like they were headed for a 26-23 loss, which would have been bad enough on it's own; but then to regain composure and march down the field for an impressive go ahead touchdown with 30 seconds left and
still lose is about as excruciating as you can get.
Quote from: webny99 on December 01, 2020, 02:37:05 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 01, 2020, 12:42:22 PM
I disagree with putting Bills-Cardinals on the list, unless you're ranking by most emotional. Choking away a double digit second half lead, like the Chargers do every week, is much worse than giving up one fluke play at the very end.
I don't know. The Bills blew a double-digit second-half lead too; they were up 23-9 in the third quarter before completely unraveling and allowing three straight Cardinals scores. It looked like they were headed for a 26-23 loss, which would have been bad enough on it's own; but then to regain composure and march down the field for an impressive go ahead touchdown with 30 seconds left and still lose is about as excruciating as you can get.
Hmm, I didn't realize that.
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
If it ever happened, it would have been during the league's first decade, before scheduling became more centralized. Even then, I highly doubt it happened.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 02, 2020, 08:24:42 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
If it ever happened, it would have been during the league's first decade, before scheduling became more centralized. Even then, I highly doubt it happened.
I saw something about the Tuesday game earlier this season having been the first Tuesday game in 70-something years, so that tells us how long ago it would have to have been. I know there was a Wednesday night game not too many years ago–the season-opening game was played on Wednesday instead of Thursday to avoid conflicting with the final night of one of the political parties' presidential nominating conventions when the candidate would be giving his keynote speech– and Saturday games are routine after the college football regular season is over. I'm not sure how routine Friday games are, but they're also not super-rare, as I believe the league has scheduled one game on Friday when Christmas falls on that day of the week (like this year) since they resumed playing Christmas games some time ago (recall for many years they went to great pains to avoid playing on Christmas if possible).
Edited to add: The Wednesday season opener was in 2012 to avoid conflicting with Obama's speech that Thursday.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:48:32 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 02, 2020, 08:24:42 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
If it ever happened, it would have been during the league's first decade, before scheduling became more centralized. Even then, I highly doubt it happened.
I saw something about the Tuesday game earlier this season having been the first Tuesday game in 70-something years, so that tells us how long ago it would have to have been. I know there was a Wednesday night game not too many years ago–the season-opening game was played on Wednesday instead of Thursday to avoid conflicting with the final night of one of the political parties' presidential nominating conventions when the candidate would be giving his keynote speech– and Saturday games are routine after the college football regular season is over. I'm not sure how routine Friday games are, but they're also not super-rare, as I believe the league has scheduled one game on Friday when Christmas falls on that day of the week (like this year) since they resumed playing Christmas games some time ago (recall for many years they went to great pains to avoid playing on Christmas if possible).
Edited to add: The Wednesday season opener was in 2012 to avoid conflicting with Obama's speech that Thursday.
It was much more recent. The Eagles played the Vikings on Tuesday, Dec 28, 2010. The game was pushed back from Sunday due to a blizzard in Philly. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201012280phi.htm
The last Tuesday game before that was in 1946 though.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2020, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:48:32 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 02, 2020, 08:24:42 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
If it ever happened, it would have been during the league's first decade, before scheduling became more centralized. Even then, I highly doubt it happened.
I saw something about the Tuesday game earlier this season having been the first Tuesday game in 70-something years, so that tells us how long ago it would have to have been. I know there was a Wednesday night game not too many years ago–the season-opening game was played on Wednesday instead of Thursday to avoid conflicting with the final night of one of the political parties' presidential nominating conventions when the candidate would be giving his keynote speech– and Saturday games are routine after the college football regular season is over. I'm not sure how routine Friday games are, but they're also not super-rare, as I believe the league has scheduled one game on Friday when Christmas falls on that day of the week (like this year) since they resumed playing Christmas games some time ago (recall for many years they went to great pains to avoid playing on Christmas if possible).
Edited to add: The Wednesday season opener was in 2012 to avoid conflicting with Obama's speech that Thursday.
It was much more recent. The Eagles played the Vikings on Tuesday, Dec 28, 2010. The game was pushed back from Sunday due to a blizzard in Philly. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201012280phi.htm
The last Tuesday game before that was in 1946 though.
Interesting, thanks. I saw various articles citing to an Elias Sports Bureau reference to it being the first Tuesday game in 70+ years. Interesting to see they overlooked that one. It seems the 1946 game was a weather-related postponement as well.
Vikings again escape by the skin of their teeth against a Jags team who is 1-11 but have played a lot of teams tough. Vikings should have wrecked these guys but played sloppy and undisciplined. A win is a win.
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Or you can be the 2011 Giants and barely make the playoffs and win the Superbowl.
For the Vikings it's pretty remarkable how they've turned a 1-5 start into a playoff contender with a bunch of rookies and practice squad fill ins on defense. They're not going to shock the world but some of these guys will be part of the future and I would want them to grow into the job this way.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Or you can be the 2011 Giants and barely make the playoffs and win the Superbowl.
Speaking of the Giants: quite the signature victory today in Seattle. Big chance to distance themselves from the pack in the NFC (l)East with the Nameless Team facing the Steelers and the non-East Coast team facing the Ravens.
In what might be the first good thing the Jets have done this year, they manage to barely lose to the Raiders to preserve their draft pick.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
The only example of that I can think of is the Bengals during the Andy Dalton era. It seems like wild card teams either ascend to the next level and become Super Bowl contenders, or they flame out sooner rather than later and become really bad.
Quote from: US 89 on December 06, 2020, 07:36:56 PM
In what might be the first good thing the Jets have done this year, they manage to barely lose to the Raiders to preserve their draft pick.
I read something interesting today. With the way that game ended, it might have seemed like the Jets intentionally lost so that they can get the top pick, but their coaching staff and a good portion of their roster knows that they aren't going to be on the team next year (the Jets have a ton of draft picks). So the Jets really are
that bad. They're not faking it.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2020, 07:31:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Or you can be the 2011 Giants and barely make the playoffs and win the Superbowl.
Speaking of the Giants: quite the signature victory today in Seattle. Big chance to distance themselves from the pack in the NFC (l)East with the Nameless Team facing the Steelers and the non-East Coast team facing the Ravens.
Eagles are an irrelevant mess, as they benched Carson Wentz in favor of Jalen Hurts today. It's been a really bad year for my Cowboys, but it's been equally bad for Philly, and they don't have quarterback injury problems (lots of them) to blame.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 27, 2020, 07:51:08 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Los Angeles Bears
Chicago Football Team (next Sunday: home against New Orleans)
Chicago really likes clinging to that "Football Team" thing!
Quote from: US 89 on December 06, 2020, 07:36:56 PM
In what might be the first good thing the Jets have done this year, they manage to barely lose to the Raiders to preserve their draft pick.
For a few minutes, it was looking like the Jags would beat the Vikings, to maintain or widen their "lead" over the Jets for the 2nd draft pick. But they too reverted to form.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Or you can be the 2011 Giants and barely make the playoffs and win the Superbowl.
Sure but you can't always count on your SB opponent to be overhyped and overrated.
I saw that 5—0 score at halftime in Seattle. Too bad that wasn't the final score. I believe there have only been three games in NFL history that ended with 5—0 scores, the best-known one being a 1970 season playoff game in which Dallas beat Detroit.
Of course, after New York's first touchdown, they made a two-point conversion to make it 8—5, so that would have been even weirder had that been the final score.
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
Quote from: oscar on December 06, 2020, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
Better yet, has any NFL team at any point in any game ever had a score of 4?
Quote from: oscar on December 06, 2020, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
In 1966, the Alouettes beat the Ottawa Rough Riders 1—0! Lowest-scoring game in CFL history. I believe the most recent time a team scored only one point in a game was in July 2012 when the Saskatchewan Roughriders beat the Eskimos 17—1.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2020, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: oscar on December 06, 2020, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
Better yet, has any NFL team at any point in any game ever had a score of 4?
On November 25, 1923, the Racine Legion beat the Chicago Cardinals 10—4. Only time a team
finished with four points. There have been two other times when a team had four points at some point during a game, most recently in 1950.
I seem to recall a college football game ending with a 6—4 score some years back. I'll have to look for that one. Edited to add: October 2004. Iowa beat Penn State 6—4.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 08:43:38 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 06, 2020, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 06, 2020, 06:16:49 PM
Patriots blowing out Chargers now, maybe playoffs are still a possibility?
You will soon learn that barely making the playoffs and getting a shitty draft pick are the fast track to long-term mediocrity, even for a franchise that drafts as well as NE.
Or you can be the 2011 Giants and barely make the playoffs and win the Superbowl.
Sure but you can't always count on your SB opponent to be overhyped and overrated.
They beat the 15-1 Packers and the 13-3 49ers on the way.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2020, 07:31:51 PM
Speaking of the Giants: quite the signature victory today in Seattle.
Colt McCoy coming through with the NFC East's FIRST win over a team with a winning record, in Week 13, to get the Giants to 5-7 and expand their division lead? Yup, exactly what what we expected in August...
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:42:24 PM
Chicago really likes clinging to that "Football Team" thing!
Oof. Starting 5-1 and missing the playoffs is rare, starting 5-1 and sitting at 5-7 in early December has to be even rarer.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
I saw that 5—0 score at halftime in Seattle. Too bad that wasn't the final score.
We did have a final score that included 5-0 today. Unfortunately for the hapless Chargers, it was
45-0...
Quote from: US 89 on December 06, 2020, 07:36:56 PM
In what might be the first good thing the Jets have done this year, they manage to barely lose to the Raiders to preserve their draft pick.
If preserving the draft pick is the goal, then aren't all 12 losses a good thing?
They've actually been competitive in a number of their games, with one-score losses to the Pats, Chargers, and now Raiders, plus a late blown lead against the Broncos. They're
so skilled at losing that I'd actually think
less of them if they had won those four and were 4-8 right now.
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2020, 10:13:43 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 06, 2020, 07:36:56 PM
In what might be the first good thing the Jets have done this year, they manage to barely lose to the Raiders to preserve their draft pick.
If preserving the draft pick is the goal, then aren't all 12 losses a good thing?
They've actually been competitive in a number of their games, with one-score losses to the Pats, Chargers, and now Raiders, plus a late blown lead against the Broncos. They're so skilled at losing that I'd actually think less of them if they had won those four and were 4-8 right now.
You literally think losing is better than winning.
Seriously. When the Bears were 4-1 you said that they should be 1-4. You also ripped on the Packers (who were 13-3 and in the NFC title game) for winning. Of course the Bears are now 5-7 and you don't hear a peep about how they should be 10-2 or something, despite, count it, five of their seven losses coming by one possession. On the other end of the spectrum, the Packers are 9-3, steamrolling most of the teams they play (all but two of their wins have been by multiple possessions, and all but one of their losses have been by one possession), and there's no talk about how they should be 11-1. Now the Jets are 0-12 and you think they would be WORSE if they were 4-8?
What is going on here? Can you explain this?
My goodness. You'd think it would be obvious why 0-12 is better than 4-8: because 0-12 sets you up for long term success.
I really don't think we need to hash over the Bears and Packers again. It's unnecessary and doesn't do anybody any good. Of course my position isn't that teams should be "ripped on" for winning, but sometimes a team's record reflects luck as much as it does skill/talent; that's just the nature of sports, and not an indictment of any particular team.
Not to feel like I'm trying to pick on you, but it goes further than just lose today and win tomorrow. The Jets ownership and front office is one of the biggest jokes in pro sports. The team has nothing and drafting Lawrence means nothing if they can't hire a good staff and field a team around him. While Lawrence is the unquestioned #1 pick, I do wonder if NY is the right place for him to be successful. I'm not the biggest follower of college football but he doesn't seem like a guy to me who will adjust to handing the adversity of losing and publications like the NY Post won't hesitate to throw him on the front page with a mocking headline after his first poor start.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
The 1-point Safety scored by the Offense/against the Defense (as when the Try begins) is much more likely than the 1-point Safety scored by the Defense/against the Offense (as when the Try begins). But when the Offense/"Trying" team scores a 1-point Safety, it is functionally the same thing as successfully converting the PAT kick thru the uprights, awarding 1 point in addition to the 6 pt TD.
The Offensive 1-point Safety has happened in CFB a few times. The Defensive 1-point Safety, I'm not sure has happened at any level of football, because it takes a ridiculous set of circumstances to make it happen. It would almost *have* to be done intentionally
I expect we'll see an Offensive 1-point Safety in the NFL sometime. Next week or in the next decade, who knows, but I think it will happen. It is an odd play, but it at least has realistic circumstances where it
could happen
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 07, 2020, 12:04:27 AM
Not to feel like I'm trying to pick on you, but it goes further than just lose today and win tomorrow. The Jets ownership and front office is one of the biggest jokes in pro sports. The team has nothing and drafting Lawrence means nothing if they can't hire a good staff and field a team around him. While Lawrence is the unquestioned #1 pick, I do wonder if NY is the right place for him to be successful. I'm not the biggest follower of college football but he doesn't seem like a guy to me who will adjust to handing the adversity of losing and publications like the NY Post won't hesitate to throw him on the front page with a mocking headline after his first poor start.
Understood: I'm not expecting the Jets to go 19-0 in 2021 even if they do get Lawrence. Presumably, they will be hiring a new coach and getting some other players with their draft picks, and from what I understand, ownership and the fans believe in the GM, so hopefully he's able to turn things around.
I guess my point about 4-8 is that if you're 4-8 with nothing, you might as well be 0-12 with nothing and at least have the pick. Otherwise you'll just keep being 4-12 or 6-10 every season for the duration, and that offers even less promise.
I'm not sure Lawrence is a good fit for New York either. "Tanking for Trevor" has been hyped up to such a degree that I'm worried expectations have gotten out of line. Being at the center of the NYC sports universe is a lot of pressure even for an established star, much less a 21-year old from the South. (He's younger than me, which is just crazy every time I think about it!)
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2020, 08:44:10 AM
....
I guess my point about 4-8 is that if you're 4-8 with nothing, you might as well be 0-12 with nothing and at least have the pick. Otherwise you'll just keep being 4-12 or 6-10 every season for the duration, and that offers even less promise.
....
The Washington Bullets teams in the 1980s were a perfect example of the phenomenon you describe. They were thoroughly mediocre. From 1982 to 1990, they finished right around .500 (a few games above or a few games below) every year; they missed the playoffs twice, but for five straight years they made the playoffs and lost in the first round every time. That was the perfect example of where you didn't want to be: Not good enough to make a run in the playoffs, but not bad enough to get a good draft pick that could change your franchise.
Even recognizing, of course, that basketball is unique in terms of being the one sport where a single player can sometimes fundamentally change a team's fortunes, the description you give reminds me of that. Football is arguably more susceptible than basketball to screwing up this sort of thing, of course, because even if you pick an outstanding quarterback, he may not be much help if, for example, you don't have a decent offensive line that can keep him on his feet long enough to throw the ball.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 09:14:40 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2020, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: oscar on December 06, 2020, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
Better yet, has any NFL team at any point in any game ever had a score of 4?
On November 25, 1923, the Racine Legion beat the Chicago Cardinals 10—4. Only time a team finished with four points. There have been two other times when a team had four points at some point during a game, most recently in 1950.
I seem to recall a college football game ending with a 6—4 score some years back. I'll have to look for that one. Edited to add: October 2004. Iowa beat Penn State 6—4.
Back in 1974 in SoCal, there was a high school score of 7-4. The NFL record for safeties in a game is 3. I believe it was the Rams who set it against the Giants.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on December 07, 2020, 02:45:49 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 09:14:40 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2020, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: oscar on December 06, 2020, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
Has any CFL team ended a game with only 1 point (a "rouge" point)?
Better yet, has any NFL team at any point in any game ever had a score of 4?
On November 25, 1923, the Racine Legion beat the Chicago Cardinals 10—4. Only time a team finished with four points. There have been two other times when a team had four points at some point during a game, most recently in 1950.
I seem to recall a college football game ending with a 6—4 score some years back. I'll have to look for that one. Edited to add: October 2004. Iowa beat Penn State 6—4.
Back in 1974 in SoCal, there was a high school score of 7-4. The NFL record for safeties in a game is 3. I believe it was the Rams who set it against the Giants.
Rick
You're correct, and apparently all three of them occurred
in the same quarter, which is even weirder.
I attended a college football game (the 2008 Gator Bowl) in which UVA scored two safeties, both of which involved Texas Tech's quarterback being called for intentional grounding in the end zone. A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. I believe that a defensive two point conversion has only happened twice in the NFL: a Saints/Panthers game in 2015 and a Chiefs/Falcons game in 2016. The latter was extremely signficant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPOClZbHQG4
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. ...
:rolleyes: That was not his point.
Hail to the Redskins!
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 08:32:23 PM
Hail to the Redskins!
Coming from a Steelers fan, good game. Washington played a hell of a game and the Steelers did not play like a 11-0 (now 11-1) team. Between this game and the Ravens game, our receivers dropped way too many passes.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. ...
:rolleyes: That was not his point.
"That was not the point", proceeds to not state the point . . .
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 09:42:18 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. ...
:rolleyes: That was not his point.
"That was not the point", proceeds to not state the point . . .
The point was it was only for 2 points, not 6 points.
Wow, the Giants beat the Seahawks, and the Football Team beats the unbeaten Steelers.
That's two of the biggest upsets of the season in one week! The NFC East just never fails to be entertaining!
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2020, 11:30:12 PM
You'd think it would be obvious why 0-12 is better than 4-8
The draft is an educated guessing game at best and a lottery at worst. Obviously this year there's a large gap between the top pick and second pick, but Lawrence is the best prospect in almost a decade according to most experts, so this is not how it usually is. Last year, you had Burrow, Tua, and Herbert all at the top of the draft, and all of them look like franchise quarterbacks. There's not too much difference there, and if there is, it's actually Herbert, who was the last picked of the three, at the top. In 2018 you had Mayfield at #1 (meh), Darnold at #3 (ick), Allen at #7 (boom!), and Rosen at #10 (big yikes). Then you had Lamar at #32. In 2017? Trubisky is the top QB taken, before Mahomes and Watson. 2016? The best QB in the draft doesn't come off the board until the fourth round (Prescott). So there will be memes about sucking (tank for Tua, bomb for Burrow, tank for Trevor, etc.) until the sun burns out. But you still have to hit on the pick. And in three of the last four drafts, the team with the top pick messed up. If you gave me a choice right now to play for the 0-12 Jets or the 4-8 Panthers, I would play for the Panthers in a heartbeat, because I don't like losing. I would rather play for an actual team with an actual coach and have a worse lottery ticket, than play for a joke team with a joke coach and have a better lottery ticket.
I like having two games on Monday. I'd like to see the Thursday games (except for opening week and Thanksgiving) moved to Monday. I know the players would like having fewer Thursday games.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 07, 2020, 09:45:58 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 09:42:18 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. ...
:rolleyes: That was not his point.
"That was not the point", proceeds to not state the point . . .
The point was it was only for 2 points, not 6 points.
Who cares? Points are points.
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 10:25:27 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 07, 2020, 09:45:58 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 09:42:18 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2020, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 07, 2020, 04:50:47 PM
A more memorable safety for me was on the day after Thanksgiving in 1994 when one of our guys intercepted NC State's two-point conversion attempt and ran it back 100 yards (NC State still won the game 30—27). As my father said at the time, "That's a lot of work for just two points."
I mean, not really. It takes like 18-19 seconds for me to run 100 yards, and I'm slower than most college football players. ...
:rolleyes: That was not his point.
"That was not the point", proceeds to not state the point . . .
The point was it was only for 2 points, not 6 points.
Who cares? Points are points.
Points only count unless you're playing horseshoes and hand grenades! :D
It's official: With a 34-24 win over the 49ers, the Hail Murray play cost the Bills a sweep of the NFC West this season.
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2020, 11:30:06 PM
It's official: With a 34-24 win over the 49ers, the Hail Murray play cost the Bills a sweep of the NFC West this season.
And we'd be all alone in the 7 seed with a little margin for error if you hadn't messed up. :bigass:
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 07, 2020, 11:51:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2020, 11:30:06 PM
It's official: With a 34-24 win over the 49ers, the Hail Murray play cost the Bills a sweep of the NFC West this season.
And we'd be all alone in the 7 seed with a little margin for error if you hadn't messed up. :bigass:
Bills dropped 143 points on the NFC West, should've been an easy sweep, smh...
My big takeaway from this week though, is that the AFC is proving to be the much stronger conference this year. The 6-6 Vikings are in the #7 spot; the 6-6 Pats, meanwhile, are all the way back in the #10 spot, hardly even in the mix with the Raiders, Browns, Ravens, Dolphins, and loser of Colts-Titans all ahead of them in the race for for the 3 wild card slots.
Vikings and Cards are 6-6, and a glut are 5-7 including the Lions, Bears, Giants, Football Team, and 49ers. WSH/SF this week is basically an elimination game but the Niners are trending downward. Bears have quit. Lions will likely lose to Green Bay. Cardinals/Giants is a game Arizona has to win at this point. Vikings will probably lose to Tampa Bay so I'm hoping the Cards fall to the Giants.
Not to bring up the Hail Murray again, but it's also the only thing standing between the Cardinals and a 5-game losing streak, so that does set up an interesting Cards-Giants matchup that the Giants really need to win too with the Browns and Ravens on the horizon.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 08, 2020, 12:40:34 AM
Vikings and Cards are 6-6, and a glut are 5-7 including the Lions, Bears, Giants, Football Team, and 49ers. WSH/SF this week is basically an elimination game but the Niners are trending downward. Bears have quit. Lions will likely lose to Green Bay. Cardinals/Giants is a game Arizona has to win at this point. Vikings will probably lose to Tampa Bay so I'm hoping the Cards fall to the Giants.
As a Giants fan, I'm also hoping the Cards fall to the Giants :-D
Also, as a Giants fan, of all the teams the Steelers could lose to, it just HAD to be Washington :banghead:
Mildly interesting to note that the last Washington victory over Pittsburgh was on November 17, 1991, at old Three Rivers Stadium to push the Redskins to 11—0; they then lost the following week en route to a 14—2 regular season and a win in Super Bowl XXVI. The 11—0 aspect is kind of amusing in light of Pittsburgh's record going into yesterday's game.
I was there the last time a Washington team won at Heinz Field before yesterday–the 2011 Winter Classic.
The earlier kickoff yesterday was nice, although 5:00 is awfully early on the East Coast. It'd be nice if they'd kick off the Monday night games around 6:30 or 7:00 on a regular basis. Easier to stay awake to the end of the game!
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 08, 2020, 12:40:34 AM
Vikings and Cards are 6-6, and a glut are 5-7 including the Lions, Bears, Giants, Football Team, and 49ers. WSH/SF this week is basically an elimination game but the Niners are trending downward. Bears have quit. Lions will likely lose to Green Bay. Cardinals/Giants is a game Arizona has to win at this point. Vikings will probably lose to Tampa Bay so I'm hoping the Cards fall to the Giants.
Wish the Pats were in the NFC this year.
Quote from: nexus73 on December 07, 2020, 02:45:49 PM
Back in 1974 in SoCal, there was a high school score of 7-4. The NFL record for safeties in a game is 3. I believe it was the Rams who set it against the Giants.
Rick
I was on the high school football team which lost 4-0 in 1984.
I was on a HS team that won a game 6-2. With a 6-0 lead, stopped them on 4th and goal, burned their 3 timeouts, then the punter ran around in the end zone for 5 seconds to run out the clock.
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 07, 2020, 12:38:35 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
The 1-point Safety scored by the Offense/against the Defense (as when the Try begins) is much more likely than the 1-point Safety scored by the Defense/against the Offense (as when the Try begins). But when the Offense/"Trying" team scores a 1-point Safety, it is functionally the same thing as successfully converting the PAT kick thru the uprights, awarding 1 point in addition to the 6 pt TD.
The Offensive 1-point Safety has happened in CFB a few times. The Defensive 1-point Safety, I'm not sure has happened at any level of football, because it takes a ridiculous set of circumstances to make it happen. It would almost *have* to be done intentionally
I expect we'll see an Offensive 1-point Safety in the NFL sometime. Next week or in the next decade, who knows, but I think it will happen. It is an odd play, but it at least has realistic circumstances where it could happen
I thought it HAS happened defensively - someone blocked the kick, ran it back, but was caught up to and force-fumbled the ball out of bounds. Not at a high level, but on video.
Scorigami is a fun concept.
https://nflscorigami.com
Quote from: Alps on December 08, 2020, 03:56:16 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 07, 2020, 12:38:35 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
The 1-point Safety scored by the Offense/against the Defense (as when the Try begins) is much more likely than the 1-point Safety scored by the Defense/against the Offense (as when the Try begins). But when the Offense/"Trying" team scores a 1-point Safety, it is functionally the same thing as successfully converting the PAT kick thru the uprights, awarding 1 point in addition to the 6 pt TD.
The Offensive 1-point Safety has happened in CFB a few times. The Defensive 1-point Safety, I'm not sure has happened at any level of football, because it takes a ridiculous set of circumstances to make it happen. It would almost *have* to be done intentionally
I expect we'll see an Offensive 1-point Safety in the NFL sometime. Next week or in the next decade, who knows, but I think it will happen. It is an odd play, but it at least has realistic circumstances where it could happen
I thought it HAS happened defensively - someone blocked the kick, ran it back, but was caught up to and force-fumbled the ball out of bounds. Not at a high level, but on video.
That isn't a Safety, tho. That would be a Touchback - ball fumbled forward into the EZ then out of bounds is a Touchback, which on a PAT play means the try is unsuccessful
Other than an Intentional Safety (Offense intentially runs backwards into their own EZ and takes a knee at the snap), for it to happen "naturally" would have to be something such as: Defense gets the ball on the Try, runs it back, fumbles the ball somewhere short of the Goal Line but inside the 5. The Offense pursues, recovers the ball in the field of play, and decides, for some reason, to run back into the EZ and gets tackled in the EZ or steps out of bounds.
Maybe it is a do or die play that the Offense needs the points to win or lose, so some sort of incentive to make a miracle happen - but in that scenario, the Defense should simply take a knee when they get the ball. Like I said, within the rules, but takes an outlandish set of circumstances to actually make it happen
With all the schedule shake-ups the NFL has had to date, it's worth pointing out that this is the first calendar week we've encountered with games on three weeknights: Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.
The first Tuesday game, Bills-Titans in Week 5, pushed the Bills TNF game to the following Monday, so we only had Mon/Tue that week.
Then last week, Ravens-Steelers on Wednesday pushed the Ravens TNF matchup back to today, so we only had Mon/Wed last week.
Quote from: webny99 on December 08, 2020, 10:00:36 PM
With all the schedule shake-ups the NFL has had to date, it's worth pointing out that this is the first calendar week we've encountered with games on three weeknights: Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.
The first Tuesday game, Bills-Titans in Week 5, pushed the Bills TNF game to the following Monday, so we only had Mon/Tue that week.
Then last week, Ravens-Steelers on Wednesday pushed the Ravens TNF matchup back to today, so we only had Mon/Wed last week.
Along those lines, as long as the Christmas Day game goes forward as scheduled, this will be the first NFL season, maybe ever?, to have games contested on each of the 7 days of the week, across the course of a season
At this point, the only day of the week we are missing is Friday, and Dec 25th is a Friday
Dez finally caught it
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 08, 2020, 10:40:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 08, 2020, 10:00:36 PM
With all the schedule shake-ups the NFL has had to date, it's worth pointing out that this is the first calendar week we've encountered with games on three weeknights: Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.
The first Tuesday game, Bills-Titans in Week 5, pushed the Bills TNF game to the following Monday, so we only had Mon/Tue that week.
Then last week, Ravens-Steelers on Wednesday pushed the Ravens TNF matchup back to today, so we only had Mon/Wed last week.
Along those lines, as long as the Christmas Day game goes forward as scheduled, this will be the first NFL season, maybe ever?, to have games contested on each of the 7 days of the week, across the course of a season
At this point, the only day of the week we are missing is Friday, and Dec 25th is a Friday
You don't say.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 02, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
I was just looking ahead at the remainder of this season's schedule and I note there are Saturday games later this month and a Friday game on Christmas. That means, assuming today's game goes off as currently scheduled and that those other games happen as scheduled, that the NFL will have played regular-season games on every day of the week this season (so far, we have Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday; today would add Wednesday, and then Friday and Saturday are noted above). I wonder whether that's ever happened before.
Whoops! Sorry...
Cowboys lose again, and in pretty much the same fashion that they've been losing all year. Got gashed in the run game for nearly 300 yards. The offense moved the ball (388 yards and 29 first downs), but missed field goals and a dropped touchdown negated some of it. CeeDee Lamb is a quality player but it's obvious that he wasn't the right pick for Dallas. They need a leader on defense, and they need a lot of help at defensive tackle and linebacker. IMO they should get rid of some of their expensive offensive linemen. Trade them away for draft picks. And Jerry Jones, being the stubborn guy that he is, would never do this, but Zeke needs to go. He ran wild behind the league's best o-line for a few years but now that the o-line has regressed, it's showing that he's not an elite running back. His fitness isn't up to par. A team would probably give up a second round pick for him, third round at worst. All of that frees up cap space and allows the Cowboys to sign Dak and do a mini-rebuild.
Another schedule-related oddity that just occurred to me is that the Bills never traveled to a Pacific Coast state this season despite playing the AFC West AND the NFC West. They hosted the Rams, Chargers, and Seahawks, so that left the 49ers game as the only opportunity, and that, of course, ended up being played in Arizona.
So across 8 games they got Arizona x2, Colorado (upcoming) and Nevada; no West Coast OR Kansas City!
You can be pretty confident that's never happened before, especially since it's rare for teams to get both those divisions in the same year to begin with, and this is the first year with an NFL team in Nevada.
Quote from: webny99 on December 08, 2020, 12:11:50 AM
My big takeaway from this week though, is that the AFC is proving to be the much stronger conference this year. The 6-6 Vikings are in the #7 spot; the 6-6 Pats, meanwhile, are all the way back in the #10 spot, hardly even in the mix with the Raiders, Browns, Ravens, Dolphins, and loser of Colts-Titans all ahead of them in the race for for the 3 wild card slots.
To add to this, I've been browsing around on FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-nfl-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo) and the AFC is really starting to stand out as hierarchical compared to the NFC.
You've got the best team in the league in the Chiefs, the second-best at least record-wise in the Steelers, a total of 9 teams with at least a 40% chance to make the playoffs, and then a group of 6 teams (Jets, Jaguars, Bengals, Chargers, Broncos, Texans) at the bottom of the barrel that are either eliminated or de-facto eliminated. That leaves the Patriots as the
only AFC team with between a 1% and 40% chance to make the playoffs, and they're at 4%. That is a stunning have/have not divide and lack of mediocre/average teams.
Now compare that to the NFC, which thanks to the nature of the NFC East has zero teams mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, only the Falcons and Panthers eliminated from division contention, and
five teams (Niners, Bears, Lions, Cowboys, Eagles) with between a 1% and 40% chance to make the playoffs. Then you've got an 8-8 finish as the #7 seed very much in play for both the Vikings and the Cardinals, while a 10-6 AFC team might miss out even with the extra playoff spot.
Patriots probably missing this year, just hope they win out so they keep their winning season streak.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 11, 2020, 03:07:30 PM
Patriots probably missing this year, just hope they win out so they keep their winning season streak.
Patriots need to rebuild next year IMO. Belichick can't save that team, there's just not enough talent, especially on offense.
A lot of blowouts today. Only two of the seven 1PM games were decided by one score, and those two were pretty lopsided too before getting close at the end.
Cowboys win today. People will whine and say that it's not in their best interest long term, but they're only a game and a half back in the NFC East right now, and that gap could narrow if the name redacted lose to the Niners. Cowboys also play the Giants in week 17. So if Washington and New York stumble down the stretch, who knows. And at the end of the day the Cowboys don't need a super high draft pick. A mid first round pick is fine for them.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:42:24 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 27, 2020, 07:51:08 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2020, 07:32:40 AM
Quote from: kurumi on October 04, 2020, 11:40:03 PM
Philly won in SF, so here's the latest:
* Washington Eagles
* Philadelphia 49ers
* San Francisco Football Team
San Francisco are now the Rams. In the interest of clarity, I guess we now have the Los Angeles NFC Football Team ("NFC" being necessary because of their other team).
Los Angeles Bears
Chicago Football Team (next Sunday: home against New Orleans)
Chicago really likes clinging to that "Football Team" thing!
Chicago Texans
Houston Football Team
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 07, 2020, 12:38:35 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
The 1-point Safety scored by the Offense/against the Defense (as when the Try begins) is much more likely than the 1-point Safety scored by the Defense/against the Offense (as when the Try begins). But when the Offense/"Trying" team scores a 1-point Safety, it is functionally the same thing as successfully converting the PAT kick thru the uprights, awarding 1 point in addition to the 6 pt TD.
The Offensive 1-point Safety has happened in CFB a few times. The Defensive 1-point Safety, I'm not sure has happened at any level of football, because it takes a ridiculous set of circumstances to make it happen. It would almost *have* to be done intentionally
I expect we'll see an Offensive 1-point Safety in the NFL sometime. Next week or in the next decade, who knows, but I think it will happen. It is an odd play, but it at least has realistic circumstances where it could happen
Something I just realized is that, in college football, it's now possible for a game to end 1-0. The 1-point safety can only be scored on a conversion attempt, which until this year has always required a preceding touchdown, but beginning last year, the 5th overtime on consist of alternating 2-point conversion attempts with no preceding touchdown. It's probably a billion to one odds that a game ever gets to a 5th OT tied 0-0, but if it did, then it could end 1-0.
Jets might actually go 0-16 holly crap
Eagles stun the Saints, 24-21.
It's exactly the kind of upset that everyone should have easily seen coming, and no one ever does.
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2020, 07:37:27 PM
Eagles stun the Saints, 24-21.
It's exactly the kind of upset that everyone should have easily seen coming, and no one ever does.
Since Wentz came into the league, the Eagles are 35-33-1 with him and 11-3 without him. :hmmm:
I find it mildly annoying when teams clinch their division this early, but alas, the Packers have clinched the NFC North and the Chiefs have clinched the AFC West.
And Washington with a commanding lead in the NFC East... you hate you see it! :-D
(Packers, not Saints, have clinched their division. Edited to reflect.)
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2020, 07:56:22 PM
I find it mildly annoying when teams clinch their division this early, but alas, the Saints have clinched the NFC South and the Chiefs have clinched the AFC West.
And Washington with a commanding lead in the NFC East... you hate you see it! :-D
And the Packers have also clinched the NFC North. Go Pack Go!
Quote from: tchafe1978 on December 13, 2020, 08:28:04 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2020, 07:56:22 PM
I find it mildly annoying when teams clinch their division this early, but alas, the Saints have clinched the NFC South and the Chiefs have clinched the AFC West.
And Washington with a commanding lead in the NFC East... you hate you see it! :-D
And the Packers have also clinched the NFC North. Go Pack Go!
Whoops, my bad. You are correct, it's the Packers that have clinched, not the Saints.
Although the Saints have clinched a playoff spot, the Bucs still have a mathematical pathway to the division title.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2020, 04:53:58 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 07, 2020, 12:38:35 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 06, 2020, 08:54:58 PM
(I still want to see a game end with a 6—1 score, but insofar as I'm aware, no NFL team has ever scored a one-point safety.)
The 1-point Safety scored by the Offense/against the Defense (as when the Try begins) is much more likely than the 1-point Safety scored by the Defense/against the Offense (as when the Try begins). But when the Offense/"Trying" team scores a 1-point Safety, it is functionally the same thing as successfully converting the PAT kick thru the uprights, awarding 1 point in addition to the 6 pt TD.
The Offensive 1-point Safety has happened in CFB a few times. The Defensive 1-point Safety, I'm not sure has happened at any level of football, because it takes a ridiculous set of circumstances to make it happen. It would almost *have* to be done intentionally
I expect we'll see an Offensive 1-point Safety in the NFL sometime. Next week or in the next decade, who knows, but I think it will happen. It is an odd play, but it at least has realistic circumstances where it could happen
Something I just realized is that, in college football, it's now possible for a game to end 1-0. The 1-point safety can only be scored on a conversion attempt, which until this year has always required a preceding touchdown, but beginning last year, the 5th overtime on consist of alternating 2-point conversion attempts with no preceding touchdown. It's probably a billion to one odds that a game ever gets to a 5th OT tied 0-0, but if it did, then it could end 1-0.
CFB OT is such a joke, and this further change to the already gimmick OT is just worse
I'd rather see the games end in Ties than deciding winners in this ridiculous format
Football isn't played as Innings, and it certainly isn't played alternating single plays.
Good for you, CFB. Good for you.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on December 13, 2020, 08:28:04 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2020, 07:56:22 PM
I find it mildly annoying when teams clinch their division this early, but alas, the Saints have clinched the NFC South and the Chiefs have clinched the AFC West.
And Washington with a commanding lead in the NFC East... you hate you see it! :-D
And the Packers have also clinched the NFC North. Go Pack Go!
And owing to the Saints' loss to the Eagles, the Packers now have the #1 seed and first-round bye in the NFC. Both teams are now 10-3, with the Packers having the tiebreak (head-to-head).
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 11, 2020, 03:07:30 PM
Patriots probably missing this year, just hope they win out so they keep their winning season streak.
They're not eliminated from the playoffs yet, but with the Bills monster win last night, they are out of the division race.
It would be very Bills-esque if the division comes down to Bills-Dolphins Week 17, but even that seems unlikely since they've got a 2-game lead now.
Who knew that starting a kick returner at quarterback doesn't work that well. Saints need to get Brees back so that come playoff time, they can lose a tight game in heartbreaking fashion instead of getting their doors blown off.
I've added the Giants to my list of wildly overhyped teams by the media this season. It was really annoying last week. They squeak past the Seahawks because Wilson missed a wide open reciever on the biggest play of the game, and the media was literally acting like they had a shot at the Super Bowl. The list also includes:
- Eagles (preseason hype)
- Cardinals (Kyler Murray hype, hAiL mUrRaY hype)
- Dolphins (all the hype about their defense, only for Mahomes to throw for 393 yards and put up 33 points)
Agree with the first three even though the Cardinals are still even money to make the playoffs.
As for the Dolphins, they probably aren't making it to the Super Bowl, but if they make the playoffs period, Flores has to be Coach of the Year. It's to their defense's credit that they had 3 interceptions to even keep it close against the Chiefs.
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2020, 12:15:25 PM
I've added the Giants to my list of wildly overhyped teams by the media this season. It was really annoying last week. They squeak past the Seahawks because Wilson missed a wide open reciever on the biggest play of the game, and the media was literally acting like they had a shot at the Super Bowl. The list also includes:
- Eagles (preseason hype)
- Cardinals (Kyler Murray hype, hAiL mUrRaY hype)
- Dolphins (all the hype about their defense, only for Mahomes to throw for 393 yards and put up 33 points)
There's almost always going to be a team or two named before the season that is expected to make the playoffs that doesn't. And vice-versa.
After all, gambling odds work the same way too.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2020, 01:11:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2020, 12:15:25 PM
I've added the Giants to my list of wildly overhyped teams by the media this season. It was really annoying last week. They squeak past the Seahawks because Wilson missed a wide open reciever on the biggest play of the game, and the media was literally acting like they had a shot at the Super Bowl. The list also includes:
- Eagles (preseason hype)
- Cardinals (Kyler Murray hype, hAiL mUrRaY hype)
- Dolphins (all the hype about their defense, only for Mahomes to throw for 393 yards and put up 33 points)
There's almost always going to be a team or two named before the season that is expected to make the playoffs that doesn't. And vice-versa.
After all, gambling odds work the same way too.
Yeah, I don't mind preseason hype when it's justified. But you can't look at that roster and say that they have a shot at the playoffs (in a normal division at least). Of course being in the NFC East makes things different.
That Ravens-Browns MNF matchup was probably the best NFL game of the year.
Quote from: US 89 on December 14, 2020, 11:46:43 PM
That Ravens-Browns MNF matchup was probably the best NFL game of the year.
New Browns played like the Pre-Ravens Browns tonight.
After a week of mostly dud games, wow, that one delivered. Definitely top-3 of the year along with the Hail Murray game and Seahawks-Cards Week 7.
Both Bengals-Browns games were great too, but the stakes were much higher tonight. And ultimately, the Ravens needed that one more - the Browns still have the better record!
With just 3 weeks remaining, you can choose your own results and game out various playoff scenarios here (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-nfl-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo).
Ravens win essentially eliminates the Patriots. Oh well.
My top 10 games list so far: (keep in mind that this is entirely subjective to my tastes)
10. 49ers at Patriots, week 7: This might seem like an odd choice, but IMO this game was the real death of the Patriots' two decade dynasty. It was this game that showed us once and for all that the Patriots' reign was over.
9. Browns at Cowboys, week 4: I walked away from the TV when it was 41-14. 20 minutes later I came back and it was 41-38. There was just so much chaos overall in this game - Jarvis Landry throwing a touchdown pass, Browns rushing for 300 yards, Dak Prescott throwing for 500 yards, and the accidental two point conversion. This game wins the "you can't make this stuff up" category.
8. Packers at Saints, week 3: Hall of Fame QB matchups rarely disappoint, and this was no exception. Alvin Kamara had arguably the best performance by any running back in any game this season - in a losing effort.
7. Chiefs at Buccaneers, week 12: See: Hall of Fame QB matchups. Tyreek Hill went crazy in the first quarter, and at that point it looked like a blowout. Brady had a mistake-prone game, especially by his standards, but there were a few vintage Brady moments in the second half.
6. Falcons at Cowboys, week 2: The most predictable unpredictable game ever. That onside kick was one of the only moments in NFL history when basically anyone who knows anything about football could have made a better play than the guys on the field.
5. Chiefs at Raiders, week 11: A classic back and forth shootout.
4. Bills at Cardinals, week 10: Only reason it's not higher is because nobody would have cared if it weren't for the catch by Hopkins.
3. Ravens at Browns, week 14: Had a little bit of everything. Lamar Jackson set the MNF record for rushing yards by a QB. Then, Maker Bayfield magically figured out how to handle adversity, and led the Browns back, only for Justin Tucker to win it with a long field goal.
2. Seahawks at Cardinals, week 7: I didn't watch any of it but I heard it was great.
1. Patriots at Seahawks, week 2: Pretty much what September is supposed to be in the NFL. Deep touchdowns, great performances, and lots of irony. LOTS of irony.
Quote from: thspfc on December 15, 2020, 12:53:01 PM
My top 10 games list so far: (keep in mind that this is entirely subjective to my tastes)
...
5. Chiefs at Raiders, week 11: A classic back and forth shootout.
4. Bills at Cardinals, week 10: Only reason it's not higher is because nobody would have cared if it weren't for the catch by Hopkins.
3. Ravens at Browns, week 14: Had a little bit of everything. Lamar Jackson set the MNF record for rushing yards by a QB. Then, Maker Bayfield magically figured out how to handle adversity, and led the Browns back, only for Justin Tucker to win it with a long field goal.
2. Seahawks at Cardinals, week 7: I didn't watch any of it but I heard it was great.
1. Patriots at Seahawks, week 2: Pretty much what September is supposed to be in the NFL. Deep touchdowns, great performances, and lots of irony. LOTS of irony.
Totally agree with your top five, although the order could be argued.
The next five are much more subjective. I'd throw at least one of the Browns-Bengals games in there, and Bills-Rams in Week 3 was pretty wild as well with the second-biggest blown lead in NFL history, a last second touchdown, and a glut of controversial calls.
And for wild finishes, don't forget Lions-Falcons (the accidental Gurley touchdown game).
As for blowouts, my pick for most enjoyable is Niners 17, Dolphins 43. I can't even tell you why, and it's certainly nothing against the Niners, but I just found that to be such a fun beatdown in what may have turned out to be one of Fitzmagic's last starts for Miami.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on December 14, 2020, 11:51:17 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 14, 2020, 11:46:43 PM
That Ravens-Browns MNF matchup was probably the best NFL game of the year.
New Browns played like the Pre-Ravens Browns tonight.
Right down to the shocking and unbelievable choke.
What a hilarious loss for the Raiders. They suck.
'Tis be another long off-season for Mr. Gruden and company. This once-Oakland Raiders, but hilariously named Las Vegas Raiders team is such a joke in the grand scheme of the NFL landscape. Sure. You could say that with the Jets of which management has been very bland lately. You could potentially say that for Detroit. Man that team is awful. Dallas can't seem to find an identity on defense. And I don't know what's with all the hubbub regarding Josh Allen. He isn't great, but from what I could briefly glean from the talk shows, looks like Allen is on the improvement. Houston? Gosh, what a mess. Baltimore is a bit of a question mark, not because of the QB or his style of play, but mainly how the plays are mapped out and how often those plans get scuppered when Lamar Jackson is having to scramble. This 2020 Patriots team? Yuck. They can't seem to draft newcomers worth diddly mush.
Jon Gruden was wearing an Oakland Raiders hat for the first half against the Chargers: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/12/18/jon-gruden-wore-oakland-hat-says-someone-tricked-him/
This is the guy you pay 10 million a year for, gets you an average football team :-D
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 18, 2020, 12:00:52 AM
What a hilarious loss for the Raiders. They suck.
They managed to stay above .500 all season against a tough schedule. They're the only team that's beat the Chiefs. They're the only team outside the AFC North that's beat the Browns.
And yet... their 421 points allowed is an NFL-worst, and their sorry defense makes them look like the Chargers... against the Chargers! I mean, come on. You can't get blown out by the Falcons, barely escape the Jets, allow 44 points to the Colts, lose to the Chargers in overtime in Week 15, and make the playoffs. Playoff teams don't do
any of those things, much less all four. What a collapse.
FiveThirtyEight has their playoff chances down to 2%, with a 9% chance if they win out, and both of those feel too high. The way the AFC is shaping up, it's more likely that an 11-5 team would miss out than a 9-7 team would make it.
It really seemed like neither team wanted to win towards the end...between Badgley's miss, Mariota's interception, Badgley's 2nd miss, AJ Cole borking the hold on Carlson's 65-yard attempt, Raiders coming up just short of a TD in OT... Great game though!
Quote from: webny99 on December 18, 2020, 09:17:51 AM
...their sorry defense makes them look like the Chargers... against the Chargers!
Even Joe Buck took a dig at them early in the game...
"Marcus Mariota on the sideline, he doesn't appear to be warming up yet...well, he probably knows he has a while, with this defense." *Troy Aikman starts chuckling in the background* "Sorry, cheap shot!"
I was disappointed in the botched hold. I wanted to see how close he'd come on the 65-yard attempt.
Quote from: webny99 on December 18, 2020, 09:17:51 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 18, 2020, 12:00:52 AM
What a hilarious loss for the Raiders. They suck.
They managed to stay above .500 all season against a tough schedule. They're the only team that's beat the Chiefs. They're the only team outside the AFC North that's beat the Browns.
And yet... their 421 points allowed is an NFL-worst, and their sorry defense makes them look like the Chargers... against the Chargers! I mean, come on. You can't get blown out by the Falcons, barely escape the Jets, allow 44 points to the Colts, lose to the Chargers in overtime in Week 15, and make the playoffs. Playoff teams don't do any of those things, much less all four. What a collapse.
FiveThirtyEight has their playoff chances down to 2%, with a 9% chance if they win out, and both of those feel too high. The way the AFC is shaping up, it's more likely that an 11-5 team would miss out than a 9-7 team would make it.
The NFC is a joke but I am really excited for the AFC playoffs. There are four or five teams that I think could upset Kansas City and win the conference. (sorry Baltimore, you're not included in that group).
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2020, 04:14:30 PM
The NFC is a joke but I am really excited for the AFC playoffs. There are four or five teams that I think could upset Kansas City and win the conference. (sorry Baltimore, you're not included in that group).
Four or five is quite a few. That's basically the rest of the playoff field if you exclude the Ravens.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 18, 2020, 01:59:58 AM
Houston? Gosh, what a mess.
Bill O'Brien, in a futile attempt to get into the playoffs, has ruined this team through stupid moves that will cost them at least 5 years until they could potentially reach playoff contention again. Deshaun Watson is all that's keeping the Texans from being worse than the Jets.
I think the team should trade Watson to the Patriots, trade Watt to the Steelers, trade McKinnie plus some wide recievers to whoever, and start afresh. That would give those guys an opportunity to play on an actual professional football team.
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 18, 2020, 09:17:49 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 18, 2020, 01:59:58 AM
Houston? Gosh, what a mess.
Bill O'Brien, in a futile attempt to get into the playoffs, has ruined this team through stupid moves that will cost them at least 5 years until they could potentially reach playoff contention again. Deshaun Watson is all that's keeping the Texans from being worse than the Jets.
They were trying to go all in for a Super Bowl run last year. That bombed and now they're left with the broken pieces and salary cap issues.
One very interesting trade would be the Texans giving Deshaun Watson, a second round pick, and a third round pick to the Cowboys in return for Dak Prescott and Dallas' first round pick. It would never happen, but on paper it sounds good. The Texans need a first round pick and the Cowboys need to get out of the Dak contract situation somehow.
It's official. With a 48-19 win over the Broncos, the Bills win the AFC East for the first time in 25 YEARS!
Where were you 25 years ago? I wasn't even alive! Neither was Josh Allen, he was born 6 months later, in May 1996.
Quote from: webny99 on December 19, 2020, 07:55:24 PM
It's official. With a 48-19 win over the Broncos, the Bills win the AFC East for the first time in 25 YEARS!
Where were you 25 years ago? I wasn't even alive! Neither was Josh Allen, he was born 6 months later, in May 1996.
I was alive by then ;)
Not that I recall much from that year, I was very young at the time.
Nonetheless, I am very pleased to see the Bills win the AFC East for the first time in 25 years. I just hope that they don't get kicked out of the playoffs or lose the Super Bowl, whatever comes first this post-season.
Seahawks are the 6th team to clinch a playoff spot; Rams will likely be the 7th. The final NFC spot looks like it will come down to the Bears and Cardinals. Vikings still have a slim chance, Niners will be eliminated if the Cardinals win.
The Pats have been eliminated after a loss to the Dolphins, who are very much still in it. They need to win out and get some help from the Ravens, Browns, or Colts, all likely playoff teams that will be endangered if the last two weeks go wrong. As for the Raiders... yikes. Nothing went their way today. With getting in over the 10-win Colts or Titans now out of reach, it looks like their only path is winning out, Bills beating Dolphins, and either Browns or Ravens losing out against creampuff schedules.
Quote from: webny99 on December 20, 2020, 05:22:03 PM
Seahawks are the 6th team to clinch a playoff spot; Rams will likely be the 7th. The final NFC spot looks like it will come down to the Bears and Cardinals. Vikings still have a slim chance, Niners will be eliminated if the Cardinals win.
The Pats have been eliminated after a loss to the Dolphins, who are very much still in it. They need to win out and get some help from the Ravens, Browns, or Colts, all likely playoff teams that will be endangered if the last two weeks go wrong. As for the Raiders... yikes. Nothing went their way today. With getting in over the 10-win Colts or Titans now out of reach, it looks like their only path is winning out, Bills beating Dolphins, and either Browns or Ravens losing out against creampuff schedules.
Rams just lost to the Jets.
Quote from: webny99 on November 30, 2020, 09:01:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 30, 2020, 07:05:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
... It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Jets 23, Rams 20
1. 2.Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. 3. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. 4. Bills 30, Cardinals 3
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Next game the Jets win is on this list by default.
If it's this season, then yes. :)
As promised. Didn't think it would happen, but you just never know.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 20, 2020, 07:07:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 20, 2020, 05:22:03 PM
Seahawks are the 6th team to clinch a playoff spot; Rams will likely be the 7th. The final NFC spot looks like it will come down to the Bears and Cardinals. Vikings still have a slim chance, Niners will be eliminated if the Cardinals win.
The Pats have been eliminated after a loss to the Dolphins, who are very much still in it. They need to win out and get some help from the Ravens, Browns, or Colts, all likely playoff teams that will be endangered if the last two weeks go wrong. As for the Raiders... yikes. Nothing went their way today. With getting in over the 10-win Colts or Titans now out of reach, it looks like their only path is winning out, Bills beating Dolphins, and either Browns or Ravens losing out against creampuff schedules.
Rams just lost to the Jets.
The Rams have one problem. It's not their offense, it's not their defense, it's not their coach or GM. It's their tendency to absolutely stink once every three weeks. Think about it:
Week 1-2: good
Week 3: bad
Week 4-5: good
Week 6: bad
Week 7 and 9: good
Week 8: bad
Week 10 and 11: good
Week 12: bad
Week 13-14: good
Week 15: bad
So they're going to win the NFC West at 11-5, then lose at home to the Seahawks or Buccaneers.
Quote from: webny99 on December 20, 2020, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 30, 2020, 09:01:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 30, 2020, 07:05:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
... It's tough to pick the top 5 worst losses so far because the Falcons and Chargers have so many to choose from... but here's what I'd go with:
1. Jets 23, Rams 20
1. 2.Vikings 26, Seahawks 27
2. 3. Falcons 39, Cowboys 40
3. 4. Bills 30, Cardinals 3
5. Falcons 22, Lions 23
Next game the Jets win is on this list by default.
If it's this season, then yes. :)
As promised. Didn't think it would happen, but you just never know.
J-E-T-S Jets-Jets-Jets.
Finally, we win a game this season!
Was anyone surprised at all when the Falcons squandered a 24-7 lead to the Bucs? I honestly feel a little bit bad for those players. It has to be so demoralizing. And now the media can't blame the coach either, because they don't have a permanent coach.
In other news (if you can call it that?), the Cowboys win their second straight to improve to 5-9. The Niners celebrating after a meaningless hail mary in a game that they were completely outplayed in and lost was disgusting, and really sums up their season. But the situation with Dallas is a prime example of why you shouldn't tank the moment things look bad. They are now a game back of first in the division. They still need to win out and have Washington lose out, but their playoff hopes are higher right now than they've been at any point in the last three months.
Quote from: thspfc on December 20, 2020, 07:34:31 PM
Was anyone surprised at all when the Falcons squandered a 24-7 lead to the Bucs? I honestly feel a little bit bad for those players. It has to be so demoralizing. And now the media can't blame the coach either, because they don't have a permanent coach.
... The Niners celebrating after a meaningless hail mary in a game that they were completely outplayed in and lost was disgusting, and really sums up their season. ...
Disgusting? That's pretty harsh. The Niners have been decimated this season plus having to move to Arizona for their home games. Of course they still lost, but you have to give them a bit of a break.
As for the Falcons blown lead, yeah, it was total script, but that last first down they handed the Bucs was what I thought was disgusting.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 20, 2020, 07:07:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 20, 2020, 05:22:03 PM
Seahawks are the 6th team to clinch a playoff spot; Rams will likely be the 7th.
...
Rams just lost to the Jets.
I hadn't looked at the game prior to posting. It did enter my mind that I was possibly handing the Jets their first win of the season by posting that.
The Rams being the seventh team to clinch a playoff spot, however, has not been ruled out. It just won't be today.
With three divisions already decided and two more on the cusp of being decided, the NFC East is the only division with more than two teams still in contention. Washington can clinch if they win out, but all four teams still have a shot.
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2020, 11:34:13 AM
With three divisions already decided and two more on the cusp of being decided, the NFC East is the only division with more than two teams still in contention. Washington can clinch if they win out, but all four teams still have a shot.
Simplest scenarios for each team:
Washington - win out
Giants - have a better record than Washington by at least one game over the next two weeks
Cowboys - win out and Washington lose out
Eagles - win out, Washington lose out, Giants lose at least once
Whoa, the Burrow-less Bengals with a monster upset over the Steelers!
I don't dare even say what this could mean for Week 17... but I like it, a lot!
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2020, 11:29:28 PM
Whoa, the Burrow-less Bengals with a monster upset over the Steelers!
I don't dare even say what this could mean for Week 17... but I like it, a lot!
Week 15 became Upset Weekend
2 of the bottom 3 teams in the League (also in the AFC) scored big upset wins
In terms of Week 17...all but guarantees Steelers/Browns will be SNF, and could very well end up being the AFCN Title Game
This AFC playoff picture is getting spicy. Interestingly enough, the Ravens are the only team in the picture that doesn't control their own destiny. Browns, Colts, and Dolphins are all in if they win out.
If the Dolphins win out to clinch a spot, things get very interesting for the Browns and Ravens, as one of them is going to miss out... unless the Colts drop the Pittsburgh game, which puts their spot in a lot of peril because it gives the Titans a big advantage in the division race, and both the Browns and Ravens have the head-to-head tiebreaker.
The Browns could be in a situation where their playoff berth depends on getting to 12-4 and beating the Steelers to win the division... and if they do it, the 11-5 Ravens miss the playoffs. Now that is a juicy storyline.
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2020, 09:13:38 AM
This AFC playoff picture is getting spicy. Interestingly enough, the Ravens are the only team in the picture that doesn't control their own destiny. Browns, Colts, and Dolphins are all in if they win out.
If the Dolphins win out to clinch a spot, things get very interesting for the Browns and Ravens, as one of them is going to miss out... unless the Colts drop the Pittsburgh game, which puts their spot in a lot of peril because it gives the Titans a big advantage in the division race, and both the Browns and Ravens have the head-to-head tiebreaker.
The Browns could be in a situation where their playoff berth depends on getting to 12-4 and beating the Steelers to win the division... and if they do it, the 11-5 Ravens miss the playoffs. Now that is a juicy storyline.
Miami is going to lose at least once in their next two games. Baltimore has been nearly perfect against sub-.500 teams in the Lamar era, so they should win out. With the way things are currently trending, the Colts (won five of their last six) will beat the Steelers this weekend, and the Steelers will lose to the Browns (also won five of their last six). If the Titans lose to Green Bay, that puts Indy in the driver's seat in the AFC South. Guess who they get to play in week 17?
So I predict the standings will be as follows:
1. Chiefs: 15-1 or 14-2, depending on whether or not they play their starters in week 17
2. Bills: 13-3
3. Browns: 12-4
4. Colts: 12-4
5. Steelers: 11-5
6. Titans: 11-5
7. Ravens: 11-5
At this point I'm kind of hoping the Dolphins miss the playoffs because yesterday I listened to Colin Cowherd compare Tua, a rookie QB who is averaging less than 200 passing yards per game, and Brian Flores, who has a career losing record as a head coach, to Brady and Belichick. I always like to see him be wrong, even if he almost never admits it.
As much I'd like to see it, I'd be shocked if the Browns win the AFC North. The script is all written for a close, exciting loss in Week 17.
Remember, the Ravens blew out the Browns the first time around, and were coming into the Monday night game on a big losing streak. This sets up very similarly.
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2020, 09:53:12 AM
Miami is going to lose at least once in their next two games.
...
At this point I'm kind of hoping the Dolphins miss the playoffs because yesterday I listened to Colin Cowherd compare Tua, a rookie QB who is averaging less than 200 passing yards per game, and Brian Flores, who has a career losing record as a head coach, to Brady and Belichick. I always like to see him be wrong, even if he almost never admits it.
The Dolphins are a better all-around team than the Raiders, so I trust them there, and then it depends on whether the Bills play their starters in Week 17. They might be locked into the #2 seed.
The Brady-Belichick comparison seems premature, but there's definitely some parallels to the 2001 Patriots. Flores is a great coach, I think he deserves Coach of the Year but it will likely only happen if they make the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2020, 09:53:12 AM
If the Titans lose to Green Bay, that puts Indy in the driver's seat in the AFC South. Guess who they get to play in week 17?
The team they lost to in Week 1! It's not going to happen, but it would be amusing if this otherwise winless Jaguars season was bookended by wins over the Colts.
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2020, 11:29:28 PM
Whoa, the Burrow-less Bengals with a monster upset over the Steelers!
I don't dare even say what this could mean for Week 17... but I like it, a lot!
I have a bad feeling that Pittsburgh is going to end up 11-5. The way they're playing right now, it is completely possible. Usually, 11-5 is not a bad thing. However, it is if you started 11-0.
Unfortunately, I think this is it for Big Ben. His age and last year's elbow surgery seem to be catching up w/ him. Plus, our OC is awful at play-calling. Very short shovel pass, a run with no gain, an incomplete deep pass, punt. Lather, rinse, repeat. I'm hoping Pittsburgh trades up in the draft and selects one of the available QBs in the first round.
Quote from: jmd41280 on December 23, 2020, 05:15:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2020, 11:29:28 PM
Whoa, the Burrow-less Bengals with a monster upset over the Steelers!
I don't dare even say what this could mean for Week 17... but I like it, a lot!
I have a bad feeling that Pittsburgh is going to end up 11-5. The way they're playing right now, it is completely possible. Usually, 11-5 is not a bad thing. However, it is if you started 11-0.
Unfortunately, I think this is it for Big Ben. His age and last year's elbow surgery seem to be catching up w/ him. Plus, our OC is awful at play-calling. Very short shovel pass, a run with no gain, an incomplete deep pass, punt. Lather, rinse, repeat. I'm hoping Pittsburgh trades up in the draft and selects one of the available QBs in the first round.
Father Time has caught up to Big Ben
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2020, 09:12:41 PM
Quote from: jmd41280 on December 23, 2020, 05:15:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2020, 11:29:28 PM
Whoa, the Burrow-less Bengals with a monster upset over the Steelers!
I don't dare even say what this could mean for Week 17... but I like it, a lot!
I have a bad feeling that Pittsburgh is going to end up 11-5. The way they're playing right now, it is completely possible. Usually, 11-5 is not a bad thing. However, it is if you started 11-0.
Unfortunately, I think this is it for Big Ben. His age and last year's elbow surgery seem to be catching up w/ him. Plus, our OC is awful at play-calling. Very short shovel pass, a run with no gain, an incomplete deep pass, punt. Lather, rinse, repeat. I'm hoping Pittsburgh trades up in the draft and selects one of the available QBs in the first round.
Father Time has caught up to Big Ben
Nicely done... :clap:
Quote from: jemacedo9 on December 24, 2020, 10:44:58 AM
Quote
Father Time has caught up to Big Ben
Nicely done... :clap:
Indeed! Can't believe I missed that the first time I read it.
How's this for a surprise: No Thursday Night Football this week, but there will be a Christmas Day game for the first time in a while (Vikings at Saints). I can see why the NFL wants to avoid playing on 12/24-12/25 and 12/31-1/1 if it can avoid that.
Quote from: Henry on December 24, 2020, 08:00:11 PM
How's this for a surprise: No Thursday Night Football this week, but there will be a Christmas Day game for the first time in a while (Vikings at Saints). I can see why the NFL wants to avoid playing on 12/24-12/25 and 12/31-1/1 if it can avoid that.
Usually when Christmas Day falls on a Sunday, most of that week's NFL action gets pushed to Christmas Eve Saturday with a special national game or two on Christmas Day Sunday.
Here we go again with the December scheduling conversation.
Once again, all week 17 games are on a Sunday. No Thursday, Saturday, or Monday games.
Quote from: thspfc on December 24, 2020, 09:42:37 PM
Here we go again with the December scheduling conversation.
Once again, all week 17 games are on a Sunday. No Thursday, Saturday, or Monday games.
For many seasons now the week 17 games have been within divisions and most start at the same time. This is to cut down on playoff positioning hanky-panky. It's the same reason why FIFA now schedules the third games of the first round (group play) within each group in the World Cup to start at the same time.
Mike
I think the all-divisional week 17 is stupid and I was never in favor of it. 11 seasons too many of that format.
Quote from: mgk920 on December 25, 2020, 12:19:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 24, 2020, 09:42:37 PM
Here we go again with the December scheduling conversation.
Once again, all week 17 games are on a Sunday. No Thursday, Saturday, or Monday games.
For many seasons now the week 17 games have been within divisions and most start at the same time. This is to cut down on playoff positioning hanky-panky. It's the same reason why FIFA now schedules the third games of the first round (group play) within each group in the World Cup to start at the same time.
Mike
Even more than avoiding hanky-panky, having all the games on the same day ensures that playoff opponents are on equal rest.
If it were not for the TV Broadcast Deals with CBS, FOX, and NBC and needing to fill 3 separate Sunday Broadcast windows, really all the Week 17 games should all be 4-4:30 EST Kickoffs - all playing at the same time
Guaranteeing an Intradivision game in W17 greatly increases the chances that CBS, FOX, and/or NBC will get to broadcast a Division Title Game - again, done due to the TV contracts
MLB does similar for Game 162 - All games start in the 4-4:30 EDT timeframe, so any "Final Day" Playoff/Divisional Pennant situations end up being contested at the same time. Obviously, MLB can't guarantee an Intradivisional, or even Intraleague, game for Week 17, as each Division and each League has an odd numeber of teams
Quote from: thspfc on December 24, 2020, 09:42:37 PM
Here we go again with the December scheduling conversation.
Once again, all week 17 games are on a Sunday. No Thursday, Saturday, or Monday games.
But the two posts before yours were talking about
this week, which is Week 16. Normally there would have been a Thursday game, but they moved it to Friday since today is Christmas.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 25, 2020, 12:46:59 PM
But the two posts before yours were talking about this week, which is Week 16. Normally there would have been a Thursday game, but they moved it to Friday since today is Christmas.
A Christmas Day Late Afternoon game is a much better TV product than a Christmas Eve Night game. Not a shock that TNF got bumped to Christmas Friday
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 25, 2020, 12:32:16 PM
I think the all-divisional week 17 is stupid and I was never in favor of it. 11 seasons too many of that format.
I'm sure it's probably done so that the league will get some games being played for the division title, but curious why you're against it.
To bring up another point that's been mentioned many times already... we need a game today to ensure a game is played on every day of the week. :-P
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 25, 2020, 12:45:25 PM
If it were not for the TV Broadcast Deals with CBS, FOX, and NBC and needing to fill 3 separate Sunday Broadcast windows, really all the Week 17 games should all be 4-4:30 EST Kickoffs - all playing at the same time
The league has tended lately to put games that matter (or don't matter) in the same time slot. If there's a bunch of games being played by teams not making the playoffs, they'll generally be 1pm games. For games that have major playoff implications, they'll be 4pm games. Games that may have some seeding implications could go in either time slot. The single bye in each conference may make things interesting too.
Quote from: webny99 on December 25, 2020, 12:51:54 PM
To bring up another point that's been mentioned many times already... we need a game today to ensure a game is played on every day of the week. :-P
As long as they time a commercial so everyone can flip to TBS to watch Ralphie visit the Chinese restaurant.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 25, 2020, 01:00:11 PM
The single bye in each conference may make things interesting too.
It's not particularly interesting in the AFC because the Chiefs can clinch with a win this week. The NFC may be more interesting, with 4 teams technically still in contention. But, for teams like the Bills and Steelers, it's still worth playing for the #2 seed so you can host the divisional round.
It is going to be weird for a team that played on wild card weekend to be hosting the divisional round. Crazily, if seeds 2-4 all lost, the #5 seed would host the divisional round, which has never been possible before.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 25, 2020, 12:32:16 PM
I think the all-divisional week 17 is stupid and I was never in favor of it. 11 seasons too many of that format.
Disagree.
If I were to critique the Week 17 schedule (which may become Week 18 before too long): I like the Divisional Matchups
But I would put your oppenent and game site on a set rotation. That final week will be a known before the schedule is announced, fine, but that way there is a regular rotation for W17 opponents thru a Division
I think it is a little bit unbalanced when the Bears haven't played the Lions (and therefore Vikings/Packers) in Week 17 since 2015
Bears/Vikings and Packers/Lions in Week 17 was 4 years in a row, 2016-2019
Bears/Packers and Vikings/Lions will be Week 17 this year, but most recent before was back in 2013
Packers have got to play the Lions a lot for W17 lately
The Bucs have clinched a playoff berth for the first time since 2007.
The Cardinals, meanwhile, blew their chance to be in control of the final NFC wild card spot. Their loss to the Niners leaves the door wide open for the Bears, who have the tiebreaker and can clinch just by winning out. It also puts the Rams in peril: if they lose to the Seahawks and the Bears win out, Cardinals-Rams Week 17 is an elimination game.
Quote from: webny99 on December 18, 2020, 09:17:51 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 18, 2020, 12:00:52 AM
What a hilarious loss for the Raiders. They suck.
... their 421 points allowed is an NFL-worst, and their sorry defense makes them look like the Chargers... against the Chargers! I mean, come on. You can't get blown out by the Falcons, barely escape the Jets, allow 44 points to the Colts, lose to the Chargers in overtime in Week 15, and make the playoffs. Playoff teams don't do any of those things, much less all four. What a collapse.
Quoted for emphasis now that the Raiders have been eliminated from the playoffs.
Not sure what was worse, the Chargers loss, or the loss last night.
Why do highly-paid NFL coaches get such basic, yet critical decisions wrong?
Down 23-22 with 3rd and goal on the 1, with 1:05 left and your opponent out of time outs, you score the touchdown 100% of the time, rather than kneel down to run the clock down and kick the FG.
Being up 5 (or 7 if you get the 2 point conversion) with 1:01 left has a higher win probability than being up 2 with 0:19 left.
I agree, but with just :19 remaining, I think 31 other defenses could've still kept the opponent out of field goal range.
The real gutsy move would've been to kneel on 3rd down and run it in for a TD on 4th down. Risky, but with that sorry defense, it has to be an option.
The world will explode if the Cowboys win the NFC East next week. All that needs to happen is a Cowboys win vs the former media loverboys Giants, and a Washington loss vs Philadelphia. There are still people who think Dallas should have tanked the season when they started 2-7. :-D :-D
Also, the Eagles are eliminated. I can already see the future: the Hurts novelty wears off midway through 2021. He finishes 2021 with 21 touchdowns and 16 interceptions or some below average statline like that. The media babies him for two more years, focusing on a four game stretch when he was good instead of the rest of his career, before it becomes apparent that he's not the answer, and the cycle repeats itself with a different quarterback. I will be revisiting this post in 2023.
A lot went down today, but my biggest takeaway is that a 10-win (possibly 11-win) team from the AFC will miss the playoffs, while a NFC East team with a losing record will host a playoff game.
At this point it's very unlikely that the NFC team is favored in the Super Bowl.
If the Bears win their last game, or the Cardinals lose theirs, the Bears will become the third team in NFL history to make the playoffs after losing 6 straight during the season.
Be interesting to see who starts at QB for the Redskins next week.
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2020, 08:11:59 PM
A lot went down today, but my biggest takeaway is that a 10-win (possibly 11-win) team from the AFC will miss the playoffs, while a NFC East team with a losing record will host a playoff game.
At this point it's very unlikely that the NFC team is favored in the Super Bowl.
You're assuming that Kansas City makes it.
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2020, 08:11:59 PM
A lot went down today, but my biggest takeaway is that a 10-win (possibly 11-win) team from the AFC will miss the playoffs, while a NFC East team with a losing record will host a playoff game.
At this point it's very unlikely that the NFC team is favored in the Super Bowl.
Poor Rivers.
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2020, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2020, 08:11:59 PM
At this point it's very unlikely that the NFC team is favored in the Super Bowl.
You're assuming that Kansas City makes it.
Not at all. I think if any team can beat the Chiefs and get to the Super Bowl, they're going to be favored.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 27, 2020, 10:22:20 PM
Poor Rivers.
How come? If they beat the Jags, they've still got a very decent shot to make the playoffs.
Chiefs haven't played all that well over the last month-plus. Some people are comparing them to the 2011 Packers, who went 15-1 but got bounced handily by the Giants in their first playoff game.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 28, 2020, 01:21:26 AM
Chiefs haven't played all that well over the last month-plus. Some people are comparing them to the 2011 Packers, who went 15-1 but got bounced handily by the Giants in their first playoff game.
8 one-score wins is the most in the league this year. That includes a sweep of the NFC South by
11 points total.
It's almost like they need to be in a hole before they're motivated to snap to life. They're still doing enough to win, but just barely in the case of yesterday against the Falcons.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2020, 07:46:33 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 28, 2020, 01:21:26 AM
Chiefs haven't played all that well over the last month-plus. Some people are comparing them to the 2011 Packers, who went 15-1 but got bounced handily by the Giants in their first playoff game.
8 one-score wins is the most in the league this year. That includes a sweep of the NFC South by 11 points total.
It's almost like they need to be in a hole before they're motivated to snap to life. They're still doing enough to win, but just barely in the case of yesterday against the Falcons.
Chiefs are not peaking at the right time like the Bills, Packers, and Ravens are. This year we're seeing a lot of good teams fall off as the season goes on. Steelers, Titans, Saints, Browns, Rams, and Seahawks and Chiefs to an extent. That probably has something to do with the chaos of training camp and no preseason.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2020, 08:48:54 PM
Be interesting to see who starts at QB for the Redskins next week.
It won't be Haskins: He was just released.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 28, 2020, 12:49:31 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2020, 08:48:54 PM
Be interesting to see who starts at QB for the Redskins next week.
It won't be Haskins: He was just released.
Yikes. I hope it's Alex Smith.
Four teams scored 40+ points this weekend. Two of them were NFC North teams. The other two were playing NFC North teams.
The Bears scoring 30+ points in four straight games is one of the more head-scratching December developments.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2020, 12:59:43 PM
The Bears scoring 30+ points in four straight games is one of the more head-scratching December developments.
Their entire season is a head-scratching development. Started 5-1, including beating Tampa Bay, while having a world-beating defense combined with minimal offensive performance, losing 6 straight as the offense gradually improved but the defense got worse, capped off by blowing a 10 point lead to abysmal Detroit with under 3 minutes left, then finally exploding on offense (against admittedly awful defenses) with the defense flashing signs of improvement.
Now the season hinges on beating Green Bay, which would be hopeless if not for the fact that the Packers have wrapped up the #1 seed and aren't likely to play their best players much, if at all.
Yet none of that is nearly as head-scratching as the Jets suddenly winning two straight and blowing their shot at Trevor Lawrence.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2020, 12:52:02 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 28, 2020, 12:49:31 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2020, 08:48:54 PM
Be interesting to see who starts at QB for the Redskins next week.
It won't be Haskins: He was just released.
Yikes. I hope it's Alex Smith.
So in 2019, the Panthers fired Ron Rivera after he lost to Haskins.
In 2020, Rivera fired Haskins after he lost to the Panthers.
What will 2021 bring?
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2020, 01:05:24 PM
Now the season hinges on beating Green Bay, which would be hopeless if not for the fact that the Packers have wrapped up the #1 seed and aren't likely to play their best players much, if at all.
Bears can still get in with a loss to the Pack, but the Rams (possibly sans Jared Goff) also have to beat the Cardinals
Bears own the tiebreaker over the Cardinals. I haven't dived deep enough into the tie-breakers to see why, but there is a reason the Bears moved into the 7 spot and the Cards to the 8, now both with the same records and same NFC records. If the Rams win and the Bears lose, Rams are the 6, and Bears are the 7
After looking it up, the tiebreaker is Common Opponents - Lions, Giants, Panthers, Rams. Bears are 3-2 against those teams/Split with Lions, Ws over Giants & Panthers, L to the Rams. Cardinals are currently 1-3 with the 2nd Rams game to go - best the can finish in common opponents is 2-3 with a win on Sunday (W vs Giants, Ls to Rams G1, Giants, Panthers)
If the Cards beat the Rams and the Bears win, it is a 3-way tie at 9-7. By rule, Ties within a Division are broken first. Right now, Rams and Cardinals are both 2-3 in the NFC West. If the Cards win, they will get the #2 spot in the NFC West. so the Rams fall out. Then it is head-to-head Cards and Bears for #6 - Bears own Common Opponents, and get the 6 and Cardinals the 7, and the Rams are 1st team out
If the Cardinals win and the Packers win, then the Bears are out
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 28, 2020, 01:52:17 PM
So in 2019, the Panthers fired Ron Rivera after he lost to Haskins.
In 2020, Rivera fired Haskins after he lost to the Panthers.
What will 2021 bring?
Panthers fire Haskins after losing to Ron Rivera? :-D
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2020, 01:05:24 PM
Now the season hinges on beating Green Bay, which would be hopeless if not for the fact that the Packers have wrapped up the #1 seed and aren't likely to play their best players much, if at all.
Whoa, the Packers don't have the #1 seed locked up just yet.
They can clinch it by beating the Bears
or by the Seahawks losing, which would force, at worst, a tie with the Saints (in which they have the head-to head tiebreaker).
If the Packers lose, though, it gets messy. The Saints can only clinch the bye with a win
and a Seahawks win. Because of the head to head loss to the Packers, they're in a weird scenario where they need the Seahawks to also win to force a 3-way tie. Seahawks get the bye themselves only if they win and the Saints and Packers both lose.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2020, 01:05:24 PM
Yet none of that is nearly as head-scratching as the Jets suddenly winning two straight and blowing their shot at Trevor Lawrence.
Everyone seemed to just assume they'd go 0-16, but in hindsight it should've been obvious that it might not happen. It's totally ridiculous that they would've had to go 0-16 to get the pick, which the coaches and players clearly wanted to avoid. They'd been surprisingly competitive in quite a few games, and they fired the defensive coordinator after the blown ending to the Raiders game which a true "tanking for Trevor" team wouldn't have done.
The Jags were much more obviously tanking IMO.
The Bills notched their first 12-win season since 1993, and first sweep of the Patriots since 1999 last night. You hate to see it! :biggrin:
Now, the key question for the AFC playoff picture is whether the Bills and Steelers will play their starters in Week 17.
My guess is Bills Yes (why not keep rolling and clinch the #2 seed?), Steelers No (basically missed their bye this season, have looked like they need some rest, and can't get the #2 seed anyways if the Bills win).
https://www.nfl.com/news/debrief-breaking-down-afc-playoff-picture-entering-week-17
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:26:43 AM
Now, the key question for the AFC playoff picture is whether the Bills and Steelers will play their starters in Week 17.
My guess is Bills Yes (why not keep rolling and clinch the #2 seed?), Steelers No (basically missed their bye this season, have looked like they need some rest, and can't get the #2 seed anyways if the Bills win).
Tomlin announced earlier that Ben and some starters will NOT start against Cleveland. Which sets up Mason Rudolph vs Myles Garret 2.0
I also certainly didn't hate seeing the Patriots lose again....... but that certainly doesn't involve any kind of Bills love.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on December 29, 2020, 03:16:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:26:43 AM
Now, the key question for the AFC playoff picture is whether the Bills and Steelers will play their starters in Week 17.
My guess is Bills Yes (why not keep rolling and clinch the #2 seed?), Steelers No (basically missed their bye this season, have looked like they need some rest, and can't get the #2 seed anyways if the Bills win).
Tomlin announced earlier that Ben and some starters will NOT start against Cleveland. Which sets up Mason Rudolph vs Myles Garret 2.0
I also certainly didn't hate seeing the Patriots lose again....... but that certainly doesn't involve any kind of Bills love.
Don't be surprised if the Steelers' announcement leads to the Bills resting.
McDermott is 🤐 but said the possibility of fans at the playoff game(s) was a factor in their decision.
With the good rhythm they've got going, I hope Allen at least plays the first half, but we won't be finding out for now.
I expect the Chiefs, Steelers, and Bills to rest starters. It might actually be benficial for the Bills or Steelers to get the third seed, because there's a good chance Baltimore, one of the hottest teams in the league, ends up at 7. Then again, Lamar hasn't exactly been great in the postseason. The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
It might actually be benficial for the Bills or Steelers to get the third seed, because there's a good chance Baltimore, one of the hottest teams in the league, ends up at 7.
I don't believe Baltimore can end up at 7 if they beat the Bengals and finish 11-5. They've got the tiebreaker over both the Browns and Colts, so it would have to involve the Colts winning the South, which can only happen if the Titans lose and finish 10-6.
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
And possibly miss out on the #1 seed? I think the #1 seed is more valuable. Lambeau is the number one place other teams don't want to travel in January.
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
And possibly miss out on the #1 seed? I think the #1 seed is more valuable. Lambeau is the number one place other teams don't want to travel in January.
It is also *BEAR WEEK*. Regardless of the standings, you WIN that game!
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
It might actually be benficial for the Bills or Steelers to get the third seed, because there's a good chance Baltimore, one of the hottest teams in the league, ends up at 7.
I don't believe Baltimore can end up at 7 if they beat the Bengals and finish 11-5. They've got the tiebreaker over both the Browns and Colts, so it would have to involve the Colts winning the South, which can only happen if the Titans lose and finish 10-6.
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
And possibly miss out on the #1 seed? I think the #1 seed is more valuable. Lambeau is the number one place other teams don't want to travel in January.
Ah, I didn't know the Seahawks could still get the 1 seed.
Quote from: mgk920 on December 30, 2020, 03:31:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
And possibly miss out on the #1 seed? I think the #1 seed is more valuable. Lambeau is the number one place other teams don't want to travel in January.
It is also *BEAR WEEK*. Regardless of the standings, you WIN that game!
:nod:
Mike
F that. It is PACKER WEEK!
Icing on the cake: WIN, AND YOU ARE IN! With the bonus (?), that if Da Bears beat the Fudgies...there is a decent chance that the two will have a rematch in the Wild Card Round
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 30, 2020, 08:29:07 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on December 30, 2020, 03:31:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 29, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 29, 2020, 08:45:34 PM
The Packers should rest their starters, but I don't know if they will. Chicago will be out for blood, so it would be smart to not put star players in Khalil Mack's way.
And possibly miss out on the #1 seed? I think the #1 seed is more valuable. Lambeau is the number one place other teams don't want to travel in January.
It is also *BEAR WEEK*. Regardless of the standings, you WIN that game!
:nod:
Mike
F that. It is PACKER WEEK!
Icing on the cake: WIN, AND YOU ARE IN! With the bonus (?), that if Da Bears beat the Fudgies...there is a decent chance that the two will have a rematch in the Wild Card Round
This is something I always look forward to. BEAR DOWN!!!
Great, then some of us have to decide which one of you to root for. :banghead: :meh:
Although for me, it's not a decision. Melt the cheese with fire, every time.
12 of this week's 16 games have playoff or seeding implications, which has to be a record (partly due to the expanded playoffs).
Outside the AFC West matchups, the only other games with no implications are Vikings-Lions and Jets-Patriots.
Quote from: webny99 on December 31, 2020, 10:56:03 AM
12 of this week's 16 games have playoff or seeding implications, which has to be a record (partly due to the expanded playoffs).
Outside the AFC West matchups, the only other games with no implications are Vikings-Lions and Jets-Patriots.
Falcons/Bucs, Saints/Panthers, and 49ers/Seahawks have only seeding implications. The way the NFL has set up the week 17 schedule doesn't make sense to me. I would have all the playoff berth/division title games in the 3:25 slot. So that would be MIA/BUF, PIT/CLE, DAL/NYG, BAL/CIN, JAX/IND, TEN/HOU, AZ/LAR, and WFT/PHI. That would be maximum chaos. To balance it out, LAC/KC and NO/CAR would be moved back to the 12:00 slot. Then GB/CHI would be SNF.
The playoff picture, particularly in the AFC, is going to come down to teams resting starters as much as anything. Steelers aren't playing their starters, to that makes it much easier for the Browns to get in. Bills haven't yet said anything, so I feel like there's a good chance that their stars play a limited amount or not at all. That is good news for the Dolphins.
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2020, 11:32:10 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 31, 2020, 10:56:03 AM
12 of this week's 16 games have playoff or seeding implications, which has to be a record (partly due to the expanded playoffs).
Outside the AFC West matchups, the only other games with no implications are Vikings-Lions and Jets-Patriots.
Falcons/Bucs, Saints/Panthers, and 49ers/Seahawks have only seeding implications. The way the NFL has set up the week 17 schedule doesn't make sense to me. I would have all the playoff berth/division title games in the 3:25 slot. So that would be MIA/BUF, PIT/CLE, DAL/NYG, BAL/CIN, JAX/IND, TEN/HOU, AZ/LAR, and WFT/PHI. That would be maximum chaos. To balance it out, LAC/KC and NO/CAR would be moved back to the 12:00 slot. Then GB/CHI would be SNF.
It's because they don't want games to be neutered by other results. Say GB/CHI goes to SNF. Seattle, Arizona, and New Orleans all lose in the afternoon. Now there is zero meaning to GB/CHI when it kicks off and you're likely to see backups play most of the game.
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2020, 11:32:10 AM
The way the NFL has set up the week 17 schedule doesn't make sense to me. I would have all the playoff berth/division title games in the 3:25 slot. So that would be MIA/BUF, PIT/CLE, DAL/NYG, BAL/CIN, JAX/IND, TEN/HOU, AZ/LAR, and WFT/PHI. That would be maximum chaos. To balance it out, LAC/KC and NO/CAR would be moved back to the 12:00 slot. Then GB/CHI would be SNF.
I agree it doesn't make perfect sense: Basically they can't have it so that a team could clinch or be eliminated from a playoff spot in a time slot before they take the field. Makes sense to have the AFC South games in the middle window. Presumably the other AFC win-and-in games are not included because they don't necessarily affect any other games. Colts are the only AFC team that needs help from other teams to get in, but even if CLE, MIA, and BAL all win, they'll still have a chance at the division if the Titans slip up.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 31, 2020, 12:21:59 PM
It's because they don't want games to be neutered by other results. Say GB/CHI goes to SNF. Seattle, Arizona, and New Orleans all lose in the afternoon. Now there is zero meaning to GB/CHI when it kicks off and you're likely to see backups play most of the game.
Yeah, GB/CHI can't be SNF because the Packers might have already clinched the bye, and the Bears might have already clinched a playoff berth. Unfortunately, but also fittingly for this year/season, WAS/PHI really is the only option for SNF.
GB/CHI was already a SNF game as well. Sunday after Thanksgiving
Quote from: ET21 on December 31, 2020, 12:48:02 PM
GB/CHI was already a SNF game as well. Sunday after Thanksgiving
Both ends of a divisional matchup can be on SNF. The only one I can think of immediately is Cowboys vs. Giants in 2011, but that was the one that finally ended that persistent urban legend.
It would make by far the most sense to have all AFC games in one time slot and all NFC games in the other, then just pick one game without cross-implications for the night.
Historically the "early slot" has been regarded as less desirable.
Maybe whichever conference has the more interesting matchups (the AFC this year IMO) would play at 4:25 ET and the other conference would be relegated to 1:00 ET.
Quote from: Alps on December 31, 2020, 02:17:11 PM
It would make by far the most sense to have all AFC games in one time slot and all NFC games in the other, then just pick one game without cross-implications for the night.
The problem with this is that it could mean starting West Coast games at 10:00 AM local time unless all games were scheduled for other time zones in that week (which may not be possible if the goal is to have all in-division games in the final week of the season, seeing as how the NFC West has three Pacific Time teams–Seattle, San Francisco, and LA–and one Mountain Time team in Phoenix).
Edited to add: I guess if the AFC had the early slot it would be feasible as long as Los Angeles always had a road game to end the season, since the rest of the AFC West is Las Vegas, Denver, and Kansas City.
Should the NFL expand to a 16 team playoff?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 31, 2020, 09:00:35 PM
Should the NFL expand to a 16 team playoff?
No. 16 games eliminate half the teams, then a single game eliminates the next half of the teams?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 31, 2020, 09:00:35 PM
Should the NFL expand to a 16 team playoff?
No, but to be honest, I've really enjoyed the expansion from 12 to 14 so far. If this year is any indication, it will make playoff races much more enticing. Just take last season as an example. In week 17 there would have been one wild card spot up for grabs in the NFC. The Rams, Eagles, Cowboys, Bears, and Buccaneers all would have been fighting for it. Instead, there was no wild card spot to play for.
With that many teams in the playoffs, the first round of playoffs should consist of more than one game. If it's two games, and each team wins one, compare the margin of victory; this is equivalent to the way soccer handles 2-game playoffs. If it's three games, the typical two out of three works well.
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2020, 07:56:25 PM
Also, the Eagles are eliminated. I can already see the future: the Hurts novelty wears off midway through 2021. He finishes 2021 with 21 touchdowns and 16 interceptions or some below average statline like that. The media babies him for two more years, focusing on a four game stretch when he was good instead of the rest of his career, before it becomes apparent that he's not the answer, and the cycle repeats itself with a different quarterback. I will be revisiting this post in 2023.
Yeah, we played that game in Philadelphia already. :thumbdown: :ded: :poke:
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2020, 09:15:23 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 31, 2020, 09:00:35 PM
Should the NFL expand to a 16 team playoff?
No, but to be honest, I've really enjoyed the expansion from 12 to 14 so far.
Absolutely same here. I like only one team getting the bye and the spiciness of the Week 17 matchups.
This year in particular is crazy in the AFC with
five 10-5 teams. It certainly worked out for maximum chaos this time, but I'd expect in the future that at least some of those wild card berths would be clinched by now.
Quote from: 1 on December 31, 2020, 09:01:25 PM
No. 16 games eliminate half the teams, then a single game eliminates the next half of the teams?
But it wouldn't be that different from what we have now. The only difference is the #1 seed would play the #8 seed instead of having the bye.
There is a problem with television showings. Three games per Saturday and Sunday is fit table. But if a 4th game per weekend were added, that would be a scheduling nightmare
Quote from: 1 on December 31, 2020, 09:01:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 31, 2020, 09:00:35 PM
Should the NFL expand to a 16 team playoff?
No. 16 games eliminate half the teams, then a single game eliminates the next half of the teams?
Baseball plays 162 games and then eliminates two of the 10 playoff teams in single games. That's arguably worse.
Quote from: Big John on January 01, 2021, 01:41:04 AM
There is a problem with television showings. Three games per Saturday and Sunday is fit table. But if a 4th game per weekend were added, that would be a scheduling nightmare
Baseball doesn't have a problem with it, somehow. Start the east coast game at noon and go every 3 hours.
I disagree pretty strongly with the Chiefs resting their starters. Having "nothing to play for" because you've already clinched the bye is a trap, and I'm really surprised Andy Reid fell for it after what happened to the Ravens last year.
Mahomes is going to roll into the divisional round having not played in three weeks, and if I was a Chiefs fan, I'd be pretty mad about it. After their mediocre performance last week, why not get back on track by dropping a 50-burger on the Chargers, and then use the bye to rest up?
Quote from: webny99 on January 01, 2021, 02:02:23 PM
I disagree pretty strongly with the Chiefs resting their starters. Having "nothing to play for" because you've already clinched the bye is a trap, and I'm really surprised Andy Reid fell for it after what happened to the Ravens last year.
Mahomes is going to roll into the divisional round having not played in three weeks, and if I was a Chiefs fan, I'd be pretty mad about it. After their mediocre performance last week, why not get back on track by dropping a 50-burger on the Chargers, and then use the bye to rest up?
The Ravens example is a one-off, compared to what normally happens. The risk of having an injury to a starter in a meaningless game is much greater than the risk of losing the first playoff game after sitting the starters and then a week off.
It works out for some teams and not for others. Maybe with the Chiefs sputtering a bit lately, best to take a week off and come back with a fresher mind.
Quote from: webny99 on January 01, 2021, 02:02:23 PM
I disagree pretty strongly with the Chiefs resting their starters. Having "nothing to play for" because you've already clinched the bye is a trap, and I'm really surprised Andy Reid fell for it after what happened to the Ravens last year.
Mahomes is going to roll into the divisional round having not played in three weeks, and if I was a Chiefs fan, I'd be pretty mad about it. After their mediocre performance last week, why not get back on track by dropping a 50-burger on the Chargers, and then use the bye to rest up?
I can answer this in three words: football is painful.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2021, 02:26:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 01, 2021, 02:02:23 PM
I disagree pretty strongly with the Chiefs resting their starters. Having "nothing to play for" because you've already clinched the bye is a trap, and I'm really surprised Andy Reid fell for it after what happened to the Ravens last year.
Mahomes is going to roll into the divisional round having not played in three weeks, and if I was a Chiefs fan, I'd be pretty mad about it. After their mediocre performance last week, why not get back on track by dropping a 50-burger on the Chargers, and then use the bye to rest up?
I can answer this in three words: football is painful.
Basically. It's always smart to rest the best players and save them for the more important game.
Interesting. I kind of figured I'd be in the minority here, it will be interesting to see what happens.
Are there any other high profile examples prior to the Ravens last year?
2009 Saints rested starters for Week 17 and won the Super Bowl.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 01, 2021, 05:02:48 PM
2009 Saints rested starters for Week 17 and won the Super Bowl.
Same with the 2017 Eagles and 2014 Patriots.
The Bills dropped 56 points on the league's best defense to wrap up the season with 501 points (a team record); finished 13-3 for the first time since 1991; swept the division for the first time this century, and remain undefeated (6-0) since Hail Murray, with a +119 point differential (avg. +19.83) in those six wins.
Josh Allen is now the Bills' single-season passing yards leader with 4,543, surpassing Drew Bledsoe's 2002 campaign.
I can't find the post but webny99 said a while ago that the Packers beat the Bears four times in 2011. That could potentially happen with the Browns and Steelers in 2021. It has been confirmed that the Browns will play the Steelers in the wild card next weekend. Browns might be favored in that game considering Pittsburgh's recent struggles. Long term the Browns seem to be trending up with a good coach, a young QB, and a solid roster overall, while the Steelers are nearing the end of an era and Roethlisberger retiring this offseason is a possibility.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 05:49:55 PM
I can't find the post but webny99 said a while ago that the Packers beat the Bears four times in 2011. That could potentially happen with the Browns and Steelers in 2021. ...
I think I remember the discussion you're referring to. Could very well be true, but it wasn't me that said it.
On the subject of the Browns, with them and the Bucs now ending their postseason droughts, the Jets are the only team not to have made the postseason in the last 6 years.
31/32 teams in 6 years (and 29/32 teams in 5 years, subtracting the Bengals and Broncos) has to be a record. It certainly is a record this century given the long droughts the Bills and Browns endured, and it could possibly be an all-time record.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 05:49:55 PM
I can't find the post but webny99 said a while ago that the Packers beat the Bears four times in 2011. That could potentially happen with the Browns and Steelers in 2021. It has been confirmed that the Browns will play the Steelers in the wild card next weekend. Browns might be favored in that game considering Pittsburgh's recent struggles. Long term the Browns seem to be trending up with a good coach, a young QB, and a solid roster overall, while the Steelers are nearing the end of an era and Roethlisberger retiring this offseason is a possibility.
In the 2010 season, the Bears and Packers played three times, but the Packers only won 2. In 2011, they only played twice.
In 1941, they played three times with the Bears winning two.
They've never played 4 times in a season.
Dolphins end up on the outside at the end of the day, and Ryan Fitzpatrick reaches 16 seasons without a playoff appearance. He twice has been win and in Week 17 and both times his team lost (2014 Jets).
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2021, 07:54:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 05:49:55 PM
I can't find the post but webny99 said a while ago that the Packers beat the Bears four times in 2011. That could potentially happen with the Browns and Steelers in 2021. It has been confirmed that the Browns will play the Steelers in the wild card next weekend. Browns might be favored in that game considering Pittsburgh's recent struggles. Long term the Browns seem to be trending up with a good coach, a young QB, and a solid roster overall, while the Steelers are nearing the end of an era and Roethlisberger retiring this offseason is a possibility.
In the 2010 season, the Bears and Packers played three times, but the Packers only won 2. In 2011, they only played twice.
In 1941, they played three times with the Bears winning two.
They've never played 4 times in a season.
What he means is calendar year: Week 17 of the 2010 season when Green Bay beat the Bears was technically in January 2011. Then three weeks later the Packers beat Chicago again in the MFC Championship game. Several months later during the scheduled 2011 season Green Bay beat Chicago twice more.
The Houston Football Team win the Snyder Prize by finishing the season with the "Football Team" moniker under the forum's game.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 03, 2021, 08:04:07 PM
Dolphins end up on the outside at the end of the day, and Ryan Fitzpatrick reaches 16 seasons without a playoff appearance. He twice has been win and in Week 17 and both times his team lost (2014 Jets).
It would've been fun to see Fitzpatrick in the playoffs, but ultimately, they still overachieved this season. They got very lucky against the Raiders, and still needed to win a big game with Tua to get in, and that didn't happen. And at the end of the day, I don't think either team wanted a rematch next week.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 03, 2021, 08:19:11 PM
The Houston Football Team win the Snyder Prize by finishing the season with the "Football Team" moniker under the forum's game.
To confirm how this all shook out:
Washington Eagles
Philadelphia 49ers
San Francisco Rams
Los Angeles (NFC) Bears
Chicago Texans
Houston Football Team
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 03, 2021, 08:30:55 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 03, 2021, 08:19:11 PM
The Houston Football Team win the Snyder Prize by finishing the season with the "Football Team" moniker under the forum's game.
To confirm how this all shook out:
Washington Eagles
Philadelphia 49ers
San Francisco Rams
Los Angeles (NFC) Bears
Chicago Texans
Houston Football Team
We were awfully close to "Football Team" ending up with a playoff team.
Honestly, the Houston deserves it. I was pretty wrong about predicting they would go 7-9 (plus they lost in one of the worst ways possible). And keep in mind they did this with a quarterback who won the passing title for the entire NFL!
Also fun fact about the Houston game: The Titans became the 2nd team in history to beat an opponent twice in a season whilst giving up 35+ points both times. The stranger thing is the only other time this happened was in 1960 when the NY Titans (Jets) beat the Dallas Texans (KC Chiefs) twice that year under the same circumstances. So both times this has happened in the NFL, it was Titans-Texans.
Packers have the number 1 seed in the NFC, but IMO, they shouldn't be the favorites until they prove themselves. They always find a creative way to choke or get steamrolled in the playoffs.
With as much talent as Aaron Rodgers has, I can't believe they haven't been able to get back to the Super Bowl in a decade. The Packers have failed Rodgers.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 03, 2021, 08:05:40 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2021, 07:54:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 05:49:55 PM
I can't find the post but webny99 said a while ago that the Packers beat the Bears four times in 2011. That could potentially happen with the Browns and Steelers in 2021. It has been confirmed that the Browns will play the Steelers in the wild card next weekend. Browns might be favored in that game considering Pittsburgh's recent struggles. Long term the Browns seem to be trending up with a good coach, a young QB, and a solid roster overall, while the Steelers are nearing the end of an era and Roethlisberger retiring this offseason is a possibility.
In the 2010 season, the Bears and Packers played three times, but the Packers only won 2. In 2011, they only played twice.
In 1941, they played three times with the Bears winning two.
They've never played 4 times in a season.
What he means is calendar year: Week 17 of the 2010 season when Green Bay beat the Bears was technically in January 2011. Then three weeks later the Packers beat Chicago again in the MFC Championship game. Several months later during the scheduled 2011 season Green Bay beat Chicago twice more.
Ah, OK, yes the Packers beat the Bears 4 times during calendar year 2011.
Another weird quirk involving the Bears - 14 years ago, the Bears and Colts became the first teams with black head coaches to reach the Super Bowl. Today they became the first teams to be #7 playoff seeds.
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 03, 2021, 09:31:35 PM
Also fun fact about the Houston game: The Titans became the 2nd team in history to beat an opponent twice in a season whilst giving up 35+ points both times.
If Ravens-Browns on MNF was the game of the year, Texans-Titans was definitely series of the year. Both games were absolute thrillers.
Man it feels great to finally see the Browns playoff drought come to an end
The AFC North has three playoff teams, and would have even under the previous format because the Ravens are #5 and Browns are #6.
Ravens-Titans is a tantalizing matchup next week.
With the expansion to 14 teams, the extra two teams are Colts and Bears. Colts are definitely deserving and would have been only the second 11-5 team in history to miss out. Bears are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but they've had a heck of a ride this season, and they're definitely more worthy than the Cardinals IMO.
Full Wild Card Weekend schedule here: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-2021-postseason-schedule
Quote from: I-39 on January 03, 2021, 09:34:17 PM
Packers have the number 1 seed in the NFC, but IMO, they shouldn't be the favorites until they prove themselves. They always find a creative way to choke or get steamrolled in the playoffs.
With as much talent as Aaron Rodgers has, I can't believe they haven't been able to get back to the Super Bowl in a decade. The Packers have failed Rodgers.
Look at the other NFC contenders though . . . Saints are even worse chokers, Seahawks can never get past the divisional, Rams are highly inconsistent, Bears and WFT/Giants are not good. Buccaneers are the only team that I don't see significant flaws in other than Green Bay. There's a good chance the Bucs will play the Packers at Lambeau in the divisional round, and that would more or less be the NFC Championship in my mind. Yes, the Saints did hammer the Bucs twice, but I don't think the Saints will make it past the divisional without screwing up in a new hilarious way.
Washington wins the NFC Least with a 7-9 record, completing an awesome comeback story for Alex Smith.
Hilariously, the Eagles and Bengals both finish the season 4-11-1... a tied record because of the tie game. :-D
Can't help but wonder if the Eagles preferred a loss (and a higher draft pick) over sending the 6-10 Giants to the playoffs... and really, who can blame them?
Quote from: webny99 on January 03, 2021, 11:43:40 PM
Washington wins the NFC Least with a 7-9 record, completing an awesome comeback story for Alex Smith.
Hilariously, the Eagles and Bengals both finish the season 4-11-1... a tied record because of the tie game. :-D
Can't help but wonder if the Eagles preferred a loss (and a higher draft pick) over sending the 6-10 Giants to the playoffs... and really, who can blame them?
Based on the 4th and Goal from the 4, along with immediately bringing in the backup QB for the final 20~ minutes of the game, the draft pick was more important that who made the playoffs.
I would have loved to see a 6-10 team be the Division winner though, which the Giants would've been if Washington lost.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2021, 12:11:52 AM
Based on the 4th and Goal from the 4, along with immediately bringing in the backup QB for the final 20~ minutes of the game, the draft pick was more important that who made the playoffs.
Not to mention at least pretending to try to win the game.
I was primarily rooting against Dan Snyder, but I too was also rooting for a 6-10 team to sneak into the playoffs.
The second half was brutal. Also got tired of Al and Cris constantly musing what Giants fans thought about any particular play:event. They weren't there.
The Giants-Cowboys game could very well have turned out differently if Mike McCarthy had remembered he had a challenge flag on Dante Pettis's 10-yard catch right before the Giants hit that 50 yard FG. Sure looked like an incomplete pass to me, which would in all likelihood have forced the Giants to punt and the Cowboys would have gotten the ball back just one point down instead of four.
And for that reason I'm glad Washington won in the end - the result of that early game didn't matter anyway.
Quote from: oscar on January 04, 2021, 12:26:15 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2021, 12:11:52 AM
Based on the 4th and Goal from the 4, along with immediately bringing in the backup QB for the final 20~ minutes of the game, the draft pick was more important that who made the playoffs.
Not to mention at least pretending to try to win the game.
I was primarily rooting against Dan Snyder, but I too was also rooting for a 6-10 team to sneak into the playoffs.
The team was trying to win the game. Other than the QB substitution, the players weren't mailing it in and there wasn't a wholesale removal of key players.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 04, 2021, 12:36:05 AM
The second half was brutal. Also got tired of Al and Cris constantly musing what Giants fans thought about any particular play:event. They weren't there.
I agree. Ultimately, I'm sure Giants fans still hate the Eagles just as much
or more than they did before, but that was an annoying few hours in between.
Quote from: Alps on January 04, 2021, 01:09:37 AM
Quote from: oscar on January 04, 2021, 12:26:15 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2021, 12:11:52 AM
Based on the 4th and Goal from the 4, along with immediately bringing in the backup QB for the final 20~ minutes of the game, the draft pick was more important that who made the playoffs.
Not to mention at least pretending to try to win the game.
I was primarily rooting against Dan Snyder, but I too was also rooting for a 6-10 team to sneak into the playoffs.
The team was trying to win the game. Other than the QB substitution, the players weren't mailing it in and there wasn't a wholesale removal of key players.
I never wanna be *that* guy that says a team mailed it in.
Buttttttttt.....
When a team doesn't start their franchise QB and removes their starting QB only down by 3 points to put in the 3rd stringer as if it was a pre-season game, I can't say they were playing at 100% here. Hurts had a bad game overall when you look at the QB rating, although he did score two TDs on his own. Do I think they played to lose...probably not. But then again, the Redskins played as if they really didn't care if they made it or not. Limping into the playoffs would be an overstatement here.
The Giants were caught in an unfortunate situation...but then again, they were 6-10.
Pederson's coaching here certainly raised some eyebrows though... https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30648412/philadelphia-eagles-doug-pederson-says-was-coaching-win-washington-wanted-get-nate-sudfeld-some-reps is just one of several stories and Facebook "opinions" by broadcast reporters that questioned his desire to win this game.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2021, 07:41:44 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 04, 2021, 12:36:05 AM
The second half was brutal. Also got tired of Al and Cris constantly musing what Giants fans thought about any particular play:event. They weren't there.
I agree. Ultimately, I'm sure Giants fans still hate the Eagles just as much or more than they did before, but that was an annoying few hours in between.
My wife was really annoyed at the announcers with the amount of praise they were giving in the multiple times they talked about Washington's comeback stories.
The 2nd half though...what can you say - the announcers know a garbage game when they see one. They joked about the fans in the stadium (0). The best thing they saw were the overhead nighttime shots of the city (pre-recorded; it was a lousy weather day/night in Philly). From a Road Enthusiast perspective, they had a great time-lapse shot of the traffic on the Ben Franklin Bridge and some marine traffic on the Delaware River, in which the camera would've been located on the tower on the Jersey side of the bridge, facing towards Center City Philly.
They also said, or started to say, the 'Redskins' 3 times, all late in the game, which shows the lack of concentration they had by that point.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 11:09:11 PM
Quote from: I-39 on January 03, 2021, 09:34:17 PM
Packers have the number 1 seed in the NFC, but IMO, they shouldn't be the favorites until they prove themselves. They always find a creative way to choke or get steamrolled in the playoffs.
With as much talent as Aaron Rodgers has, I can't believe they haven't been able to get back to the Super Bowl in a decade. The Packers have failed Rodgers.
Look at the other NFC contenders though . . . Saints are even worse chokers, Seahawks can never get past the divisional, Rams are highly inconsistent, Bears and WFT/Giants are not good. Buccaneers are the only team that I don't see significant flaws in other than Green Bay. There's a good chance the Bucs will play the Packers at Lambeau in the divisional round, and that would more or less be the NFC Championship in my mind. Yes, the Saints did hammer the Bucs twice, but I don't think the Saints will make it past the divisional without screwing up in a new hilarious way.
True, but I'm still not confident because the Packers always seem to find a way to mess it up. I really want to see Aaron Rodgers get a second Super Bowl, or at least appear in one. This is his best shot in years, but we'll see.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 11:09:11 PM
Quote from: I-39 on January 03, 2021, 09:34:17 PM
Packers have the number 1 seed in the NFC, but IMO, they shouldn't be the favorites until they prove themselves. They always find a creative way to choke or get steamrolled in the playoffs.
With as much talent as Aaron Rodgers has, I can't believe they haven't been able to get back to the Super Bowl in a decade. The Packers have failed Rodgers.
Look at the other NFC contenders though . . . Saints are even worse chokers, Seahawks can never get past the divisional, Rams are highly inconsistent, Bears and WFT/Giants are not good. Buccaneers are the only team that I don't see significant flaws in other than Green Bay. There's a good chance the Bucs will play the Packers at Lambeau in the divisional round, and that would more or less be the NFC Championship in my mind. Yes, the Saints did hammer the Bucs twice, but I don't think the Saints will make it past the divisional without screwing up in a new hilarious way.
GB has had many other seasons in the past 10 years where they were the clear favorite yet exited in either the Wild Card, 1st, or conf rounds. 2 Super Bowl wins in over 25 years of two HoF QBs, I am shocked fans did not revolt like 5 or 6 years ago against management.
The 2020 NFC East is officially NOT the worst division in NFL history. Its record of 23-40-1 is one game better than the 2014 NFC South, at 22-41-1. Ha!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 04, 2021, 09:14:46 AM
I never wanna be *that* guy that says a team mailed it in.
Buttttttttt.....
....
Are you saying it Hurts to be a New York NFC Football Team fan this morning?
:bigass:
Quote from: ET21 on January 04, 2021, 09:21:55 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2021, 11:09:11 PM
Quote from: I-39 on January 03, 2021, 09:34:17 PM
Packers have the number 1 seed in the NFC, but IMO, they shouldn't be the favorites until they prove themselves. They always find a creative way to choke or get steamrolled in the playoffs.
With as much talent as Aaron Rodgers has, I can't believe they haven't been able to get back to the Super Bowl in a decade. The Packers have failed Rodgers.
Look at the other NFC contenders though . . . Saints are even worse chokers, Seahawks can never get past the divisional, Rams are highly inconsistent, Bears and WFT/Giants are not good. Buccaneers are the only team that I don't see significant flaws in other than Green Bay. There's a good chance the Bucs will play the Packers at Lambeau in the divisional round, and that would more or less be the NFC Championship in my mind. Yes, the Saints did hammer the Bucs twice, but I don't think the Saints will make it past the divisional without screwing up in a new hilarious way.
GB has had many other seasons in the past 10 years where they were the clear favorite yet exited in either the Wild Card, 1st, or conf rounds. 2 Super Bowl wins in over 25 years of two HoF QBs, I am shocked fans did not revolt like 5 or 6 years ago against management.
The fans did, but management was in denial there was a problem. When the Packers had the meltdown in Seattle in 2014 and they came back in 2015 and regressed, they should have fired everyone afterwards. That right there exposed just how much GB management cares about winning. Rodgers has been carrying the Packers for years.
Imagine if he had the kind of teams Brady had in New England........
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eq5HL5NXIAAesJG?format=jpg&name=medium)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eq5HL5QXAAMD6rl?format=jpg&name=medium)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eq3Qf6ZWMAYGtJd?format=jpg&name=small)
Somebody tweeted that the most enthusiasm they'd seen all season from the Giants' offense was last night on Twitter.
We're now up to 6 head coaching vacancies: Texans, Falcons, Lions, Jets, Jaguars, and Chargers.
I'm surprised by the Chargers. I figured Anthony Lynn saved his job with 4 straight wins to end the season. Just goes to show how much I know, I guess. 7-9 isn't a horrific record, but going 3-9 capped by the terrible 45-0 shutout against the Patriots must have sealed it. The Chargers are absolutely a 10- or 12-win playoff team with a better coach and the talent they've got.
Closing thoughts re: Eagles - Looking at Hurts' stats, I see no reason why he shouldn't have been lifted. Looking at Wentz' news stories lately, I see no reason why he would have been played. He's done in Philly. Hurts has a way to go. They would not have won that game without Wentz.
Quote from: Alps on January 04, 2021, 03:43:50 PM
Closing thoughts re: Eagles - Looking at Hurts' stats, I see no reason why he shouldn't have been lifted. Looking at Wentz' news stories lately, I see no reason why he would have been played. He's done in Philly. Hurts has a way to go. They would not have won that game without Wentz.
Pedersen's post game presser indicated his decision was no more than "kid rode the bench all season and deserved to play" . That's how high school works, not the NFL. Here's my problem with it is that although Hurts wasn't great (he did score both TDs though), is it immediately became clear why you don't just switch QBs for fun. First, he fumbled the snap and Washington recovered. Your center was used to Hurts being back there, not this guy. Then a drive or two later, he missed an open WR on an out route and on the next play a WR had to make a great play to come back to an easy comeback route. The WRs were used to the niches of working with Hurts on these routes, not this guy's. Hurts still gave them the best chance to win.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 04, 2021, 04:29:33 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 04, 2021, 03:43:50 PM
Closing thoughts re: Eagles - Looking at Hurts' stats, I see no reason why he shouldn't have been lifted. Looking at Wentz' news stories lately, I see no reason why he would have been played. He's done in Philly. Hurts has a way to go. They would not have won that game without Wentz.
Pedersen's post game presser indicated his decision was no more than "kid rode the bench all season and deserved to play" . That's how high school works, not the NFL. Here's my problem with it is that although Hurts wasn't great (he did score both TDs though), is it immediately became clear why you don't just switch QBs for fun. First, he fumbled the snap and Washington recovered. Your center was used to Hurts being back there, not this guy. Then a drive or two later, he missed an open WR on an out route and on the next play a WR had to make a great play to come back to an easy comeback route. The WRs were used to the niches of working with Hurts on these routes, not this guy's. Hurts still gave them the best chance to win.
What is Philly's incentive to win? They get a worse draft pick. Want to give teams incentives to go all-out to win in Week 17? Make the draft order more of an NBA-style lottery rather than strictly by record. Also, have a bonus pool for teams that win Week 17. If winning that game is worth $25K a person, that QB change doesn't happen.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 04, 2021, 04:41:34 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 04, 2021, 04:29:33 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 04, 2021, 03:43:50 PM
Closing thoughts re: Eagles - Looking at Hurts' stats, I see no reason why he shouldn't have been lifted. Looking at Wentz' news stories lately, I see no reason why he would have been played. He's done in Philly. Hurts has a way to go. They would not have won that game without Wentz.
Pedersen's post game presser indicated his decision was no more than "kid rode the bench all season and deserved to play" . That's how high school works, not the NFL. Here's my problem with it is that although Hurts wasn't great (he did score both TDs though), is it immediately became clear why you don't just switch QBs for fun. First, he fumbled the snap and Washington recovered. Your center was used to Hurts being back there, not this guy. Then a drive or two later, he missed an open WR on an out route and on the next play a WR had to make a great play to come back to an easy comeback route. The WRs were used to the niches of working with Hurts on these routes, not this guy's. Hurts still gave them the best chance to win.
What is Philly's incentive to win? They get a worse draft pick.
How many times do I need to answer this question in this thread? Do you guys just not have any competitive values?
The Eagles' incentive to win is that winning is fun and losing is not.
The media has been going bonkers over Pederson today, but I agree with some others in this thread. Hurts was awful and he deserved to be benched. He's earned the chance be the Eagles' QB next year with his play over his first three starts, but I agreed with the choice to bench him in that moment.
It was basically known before the game that Sudfeld might play. Stuff like that happens with some frequency, it's just getting so much attention because it was a close, prime-time game, and the season finale, no less.
I think there's an unspoken rule that you play to win in a game that high profile... and the Eagles definitely could have won! But as far as the organization/coaching staff/fans are concerned, the will to kick the Giants out of the the playoffs and keep the #6 pick > the will to win a meaningless game in a lost season while dropping three spots in the draft. And it's not even that close.
It's too bad there wasn't a true division title game with both teams playing to win, but ultimately, the entire NFC East got what they deserved. It was a weird and certainly fitting way to end to the regular season.
It's also being overlooked that Washington should have been playing for their playoff lives, but yet may have gotten lucky that the Eagles seemingly gave up. Washington was the favorite to win, yet they failed to cover the spread (-6.5), even against a very injured starting Eagles lineup.
It was a bleak performance by Washington overall, and if Hurts remained in the game that probably would have been the bigger story.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2021, 11:31:26 PM
It was basically known before the game that Sudfeld might play. Stuff like that happens with some frequency, it's just getting so much attention because it was a close, prime-time game, and the season finale, no less.
I think there's an unspoken rule that you play to win in a game that high profile... and the Eagles definitely could have won! But as far as the organization/coaching staff/fans are concerned, the will to kick the Giants out of the the playoffs and keep the #6 pick > the will to win a meaningless game in a lost season while dropping three spots in the draft. And it's not even that close.
Kick the Giants out . . . and let the Washington Football Team in. Yep, big difference there. :rolleyes:
6th pick to 9th pick? A solid starter to a solid starter? Massive difference there. :rolleyes:
Lol
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2021, 09:14:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2021, 11:31:26 PM
I think there's an unspoken rule that you play to win in a game that high profile... and the Eagles definitely could have won! But as far as the organization/coaching staff/fans are concerned, the will to kick the Giants out of the the playoffs and keep the #6 pick > the will to win a meaningless game in a lost season while dropping three spots in the draft. And it's not even that close.
Kick the Giants out . . . and let the Washington Football Team in. Yep, big difference there. :rolleyes:
6th pick to 9th pick? A solid starter to a solid starter? Massive difference there. :rolleyes:
Neither of those are a big difference to you and me, but I was referring to the perspective of the Eagles organization/coaches/fans (not necessarily players). I think they hate the Giants
way more than they hate Washington, and they would certainly never live it down if they let the 6-10 Giants into the playoffs, especially if the Giants then went on a playoff run (remembering that they were a 2pt conversion away from overtime against the Bucs earlier this season).
As for the pick, three spots in the draft is worth way more than a Week 17 win in a lost season, especially since they're near the top of the draft.
Circling da Bears' game in New Orleans on my calendar right now! I'm so glad the playoffs got expanded, because under the old format, they would've been eliminated already.
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2021, 09:58:44 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2021, 09:14:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2021, 11:31:26 PM
I think there's an unspoken rule that you play to win in a game that high profile... and the Eagles definitely could have won! But as far as the organization/coaching staff/fans are concerned, the will to kick the Giants out of the the playoffs and keep the #6 pick > the will to win a meaningless game in a lost season while dropping three spots in the draft. And it's not even that close.
Kick the Giants out . . . and let the Washington Football Team in. Yep, big difference there. :rolleyes:
6th pick to 9th pick? A solid starter to a solid starter? Massive difference there. :rolleyes:
Neither of those are a big difference to you and me, but I was referring to the perspective of the Eagles organization/coaches/fans (not necessarily players). I think they hate the Giants way more than they hate Washington, and they would certainly never live it down if they let the 6-10 Giants into the playoffs, especially if the Giants then went on a playoff run (remembering that they were a 2pt conversion away from overtime against the Bucs earlier this season).
As for the pick, three spots in the draft is worth way more than a Week 17 win in a lost season, especially since they're near the top of the draft.
I speak from expierence when I say that ending a season on a loss in sports is the equivalent of pulling your teeth out. Winning that game would have created so much more optimism in the locker room going into next year.
Even though we got shafted by our arch rivals (I for one am not surprised it happened), I'm just hoping the Giants do at least decent in the draft. Only thing is we still have Gettleman at the helm smdh. Still I think the Eagles would've put up a better effort if the Cowboys would've had that shot instead of us. I'm kinda wishing the WSH/PHI game was the early game instead of DAL/NYG :-D
Wild Card predictions:
Bills 38, Colts 17
Seahawks 23, Rams 17
Buccaneers 31, WFT 7
Titans 35, Ravens 34
Bears 20, Saints 17
Steelers 26, Browns 21
My Super Bowl prediction just in case: Packers 26-18 Bills, Aaron Jones MVP
Bills escape with a 27-24 win over the Colts that undoubtedly cost everyone in Western NY a few years off their lives. Colts had a missed FG AND went for a 4th&3 right before halftime that also would've been an easy FG. Then at the end a controversial fumble call that went the Colts way.
But hey, a win's a win.
The Seahawks' first home playoff loss since 2004 is a very disappointing end to a 12-4 season, although you have to hand it to the Rams for what they've overcome. No disrespect to the Rams, but the NFC divisional round is a lot less juicy now that the Seahawks aren't involved.
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 09, 2021, 10:25:15 PM
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Agreed with your first point, but did you mean Seattle?
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2021, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 09, 2021, 10:25:15 PM
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Agreed with your first point, but did you mean Seattle?
Washington won the Division, so they hosted.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2021, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 09, 2021, 10:25:15 PM
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Agreed with your first point, but did you mean Seattle?
No, I mean Washington State in regards to COVID restrictions. I believe the no fans in attendance is a State thing.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 10, 2021, 02:28:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2021, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 09, 2021, 10:25:15 PM
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Agreed with your first point, but did you mean Seattle?
No, I mean Washington State in regards to COVID restrictions. I believe the no fans in attendance is a State thing.
Ah, OK. Got confused because Washington the Football Team also played yesterday.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2021, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 09, 2021, 10:25:15 PM
Seattle can't play defense and it came back to haunt them, I don't find the result today too surprising. It doesn't help that Washington didn't allow at least some crowd in the stands IMO.
Agreed with your first point, but did you mean Seattle?
I assumed he meant the state government wasn't allowing fans and that it robbed Seattle of an aspect of home-field advantage.
The Seahawks just beat the Rams in Seattle two weeks ago. Rams just came to play and Seattle didn't.
I suppose this is off-topic, but WTF makes beer, insurance, and truck companies think repeatedly watching their lame TV commercials is going to result in my dropping serious coin for their products?
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 10, 2021, 09:32:55 PM
I suppose this is off-topic, but WTF makes beer, insurance, and truck companies think repeatedly watching their lame TV commercials is going to result in my dropping serious coin for their products?
They have to show something between plays, they already analyze the game while it's in progress, and it's not election season anymore. What would you rather have them do?
Ben Roethlisberger breaks the all time record for completions in a game. I kind of figured this could happen after the Steelers got behind 28-0 in the first quarter, but I didn't actually start tracking it until the drive that made it 35-23 in the 3rd. Steelers got beat, kind of badly, but it's fun to see a record set that might not be broken for a long time.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 10, 2021, 09:32:55 PM
I suppose this is off-topic, but WTF makes beer, insurance, and truck companies think repeatedly watching their lame TV commercials is going to result in my dropping serious coin for their products?
I think advertisements have proven themselves worth the revenue by now, after 70+ years on TV...
The Divisional Round is now set, and unlike previous years, there were no massive Wild Card upsets, so there are 8 very good teams remaining. You could certainly argue it's the 8 best teams in the league. Interestingly, the 3 and 4 seeds got completely swept, so both conferences are left with seeds 1, 2, 5 and 6. Had the Bills or Saints slipped up - and the Bills came very close - we would've had a 5 seed HOSTING the Divisional Round. :-o
AFC: 5 Ravens at 2 Bills, 6 Browns at 1 Chiefs
NFC: 5 Bucs at 2 Saints, 6 Rams at 1 Packers
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 10, 2021, 09:32:55 PM
I suppose this is off-topic, but WTF makes beer, insurance, and truck companies think repeatedly watching their lame TV commercials is going to result in my dropping serious coin for their products?
I'd rather see those commercials than ads for feminine hygiene products and the like....
The Browns' 3 signature wins this season have all been very similar: stun the opponent by jumping out to a monster lead early, and then coast to victory. Happened against the Cowboys and Titans in the regular season and now the Steelers.
The Steelers might be a great defense in the regular season, but this is brutal. They've given up 93 points in their last two playoff appearances.
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2021, 11:14:00 AM
The Browns' 3 signature wins this season have all been very similar: stun the opponent by jumping out to a monster lead early, and then coast to victory. Happened against the Cowboys and Titans in the regular season and now the Steelers.
The Steelers might be a great defense in the regular season, but this is brutal. They've given up 93 points in their last two playoff appearances.
To be fair, their offense had a pretty big hand in giving up points last night.
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2021, 08:16:10 AM
The Divisional Round is now set, and unlike previous years, there were no massive Wild Card upsets, so there are 8 very good teams remaining. You could certainly argue it's the 8 best teams in the league. Interestingly, the 3 and 4 seeds got completely swept, so both conferences are left with seeds 1, 2, 5 and 6. Had the Bills or Saints slipped up - and the Bills came very close - we would've had a 5 seed HOSTING the Divisional Round. :-o
AFC: 5 Ravens at 2 Bills, 6 Browns at 1 Chiefs
NFC: 5 Bucs at 2 Saints, 6 Rams at 1 Packers
The Browns' win was definitely an upset, and close to a massive upset, depending how you want to term that. They were generally 5.5 or 6 point underdogs against the Steelers. The Rams were a FG underdog.
Some writing was on the wall: Pittsburgh was 1-4 in their last 5 games. Browns struggled down the stretch too. But probably a little too much history at play here with the Steelers playoff success over time and the Browns not even making the playoffs for quite a while.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 11, 2021, 11:37:40 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2021, 11:14:00 AM
The Steelers might be a great defense in the regular season, but this is brutal. They've given up 93 points in their last two playoff appearances.
To be fair, their offense had a pretty big hand in giving up points last night.
With the fumble and the picks, sure. It was a team meltdown. But after the first quarter, the offense did everything possible to will them back into it. They could've won if the defense got some stops in the fourth quarter.
(And the "93 points in 2 games" stat is only possible because of the 2018 loss to the Jaguars, which was just as bad if not worse defensively. 45 points a week after the Bills held them to 10!)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 11, 2021, 11:44:07 AM
The Browns' win was definitely an upset, and close to a massive upset, depending how you want to term that. They were generally 5.5 or 6 point underdogs against the Steelers. The Rams were a FG underdog.
Being the nerd that I am, I tend to go by FiveThirtyEight's predictions (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-nfl-predictions/games/?ex_cid=rrpromo), and they had the Browns with a decent 38% chance.
Contrast that to Titans/Ravens last year when they had Titans only at 12%.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 11, 2021, 11:44:07 AM
Some writing was on the wall: Pittsburgh was 1-4 in their last 5 games. Browns struggled down the stretch too. But probably a little too much history at play here with the Steelers playoff success over time and the Browns not even making the playoffs for quite a while.
Oh, absolutely. JuJu's quote certainly helped fire up the Browns. And the COVID situation helped, narrative-wise, because the whole week was spent writing the Browns off and lamenting "what could have been" if they had their coach and other key players. Turns out it doesn't matter if everyone else shows up!
The Philadelphia Football Team fired their coach.
Ravens actually got better by getting worse from last year compared to this year, if that makes any sense. In 2019 they rolled through the regular season while local and national media lapped up their attractiveness and trash talking, only to get embarrassed the first time they faced real adversity, when they went down 14-0 in the playoffs. This season, they had to take a hard look at themselves and make important changes after a midseason stretch when they lost four out of five and were bound to miss the playoffs. Then they got behind 10-0 early in the playoffs, and were able to keep fighting because it wasn't the first time they faced adversity.
All I've heard about the Ravens, though, is that Lamar "busted the narrative" of playoff failure. If this was all on the greatness of Lamar, then why did he only score 20 points on a Titans defense that absolutely stinks?
- Gave up 30 to the Jags
- Gave up 30 to the Vikings
- Gave up 36 to the Texans
- Gave up 27 to the Steelers
- Gave up 31 to the Bengals
- Gave up 34 to the Colts
- Gave up 26 to the Colts
- Gave up 41 to the Browns
- Gave up 25 to the Lions
- Gave up 40 to the Packers
- Gave up 38 to the Texans
So excuse me if I'm not super impressed by this. Ravens defense won that game, Lamar just did what he had to.
Kevin Stefanski is probably going to win coach of the year, but I don't think he should. It's not like he took a 6-10 roster and went 11-5. Think back to the 2019 offseason. Most people had the Browns going 10-6 or 11-5 in 2019. Then Freddie Kitchens turned out to be the worst head coach of the entire decade (yes, worse than Gase), and they went 6-10. The Browns' roster is really good, all Stefanski has had to do is be merely average to above average. My pick for coach of the year would be McDermott.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 11, 2021, 02:57:37 PM
The Philadelphia Football Team fired their coach.
Ron Rivera is now the longest-tenured coach in the NFC Least by virtue of being hired before Judge and McCarthy.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2021, 06:07:14 PM
Ravens actually got better by getting worse from last year compared to this year, if that makes any sense. In 2019 they rolled through the regular season while local and national media lapped up their attractiveness and trash talking, only to get embarrassed the first time they faced real adversity, when they went down 14-0 in the playoffs. This season, they had to take a hard look at themselves and make important changes after a midseason stretch when they lost four out of five and were bound to miss the playoffs. Then they got behind 10-0 early in the playoffs, and were able to keep fighting because it wasn't the first time they faced adversity.
It does. I think this version of the Ravens is more dangerous precisely for that reason. I think the Hail Murray had a similar effect for the Bills who took the loss into their bye week and then won six straight afterwards.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2021, 06:07:14 PM
Kevin Stefanski is probably going to win coach of the year, but I don't think he should. It's not like he took a 6-10 roster and went 11-5. Think back to the 2019 offseason. Most people had the Browns going 10-6 or 11-5 in 2019. Then Freddie Kitchens turned out to be the worst head coach of the entire decade (yes, worse than Gase), and they went 6-10. The Browns' roster is really good, all Stefanski has had to do is be merely average to above average. My pick for coach of the year would be McDermott.
There's a lot of good candidates this year. I think it would've been Flores if the Dolphins made the playoffs. McDermott is definitely in the mix, but I'm obliged to give Matt LeFleur some credit, too. Despite what I've said about their record last year, 26-6 is an incredible record for his first two seasons.
I hope Washington allows Taylor Heinicke the opportunity to compete for the starting job in the 2021 season. He had a really good performance against the Bucs. Plus, an incredible play on that 8 yard touchdown run he had!
(this message brought to you by a fellow ODU alum)
Quote from: amroad17 on January 12, 2021, 12:28:44 AM
I hope Washington allows Taylor Heinicke the opportunity to compete for the starting job in the 2021 season. He had a really good performance against the Bucs. Plus, an incredible play on that 8 yard touchdown run he had!
(this message brought to you by a fellow ODU alum)
He should at least be in the running. Smith is injury prone and they got rid of Haskins so unless they draft a QB or trade for one then he might have a shot.
And the coaching carousel continues... With the Jets hiring Saleh and the Jags hiring Urban Meyer, we're down to 5 head coaching vacancies: Chargers, Eagles, Falcons, Lions, and Texans.
Quote from: webny99 on January 15, 2021, 09:07:47 AM
And the coaching carousel continues... With the Jets hiring Saleh and the Jags hiring Urban Meyer, we're down to 5 head coaching vacancies: Chargers, Eagles, Falcons, Lions, and Texans.
Falcons hired Arthur Smith, so make it four.
So the Packers are back in the NFC Championship game. Do you think they can actually win it this time? They have a pretty bad track record in these games.
Quote from: I-39 on January 17, 2021, 09:07:10 AM
So the Packers are back in the NFC Championship game. Do you think they can actually win it this time? They have a pretty bad track record in these games.
Yeah they need to show up. If they lose again again in the Championship round, that fanbase may riot
I have confidence in the Packers, even going up against the only team to soundly beat them this year. Rodgers is on a mission this year, playing the best football of his career. Tampa Bay isn't stopping him this time, not at Lambeau. And the Packers defense is greatly improved since the last time they played as well. Packers win 27-20.
I hope you're right. It's just seems like the NFC Championship game always brings out the flaws in the Packers and they they can almost never win it. They need to make a huge statement on Sunday.
I really want to see Aaron Rodgers win a second Super Bowl.
Packers are very similar to the Saints. Having good teams year after year only to get knocked out in the 1st or 2nd rounds of the playoffs. They can make a big statement and break the narrative if they can win on Sunday against TB
With the conference championships again on the horizon, what were the best AFC/NFC championships of the past decade?
For the AFC, Pats 37/Chiefs 31 (OT) in the 2018-19 playoffs. Don't like the result, but it was undeniably a great game.
For the NFC, Seahawks 28/Packers 22 (OT) in the 2014-15 playoffs. One of the wildest games in NFL history period, much less the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on January 18, 2021, 09:58:26 AM
With the conference championships again on the horizon, what were the best AFC/NFC championships of the past decade?
For the AFC, Pats 37/Chiefs 31 (OT) in the 2018-19 playoffs. Don't like the result, but it was undeniably a great game.
For the NFC, Seahawks 28/Packers 22 (OT) in the 2014-15 playoffs. One of the wildest games in NFL history period, much less the playoffs.
Hey, it looks like we could have a Brady/Mahomes rematch in the Super Bowl this post-season.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on January 18, 2021, 10:19:43 AM
Hey, it looks like we could have a Brady/Mahomes rematch in the Super Bowl this post-season.
Of the four potential Super Bowl matchups, that one is by far my least-favorite.
As a Bears fan, I've been conditioned to strongly dislike the Packers.
As a Notre Dame grad and fan, I've been conditioned to strongly dislike Michigan, including Tom Brady.
I may not even watch the NFC Championship game and will be rooting for the AFC team in the Super Bowl regardless of matchup.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on January 18, 2021, 10:19:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 18, 2021, 09:58:26 AM
With the conference championships again on the horizon, what were the best AFC/NFC championships of the past decade?
For the AFC, Pats 37/Chiefs 31 (OT) in the 2018-19 playoffs. Don't like the result, but it was undeniably a great game.
For the NFC, Seahawks 28/Packers 22 (OT) in the 2014-15 playoffs. One of the wildest games in NFL history period, much less the playoffs.
Hey, it looks like we could have a Brady/Mahomes rematch in the Super Bowl this post-season.
Please no. I'm tired of seeing Brady in the Super Bowl.
Don't let the final score or cries about the fumble touchback rule decieve you: the Browns got dominated by the Chiefs. Think, if Butker makes that extra point and that chip shot FG, now it's 26-17. If KC turns even one of those four FG drives into TDs, now it's 30-17. If Mahomes doesn't get hurt, it's even more than that because they scored on all but one of their drives until Mahomes went down. Baker was not impressive at all, it was checkdown after checkdown all game. Stefanski's defenisve gameplan was not too bad, but on offense, it was terrible. Landry, arguably their best player, had 7 receptions for 20 yards. That's less than 3 yards per catch. Ick.
It was a little sad to see Brees go out on such a disappointing game, but I think that was more about the Tampa defense than it was the Saints "offense" (?). They smothered all of the plays that the Saints did to perfection all year long.
The NFC title game is almost a reverse of what the narrative around Bucs/Saints game was. I would certainly say that Tampa is a better roster than New Orleans, but the Saints won in dominating fashion in the regular season. Tampa crushed the Packers in the regular season despite most agreeing that Green Bay has the better team. So for that reason I am inclined to pick Green Bay, but it's also hard to pick against Brady . . .
Quote from: webny99 on January 18, 2021, 03:39:58 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on January 18, 2021, 10:19:43 AM
Hey, it looks like we could have a Brady/Mahomes rematch in the Super Bowl this post-season.
Of the four potential Super Bowl matchups, that one is by far my least-favorite.
I would love to see Brady/Mahomes in the Super Bowl. Really there's not a bad Super Bowl matchup left. Bucs/Bills would be very lacking in terms of history but it wouldn't be a dull game.
Being a lifelong Packer fan, I hope the Packers do beat the Buccaneers in the NFC Championship Game. But I am highly pessimistic about their chances, given their Week 6 performance in Tampa. As for the AFC Championship game, I expect the Chiefs will get Patrick Mahomes back from concussion protocol and they will defeat the Bills to get back to the Super Bowl for the second straight year. I will hold off on making predictions about who will win the Super Bowl until the current four teams left are narrowed down to two.
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2021, 06:56:30 PM
Don't let the final score or cries about the fumble touchback rule decieve you: the Browns got dominated by the Chiefs.
Well, it was a
minimum six-point swing, and they lost by five, so...
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2021, 07:01:08 PMBucs/Bills would be very lacking in terms of history but it wouldn't be a dull game.
Come on now. Brady and the Bills have almost as much history as Brady and the Bill!
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2021, 06:56:30 PM
Don't let the final score or cries about the fumble touchback rule decieve you:
Not saying that Cleveland deserved to win, but it is a stupid rule. You can lose possession without actually losing possession. In this case it was compounded by the fact that an illegal hit dislodged the ball but that is not reviewable. If the NFL wants to say that only deliberate head to head contact is a penalty and instant replay can't determine intent, I get that, but when head to head contact forces a fumble there ought to be a remedy for that.
Another stupid rule is that a kickoff that is in bounds can be considered out of bounds by being touched by a player who is out of bounds. It's a cheap way to get better field position and needs to be changed.
As long as Pretty Boy Brady gets completely annihilated on Sunday I will be happy, but I would prefer the Bills as a "new face" in the Bowl.
Quote from: Alps on January 19, 2021, 02:08:13 AM
As long as Pretty Boy Brady gets completely annihilated on Sunday I will be happy, but I would prefer the Bills as a "new face" in the Bowl.
You mean an old face, because they lost four in a row from 1991 to '94!
Quote from: Henry on January 19, 2021, 10:22:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 19, 2021, 02:08:13 AM
As long as Pretty Boy Brady gets completely annihilated on Sunday I will be happy, but I would prefer the Bills as a "new face" in the Bowl.
You mean an old face, because they lost four in a row from 1991 to '94!
I put it in quotes for a reason, but they haven't been there in a long time.
A Bills/Bucs superbowl would be epic, whatever the outcome. The Bills would be America's team for the moment, with out of state TV people babbling about chicken wings and lake effect and whatnot. If the Bills vanquish their ancient enemy, it'll be like the Red Sox in 2004. No table would be safe. But if, if, he who shall not be named gets a 7th ring, immediately after leaving the team where he earned his first 6, then we would know 2020 was not quite over.
Two matchups I wouldn't mind seeing for the SB with the 4 teams left
GB/KC: rematch of SB 1
Bills/Bucs: Two random teams that have had droughts making it to the big game
If the Tampa Bay Football Team make it, it'll give the Brady worshippers one more thing to trumpet, as they would become the first team to play in a Super Bowl at their home stadium. (It's bound to happen someday now that the game isn't being held at non-NFL venues in the same metropolitan area, such as the various games played at the Rose Bowl, or Super Bowl XIX at the old Stanford Stadium before it was demolished and rebuilt.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 20, 2021, 09:30:35 AM
If the Tampa Bay Football Team make it, it'll give the Brady worshippers one more thing to trumpet, as they would become the first team to play in a Super Bowl at their home stadium. (It's bound to happen someday now that the game isn't being held at non-NFL venues in the same metropolitan area, such as the various games played at the Rose Bowl, or Super Bowl XIX at the old Stanford Stadium before it was demolished and rebuilt.)
I can only imagine those Vikings fans still lamenting the fact that they never got a chance to play for the Lombardi Trophy in their own building a couple of years back.
Philip Rivers is retiring after 16 seasons with the Chargers and 1 season with the Colts.
The two-minute drill attempt against the Bills in the Wild Card Round is such a fitting way for his NFL career to conclude.
https://www.colts.com/news/retirement-philip-rivers-statement-17-nfl-seasons-san-diego-chargers-2020-season
Don't be surprised if Drew Brees hangs it up too, after the Saints' loss to their division rivals from Tampa Bay. At least he has one Super Bowl ring.
Quote from: Henry on January 21, 2021, 10:38:12 AM
At least he has one Super Bowl ring
. . . that should be heavily tainted by Bountygate but somehow is not, while Brady and Belichick have legacies of cheating over pretty much nothing. To be fair, Bountygate was out of Brees' control (supposedly; wouldn't be surprised if the media purposely left him out of the controversy) and he did get robbed of a more legitimate trip to the SB a few years ago.
As a Vikings fan, I can't really be bothered by the bounty shit as much as we turned it over 5 times in that game along with a slew of other devastating errors. I didn't even want them to change the OT rules just because my team got fucked by them. Our defense didn't stop them in OT.
The Pack will do fine against Tampa if they don't cough the ball up three times. That's the only reason the first game got out of hand.
I'm predicting an State Farm super bowl. ;)
Quote from: thspfc on December 15, 2020, 12:53:01 PM
My top 10 games list so far: (keep in mind that this is entirely subjective to my tastes)
10. 49ers at Patriots, week 7: This might seem like an odd choice, but IMO this game was the real death of the Patriots' two decade dynasty. It was this game that showed us once and for all that the Patriots' reign was over.
9. Browns at Cowboys, week 4: I walked away from the TV when it was 41-14. 20 minutes later I came back and it was 41-38. There was just so much chaos overall in this game - Jarvis Landry throwing a touchdown pass, Browns rushing for 300 yards, Dak Prescott throwing for 500 yards, and the accidental two point conversion. This game wins the "you can't make this stuff up" category.
8. Packers at Saints, week 3: Hall of Fame QB matchups rarely disappoint, and this was no exception. Alvin Kamara had arguably the best performance by any running back in any game this season - in a losing effort.
7. Chiefs at Buccaneers, week 12: See: Hall of Fame QB matchups. Tyreek Hill went crazy in the first quarter, and at that point it looked like a blowout. Brady had a mistake-prone game, especially by his standards, but there were a few vintage Brady moments in the second half.
6. Falcons at Cowboys, week 2: The most predictable unpredictable game ever. That onside kick was one of the only moments in NFL history when basically anyone who knows anything about football could have made a better play than the guys on the field.
5. Chiefs at Raiders, week 11: A classic back and forth shootout.
4. Bills at Cardinals, week 10: Only reason it's not higher is because nobody would have cared if it weren't for the catch by Hopkins.
3. Ravens at Browns, week 14: Had a little bit of everything. Lamar Jackson set the MNF record for rushing yards by a QB. Then, Maker Bayfield magically figured out how to handle adversity, and led the Browns back, only for Justin Tucker to win it with a long field goal.
2. Seahawks at Cardinals, week 7: I didn't watch any of it but I heard it was great.
1. Patriots at Seahawks, week 2: Pretty much what September is supposed to be in the NFL. Deep touchdowns, great performances, and lots of irony. LOTS of irony.
I'm updating and expanding my list, with something of a playoffs bias due to the one and done nature of them:
20. Buccaneers at Falcons, week 15
19. Ravens at Titans, wild card
18. Browns at Cowboys, week 4
17. Cowboys at Giants, week 17
16. Dolphins at Raiders, week 16
15. Packers at Saints, week 3
14. Chiefs at Buccaneers, week 12
13. Falcons at Cowboys, week 2
12. Buccaneers at Saints, divisional
11. Chiefs at Raiders, week 11
10. Bills at Cardinals, week 10
9. Buccaneers at WFT, wild card
8. Colts at Bills, wild card
7. Ravens at Browns, week 14
6. Seahawks at Cardinals, week 7
5. Titans at Texans, week 17
4. Browns at Steelers, wild card
3. Browns at Chiefs, divisional
2. Patriots at Seahawks, week 2
1. Buccaneers at Packers, NFC championship
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2021, 07:42:26 PM
1. Buccaneers at Packers, NFC championship
Other than the Packers coming back to make it a close game, there wasn't anything really exciting to make it a really great game. The only memorable thing to come out of it is Tampa will be the 1st team to host and play in the Superbowl.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2021, 07:50:05 PM
Other than the Packers coming back to make it a close game
I wish they hadn't. Makes the end result all the worse.
Packers probably did deserve to lose, but that PI at the end really shouldn't have been called given the holds the Bucs had gotten away with over the course of that game.
Bucs played like ass in the second half offensively, but GB couldn't do anything with the mistakes. GB's coaching today was similarly rectal with the poor defensive call allowing the Bucs to get the Hail Mary TD and then obviously kicking the field goal down 8 with 3 minutes left.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 24, 2021, 07:55:36 PM
Bucs played like ass in the second half offensively, but GB couldn't do anything with the mistakes. GB's coaching today was similarly rectal with the poor defensive call allowing the Bucs to get the Hail Mary TD and then obviously kicking the field goal down 8 with 3 minutes left.
Everything compounded. First mistake was chasing the points by going for 2 too early, which left them down 8 instead of down 7. Next mistake was Rodgers not running on 3rd and goal. Probably doesn't score but at least gets to a more manageable 4th and goal, where they can go for it (but should have anyway).
If I had a head coaching vacancy, I'd be hiring Todd Bowles.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2021, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 24, 2021, 07:55:36 PM
Bucs played like ass in the second half offensively, but GB couldn't do anything with the mistakes. GB's coaching today was similarly rectal with the poor defensive call allowing the Bucs to get the Hail Mary TD and then obviously kicking the field goal down 8 with 3 minutes left.
Everything compounded. First mistake was chasing the points by going for 2 too early, which left them down 8 instead of down 7. Next mistake was Rodgers not running on 3rd and goal. Probably doesn't score but at least gets to a more manageable 4th and goal, where they can go for it (but should have anyway).
If I had a head coaching vacancy, I'd be hiring Todd Bowles.
He would've definitely been able to run it close if not in. They didn't talk about it on TV but it was a huge missed opportunity.
What ultimately killed the Packers was turnovers. First, the Bucs turned two Packers turnovers into 14 points, but the Packers could only turn 3 Brady picks into 6 points. And they might have as well gone for it on 4th and goal. If they score, they can tie it with a two point conversion. If they don't make it, the Bucs get the ball back and run out the clock, just the same as having kicked the field goal. Might as well take your shot while you can. But there were many missed opportunities. A couple bad calls by the refs when there weren't many didn't help either. They missed a PI call against the Bucs on Lazard on Rodgers' pick, and then called a ticky tack PI on the Packers later in the game. No matter how you look at it though, as often seems to be with the Packers, it was one big case of coulda, woulda, shoulda.
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
I guess will have to cross "no team has ever played the Super Bowl at home" off the list of things that have never happened before. I was just reading that the NFL was planning on not having any team arrive in Tampa until a couple of days before the game, but if half your participants already live there then how does that go? It would seem a little unfair that Tampa Bay could get to train nearby the game while "staying at home" while Kansas City has to train up at their place until a couple of days before. On the bright side, Kansas City is a very good team so that point could be negated.
And what's up with Tampa being in three major championships this past year. They were in the Stanley Cup (and won,) the World Series and now the Super Bowl. I know that having a city like New York or Los Angeles or Boston doing this isn't unheard of but a metropolitan area a bit smaller like Tampa Bay it seems weird. When you include the Miami Heat in the NBA Finals then the state of Florida has been represented in all four of the last major league championships.
The Chiefs don't deserve a second straight Super Bowl, and Tom Brady certainly doesn't deserve a tenth, but such is life. It was over the second I posted that Chiefs-Bucs was my least-favorite matchup. Now I'm left with so much disgust about both teams that I have zero rooting interests, which I guess makes the next few weeks less stressful, if nothing else.
I know there's plenty of disappointed Packers fans on here, but I might be even more disappointed. Who should be more disappointed?
With the Bills, this is the second straight year where they've had a meltdown once they get into unfamiliar territory. Last year it was the Wild Card game, this year they made it past that (the Colts matchup was a trap game if there ever was one...), then got past the divisional round thanks to DC Leslie Frazier's great plan to stop the Ravens. But then as soon as they had to go on the road for the championship, things got off the rails. This is absolutely a team that could win the Super Bowl. I'd say the next step is to win a road playoff game... something they still haven't done this century.
With the Packers, this is now 4 of the past 7 NFC Championships that they've made and lost, which is depressing, but still a positive sign that you can be very good consistently. Again, absolutely a team that could win the Super Bowl. I don't kill the draft pick: There's no way Rodgers has a lights-out MVP campaign and gets you the #1 seed without that pick. It's just weird that they still ended up in the same spot they did last year, although it was a much more even matchup this time around. I'm more perplexed than disappointed, though... is this just bad luck, or do they have a fatal flaw that's being overlooked?
With regards to today's performances specifically, I would point to coaching on the part of both the Bills and Packers. McDermott and LeFleur both had to be expecting potential shootouts, and neither were aggressive enough in key situations.
Quote from: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 10:09:04 PM
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
Well, you can go back to draft night and they opted for luxury over need with their top two picks. That may not have made a difference this year, but maybe for next year. It was a deep receiver draft, and they passed on those; lots of receivers taken after GB's round 1 selection made immediate impacts in 2020. It showed when they played good teams how inadequate MVS and Lazard are as secondary options.
As for the playoffs as a whole, they've been mediocre to good, depending on how you define it. Only 5/12 games finished within one score, but all of the other seven were two-score games, so a notable lack of blowouts.
The Bills own the most lopsided win and the most lopsided loss of the playoffs, with the Ravens and Chiefs games both being decided by 14 points. They also own the closest game of the playoffs with the 3-point win over the Colts. So, a heck of an interesting postseason ride, even if it didn't end how anyone in Western NY wanted it to.
Quote from: tdindy88 on January 24, 2021, 10:24:53 PM
I guess will have to cross "no team has ever played the Super Bowl at home" off the list of things that have never happened before. I was just reading that the NFL was planning on not having any team arrive in Tampa until a couple of days before the game, but if half your participants already live there then how does that go? It would seem a little unfair that Tampa Bay could get to train nearby the game while "staying at home" while Kansas City has to train up at their place until a couple of days before. On the bright side, Kansas City is a very good team so that point could be negated.
And what's up with Tampa being in three major championships this past year. They were in the Stanley Cup (and won,) the World Series and now the Super Bowl. I know that having a city like New York or Los Angeles or Boston doing this isn't unheard of but a metropolitan area a bit smaller like Tampa Bay it seems weird. When you include the Miami Heat in the NBA Finals then the state of Florida has been represented in all four of the last major league championships.
Bear in mind that the Chiefs already played in TB (and won, 27-24) this season. So they're at least familiar with what will be a subdued Super Bowl setting compared with previous years. And it certainly does appear that Florida is being rewarded by being somewhat loose when it comes to COVID-19 restrictions.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2021, 11:00:34 PM
As for the playoffs as a whole, they've been mediocre to good, depending on how you define it. Only 5/12 games finished within one score, but all of the other seven were two-score games, so a notable lack of blowouts.
The Bills own the most lopsided win and the most lopsided loss of the playoffs, with the Ravens and Chiefs games both being decided by 14 points. They also own the closest game of the playoffs with the 3-point win over the Colts. So, a heck of an interesting postseason ride, even if it didn't end how anyone in Western NY wanted it to.
The Bears were behind 21-3 until scoring on the final play of the game, so that was the most lopsided loss even though the final margin was less than 14.
Quote from: brad2971 on January 24, 2021, 11:28:03 PM
...And it certainly does appear that Florida is being rewarded by being somewhat loose when it comes to COVID-19 restrictions.
That is a cruel twist, although I don't know how the Florida teams winning have much to do with COVID. The NHL season was played entirely in Canada. MLB was played without any fans. Football left it up to each team (and their respective jurisdiction's limits) when it came to fans, and the Bucs managed to win 3 games in the playoffs on the road, all mainly in stadiums with opposing fans present.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 25, 2021, 07:08:59 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2021, 11:00:34 PM
As for the playoffs as a whole, they've been mediocre to good, depending on how you define it. Only 5/12 games finished within one score, but all of the other seven were two-score games, so a notable lack of blowouts.
The Bills own the most lopsided win and the most lopsided loss of the playoffs, with the Ravens and Chiefs games both being decided by 14 points. They also own the closest game of the playoffs with the 3-point win over the Colts. So, a heck of an interesting postseason ride, even if it didn't end how anyone in Western NY wanted it to.
The Bears were behind 21-3 until scoring on the final play of the game, so that was the most lopsided loss even though the final margin was less than 14.
Yeah, it should've been 28-3. It definitely felt more like a blowout than the score showed.
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2021, 07:42:26 PM
I'm updating and expanding my list, with something of a playoffs bias due to the one and done nature of them:
...
10. Bills at Cardinals, week 10
9. Buccaneers at WFT, wild card
8. Colts at Bills, wild card
7. Ravens at Browns, week 14
6. Seahawks at Cardinals, week 7
5. Titans at Texans, week 17
4. Browns at Steelers, wild card
3. Browns at Chiefs, divisional
2. Patriots at Seahawks, week 2
1. Buccaneers at Packers, NFC championship
What makes Bucs-Packers #1?
Colts-Bills was the best game of the playoffs so far, and it's not even that close IMO.
Sure, Browns-Steelers was a saucy narrative and a lot of fun, but it wasn't a great game by any stretch.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2021, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 24, 2021, 07:55:36 PM
Bucs played like ass in the second half offensively, but GB couldn't do anything with the mistakes. GB's coaching today was similarly rectal with the poor defensive call allowing the Bucs to get the Hail Mary TD and then obviously kicking the field goal down 8 with 3 minutes left.
Everything compounded. First mistake was chasing the points by going for 2 too early, which left them down 8 instead of down 7. Next mistake was Rodgers not running on 3rd and goal. Probably doesn't score but at least gets to a more manageable 4th and goal, where they can go for it (but should have anyway).
If I had a head coaching vacancy, I'd be hiring Todd Bowles.
Going for two was the right call there IMO. If St. Brown didn't drop it, the Packers would have been down 31-28 and only needing a field goal if they got the ball back. But the defense shot themselves in the foot with jersey grabbing for no reason and walking slowly off the field during substitutions when the Bucs were already at the line of scrimmage. Whine about the refs, but Green Bay didn't deserve to win the game. They played quite badly.
Quote from: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 10:09:04 PM
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
All the clamoring was about them not drafting a WR, but what they really need is a cornerback to replace Kevin King, who was basically the biggest reason they lost the game yesterday on multiple levels.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2021, 09:04:25 AM
Quote from: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 10:09:04 PM
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
All the clamoring was about them not drafting a WR, but what they really need is a cornerback to replace Kevin King, who was basically the biggest reason they lost the game yesterday on multiple levels.
I'm tired of the excuses. The fact is there is always something wrong on one side of the ball or another. I would demand a trade if I were Rodgers at this point.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2021, 09:01:08 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2021, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 24, 2021, 07:55:36 PM
Bucs played like ass in the second half offensively, but GB couldn't do anything with the mistakes. GB's coaching today was similarly rectal with the poor defensive call allowing the Bucs to get the Hail Mary TD and then obviously kicking the field goal down 8 with 3 minutes left.
Everything compounded. First mistake was chasing the points by going for 2 too early, which left them down 8 instead of down 7. Next mistake was Rodgers not running on 3rd and goal. Probably doesn't score but at least gets to a more manageable 4th and goal, where they can go for it (but should have anyway).
If I had a head coaching vacancy, I'd be hiring Todd Bowles.
Going for two was the right call there IMO. If St. Brown didn't drop it, the Packers would have been down 31-28 and only needing a field goal if they got the ball back. But the defense shot themselves in the foot with jersey grabbing for no reason and walking slowly off the field during substitutions when the Bucs were already at the line of scrimmage. Whine about the refs, but Green Bay didn't deserve to win the game. They played quite badly.
Yeah, a lot of bitching today about that call, but that goes with the game. While a lot was made about similar-type calls not being called earlier, this one was such a blatant violation that it really deserved to be called.
Maybe a little more surprising...late in the Bills game, after a QB sack, there were 3 personal fouls against Buffalo and 1 against KC. The refs termed it "Off-setting", and they were gracious in not throwing out 73 or 76 of Buffalo to make sure things didn't get out of hand. That momentarily saved Buffalo, who managed a long FG on the next play.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2021, 10:01:31 AM
Maybe a little more surprising...late in the Bills game, after a QB sack, there were 3 personal fouls against Buffalo and 1 against KC. The refs termed it "Off-setting", and they were gracious in not throwing out 73 or 76 of Buffalo to make sure things didn't get out of hand. That momentarily saved Buffalo, who managed a long FG on the next play.
That was a chaotic sequence. I get their frustration, but everyone, including Allen, needed to be more mature in that situation.
#73 is Dion "Shnowman" Dawkins, probably the Bills' 2nd-most beloved player after Allen.
I see the Packers kept up their playoff narrative :-D
Quote from: tdindy88 on January 24, 2021, 10:24:53 PM
And what's up with Tampa being in three major championships this past year. They were in the Stanley Cup (and won,) the World Series and now the Super Bowl. I know that having a city like New York or Los Angeles or Boston doing this isn't unheard of but a metropolitan area a bit smaller like Tampa Bay it seems weird. When you include the Miami Heat in the NBA Finals then the state of Florida has been represented in all four of the last major league championships.
Philadelphia, in 1980, had all 4 of their teams in the finals (NHL, NBA, World Series, & Super Bowl), though only the Phils won.
Cleveland, in 2016 had the Cavs and the Monsters (AAA level minor league hockey) win championships, and the Indians made the World Series...followed by the Browns going 0-16.
Tampa also had their minor league (tier 2) soccer team advance to the championship game, which unfortunately ended up being cancelled due to a covid outbreak.
Quote from: I-39 on January 25, 2021, 09:12:29 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2021, 09:04:25 AM
Quote from: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 10:09:04 PM
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
All the clamoring was about them not drafting a WR, but what they really need is a cornerback to replace Kevin King, who was basically the biggest reason they lost the game yesterday on multiple levels.
I'm tired of the excuses. The fact is there is always something wrong on one side of the ball or another. I would demand a trade if I were Rodgers at this point.
What teams have the cap space and the right situation for him? Indianapolis perhaps. New England could work - if Rodgers was capable of putting his ego aside for the good of his team, which he is not.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2021, 11:37:08 PM
Quote from: I-39 on January 25, 2021, 09:12:29 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2021, 09:04:25 AM
Quote from: I-39 on January 24, 2021, 10:09:04 PM
The Packers have some serious problems. How can you keep getting this close and failing. There's always something wrong one way or another with the team when they get to the NFC Championship game.
I'm not convinced management really cares about winning. While they have been marginally better in recent years since reassigning Ted Thompson (RIP), they still really haven't been going "all in" on winning and being more aggressive in improving the team. The Jordan Love pick last year tells you all you need to know.
All the clamoring was about them not drafting a WR, but what they really need is a cornerback to replace Kevin King, who was basically the biggest reason they lost the game yesterday on multiple levels.
I'm tired of the excuses. The fact is there is always something wrong on one side of the ball or another. I would demand a trade if I were Rodgers at this point.
What teams have the cap space and the right situation for him? Indianapolis perhaps. New England could work - if Rodgers was capable of putting his ego aside for the good of his team, which he is not.
Neither is Brady.
Will Deshaun Watson end up getting traded? I can't believe it could happen. Buckle up, because pretty much every team could be in the mix except for a handful. My full "Who could use Deshaun Watson?" rankings, excluding the AFC South:
1. 49ers
2. Broncos
3. Bears
4. Patriots
5. Lions (if Stafford goes elsewhere)
6. Washington
7. Jets
8. Panthers
9. Dolphins
10. Saints (if Brees retires)
11. Eagles
12. Giants
13. Rams
14. Cardinals
15. Raiders
16. Browns
17. Vikings
18. Steelers (if Big Ben returns)
19. Falcons
20. Cowboys
21. Bucs
22. Bengals
23. Ravens
24. Seahawks
25. Chargers
26. Packers
27. Bills
28. Chiefs
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 09:14:08 AM
Will Deshaun Watson end up getting traded? I can't believe it could happen. Buckle up, because pretty much every team could be in the mix except for a handful. My full "Who could use Deshaun Watson?" rankings, excluding the AFC South:
1. 49ers
2. Broncos
3. Bears
4. Patriots
5. Lions (if Stafford goes elsewhere)
6. Washington
7. Jets
8. Panthers
9. Dolphins
10. Saints (if Brees retires)
11. Eagles
12. Giants
13. Rams
14. Cardinals
15. Raiders
16. Browns
17. Vikings
18. Steelers (if Big Ben returns)
19. Falcons
20. Cowboys
21. Bucs
22. Bengals
23. Ravens
24. Seahawks
25. Chargers
26. Packers
27. Bills
28. Chiefs
Jets should be much higher on that list. Their coaching/system ruins young quarterbacks. Get someone already established and they've got a shot.
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2021, 05:55:19 PM
Jets should be much higher on that list. Their coaching/system ruins young quarterbacks. Get someone already established and they've got a shot.
My thinking is that Darnold has potential, and I'd be really interested to see what Saleh can do with him. Obviously if he gets traded, they're much higher.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2021, 05:55:19 PM
Jets should be much higher on that list. Their coaching/system ruins young quarterbacks. Get someone already established and they've got a shot.
My thinking is that Darnold has potential, and I'd be really interested to see what Saleh can do with him. Obviously if he gets traded, they're much higher.
Saleh is a defensive coach, so in terms of Darnold's development, he won't be the guy for that.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 26, 2021, 06:38:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2021, 05:55:19 PM
Jets should be much higher on that list. Their coaching/system ruins young quarterbacks. Get someone already established and they've got a shot.
My thinking is that Darnold has potential, and I'd be really interested to see what Saleh can do with him. Obviously if he gets traded, they're much higher.
Saleh is a defensive coach, so in terms of Darnold's development, he won't be the guy for that.
Also, Darnold
had potential before the Jets drafted him. Look at what happened to Mark Sanchez and Geno Smith.
Quote from: US 89 on January 26, 2021, 06:40:07 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 26, 2021, 06:38:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2021, 05:55:19 PM
Jets should be much higher on that list. Their coaching/system ruins young quarterbacks. Get someone already established and they've got a shot.
My thinking is that Darnold has potential, and I'd be really interested to see what Saleh can do with him. Obviously if he gets traded, they're much higher.
Saleh is a defensive coach, so in terms of Darnold's development, he won't be the guy for that.
Also, Darnold had potential before the Jets drafted him. Look at what happened to Mark Sanchez and Geno Smith.
There's no denying the unending QB problems the Jets have had, but I think Saleh was a great hire for head coach. That's not everything, but it's a monster step in the right direction. (It would be Mike LeFleur working directly with Darnold, obviously).
I think it's now accurate to say that Rodgers is a great regular season qb. But in the post season however he is garbage. He is now 1-4 in NFC championship games and his one and only win came against a Bears team with Caleb Haney at qb. That isn't saying much. Two of those losses were blowouts against the Falcons and 49ers.
Quote from: dvferyance on January 28, 2021, 01:18:31 PM
I think it's now accurate to say that Rodgers is a great regular season qb. But in the post season however he is garbage. He is now 1-4 in NFC championship games and his one and only win came against a Bears team with Caleb Haney at qb. That isn't saying much. Two of those losses were blowouts against the Falcons and 49ers.
There was a weird stat going around about Rodgers this week... something like he's never come back from down more than a point against a team with a winning record? Crazy if true.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 09:14:08 AM
Will Deshaun Watson end up getting traded? I can't believe it could happen.
So sick of the Watson drama. Seriously - you can't tell me that a WIDE RECEIVERS coach for the 32ND RANKED PASSING OFFENSE is a good hire. But he's being a little whiner by not doing simple basic respect acts like returning calls from the team. My wild guess is that the organization isn't going to be interested in giving him what he wants if he can't show them the tiniest ounce of respect. Watson is going nowhere and he is going to continue to get credit for putting up good stats en route to bad playoffs-less seasons (while guys like Dak Prescott get heavily scrutinized - remember when Dak was breaking all kinds of records during the Cowboys' 1-3 start? People were ripping him), just so that the media can keep painting the picture of the Texans organization being the bad guys.
It's unbelievable that a top-5 QB coming off a statistically great season finished with a 4-12 record. What has the Texans organization done to earn Watson's respect? Nothing. Of course there's media hype because it this is unlike anything that's ever happened in NFL history, but it couldn't be more obvious that the organization is at fault. You simply cannot ever, ever let things get to this point with your franchise QB.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2021, 10:50:48 PM
It's unbelievable that a top-5 QB coming off a statistically great season finished with a 4-12 record. What has the Texans organization done to earn Watson's respect? Nothing. Of course there's media hype because it this is unlike anything that's ever happened in NFL history, but it couldn't be more obvious that the organization is at fault. You simply cannot ever, ever let things get to this point with your franchise QB.
Outside the "Love ya Blue" Houston Oilers of the late '70s, what happened with DeShaun Watson is typical Houston NFL behavior. I don't blame DeShaun for wanting out.
Considering both Bob McNair (Texans) and Bud Adams (Oilers) were veterans of the oil&gas business, maybe oil&gas ownership should be considered a red flag. Compare that with the Fertitta brothers owning the successful Houston Rockets and Jim Crane owning the Houston Astros, neither of whom are that heavily involved in Houston's hometown big industry.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2021, 10:50:48 PM
It's unbelievable that a top-5 QB coming off a statistically great season finished with a 4-12 record. What has the Texans organization done to earn Watson's respect? Nothing. Of course there's media hype because it this is unlike anything that's ever happened in NFL history, but it couldn't be more obvious that the organization is at fault. You simply cannot ever, ever let things get to this point with your franchise QB.
The only thing they did wrong was not hand the keys of the organization to Watson. How dare them hire a GM by themselves, rather than let their young quarterback do it for them? Players should never, ever have final say over management descisions off the field. Then, Watson tried to manipulate the franchise into hiring his head coaching pick. In doing so, instead of trying to have a real conversation (he stopped returning calls), he threatened to force his way out. And I'll reiterate. Brady and Mahomes are often highly praised for their W/L records. Prescott gets knocked for putting up good stats but mediocre W/L records. The Texans went 4-12. Yet Watson is catching no blame for any of it. This is a huge clown show on the part of Watson and the media. Whether or not wins are truly a QB stat is beyond the point. Let's just enforce the rules equally please.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2021, 11:03:20 AM
The only thing they did wrong was not hand the keys of the organization to Watson. How dare them hire a GM by themselves, rather than let their young quarterback do it for them? Players should never, ever have final say over management descisions off the field. Then, Watson tried to manipulate the franchise into hiring his head coaching pick. In doing so, instead of trying to have a real conversation (he stopped returning calls), he threatened to force his way out. And I'll reiterate. Brady and Mahomes are often highly praised for their W/L records. Prescott gets knocked for putting up good stats but mediocre W/L records. The Texans went 4-12. Yet Watson is catching no blame for any of it. This is a huge clown show on the part of Watson and the media. Whether or not wins are truly a QB stat is beyond the point. Let's just enforce the rules equally please.
Of course Watson isn't going to have final say in management decisions. He just wanted to be in the conversation for the head coach hire, which is 100% fair. Again, you expect a clown show from the media because it's an unprecedented situation, but the organization created the situation in the first place. Things like this do not happen in competent organizations, period. How could you blame Watson for having enough of it?
Also, why on Earth would he catch blame for their record? He should be
credited for their record, because they're 0-16 without him.
I blame a lot of the 4-12 record on the past mistakes of the coaching staff, particularly Bill O'Brien and Cal McNair. Years before O'Brien was fired, many other Texans fans I knew already wanted him out during the Osweiler fiasco. Webny, you're very right that Watson was all keeping the team from being 0-16, every position is garbage other than kicker, linebacker, and quarterback. I'm just not really a fan of the Texans much anymore because of their management. I really hope Watson and Watt excel with a different team.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2021, 11:35:24 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2021, 11:03:20 AM
The only thing they did wrong was not hand the keys of the organization to Watson. How dare them hire a GM by themselves, rather than let their young quarterback do it for them? Players should never, ever have final say over management descisions off the field. Then, Watson tried to manipulate the franchise into hiring his head coaching pick. In doing so, instead of trying to have a real conversation (he stopped returning calls), he threatened to force his way out. And I'll reiterate. Brady and Mahomes are often highly praised for their W/L records. Prescott gets knocked for putting up good stats but mediocre W/L records. The Texans went 4-12. Yet Watson is catching no blame for any of it. This is a huge clown show on the part of Watson and the media. Whether or not wins are truly a QB stat is beyond the point. Let's just enforce the rules equally please.
Of course Watson isn't going to have final say in management decisions. He just wanted to be in the conversation for the head coach hire, which is 100% fair. Again, you expect a clown show from the media because it's an unprecedented situation, but the organization created the situation in the first place. Things like this do not happen in competent organizations, period. How could you blame Watson for having enough of it?
Also, why on Earth would he catch blame for their record? He should be credited for their record, because they're 0-16 without him.
I don't blame him for wanting out. I blame him for acting immature by not giving them the time of day.
And I guess we're now giving credit to QBs for 4-12 records. I think this fiasco has broken the NFL and its media
Whoa. Matthew Stafford to the Rams and Jared Goff (plus some draft picks) to the Lions.
https://www.nfl.com/news/silver-jared-goff-excited-to-be-with-lions-franchise-that-wants-appreciates-him?campaign=Twitter_atn
^^ The draft picks are two 1sts and a 3rd
There have only been three of the past 20 seasons that none of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, or Ben Roethisberger started in the Super Bowl.
XXXVII: Brad Johnson vs Rich Gannon
XLVII: Joe Flacco vs Colin Kapernick
LIV: Patrick Mahomes vs Jimmy Garropolo
So the last Super Bowl to be played before the whole Brady/Manning/Big Ben madness started would be XXXV, when Trent Dilfer faced off against Kerry Collins.
Brady has faced Kurt Warner, Jake Delhomme, Donovan McNabb, Eli Manning* (twice), Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, Nick Foles*, Jared Goff and Patrick Mahomes (TBD)
Manning has faced Jay Cutler, Drew Brees*, Russell Wilson* and Cam Newton
Big Ben has faced Matt Hasselbeck, Kurt Warner and Aaron Rodgers*
*--indicates that they lost against their opposing QB
Quote from: Henry on February 02, 2021, 11:10:49 AM
So the last Super Bowl to be played before the whole Brady/Manning/Big Ben madness started would be XXXV, when Trent Dilfer faced off against Kerry Collins.
Brady has faced Kurt Warner, Jake Delhomme, Donovan McNabb, Eli Manning* (twice), Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, Nick Foles*, Jared Goff and Patrick Mahomes (TBD)
Manning has faced Jay Cutler"Rex Grossman is our quarterback", Drew Brees*, Russell Wilson* and Cam Newton
Big Ben has faced Matt Hasselbeck, Kurt Warner and Aaron Rodgers*
*--indicates that they lost against their opposing QB
Honestly, I really don't see any competition to the Bucs in the NFC for next season. Packers and Seahawks always screw up in the playoffs. Rams maybe, but that's it. I would not be surprised at all to see the Bucs back in the Super Bowl next year regardless of this year's result. In fact, I'm more confident about the Bucs being in next year's Super Bowl than I am about the Chiefs doing the same. Chiefs have real competition - Bills and Browns most notably, and there are a host of others like the Ravens, Titans, Colts, and Dolphins.
Quote from: thspfc on February 02, 2021, 04:28:04 PM
Honestly, I really don't see any competition to the Bucs in the NFC for next season. Packers and Seahawks always screw up in the playoffs. Rams maybe, but that's it. I would not be surprised at all to see the Bucs back in the Super Bowl next year regardless of this year's result. In fact, I'm more confident about the Bucs being in next year's Super Bowl than I am about the Chiefs doing the same. Chiefs have real competition - Bills and Browns most notably, and there are a host of others like the Ravens, Titans, Colts, and Dolphins.
I've said this before and I'll say it again--the NFL really needs to drop the Conferences and operate as a single, 8-division league. Get better teams in the playoffs and better matchups in the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on February 02, 2021, 04:28:04 PM
Honestly, I really don't see any competition to the Bucs in the NFC for next season. Packers and Seahawks always screw up in the playoffs. Rams maybe, but that's it. I would not be surprised at all to see the Bucs back in the Super Bowl next year regardless of this year's result. In fact, I'm more confident about the Bucs being in next year's Super Bowl than I am about the Chiefs doing the same. Chiefs have real competition - Bills and Browns most notably, and there are a host of others like the Ravens, Titans, Colts, and Dolphins.
The Rams sure better be in the mix. They need to make the Super Bowl or the Goff trade is basically a disaster IMO. I think it's a distasteful trade on their part and strongly suspect the Lions will be viewed as the winners of the trade in the long term.
And don't forget the Niners. They could easily make the Super Bowl with an upgrade at QB and maybe even without one, as they did last year. It's underrated how close they were to 16-0 last year, with their three losses being a last-second Falcons TD, a last-second Ravens FG, and in overtime against the Seahawks.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 04:39:29 PM
I've said this before and I'll say it again--the NFL really needs to drop the Conferences and operate as a single, 8-division league. Get better teams in the playoffs and better matchups in the playoffs.
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
Best 8 teams make the playoffs, single elimination.
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 04:39:29 PM
I've said this before and I'll say it again--the NFL really needs to drop the Conferences and operate as a single, 8-division league. Get better teams in the playoffs and better matchups in the playoffs.
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
Eight division winners seeded 1-8 and six wildcards seeded 9-14 all in a single tournament. This year, you would have had (1) Kansas City and (2) Buffalo receiving byes, with first round matchups of (3) Green Bay vs (14) Miami, (4) Pittsburgh vs (13) LA Rams, (5) New Orleans vs (12) Indianapolis, (6) Seattle vs (11) Cleveland, (7) Tennessee vs (10) Tampa Bay, and (8) Washington vs (9) Baltimore
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 09:32:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 04:39:29 PM
I've said this before and I'll say it again--the NFL really needs to drop the Conferences and operate as a single, 8-division league. Get better teams in the playoffs and better matchups in the playoffs.
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
Eight division winners seeded 1-8 and six wildcards seeded 9-14 all in a single tournament. This year, you would have had (1) Kansas City and (2) Buffalo receiving byes, with first round matchups of (3) Green Bay vs (14) Miami, (4) Pittsburgh vs (13) LA Rams, (5) New Orleans vs (12) Indianapolis, (6) Seattle vs (11) Cleveland, (7) Tennessee vs (10) Tampa Bay, and (8) Washington vs (9) Baltimore
Why not eliminate divisions, too? Have it strictly based on record.
And 14 teams is too many for the playoffs. If each playoff round halves the number of teams, why does it take 16 games to go from 32 to 14, which is only barely more than halving?
Quote from: 1 on February 02, 2021, 09:41:56 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 09:32:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 04:39:29 PM
I've said this before and I'll say it again--the NFL really needs to drop the Conferences and operate as a single, 8-division league. Get better teams in the playoffs and better matchups in the playoffs.
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
Eight division winners seeded 1-8 and six wildcards seeded 9-14 all in a single tournament. This year, you would have had (1) Kansas City and (2) Buffalo receiving byes, with first round matchups of (3) Green Bay vs (14) Miami, (4) Pittsburgh vs (13) LA Rams, (5) New Orleans vs (12) Indianapolis, (6) Seattle vs (11) Cleveland, (7) Tennessee vs (10) Tampa Bay, and (8) Washington vs (9) Baltimore
Why not eliminate divisions, too? Have it strictly based on record.
And 14 teams is too many for the playoffs. If each playoff round halves the number of teams, why does it take 16 games to go from 32 to 14, which is only barely more than halving?
Divisions will never go away because division rivals aren't going to give up playing each other twice a year.
Every sport has too many playoff teams. It's an inevitable byproduct of sports on TV.
Expanding the playoffs beyond a certain point is never a good idea from a pure competitive standpoint. It reduces the incentive for teams to truly get better.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 09:32:37 PM
Eight division winners seeded 1-8 and six wildcards seeded 9-14 all in a single tournament. This year, you would have had (1) Kansas City and (2) Buffalo receiving byes, with first round matchups of (3) Green Bay vs (14) Miami, (4) Pittsburgh vs (13) LA Rams, (5) New Orleans vs (12) Indianapolis, (6) Seattle vs (11) Cleveland, (7) Tennessee vs (10) Tampa Bay, and (8) Washington vs (9) Baltimore
Interesting. It looks even more chaotic than what we have now, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Coincidentally, the way it worked out every single matchup is an AFC-NFC matchup thanks to an 8-6 split in favor of the AFC and the two byes going to the AFC.
(Just out of curiousity, I'm assuming you used the normal tiebreakers to determine that Buffalo got the bye over Green Bay? Just looking at it quickly I'm actually coming up with Green Bay winning based on strength of victory, given that conference record is obsolete in this scenario.)
Quote from: 1 on February 02, 2021, 09:41:56 PM
And 14 teams is too many for the playoffs. If each playoff round halves the number of teams, why does it take 16 games to go from 32 to 14, which is only barely more than halving?
14 is actually
less than the other major leagues have, and they play more regular season games.
I thought the expanded playoffs this year made for a crazier Week 17 and a better wild-card weekend. Colts-Bills, one of the extra games, was arguably the best of the weekend. Also, the fact that the #2 seeds had to play set up a more interesting divisional round where you couldn't just assume the #1 and #2 seeds would roll over their opponents and into the championships.
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 10:15:42 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 02, 2021, 09:32:37 PM
Eight division winners seeded 1-8 and six wildcards seeded 9-14 all in a single tournament. This year, you would have had (1) Kansas City and (2) Buffalo receiving byes, with first round matchups of (3) Green Bay vs (14) Miami, (4) Pittsburgh vs (13) LA Rams, (5) New Orleans vs (12) Indianapolis, (6) Seattle vs (11) Cleveland, (7) Tennessee vs (10) Tampa Bay, and (8) Washington vs (9) Baltimore
Interesting. It looks even more chaotic than what we have now, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Coincidentally, the way it worked out every single matchup is an AFC-NFC matchup thanks to an 8-6 split in favor of the AFC and the two byes going to the AFC.
(Just out of curiousity, I'm assuming you used the normal tiebreakers to determine that Buffalo got the bye over Green Bay? Just looking at it quickly I'm actually coming up with Green Bay winning based on strength of victory, given that conference record is obsolete in this scenario.)
Yes, conference record tiebreaker would go away. I thought I was looking at the SOV column but I may have been looking at the SOS column, so some of the matchups could change.
The only change I would make is restructuring the playoffs for both conferences. Using this year's calendar:
1/10: Play-ins round: WC #2 (6 seed) vs WC #3 (7 seed)
1/16 and 1/17: Wild Card round: DIV #3 (3 seed) vs winner of Wild Card
DIV #4 (4 seed) vs WC #1 (5 seed)
1/23 and 1/24: Divisional round: DIV #1 (1 seed) vs lowest remaining seed
DIV #2 (2 seed) vs second lowest remaining seed
1/31: Conference championships: Divisional round winner vs divisional round winner
This would give the #1 and #2 seeds two-week byes and the #3-5 seeds one-week byes.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 03, 2021, 07:25:24 AM
I thought I was looking at the SOV column but I may have been looking at the SOS column, so some of the matchups could change.
Ah, OK. Buffalo definitely owns that one. They had one of the toughest schedules, so tough that many people thought they could get much better as a team and still struggle to match their 10-6 record from 2019.
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
....
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
FWIW, the NHL isn't using conferences during the current season. The top four teams in each division make the playoffs and the #1 seed plays #4 and #2 plays #3, with the winners of those matchups meeting in the second round (just like it was back in the 1980s). The four teams that emerge from that (qualifying for the round normally known as the "Conference Finals" but this year called the "Stanley Cup Semifinals") will be seeded 1—4 based on regular-season record and will be matched up based on that, with the winners advancing to the Stanley Cup Finals. Naturally, some commentators like the theoretical prospect for some Original Six matchups in the Finals that wouldn't be possible in a standard year–Montreal v. Boston or Toronto v. the Rangers, for example.
That system probably works better for a league aligned like the NHL is, though, with only four divisions with either seven or eight teams each. The NFL's eight-division setup makes it less practical. The NHL a also has a long history of too many teams in the playoffs. But my point isn't whether it's an ideal idea–I'm just pointing out that a "no-conferences" system is being used somewhere.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 04, 2021, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
....
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
FWIW, the NHL isn't using conferences during the current season. The top four teams in each division make the playoffs and the #1 seed plays #4 and #2 plays #3, with the winners of those matchups meeting in the second round (just like it was back in the 1980s). The four teams that emerge from that (qualifying for the round normally known as the "Conference Finals" but this year called the "Stanley Cup Semifinals") will be seeded 1—4 based on regular-season record and will be matched up based on that, with the winners advancing to the Stanley Cup Finals. Naturally, some commentators like the theoretical prospect for some Original Six matchups in the Finals that wouldn't be possible in a standard year–Montreal v. Boston or Toronto v. the Rangers, for example.
That system probably works better for a league aligned like the NHL is, though, with only four divisions with either seven or eight teams each. The NFL's eight-division setup makes it less practical. The NHL a also has a long history of too many teams in the playoffs. But my point isn't whether it's an ideal idea–I'm just pointing out that a "no-conferences" system is being used somewhere.
This is a byproduct of temporarily realigned conferences due to restrictions with US-Canada travel. The 2021 playoff format makes it so only 1 Canadian team will cross into the US. in other leagues the Toronto teams have moved to the US for the year (Raptors to Tampa, Blue Jays to Buffalo), but moving 7 NHL franchises is much harder. Also, in this format the semifinals and finals are going to be the only times any of those teams played each other (compared to 8+ times during the regular season).
Bucs 35, Chiefs 24
Quote from: I-55 on February 04, 2021, 04:47:00 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 04, 2021, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 02, 2021, 09:02:00 PM
....
How would the playoffs be structured with no conferences?
FWIW, the NHL isn't using conferences during the current season. The top four teams in each division make the playoffs and the #1 seed plays #4 and #2 plays #3, with the winners of those matchups meeting in the second round (just like it was back in the 1980s). The four teams that emerge from that (qualifying for the round normally known as the "Conference Finals" but this year called the "Stanley Cup Semifinals") will be seeded 1—4 based on regular-season record and will be matched up based on that, with the winners advancing to the Stanley Cup Finals. Naturally, some commentators like the theoretical prospect for some Original Six matchups in the Finals that wouldn't be possible in a standard year–Montreal v. Boston or Toronto v. the Rangers, for example.
That system probably works better for a league aligned like the NHL is, though, with only four divisions with either seven or eight teams each. The NFL's eight-division setup makes it less practical. The NHL a also has a long history of too many teams in the playoffs. But my point isn't whether it's an ideal idea–I'm just pointing out that a "no-conferences" system is being used somewhere.
This is a byproduct of temporarily realigned conferences due to restrictions with US-Canada travel. The 2021 playoff format makes it so only 1 Canadian team will cross into the US. in other leagues the Toronto teams have moved to the US for the year (Raptors to Tampa, Blue Jays to Buffalo), but moving 7 NHL franchises is much harder. Also, in this format the semifinals and finals are going to be the only times any of those teams played each other (compared to 8+ times during the regular season).
All of that is true, but it has nothing to do with the point I was making. webny99 asked about how you'd structure playoffs with no conferences and I cited this NHL season as an example. The reason why the NHL is doing it wasn't relevant to his question, so I didn't mention it.
With the Super Bowl again on the horizon, what have been the best Super Bowls of this century so far?
I'm no Pats fan, but it's tough to deny that they've been involved with some all-time great Super Bowls. In fact, it's pretty tough to come up with an answer for the best that didn't involve the Patriots. IMO it's either Pats-Falcons (2017), Pats-Seahawks (2015), or Pats-Giants (2008).
For those of you that enjoy the commercials, FiveThirtyEight has some fun analysis, including a look back at past commercials, here:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/super-bowl-ads/
Pats-Seahawks 2015 is probably one of my all time favorites with the 28-3 SB a close 2nd. Last years was pretty good
My prediction this year: the winner will legitimately be in dispute because of a borderline bad call.
Quote from: ET21 on February 06, 2021, 07:35:54 PM
Pats-Seahawks 2015 is probably one of my all time favorites with the 28-3 SB a close 2nd.
I agree. Pats-Seahawks was one for the ages. It's not as famous as 28-3 (case in point, we all know what 28-3 is without even mentioning any context), but it was better in terms of being a great game from start to finish. You knew it had the makings of something special when the Seahawks scored a late TD to tie it up at 14-14 going into halftime.
Quote from: ET21 on February 06, 2021, 07:35:54 PM
Pats-Seahawks 2015 is probably one of my all time favorites with the 28-3 SB a close 2nd. Last years was pretty good
My top two are Eagles/Pats and 28-3.
I watched the NFL Honors program last night. Toward the end, Peyton Manning's Hall of Fame election was announced. That announcement was preceded by one of his insurance commercials. And the announcement itself showed the Hall of Fame representative walking in on what looked like the filming of yet another commercial, to tell Manning the good news. Nice touches.
Go Bucs
NFL writer and Around the NFL Podcast legend Chris Wesseling has passed away at the age of 46 after battling cancer for several years.
Devestating. :-(
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-com-writer-podcaster-chris-wesseling-dies-at-age-46#
Quote from: 1 on February 06, 2021, 08:03:54 PM
My prediction this year: the winner will legitimately be in dispute because of a borderline bad call.
Well, we don't know yet if the winner will be in dispute because of it, but ... there has definitely been some bad calls.
(edited to fix typo)
I'm only watching the SB up to half this year. As of that point, the Bucc's best player is the yellow flag. :banghead:
and buccs win with KC only scoring field goals.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 07, 2021, 10:17:59 PM
and buccs win with KC only scoring field goals.
31-9, to be exact. The first and only blowout of the playoffs. The first and only multi-score loss of Mahomes' career. If you didn't see it coming, welcome to the NFL.
Tampa just plain out played and out coached Kansas City in every facet of the game. Those penalties through the game were for the most part pretty glaring because Tampa was having their way the entire time.
Hearing fireworks outside after the Bucs shellacking of the Chiefs.
Surprised at how one sided the game was, but maybe not as much with how many flags the refs threw.
And Florida Man even made an appearance.
Next NFL news will be the Carson Wentz trade.
Quote from: Alex on February 07, 2021, 10:30:16 PM
Surprised at how one sided the game was, but maybe not as much with how many flags the refs threw.
I don't dispute that some of those calls were bad, but I don't think they changed the outcome of the game one bit. The Chiefs were simply outmatched at all levels tonight.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 07, 2021, 09:07:08 PM
I'm only watching the SB up to half this year. As of that point, the Bucc's best player is the yellow flag. :banghead:
Yeah, but they were all pretty much justified.
What a performance by the tampa bay defense
Apparent explanation regarding the halftime gimp mask thing:
https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2021/2/7/22271742/super-bowl-2021-halftime-show-the-weeknd-white-masks-explained?fbclid=IwAR29fIOVSwYhOPqayX4NQeRQaH3lgYZZ3qhJbHw6ce-e4BCN9MicQo0Jo4Q
I've already heard it called "trendy V for Vendetta."
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2021, 10:24:23 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 07, 2021, 10:17:59 PM
and buccs win with KC only scoring field goals.
31-9, to be exact. The first and only blowout of the playoffs. The first and only multi-score loss of Mahomes' career. If you didn't see it coming, welcome to the NFL.
Meh, I'd call the AFC title game pretty much a blowout. Buffalo was no match for KC after getting the 9-spot.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 07, 2021, 10:51:27 PM
Meh, I'd call the AFC title game pretty much a blowout. Buffalo was no match for KC after getting the 9-spot.
I call a blowout 17 or more points (at least 3 scores).
Yes, the Bills were outclassed (which made the SB very satisfying), but it was not on the same level. The Bills were ineffective in the red zone and had two terrible, mind-boggling FG's. If they convert both of those, it's a one-score game at the end. Even without that, they still had 6 scoring drives and scored 24 points and 2 TD's. Both were complete team losses, but the Chiefs was worse.
She said "crack."
Tom Brady wins again....... yawn.
Didn't watch a second of the game.
Top to bottom the Bucs are the best team in the league. They don't have the best player at any one position, but they are extremely deep and have quality players everywhere. They are a worthy Super Bowl champion. The unsung heroes are their GM and scouting department. They've gotten great players through the draft like Evans, David, Barrett, Winfield, Godwin, Wirfs, I could go on, and they've also made smart free agent signings like Gronk, Fournette, AB, and of course Brady. Tampa will be back in this game a year from now, they have no real competition in the NFC.
Quote from: I-39 on February 07, 2021, 11:22:37 PM
Tom Brady wins again....... yawn.
Didn't watch a second of the game.
They should do like Jeopardy! used to do and make it so that after you win so many times you get automatically replaced by someone new.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 07, 2021, 10:42:13 PM
What a performance by the tampa bay defense
Yes, but one thing that I wasn't aware of until just before kickoff was that both of KC's starting OTs were out with injuries. If I'd known that, I could have told you Tampa's defense would dominate the game. You can't beat a good defense with two starting linemen out.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 08, 2021, 07:20:03 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 07, 2021, 10:42:13 PM
What a performance by the tampa bay defense
Yes, but one thing that I wasn't aware of until just before kickoff was that both of KC's starting OTs were out with injuries. If I'd known that, I could have told you Tampa's defense would dominate the game. You can't beat a good defense with two starting linemen out.
The blame is unfortunately going to bypass Mahomes and Reid entirely. I get that the Tampa defense was on top of their game, but Reid failed to adjust his gameplan and Mahomes repeatedly missed open throws or threw into triple coverage. Sadly, Mahomes is the new golden boy and he's going to get treated as such by the media.
Goat
Quote from: thspfc on February 08, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 08, 2021, 07:20:03 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 07, 2021, 10:42:13 PM
What a performance by the tampa bay defense
Yes, but one thing that I wasn't aware of until just before kickoff was that both of KC's starting OTs were out with injuries. If I'd known that, I could have told you Tampa's defense would dominate the game. You can't beat a good defense with two starting linemen out.
The blame is unfortunately going to bypass Mahomes and Reid entirely. I get that the Tampa defense was on top of their game, but Reid failed to adjust his gameplan and Mahomes repeatedly missed open throws or threw into triple coverage. Sadly, Mahomes is the new golden boy and he's going to get treated as such by the media.
That's what Reid did best when he was in Philly...fail to adjust.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 07, 2021, 10:28:29 PM
Tampa just plain out played and out coached Kansas City in every facet of the game.
As a non-fan...
When I read predictions of a high-scoring game, I expected it to be an offense-driven game with weak defense.
Instead, what I saw was that Tampa Bay played solid defense the entire game. And Kansas City had good defense for... umm, about the first four minutes? and then stopped.
Kansas City as a team failed miserably. However, some of those passes by Mahomes were incredible–if only they had been caught. There was more than one occasion when it looked hopeless for Mahomes, with no way out, and yet he somehow managed to throw a great pass. And then the receiver didn't catch it.
Le sigh...well, at least New England wasn't in it this time!
Quote from: thspfc on February 08, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
The blame is unfortunately going to bypass Mahomes and Reid entirely. I get that the Tampa defense was on top of their game, but Reid failed to adjust his gameplan and Mahomes repeatedly missed open throws or threw into triple coverage. Sadly, Mahomes is the new golden boy and he's going to get treated as such by the media.
Yes, Mahomes and Reid should get *some* blame, but ultimately, it was the O-line issues that were too much to overcome. Mahomes was pressured on 52% of dropbacks, the most in Super Bowl history. He was on the run all night.
Quote from: kphoger on February 08, 2021, 10:51:36 AM
When I read predictions of a high-scoring game, I expected it to be an offense-driven game with weak defense.
Upthread,
cabiness42 mentioned not knowing about the Chiefs' O-line issues until right before kickoff. But everyone that follows this stuff closely, including everyone in the media, knew all along and simply believed that Mahomes would overcome it. It's not that there was disrespect for the Bucs' defense, but people thought the Chiefs offense was so good that it wouldn't matter, hence the predictions for a high-scoring, shootout game.
In the end, it was a much greater mismatch than anyone could have predicted.
Quote from: I-39 on February 07, 2021, 11:22:37 PM
Tom Brady wins again....... yawn.
Didn't watch a second of the game.
You know, I don't like TB because of the deflategate and the incident of Brady deciding to deflate the balls in the NFC title game in 2015. :pan:
But this game, (yawn) was a game that never existed. No one will outsmart Brady, and every other year this happens. 2019, 2017, 2015...
Congrats Arians for the win. But that TD by Gronk, was not. :clap: :clap: :popcorn:
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2021, 11:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 08, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
The blame is unfortunately going to bypass Mahomes and Reid entirely. I get that the Tampa defense was on top of their game, but Reid failed to adjust his gameplan and Mahomes repeatedly missed open throws or threw into triple coverage. Sadly, Mahomes is the new golden boy and he's going to get treated as such by the media.
Yes, Mahomes and Reid should get *some* blame, but ultimately, it was the O-line issues that were too much to overcome. Mahomes was pressured on 52% of dropbacks, the most in Super Bowl history. He was on the run all night.
Quote from: kphoger on February 08, 2021, 10:51:36 AM
When I read predictions of a high-scoring game, I expected it to be an offense-driven game with weak defense.
Upthread, cabiness42 mentioned not knowing about the Chiefs' O-line issues until right before kickoff. But everyone that follows this stuff closely, including everyone in the media, knew all along and simply believed that Mahomes would overcome it. It's not that there was disrespect for the Bucs' defense, but people thought the Chiefs offense was so good that it wouldn't matter, hence the predictions for a high-scoring, shootout game.
In the end, it was a much greater mismatch than anyone could have predicted.
One word. 🐐
Quote from: snowc on February 08, 2021, 11:06:20 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2021, 11:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 08, 2021, 08:51:57 AM
The blame is unfortunately going to bypass Mahomes and Reid entirely. I get that the Tampa defense was on top of their game, but Reid failed to adjust his gameplan and Mahomes repeatedly missed open throws or threw into triple coverage. Sadly, Mahomes is the new golden boy and he's going to get treated as such by the media.
Yes, Mahomes and Reid should get *some* blame, but ultimately, it was the O-line issues that were too much to overcome. Mahomes was pressured on 52% of dropbacks, the most in Super Bowl history. He was on the run all night.
Quote from: kphoger on February 08, 2021, 10:51:36 AM
When I read predictions of a high-scoring game, I expected it to be an offense-driven game with weak defense.
Upthread, cabiness42 mentioned not knowing about the Chiefs' O-line issues until right before kickoff. But everyone that follows this stuff closely, including everyone in the media, knew all along and simply believed that Mahomes would overcome it. It's not that there was disrespect for the Bucs' defense, but people thought the Chiefs offense was so good that it wouldn't matter, hence the predictions for a high-scoring, shootout game.
In the end, it was a much greater mismatch than anyone could have predicted.
One word. 🐐
I think that's a good note to retire this 32-page thread on. Rest in peace, 2020 NFL season
Quote from: thspfc on February 10, 2021, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: snowc on February 08, 2021, 11:06:20 AM
One word. 🐐
I think that's a good note to retire this 32-page thread on. Rest in peace, 2020 NFL season
Yeah, I was just noticing that, as of the 🐐 post, this thread has surpassed BASE-BALL and is now the third-longest sports thread of all time.
I can't think of any reason not to keep it going for 2021, so I've updated the title to
NFL (2021 Season).
With Super Bowl 55 now in the books, my posts that follow will be (1) a review of all the questions I outlined in the OP, and (2) a spin forward to the year to come.
Here's a review of my questions for the 2020 season, as outlined in the
OP (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.0):
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Can teams that had unexpected success this year replicate that next year? (SF 49ers, Buffalo Bills, Tennessee Titans...)
Not much ambiguity here! A solid No for the 49ers, a solid Yes for the Titans, and an even more solid Yes for the Bills.
The 49ers suffered one crushing injury after another on both sides of the ball to finish 6-10, and, with a roster ready to contend, their QB situation remains unclear heading into the offseason. Meanwhile, the Titans pulled out several close wins with their high-powered offense to finally improve on their 9-7 record of the past
four years and win the division for the first time since 2008. Despite the offense struggling in the Wild Card playoffs, improving the defense is the logical step towards sustained success.
The Bills were perhaps one of the most improved teams of the season despite their defensive regression thanks to Josh Allen's third-year growth and the offseason acquisition of Stefon Diggs (perhaps the greatest trade in NFL history in terms of how it worked out for both teams). Allen led the team to their first AFC championship in 27 years, and while the loss to the Chiefs was disappointing, there's every reason to think they'll be back.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Can teams that underperformed make a playoff run next year? (Dallas Cowboys, LA Rams, Cleveland Browns...)
Perhaps even less ambiguity here. No matter how you define "playoff run", both the Rams and Browns won a playoff game and made it to the Divisional Round, so it's a solid Yes for both of those teams, and a solid No for the Cowboys.
With Dak Prescott presumably returning from a devastating injury, the Rams going "Super Bowl or bust" in acquiring Matthew Stafford, and the Browns hitting a home run with Coach of the Year Kevin Stefanski, there's plenty of reason to think all three teams will be back in the postseason next year.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Will the Patriots extend their dynasty?
A solid No. Considering their lack of talent and multitude of COVID opt-outs, their 7-9 record is a testament to Belichick's greatness. A fresh start at QB and elsewhere is on the horizon.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Can the Ravens supplant the Chiefs as the team to beat in the AFC?
No disrespect to the Ravens, but this was perhaps the most laughable of my preseason insinuations. The Ravens are in a tough division and would be lucky to secure a top 5 ranking in the AFC. Their offseason focus should be clear: improve the passing game, because a great running game only goes so far in January.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Will the 2020 NFC West be the greatest division of all time?
No, and in fact, they weren't even the best division
this season. The AFC North produced more playoff teams and was a better and tougher division all around. Those two are clearly the heavyweights, though.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
Can the Saints overcome their run of postseason woes?
Why did I think it could happen? The divisional round loss to the Bucs wasn't quite as painful and gut-wrenching as the past three losses in terms of how it ended, but it was equally sad and depressing. They've got a great coach and great talent (and a very complicated cap situation), but I wouldn't rule them out as a contender next year with Jameis Winston at QB.
Quote from: webny99 on February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM
My way-to-early Super Bowl matchup for next year: Ravens vs. Saints! :nod:
Well, I tried. I mostly just went with what I wanted to see, which was a close game with the score in the 20's between powerful, talented teams with respectable defenses. In the end, both teams made the playoffs but lost in the divisional round.
A spin forward to 2021
With Super Bowl 55 in the books, it's once again time to start talking about the offseason and looking ahead to the 2021 NFL season!
There are a multitude of draft and free agency narratives in the NFL this year. Trevor Lawrence, Justin Fields, Carson Wentz, Jimmy Garoppolo and Deshaun Watson, just to scratch the surface. And that doesn't even consider Matthew Stafford and Jared Goff, who already traded places (https://www.nfl.com/news/lions-agree-to-trade-matthew-stafford-to-rams-in-blockbuster-deal-involving-jare#:~:text=Detroit%20will%20acquire%20Goff%2C%20a,exchange%20for%20Stafford%2C%20per%20Pelissero.&text=The%20Rams%20will%20inherit%20the,hit%20in%202021%2C%20per%20Pelissero.) before the Super Bowl.
Can teams that finished short of the playoffs make a postseason run next year? (Arizona Cardinals, Miami Dolphins, Minnesota Vikings)
Can teams that are a QB away from contention get the all-important position figured out? (Indianapolis Colts, Denver Broncos, San Francisco 49ers)
Will the Chiefs run it back to the biggest stage? Can the Bills and Packers get over the Championship hump?
Will the 2021 NFC South be among the league's best divisions? Will the Rams go on a Super Bowl run?
I can't wait to see all that and more unfold over the next 12 months! :coffee:
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PMCan the Bills and Packers get over the Championship hump?
Don't know about the Bills, but the Packers are likely done now. I suspect they'll regress next year.
As far as I'm concerned regarding the NFC, there's the Bucs and Rams and a lot of nothing after that. Packers will probably post an attractive regular season record, but then self destruct in the playoffs like usual. Ditto for the Seahawks. Niners are the big question mark to me, it depends on who their QB is and how long their IR list becomes. I expect the AFC to be much more interesting. Chiefs, Bills, Colts, and Browns all have a legitimate shot IMO. If the Browns want to win, they're going to need their running game and defense to carry their mediocre at best quarterback. Ravens will be good in the regular season again, but I'm not wasting any time on them in the playoffs. Titans need a better defense.
Way-too-early playoff predictions:
AFC East: Bills division winners
AFC North: Ravens division winners, Browns wild card
AFC South: Colts division winners, Titans wild card
AFC West: Chiefs division winners, Chargers wild card
NFC East: Cowboys division winners
NFC North: Packers division winners, Vikings wild card, Bears wild card
NFC South: Buccaneers division winners
NFC West: Rams division winners, Seahawks wild card
What I would like to know is: will we be going to the 17-game schedule in 2021? That's what I've heard, anyway.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 11, 2021, 06:19:59 PM
What I would like to know is: will we be going to the 17-game schedule in 2021? That's what I've heard, anyway.
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-plans-to-expand-regular-season-to-17-games-per-team-in-2021
Here's a story that indicates that it's going to happen but can't be announced until a media contract gets finalized. Regular season would start at the same time, end a week later, with the playoffs also being a week later. The extra game would be an interconference game against a team that finished in the same place. My guess is that it would alternate with all NFC teams being home one year and all AFC teams the next, so that teams within a conference competing for wildcard spots are all playing the same number of home games.
Also, if this goes through, for the forseeable future, Tom Brady and Rex Grossman will be the only QBs ever to lose on my birthday.
I don't get it. Why have another game that throws off the home/away balance?
Quote from: thspfc on February 11, 2021, 09:26:49 PM
I don't get it. Why have another game that throws off the home/away balance?
$$$
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 11, 2021, 06:34:42 PM
My guess is that it would alternate with all NFC teams being home one year and all AFC teams the next, so that teams within a conference competing for wildcard spots are all playing the same number of home games.
Not sure how it would work for home vs. away, but it would be the opposite conference team from the division your team hasn't seen for two years and won't see for two more. Sounds complicated, but using the Bills as an example:
They faced the NFC East in 2019 and won't again until 2023. So in 2021, they are two years away from any regularly scheduled games against the NFC East. As last year's division winner, they'll play Washington, while the Dolphins will play the Giants, the Pats will play the Cowboys, and the Jets will play the Eagles.
(Ironically, the last-place matchup whipped up on the first-place matchup in the 2019 regular season games. The Eagles beat the Bills 31-13 (it was the Bills only loss all season by more than a touchdown), while the Jets beat the Redskins 34-17.)
I don't mind an extra week of NFL action, but I'm not a fan of an odd number of games.
Don't be surprised if calls for an 18-game season come to be. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the current 16 games; why fix something that isn't broken? It's just change for the sake of change.
Quote from: Henry on February 12, 2021, 10:48:17 AM
Don't be surprised if calls for an 18-game season come to be. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the current 16 games; why fix something that isn't broken? It's just change for the sake of change.
If they wanted more TV money, they could have just added a second bye for every team and still get 18 weeks worth of games.
Let's not forget the NFL's other motivation both for adding a 17th game and the new 7th seeds this year (allowing for 6 wild-card games):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcrRl9CgaVw
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 12, 2021, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on February 12, 2021, 10:48:17 AM
Don't be surprised if calls for an 18-game season come to be. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the current 16 games; why fix something that isn't broken? It's just change for the sake of change.
If they wanted more TV money, they could have just added a second bye for every team and still get 18 weeks worth of games.
They did that in 1993 and it was a flop. Apparently most of the teams felt having two weeks off was too disruptive. The only other time they've played over 18 weeks was unplanned but entirely understandable (2001).
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 12, 2021, 10:54:49 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 12, 2021, 10:50:03 AM
If they wanted more TV money, they could have just added a second bye for every team and still get 18 weeks worth of games.
They did that in 1993 and it was a flop. Apparently most of the teams felt having two weeks off was too disruptive. The only other time they've played over 18 weeks was unplanned but entirely understandable (2001).
Also, adding an extra bye week wouldn't increase the total number of games. In an 18 week season, the byes could be spread out over 14 weeks at most. At least 4 teams per week would be on bye for nearly the entire season, and timing two byes for each team would make the schedule even more complicated than it already is.
The NFL ownership wanted an 18-game season, bur the players union objected that plan. So the compromise was to make it a 17-team season.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 12, 2021, 10:54:49 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 12, 2021, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on February 12, 2021, 10:48:17 AM
Don't be surprised if calls for an 18-game season come to be. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the current 16 games; why fix something that isn't broken? It's just change for the sake of change.
If they wanted more TV money, they could have just added a second bye for every team and still get 18 weeks worth of games.
They did that in 1993 and it was a flop. Apparently most of the teams felt having two weeks off was too disruptive. The only other time they've played over 18 weeks was unplanned but entirely understandable (2001).
I remember that and I remember them saying that, but one thing I don't recall anyone ever saying is that every team had both their byes in the first half of the season. I thought it was poorly executed. If they had a bye somewhere in the first 9 weeks and another in the second 9 weeks, it would work out better.
Byes need to be restructured. It's been extremely obvious for a while now that a late bye provides a massive advantage over teams that had early byes. This year, the Bucs had a week 13 bye. Last year's Chiefs had a week 12 bye. The 2018 Patriots had a week 11 bye. No Super Bowl champion has had a bye earlier than week 9 since 2015. If it was me, I would just give every team the same week off in the middle of the season, like maybe the second weekend of November. But that's never going to happen, so they can at least condense the range of byes. Instead of from week 4 to week 13, it could be from week 7 to week 10.
They're never going to give more than 4 teams a bye during the same week or else the slate of games gets thin, but they could implement a rule whereby you must alternate between early and late byes every other season.
Four teams per week requires at least eight weeks. However, it's not unheard of for six teams to be on bye at once. This year, weeks 8 and 11 (IIRC) were scheduled with six teams off before that had to be reshuffled due to COVID.
I'd do it as follows:
Week 6: 4 teams
Week 7: 6 teams
Week 8: 6 teams
Week 9: 6 teams
Week 10: 6 teams
Week 11: 4 teams
I'd actually prefer Weeks 7-12, but Thanksgiving is usually Week 12, and all teams have to play that week, so you'd have to bump some teams to Week 13, giving them a two-week advantage over the other teams.
JJ Watt was released by the Texans on Friday and... the Bills make a ton of sense as a potential landing spot?
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2021, 08:30:54 AM
JJ Watt was released by the Texans on Friday and... the Bills make a ton of sense as a potential landing spot?
A lot of speculation has him going to the Packers. The Packers are his home state team, and it fits and area of need for the team. Question is, what will his price be, and will the team be able to fit him in under the salary cap? One other much talked about team for him is the Steelers, obviously because both of his brothers play for the Steelers. But the thought also is he wants a chance at a Super Bowl, and the Packers are probably closer to being a Super Bowl team than the Steelers.
I don't understand the love for JJ Watt as a free agent. He was 56th in sacks last year. The Texans' defense was horrible all around, and their pass rush was dead last. He uses the media to rip on his teammates, because apparently he doesn't want to handle it himself, or he's not successful. Point is, he's going to be paid a lot more money than he's worth as a player.
Packers and Steelers will have to do some cap gymnastics to make Watt work. The Dolphins, 49ers, and Cardinals might be more feasible from that standpoint.
Carson Wentz traded to the Colts, a trade many expected, for a third round pick and a second round pick. The second rounder becomes a first rounder if: Wentz plays at least 75% of snaps in 2021 or he plays at least 70% and the Colts make the playoffs.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-the-eagles-had-to-get-rid-of-wentz-and-the-colts-had-to-take-a-chance-on-him/
Looks like the Browns didn't realize that Watt wasn't headed there. D'oh!
Good on the Cardinals' part. I'll be rooting for them.
As for the Texans...
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 01, 2021, 03:57:38 PM
As for the Texans...
...they could go 0-16 next year if Watson leaves.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 01, 2021, 03:57:38 PM
Looks like the Browns didn't realize that Watt wasn't headed there. D'oh!
Good on the Cardinals' part. I'll be rooting for them.
As for the Texans...
I won't, but I'll be rooting for Watt to have a healthy season to see what he can still do. Dude's legendary.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/28/nfl-17-game-schedule-zach-wilson-fmia-peter-king/
Details confirming how the 17th game is going to work:
Teams will play a team from the opposite conference that finished in the same place in their division. The division matchups for the 17th game will be the same as the whole-division matchups from 2019:
NFC North vs AFC West
NFC South vs AFC South
NFC East vs AFC East
NFC West vs AFC North
The AFC teams will host all games this year, with the NFC teams all hosting next year. This ensures that teams competing for wild card spots and division winner seeding within each conference all played the same number of home games. I have seen a couple other article indicating that all of these games will be played the last week of the season, but this source does not specify that.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 02, 2021, 07:35:04 AM
...I have seen a couple other article indicating that all of these games will be played the last week of the season, but this source does not specify that.
For the 2021 season, that may be the easiest way to incorporate it into the schedule, as it's very likely the schedule for the 16 week season has already been determined. It could also have come down to stadium availability for what will be the 17th week, with AFC teams winning out.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 02, 2021, 08:11:24 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 02, 2021, 07:35:04 AM
...I have seen a couple other article indicating that all of these games will be played the last week of the season, but this source does not specify that.
For the 2021 season, that may be the easiest way to incorporate it into the schedule, as it's very likely the schedule for the 16 week season has already been determined. It could also have come down to stadium availability for what will be the 17th week, with AFC teams winning out.
Doesn't the schedule usually come out in April or May? I'd be surprised if it's mostly done already, and equally surprised if the extra games are played the last week. Chiefs-Packers is one of the extra games, and the league isn't going to want to see backups in that one.
^^ A few years ago, the NFL started to make the final week of the regular season all divisional games in order to try to make those games more intriguing. The NFL seem to like this policy, since they followed it the last few years. So I don't see week 18 being the extra games.
The Redskins released Alex Smith. Fully expected, and fully understandable given his cap hit combined with his hampered mobility, but still a sad coda to his time in DC. What a comeback story, though.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 05, 2021, 02:08:17 PM
The Redskins released Alex Smith. Fully expected, and fully understandable given his cap hit combined with his hampered mobility, but still a sad coda to his time in DC. What a comeback story, though.
I would like to see the Texans pick him up since Watson won't be playing for them anymore.
Drew Brees has announced his retirement after 20 years in the NFL and 15 years with the Saints.
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 05:59:12 PM
Drew Brees has announced his retirement after 20 years in the NFL and 15 years with the Saints.
Poor Falcons and Panthers. Brees finally retires and now they have to deal with Brady.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 15, 2021, 06:18:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 05:59:12 PM
Drew Brees has announced his retirement after 20 years in the NFL and 15 years with the Saints.
Poor Falcons and Panthers. Brees finally retires and now they have to deal with Brady.
Nah, I'm all for it. The less fun those teams have, the merrier.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 15, 2021, 06:18:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 05:59:12 PM
Drew Brees has announced his retirement after 20 years in the NFL and 15 years with the Saints.
Poor Falcons and Panthers. Brees finally retires and now they have to deal with Brady.
The NFC South has always been a competitive division even with Brees. Except for the past few years, it usually comes down to the wire just like the NFC East. It's also the only division where all four teams have made the championship recently.
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 06:43:43 PM
The NFC South has always been a competitive division even with Brees. Except for the past few years, it usually comes down to the wire just like the NFC East. It's also the only division where all four teams have made the championship recently.
Not quite on that last point
NFC South:
Bucs: LV
Falcons: LI
Panthers: L
Saints: XLIV
NFC West:
49ers: LIV
Rams: LIII
Seahawks: XLIX
Cardinals: XLIII
Of course, the current NFC South and West are basically one division that split into two (the old NFC West: Rams, 49ers, Saints, Falcons, Panthers), with the Cardinals (old NFC East), Seahawks (old AFC West), and Bucs (old NFC Central) added
Brees retiring is that best thing that will happen to the Saints this offseason. Now they can stop thinking about the inevativble playoff implosions spearheaded by Mr. Regular Season Stats, deal with their terrible salary cap situation, and stop supporting the sexual abuse of children (though the third one is not Brees' fault). Long story short, the Saints are my least favorite team in the league and I can't wait for them to stink again.
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 15, 2021, 06:56:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 06:43:43 PM
It's also the only division where all four teams have made the championship recently.
Not quite on that last point
NFC South:
Bucs: LV
Falcons: LI
Panthers: L
Saints: XLIV
NFC West:
49ers: LIV
Rams: LIII
Seahawks: XLIX
Cardinals: XLIII
You've got me there, although I was actually referring to the NFC title game, not the Super Bowl (this changes the years for the Cards, Seahawks, and Saints).
I almost said "in the past six years" or "the most recently of any division", but I couldn't think of a non-clumsy way to word it.
I would be shocked if the Bucs don't win the NFCS in 2021. There's just no one else who is relevant. Saints are in shambles. Falcons have no defense and a first year coach. Panthers have no quarterback.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2021, 07:56:49 PM
Brees retiring is that best thing that will happen to the Saints this offseason. Now they can stop thinking about the inevativble playoff implosions spearheaded by Mr. Regular Season Stats, deal with their terrible salary cap situation, and stop supporting the sexual abuse of children (though the third one is not Brees' fault). Long story short, the Saints are my least favorite team in the league and I can't wait for them to stink again.
I get that your problems with the Saints are probably deeper rooted than just Drew Brees, but how about an ounce of respect for the guy who just finished a HOF career...
(Personally, I don't have anything against the Saints. Their unbelievable back-to-back-to-back-to-back January implosions make me feel just a tad sorry for them, if anything, although it's hard not to think of Bountygate when bad stuff happens to them.)
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2021, 08:07:30 PM
I would be shocked if the Bucs don't win the NFCS in 2021. There's just no one else who is relevant. Saints are in shambles. Falcons have no defense and a first year coach. Panthers have no quarterback.
The Bucs are the favorite, but I would not be stunned if any of the other three teams won it. Their games within the division are always wild and unpredictable.
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:21:40 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2021, 07:56:49 PM
Brees retiring is that best thing that will happen to the Saints this offseason. Now they can stop thinking about the inevativble playoff implosions spearheaded by Mr. Regular Season Stats, deal with their terrible salary cap situation, and stop supporting the sexual abuse of children (though the third one is not Brees' fault). Long story short, the Saints are my least favorite team in the league and I can't wait for them to stink again.
I get that your problems with the Saints are probably deeper rooted than just Drew Brees, but how about an ounce of respect for the guy who just finished a HOF career...
(Personally, I don't have anything against the Saints. Their unbelievable back-to-back-to-back-to-back January implosions make me feel just a tad sorry for them, if anything, although it's hard not to think of Bountygate when bad stuff happens to them.)
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2021, 08:07:30 PM
I would be shocked if the Bucs don't win the NFCS in 2021. There's just no one else who is relevant. Saints are in shambles. Falcons have no defense and a first year coach. Panthers have no quarterback.
The Bucs are the favorite, but I would not be stunned if any of the other three teams won it. Their games within the division are always wild and unpredictable.
So, like, five blowouts and one close game? So wild and unpredictable.
Quote from: thspfc on March 16, 2021, 07:44:02 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:21:40 PM
Their games within the division are always wild and unpredictable.
So, like, five blowouts and one close game? So wild and unpredictable.
Score(s) aside, from a historical perspective they're unpredictable. The Saints whooping the Bucs 38-3 was one of the most surprising results of the year. The Falcons were underdogs against the Panthers on TNF Week 8 and won easily. Meanwhile, they were favored in Week 11 against the Saints with Brees out and lost handily.
Also, back in 2015, the Falcons ended the 14-0 Panthers perfect season. And in 2019 the 1-7 Falcons beat the 7-1 Saints as one of the biggest underdogs of the season, which ended up costing the Saints a bye.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2021, 07:59:31 AM
Quote from: thspfc on March 16, 2021, 07:44:02 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2021, 09:21:40 PM
Their games within the division are always wild and unpredictable.
So, like, five blowouts and one close game? So wild and unpredictable.
Score(s) aside, from a historical perspective they're unpredictable. The Saints whooping the Bucs 38-3 was one of the most surprising results of the year. The Falcons were underdogs against the Panthers on TNF Week 8 and won easily. Meanwhile, they were favored in Week 11 against the Saints with Brees out and lost handily.
Also, back in 2015, the Falcons ended the 14-0 Panthers perfect season. And in 2019 the 1-7 Falcons beat the 7-1 Saints as one of the biggest underdogs of the season, which ended up costing the Saints a bye.
I guess ARS was right about being Underdog ;)
So many big free agent signings around the league this week. Patriots get a bunch of guys, including two meh WRs and two solid TEs. Bears sign Andy Dalton. Dolphins sign Will Fuller. Vikings sign Patrick Peterson. Bills sign Mitch Trubisky. Giants sign Kyle Rudolph. Buccaneers retain Lavonte David, Shaq Barrett, and Chris Godwin. At this point the Bucs don't have a single area of their roster that is not top 5 in the league except for maybe running back, but there have been rumors that they're going to get James White. Plus, they still have both their offensive and defensive coorinators. The only things stopping them from at least winning the NFC again are injuries or a lack of motivation after winning it all, but I don't worry about that with Brady at the helm.
Quote from: thspfc on March 19, 2021, 11:42:13 AM
Bears sign Andy Dalton. ... Bills sign Mitch Trubisky. ...
Poor Bears fans.
I like this from the Bills angle - Matt Barkley is a great guy and was an OK backup, but Trubisky is a big upgrade.
Huge news: Dolphins trade the 3rd overall pick to the Niners in exchange for the 12th overall pick and a boatload of other draft picks. Only logical explanation for this is that the Niners are going to draft a QB. With every passing team that finds a starting quarterback, it looks more and more possible that the Jets are going to hang onto Sam Darnold, which is a terrible move on the part of the Jets IMO.
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2021, 01:21:05 PM
Huge news: Dolphins trade the 3rd overall pick to the Niners in exchange for the 12th overall pick and a boatload of other draft picks. Only logical explanation for this is that the Niners are going to draft a QB. With every passing team that finds a starting quarterback, it looks more and more possible that the Jets are going to hang onto Sam Darnold, which is a terrible move on the part of the Jets IMO.
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself. Looks like the Dolphins also traded with the Eagles to go from 12th back up to 6th (so maybe the Eagles' season finale tank was worth something after all...)
As for the Jets, I wouldn't be so opposed to sticking with Darnold if it wasn't such a great QB class. I think he could improve significantly under the new scheme and still be the guy - and yet, there are several other QB's in the draft that could be better than Darnold even if he
is the guy. If they do stick with Darnold, it would make sense to trade down and get a haul for the number 2 pick.
I dunno what the Eagles are doing anymore. Frankly, I have pretty much zero faith in this season at this point.
Quote from: Zeffy on March 26, 2021, 05:13:42 PM
I dunno what the Eagles are doing anymore. Frankly, I have pretty much zero faith in this season at this point.
And Howie Roseman appears to have no worries about his job security.
It appears to me that they have few aspirations for the 2021-22 season beyond rebuilding.
From the Bleeding Green National Eagles blog (https://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2021/3/26/22353093/eagles-trade-down-nfl-draft-2021-jalen-hurts-howie-roseman-deshaun-watson-first-round-picks-analysis):
QuoteHowie Roseman definitely isn't on the hot seat
This much shouldn't come as a surprise. Despite playing a key part in the Eagles' downward trajectory since February 2018, Roseman was spared from any criticism in Jeffrey Lurie's postseason press conference. The Eagles' much-maligned general manager is in very good standing with the owner.
Today's trade down only reinforces that perception. It was a move that appears to be made with a long-term focus in mind. It's a decision that's going to take some time to fully evaluate. Lurie is trusting Roseman to lead the Eagles through a rebuild and get back on track.
Good news for those who still have faith in Philly's GM. Bad news for the many who would like to see him gone.
Aaron Jones is back on the Packers.
Bills Stadium, formerly Ralph Wilson Stadium for much of this century and then New Era Field from 2016-19, is now Highmark Stadium.
I don't love it, but joked, "it's the high mark of the new era at the Ralph" :-P
It's official. The NFL is going to a 17 game season.
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-enhanced-schedule-with-17-regular-season-games-per-team
The extra game has all NFC teams on the road this year. 1st place in the division plays 1st place in the other division and so on.
AFC East vs NFC East
AFC North vs NFC West
AFC South vs NFC South
AFC West vs NFC North
So your matchups are:
Washington @ Buffalo
NY Giants @ Miami
Dallas @ New England
Philadelphia @ NY Jets
Seattle @ Pittsburgh
LA Rams @ Baltimore
Arizona @ Cleveland
San Francisco @ Cincinnati
New Orleans @ Tennessee
Tampa Bay @ Indianapolis
Carolina @ Houston
Atlanta @ Jacksonville
Green Bay @ Kansas City
Chicago @ Las Vegas
Minnesota @ LA Chargers
Detroit @ Denver
When will the ACTUAL SCHEDULE - as in, a list showing which team plays which other team, and on what date - be out? That's what I'm most interested in.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 30, 2021, 05:54:44 PM
When will the ACTUAL SCHEDULE - as in, a list showing which team plays which other team, and on what date - be out? That's what I'm most interested in.
Usually comes out the 2nd or 3rd week of April before the Draft.
Since 2005, the earliest is April 6th and the latest (last year excluded) was April 23rd.
But there are reports that it could be as late as May 13th.
A question I have about the new schedule: with the shortened preseason, does that mean the Super Bowl will still be on the first Sunday in February? Or will it nonetheless be pushed back to the second Sunday of the month?
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 30, 2021, 06:03:29 PM
A question I have about the new schedule: with the shortened preseason, does that mean the Super Bowl will still be on the first Sunday in February? Or will it nonetheless be pushed back to the second Sunday of the month?
Regular season starts the same time, ends a week later, with each round of the playoffs a week later. Super Bowl now 2nd Sunday in February.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 06:16:00 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 30, 2021, 06:03:29 PM
A question I have about the new schedule: with the shortened preseason, does that mean the Super Bowl will still be on the first Sunday in February? Or will it nonetheless be pushed back to the second Sunday of the month?
not this year but in future years, the second Sunday will be the day before President's day.
Regular season starts the same time, ends a week later, with each round of the playoffs a week later. Super Bowl now 2nd Sunday in February.
One thing that will be interesting to see is how the movement of the Super Bowl from 1st to 2nd Sunday in February affects other sports.
MLB - Spring training generally begins around February 15 and there's no real reason to change anything
NHL - All-Star game is usually the last weekend in January. I would think this gets moved back a week to avoid being the same weekend as the NFL conference championship games
NBA - All-Star game is usually the 2nd weekend in February and they pretty much have to move this.
NASCAR - Daytona 500 has to move off the 2nd weekend in February
Golf - Pebble Beach Pro-Am is traditionally the 2nd weekend in February, and as one of the oldest and most prestigious non-majors, I can see that tournament using its clout to try to move off that weekend.
While the current 17-game seems like a great idea, I would've liked it to take a different direction. I would've liked to see a yearly AFC-NFC rivalry game sometime during the season. The problem is not all teams have a good rival in the opposite conference. Here's the best I could come up with for this proposition:
Houston vs. Dallas
LA Chargers vs. LA Rams
NY Jets vs. NY Giants
Baltimore vs. Washington
Pittsburgh vs. Philadelphia
Miami vs. Tampa Bay
Jacksonville vs. Atlanta
Tennessee vs. Carolina
Las Vegas vs. San Francisco
Denver vs. Seattle
Kansas City vs. Arizona
Cleveland vs. Detroit
Indianapolis vs. Chicago
Buffalo vs. Green Bay
Cincinnati vs. Minnesota (yeah this one sucks)
New England vs. New Orleans
The site would rotate every year between the two teams' stadiums. Every four years, the other game that the two teams would usually play would be hosted at a neutral site. I feel that this idea could boost attendance and revenue for certain games (HOU-DAL etc.), but as I said earlier I don't think it would work.
Two problems with that:
1) Once every 4 years you're regularly scheduled to play that team so you'd be playing them twice
2) Unfair for a team whose rival is a regular playoff/Super Bowl team.
Making those the permanent Week 3 preseason games isn't a bad idea, though.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
Two problems with that:
1) Once every 4 years you're regularly scheduled to play that team so you'd be playing them twice
Teams already play division rivals twice a year and nobody has a problem with that, so I don't see why it would be any different here (could be a problem with the CIN-MIN game, though!)
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
2) Unfair for a team whose rival is a regular playoff/Super Bowl team.
This already happens everywhere in today's NFL. The Lions have to play Green Bay every year, for example. Besides, teams gradually gain and lose their dominance over the years.
Quote from: Big John on March 30, 2021, 06:57:26 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 06:16:00 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 30, 2021, 06:03:29 PM
A question I have about the new schedule: with the shortened preseason, does that mean the Super Bowl will still be on the first Sunday in February? Or will it nonetheless be pushed back to the second Sunday of the month?
Regular season starts the same time, ends a week later, with each round of the playoffs a week later. Super Bowl now 2nd Sunday in February.
not this year but in future years, the second Sunday will be the day before President's day.
Fixed your quote for you. It will be interesting to see if President's Day becomes a more standard holiday as a result of this.
Quote from: webny99 on March 30, 2021, 08:09:06 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 30, 2021, 06:57:26 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 06:16:00 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 30, 2021, 06:03:29 PM
A question I have about the new schedule: with the shortened preseason, does that mean the Super Bowl will still be on the first Sunday in February? Or will it nonetheless be pushed back to the second Sunday of the month?
Regular season starts the same time, ends a week later, with each round of the playoffs a week later. Super Bowl now 2nd Sunday in February.
not this year but in future years, the second Sunday will be the day before President's day.
Fixed your quote for you. It will be interesting to see if President's Day becomes a more standard holiday as a result of this.
Presidents Day is 3rd Monday so only when the 14th is a Sunday do you get the holiday the day after the Super Bowl.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
Two problems with that:
1) Once every 4 years you're regularly scheduled to play that team so you'd be playing them twice
2) Unfair for a team whose rival is a regular playoff/Super Bowl team.
Making those the permanent Week 3 preseason games isn't a bad idea, though.
For point 2, teams can go from trash to great and vice versa in a blink of an eye, so that point isn't really concerning.
The NFC North has a brutal schedule next year: AFC North and NFC West, plus their 17th game against the AFC West.
Bit of a change from the last two years, especially 2019, when the Packers were criticized as the worst 13-3 team ever because of their schedule.
I'm really not a fan of this 17-game season, but I'll still tune in on Sunday.
They've been playing 16 games for four and a half decades, and there's never been a problem with it that I know of. My thing is, why change it now?
Also, I wish they'd start the season a week earlier instead of ending it a week later. That way, the playoffs, Pro Bowl and Super Bowl can still be played in the appropriate weeks.
Quote from: Henry on March 31, 2021, 11:17:22 AM
I'm really not a fan of this 17-game season, but I'll still tune in on Sunday.
They've been playing 16 games for four and a half decades, and there's never been a problem with it that I know of. My thing is, why change it now?
Also, I wish they'd start the season a week earlier instead of ending it a week later. That way, the playoffs, Pro Bowl and Super Bowl can still be played in the appropriate weeks.
"The appropriate weeks" have not been that way very long. As recently as 2003, the Super Bowl was still in January. In any event, the time between the Super Bowl and baseball opening day is the worst part of the sports calendar so I welcome having that time shortened by a week.
Quote from: webny99 on March 31, 2021, 09:40:56 AM
The NFC North has a brutal schedule next year: AFC North and NFC West, plus their 17th game against the AFC West.
Bit of a change from the last two years, especially 2019, when the Packers were criticized as the worst 13-3 team ever because of their schedule.
The actual worst 13-3 team ever was the Saints that same year. Only 13-3 team to not make it to at least the divisional round. Packers made the NFC Championship.
Quote from: thspfc on March 31, 2021, 05:53:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 31, 2021, 09:40:56 AM
Bit of a change from the last two years, especially 2019, when the Packers were criticized as the worst 13-3 team ever because of their schedule.
The actual worst 13-3 team ever was the Saints that same year. Only 13-3 team to not make it to at least the divisional round. Packers made the NFC Championship.
The Saints were worse in the playoffs, obviously, but the Packers were worse in the regular season. It was pure luck that they got the bye over the Saints.
As you probably know by now, Aaron Rodgers will host Jeopardy! for the next two weeks. He's already become a viral star via last night's Final Jeopardy! when a contestant asked "Who wanted to kick that field goal?" in reference to the controversial NFC Championship Game ending which caused the Packers to lose to Tampa Bay:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jeopardy-contestant-pokes-fun-guest-032804310.html
In Rodgers' own words: "That is a great question! Should be correct, but unfortunately for this game today, it's incorrect." And in a twist of irony, the correct answer was Mr. Rogers, as in Fred from Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. BTW, the contestant who referenced the Packers wagered nothing. I may be a Bears fan, but I found that moment hilarious, and I think Rodgers is doing pretty good as host. It'll be interesting to see how he'll be able to juggle his two jobs (hosting the show and then QB for the Packers) if he should get it, but it sounds like he's very interested in it. However, there are many more people waiting in line for the gig, so nothing's being finalized.
Quote from: Henry on April 06, 2021, 10:16:14 AM
As you probably know by now, Aaron Rodgers will host Jeopardy! for the next two weeks. He's already become a viral star via last night's Final Jeopardy! when a contestant asked "Who wanted to kick that field goal?" in reference to the controversial NFC Championship Game ending which caused the Packers to lose to Tampa Bay:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jeopardy-contestant-pokes-fun-guest-032804310.html
In Rodgers' own words: "That is a great question! Should be correct, but unfortunately for this game today, it's incorrect." And in a twist of irony, the correct answer was Mr. Rogers, as in Fred from Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. BTW, the contestant who referenced the Packers wagered nothing. I may be a Bears fan, but I found that moment hilarious, and I think Rodgers is doing pretty good as host. It'll be interesting to see how he'll be able to juggle his two jobs (hosting the show and then QB for the Packers) if he should get it, but it sounds like he's very interested in it. However, there are many more people waiting in line for the gig, so nothing's being finalized.
He's better than Dr. Oz as a host, but not as good as Mike Richards or Ken Jennings.
In other NFL news, Sam Darnold has been traded to the Carolina Panthers for a 2021 sixth-round pick and 2022 second- and fourth-round picks. I wanted to see him on the Broncos, but Carolina is not a bad landing spot either.
You have to figure the 49ers trade and the Watson situation factored heavily in this. Now we're basically guaranteed 3 QB's in the first 3 picks, so the draft really starts with Atlanta at pick #4. Two of Jones/Fields/Lance will still be available at that point.
Quote from: webny99 on April 06, 2021, 11:54:38 AM
In other NFL news, Sam Darnold has been traded to the Carolina Panthers for a 2021 sixth-round pick and 2022 second- and fourth-round picks. I wanted to see him on the Broncos, but Carolina is not a bad landing spot either.
You have to figure the 49ers trade and the Watson situation factored heavily in this. Now we're basically guaranteed 3 QB's in the first 3 picks, so the draft really starts with Atlanta at pick #4. Two of Jones/Fields/Lance will still be available at that point.
We're guaranteed that QB1 and QB3 will be more successful than QB2.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 30, 2021, 07:37:47 PM
Two problems with that:
1) Once every 4 years you're regularly scheduled to play that team so you'd be playing them twice
2) Unfair for a team whose rival is a regular playoff/Super Bowl team.
Making those the permanent Week 3 preseason games isn't a bad idea, though.
It's great for ratings and for a league built on rivalries. The 4 year rotation is really not all that fair either.
Quote from: webny99 on March 30, 2021, 10:26:43 AM
Bills Stadium, formerly Ralph Wilson Stadium for much of this century and then New Era Field from 2016-19, is now Highmark Stadium.
I don't love it, but joked, "it's the high mark of the new era at the Ralph" :-P
For people who don't know what Highmark is, it's a PBM (pharmacy benefits management) located in Pittsburgh, with offices in Buffalo.
Quote from: Henry on April 06, 2021, 10:16:14 AM
As you probably know by now, Aaron Rodgers will host Jeopardy! for the next two weeks. He's already become a viral star via last night's Final Jeopardy! when a contestant asked "Who wanted to kick that field goal?" in reference to the controversial NFC Championship Game ending which caused the Packers to lose to Tampa Bay:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jeopardy-contestant-pokes-fun-guest-032804310.html
In Rodgers' own words: "That is a great question! Should be correct, but unfortunately for this game today, it's incorrect." And in a twist of irony, the correct answer was Mr. Rogers, as in Fred from Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. BTW, the contestant who referenced the Packers wagered nothing. I may be a Bears fan, but I found that moment hilarious, and I think Rodgers is doing pretty good as host. It'll be interesting to see how he'll be able to juggle his two jobs (hosting the show and then QB for the Packers) if he should get it, but it sounds like he's very interested in it. However, there are many more people waiting in line for the gig, so nothing's being finalized.
Thanks. I hate it.
Especially the HAIL MURRAY!
:rofl:
With the NFL draft coming up tomorrow, who's got predictions?
Here's a bold one: 7 QB's will come off the board in the first round.
Quote from: webny99 on April 28, 2021, 06:54:35 PM
With the NFL draft coming up tomorrow, who's got predictions?
Here's a bold one: 7 QB's will come off the board in the first round.
HOT TAKE Jacksonville with draft Trevor Lawrence 1st overall.
Quote from: webny99 on April 28, 2021, 06:54:35 PM
With the NFL draft coming up tomorrow, who's got predictions?
Here's a bold one: 7 QB's will come off the board in the first round.
That's quite a bit, but anything is possible.
I heard that it's a pretty decent receiver class this year. It's interesting because there was such a clusterf*#ck of a college football season, and a lot of these players might not have proven themselves as much as draftees in years past.
I'm curious what the Niners end up doing. They did quite a bit to trade up to number 3, and if I recall correctly, Jimmy G's future isn't certain.
The Niners are down to 2 quarterbacks but won't reveal which one they will take. (Jones or Lance, they ruled out Fields)
Steelers will take Harris.
Watch out for a Cardinals and Steelers pick swap . . . it makes sense in theory. Steelers need one of the top three offensive tackles, one of which will be on the board at #16, while the Cardinals need a wide receiver, and they're not getting one of the top three at #16 so there's not much reason to stay where they are. Such a trade would probably involve the Steelers giving the Cardinals their second round pick, and maybe a 5th/6th round pick as well.
I would be shocked if my Cowboys don't draft either Patrick Surtain or Jaycee Horn.
Green Bay will make their usual blunder, at least in the eyes of the media. Gutekunst will never be able to win the Wisconsin media's respect again after the Jordan Love pick.
A lot of people have been clamoring for a pick swap between the Falcons and Broncos, which would be an idiotic move on the part of the Broncos. Nobody between #3 (Niners) and #9 (Broncos) is even considering drafting a QB. I guess Denver might be interested in Kyle Pitts, but they already have a pretty good TE of their own, Noah Fant.
Joe Burrow is actively trying to get himself injured by telling the Bengals to draft Ja'Marr Chase rather than an offensive lineman. But none of that blame is going to fall on Burrow, because he's Ohio's golden boy and the Bengals are the bad guys, right?
My "mock draft" (basically me making hot take picks without doing much research) has only four QBs drafted in the first round: Lawrence #1 to JAX, Wilson #2 to NYJ, Fields #3 to SF, Lance #20 to CHI. FWIW, I had Mac Jones going #41 to the Broncos. Now that they have Teddy Bridgewater, I'm going to say he goes #46 to the Patriots. I don't care how wrong it is, we'll see who gets the last laugh if Mac Jones doesn't succeed in the NFL. :-D
We're less than 24 hours from the Jaguars' next first round pick, yet still over 1,000 days away from the Rams' next first round pick.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2021, 10:16:26 PM
A lot of people have been clamoring for a pick swap between the Falcons and Broncos, which would be an idiotic move on the part of the Broncos. Nobody between #3 (Niners) and #9 (Broncos) is even considering drafting a QB.
I will have to disagree. Both the Lions and Panthers could (and I would argue
should) be considering taking a QB, especially if Fields/Lance fall to them. There's no way either team is thinking they're set at QB for the future.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2021, 10:16:26 PM
My "mock draft" (basically me making hot take picks without doing much research) has only four QBs drafted in the first round: Lawrence #1 to JAX, Wilson #2 to NYJ, Fields #3 to SF, Lance #20 to CHI.
Per the post above yours, and from what I have heard as well, the 49ers pick is still uncertain but it likely won't be Fields.
The more QBs that go early, the better that is for the Vikings.
Quote from: Big John on April 28, 2021, 07:48:08 PM
The Niners are down to 2 quarterbacks but won't reveal which one they will take. (Jones or Lance, they ruled out Fields)
Steelers will take Harris.
I haven't seen any information in the last 48 hours on the Niners and Fields, so that may just be the rumor mill spinning. Prepare for anything.
As a Packers fan, this is me anticipating tonight's draft..... :-|
(https://i.imgflip.com/3fxxss.jpg)
Oh, come on. The Packers have a stellar draft record compared to the Bears.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 10:20:08 AM
Oh, come on. The Packers have a stellar draft record compared to the Bears.
Yessssss, but it's the Bears. That's not saying much. lol.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 10:18:52 AM
As a Packers fan, this is me anticipating tonight's draft..... :-|
(https://i.imgflip.com/3fxxss.jpg)
Jordan Love
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 29, 2021, 10:29:33 AM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 10:18:52 AM
As a Packers fan, this is me anticipating tonight's draft..... :-|
(https://i.imgflip.com/3fxxss.jpg)
Jordan Love
Exactly! Though a silver lining with that might have been that the pick lit a fire under Rodgers, and he had an amazing season.
Rodgers didn't have an amazing season because of drafting Love. He had an amazing season because he finally got a better O-line.
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
Rodgers didn't have an amazing season because of drafting Love. He had an amazing season because he finally got a better O-line.
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
(See: Cutler, Jay)
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
The way you worded that sounds like it would've been the Bears OL drafting Rodgers. :spin:
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:56:15 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
The way you worded that sounds like it would've been the Bears OL drafting Rodgers. :spin:
Bears OL couldn't be any worse at drafting than management.
In reality, the team needs new ownership. I get that George Halas is pretty much the guy who founded the NFL but his grandkids have proven that they are not cut out for running a football team.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:56:15 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
The way you worded that sounds like it would've been the Bears OL drafting Rodgers. :spin:
Bears OL couldn't be any worse at drafting than management.
In reality, the team needs new ownership. I get that George Halas is pretty much the guy who founded the NFL but his grandkids have proven that they are not cut out for running a football team.
Or even better, maybe OL stands for "Organizational Laughingstock"
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:56:15 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
The way you worded that sounds like it would've been the Bears OL drafting Rodgers. :spin:
Bears OL couldn't be any worse at drafting than management.
In reality, the team needs new ownership. I get that George Halas is pretty much the guy who founded the NFL but his grandkids have proven that they are not cut out for running a football team.
Plenty of terrible owners out there, but yes, the Halas grandkids aren't that competent at running the team.
(also see Jones, Jerruh)
The Cowboys suffer from a megalomaniac owner who THINKS he's also a coach.....doesn't work so well.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 29, 2021, 11:49:10 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
Rodgers didn't have an amazing season because of drafting Love. He had an amazing season because he finally got a better O-line.
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
(See: Cutler, Jay)
LOL.....reminded me of this gem. :-D
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/82/91/7f/82917f2e048e419352893e4595c74629.jpg)
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/29/report-tim-tebow-recently-worked-out-for-jaguars-as-a-tight-end/
:-D
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 29, 2021, 03:18:14 PM
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/29/report-tim-tebow-recently-worked-out-for-jaguars-as-a-tight-end/
:-D
If he'd done that 12 years ago, he might have had a nice career.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/31359453/aaron-rodgers-want-return-green-bay-packers-sources-say
LMFAO
Hopefully the Packers have sense enough to draft Kadarius Toney or another offensive weapon with the #29 pick tonight.
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 04:18:32 PM
Hopefully the Packers have sense enough to draft Kadarius Toney or another offensive weapon with the #29 pick tonight.
I'm hoping they're smarter this year. They've traded with Indy to move to 21 last I saw.
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 04:18:32 PM
Hopefully the Packers have sense enough to draft Kadarius Toney or another offensive weapon with the #29 pick tonight.
They might need a quarterback...
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 04:18:32 PM
Hopefully the Packers have sense enough to draft Kadarius Toney or another offensive weapon with the #29 pick tonight.
I'm hoping they're smarter this year. They've traded with Indy to move to 21 last I saw.
They did? Did that just break?
Only reason I ask is because this is from their Twitter account just a couple hours ago:
https://twitter.com/packers/status/1387826818141544456
I couldn't find any links verifying such trade.
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 04:20:54 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 04:18:32 PM
Hopefully the Packers have sense enough to draft Kadarius Toney or another offensive weapon with the #29 pick tonight.
I'm hoping they're smarter this year. They've traded with Indy to move to 21 last I saw.
They did? Did that just break?
Only reason I ask is because this is from their Twitter account just a couple hours ago:
https://twitter.com/packers/status/1387826818141544456
I misspoke. I looked again, and it looks like they're still at 29. This is likely rumor mill stuff I was reading on Twitter.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 05:01:29 PM
I misspoke. I looked again, and it looks like they're still at 29. This is likely rumor mill stuff I was reading on Twitter.
No worries, just making sure I didn't miss anything!
As a Packers fan, I didn't even have to wait for the draft to be disappointed.....if this is indeed true.
Reigning MVP Aaron Rodgers is so disgruntled with the Green Bay Packers that he has told some within the organization that he does not want to return to the team, league and team sources told ESPN on Thursday.
The Packers are aware of his feelings, concerned about them and have had team president Mark Murphy, general manager Brian Gutekunst and head coach Matt LaFleur each fly out on separate trips to meet with Rodgers at various points this offseason, sources told ESPN.
"As we've stated since the season ended, we are committed to Aaron in 2021 and beyond," Gutekunst told ESPN. "Aaron has been a vital part of our success and we look forward to competing for another championship with him leading our team."
Rodgers, 37, has not budged this offseason, but neither have the Packers, who have made it known they are not interested in trading Rodgers anywhere.
More at the link below:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/31359453/aaron-rodgers-want-return-green-bay-packers-sources-say (http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/31359453/aaron-rodgers-want-return-green-bay-packers-sources-say)
Quote from OCGuy81 Quote
Plenty of terrible owners out there, but yes, the Halas grandkids aren't that competent at running the team.
(also see Jones, Jerruh)
The Cowboys suffer from a megalomaniac owner who THINKS he's also a coach.....doesn't work so well.
I have two simple numbers that refute this.
1. Cowboys value when Jones bought the team: $140 million (roughly $300 million adjusted for inflation)
2. Cowboys value today: $5.5 billion
Conclusion: you have no idea what the heck you're talking about.
Quote from: thspfc on April 29, 2021, 07:14:25 PM
Quote from OCGuy81 Quote
Plenty of terrible owners out there, but yes, the Halas grandkids aren't that competent at running the team.
(also see Jones, Jerruh)
The Cowboys suffer from a megalomaniac owner who THINKS he's also a coach.....doesn't work so well.
I have two simple numbers that refute this.
1. Cowboys value when Jones bought the team: $140 million (roughly $300 million adjusted for inflation)
2. Cowboys value today: $5.5 billion
Conclusion: you have no idea what the heck you're talking about.
I'm not saying he doesn't have business savvy. Your stats are all factual, and he's made a great return on his investment.
I was arguing that the reason they haven't had near the amount of success in recent decades is when old man Jones meddles too much in the coaching. You hire a coach to, well, coach.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 29, 2021, 06:54:41 PM
As a Packers fan, I didn't even have to wait for the draft to be disappointed.....if this is indeed true.
Reigning MVP Aaron Rodgers is so disgruntled with the Green Bay Packers that he has told some within the organization that he does not want to return to the team, league and team sources told ESPN on Thursday.
The Packers are aware of his feelings, concerned about them and have had team president Mark Murphy, general manager Brian Gutekunst and head coach Matt LaFleur each fly out on separate trips to meet with Rodgers at various points this offseason, sources told ESPN.
"As we've stated since the season ended, we are committed to Aaron in 2021 and beyond," Gutekunst told ESPN. "Aaron has been a vital part of our success and we look forward to competing for another championship with him leading our team."
Rodgers, 37, has not budged this offseason, but neither have the Packers, who have made it known they are not interested in trading Rodgers anywhere.
More at the link below:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/31359453/aaron-rodgers-want-return-green-bay-packers-sources-say (http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/31359453/aaron-rodgers-want-return-green-bay-packers-sources-say)
At least he has his TV career to fall back on.
We got Mac Jones without trading up!
Quote from: webny99 on March 26, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2021, 01:21:05 PM
Huge news: Dolphins trade the 3rd overall pick to the Niners in exchange for the 12th overall pick and a boatload of other draft picks. Only logical explanation for this is that the Niners are going to draft a QB. ...
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself.
Called it. I figured all along the 49ers would draft Trey Lance and not Mac Jones. It was kind of weird how secretive they kept it right up until announcing the pick. As expected, the first three picks were QB's and then Justin Fields to the Bears (via Giants) at #11 and Mac Jones to the Pats at #15.
There's been three trades so far: Eagles/Cowboys, Giants/Bears, and Vikings/Jets (via Seahawks)
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 26, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2021, 01:21:05 PM
Huge news: Dolphins trade the 3rd overall pick to the Niners in exchange for the 12th overall pick and a boatload of other draft picks. Only logical explanation for this is that the Niners are going to draft a QB. ...
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself.
Called it. I figured all along the 49ers would draft Trey Lance and not Mac Jones. It was kind of weird how secretive they kept it right up until announcing the pick. As expected, the first three picks were QB's and then Justin Fields to the Bears (via Giants) at #11 and Mac Jones to the Pats at #15.
There's been three trades so far: Eagles/Cowboys, Giants/Bears, and Vikings/Jets (via Seahawks)
Jets finally look like a competent team.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 29, 2021, 11:45:41 AM
Rodgers didn't have an amazing season because of drafting Love. He had an amazing season because he finally got a better O-line.
If Aaron Rodgers had been drafted by and played behind the OL of the Bears, he'd have been out of the league long before now.
And behind the Lions OL, he would have the bust label put on him in his 2nd year. (see Andre Ware, Chuck Long, Joey Harrington, etc.)
Bears: trade up & select Justin Fields
Me:
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/u6EiPNT9dLDrU7ZQuF/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b9524bdd5d0f5b6850fd3c0db978f34f2b054bc75fd2&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
All of Chicago, probably:
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/Yn05PwDC7OE2ygrSpa/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b952c5a6ca9d3c878a9d030e483747a41ab4ec65e4b3&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 26, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2021, 01:21:05 PM
Huge news: Dolphins trade the 3rd overall pick to the Niners in exchange for the 12th overall pick and a boatload of other draft picks. Only logical explanation for this is that the Niners are going to draft a QB. ...
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself.
Called it. I figured all along the 49ers would draft Trey Lance and not Mac Jones. It was kind of weird how secretive they kept it right up until announcing the pick. As expected, the first three picks were QB's and then Justin Fields to the Bears (via Giants) at #11 and Mac Jones to the Pats at #15.
There's been three trades so far: Eagles/Cowboys, Giants/Bears, and Vikings/Jets (via Seahawks)
Why would they tell us who they were going to draft?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 08:03:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 26, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself.
Called it. I figured all along the 49ers would draft Trey Lance and not Mac Jones. It was kind of weird how secretive they kept it right up until announcing the pick. ...
Why would they tell us who they were going to draft?
Of course they aren't going to proclaim it publicly, but usually a good number of people within the organization know, and the media and league sources have basically it figured out before draft night (like what happened with the Jets).
But in this case it seems that literally no one besides Lynch/Shanahan knew the pick, not even the 49ers other coaches.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 08:35:25 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 08:03:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2021, 11:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 26, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Wow. Now for a full month of speculation: I have a prediction, but I'll keep it to myself.
Called it. I figured all along the 49ers would draft Trey Lance and not Mac Jones. It was kind of weird how secretive they kept it right up until announcing the pick. ...
Why would they tell us who they were going to draft?
Of course they aren't going to proclaim it publicly, but usually a good number of people within the organization know, and the media and league sources have basically it figured out before draft night (like what happened with the Jets).
But in this case it seems that literally no one besides Lynch/Shanahan knew the pick, not even the 49ers other coaches.
I mean with how good people like Adam Schefter are at prying out information, I can't blame teams for getting more & more paranoid about sharing info even in-house.
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
No Lawrence?
I really have no idea. Making predictions about NFL careers doesn't usually go well, but I think all five fanbases should be excited.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 12:57:28 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
No Lawrence?
I really have no idea. Making predictions about NFL careers doesn't usually go well, but I think all five fanbases should be excited.
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Lance is the biggest risk because of his playing FCS.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 30, 2021, 01:34:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Lance is the biggest risk because of his playing FCS.
I might go Jones just because Belichick/McDaniels.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Ouch...that stings, but I can't say it isn't true :banghead: :ded:
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 30, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 30, 2021, 01:34:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Lance is the biggest risk because of his playing FCS.
I might go Jones just because Belichick/McDaniels.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Ouch...that stings, but I can't say it isn't true :banghead: :ded:
To give credit where it's due, the Bears have long been great on defense. Just that QB slot.....who was the last great Bears QB? McMahon??
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 30, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 30, 2021, 01:34:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Lance is the biggest risk because of his playing FCS.
I might go Jones just because Belichick/McDaniels.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Ouch...that stings, but I can't say it isn't true :banghead: :ded:
To give credit where it's due, the Bears have long been great on defense. Just that QB slot.....who was the last great Bears QB? McMahon??
McMahon was great until a dirty, filthy Packers player body slammed him to the turf and ruined his career. I would say that guy should be shot, but he took care of it himself.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 30, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Ouch...that stings, but I can't say it isn't true :banghead: :ded:
To give credit where it's due, the Bears have long been great on defense. Just that QB slot.....who was the last great Bears QB? McMahon??
Josh McCown? :-D
(For the record, I'm only half-joking....he had a run in the back half of the 2013 season lighting up the stat sheet in relief of an injured Jay Cutler, to the point that much of the fanbase wanted him to keep starting when Cutler returned.)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
Cautiously optimistic it's Wilson and the Jets have turned the corner, but let's see who else they draft.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 30, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 30, 2021, 01:34:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
If I put Lawrence everyone would say him.
I might say Lance because he's in a better situation. The Jags don't exactly have a reputation of winning, and Urban Meyer is a big question mark.
Lance is the biggest risk because of his playing FCS.
I might go Jones just because Belichick/McDaniels.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
I'd certainly rule out Fields, given Chicago's track record at the QB position.
Ouch...that stings, but I can't say it isn't true :banghead: :ded:
To give credit where it's due, the Bears have long been great on defense. Just that QB slot.....who was the last great Bears QB? McMahon??
Sid Luckman.
Quote from: Alps on April 30, 2021, 03:07:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
Cautiously optimistic it's Wilson and the Jets have turned the corner, but let's see who else they draft.
Why are you giving the Jets so much credit all of a sudden? All the Jets have done for the past 20 years is ruin QBs. Until proven otherwise, Zach Wilson is the next Mark Sanchez or Sam Darnold.
Quote from: US 89 on April 30, 2021, 03:39:15 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 30, 2021, 03:07:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
Cautiously optimistic it's Wilson and the Jets have turned the corner, but let's see who else they draft.
Why are you giving the Jets so much credit all of a sudden? All the Jets have done for the past 20 years is ruin QBs. Until proven otherwise, Zach Wilson is the next Mark Sanchez or Sam Darnold.
My guess is because of the new coaching staff.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 04:00:16 PM
Quote from: US 89 on April 30, 2021, 03:39:15 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 30, 2021, 03:07:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:58:57 AM
Who do you think will have the best career?
Wilson
Lance
Fields
Jones
Cautiously optimistic it's Wilson and the Jets have turned the corner, but let's see who else they draft.
Why are you giving the Jets so much credit all of a sudden? All the Jets have done for the past 20 years is ruin QBs. Until proven otherwise, Zach Wilson is the next Mark Sanchez or Sam Darnold.
My guess is because of the new coaching staff.
Exactly. By trading up and grabbing an OL (plus Becton last year) they appear serious about protecting the QB.
Whoa. A flashy transition from Round 2 to Round 3 with 3 more QB's in 4 picks.
Kyle Trask to the Bucs at #64
Kellen Mond to the Vikings (via Jets) at #66
Davis Mills to the Texans at #67 (the Texans first pick of the draft!)
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 09:59:14 PM
Whoa. A flashy transition from Round 2 to Round 3 with 3 more QB's in 4 picks.
Kyle Trask to the Bucs at #64
Kellen Mond to the Vikings (via Jets) at #66
Davis Mills to the Texans at #67 (the Texans first pick of the draft!)
Got their Watson replacement.
Andre Cisco was a friend of mine ;)
Lol the Packers drafted A. Rodgers
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 10:07:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 09:59:14 PM
Whoa. A flashy transition from Round 2 to Round 3 with 3 more QB's in 4 picks.
Kyle Trask to the Bucs at #64
Kellen Mond to the Vikings (via Jets) at #66
Davis Mills to the Texans at #67 (the Texans first pick of the draft!)
Got their Watson replacement.
Hahaha. But Trask fell farther than he perhaps should have.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 09:59:14 PM
Whoa. A flashy transition from Round 2 to Round 3 with 3 more QB's in 4 picks.
Kyle Trask to the Bucs at #64
Kellen Mond to the Vikings (via Jets) at #66
Davis Mills to the Texans at #67 (the Texans first pick of the draft!)
Quarterbacks! Wow! Sure, they're probably career backups. But they're quarterbacks!!!!!!
Lol the Ravens drafted a guy named Cleveland.
Quote from: thspfc on May 01, 2021, 07:38:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2021, 09:59:14 PM
Whoa. A flashy transition from Round 2 to Round 3 with 3 more QB's in 4 picks.
Kyle Trask to the Bucs at #64
Kellen Mond to the Vikings (via Jets) at #66
Davis Mills to the Texans at #67 (the Texans first pick of the draft!)
Quarterbacks! Wow! Sure, they're probably career backups. But they're quarterbacks!!!!!!
Mond maybe. Trask and Mills no.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:00:29 PM
Lol the Packers drafted A. Rodgers
Drama aside, A. Rodgers will be playing for the Packers in the 2021 season. LOL.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 03, 2021, 10:18:02 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 30, 2021, 11:00:29 PM
Lol the Packers drafted A. Rodgers
Drama aside, A. Rodgers will be playing for the Packers in the 2021 season. LOL.
Maybe the Packers will trade the wrong A. Rodgers.
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1391815504772349954
:-D :-D
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 10, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1391815504772349954
:-D :-D
If he hadn't been so insistent on being a starting QB when he first came out of college, he could have been Taysom Hill before Taysom Hill.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 10, 2021, 04:41:13 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 10, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1391815504772349954
:-D :-D
If he hadn't been so insistent on being a starting QB when he first came out of college, he could have been Taysom Hill before Taysom Hill.
I really hope he makes the team!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 10, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1391815504772349954
:-D :-D
The Jaguars joining MLB?
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 07:25:42 AM
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Lol the media would be dumb, Tebow hasn't played QB since 2012.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:20:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 07:25:42 AM
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Lol the media would be dumb, Tebow hasn't played QB since 2012.
The media has one goal: Stir up controversy.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 11, 2021, 10:28:14 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:20:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 07:25:42 AM
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Lol the media would be dumb, Tebow hasn't played QB since 2012.
The media has one goal: Stir up controversy.
Sports media is one of the worst parts about modern sports.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 07:25:42 AM
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Sounds about right. :D
Although it really does depend on how Lawrence plays.
https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1392146421197987845?s=19
What do you guys think about London games?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 01:20:31 PM
https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1392146421197987845?s=19
What do you guys think about London games?
Aw that sucks!! I was hoping Covid would've been the nail in the coffin for Goedell's dream of a London franchise.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 01:31:03 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 01:20:31 PM
https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1392146421197987845?s=19
What do you guys think about London games?
Aw that sucks!! I was hoping Covid would've been the nail in the coffin for Goedell's dream of a London franchise.
With the UK's high vaccination rate this is possible. Mexico was canceled, however.
To answer your previous question regarding London games, I'm not a fan at all, and don't see a franchise there working out from a logistics standpoint.
The time difference is what would be a huge disadvantage to both the London team and the visiting team. It's one thing for a west coast team to play on the east coast or vice versa. You're dealing with a 3 hour difference.
But a west coast team traveling to London, or vice versa? 8 hours! That's some jet lag!
Mexico City would make more sense as they're in Central time.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:09:24 PM
To answer your previous question regarding London games, I'm not a fan at all, and don't see a franchise there working out from a logistics standpoint.
The time difference is what would be a huge disadvantage to both the London team and the visiting team. It's one thing for a west coast team to play on the east coast or vice versa. You're dealing with a 3 hour difference.
But a west coast team traveling to London, or vice versa? 8 hours! That's some jet lag!
Mexico City would make more sense as they're in Central time.
Mexico wouldn't be covid-possible.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 03:14:47 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:09:24 PM
To answer your previous question regarding London games, I'm not a fan at all, and don't see a franchise there working out from a logistics standpoint.
The time difference is what would be a huge disadvantage to both the London team and the visiting team. It's one thing for a west coast team to play on the east coast or vice versa. You're dealing with a 3 hour difference.
But a west coast team traveling to London, or vice versa? 8 hours! That's some jet lag!
Mexico City would make more sense as they're in Central time.
Mexico wouldn't be covid-possible.
Correct, right now. But I'm thinking long term, and how the commissioner has mentioned before he'd love to take the NFL global. (Obviously he forgets how ummm "successful" NFL Europe was...)
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:18:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 03:14:47 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:09:24 PM
To answer your previous question regarding London games, I'm not a fan at all, and don't see a franchise there working out from a logistics standpoint.
The time difference is what would be a huge disadvantage to both the London team and the visiting team. It's one thing for a west coast team to play on the east coast or vice versa. You're dealing with a 3 hour difference.
But a west coast team traveling to London, or vice versa? 8 hours! That's some jet lag!
Mexico City would make more sense as they're in Central time.
Mexico wouldn't be covid-possible.
Correct, right now. But I'm thinking long term, and how the commissioner has mentioned before he'd love to take the NFL global. (Obviously he forgets how ummm "successful" NFL Europe was...)
NFL Europe wasn't the real thing, however.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 03:30:49 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:18:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 03:14:47 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 03:09:24 PM
To answer your previous question regarding London games, I'm not a fan at all, and don't see a franchise there working out from a logistics standpoint.
The time difference is what would be a huge disadvantage to both the London team and the visiting team. It's one thing for a west coast team to play on the east coast or vice versa. You're dealing with a 3 hour difference.
But a west coast team traveling to London, or vice versa? 8 hours! That's some jet lag!
Mexico City would make more sense as they're in Central time.
Mexico wouldn't be covid-possible.
Correct, right now. But I'm thinking long term, and how the commissioner has mentioned before he'd love to take the NFL global. (Obviously he forgets how ummm "successful" NFL Europe was...)
NFL Europe wasn't the real thing, however.
True, but what I've read says that the response to the NFL over there has been mediocre. The fans turning out at the stadium are mostly expats. I just don't see a team working there.....but I suppose that's why I'm not making that sweet commissioner salary.
Am I weird if I look forward to the schedule release more than I look forward to the draft? I can't wait to see the schedule tomorrow. Can't wait to see who the NFL values as prime time national TV teams. Obviously teams like the Cowboys and Packers get a lot of nationally televised games every season. The Chiefs and Seahawks have been popular during the regimes of their respective star quarterbacks. But this year I would also expect the Buccaneers, Bills, Rams, 49ers, Browns, and Colts to get a lot of national games. The Jaguars will get more attention than they have in the past. Watch out for Jags/Panthers as a possible week 2 Thursday night matchup.
The NFL increased the maximum number of prime time games a team can be scheduled for from 5 to 7. We'll see if any team gets 6 or 7 night games.
The Cowboys have been rumored as a likely opening night opponent for the Buccaneers. That's a welcome idea to me, as it would mean them playing in scorching Florida at night rather than during the day.
Death, taxes, and Cowboys/Giants on national TV.
The most enticing game of the regular season is Bucs at Pats for obvious reasons.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:31:17 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 11, 2021, 10:28:14 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:20:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 07:25:42 AM
Bets on how long it takes the media to clamor for Tebow to start over Lawrence at QB? My guess is week 3.
Lol the media would be dumb, Tebow hasn't played QB since 2012.
The media has one goal: Stir up controversy.
Sports media is one of the worst parts about modern sports.
Sports media is one of the big parts of keeping the $$$ flowing to teams, players... and media. Just sayin'.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 04:09:29 PM
Am I weird if I look forward to the schedule release more than I look forward to the draft? I can't wait to see the schedule tomorrow. Can't wait to see who the NFL values as prime time national TV teams. Obviously teams like the Cowboys and Packers get a lot of nationally televised games every season. The Chiefs and Seahawks have been popular during the regimes of their respective star quarterbacks. But this year I would also expect the Buccaneers, Bills, Rams, 49ers, Browns, and Colts to get a lot of national games. The Jaguars will get more attention than they have in the past. Watch out for Jags/Panthers as a possible week 2 Thursday night matchup.
The NFL increased the maximum number of prime time games a team can be scheduled for from 5 to 7. We'll see if any team gets 6 or 7 night games.
The Cowboys have been rumored as a likely opening night opponent for the Buccaneers. That's a welcome idea to me, as it would mean them playing in scorching Florida at night rather than during the day.
Death, taxes, and Cowboys/Giants on national TV.
The most enticing game of the regular season is Bucs at Pats for obvious reasons.
Aren't Thursday night games supposed to be Amazon exclusives?
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 04:38:32 PM
Aren't Thursday night games supposed to be Amazon exclusives?
In 2022, yes.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 04:09:29 PM
Am I weird if I look forward to the schedule release more than I look forward to the draft? I can't wait to see the schedule tomorrow. Can't wait to see who the NFL values as prime time national TV teams.
More than the draft is a bit much, but I agree with your sentiment.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2021, 04:09:29 PM
The most enticing game of the regular season is Bucs at Pats for obvious reasons.
Bills-Bucs has to be top-5 as well. And don't forget Jets-Jags.
(I'm weirdly looking forward to Rams-Lions also, but I don't think it's top 5, LOL!)
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 05:36:37 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 11, 2021, 04:38:32 PM
Aren't Thursday night games supposed to be Amazon exclusives?
In 2022, yes.
Got it. I wonder if they'll make those better matchups to entice people into subscribing to Prime. Last year had some good ones, but prior to that, Thursday night games were usually mediocre matchups.
Sunday Night Football is definitely the marquee game of the week. Of course, I'm old enough to remember when that was Monday Night Football, but the times they are a changin.
Excited for Bucs at Pats.
Aaron Rodgers please stay in Green Bay.
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on May 11, 2021, 09:49:34 PM
Aaron Rodgers please stay in Green Bay.
Aren't you a Vikings fan?
Somebody already has Green Bay avatar
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on May 11, 2021, 10:10:59 PM
Somebody already has Green Bay avatar
Then why use the Vikings one? They are big rivals.
Well, Vikings fans might be in support of the Packers organization if they trade Rodgers out of the division. :-P
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 10:22:00 PM
Well, Vikings fans might be in support of the Packers organization if they trade Rodgers out of the division. :-P
No, he wants Aaron Rodgers to stay in Green Bay.
Week 1:
Cowboys at Bucs on Thursday night
Packers at Saints on Sunday afternoon
Broncos at Giants on Sunday afternoon
Bears at Rams on Sunday night
It's obvious that the NFL is putting both the Packers and Broncos in the same window and network to follow wherever Rodgers goes. I think there's a 90% chance he stays with the Packers, but if not the Broncos are the most likely destination.
Not surprised that the Rams are in prime time right away, though I might have expected it to be the Lions instead of the Bears.
Jets at Panthers is the headliner of the week 1 early slate.
Interesting that both CBS and Fox seemingly have national games in the 3:25 time slot, Browns/Chiefs and Packers/Saints.
Quote from: thspfc
link=topic=26378.msg2612774#msg2612774 date=1620824110
Jets at Panthers is the headliner of the week 1 early slate.
Interesting that both CBS and Fox seemingly have national games in the 3:25 time slot, Browns/Chiefs and Packers/Saints.
That's normal though. But based on the NFL overly complicated and restrictive TB rules, not all makets will see both games.
Cowboys Buccaneers opener.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:48:46 AM
Week 1:
Bears at Rams on Sunday night
Bears played (and won) the first game in Lucas Oil Stadium, now they get to play the first game in SoFi stadium that has fans.
https://twitter.com/mysportsupdate/status/1392451713580343299?s=21
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 12, 2021, 09:05:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:48:46 AM
Week 1:
Bears at Rams on Sunday night
Bears played (and won) the first game in Lucas Oil Stadium, now they get to play the first game in SoFi stadium that has fans.
I remember watching that game - besides Lucas Oil's debut (and I remember a filler segment by the sideline reporter explaining how their retractable roof works), it was also Matt Forte's debut. He had a ~50 yard td and finished with over 100 yards rushing if I remember correctly.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:50:13 AM
Not surprised that the Rams are in prime time right away, though I might have expected it to be the Lions instead of the Bears.
Why, because of Goff and Stafford? It would be a massive shock if the Lions are better than the Bears. The Lions are, along with the Texans, probably the worst two teams in the league and in fact the
only two teams I feel safe saying won't make the playoffs.
Hey, no Week 1 MNF double header this year? That was always kind of weird here in Eastern Time - the second game didn't end until after 1 AM.
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 10:01:33 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:50:13 AM
Not surprised that the Rams are in prime time right away, though I might have expected it to be the Lions instead of the Bears.
The Lions are, along with the Texans, probably the worst two teams in the league and in fact the only two teams I feel safe saying won't make the playoffs.
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
I feel very confident that the Texans won't win 3 games.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 10:01:33 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:50:13 AM
Not surprised that the Rams are in prime time right away, though I might have expected it to be the Lions instead of the Bears.
The Lions are, along with the Texans, probably the worst two teams in the league and in fact the only two teams I feel safe saying won't make the playoffs.
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
Jaguars could if Lawrence has a stellar rookie season.
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 12, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
I feel very confident that the Texans won't win 3 games.
You were very careful to word it that way, because you're covered if they win 4 or 5. :-P
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 01:34:26 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 12, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
I feel very confident that the Texans won't win 3 games.
You were very careful to word it that way, because you're covered if they win 4 or 5. :-P
LOL that was unintentional. They'll probably win 4 or 5 if Watson comes back, but if not, then I can't see them winning more than 2.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 10:01:33 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 08:50:13 AM
Not surprised that the Rams are in prime time right away, though I might have expected it to be the Lions instead of the Bears.
The Lions are, along with the Texans, probably the worst two teams in the league and in fact the only two teams I feel safe saying won't make the playoffs.
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
Alright, I'm going to file this for the future :D
Eagles have a shot in their division, so do the Jaguars (given the Titans loss of talent on offense and Wentz being a huge question mark). Broncos could absolutely make the playoffs, obviously with Rodgers, but even with Teddy. He should be serviceable with that roster.
The Jets are anyone's guess, but the AFC East does have a favorable schedule this year, at least.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
Jets - I agree
Bengals - If Burrow makes huge strides, I could see a wild card
Jaguars - That division makes it possible
Texans - I agree
Broncos - Maybe if they get Rodgers?
Eagles - That division makes it possible
Lions - I agree
Panthers - I agree
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 12, 2021, 01:42:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
Jets - I agree
Bengals - If Burrow makes huge strides, I could see a wild card
Jaguars - That division makes it possible
Texas - I agree
Broncos - Maybe if they get Rodgers?
Eagles - That division makes it possible
Lions - I agree
Panthers - I agree
Chris
I agree on the Eagles. Unless the NFC East suddenly gets a lot better, that will probably be the division where 1 game over 500 will get you the crown.
For the 7th time in 10 years and 6th in 7, the Bears will close the season in Minnesota. This is why all division final week is stupid. So sick of the same matchups over and over.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 12, 2021, 04:29:56 PM
For the 7th time in 10 years and 6th in 7, the Bears will close the season in Minnesota. This is why all division final week is stupid. So sick of the same matchups over and over.
It disincentivizes resting players week 17.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 12, 2021, 04:29:56 PM
For the 7th time in 10 years and 6th in 7, the Bears will close the season in Minnesota. This is why all division final week is stupid. So sick of the same matchups over and over.
If I'm not mistaken, with the addition of the 17th game, I thought they were no longer doing the final week that way. Also, I thought only the first week was released so far. How'd you get your info?
Chris
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 12, 2021, 04:29:56 PM
For the 7th time in 10 years and 6th in 7, the Bears will close the season in Minnesota. This is why all division final week is stupid. So sick of the same matchups over and over.
I actually like the divisional games the final week of the season. You get good rivalry games, and even if a team in a division isn't going anywhere, they might be able to play spoiler in regards to a rival's seeding.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 12, 2021, 08:59:50 AM
Quote from: thspfc
link=topic=26378.msg2612774#msg2612774 date=1620824110
Jets at Panthers is the headliner of the week 1 early slate.
Interesting that both CBS and Fox seemingly have national games in the 3:25 time slot, Browns/Chiefs and Packers/Saints.
That's normal though. But based on the NFL overly complicated and restrictive TB rules, not all makets will see both games.
They changed the rules for week 1 that both CBS and Fox will both have a doubleheader.
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 12, 2021, 01:42:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
Jets - I agree
Bengals - If Burrow makes huge strides, I could see a wild card
Jaguars - That division makes it possible
Texans - I agree
Broncos - Maybe if they get Rodgers?
Eagles - That division makes it possible
Lions - I agree
Panthers - I agree
Chris
Teams go beyond quarterbacks. The Jags' roster, while better than it was last year, is still terrible. Same with the Jets and Bengals. The NFC Least had to play against the NFC West and AFC North, the two best divisions last year. So that division is better than you think. Plus, three of the four teams in that division had a first year HC last season, which obviously impacted their 2020 records. The only team that didn't? The team that has a first year head coach this year. The Eagles also lost their quarterback of 5 years and will be rolling with by far the least experienced QB/HC combination of any of them in the division. To me the NFCE will probably shake out like this:
1. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 10-7
2. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 8-9
3. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 7-10
4. Eagles: 5-12
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 12, 2021, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 12, 2021, 04:29:56 PM
For the 7th time in 10 years and 6th in 7, the Bears will close the season in Minnesota. This is why all division final week is stupid. So sick of the same matchups over and over.
I actually like the divisional games the final week of the season. You get good rivalry games, and even if a team in a division isn't going anywhere, they might be able to play spoiler in regards to a rival's seeding.
That's fine if they mix up the matchups, but for the Bears to get to play Detroit as that game only once in 10 years is wrong. It needs to be fair.
Bears full schedule is out: https://twitter.com/DannyParkins/status/1392582812990115846
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 05:46:33 PM
Teams go beyond quarterbacks. The Jags' roster, while better than it was last year, is still terrible.
They signed a bunch of decent free agents as well. I know free agency doesn't always pay off, but I still see them probably going 7-10 or 8-9. If I'm off by just a little bit, they could sneak in.
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 05:46:33 PM
The NFC Least had to play against the NFC West and AFC North, the two best divisions last year. So that division is better than you think. Plus, three of the four teams in that division had a first year HC last season, which obviously impacted their 2020 records. The only team that didn't? The team that has a first year head coach this year. The Eagles also lost their quarterback of 5 years and will be rolling with by far the least experienced QB/HC combination of any of them in the division. To me the NFCE will probably shake out like this:
1. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 10-7
2. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 8-9
3. Washington/Dallas/Giants: 7-10
4. Eagles: 5-12
FWIW, the Vegas win totals for those teams are:
Dallas - 9.5
Washington - 8
Giants - 7
Philly - 6.5
I personally would take the under on Dallas since they still don't have a defense and I'd probably take the over on Washington. The other teams seem about right. I just know there's a lot of variability in the NFL and while I think the Eagles probably won't make the playoffs, they're not one of the teams I'd immediately write off.
Chris
I would question what the Giants are doing if they don't make the playoffs this season.
There's a pretty clear top-3 playoffs-or-bust teams IMO: Giants, Cardinals, and Raiders.
Falcons and Chargers are also near the top of the list but rank a little lower because they both have first-year head coaches.
(This is now the second Sports thread with 1000 replies, and my first thread with 1000 replies)
Matt Nagy is toast if the Bears don't make the playoffs, and he's probably still toast if they lose in the wild card round again.
My guess is that Mike Zimmer also needs to make the playoffs to keep his job.
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 07:51:13 PM
I would question what the Giants are doing if they don't make the playoffs this season.
There's a pretty clear top-3 playoffs-or-bust teams IMO: Giants, Cardinals, and Raiders.
Falcons and Chargers are also near the top of the list but rank a little lower because they both have first-year head coaches.
(This is now the second Sports thread with 1000 replies, and my first thread with 1000 replies)
For what Gruden got paid....yeah, the Raiders need to make the playoffs, or he's out.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 13, 2021, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 07:51:13 PM
I would question what the Giants are doing if they don't make the playoffs this season.
There's a pretty clear top-3 playoffs-or-bust teams IMO: Giants, Cardinals, and Raiders.
Falcons and Chargers are also near the top of the list but rank a little lower because they both have first-year head coaches.
(This is now the second Sports thread with 1000 replies, and my first thread with 1000 replies)
For what Gruden got paid....yeah, the Raiders need to make the playoffs, or he's out.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Mayock loves Gruden to a fault. Similar to how Jerry Jones loved Jason Garrett too much to fire him for a while.
Time for a 2+ month bump, because THE NFL STARTS IN 10 DAYS! Well, the preseason anyways.
I get to see my Cowboys kick off both the preseason (against the Steelers) and the actual season (against the Buccaneers). Only reason I'm going to watch the preseason is to see how Dak Prescott is doing following the ankle injury against the Giants last October.
Rodgers ends the drama by reporting today.
Quote from: Big John on July 27, 2021, 01:59:04 PM
Rodgers ends the drama by reporting today.
RIP Broncos fans.
Oh was there some scuzzlebutt? I hadn't heard. :meh: :-P
Quote from: Big John on July 27, 2021, 01:59:04 PM
Rodgers ends the drama by reporting today.
Was a long time coming. NFL fans always fail to realize that the front office is in charge of players who are under contract. Tom Brady leaving the Patriots got everyone excited about star players, particularly quarterbacks, moving around whenever they want wherever they want. But the Brady situation literally took decades to happen, as he was an unrestricted free agent for the first time in his 20-year career. Rodgers is under contract. So is Deshaun Watson, so was Russell Wilson when he and the Seahawks were having their "feud" (it was a bunch of made-up and overblown storylines, there was never a chance that Wilson was going to be traded). When a player is under contract there is three ways they can go to a different team: a trade, in which case the front office makes the final decision, and if they don't want to trade you then they won't trade you; fake retirement, which is a great way to make everyone hate you; or getting cut, and stars almost never get cut.
These are my preseason rankings from 1-32. Doesn't reflect who I think will win the Super Bowl/go to the Super Bowl etc., but it's who I think the best teams are right now.
Tier 1: Super Bowl contenders
1. Buccaneers
2. Chiefs
3. Rams
4. Packers
5. Browns
6. Bills
Tier 2: Will most likely make the playoffs
7. Seahawks
8. Ravens
9. Titans
10. Steelers
11. Colts
Tier 3: Playoff bubble
12. Dolphins
13. Chargers
14. Cardinals
15. Vikings
16. 49ers
17. Bears
18. Saints
19. Patriots
20. Raiders
21. Cowboys
Tier 4: Not good but not completely awful
22. Washington
23. Giants
24. Falcons
25. Panthers
26. Broncos
27. Bengals
28. Jaguars
Tier 5: Roll out the tanks
29. Eagles
30. Texans
31. Lions
32. Jets
Quote from: thspfc on July 28, 2021, 01:11:44 PM
These are my preseason rankings from 1-32. Doesn't reflect who I think will win the Super Bowl/go to the Super Bowl etc., but it's who I think the best teams are right now.
Tier 1: Super Bowl contenders
1. Buccaneers
2. Chiefs
3. Rams
4. Packers
5. Browns
6. Bills
Tier 2: Will most likely make the playoffs
7. Seahawks
8. Ravens
9. Titans
10. Steelers
11. Colts
Tier 3: Playoff bubble
12. Dolphins
13. Chargers
14. Cardinals
15. Vikings
16. 49ers
17. Bears
18. Saints
19. Patriots
20. Raiders
21. Cowboys
Tier 4: Not good but not completely awful
22. Washington
23. Giants
24. Falcons
25. Panthers
26. Broncos
27. Bengals
28. Jaguars
Tier 5: Roll out the tanks
29. Eagles
30. Texans
31. Lions
32. Jets
Jets have the pieces to be Tier 4 but the management to be Tier 6.
Quote from: thspfc on July 28, 2021, 12:51:50 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 27, 2021, 01:59:04 PM
Rodgers ends the drama by reporting today.
Was a long time coming. NFL fans always fail to realize that the front office is in charge of players who are under contract. Tom Brady leaving the Patriots got everyone excited about star players, particularly quarterbacks, moving around whenever they want wherever they want. But the Brady situation literally took decades to happen, as he was an unrestricted free agent for the first time in his 20-year career. Rodgers is under contract. So is Deshaun Watson, so was Russell Wilson when he and the Seahawks were having their "feud" (it was a bunch of made-up and overblown storylines, there was never a chance that Wilson was going to be traded). When a player is under contract there is three ways they can go to a different team: a trade, in which case the front office makes the final decision, and if they don't want to trade you then they won't trade you; fake retirement, which is a great way to make everyone hate you; or getting cut, and stars almost never get cut.
Rodgers is under contract, but also at an age and a wealth level where he could easily retire if he didn't get what he wanted. The "front office" didn't have a lot of leverage in this situation.
Seems as tho the front office signing Rodgers' old buddy Randall Cobb helped smooth things over in Green Bay.
Carson Wentz is going to miss at least one week of the regular season with a foot injury that has apparently persisted since he was in high school. The dude was with the Eagles for five years, and they did absolutely nothing to fix it. Speaking of the Eagles, Devonta Smith has a knee injury, but he's expected to be back for week 1.
If I was an NFL player I would beg to not go to Philadelphia. Year after year. So many injuries. Eagles fans still want to blame bad luck. When you're one of the 3 most injured teams in the league 5 years in a row, you are doing something very wrong. Maybe it was a Doug Pederson thing and the Smith injury is not indicative of how this season will go.
Quote from: thspfc on August 02, 2021, 04:50:11 PM
Carson Wentz is going to miss at least one week of the regular season with a foot injury that has apparently persisted since he was in high school. The dude was with the Eagles for five years, and they did absolutely nothing to fix it. Speaking of the Eagles, Devonta Smith has a knee injury, but he's expected to be back for week 1.
If I was an NFL player I would beg to not go to Philadelphia. Year after year. So many injuries. Eagles fans still want to blame bad luck. When you're one of the 3 most injured teams in the league 5 years in a row, you are doing something very wrong. Maybe it was a Doug Pederson thing and the Smith injury is not indicative of how this season will go.
A lot of Philly fans blame the medical staff. There was a fairly direct correlation between a largely revamped medical staff and more injuries.
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:53:07 PM
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
It's still a couple of years until NFL players start being younger than me, but already some upcoming NBA prospects are younger than me.
It gets weirder when you reach the age where many players are on the downside of their careers, and only the best of the best are still playing.
I became older than every NFL player when Adam Vinatierri retired.
Hey, just curious. Any interest in an AARoads Fantasy Football League? (Maybe make a separate thread for it to see if we could get 10-12 people?)
Chris
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 11, 2021, 04:37:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:53:07 PM
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
It's still a couple of years until NFL players start being younger than me, but already some upcoming NBA prospects are younger than me.
What stinks is when you hear the oldest player in a given league described as "old" and he's several years younger than you are (I'm thinking of Zdeno Chara).
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 05:20:22 PM
Hey, just curious. Any interest in an AARoads Fantasy Football League? (Maybe make a separate thread for it to see if we could get 10-12 people?)
Chris
I'm interested, I would prefer an nfl.com league.
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 08:44:37 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 05:20:22 PM
Hey, just curious. Any interest in an AARoads Fantasy Football League? (Maybe make a separate thread for it to see if we could get 10-12 people?)
Chris
I'm interested, I would prefer an nfl.com league.
Never played there. Any particular reason you like them? Or just convenience with your other leagues?
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 08:57:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 08:44:37 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 05:20:22 PM
Hey, just curious. Any interest in an AARoads Fantasy Football League? (Maybe make a separate thread for it to see if we could get 10-12 people?)
Chris
I'm interested, I would prefer an nfl.com league.
Never played there. Any particular reason you like them? Or just convenience with your other leagues?
Chris
I must say I prefer NFL.com over Yahoo for fantasy football. I
might be up for it. I'm actually the reigning champion of my youth group league.
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:53:07 PM
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
you are also a better football player
Quote from: Alps on August 11, 2021, 09:38:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:53:07 PM
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
you are also a better football player
Haha! No way, I am terrible at sports, including football. Zach Wilson is still better than me even if he's the biggest bust of all time.
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp. But it doesn't matter until week 1. Jets will have a top 5 draft pick next year regardless of whether or not Wilson plays well, so if he has a bad rookie season, who knows if he'll be a Jet in 2022.
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 11:39:55 PM
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp. But it doesn't matter until week 1. Jets will have a top 5 draft pick next year regardless of whether or not Wilson plays well, so if he has a bad rookie season, who knows if he'll be a Jet in 2022.
Without looking to verify, I would highly doubt any 1st round QB has ever not been on the team that he started his career with (draft day trades and such notwithstanding) on opening day of his 2nd year. Tough to bail on investments quite that early.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 11:45:13 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 11:39:55 PM
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp. But it doesn't matter until week 1. Jets will have a top 5 draft pick next year regardless of whether or not Wilson plays well, so if he has a bad rookie season, who knows if he'll be a Jet in 2022.
Without looking to verify, I would highly doubt any 1st round QB has ever not been on the team that he started his career with (draft day trades and such notwithstanding) on opening day of his 2nd year. Tough to bail on investments quite that early.
Chris
Josh Rosen was drafted by the Cardinals in 2018 and was shipped off to the Dolphins one year later.
Quote from: thspfc on August 12, 2021, 11:38:54 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 11, 2021, 11:45:13 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 11:39:55 PM
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp. But it doesn't matter until week 1. Jets will have a top 5 draft pick next year regardless of whether or not Wilson plays well, so if he has a bad rookie season, who knows if he'll be a Jet in 2022.
Without looking to verify, I would highly doubt any 1st round QB has ever not been on the team that he started his career with (draft day trades and such notwithstanding) on opening day of his 2nd year. Tough to bail on investments quite that early.
Chris
Josh Rosen was drafted by the Cardinals in 2018 and was shipped off to the Dolphins one year later.
Good call. Forgot about him. Still, rare.
Chris
Quote from: Alps on August 11, 2021, 09:38:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2021, 03:53:07 PM
Just realized that I am within a couple days of the exact same age as Jets quarterback Zach Wilson.
Wow, that is hard to wrap my head around.
you are also a better football player
Midway through last season, ESPN or a similar site was breaking down strengths and weaknesses of all 32 teams. The Jets' weakness was a single word: "Football".
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 11:39:55 PM
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp.
Surprisingly it never occurred to me until just now that the NFL now has two Wilson QB's - Zach and Russell.
There's also three Allen QB's, but Kyle and Brandon aren't as well known.
Quote from: webny99 on August 12, 2021, 11:46:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on August 11, 2021, 11:39:55 PM
Apparently Wilson has been less than impressive in training camp.
Surprisingly it never occurred to me until just now that the NFL now has two Wilson QB's - Zach and Russell.
There's also three Allen QB's, but Kyle and Brandon aren't as well known.
Brandon Allen had a huge game against the Texans week 16 last season. Of course it was a 3-10-1 team vs. a 4-10 team at 12:00 PM, so nobody watched.
Ryan Fitzpatrick is still on his whining tirade about being benched for Tua in week 8 last season. Maybe if you didn't want to be benched you should have done better than, checks notes . . .
20/30, 191 yards, 3 INTs at New England
29/45, 315 yards, 2 INTs vs Seattle
18/27, 191 yards, 3 INTs vs the Jets
Even his good games were nothing special, and they were against the mediocre at best Bills' defense, the 1-15 Jaguars, and the 49ers who were injured to Mars and back. Dude has never led a team to the playoffs and has a career winning percentage of .409. There's a reason why he's always on bad teams. Well, two reasons, actually. 1) He's a below average starter at best, and a mediocre backup at worst. And 2) Because he's not good, he only ever gets asked to start on bad teams who have no realistic hopes of doing anything in the playoffs, and just need someone to ensure that they only lose by 7-10 points instead of 20. He's going to have a dreadful start to the year and be benched for Taylor Heinicke by week 5. And the worst part is that people still adore him. Maybe it's the extravagant outfits after winning a week 2 game against a mediocre team, in a season in which he would get benched two weeks later and the team would go 5-11. I don't know but Fitzpatrick and his fans are getting on my nerves and it makes me hate the Football Team even more.
I'm not a Fitzpatrick fan per se, but you're definitely cherry picking stats.
His games started before getting benched:
Week 1 @ NE: 20/30, 191 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT - Obviously not a good game
Week 2 vs. BUF: 31/47, 328 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Almost beat the #2 seed in the AFC
Week 3 @ JAX: 18/20, 160 yds, 3 (total) TD, 0 INT - Won the game easily and performed as well as needed
Week 4 vs. SEA: 29/45, 315 yds, 1 (total) TD, 2 INT - Not a great game from him, but lost to a team that was at that point 3-0 and playing very well
Week 5 @ SF: 22/28, 350 yds, 3 TD, 0 INT - Very good game from him against a pretty good defense
Week 6 vs. NYJ: 18/28, 191 yds, 3 TD (which you conveniently left out), 2 INT (not 3, as you posted) - Ball got away from him a little bit, but still 3 TDs and a shutout against the Jets.
He's not a bad quarterback. Certainly not a great either, but his stats were definitely better than Tua's when he started the next batch of games.
Week 8 vs. LAR: 12/22, 93 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT - Barely moved the ball
Week 9 @ ARI: 20/28, 248 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - His best game as a starter, unquestionably
Week 10 vs. LAC: 15/25, 169 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Not bad, not great
Week 11 @ DEN: 11/20, 83 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT - Barely moved the ball
Averages in these stretches:
Yards: Fitzpatrick - 256, Tua - 148 -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
Completion Percentage: Fitzpatrick - 69.7%, Tua - 61.0% -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
TDs: Fitzpatrick - 1.83, Tua - 1.5 -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
INTs: Fitzpatrick - 1.17, Tua - 0 -> Advantage Tua
I don't know how you can really argue who was better statistically and if I were Fitzy, I'd be upset about getting benched too.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 13, 2021, 01:09:41 PM
Week 2 vs. BUF: 31/47, 328 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Beat the #2 seed in the AFC
Not a bad performance, but the Bills won that game 31-28.
(I don't have any strong Fitz takes myself, but am mildly amused by those of you that do! :))
Quote from: webny99 on August 13, 2021, 01:16:27 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 13, 2021, 01:09:41 PM
Week 2 vs. BUF: 31/47, 328 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Beat the #2 seed in the AFC
Not a bad performance, but the Bills won that game 31-28.
(I don't have any strong Fitz takes myself, but am mildly amused by those of you that do! :))
Oops, was going too quickly. I'll edit. I don't have a huge take, but a) I just like a nice, civil argument and b) I don't like selective stat references.
Also, for those of you that like advanced stats:
2020 DVOA: Fitzpatrick - +7.5%, Tua - -8.5% (DVOA is basically how successful a player is vs. the average player in the league in the same game situations. Positive is better.) -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
2020 DYAR: Fitzpatrick - 362, Tua - 56 (DYAR is defense-adjusted yards above replacement player. Higher is better.) -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
Chris
My top 10 hot takes for this season:
10. Chiefs blow out the Browns 48-21 in week 1
9. Vikings make the playoffs
8. Texans finish with at least 5 wins
7. 49ers get last in the NFC West (shouldn't be a hot take because they were last in 2020, but people like them for some reason)
6. Eagles finish with fewer than 5 wins
5. Panthers finish with fewer than 6 wins
4. Ryan Fitzpatrick is benched for Taylor Heinicke by mid-October
3. NFC East has three teams with a record of 8-9 or better
2. Jets don't win a single game until late November/early December and get the no. 1 overall pick
1. Tua Tagovailoa finishes with a higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, better QBR, better passer rating, more touchdowns, and fewer turnovers than Joe Burrow
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 13, 2021, 01:09:41 PM
I'm not a Fitzpatrick fan per se, but you're definitely cherry picking stats.
His games started before getting benched:
Week 1 @ NE: 20/30, 191 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT - Obviously not a good game
Week 2 vs. BUF: 31/47, 328 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Almost beat the #2 seed in the AFC
Week 3 @ JAX: 18/20, 160 yds, 3 (total) TD, 0 INT - Won the game easily and performed as well as needed
Week 4 vs. SEA: 29/45, 315 yds, 1 (total) TD, 2 INT - Not a great game from him, but lost to a team that was at that point 3-0 and playing very well
Week 5 @ SF: 22/28, 350 yds, 3 TD, 0 INT - Very good game from him against a pretty good defense
Week 6 vs. NYJ: 18/28, 191 yds, 3 TD (which you conveniently left out), 2 INT (not 3, as you posted) - Ball got away from him a little bit, but still 3 TDs and a shutout against the Jets.
He's not a bad quarterback. Certainly not a great either, but his stats were definitely better than Tua's when he started the next batch of games.
Week 8 vs. LAR: 12/22, 93 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT - Barely moved the ball
Week 9 @ ARI: 20/28, 248 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - His best game as a starter, unquestionably
Week 10 vs. LAC: 15/25, 169 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Not bad, not great
Week 11 @ DEN: 11/20, 83 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT - Barely moved the ball
Averages in these stretches:
Yards: Fitzpatrick - 256, Tua - 148 -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
Completion Percentage: Fitzpatrick - 69.7%, Tua - 61.0% -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
TDs: Fitzpatrick - 1.83, Tua - 1.5 -> Advantage Fitzpatrick
INTs: Fitzpatrick - 1.17, Tua - 0 -> Advantage Tua
I don't know how you can really argue who was better statistically and if I were Fitzy, I'd be upset about getting benched too.
Chris
Tua is also the future of the team though. Fitzpatrick was at least mediocre during his time in Miami, but mediocre will not get you anywhere in a conference where you will have to contend with the Chiefs, Bills, Browns, Chargers, and Ravens for the next decade, at least. Even if Fitzpatrick was slightly better this season, look at how much crap the Packers have been getting over the past 16 months for the Jordan Love situation, and how he didn't play in 2020. Now imagine if it was Ryan Fitzpatrick starting over Love rather than the league MVP. You have to see what your first round pick can do in the regular season.
Quote from: webny99 on August 13, 2021, 01:16:27 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 13, 2021, 01:09:41 PM
Week 2 vs. BUF: 31/47, 328 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT - Beat the #2 seed in the AFC
Not a bad performance, but the Bills won that game 31-28.
(I don't have any strong Fitz takes myself, but am mildly amused by those of you that do! :))
I wasn't going to bring up W/L records, but FWIW, Tua went 6-3 compared to Fitzpatrick's 4-3.
Quote from: thspfc on August 15, 2021, 02:31:32 PM
My top 10 hot takes for this season:
7. 49ers get last in the NFC West (shouldn't be a hot take because they were last in 2020, but people like them for some reason)
The pundits seem mildly optimistic about this year (but not to the point of leading the division or going far). Win total projections:
ESPN: 10-11
USA Today ("San Francisco 48ers" though): 10
Bleacher Report: 8
SI: 10-11
CBS: 10.5
Quick eyeballing of other predictions from those sources: NFC West shakes out to LA/SEA, then SF, then AZ
tl;dr: I agree, it's a hot take :-)
My 2021 AFC predictions . . .
AFC East
1. Bills (13-4): My one big concern with the Bills is running the ball. It was the reason why their offense fizzled out in the playoffs, playing poorly against the Ravens and then getting blown out by the Chiefs. If Josh Allen has an off game, or even a mediocre game, they're in trouble. Case in point: the Titans and Chiefs games last season. Their defense also struggled against the better passing offenses they played last year. But the Bills' passing offense will carry them to a great regular season.
2. Dolphins (11-6): I was very anti-Dolphins last season but I'm coming around on them now. The two reasons why I don't think they will win the division are a) we don't know if Tua is the answer at QB, and b) the Bills absolutely gashed them last year to the tune of 87 points over two games. But they have an excellent group of skill players and a good secondary.
3. Patriots (9-8): I'm always skeptical of teams who draft QBs in the first round, but I don't think Belichick will be rushing to get Mac Jones in there too soon. The problem is that Cam Newton can't throw the ball downfield, yet all New England has are deep ball WRs. They have two good tight ends, but tight ends do not win you a lot of games. Overall it's a decent team but they have no "it factor", nobody who is going to scare opposing teams.
4. Jets (2-15): They'll go 0-6 in the division because in terms of talent and experience they are far inferior everywhere on the field compared to the other three teams in the division. With a first year coaching staff, a bad offensive line, and a below average skill group, Zach Wilson will have a rough time in year 1.
AFC North
1. Ravens (13-4): They will once again have the best rushing offense in the league by far. Lamar Jackson's passing stats will improve with the addition of a few wide receivers including Sammy Watkins. But the best rushing offense doesn't get you far in the playoffs if you can't consistently throw for 250-350 yards a game.
2. Browns (13-4): I have them second in the division because they struggled against the Ravens last year, giving up a total of 85 points in those two games. Baker Mayfield will take another step forward, but he won't by any means be an elite quarterback. They have the best offensive line and probably the best duo of running backs in Nick Chubb and Kareem Hunt. Their secondary was atrocious last year but they improved it in the offseason, with John Johnson from the Rams and Greg Newsome from Northwestern. Even so I think they get ripped apart by the Chiefs in week 1 because it's not good to play the Chiefs with a brand new secondary.
3. Steelers (11-6): The only thing people remember about the Steelers is how they slumped to end the season, not how they started 11-0. But they did start 11-0. Big Ben is still better than people think. They have three great young receivers. They have improved their running game with Najee Harris. Their pass rush is really good. The problem is that I don't think they will do any better than 1-3 against the top two teams in the division.
4. Bengals (5-12): Similar to the Jets but not as bad, the Bengals will be the obvious runt of the litter in this division. They might snatch an upset win over Pittsburgh or Cleveland. Joe Burrow is still recovering from injury, their offensive line is still bad, and their defense is still really bad.
AFC South
1. Titans (10-7): Their offense will be top 6-8 in the league, and their defense will be bottom 10. They benefit from being in a weak division.
2. Colts (7-10): They are better than their record will show, but the fact is there are so many good teams in the AFC that it has to be like that for some teams. Carson Wentz's foot injury is concerning, even if he's ready to go in week 1. Let's not forget that Wentz was less than impressive in 2020. They had a tendency to play down to the level of their opponent last year, I think they'll lose some close games that they should have won.
3. Texans (5-12): Deshaun Watson is sadly going to be starting for the Texans this season. The majority of their losses in 2020 were close, they were better than their record would indicate. With no cap room and no draft picks until the third round, they didn't improve much in the offseason. The defense is still awful.
4. Jaguars (4-13) Below average offensive line, rookie quarterback, and first year head coach. They do have decent RBs and WRs. They'll be exciting for the first few games, but everyone will soon realize that they're not very good. That being said I do expect Trevor Lawrence to have a decent rookie season.
AFC West
1. Chiefs (15-2): Their offense is ridiculous and the addition of Orlando Brown should make it one level higher still than last season. They are the best two minute drill team ever, other than perhaps the '07 Patriots. Mahomes will put up MVP stats yet again. One thing they had issues with last season was, oddly, red zone offense.
2. Chargers (9-8): I think they will struggle at the beginning of the season with a first year head coach, a brand new offensive line, and a heavily frontloaded schedule. But they'll pick it up later on in the season. Justin Herbert will have a great year, but the pressure on him will increase during the offseason, with no playoff appearences.
3. Broncos (6-11): I hope they start Drew Lock rather than Teddy Bridgewater because Bridgewater is a ticket straight to 6 wins without fail, whereas with Lock they will at least see once and for all whether or not he has a future as a starter. Their receivers, tight ends, and running backs are pretty good (so long as they don't have to play quarterback :-D). Defense is a far cry from the No Fly Zone, to say the least.
4. Raiders (5-12): They don't have anybody or any group of players that will go out and win the team the game. There are questions about the head coach. Their offensive line was gutted. They're always bad in November and December. Really there's not too much to like about this team, aside from their stadium I guess.
AFC Playoffs
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Ravens
4. Titans
5. Browns
6. Steelers
7. Dolphins
Wild Card
Bills beat Dolphins - As I mentioned, the Dolphins had trouble with the Bills last season
Steelers beat Ravens - Steelers are the more complete team, and that's important in the playoffs
Browns beat Titans - Titans defense was really bad against the Browns last season
Divisional
Chiefs beat Steelers - Chiefs offense coming off a bye will be too much for even the Steelers defense to handle
Browns beat Bills - Browns running game will power through the Bills defense
AFC Championship
Chiefs beat Browns - the only reason why the divisional round game last season wasn't a blowout was the Mahomes injury
AFC offensive player of the year: Patrick Mahomes
AFC defensive player of the year: TJ Watt
AFC offensive rookie of the year: Trevor Lawrence
AFC defensive rookie of the year: Patrick Surtain
Fired coaches: Zac Taylor (CIN), Vic Fangio (DEN), Jon Gruden (LV)
Just for a counterpoint...
My 2021 AFC predictions . . .
AFC East
1. Bills (12-5): I'm seeing Josh Allen a little bit like Lamar Jackson last year where teams are going to understand how to game plan for him a bit more. Still a good team.
2. Dolphins (11-6): I think the defense leads the way, Tua does okay but not great, and the running game is a committee mess.
3. Patriots (7-10): Belichick is still Belichick, but I don't see how the offense offers anything scary. Especially with Miami having improved, I don't see them getting to .500.
4. Jets (3-14): They're bad, but every one in a while blind squirrels find nuts.
AFC North
1. Ravens (12-5): Good defense, good running game. We'll see if adding some receivers does anything.
2. Steelers (11-6): Tomlin's teams don't stay down for long. The offensive line is terrible, but they have three really good WRs so I expect Big Ben to air it out a lot.
3. Browns (9-8): Cleveland isn't allowed to have nice things for long.
4. Bengals (7-10): Very underrated offense. Defense terrible.
AFC South
1. Titans (13-4): They'll go 6-0 in the division. Adding Julio won't honestly move the needle that much on offense.
2. Jaguars (7-10): Underrated offensive weapons again. A slight surprised to finish second in the division.
3. Colts (6-11): No QB, No WRs. Pretty much just Jonathan Taylor on offense and if he gets hurt, watch out.
4. Texans (2-15): Worst defense in the league. If DeShaun doesn't play, arguably worst offense in the league.
AFC West
1. Chiefs (16-1): Mahomes is a bad, bad man.
2. Chargers (11-6): Ekeler is underrated. Herbert will vault into the top 7-8 QBs in the league. Keenan Allen leads the league in targets.
3. Broncos (9-8): Lock proves not horrible. Sutton/Jeudy/Patrick/Hamler do help him out. Javonte Williams outrushes Melvin Gordon.
4. Raiders (5-12): Waller is good. They have an anonymous team though.
AFC Playoffs
1. Chiefs
2. Titans
3. Ravens
4. Bills
5. Dolphins
6. Chargers
7. Steelers
Wild Card
Titans over Steelers - High scoring game, but the running game behind Henry pulls it out
Chargers over Ravens - More offensive weapons for Chargers
Bills over Dolphins - Not taking Tua over Allen
Divisional
Chiefs over Chargers - They'll be very familiar with each other. Even if the Chargers manage to get a game from them in the regular season, going with Patty
Bills over Titans - A more complete team overall.
AFC Championship
Chiefs over Bills - Until Mahomes isn't a Chief, I have no reason to pick against them
AFC offensive player of the year: Patrick Mahomes
AFC defensive player of the year: TJ Watt
AFC offensive rookie of the year: Ja'Marr Chase
AFC defensive rookie of the year: Patrick Surtain
Fired coaches: Jon Gruden (LV), David Culley (HOU) (Only his first year, but this franchise is doomed)
Chris
I've got a few hot takes, some of which I'm really hesitant to share because it will essentially guarantee they won't happen. Generally the only predictions that come true are the ones that you don't share with anyone.
In any case, I try not to read too much into the past when thinking about the future. Sure, it makes sense to look at the past for context, but I don't just assume things will be the same just because they are similar externally. There's always some surprises, some disappointments, and more change in general than you'd expect.
So with that in mind, here are three of my hottest takes for the 2021 NFL season:
-The Chiefs and Bucs will BOTH be first-round playoff exits
-Only ONE team from the AFC North will make the playoffs
-The Jaguars will make the playoffs
Jaguars cut Tim Tebow
Okay, fine. Just records, no analyses (and not going game by game, so don't mind my addition):
AFC East:
* Bills 13-4
* Cheaters 11-6
* Dolphins 10-7
* Jets 6-11
AFC North:
* Browns 12-5
* Ravens 9-8
* Bengals 8-9
* Steelers 7-10
AFC South:
* Titans 10-7
* Jaguars 8-9
* Colts 6-11
* Texans 3-14
AFC West:
* Chiefs 14-3
* Chargers 10-7
* Broncos 8-8-1
* Raiders 6-10-1
My 2021 NFC predictions . . .
NFC East
1. Cowboys (9-8): This might be wishful thinking, but there's absolutely no reason why this team can't get to 9 wins this season, and 9 wins will be good enough for first place in the division. Yes, the run defense is not very good, but Micah Parsons should help matters. The secondary will be much better than last season with the additions of Keanu Neal and Malik Hooker. So if the defense can simply be serviceable, Dak Prescott and the offense can get the Cowboys to the playoffs. Ezekiel Elliott is primed for a bounce-back season. Amari Cooper and CeeDee Lamb are both going to have huge seasons with Prescott back.
2. Giants (8-9): They made a lot of good moves in the offseason, but this is still a below average team with a below average quarterback and a below average head coach. Daniel Jones cannot be trusted with the game on the line, and neither can their defense. Their best player, Saquon Barkley, has had injury issues for the majority of his time in the league.
3. Washington (8-9): Dysfunctional organization with big question marks at quarterback. A tale as old as time. Outside of Terry McLaurin they don't have any great skill players. A great defensive front will only get you so far if your offense is terrible. I have them below the Giants because they are 0-4 against the Giants over the last two seasons.
4. Eagles (4-13): My money is on the Eagles being the least entertaining team to watch this season, because they have literally not a single player that will draw people to a TV. We'll find out if Jalen Hurts is the guy. If he's not, they'll use their shiny top 5 pick on a QB.
NFC North
1. Packers (13-4): Aaron Rodgers is back and it seems like there won't be any more animosity, until the 2022 offseason at least. This is, once again, a Super Bowl-caliber team that will dominate in the regular season. When they do lose it's because of bad offensive line play and stupid mistakes at the worst possible time.
2. Vikings (11-6): I expect the Vikings to bounce back this year. Kirk Cousins was, quietly, one of the best quarterbacks in the league down the stretch in 2020. Justin Jefferson and Adam Thielen might just be the second best receiving duo in the NFL this season, after Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelce. The defense is still suspect but it should be better than last season. During his time in Minnesota Mike Zimmer has earned a reputation of cooling his seat right back off when it seems to get hot, like he did in 2017 and 2019.
3. Bears (7-10): A very hard team to predict, as I could see the season going one of a few very different ways. It was a questionable offseason for the Bears. Their quarterback situation this season is unclear - will Andy Dalton start as long as he plays well? Is it predetermined that Justin Fields will take over at some point? Will Fields start right away? That uncertainty scares me. Their pass rush is still very good, as is their receiving core. But they have a frontloaded schedule and if they start poorly, Matt Nagy could get fired and teams that fire their coach mid-season rarely finish with more than 6 wins. I think Nagy will hold onto his job for at least the duration of the season.
4. Lions (4-13): Just not much to like about this team. First year head coach. The few great players that they do have are very young.
NFC South
1. Buccaneers (14-3): They're the most complete team in the league. Really not much to say. The weak division helps them out.
2. Falcons (6-11): They will have a great passing offense, and probably not much else. The run game will be below average. The defense will be below average. First year head coach. I have them being better than last year because they would have been 7-9 last year if they could consistently hold a 16+ point lead.
3. Saints (5-12): Had the worst offseason of any team in the league in terms of talent lost. Neither Taysom Hill nor Jameis Winston is a reliable replacement for Drew Brees, and a shell-of-his-former-self 2020 Drew Brees at that. They were gutted in free agency. Alvin Kamara and Michael Thomas (if/when he's healthy) will put points on the board, but not enough in most cases.
4. Panthers (4-13): Probably the most overrated team in the league headed into this season. Sam Darnold is not it. He's just not. Their defense will be terrible. They need Christian McCaffrey to stay healthy. They have a couple decent receivers and they might have a good coach.
NFC West
1. Rams (13-4): Seems like people are overthinking the Rams. They have one of the best defenses, if not the outright best. They have a great group of skill players. The Cam Akers injury doesn't scare me as much as it does other people, since it's obvious that Sean McVay's offense can work with the vast majority of capable running backs. The expectations are sky high for Matthew Stafford, but even if he doesn't meet them, keep in mind that this team went 10-6 last season with the mediocre at best Jared Goff.
2. Seahawks (11-6): Their tendency to always play down to the level of their competition will finally bite them this year. Russell Wilson will be great in September and October, then fall off significantly late in the season like he's done four of the past five seasons. The defense will be better than last year, but they now have quite possibly the league's most overrated player, Jamal Adams, locked into a huge contract.
3. Cardinals (10-7): Kyler Murray and DeAndre Hopkins will have huge seasons in their second year together. AJ Green is a good addition to an already very good receiving core. Their secondary has a few good young players, though the loss of Patrick Peterson will hurt. The thing I don't like is the JJ Watt signing, that will turn out to be one of the worst free agent signings of the decade.
4. 49ers (7-10): The best injured reserve list of all time, except now there's a quarterback controversy. Woohoo!
NFC Playoffs
1. Buccaneers
2. Packers
3. Rams
4. Cowboys
5. Seahawks
6. Vikings
7. Cardinals
Wild Card
Packers beat Cardinals - Packers tend to turn it on going into the playoffs, so Rodgers will gash this Cards defense
Rams beat Vikings - Rams pass rush will give the Vikings major trouble, similar to what the 49ers did in the 2019 Divisional
Seahawks beat Cowboys - These two teams always play each other very close, but the Seahawks are the better team overall
Divisional
Buccaneers beat Seahawks - Bucs pass rush and run defense will be too much for the Seahawks to handle
Rams beat Packers - Somebody on the Packers will commit a stupid penalty at the worst time
NFC Championship
Buccaneers beat Rams - Comes down to the 7-time Super Bowl champion vs a guy playing in his first conference championship game
NFC offensive player of the year: DeAndre Hopkins
NFC defensive player of the year: Aaron Donald
NFC offensive rookie of the year: Kyle Pitts
NFC defensive rookie of the year: Jaycee Horn
Fired coaches: Matt Nagy (CHI)
And my more specific predictions:
Super Bowl: Chiefs 41, Buccaneers 28
Super Bowl MVP: Patrick Mahomes
Regular Season MVP: Patrick Mahomes
Biggest Blowout: Rams 45, Jaguars 7 in week 13: Rams defense will destroy the Jags young offense, and the Jags defense won't stop the Rams offense
Biggest Upset: Bengals over Packers in week 5: Packers have lost an out of conference road game in at least 11 straight seasons, and the Bengals are the kind of team that could pull off an upset over anyone (they beat the Titans and Steelers last year)
Game that is most likely to end in a tie: Broncos at Jaguars in week 2: there's usually one tie per season, and it's usually an early season game between two bad teams who have okay offenses and bad defenses. I think this one fits the bill. If I get this right, I win the AARoads Forum.
My predictions:
AFC East:
1. Bills (14-3)
2. Dolphins (11-6)
3. Patriots (9-7-1)
4. Jets (2-15)
AFC North:
1. Browns (11-6)
2. Ravens (11-6)
3. Steelers (8-9)
4. Bengals (5-12)
AFC South:
1. Titans (12-5)
2. Colts (8-9)
3. Jaguars (7-10)
4. Texans (1-16)
AFC West:
1. Chiefs (15-2)
2. Chargers (11-6)
3. Broncos (6-11)
4. Raiders (6-11)
AFC Playoff Seeds:
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Titans
4. Browns
5. Chargers
6. Ravens
7. Dolphins
AFC Championship:
Bills over Chiefs, 35-31
NFC East:
1. Cowboys (10-7)
2. Washington (8-9)
3. Giants (8-9)
4. Eagles (3-14)
NFC North:
1. Bears (10-7)
2. Packers (10-7)
3. Vikings (9-8)
4. Lions (2-15)
NFC South:
1. Buccaneers (13-4)
2. Saints (6-10-1)
3. Falcons (6-11)
4. Panthers (4-13)
NFC West:
1. Rams (16-1)
2. Cardinals (12-5)
3. 49ers (10-7)
4. Seahawks (9-8)
NFC Playoff Seeds:
1. Rams
2. Buccaneers
3. Cowboys
4. Bears
5. Cardinals
6. 49ers
7. Packers
NFC Championship:
Rams over Cardinals, 34-13
Super Bowl:
Rams over Bills, 30-21
HOT TAKES:
-Bears win NFC North
-Cardinals and Chargers surprise positively
-NFC West has no losing teams, with Seahawks in last place
My turn for NFC.
My 2021 NFC predictions . . .
NFC East
1. Washington (12-5): Ron Rivera will be on the short list of Coach of the Year candidates. McLaurin, Curtis Samuel, and Antonio Gibson all make steps up. Chase Young wins Defensive Player of the Year.
2. Cowboys (9-8): The long time strength of the Cowboys, the offensive line, is now not what it was. Defense doesn't have many playmakers. Dak is good and the skill players are good, but not enough to overcome the other obstacles, not least of which is Mike McCarthy.
3. Eagles (6-11): Hurts is okay, but eventually his low completion percentage might get him benched. No stars anywhere on the offensive or defensive side of the ball other than Devonta Smith. He'll be fine.
4. Giants (4-13): Daniel Jones is not the answer. They'll be in position to draft another QB next year.
NFC North
1. Packers (12-5): I feel like Aaron Rodgers will come back to earth a little bit. Still a good team, but didn't add much to a team that couldn't get it done in the playoffs last year.
2. Vikings (11-6): Offense will be slightly improved, defense will be massively improved. Patrick Peterson wins comeback player of the year.
3. Bears (6-11): They have Khalil Mack and Akiem Nicks. Allen Robinson gets his stats no matter who the QB is. Unfortunately all of that won't translate to too many wins.
4. Lions (3-14): Goff got cast aside by the Rams for a reason. When your starting WRs are Tyrell Williams and Breshad Perriman, I worry for you.
NFC South
1. Buccaneers (14-3): Agree with thspfc. Very complete team. No major deficiencies.
2. Panthers (8-9): I'll go out on a limb and say Darnold doesn't have a terrible year. They have lots of playmakers on offense. I predict losing a lot of 34-31 type games.
3. Falcons (7-10): Losing Julio isn't as big of a deal as one might think since a) he's always hurt, and b) Kyle Pitts is a unicorn. Running game might be a bit of a challenge and the defense isn't particular strong in any area.
4. Saints (5-12): I don't see any team with either Jameis Winston or Tysom Hill being able to win a lot of games. Michael Thomas is a headcase and at some point goes on strike.
NFC West
1. Rams (12-5): Good offense. Darrell Henderson can fill in for Akers just fine. Higbee leads the team in TDs. Aaron Donald is an absurd human being.
2. Seahawks (12-5): DK Metcalf is a cyborg. Defense won't return to the Legion of Boom days, but should be better.
3. Cardinals (11-6): Had a good draft and their young players are growing up together. I think Kyler makes a step forward this year.
4. 49ers (6-11): Defense won't be the same after losing Saleh to the Jets. Trey Lance will be starting by Week 5.
NFC Playoffs
1. Buccaneers
2. Packers
3. Rams
4. Football Team
5. Seahawks
6. Cardinals
7. Vikings
Wild Card
Vikings over Packers - Zimmer has Rodgers' number
Rams over Cardinals - Rams' defense contains Kyler
Seahawks over Football Team - Russ > Fitzy
Divisional
Buccaneers over Vikings - Sigh. Brady beats my boys.
Seahawks over Rams - Russ gets cooking again.
NFC Championship
Seahawks over Buccaneers - Brady can't win 'em all, right?
NFC offensive player of the year: Russell Wilson
NFC defensive player of the year: Chase Young
NFC offensive rookie of the year: Kyle Pitts
NFC defensive rookie of the year: Zaven Collins
Fired coaches: Matt Nagy (CHI), Joe Judge (NYG)
Super Bowl: Chiefs over Seahawks - The Chiefs will learn from their mistakes from last year.
Chris
Something about this 17-game season doesn't sit well with me. For one thing, there'll be no more .500 records or any other record that adds up to 16 (4-12, 6-10, 8-8, 9-7, 11-5, 13-3, etc.), and for another, it's just the fact that an odd number of games will be played from now on. And FWIW, I'll never get used to this new thing at all; change for the sake of change is what it is. Surprisingly, I had no complaints when 31 teams existed, because I knew that a 32nd one would be added later on.
^^ 8-8-1 will bring a .500 record.
What makes no sense to me is that people think that Jameis Winston will still put up insane stats if he cuts down on interceptions. No, the reason why he was putting up huge stats is because he was a) frequently taking the risks that led to interceptions, and b) constantly playing from behind because he threw interceptions which the other team turned into touchdowns. And now he's on the Saints who don't have anyone comparable to Mike Evans in terms of a deep ball receiver, Michael Thomas is good when he's healthy but he's not a deep ball guy.
So if Jameis gets his interceptions down to a reasonable amount, you can subtract ~100 yards and 1-2 touchdowns per game compared to his 2019 stats. That doesn't mean that he'll be bad, but he won't instantly turn into Aaron Rodgers.
Sony Michel is a Ram now, Pats get a 5th and 6th round pick
Something completely bizarre about this year's preseason: only 3 AFC teams finished with a losing record, and only 2 teams in the NFC (most likely 3 if the Cardinals-Saints game had been played) finished with a winning record.
And Cam Newton released. Surprising. Not surprising he didn't win the job over Mac Jones, but there is some speculation that the team wasn't happy with his approach to the Covid protocols, so just released him instead of possibly needing to play him and having him be ineligible.
Chris
... and with that, Josh Allen is officially the oldest QB in the AFC East at 25 years old. :-o
While he was a free agent last offseason, Cam said that he would only sign with a team if he had a chance to compete for the starting job, or something along those lines. So I guess it's not totally out of left field that the Patriots released him after making the decision that Jones is going to start right away. I'm guessing it was a mutual decision between Cam and the Patriots, as Cam doesn't want to be a backup, and the Patriots don't need him at this point. My question is, where does Cam think he can be a starter? Denver, Indianapolis, and Carolina are the only teams where I think he would even have a chance (Indianapolis because of Wentz's ongoing foot injury - Wentz is better than Cam). I think he'll reluctantly sign with somebody in the coming weeks upon realizing that he won't be a starter, and he'll bounce around with a few different teams before retiring for good.
But barring a turnaround for the ages, looks like the days of Supercam are over. His career was definitely not a failure, even by #1 pick standards - an MVP award, four playoff appearances, three division titles, a Super Bowl appearence, and he'll go down as one of the best dual-threat QBs ever. Though you have to wonder what could have been if it weren't for the injuries.
On the other hand, this feels like a near-complete reboot for the Patriots, with all of the notable players from the Brady era gone. Last season was them making an attempt to salvage the 2018 Super Bowl team that broke to pieces when Brady left. It didn't work, and now they have pretty much a brand new roster. I still don't think they're going to make the playoffs this year, but we'll see if they return to Super Bowl contention somewhere down the line. It won't be easy with the Bills and Dolphins looking like they will be consistent playoff teams for the next 5-10 years.
BUF 13 4 MIA 10 7 NE 10 7 NYJ 3 14
BAL 11 6 CLE 11 6 PIT 9 8 CIN 3 14
TEN 11 6 IND 9 8 JAX 7 10 HOU 2 15
KC 13 4 LAC 12 5 DEN 8 9 LV 7 10
NYG 9 8 DAL 8 9 WAS 8 9 PHI 7 10
GB 11 6 CHI 8 9 MIN 7 10 DET 4 13
TB 13 4 NO 6 11 ATL 6 11 CAR 4 13
LAR 13 4 SEA 12 5 SF 11 6 ARI 6 11
(2) KC over (7) MIA, (6) CLE over (3) BAL, (5) LAC over (4) TEN
(2) LAR over (7) CHI, (6) SF over (3) GB, (5) SEA over (4) NYG
(1) BUF over (6) CLE, (5) LAC over (2) KC
(1) TB over (6) SF, (2) LAR over (5) SEA
(1) BUF over (5) LAC
(2) LAR over (1) TB
Buffalo finally wins their first Super Bowl in 5 attempts by completing the LA double in LA.
Quote from: webny99 on August 31, 2021, 11:03:35 AM
... and with that, Josh Allen is officially the oldest QB in the AFC East at 25 years old. :-o
For a few days at least, until the Dolphins do something incredibly dumb and trade for Watson.
I'm going to miss Cam. If Mac wasn't around I was really interested to see the leap forward he could take this year, but clearly what happened in the past week pissed off Belichick so much that Cam went from being the announced starter to unemployed.
Quote from: SectorZ on August 31, 2021, 12:07:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 31, 2021, 11:03:35 AM
... and with that, Josh Allen is officially the oldest QB in the AFC East at 25 years old. :-o
For a few days at least, until the Dolphins do something incredibly dumb and trade for Watson.
I'm going to miss Cam. If Mac wasn't around I was really interested to see the leap forward he could take this year, but clearly what happened in the past week pissed off Belichick so much that Cam went from being the announced starter to unemployed.
I'm sure that the Covid situation didn't help Cam's case to be the starter, but even if that fiasco hadn't gone down, he would still have been released. This is more about Cam wanting to be a starter somewhere, even if it's not New England, than it is about Covid.
Quote from: thspfc on August 31, 2021, 01:13:42 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 31, 2021, 12:07:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 31, 2021, 11:03:35 AM
... and with that, Josh Allen is officially the oldest QB in the AFC East at 25 years old. :-o
For a few days at least, until the Dolphins do something incredibly dumb and trade for Watson.
I'm going to miss Cam. If Mac wasn't around I was really interested to see the leap forward he could take this year, but clearly what happened in the past week pissed off Belichick so much that Cam went from being the announced starter to unemployed.
I'm sure that the Covid situation didn't help Cam's case to be the starter, but even if that fiasco hadn't gone down, he would still have been released. This is more about Cam wanting to be a starter somewhere, even if it's not New England, than it is about Covid.
I don't want to turn this into the Covid thread, but as it relates to football, there are plenty of news bites out there that if you're not a star and you're unvaccinated, you're going to have a tough time latching on with a team. There are too many comparable players below the star level, that the teams might as well sign the ones that don't have the potential to have as many missed games.
In this case specifically, with all the injuries is Cam that much better than Hoyer? Probably not, hence why he got cut.
Chris
It may surprise you, but I'd love to see the Jets sign Cam. Or some other veteran presence at QB to help balance Zach.
Quote from: jayhawkco on August 31, 2021, 01:16:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 31, 2021, 01:13:42 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 31, 2021, 12:07:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 31, 2021, 11:03:35 AM
... and with that, Josh Allen is officially the oldest QB in the AFC East at 25 years old. :-o
For a few days at least, until the Dolphins do something incredibly dumb and trade for Watson.
I'm going to miss Cam. If Mac wasn't around I was really interested to see the leap forward he could take this year, but clearly what happened in the past week pissed off Belichick so much that Cam went from being the announced starter to unemployed.
I'm sure that the Covid situation didn't help Cam's case to be the starter, but even if that fiasco hadn't gone down, he would still have been released. This is more about Cam wanting to be a starter somewhere, even if it's not New England, than it is about Covid.
I don't want to turn this into the Covid thread, but as it relates to football, there are plenty of news bites out there that if you're not a star and you're unvaccinated, you're going to have a tough time latching on with a team. There are too many comparable players below the star level, that the teams might as well sign the ones that don't have the potential to have as many missed games.
In this case specifically, with all the injuries is Cam that much better than Hoyer? Probably not, hence why he got cut.
Chris
Aaand, Hoyer just got cut.
Quote from: thspfc on September 01, 2021, 07:37:40 AM
Aaand, Hoyer just got cut.
Yeah, not sure what they're doing exactly. I'm guessing that's an administrative thing and they'll resign him soon. That's what apparently the Vikings are doing with Everson Griffin.
Or maybe they're just like the Lions who cut all of their kickers.
Chris
Good news, Lions fans sheeple! Jared Goff expects they will win the NFC North this year.
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2021/08/30/detroit-lions-qb-jared-goff-we-expect-win-nfc-north/5654022001/
Quote
"Of course, it's a new regime, new staff, they weren't very good last year. It's a whole new thing and I understand it," Goff said. "But just like every other team in this league, there's expectations, and I don't know what the stat is, but every year there's new teams in the playoff. Every year there's teams that were in the playoffs last year that aren't and why not us? Why can't we be that one that wasn't in last year that is this year?"
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 01, 2021, 09:14:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 01, 2021, 07:37:40 AM
Aaand, Hoyer just got cut.
Yeah, not sure what they're doing exactly. I'm guessing that's an administrative thing and they'll resign him soon. That's what apparently the Vikings are doing with Everson Griffin.
Or maybe they're just like the Lions who cut all of their kickers.
Chris
Yeah they re-signed him apparently.
Well, this is it - the next time we have a weekend with no NFL action, we'll know the Super Bowl LVI matchup! :)
... and FiveThirtyEight's 2021 NFL prediction model is here!
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2021-nfl-predictions/
Taking a closer look at which teams have the best playoff odds according to FiveThirtyEight...
AFC
Tier 1 (playoff odds >50%)
1 Chiefs
2 Bills
3 Ravens
4 Titans
5 Browns
6 Colts
Tier 2 (50% > playoff odds > 30%)
7 Dolphins
8 Chargers
9 Patriots
10 Broncos
11 Steelers
Tier 3 (playoff odds <30%)
12 Raiders
13 Bengals
14 Jaguars
15 Jets
16 Texans
NFC
Tier 1 (playoff odds >50%)
1 Bucs
2 Packers
3 Rams
4 Cowboys
5 49ers
6 Seahawks
Tier 2 (50% > playoff odds > 30%)
7 Saints
8 Washington
9 Vikings
10 Cardinals
11 Falcons
Tier 3 (playoff odds <30%)
12 Giants
13 Bears
14 Panthers
15 Eagles
16 Lions
With 14 playoff spots, there's room for all of Tier 1 to make the playoffs plus one more team from each conference - presumably from Tier 2, but there's always surprises. So with that said, my prediction is is that there will be at least one Tier 1 team that misses the playoffs and at least one Tier 3 team that makes the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 06:42:20 PM
Taking a closer look at which teams have the best playoff odds according to FiveThirtyEight...
AFC
Tier 1 (playoff odds >50%)
1 Chiefs
2 Bills
3 Ravens
4 Titans
5 Browns
6 Colts
Tier 2 (50% > playoff odds > 30%)
7 Dolphins
8 Chargers
9 Patriots
10 Broncos
11 Steelers
Tier 3 (playoff odds <30%)
12 Raiders
13 Bengals
14 Jaguars
15 Jets
16 Texans
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary? (Interestingly, Bridgewater has never actually gone 6-10, but his play is such that you would expect that every year). The Steelers have the best pass rush in the league, and a young and promising 1-2-3 punch of WRs that could very well be the best in the league by the end of the season. Their biggest weakness last year was running the ball, and they just drafted a running back from Alabama in the first round. Pass blocking is questionable but poor pass blocking isn't a season killer, unless it leads to your QB getting hurt - and the Steelers were one game away from making the playoffs anyways in 2019 when Roethlisberger was out. And, oh, Roethlisberger, the guy who people think is going to be Nathan Peterman all of a sudden. At the very least he'll be better than Drew Brees was last season.
Quote
NFC
Tier 1 (playoff odds >50%)
1 Bucs
2 Packers
3 Rams
4 Cowboys
5 49ers
6 Seahawks
Tier 2 (50% > playoff odds > 30%)
7 Saints
8 Washington
9 Vikings
10 Cardinals
11 Falcons
Tier 3 (playoff odds <30%)
12 Giants
13 Bears
14 Panthers
15 Eagles
16 Lions
Everyone knows what the definition of insanity is, that's how I feel when it comes to the 49ers. If you assume that nobody is going to injure even a hangnail all season, they MIGHT be like the 7th best team in the conference. Don't talk to me about how they were in the Super Bowl in 2019 - 1), they've lost several key pieces from that team, and 2), the NFC was terrible in 2019. Now you factor in how the Rams, Buccaneers, Packers, Seahawks, Cardinals, etc. have improved in that timeframe. So if the Niners went the entire year without a single injury, they would be like 7th. But, they have been one of the three most injured teams in the league for 3 of the last 4 seasons. That is not bad luck, that is a problem. It's anyone's guess as to whose fault it is. But it's not by chance.
I also don't think the Cowboys should be above the Seahawks but the NFC East is definitely terrible.
Quote
With 14 playoff spots, there's room for all of Tier 1 to make the playoffs plus one more team from each conference - presumably from Tier 2, but there's always surprises. So with that said, my prediction is is that there will be at least one Tier 1 team that misses the playoffs and at least one Tier 3 team that makes the playoffs.
Colts and 49ers will miss the playoffs. I don't think any of Tier 3 will make the playoffs, but if I had to bet on one of them it would be the Giants.
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
This isn't his own list.
Quote from: 1 on September 08, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
This isn't his own list.
Correct. It's straight from the FiveThirtyEight predictions, linked to above. I will note that I was initially surprised by the Steelers relatively low playoff odds (37%). But then you factor in that they're in a tough division, with the league's toughest schedule thanks to having to play the Chiefs, Bills, and Titans. That's a couple more potential losses added to an already tough schedule. Also keep in mind that they kind of lucked their way to a bunch of wins early last year, and then lost five of their last six games to end the season. They never looked like a great team, even when they were 11-0, so they're going to have to be
a lot better than they were last year to finish above .500. While I think they
could get to 10 wins, trying to find those 10 on their schedule is harder than it looks. 8-9 or 7-10 might be just as likely, and Mike Tomlin is way overdue for a losing record.
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
Everyone knows what the definition of insanity is, that's how I feel when it comes to the 49ers. If you assume that nobody is going to injure even a hangnail all season, they MIGHT be like the 7th best team in the conference. Don't talk to me about how they were in the Super Bowl in 2019 - 1), they've lost several key pieces from that team, and 2), the NFC was terrible in 2019. Now you factor in how the Rams, Buccaneers, Packers, Seahawks, Cardinals, etc. have improved in that timeframe. So if the Niners went the entire year without a single injury, they would be like 7th. But, they have been one of the three most injured teams in the league for 3 of the last 4 seasons. That is not bad luck, that is a problem. It's anyone's guess as to whose fault it is. But it's not by chance.
Not to go down this rabbit hole again, but I don't think there's much evidence that their injuries are more than just bad luck. Jimmy G is very injury-prone, and that's caused a lot of week-to-week uncertainty at QB, but that shouldn't matter as much now that they have Trey Lance in waiting. I also think a lot of the 49ers hype is founded on people's belief in Kyle Shanahan, but given that he's now had three losing seasons and only one winning season, he needs to win this year or his legitimacy will start to be questioned. It's a very solid team that
should be able to win now, and if they can't, it's on the coaching staff IMO.
With that said, I can see the case for putting the 49ers in the top 5 in the NFC. They're better than the Cardinals, they've won four straight against the Rams (haven't lost to the Rams since
2018, their Super Bowl season), and they're perennially a pretty even match with the Seahawks. It's not unthinkable at all that they could win that division. (FiveThirtyEight's NFC West division odds are Rams 32%, 49ers 28%, Seahawks 27%, Cardinals 13%, which seems about right.)
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
I also don't think the Cowboys should be above the Seahawks but the NFC East is definitely terrible.
I ranked 1-4 as the division winners, so this would be the hypothetical seeding. Once you get past 4, all other teams are just ranked by straight playoff odds.
Tonight, the season opens with the Super Bowl champion Buccaneers hosting Dallas. Later on, my Bears will get the primetime spotlight when they travel to L.A. to take on the Rams.
Quote from: 1 on September 08, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
This isn't his own list.
Right. Where in that post did I mention webny99 personally?
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 10:27:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 08, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
This isn't his own list.
Correct. It's straight from the FiveThirtyEight predictions, linked to above. I will note that I was initially surprised by the Steelers relatively low playoff odds (37%). But then you factor in that they're in a tough division, with the league's toughest schedule thanks to having to play the Chiefs, Bills, and Titans. That's a couple more potential losses added to an already tough schedule. Also keep in mind that they kind of lucked their way to a bunch of wins early last year, and then lost five of their last six games to end the season. They never looked like a great team, even when they were 11-0, so they're going to have to be a lot better than they were last year to finish above .500. While I think they could get to 10 wins, trying to find those 10 on their schedule is harder than it looks. 8-9 or 7-10 might be just as likely, and Mike Tomlin is way overdue for a losing record.
So a team that went 12-4 is going to need to be way better than the 12-4 team to finish 9-8? And the Steelers didn't regress much at all. They probably aren't going 13-4 but they will be over .500.
And the point about Tomlin being "due" for a losing record? What? I guess Belichick and the Patriots or Brady and the Buccaneers are "due" for the worst record in the league then? :-D
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2021, 12:28:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 10:27:58 PM
Also keep in mind that they kind of lucked their way to a bunch of wins early last year, and then lost five of their last six games to end the season. They never looked like a great team, even when they were 11-0, so they're going to have to be a lot better than they were last year to finish above .500. While I think they could get to 10 wins, trying to find those 10 on their schedule is harder than it looks. 8-9 or 7-10 might be just as likely, and Mike Tomlin is way overdue for a losing record.
So a team that went 12-4 is going to need to be way better than the 12-4 team to finish 9-8? And the Steelers didn't regress much at all. They probably aren't going 13-4 but they will be over .500.
Yes, I do think they need to be better to finish above .500 given their schedule and the fact that their 12-4 record last year was not indicative of a 12-4 team. If not for a missed Titans field goal, an unbelievable collapse by the Colts, and the Covid game against the Ravens that they nearly lost
without Lamar on the field, they're 9-7 and out of the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2021, 12:28:50 PM
And the point about Tomlin being "due" for a losing record? What? I guess Belichick and the Patriots or Brady and the Buccaneers are "due" for the worst record in the league then? :-D
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2021, 12:22:55 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 08, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos ...
This isn't his own list.
Right. Where in that post did I mention webny99 personally?
Well, forgive us for assuming it was addressed to me...
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 06:42:20 PM
Taking a closer look at which teams have the best playoff odds according to FiveThirtyEight...
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
Assuming that FiveThirtyEight is doing what they normally do here, "disrespect", "feelings", and "thinking" aren't actually happening–the FiveThirtyEight MO is to build a math model that makes rankings like this and then dump data into it and publish the results. You can question the assumptions their model makes, but Nate Silver isn't ranking the Steelers any certain way because he personally thinks they suck.
Ravens had two players back to back tear ACLs (likely). Marcus Peters and Gus Edwards. Crappy luck.
Chris
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 09, 2021, 03:48:03 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 06:42:20 PM
Taking a closer look at which teams have the best playoff odds according to FiveThirtyEight...
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
Assuming that FiveThirtyEight is doing what they normally do here, "disrespect", "feelings", and "thinking" aren't actually happening–the FiveThirtyEight MO is to build a math model that makes rankings like this and then dump data into it and publish the results. You can question the assumptions their model makes, but Nate Silver isn't ranking the Steelers any certain way because he personally thinks they suck.
I am aware of that, I just think that the model is really underrating the Steelers.
A bit more information about how the FiveThirtyEight NFL prediction model works can be found here:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/methodology/how-our-nfl-predictions-work/
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2021, 09:16:47 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 09, 2021, 03:48:03 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 08, 2021, 09:08:40 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 08, 2021, 06:42:20 PM
Taking a closer look at which teams have the best playoff odds according to FiveThirtyEight...
What is with the Steelers disrespect? I in terms of my feelings I really don't like the Steelers, but how could you possibly think that they have worse odds to make the playoffs than the freaking Broncos, who have 6-10 himself playing quarterback and a really bad secondary?
Assuming that FiveThirtyEight is doing what they normally do here, "disrespect", "feelings", and "thinking" aren't actually happening–the FiveThirtyEight MO is to build a math model that makes rankings like this and then dump data into it and publish the results. You can question the assumptions their model makes, but Nate Silver isn't ranking the Steelers any certain way because he personally thinks they suck.
I am aware of that, I just think that the model is really underrating the Steelers.
This is why the analytics stuff annoys me a bit, because it can't measure the human components of the game.
You can never count out Tom Brady!
I am willing to give our new head coach David Culley a chance with the Texans, but then again what choice do I have.....really I mean I will not jump to conclusions until the end of the year, but then again, my Texans are planning to get the top pick in next year's draft. To me the NFL never existed until September 2002 when I finally found a team I can cheer for -- the Houston Texans. Before then I never found a team to support, so football never interested me very much. People ask me 'What about the Oilers?' The Oilers were hardly ever mentioned (much less) marketed in South Texas, so I never knew Houston had an NFL team, and when I finally heard about the Oilers, there were just about to announce their relocation to Tennessee.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 10, 2021, 12:07:33 AM
You can never count out Tom Brady!
Literally nobody was ever counting him out last night. Especially against the Cowboys suspect pass defense.
But wow, what a game that was. Dak Prescott throws for 400+ yards for the 4th straight game that he hasn't been injured. He and Brady combined for 74 completions on 108 attempts for 782 yards and 7 touchdowns. Amari Cooper went crazy, with 13 catches for 139 yards and 2 TDs, amounting to 38 points for my fantasy team :sombrero:. Finding a game with more prolific quarterback and wide receiver play than that would be a challenge. For the Cowboys it's hard to blame the loss on any one person or unit . . . yes, the defense got shredded by the Bucs passing game, but they also forced four turnovers, off which the Cowboys scored 12 points. The offense gained 451 yards which has become par for the course for them when Dak is healthy. They only turned it over once, but two missed field goals (albeit one of which was a 60 yarder) and a missed extra point kept a couple long drives scoreless.
Turnovers are great but for this defense to be good enough, they need more stops on 2nd and 3rd down. But they are young and it is the Super Bowl champs. It was mentioned a couple times on the broadcast that the Cowboys don't play a 2020 playoff team until week 11. That's a lot of time for the defense to shore up against mediocre/worse than mediocre competition.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Based on your logic, Brady and the Buccaneers should at the very least miss the playoffs, correct?
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Based on your logic, Brady and the Buccaneers should at the very least miss the playoffs, correct?
I don't see how predicting the Bucs fortunes has anything to do with my logic about the Steelers...
In any case, the Bucs will probably make the playoffs since it seems like the NFC South is theirs to lose. And I already predicted that they're going to lose in the wild card round. :D
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 02:37:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Based on your logic, Brady and the Buccaneers should at the very least miss the playoffs, correct?
I don't see how predicting the Bucs fortunes has anything to do with my logic about the Steelers...
Because you said that the Steelers are going to be under .500 in part because Tomlin is "due" for a losing record. So Brady is "due" to miss the playoffs, correct? And Russell Wilson is "due" to go under .500, correct?
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 02:37:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
Based on your logic, Brady and the Buccaneers should at the very least miss the playoffs, correct?
I don't see how predicting the Bucs fortunes has anything to do with my logic about the Steelers...
Because you said that the Steelers are going to be under .500 in part because Tomlin is "due" for a losing record. So Brady is "due" to miss the playoffs, correct? And Russell Wilson is "due" to go under .500, correct?
No, Brady and Wilson are clearly above-average quarterbacks. Mike Tomlin might be an above-average coach, but he has coached a lot of average teams. You might need to re-read what I said with emphasis added.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 02:37:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
Based on your logic, Brady and the Buccaneers should at the very least miss the playoffs, correct?
I don't see how predicting the Bucs fortunes has anything to do with my logic about the Steelers...
Because you said that the Steelers are going to be under .500 in part because Tomlin is "due" for a losing record. So Brady is "due" to miss the playoffs, correct? And Russell Wilson is "due" to go under .500, correct?
No, Brady and Wilson are clearly above-average quarterbacks. Mike Tomlin might be an above-average coach, but he has coached a lot of average teams. You might need to re-read what I said with emphasis added.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
Not the worst record in the league, just a losing record. It's not comparable to Brady/Belichick because they never even flirted with .500. They never had less than 10 wins from 2003 to 2019. Meanwhile, Tomlin has three 8-8 seasons, a 9-7 season, and a 9-6-1 season. Their luck in seasons where they are about average (which I think they will be this season) isn't going to last forever and I wouldn't be surprised if they end up below .500. I think 8-9 or 7-10 is a very realistic outcome.
Mike Tomlin's 14 seasons as Steelers head coach, average seasons in italics
2007: 10-6, won division
2008: 12-4, Super Bowl champs
2009: 9-72010: 12-4, won division, Super Bowl runners up
2011: 12-4, second in division
2012: 8-82013: 8-82014: 11-5, won division
2015: 10-6, second in division, made divisional round
2016: 11-5, won division, made AFC title game
2017: 13-3, won division
2018: 9-6-1 (debatable as to whether that's average or above average; worth noting that almost all of their losses were nailbiters, and I know that margins of victory
only matter when you want them to always matter)
2019: 8-82020: 12-4, won divison
So out of 14 seasons, Tomlin has had either 4 or 5 average seasons, depending on how you count 2018. That means that 65% of his teams have been above average.
If you're trying to argue that Tomlin might not be an above average coach, then you need to delete your internet. Yes, Brady and Russ are even more so above average, but it's extremely obvious that Tomlin also is. To put it this way, if Tomlin is not above average, then neither is John Harbaugh, Pete Carroll, Kyle Shanahan, Sean McVay, or Bruce Arians.
Maybe you need to reread what I said again though. While Brady has never really flirted with .500, he has flirted with missing the playoffs several times before, with New England/Tampa not clinching a playoff berth until after their week 16 game. So when we factor in this "luck" that you speak of, surely they're due to miss the playoffs, right? If Tomlin has been lucky to be above .500 on the four occasions that he was close to .500, then Brady has been lucky to make the playoffs on the several occasions that he has been close to missing them, correct?
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 08:12:35 PM
If you're trying to argue that Tomlin might not be an above average coach, then you need to delete your internet. Yes, Brady and Russ are even more so above average, but it's extremely obvious that Tomlin also is. To put it this way, if Tomlin is not above average, then neither is John Harbaugh, Pete Carroll, Kyle Shanahan, Sean McVay, or Bruce Arians.
I am not trying to argue that Mike Tomlin isn't above average. He certainly is, but the coach is only a small part of the equation of a teams win-loss record. There's also the front office, the roster, and most importantly, the QB. My point is that it's kind of fluky that Mike Tomlin has never had a losing season, because any one of the 8-8 seasons could have just as easily been 7-9 and then the "no losing seasons" thing wouldn't be a talking point.
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 08:12:35 PM
Maybe you need to reread what I said again though. While Brady has never really flirted with .500, he has flirted with missing the playoffs several times before, with New England/Tampa not clinching a playoff berth until after their week 16 game. So when we factor in this "luck" that you speak of, surely they're due to miss the playoffs, right? If Tomlin has been lucky to be above .500 on the four occasions that he was close to .500, then Brady has been lucky to make the playoffs on the several occasions that he has been close to missing them, correct?
I don't think there's anything flukey about Brady making the playoffs every year. You usually need 10 wins to make the playoffs, and he has led his team to at least 10 wins every year from 2003 to 2020, except the year that he was injured and the Patriots went 11-5 and still missed the playoffs - now that
was kind of flukey.
Also, whether a team makes the playoffs isn't really directly comparable to whether they are above .500. Part of making the playoffs is getting the wins
when you need them to get in, which Brady/Belichick always found a way to do. That's skill. Being above .500 or below .500 is just however things shake out after the twists and turns of the season. That's luck.
Quote from: webny99 on September 10, 2021, 09:11:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 08:12:35 PM
If you're trying to argue that Tomlin might not be an above average coach, then you need to delete your internet. Yes, Brady and Russ are even more so above average, but it's extremely obvious that Tomlin also is. To put it this way, if Tomlin is not above average, then neither is John Harbaugh, Pete Carroll, Kyle Shanahan, Sean McVay, or Bruce Arians.
I am not trying to argue that Mike Tomlin isn't above average. He certainly is, but the coach is only a small part of the equation of a teams win-loss record. There's also the front office, the roster, and most importantly, the QB. My point is that it's kind of fluky that Mike Tomlin has never had a losing season, because any one of the 8-8 seasons could have just as easily been 7-9 and then the "no losing seasons" thing wouldn't be a talking point.
They could have just as easily been 9-7 for that matter.
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2021, 08:12:35 PM
Maybe you need to reread what I said again though. While Brady has never really flirted with .500, he has flirted with missing the playoffs several times before, with New England/Tampa not clinching a playoff berth until after their week 16 game. So when we factor in this "luck" that you speak of, surely they're due to miss the playoffs, right? If Tomlin has been lucky to be above .500 on the four occasions that he was close to .500, then Brady has been lucky to make the playoffs on the several occasions that he has been close to missing them, correct?
Quote
I don't think there's anything flukey about Brady making the playoffs every year. You usually need 10 wins to make the playoffs, and he has led his team to at least 10 wins every year from 2003 to 2020, except the year that he was injured and the Patriots went 11-5 and still missed the playoffs - now that was kind of flukey.
I don't think there's anything flukey about Tomlin being at or above .500 every year. You usually need 8 wins to be above .500, and he has led his team to at least 8 wins every year from 2007 to 2020.
Quote
Also, whether a team makes the playoffs isn't really directly comparable to whether they are above .500. Part of making the playoffs is getting the wins when you need them to get in, which Brady/Belichick always found a way to do. That's skill. Being above .500 or below .500 is just however things shake out after the twists and turns of the season. That's luck.
I don't even know what this paragraph is supposed to mean. Does anyone else understand this nonsense? Like, wins are important, until you don't have quite enough of them, at which point they come down to luck? Are you assuming that every single team that goes 8-8 is predetermined to not be making the playoffs from the start of they year, and is therefore just spinning a wheel to decide whether they win or lose?
I honestly might make this my signature for the sake of how terrible it is. Such an awful take.
^ Goodness gracious, the line in your signature is terrible. I can't even imagine dreaming up that nonsense. You should at least credit whoever came up with it, or people might think you came up with it yourself.
Prediction for every game today . . .
Jaguars 24, Texans 21
Washington 23, Chargers 17
Seahawks 34, Colts 27
Panthers 30, Jets 17
Vikings 35, Bengals 20
Titans 36, Cardinals 34
49ers 31, Lions 7
Bills 24, Steelers 19
Falcons 44, Eagles 14
Chiefs 48, Browns 21
Packers 28, Saints 17
Giants 19, Broncos 18
Dolphins 23, Patriots 21
Rams 21, Bears 13
As a Bears fan I'd be encouraged to only lose to the Rams by 8.
Well, well, well . . .
Steelers 23, Bills 16
I predicted that the Bills would win, but I'm certainly not complaining . . .
Vikings/Bengals is on trajectory for a tie. Seems pretty fitting considering that the Vikings and Bengals are two teams that seem to play in tie games a disproportionate number of times.
The Lions might be about to finish one of the greatest comebacks of all time.
Turns out that the Texans aren't as bad as most people think, as they've already tied or exceeded the win total a lot of people expected.
I'd say that win for the Niners is not the closest feeling that you can get to a loss, because their offense was really good. But yikes. You just can't get outscored 23-3 in the last 20 minutes against one of the league's worst teams. It's "garbage time", until it's not.
Quote from: thspfc on September 12, 2021, 04:19:08 PM
I predicted that the Bills would win, but I'm certainly not complaining . . .
Because it's fun when webny99 is salty? I really wasn't that shocked, as the Bills were "due" for a loss to the Steelers. Ultimately the Steelers reached their top gear for one quarter and the Bills didn't, and that's about all there is to it. It's too bad Buffalo can't open against the Jets every year, but on to next week.
Quote from: thspfc on September 12, 2021, 04:22:37 PM
Turns out that the Texans aren't as bad as most people think, as they've already tied or exceeded the win total a lot of people expected.
What I find even more hilarious is that the Titans and Colts lost too, so the Texans are all alone atop the AFC South. :-D
Quote from: thspfc on September 12, 2021, 04:22:37 PM
Vikings/Bengals is on trajectory for a tie. Seems pretty fitting considering that the Vikings and Bengals are two teams that seem to play in tie games a disproportionate number of times.
... and the Bengals finish it off with a FG with just a few seconds left in overtime. Ugly, but still a much-needed win for that franchise and their fans to start the season.
Did Dalvin Cook fumble?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 12, 2021, 05:00:53 PM
Did Dalvin Cook fumble?
Of course I'll say no, but it was one of those calls that the booth was going to stay with the original call.
If the Vikings didn't play like shit in the first half, it doesn't matter anyway.
Apparently a toilet drain line burst at FedEx Field today, pouring foul water into a section of stands occupied by fans. Gives new meaning to the Redskins being a shitshow.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 03, 2021, 08:19:11 PM
The Houston Football Team win the Snyder Prize by finishing the season with the "Football Team" moniker under the forum's game.
If we continue this from last season, Houston just became the Jaguars and Jacksonville became the Football Team.
Packers got their ass kicked by the Saints.
Quote from: thspfc on September 12, 2021, 10:35:21 AM
Titans 36, Cardinals 34
Falcons 44, Eagles 14
Packers 28, Saints 17
Just gonna pretend that those never happened . . .
QuoteChiefs 48, Browns 21
Not exactly. But the Chiefs won nonetheless, so the Browns fans remain in a stable headspace for at least a couple more weeks. With the history of the Browns secondary when playing with a double digit lead (i.e. the Cowboys, Titans, and Steelers games last year in which they nearly surrendered seemingly insurmountable leads), the tendency of their passing game to shut down in the biggest moments against the best teams, and the fact that they're the Browns, it shouldn't be surprising that they gave up a 12-point lead.
Packers looked like shit today. Had to stop watching at the end of the 3rd. Yeesh.
Fortunately, that Chiefs-Browns games was way more entertaining. Can't believe the Browns' punter fumbled that snap! Derp! And that one TD Mahomes threw; they don't teach ya to do that! Off balance throw across your body to a deep receiver? You could practically hear the entire KC sideline simultaneously clench their sphincters.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 12, 2021, 09:11:18 PM
Packers looked like shit today. Had to stop watching at the end of the 3rd. Yeesh.
Fortunately, that Chiefs-Browns games was way more entertaining. Can't believe the Browns' punter fumbled that snap! Derp! And that one TD Mahomes threw; they don't teach ya to do that! Off balance throw across your body to a deep receiver? You could practically hear the entire KC sideline simultaneously clench their sphincters.
My friend asked me if Aaron Rodgers had retired. He may as well have...
What was the biggest surprise of Week 1 so far? Had to be Cardinals 38, Titans 13, right?
Or maybe Packers-Saints, but the Packers seem to have a dud performance every once in a while.
And not exactly surprising, but I really enjoyed the chaotic ending of 49ers-Lions.
An amusing summary of last night in WNY (even the rain is accurate):
(https://imgur.com/INJXvJ6.jpg)
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 12, 2021, 05:37:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 12, 2021, 05:00:53 PM
Did Dalvin Cook fumble?
Of course I'll say no, but it was one of those calls that the booth was going to stay with the original call.
If the Vikings didn't play like shit in the first half, it doesn't matter anyway.
Agreed. It wasn't a fumble, but as soon as they called it that way on the field, it was moot. The ten penalties in the first half was absurd. Two false starts by C.J. Ham on the first drive alone.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 13, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 12, 2021, 05:37:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 12, 2021, 05:00:53 PM
Did Dalvin Cook fumble?
Of course I'll say no, but it was one of those calls that the booth was going to stay with the original call.
If the Vikings didn't play like shit in the first half, it doesn't matter anyway.
Agreed. It wasn't a fumble, but as soon as they called it that way on the field, it was moot. The ten penalties in the first half was absurd. Two false starts by C.J. Ham on the first drive alone.
Chris
Part of this problem is the NFL's own doing, as officials are encouraged to rule fumbles on close calls (same with touchdown/no touchdown plays) because they can fix it in replay, so they don't accidentally screw the defensive team by not letting a fumble-score play out. But then because of that you get situations like yesterday where there was no definitive proof Cook didn't fumble even if it looked like he was probably down in at least two of the shots, and even if they were 90% sure he didn't they had no choice but to stay with it because they couldn't be 100% sure.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 13, 2021, 03:46:53 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 13, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 12, 2021, 05:37:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 12, 2021, 05:00:53 PM
Did Dalvin Cook fumble?
Of course I'll say no, but it was one of those calls that the booth was going to stay with the original call.
If the Vikings didn't play like shit in the first half, it doesn't matter anyway.
Agreed. It wasn't a fumble, but as soon as they called it that way on the field, it was moot. The ten penalties in the first half was absurd. Two false starts by C.J. Ham on the first drive alone.
Chris
Part of this problem is the NFL's own doing, as officials are encouraged to rule fumbles on close calls (same with touchdown/no touchdown plays) because they can fix it in replay, so they don't accidentally screw the defensive team by not letting a fumble-score play out. But then because of that you get situations like yesterday where there was no definitive proof Cook didn't fumble even if it looked like he was probably down in at least two of the shots, and even if they were 90% sure he didn't they had no choice but to stay with it because they couldn't be 100% sure.
Yep. Agreed, there's not a good answer. Unfortunately, those type of things tend to go against the teams I cheer for.
Chris
My takeaways from Week 1:
- I'm genuinely surprised how well the Texans played against the Jaguars. Not many penalties, the defense made some big plays (fun fact, the Texans had 3 INTs yesterday, just as many as they had all year last year), and the offense was pretty great (if not a little inconsistent). And yes, I'm happy that they are in sole command of the AFC South. But I'm not sure if yesterday's game was a testament to how good the Texans are or how bad Urban Meyer's coaching is the Jaguars are. If this game wasn't a fluke, then I could totally see the Texans making a run at winning the division if they play in a lot of shootouts (that's going to be the only way they're going to win with that defense). We'll see how they do against Cleveland next week.
- The NFC West could be the best all-around division the NFL has ever seen. Each team scored at least 28 points, and all won by at least 10 points (except the 49ers, but that final score is deceiving).
- Potentially underrated teams: Cardinals, Eagles, Rams. Overrated teams: Falcons, Giants, Packers
- The Chargers actually managed to close out a close game without breaking hearts. Both them and the WFT seem like playoff teams to me this week.
- AFC South is by far the worst division. the NFC East looks good in comparison.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 13, 2021, 09:34:16 PM
- I'm genuinely surprised how well the Texans played against the Jaguars. Not many penalties, the defense made some big plays (fun fact, the Texans had 3 INTs yesterday, just as many as they had all year last year), and the offense was pretty great (if not a little inconsistent). And yes, I'm happy that they are in sole command of the AFC South. But I'm not sure if yesterday's game was a testament to how good the Texans are or how bad Urban Meyer's coaching is the Jaguars are. If this game wasn't a fluke, then I could totally see the Texans making a run at winning the division if they play in a lot of shootouts (that's going to be the only way they're going to win with that defense). We'll see how they do against Cleveland next week.
I don't want to overreact to week 1 for the 392nd year in a row. But I am more concerned about the Jaguars than I am about any other team after yesterday, save for maybe the Falcons. Got whopped by a team that was the consensus worst in the league throughout the offseason, defense couldn't stop a Bishop Sycamore offense, and the Jags offense was ineffective for the vast majority of the game against a defensive front that was ALREADY the WORST in the league last year - and then lost JJ Watt! Only 76 rushing yards for the Jags, compared to the Texans' 160. Now, with that being said, the Browns lost 38-6 to the Ravens in week 1 last season with a new head coach, but it's obvious that this Jacksonville team is not anywhere close to the talent level of the Browns. Way too early to call on Urban Meyer, doesn't look good early on though.
Quote
- The NFC West could be the best all-around division the NFL has ever seen. Each team scored at least 28 points, and all won by at least 10 points (except the 49ers, but that final score is deceiving).
First off, no, that 49ers vs Lions score is not deceiving at all. The Lions were like 20 yards away from scoring to make it 41-39, and at then a 2-pt conversion (of which the Lions had already made 2) would have tied it. Just because it was a late comeback doesn't mean that the score is not indicative of how the game went. If it was, say, 56-35 with the losing team scoring three of their five TDs while trailing by 30+ points in the 4th quarter, then sure, you can say that the score was deceiving.
More importantly: it might not even be the best division this season. The AFC North rivals the NFC West. Don't know if it's better though.
Whichever way you slice it, giving up 33 points to Detroit is embarrassing for this 49ers team. Lions were playing their first game with a first year head coach, a new mediocre quarterback, and, uh, not a whole lot of generational talent at wide receiver. Goff was 38/57 for 338 yards and 3 touchdowns. Sure, the Niners offense played great - against the Lions defense, yeah. But when your defense is supposed to be your biggest strength and you give up 33 points, 430 yards, and 31 first downs to a brand-new somewhat disjointed devoid of talent offense, that should raise some questions.
Quote from: thspfc on September 13, 2021, 10:42:21 PM
First off, no, that 49ers vs Lions score is not deceiving at all. The Lions were like 20 yards away from scoring to make it 41-39, and at then a 2-pt conversion (of which the Lions had already made 2) would have tied it. Just because it was a late comeback doesn't mean that the score is not indicative of how the game went. If it was, say, 56-35 with the losing team scoring three of their five TDs while trailing by 30+ points in the 4th quarter, then sure, you can say that the score was deceiving.
Yes, very true, but it took two improbable events (Lions recovering onside kick and 49ers fumbling on their second-to-last drive) for that last drive of the Lions to even happen. The 49ers played like complete crap for the last 6 minutes of the game, but they dominated the rest of it. Even then, nearly choking up a 24 point lead in the last few minutes (even if it's based on a perfect storm of events) is not a good look for the 49ers.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 13, 2021, 09:34:16 PM
- AFC South is by far the worst division. the NFC East looks good in comparison.
The NFC East might not even be second-worst, because the NFC North might be worse than them too.
Quote from: thspfc on September 12, 2021, 04:22:37 PMTurns out that the Texans aren't as bad as most people think, as they've already tied or exceeded the win total a lot of people expected.
Much of our Texans fan base like to credit our new head coach David Culley for the win. He is certainly an upgrade over Bill 0'Brien. And based on the locker room post game talk, the players seem very eager to play for him. Coach Culley is a player's coach who has brought an exciting and positive culture for our players.
We're probably not going to win next weekend at Cleveland, but if the Texans pick up where they left off (energy wise), I am hopeful for a more competitive and interesting game than most people expect.
Quote from: No one since 2007, and that's being kind
We're probably not going to win next weekend at Cleveland...
Words that haven't been spoken for years.
Man that Raiders Ravens game was crazy!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 14, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
Man that Raiders Ravens game was crazy!
dont get me started on that. lamar did :pan: to stop the raiders.
Quote from: snowc on September 14, 2021, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 14, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
Man that Raiders Ravens game was crazy!
dont get me started on that. lamar did :pan: to stop the raiders.
He's playing defense too?
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 14, 2021, 05:38:26 PM
Quote from: snowc on September 14, 2021, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 14, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
Man that Raiders Ravens game was crazy!
dont get me started on that. lamar did :pan: to stop the raiders.
He's playing defense too?
Chris
Although that strip-sack was bad.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 14, 2021, 06:17:06 PM
Although that strip-sack was bad.
100%. Cost me the chance at a decent bet I had.
Chris
So my 13 year old son started playing fantasy football. I didn't find out until he mentioned about 2:30 Sunday afternoon that his fantasy team was doing well. Without any input from me, he managed to draft a pretty decent team. I did look at his roster and advised him to drop his 2nd kicker and 2nd tight end (he was worried about bye weeks and I told him you just pick up an extra guy that week and drop him again) and replaced them with the backups for his two running backs.
Wow, the ending of that game between the Giants and Washington was something else...
Quote from: webny99 on September 17, 2021, 04:04:11 PM
Wow, the ending of that game between the Giants and Washington was something else...
Primetime games have been amazing this year besides Bears Rams.
Predictions for every game on Sunday . . .
Steelers 26, Raiders 25
49ers 37, Eagles 30
Browns 34, Texans 26
Broncos 24, Jaguars 14
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Rams 42, Colts 24
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Patriots 23, Jets 16
Bengals 25, Bears 21
Buccaneers 38, Falcons 33
Cardinals 45, Vikings 27
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Chargers 32, Cowboys 26
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
Quote from: webny99 on September 13, 2021, 11:03:18 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 13, 2021, 09:34:16 PM
- AFC South is by far the worst division. the NFC East looks good in comparison.
The NFC East might not even be second-worst, because the NFC North might be worse than them too.
Come to think of it, while a lot of things got more muddled in week 1, the division hierarchy got even clearer:
1. NFC West
2. AFC North
3. AFC West
4. AFC East
5. NFC South
6. NFC East
7. NFC North
8. AFC South
I think it's an overreaction to put the NFCE ahead of the NFCN. The Packers were the biggest disappointment in week 1, but I still believe that they're better than all the NFC East teams. I'd say that the Vikings and Bears are roughly on par with the two best NFCE teams (Cowboys and Football Team IMO) respectively, and then I think the Lions are the worst team of the eight, but not by a whole lot.
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 07:39:05 PM
Predictions for every game on Sunday . . .
Steelers 26, Raiders 25
49ers 37, Eagles 30
Browns 34, Texans 26
Broncos 24, Jaguars 14
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Rams 42, Colts 24
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Patriots 23, Jets 16
Bengals 25, Bears 21
Buccaneers 38, Falcons 33
Cardinals 45, Vikings 27
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Chargers 32, Cowboys 26
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
I'm tempted to play a parlay card with those predictions, just to see how it plays out
Maybe 2 parlay cards. One for Spreads and one for Over/Unders
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 08:01:06 PM
I think it's an overreaction to put the NFCE ahead of the NFCN. The Packers were the biggest disappointment in week 1, but I still believe that they're better than all the NFC East teams. I'd say that the Vikings and Bears are roughly on par with the two best NFCE teams (Cowboys and Football Team IMO) respectively, and then I think the Lions are the worst team of the eight, but not by a whole lot.
I guess we'll see. You didn't mention the Eagles, the only team from
either division that won in Week 1, and looked almost as good as the Packers looked bad. Granted, it was the Falcons. But Eagles-49ers should be an interesting one.
Quote from: webny99 on September 17, 2021, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 13, 2021, 11:03:18 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 13, 2021, 09:34:16 PM
- AFC South is by far the worst division. the NFC East looks good in comparison.
The NFC East might not even be second-worst, because the NFC North might be worse than them too.
Come to think of it, while a lot of things got more muddled in week 1, the division hierarchy got even clearer:
1. NFC West
2. AFC North
3. AFC West
4. AFC East
5. NFC South
6. NFC East
7. NFC North
8. AFC South
But that's not accounting for the relative talent levels between the divisions. A more accurate hierarchy picture looks like this:
1. NFC West
2. AFC North
(small gap)
3. AFC West
4. AFC East
(big gap)
5. NFC South
(huge gap)
6. NFC East
7. NFC North
8. AFC South
There doesn't seem to be much parity between the divisions in the NFL this season.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 17, 2021, 09:28:17 PM
There doesn't seem to be much parity between the divisions in the NFL this season.
Hopefully a few Drafts and Offseasons will help equalize the 8 Divisions...but should it continue to have 1-3 Divisions top to bottom stellar and 1-3 Divisions top to bottom horrid, the NFL would have to consider realignment, to keep Competitive Balance
I think the NFC West has been unfair for the last few seasons, but if the AFC North and AFC West join them at the top, and then the competition level just drastically drops, that will be a big problem
Tommy Brady is keeping the NFC South up - when he does hang it up, the NFC South will drop pretty quickly, as well
The NFC South actually ranks third by average FiveThirtyEight ELO rating. That surprised me, but the Bucs bring the whole division way up.
Personally I kind of like the ebbs and flows of some divisions being tougher than others as long as there's relative balance between the conferences. Sure, the AFC looks considerably stronger right now (and has a lot more young QB's), but there's also consensus that the best overall division is in the NFC, so it's not that extreme.
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 07:39:05 PM
Predictions for every game on Sunday . . .
Steelers 26, Raiders 25
49ers 37, Eagles 30
Browns 34, Texans 26
Broncos 24, Jaguars 14
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Rams 42, Colts 24
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Patriots 23, Jets 16
Bengals 25, Bears 21
Buccaneers 38, Falcons 33
Cardinals 45, Vikings 27
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Chargers 32, Cowboys 26
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
Welp, there goes my panthers and bills. :wow:
Quote from: snowc on September 18, 2021, 11:50:41 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 07:39:05 PM
Predictions for every game on Sunday . . .
Steelers 26, Raiders 25
49ers 37, Eagles 30
Browns 34, Texans 26
Broncos 24, Jaguars 14
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Rams 42, Colts 24
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Patriots 23, Jets 16
Bengals 25, Bears 21
Buccaneers 38, Falcons 33
Cardinals 45, Vikings 27
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Chargers 32, Cowboys 26
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
Welp, there goes my panthers and bills. :wow:
If anything this is good news for them because I went 6/14 last week.
Quote from: thspfc on September 18, 2021, 02:22:30 PM
Quote from: snowc on September 18, 2021, 11:50:41 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 07:39:05 PM
Predictions for every game on Sunday . . .
Steelers 26, Raiders 25
49ers 37, Eagles 30
Browns 34, Texans 26
Broncos 24, Jaguars 14
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Rams 42, Colts 24
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Patriots 23, Jets 16
Bengals 25, Bears 21
Buccaneers 38, Falcons 33
Cardinals 45, Vikings 27
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Chargers 32, Cowboys 26
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
Welp, there goes my panthers and bills. :wow:
If anything this is good news for them because I went 6/14 last week.
Got the TV on, Bills vs Dolphins playing in a half hour. Let see if Bills :pan: the Dolphins! :clap:
Diggs got another TD for the Bills - 13-0 Bills!
Bills back from HT
Buffalo is delayed due to lightning!
:colorful:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51494135025_c33e6dc0e8_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2msmUje)lightning at mia stadium (https://flic.kr/p/2msmUje) by Bryce Monaghan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/193940216@N02/), on Flickr
Patriots won but red zone offense still needs some work
Big W for the Cowboys! For the first time in what feels like forever, Dak didn't have to carry the team to the win, instead it was Pollard and Zeke with a combined 180 yards rushing that led the way.
Some great games in the late window today! AFC West is shaping up to be a great division, starting to think there may be 3 playoff teams from that division.
Vikings pulled a Viking
I can guarantee that tomorrow, at least one very well-known talking head will claim that the Chiefs are going to finish last in their division this season. Even with the Chiefs currently being tied for last in the AFCW, I'd say they are still a 99.9% lock to win the division.
The people who are hyped on the Broncos are the same people who have spent the last two weeks laughing at the two teams that the Broncos have beat.
I'll believe it's a legitimate Raiders team when I see them playing at this same level come December.
Don't really have an opinion on the Chargers, they're pretty average. Played against two average teams, won one, lost one, both were close.
QuoteBroncos 24, Jaguars 14
So close!
QuoteSaints 27, Panthers 6
Almost the right score, but wrong winner.
QuoteRams 42, Colts 24
Got the Colts' point total right.
Quote
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
*Shoves in nearest cabinet*
Quote
Seahawks 35, Titans 30
Somewhat close, wrong winner though.
I'm probably going to do this every week, and if I get even one game exactly right I will be satisfied.
Quote from: thspfc on September 17, 2021, 07:39:05 PM
Saints 27, Panthers 6
Dolphins 28, Bills 27
Chiefs 31, Ravens 10
Those were way off...
Wow what a snf game!
With 2 games in the bag, we have enough to show the average (16-game) season record for each of the four regions.
(afc combined scores, then nfc)
east: 3-5 + 3-5 == 6-10
north: 4-4 + 1-7 == 5-11
south: 2-6 + 5-3 == 7-9
west: 6-2 + 7-1 == 13-3
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 17, 2021, 10:30:10 PM
the NFL would have to consider realignment
Agreed! Here's how it should be to make geographical sense:
AFC East: Baltimore, Buffalo, NY Jets (rename it to 'Newark'), and New England (rename it to 'Boston')
AFC North: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh
AFC South: Houston, Jacksonville, Miami, Tennessee (rename it to 'Nashville')
AFC West: Stay the same except return the Chargers back to San Diego.
Quote from: thspfc on September 19, 2021, 11:35:26 PM
I can guarantee that tomorrow, at least one very well-known talking head will claim that the Chiefs are going to finish last in their division this season. Even with the Chiefs currently being tied for last in the AFCW, I'd say they are still a 99.9% lock to win the division.
If you'd stuck to the original point and said there's a 99.9% chance they won't finish last, I could maybe agree with that.
But I definitely don't agree that there's a 99.9% chance they win the division. After last night's loss, FiveThirtyEight has them roughly even with the field at 46%. That seems pretty low, but it makes some sense when you factor in that the Broncos and Raiders are 2-0, and any of the other three teams could be a legitimate challenger for the division. (I think that's also factoring in tiebreakers, which is way too early in the season to do that IMO.)
Quote from: webny99 on September 20, 2021, 08:17:00 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 19, 2021, 11:35:26 PM
I can guarantee that tomorrow, at least one very well-known talking head will claim that the Chiefs are going to finish last in their division this season. Even with the Chiefs currently being tied for last in the AFCW, I'd say they are still a 99.9% lock to win the division.
If you'd stuck to the original point and said there's a 99.9% chance they won't finish last, I could maybe agree with that.
But I definitely don't agree that there's a 99.9% chance they win the division. After last night's loss, FiveThirtyEight has them roughly even with the field at 46%. That seems pretty low, but it makes some sense when you factor in that the Broncos and Raiders are 2-0, and any of the other three teams could be a legitimate challenger for the division. (I think that's also factoring in tiebreakers, which is way too early in the season to do that IMO.)
Broncos play the Jets in week 3 so they're going to be 3-0. After that? Ravens, Steelers, Raiders, Browns, Washington, Cowboys, Eagles, Chargers, Chiefs. That looks like a 2-7 or 3-6 stretch. Their schedule won't stay easy forever.
Quote from: jgb191 on September 20, 2021, 01:09:14 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 17, 2021, 10:30:10 PM
the NFL would have to consider realignment
Agreed! Here's how it should be to make geographical sense:
AFC East: Baltimore, Buffalo, NY Jets (rename it to 'Newark'), and New England (rename it to 'Boston')
AFC North: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh
AFC South: Houston, Jacksonville, Miami, Tennessee (rename it to 'Nashville')
AFC West: Stay the same except return the Chargers back to San Diego.
1) Existing rivalries are huge TV draws, so barring a coast-to-coast relocation, the divisions aren't changing.
2) Teams only have 8-9 road games per year, compared to 40+ for NBA/NHL and 80+ for MLB, so geographic compactness isn't as important
3) The Giants and Jets are closer to NYC than the Patriots are to Boston, so taking New York out of a team name but adding Boston to another doesn't make sense.
Quote from: jgb191 on September 20, 2021, 01:09:14 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 17, 2021, 10:30:10 PM
the NFL would have to consider realignment
Agreed! Here's how it should be to make geographical sense:
AFC East: Baltimore, Buffalo, NY Jets (rename it to 'Newark'), and New England (rename it to 'Boston')
AFC North: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh
AFC South: Houston, Jacksonville, Miami, Tennessee (rename it to 'Nashville')
AFC West: Stay the same except return the Chargers back to San Diego.
In a world where money does not exist, maybe, . . .
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2021, 08:44:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 20, 2021, 08:17:00 AM
After last night's loss, FiveThirtyEight has them roughly even with the field at 46%. That seems pretty low, but it makes some sense when you factor in that the Broncos and Raiders are 2-0, and any of the other three teams could be a legitimate challenger for the division. (I think that's also factoring in tiebreakers, which is way too early in the season to do that IMO.)
Broncos play the Jets in week 3 so they're going to be 3-0. After that? Ravens, Steelers, Raiders, Browns, Washington, Cowboys, Eagles, Chargers, Chiefs. That looks like a 2-7 or 3-6 stretch. Their schedule won't stay easy forever.
For sure, but if they can pull an upset or two they would still be right in the mix for a wild card. Also the Broncos are probably least likely to challenge the Chiefs for the division, Raiders or Chargers have a more legitimate shot IMO.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 19, 2021, 10:17:44 PM
Vikings pulled a Viking
It's just absolutely painful to be a fan of this team.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 20, 2021, 10:46:19 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 19, 2021, 10:17:44 PM
Vikings pulled a Viking
It's just absolutely painful to be a fan of this team.
Unbelievable. Nothing left to say at this point.
Quote from: webny99 on September 20, 2021, 10:48:36 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 20, 2021, 10:46:19 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 19, 2021, 10:17:44 PM
Vikings pulled a Viking
It's just absolutely painful to be a fan of this team.
Unbelievable. Nothing left to say at this point.
The crappy thing is, I'm also a Tottenham fan (if you follow English soccer) and my club has the exact same reputation of somehow, inexplicably, choking it away at the end; so much so that there is a term for it: "Spursy". I don't know why I do it to myself.
Chris
An interesting - and relatively small! - group of 2-0 teams this season. Bucs and Rams are unsurprising, but the Cardinals, 49ers, Broncos, Raiders, and Panthers all missed the playoffs last year.
And it's pretty crazy that the Broncos and Raiders are all alone atop the AFC, with 11 teams being 1-1 and only the Colts, Jets and Jags being 0-2.
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2021, 09:43:34 PM
An interesting - and relatively small! - group of 2-0 teams this season. Bucs and Rams are unsurprising, but the Cardinals, 49ers, Broncos, Raiders, and Panthers all missed the playoffs last year.
And it's pretty crazy that the Broncos and Raiders are all alone atop the AFC, with 11 teams being 1-1 and only the Colts, Jets and Jags being 0-2.
Neither the Cardinals nor the 49ers are surprising to be 2-0.
The 49ers are an injury-plagued season removed from an NFC Championship/appearance in SB LIV. They have started the 2021 campaign healthy. If they can continue that way, they should continue to be among the top teams in the NFL
The Cardinals would be a favorite to win 2 of the other 3 NFC Divisions, and probably at least 2 of the 4 AFC Divisions. If the Cardinals were still in the old NFC East, they would be the Runaway Odds On Favorite to win the Division. However, when the 8 Division format was created, the Cardinals got put into the NFC West, and the NFC West is deep in talent. This is my long-winded way of saying the Cardinals have a hell of a football team, but they were probably picked to finish 4th in the best Division in the NFL
The Rams, 49ers, and Cardinals all hail from that NFC West. While theoretically possible, I don't think any of the 3 teams will go undefeated, and while not impossible I would find it highly highly highly unlikely that all 3 will go undefeated. I don't think a Perfect Team comes out of the NFCW this year, and if one does, that is the hands-down SB Favorite
The Broncos have beaten the Jags and Giants, not exactly top-notch competition.
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 22, 2021, 12:25:55 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 21, 2021, 09:43:34 PM
An interesting - and relatively small! - group of 2-0 teams this season. Bucs and Rams are unsurprising, but the Cardinals, 49ers, Broncos, Raiders, and Panthers all missed the playoffs last year.
And it's pretty crazy that the Broncos and Raiders are all alone atop the AFC, with 11 teams being 1-1 and only the Colts, Jets and Jags being 0-2.
Neither the Cardinals nor the 49ers are surprising to be 2-0.
The 49ers are an injury-plagued season removed from an NFC Championship/appearance in SB LIV. They have started the 2021 campaign healthy. If they can continue that way, they should continue to be among the top teams in the NFL
The Cardinals would be a favorite to win 2 of the other 3 NFC Divisions, and probably at least 2 of the 4 AFC Divisions. If the Cardinals were still in the old NFC East, they would be the Runaway Odds On Favorite to win the Division. However, when the 8 Division format was created, the Cardinals got put into the NFC West, and the NFC West is deep in talent. This is my long-winded way of saying the Cardinals have a hell of a football team, but they were probably picked to finish 4th in the best Division in the NFL
The Rams, 49ers, and Cardinals all hail from that NFC West. While theoretically possible, I don't think any of the 3 teams will go undefeated, and while not impossible I would find it highly highly highly unlikely that all 3 will go undefeated. I don't think a Perfect Team comes out of the NFCW this year, and if one does, that is the hands-down SB Favorite
All three going undefeated would involve 6 specific games ending in a tie.
Predictions
Chiefs 31, Chargers 28
Cardinals 41, Jaguars 23
Browns 23, Bears 6
Washington 29, Bills 23
Colts 34, Titans 17
Patriots 26, Saints 16
Giants 30, Falcons 21
Steelers 21, Bengals 19
Ravens 27, Lions 17
Broncos 28, Jets 22
Raiders 24, Dolphins 20
Rams 33, Buccaneers 24
Seahawks 37, Vikings 31
Packers 28, 49ers 20
Quote from: thspfc on September 23, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
Predictions
Chiefs 31, Chargers 28
Cardinals 41, Jaguars 23
Browns 23, Bears 6
Football Team 29, Bills 23
Colts 34, Titans 17
Patriots 26, Saints 16
Giants 30, Falcons 21
Steelers 21, Bengals 19
Ravens 27, Lions 17
Broncos 28, Jets 22
Raiders 24, Dolphins 20
Rams 33, Buccaneers 24
Seahawks 37, Vikings 31
Packers 28, 49ers 20
Fixed :sombrero:
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 23, 2021, 02:43:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 23, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
Predictions
...
Football Team 29, Bills 23
Fixed :sombrero:
Tempted to fix again - to fix the score - but won't take the bait. :-P
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Quote from: webny99 on September 23, 2021, 03:09:47 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 23, 2021, 02:43:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 23, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
Predictions
...
Football Team 29, Bills 23
Fixed :sombrero:
Tempted to fix again - to fix the score - but won't take the bait. :-P
Tempted to fix again to add the prediction for Texans vs. Panthers.
Wow Sam Darnold
Quote from: Alps on September 23, 2021, 11:47:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 23, 2021, 03:09:47 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on September 23, 2021, 02:43:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 23, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
Predictions
...
Football Team 29, Bills 23
Fixed :sombrero:
Tempted to fix again - to fix the score - but won't take the bait. :-P
Tempted to fix again to add the prediction for Texans vs. Panthers.
And Cowboys-Eagles, for that matter.
I think the Texans would've had a chance to win that game if Tyrod Taylor had not been hurt. I know Carolina's defense is one of the best in the league, but Davis Mills is not the answer at quarterback for the Texans. Still, you've got to give credit to the Panthers, who've defied convention to remain undefeated.
On a related note, does anyone else here dislike Thursday Night games with a passion? I feel like they do more harm than good.
The Wild Card round will now have a Monday night game:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32269232/nfl-play-one-six-wild-card-games-monday-night
IIRC, this would be the first instance of a playoff game ever being played on a day other than Saturday or Sunday. Seeing that ESPN has the MNF package, a Wild Card edition would also be aired, with the other three networks continuing to broadcast the weekend games (two each for NBC and CBS, one for FOX).
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 24, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
I think the Texans would've had a chance to win that game if Tyrod Taylor had not been hurt. I know Carolina's defense is one of the best in the league, but Davis Mills is not the answer at quarterback for the Texans. Still, you've got to give credit to the Panthers, who've defied convention to remain undefeated.
On a related note, does anyone else here dislike Thursday Night games with a passion? I feel like they do more harm than good.
I don't watch unless the Bears are playing. I get enough football Saturday-Monday.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 24, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
On a related note, does anyone else here dislike Thursday Night games with a passion? I feel like they do more harm than good.
I used to really hate them, but when I worked on the road for a couple years, I softened a bit. If only because it was an excuse for food and drink specials at the Chili's or B-Dubs or whatever next to the hotel.
I tell you want I don't like is the slow migration of football games to cable. Monday Night's been gone for a while; now Thursday games aren't on CBS anymore; and this Monday night playoff game slides it a little more.
They pulled this shit with baseball 20 years ago and I didn't like it then. What, it's more important to have another stupid "talent" show on the networks instead of live sports? Another dumb reality show with morons yelling at each other over nothing? Yeah, that's way better than baseball. Screw you, America.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 24, 2021, 09:55:00 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 24, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
On a related note, does anyone else here dislike Thursday Night games with a passion? I feel like they do more harm than good.
I used to really hate them, but when I worked on the road for a couple years, I softened a bit. If only because it was an excuse for food and drink specials at the Chili's or B-Dubs or whatever next to the hotel.
I tell you want I don't like is the slow migration of football games to cable. Monday Night's been gone for a while; now Thursday games aren't on CBS anymore; and this Monday night playoff game slides it a little more.
They pulled this shit with baseball 20 years ago and I didn't like it then. What, it's more important to have another stupid "talent" show on the networks instead of live sports? Another dumb reality show with morons yelling at each other over nothing? Yeah, that's way better than baseball. Screw you, America.
Don't forget that there's now streaming rights via Amazon for Thursday Night Football starting next season. But there's going to be a required simulcast on local TV stations. We'll see how that goes.
I don't like all the games on cable or streaming services either. I don't have cable or sattelite, or anything like YouTube TV or Hulu Live. Just our antenna for local stations and a Roku. I get Madison stations on the antenna, and Madison isn't considered part of the local market for the Packers like Green Bay and Milwaukee is, so any Packers games on ESPN or whatever, I can't watch on TV. Thankfully though the Yahoo Sports app streams any locally or nationally broadcast games, so at least I can watch on my tiny phone screen. But the Thursday night games on NFL Network, because of "rights restrictions", they don't let you watch over WiFi and force you to use your data connection instead.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on September 24, 2021, 10:16:10 AM
I don't like all the games on cable or streaming services either. I don't have cable or sattelite, or anything like YouTube TV or Hulu Live. Just our antenna for local stations and a Roku. I get Madison stations on the antenna, and Madison isn't considered part of the local market for the Packers like Green Bay and Milwaukee is, so any Packers games on ESPN or whatever, I can't watch on TV. Thankfully though the Yahoo Sports app streams any locally or nationally broadcast games, so at least I can watch on my tiny phone screen. But the Thursday night games on NFL Network, because of "rights restrictions", they don't let you watch over WiFi and force you to use your data connection instead.
Unfortunately, we're still not at the point where you can subscribe to individual channels. You can't get only ESPN because Disney wants you to subscribe to a package that also includes Disney Channel, A&E, FX, History and Lifetime.
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 23, 2021, 04:39:05 PM
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Justin Fields in his first career start in a season in which all but one of the rookie quarterbacks have struggled early, and he wasn't very good against a bad Bengals defense? And the Bears won't be able to run the ball either, as the Browns' run defense has been very good so far against two teams that will probably have better run games than the Bears.
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2021, 12:33:29 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 23, 2021, 04:39:05 PM
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Justin Fields in his first career start in a season in which all but one of the rookie quarterbacks have struggled early, and he wasn't very good against a bad Bengals defense? And the Bears won't be able to run the ball either, as the Browns' run defense has been very good so far against two teams that will probably have better run games than the Bears.
I dunno. I put my money where my mouth is and have CHI +7.5 in a parlay I played for this weekend. I personally think Fields is the 2nd best of the QBs that came out this year (after Lawrence) and I feel like his running ability should be enough to keep things interesting. While the Browns may have shut down running games, they shut down the power RBs known as Edwards-Helaire and Ingram, who haven't run on anyone this year. Neither of those games featured a true running QB like Fields is; Mahomes can run some, but he's not Lamar or Kyler. Tyrod Taylor/Davis Mills same story; and, the Browns "only" beat Houston by 10. Chicago is a better team than Houston making me think that this game will be close.
Chris
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2021, 12:33:29 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 23, 2021, 04:39:05 PM
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Justin Fields in his first career start in a season in which all but one of the rookie quarterbacks have struggled early, and he wasn't very good against a bad Bengals defense? And the Bears won't be able to run the ball either, as the Browns' run defense has been very good so far against two teams that will probably have better run games than the Bears.
A full week of practice with the first team will help Fields this week. Cleveland didn't exactly blow the doors off a pretty bad Houston team last week, either.
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 24, 2021, 04:52:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2021, 12:33:29 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 23, 2021, 04:39:05 PM
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Justin Fields in his first career start in a season in which all but one of the rookie quarterbacks have struggled early, and he wasn't very good against a bad Bengals defense? And the Bears won't be able to run the ball either, as the Browns' run defense has been very good so far against two teams that will probably have better run games than the Bears.
I dunno. I put my money where my mouth is and have CHI +7.5 in a parlay I played for this weekend. I personally think Fields is the 2nd best of the QBs that came out this year (after Lawrence) and I feel like his running ability should be enough to keep things interesting. While the Browns may have shut down running games, they shut down the power RBs known as Edwards-Helaire and Ingram, who haven't run on anyone this year. Neither of those games featured a true running QB like Fields is; Mahomes can run some, but he's not Lamar or Kyler. Tyrod Taylor/Davis Mills same story; and, the Browns "only" beat Houston by 10. Chicago is a better team than Houston making me think that this game will be close.
Chris
Since when was Tyrod Taylor not a dual-threat quarterback?
Quote from: Henry on September 24, 2021, 09:44:50 AM
The Wild Card round will now have a Monday night game:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32269232/nfl-play-one-six-wild-card-games-monday-night
IIRC, this would be the first instance of a playoff game ever being played on a day other than Saturday or Sunday. Seeing that ESPN has the MNF package, a Wild Card edition would also be aired, with the other three networks continuing to broadcast the weekend games (two each for NBC and CBS, one for FOX).
You do not recall correctly. This I believe is the 4th instance; such was cited on the radio when the news broke.
Quote from: Henry on September 24, 2021, 09:44:50 AM
The Wild Card round will now have a Monday night game:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32269232/nfl-play-one-six-wild-card-games-monday-night
IIRC, this would be the first instance of a playoff game ever being played on a day other than Saturday or Sunday. Seeing that ESPN has the MNF package, a Wild Card edition would also be aired, with the other three networks continuing to broadcast the weekend games (two each for NBC and CBS, one for FOX).
This year it's Fox's turn to have two wild card round games while CBS has one, and CBS has two divisional round games while Fox has one. It alternates every season.
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:24:11 AM
Quote from: Henry on September 24, 2021, 09:44:50 AM
The Wild Card round will now have a Monday night game:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32269232/nfl-play-one-six-wild-card-games-monday-night
IIRC, this would be the first instance of a playoff game ever being played on a day other than Saturday or Sunday. Seeing that ESPN has the MNF package, a Wild Card edition would also be aired, with the other three networks continuing to broadcast the weekend games (two each for NBC and CBS, one for FOX).
This year it's Fox's turn to have two wild card round games while CBS has one, and CBS has two divisional round games while Fox has one. It alternates every season.
No - the 5th&6th WC Games that were added last season were bid out on separate contracts than the existing, current TV deals - CBS won one, NBC won the other. That is why it went from each of the 4 Networks have 1 WC game to 2 Networks having 1 and 2 Networks having 2, and those 2 are set on NBC and CBS
Otherwise, CBS would not have had the rights to air the Bears/Saints WC game last season, since CBS has the AFC Contract and the AFC Playoffs, and Bears/Saints was an NFC WC game...but that was one of the 2 "bonus" WC games, and those Rights were sold separately
When the new TV contracts begin, that may change, but the WC Round has nothing to do with the Divisional Round rotation
Wow, where to start with Week 3 in the NFL!
Ravens make history at Ford Field with a 66-yard game-winner from Justin Tucker.
Chargers beat Chiefs at Arrowhead to send the Chiefs to 1-2, all alone in 4th place in the division.
Giants out-Falcon the Falcons and fall to 0-3.
Quote from: webny99 on September 26, 2021, 06:07:19 PM
Wow, where to start with Week 3 in the NFL!
Ravens make history at Ford Field with a 66-yard game-winner from Justin Tucker.
Chargers beat Chiefs at Arrowhead to send the Chiefs to 1-2, all alone in 4th place in the division.
Giants out-Falcon the Falcons and fall to 0-3.
Yeah...typical kick in the nuts way for Lions to lose again.
Missed false start against Baltimore?
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2021, 06:29:26 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 24, 2021, 04:52:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2021, 12:33:29 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 23, 2021, 04:39:05 PM
Not that I want them to, but I have a hunch the Bears are going to put up a better fight against Cleveland than you think.
Chris
Justin Fields in his first career start in a season in which all but one of the rookie quarterbacks have struggled early, and he wasn't very good against a bad Bengals defense? And the Bears won't be able to run the ball either, as the Browns' run defense has been very good so far against two teams that will probably have better run games than the Bears.
I dunno. I put my money where my mouth is and have CHI +7.5 in a parlay I played for this weekend. I personally think Fields is the 2nd best of the QBs that came out this year (after Lawrence) and I feel like his running ability should be enough to keep things interesting. While the Browns may have shut down running games, they shut down the power RBs known as Edwards-Helaire and Ingram, who haven't run on anyone this year. Neither of those games featured a true running QB like Fields is; Mahomes can run some, but he's not Lamar or Kyler. Tyrod Taylor/Davis Mills same story; and, the Browns "only" beat Houston by 10. Chicago is a better team than Houston making me think that this game will be close.
Chris
Since when was Tyrod Taylor not a dual-threat quarterback?
Obviously I was wrong on this game, and Fields getting hurt didn't help the cause. When I referenced Tyrod, he only had one rushing attempt against Cleveland. He has the ability to run, but didn't use it much against the Browns.
Chris
Quote from: thspfc on September 23, 2021, 12:59:39 PM
Predictions
Chiefs 31, Chargers 28
Cardinals 41, Jaguars 23
Browns 23, Bears 6
Washington 29, Bills 23
Colts 34, Titans 17
Patriots 26, Saints 16
Giants 30, Falcons 21
Steelers 21, Bengals 19
Ravens 27, Lions 17
Just look at how that one was almost exact, don't look at how I went 3 of 9 in total in the early window.
Seems like Josh Allen is back to his 2020 form, it definitely took a couple weeks though.
If the Buccaneers can't pull off a large comeback then everyone is in for some of the usual "is Brady done?" talk, even though he's actually played a pretty solid game despite the score.
- Hey, the Falcons grabbed a victory from the jaws of defeat
"You mean the other way around, right?"
- No, not this time!
Quote from: kurumi on September 26, 2021, 08:20:48 PM
- Hey, the Falcons grabbed a victory from the jaws of defeat
"You mean the other way around, right?"
- No, not this time!
And the Giants are starting out 0-3 yet again smdh this is going to be a loonng season
One thing that's not being talked about at all is how terrible the Buccaneers' pass defense has been. They're giving up 35 completions, 349 yards, and 3 touchdowns per game. Now, the Cowboys, Falcons, and Rams are three of the best passing offenses. But for a defense that was so good during the Super Bowl run last season, it's surprising to see them playing like this.
It seems like the Jets set a new all-time low every single week. And between the Jets own losses, and Sam Darnold playing well, the Jets are getting ever closer to the 2010s Browns levels of incompetence - they've already surpassed the 21st century Lions for second place on the list of being the biggest joke team in the NFL.
If the season ended today, Derek Carr would be the unanimous MVP.
New York (really New Jersey) football really sucks.
With the Packers win over the 49ers 30-28, I think rumors of the Packers and Rodgers' demise were greatly exagerrated.
Never give Rodgers time, he'll find a way to beat you.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 26, 2021, 06:40:59 PM
Missed false start against Baltimore?
Missed delay of game on Baltimore the play before the kick.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 27, 2021, 01:08:31 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 26, 2021, 06:40:59 PM
Missed false start against Baltimore?
Missed delay of game on Baltimore the play before the kick.
Yeah, that's what I meant. God hates the Lions lol.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 26, 2021, 11:32:07 PM
New York (really New Jersey) football really sucks.
Real New York football isn't bad! :)
Quote from: tchafe1978 on September 26, 2021, 11:45:54 PM
With the Packers win over the 49ers 30-28, I think rumors of the Packers and Rodgers' demise were greatly exagerrated.
Never give Rodgers time, he'll find a way to beat you.
Nobody really said that the Packers were awful. Worse than last year, sure, but definitely not done for. I think it's more about the 49ers being overrated. Their secondary is terrible. Anybody can throw on them.
If the 49ers were a bit savvier with their clock management at the end there, they could have stolen a game that the Packers dominated. To me it's a big sigh of relief for the Packers more than a sign of another great season.
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2021, 10:53:18 AM
If the 49ers were a bit savvier with their clock management at the end there, they could have stolen a game that the Packers dominated. To me it's a big sigh of relief for the Packers more than a sign of another great season.
I was just coming to post something I saw on FB just now lmao
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210927/ddc9252924e95c13a73b7f8f23b426cc.jpg)
moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2021, 10:53:18 AM
If the 49ers were a bit savvier with their clock management at the end there, they could have stolen a game that the Packers dominated. To me it's a big sigh of relief for the Packers more than a sign of another great season.
Not sure I follow this. It's almost a bad thing for the Packers that they dominated the game against a team that a lot of people think is good?
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2021, 12:21:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2021, 10:53:18 AM
If the 49ers were a bit savvier with their clock management at the end there, they could have stolen a game that the Packers dominated. To me it's a big sigh of relief for the Packers more than a sign of another great season.
Not sure I follow this. It's almost a bad thing for the Packers that they dominated the game against a team that a lot of people think is good?
It's not a bad thing, the score just wasn't representative of how dominant the Packers were for much of the game. It was still a nail-biter at the end despite their dominance, so if you're a Packers fan I think you're just relieved to get the W.
Shit, I'll admit I shut the game off after the Niners got that last TD. Too annoyed the Pack choked away the lead. Not the first time I've done that prematurely in my career as an armchair quarterback.
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2021, 01:11:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2021, 12:21:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2021, 10:53:18 AM
If the 49ers were a bit savvier with their clock management at the end there, they could have stolen a game that the Packers dominated. To me it's a big sigh of relief for the Packers more than a sign of another great season.
Not sure I follow this. It's almost a bad thing for the Packers that they dominated the game against a team that a lot of people think is good?
It's not a bad thing, the score just wasn't representative of how dominant the Packers were for much of the game. It was still a nail-biter at the end despite their dominance, so if you're a Packers fan I think you're just relieved to get the W.
along with some fans saying the officiating was very questionable.
Quote from: thspfc on September 27, 2021, 10:43:20 AM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on September 26, 2021, 11:45:54 PM
With the Packers win over the 49ers 30-28, I think rumors of the Packers and Rodgers' demise were greatly exagerrated.
Never give Rodgers time, he'll find a way to beat you.
Nobody really said that the Packers were awful. Worse than last year, sure, but definitely not done for. I think it's more about the 49ers being overrated. Their secondary is terrible. Anybody can throw on them.
I heard plenty of fans that were ready to bury the team and Rodgers after the first game loss to the Saints. It was only one game.
Eagles suck lol
Predictions for Sunday
Titans 37, Jets 14
Lions 29, Bears 14
Dolphins 24, Colts 16
Browns 31, Vikings 17
Falcons 33, Washington 25
Bills 48, Texans 7
Saints 23, Giants 20
Chiefs 42, Eagles 34
Cowboys 34, Panthers 17
Seahawks 28, 49ers 14
Rams 41, Cardinals 20
Packers 26, Steelers 10
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
Buccaneers 30, Patriots 7
Lions will get their first win against a Bears team that I have 0 faith in, until Andy Dalton is back at least. Panthers defense will return to earth. McVay's Rams have owned the Cardinals, winning all 8 matchups by an average of 20 points. That's probably the most lopsided divisional matchup in the league since 2017. Broncos will get another win to start 4-0, before they come crashing down sometime within the next month. Mac Jones will have his first "rookie game".
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Two solid defenses, but that's still a really low score. Would be a surprise if one team or the other doesn't crack 20 points.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
Quote from: webny99 on October 01, 2021, 09:59:24 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Two solid defenses, but that's still a really low score. Would be a surprise if one team or the other doesn't crack 20 points.
Ravens only scored 16 legitimate points against a terrible Lions defense last week.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
The longest possible field goal is 117 yards.
Quote from: thspfc on October 01, 2021, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
The longest possible field goal is 117 yards.
119 yards. Just because it's customary to have the kicker go seven yards behind the line of scrimmage doesn't mean it's mandatory.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 01, 2021, 04:43:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 01, 2021, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
The longest possible field goal is 117 yards.
119 yards. Just because it's customary to have the kicker go seven yards behind the line of scrimmage doesn't mean it's mandatory.
Chris
The kicker might step out of bounds, but theoreticaly, yes. 119 yards.
Quote from: thspfc on October 01, 2021, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
The longest possible field goal is 117 yards.
Justin Tucker would make that but only against the Lions in Denver.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 06:14:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 01, 2021, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 01, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2021, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: ET21 on October 01, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
That's a bold pick.
Don't worry, Justin Tucker will boom thru a 75-yard FG in the mile-high air to make it 15-14 as time expires! :-D
109 yard field goal
The longest possible field goal is 117 yards.
Justin Tucker would make that but only against the Lions in Denver.
Justin Tucker is already the GOAT kicker playing for a team in a low elevation coastal city, imagine him on the Broncos. It would be Tom Brady and Jerry Rice levels of positional dominance.
How to lie with math:
Detroit elevation: 630 ft
Justin Tucker FG in Detroit: 66 yd
Denver elevation: 5367 ft
Justin Tucker FG in Denver: 562 yd
It'll go through some guy's front window and the Ravens will be "let's get outta here!"
Quote from: kurumi on October 02, 2021, 12:17:28 PM
How to lie with math:
Detroit elevation: 630 ft
Justin Tucker FG in Detroit: 66 yd
Denver elevation: 5367 ft
Justin Tucker FG in Denver: 562 yd
It'll go through some guy's front window and the Ravens will be "let's get outta here!"
I thought power varied with the cube of distance :D
I'll be at the Bears game tomorrow, expectations set very low and cannot wait to hear all the boos for Nagy
Quote from: ET21 on October 02, 2021, 05:51:24 PM
I'll be at the Bears game tomorrow, expectations set very low and cannot wait to hear all the boos for Nagy
I'll be at the Bears game next Sunday. Pretty sure the Raiders fans will be loud and drunk as usual
Quote from: ET21 on October 02, 2021, 05:51:24 PM
I'll be at the Bears game tomorrow, expectations set very low and cannot wait to hear all the boos for Nagy
My son just said he wants the Bears to lose as many games as possible this season so Matt Nagy could get fired. I had that attitude with Notre Dame in 2016, they went 4-8 and then didn't fire Brian Kelly and he's still around, so I can't get myself on that train again.
0 and 16 again? Any takers?
I don't think the Fords even care. Can they sell the Lions and be done with it?
Quote from: Brandon on October 03, 2021, 01:44:09 PM
0 and 16 again? Any takers?
I don't think the Fords even care. Can they sell the Lions and be done with it?
Playing 17 games this year.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 03, 2021, 01:45:32 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 03, 2021, 01:44:09 PM
0 and 16 again? Any takers?
I don't think the Fords even care. Can they sell the Lions and be done with it?
Playing 17 games this year.
Oh good, now they get to set a new record in shittiness.
Not a lot of classics today, although Jets-Titans was pretty wild. Nice to see the Jets look somewhat competent and get a win.
Kind of funny that both the Giants and Jets pulled out overtime victories against tough opponents after everyone left NY(C) football for dead with both teams at 0-3.
The only real NY team is up to +90 in point differential through four weeks (+97 through three weeks!!), but it's hard to know for sure what to make of them since no game has been truly competitive in the second half since Week 1. One thing is for sure, the defense is closer to 2019 form than 2020, which is a promising sign. And at least the Chiefs handled the Eagles today, so the Bills will be underdogs next week. Going into Arrowhead as favorites with the Chiefs on a 3-game losing streak would have been disastrous. This sets up much better narrative-wise and for their chances of winning.
Also, not sure if I've mentioned this before, but I find it amusing that Mitch Trubisky is the 2nd-best QB in the AFC East (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2021-nfl-predictions/quarterbacks/). :-P
Quote from: Brandon on October 03, 2021, 01:44:09 PM
0 and 16 again? Any takers?
I don't think the Fords even care. Can they sell the Lions and be done with it?
Why should they care and why should they sell? The money is rolling in. Ford Field is full for every home game (maybe not sellouts but at least 85% to 90%), nobody is staying away from other stadiums when they're the opponent there, and the merchandise sells. William Clay Ford said outright the reason he bought the team was for investment purposes. The question I have is why so many people complaining about the product keep paying for it. Anyone can have an off-day, but this has been going on for decades. If I go to a restaurant only a few times and it's a bad experience each time, I stop going there.
I really don't get the idea that people are "making a statement" by booing the owners at the Calvin Johnson event last week or putting paper bags over their heads in the stands. Nyuk, nyuk, that's so clever. You paid $50+ per ticket plus $30 for parking plus you know you had at least a couple $12 brewskis, and then you think you'll tell them off by wearing a paper bag. They're not even looking at you; they're busy depositing your money in their bank account.
Did today's performance cement the Texans as the worst team in the NFL?
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 02, 2021, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: ET21 on October 02, 2021, 05:51:24 PM
I'll be at the Bears game tomorrow, expectations set very low and cannot wait to hear all the boos for Nagy
My son just said he wants the Bears to lose as many games as possible this season so Matt Nagy could get fired. I had that attitude with Notre Dame in 2016, they went 4-8 and then didn't fire Brian Kelly and he's still around, so I can't get myself on that train again.
Just like last season: Nagy hands off playcalling to Lazor, suddenly the offense commits to Montgomery (hope he's okay) and the play-action opens up - those were some beautiful deep balls to both ARob & Mooney.
Which leads me to my own internal conundrum regarding Nagy: I might be okay with him sticking around if he can set his ego aside, leave the playcalling to his OC, and embrace simply being the HC. But can we trust him to do that, or will he try to snatch the playsheet back as soon as Lazor gets the offense into a rhythm? You know, as he's already done once coming off last season?
Quote from: webny99 on October 03, 2021, 07:00:44 PM
Not a lot of classics today, although Jets-Titans was pretty wild. Nice to see the Jets look somewhat competent and get a win.
Kind of funny that both the Giants and Jets pulled out overtime victories against tough opponents after everyone left NY(C) football for dead with both teams at 0-3.
The only real NY team is up to +90 in point differential through four weeks (+97 through three weeks!!), but it's hard to know for sure what to make of them since no game has been truly competitive in the second half since Week 1. One thing is for sure, the defense is closer to 2019 form than 2020, which is a promising sign. And at least the Chiefs handled the Eagles today, so the Bills will be underdogs next week. Going into Arrowhead as favorites with the Chiefs on a 3-game losing streak would have been disastrous. This sets up much better narrative-wise and for their chances of winning.
Also, not sure if I've mentioned this before, but I find it amusing that Mitch Trubisky is the 2nd-best QB in the AFC East (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2021-nfl-predictions/quarterbacks/). :-P
I was at Jets Titans and after a revolting Jets first quarter that was a hell of an entertaining game right down to the last second.
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 03, 2021, 07:04:03 PM
Did today's performance cement the Texans as the worst team in the NFL?
FiveThirtyEight's prediction model actually thinks the Texans are
better after Week 4. They got a bump of 18 Elo points despite the 40-0 loss. Maybe they get credit on defense for holding the Bills to field goals on four of their drives.
In fairness, it could have been 56-0 with better red zone execution by the Bills, so you do have to give the Texans defense some credit for that, and their offense performed about as well as expected with a rookie QB in his first road start against a good if not great defense.
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 03, 2021, 07:04:03 PM
Did today's performance cement the Texans as the worst team in the NFL?
No. That honor belongs to a team that made it three times to the goal line and three times turned the ball over to the crappy Bears at it. That would be the 0 and now 4 Lions. They managed, yet again, to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Quote from: Alps on October 03, 2021, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 03, 2021, 07:00:44 PM
Not a lot of classics today, although Jets-Titans was pretty wild. Nice to see the Jets look somewhat competent and get a win.
...
I was at Jets Titans and after a revolting Jets first quarter that was a hell of an entertaining game right down to the last second.
I think you've got something with Zach Wilson. I loved how he waved Corey Davis deep and then placed it perfectly for the TD.
Giants got the W today because we finally figured out how to catch the damn ball
Hard to say if the Texans are worse than the Jaguars. With Tyrod Taylor, probably not. Without him, they definitely are worse.
As was mentioned the Bills have a +90 point differential - yet the Packers, who are also 3-1, have a -5. And it's not like the Packers have been winning on last second field goals (well, sometimes). Their wins are by an average of 10 points, and they're 3-1, yet that Saints game wrecked their PD. Thankfully for them, point differential isn't a significant stat in the NFL and is not used in tiebreakers (though I think it should be, maybe as the third tiebreaker after head to head and division/conference record).
Zeke is back. Carolina's defense caved the moment they had to face a team that actually has an offense - their first three opponents are 29th, 28th, and 30th in total offense respectively. Sam Darnold looked more like the Jets version of himself for the first three quarters, until the Panthers offense found some traction.
Quote from: webny99 on October 03, 2021, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 03, 2021, 07:04:03 PM
Did today's performance cement the Texans as the worst team in the NFL?
FiveThirtyEight's prediction model actually thinks the Texans are better after Week 4. They got a bump of 18 Elo points despite the 40-0 loss. Maybe they get credit on defense for holding the Bills to field goals on four of their drives.
In fairness, it could have been 56-0 with better red zone execution by the Bills, so you do have to give the Texans defense some credit for that, and their offense performed about as well as expected with a rookie QB in his first road start against a good if not great defense.
Even if those earlier FGs went for TDs, most NFL teams let off the throttle if it's a blood-bath, so a score of 50+ to 0 will rarely happen.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2021, 12:45:54 PM
Predictions for Sunday
Titans 37, Jets 14
Lions 29, Bears 14
Dolphins 24, Colts 16
Browns 31, Vikings 17
Falcons 33, Washington 25
Bills 48, Texans 7
Saints 23, Giants 20
Chiefs 42, Eagles 34
Cowboys 34, Panthers 17
Seahawks 28, 49ers 14
Rams 41, Cardinals 20
Packers 26, Steelers 10
Broncos 14, Ravens 12
Buccaneers 30, Patriots 7
A few solid predictions, and a lot of trash. Chiefs/Eagles was close, and I don't think 42-30 is a particularly easy score to predict. Seahawks/49ers was a successful extra point and a late 49ers touchdown away. Packers/Steelers and Bills/Texans were decent.
On the other hand, you have, . . . the others . . .
NOO Folk :(. Should have gone for it.
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 09:50:11 PM
As was mentioned the Bills have a +90 point differential - yet the Packers, who are also 3-1, have a -5. And it's not like the Packers have been winning on last second field goals (well, sometimes). Their wins are by an average of 10 points, and they're 3-1, yet that Saints game wrecked their PD. Thankfully for them, point differential isn't a significant stat in the NFL and is not used in tiebreakers (though I think it should be, maybe as the third tiebreaker after head to head and division/conference record).
No, it should not be. PD as a stat would keep teams on the throttle long after a game is decided. There is sportsmanship now and the opportunity to bring in other players in a blowout. That's important to the game.
Since the Texans were never expected to even contend for a playoff spot this year, it only makes sense to go for a high pick in next year's draft. In the meantime (with Tyrod hurt and Deshaun refusing to play), all we can do is through the motions with our 3rd-string QB in Mills. Let's get a high pick to rebuild on and go from there.
Quote from: Alps on October 03, 2021, 07:22:17 PM
I was at Jets Titans and after a revolting Jets first quarter that was a hell of an entertaining game right down to the last second.
I watched the end of the 4th quarter and overtime of that game after whatever was on that channel first ended. I was disappointed only because I was rooting for a tie.
Quote from: US 89 on October 04, 2021, 01:01:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 03, 2021, 07:22:17 PM
I was at Jets Titans and after a revolting Jets first quarter that was a hell of an entertaining game right down to the last second.
I watched the end of the 4th quarter and overtime of that game after whatever was on that channel first ended. I was disappointed only because I was rooting for a tie.
Me too. I thought the Jets going 0-16-1 would be amazing.
(https://i.imgur.com/ksf1zhq.jpeg)
My Panthers lost, but that doesn't mean I stop caring! :ded: :pan:
Quote from: Alps on October 04, 2021, 12:28:57 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 09:50:11 PM
As was mentioned the Bills have a +90 point differential - yet the Packers, who are also 3-1, have a -5. And it's not like the Packers have been winning on last second field goals (well, sometimes). Their wins are by an average of 10 points, and they're 3-1, yet that Saints game wrecked their PD. Thankfully for them, point differential isn't a significant stat in the NFL and is not used in tiebreakers (though I think it should be, maybe as the third tiebreaker after head to head and division/conference record).
No, it should not be. PD as a stat would keep teams on the throttle long after a game is decided. There is sportsmanship now and the opportunity to bring in other players in a blowout. That's important to the game.
Sportsmanship is a thing in the NFL and football in general nowadays?
Quote from: snowc on October 04, 2021, 07:34:48 AM
My Panthers lost, but that doesn't mean I stop caring!
Looks like that one is
making its rounds (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2660107#msg2660107)...
Quote from: Alps on October 04, 2021, 12:28:57 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 09:50:11 PM
As was mentioned the Bills have a +90 point differential - yet the Packers, who are also 3-1, have a -5. And it's not like the Packers have been winning on last second field goals (well, sometimes). Their wins are by an average of 10 points, and they're 3-1, yet that Saints game wrecked their PD. Thankfully for them, point differential isn't a significant stat in the NFL and is not used in tiebreakers (though I think it should be, maybe as the third tiebreaker after head to head and division/conference record).
No, it should not be. PD as a stat would keep teams on the throttle long after a game is decided. There is sportsmanship now and the opportunity to bring in other players in a blowout. That's important to the game.
I think it would be a better tiebreaker than the current third tiebreaker, games against common opponents. That one seems too heavily affected by chance, or how one team matches up tactically against another that might or might not be better than them.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 04, 2021, 12:24:48 AM
NOO Folk :(. Should have gone for it.
I am with you on this one. Kicking the FG was kind of a lose-lose.
I also thought a final score of 20-19 would have been fitting since 2019 was Brady's last year with the Pats.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 04, 2021, 06:56:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 04, 2021, 01:01:46 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 03, 2021, 07:22:17 PM
I was at Jets Titans and after a revolting Jets first quarter that was a hell of an entertaining game right down to the last second.
I watched the end of the 4th quarter and overtime of that game after whatever was on that channel first ended. I was disappointed only because I was rooting for a tie.
Me too. I thought the Jets going 0-16-1 would be amazing.
Jets needed that first win to jumpstart the team. Getting over the 0-fer hump is a huge morale boost. A tie just wouldn't have done it.
Is it just me, or does it seem like the NFL has been even more unpredictable than usual this season?
The Cardinals are the only undefeated team and the Jags and Lions are the only winless teams after four weeks. Contrast that to last year, when there were five* undefeated teams and four winless teams.
And even then, Cardinals should be 3-1 if not for a chip shot FG miss by the Vikings, the Lions should be 1-3 if not for the longest FG in NFL history, and the Jags... well, they came really close against the Bengals, at least.
The playoff bubble also seems bigger than usual. There's still only about 5 teams that I am very confident will not make the playoffs (including the Pittsburgh Steelers... who saw that coming?), whereas there would usually be more like 10 or 12 at this point in the season.
*Technically six teams, as the 3-0 Titans and 3-0 Steelers took an early bye because of a Covid outbreak. But they played each other in Week 5 and only the Steelers remained undefeated through four games.
What is going on with Urban Meyer
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 11:39:41 AM
What is going on with Urban Meyer
A lot of unnecessary drama if you ask me.
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2021, 03:54:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 11:39:41 AM
What is going on with Urban Meyer
A lot of unnecessary drama if you ask me.
Dude ditched his team to go party with some college kids.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 04:11:53 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2021, 03:54:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 11:39:41 AM
What is going on with Urban Meyer
A lot of unnecessary drama if you ask me.
Dude ditched his team to go party with some college kids.
He is the HC of the Jags, and he got done getting his team's ass kicked by the Bengals in the "˜Nati, which is only a few hour drive up I-71 from his old stomping grounds of Columbus
Go party and enjoy yourself where you are appreciated. Let Urban do Urban. And if Shad Khan doesn't like it, he can kick Urban to the curb if/when he feels it appropriate, and I don't think he'll worry too much about the buy-out language costs
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 04:11:53 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2021, 03:54:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 11:39:41 AM
What is going on with Urban Meyer
A lot of unnecessary drama if you ask me.
Dude ditched his team to go party with some college kids.
Yeah, I know. Of course the media will blow it up, but I meant it was unnecessary on Meyer's part.
Ultimately not a huge deal, but the whole Urban Meyer experience just doesn't sit well with me. He has a very self-important air that isn't a good fit for the NFL. A coach with real leadership skills that was committed to the team and truly cared about his players wouldn't get themselves into this type of drama or controversy off the field. Can you imagine something like this happening with Sean McDermott or Brandon Staley, for example? Or even long-time coaches like Reid or Belichick? Of course not, and I would not be happy about it if I was a Jaguars player.
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2021, 09:41:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 04:11:53 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2021, 03:54:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 05, 2021, 11:39:41 AM
What is going on with Urban Meyer
A lot of unnecessary drama if you ask me.
Dude ditched his team to go party with some college kids.
Yeah, I know. Of course the media will blow it up, but I meant it was unnecessary on Meyer's part.
Ultimately not a huge deal, but the whole Urban Meyer experience just doesn't sit well with me. He just doesn't seem like a good fit for the NFL.
Dude needed the stress relief so he doesn't have another kinda sorta heart attack. :rolleyes:
FiveThirtyEight on the greatness of the NFC West:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-nfc-west-the-toughest-division-in-nfl-history/
Farewell Stephon Gilmore and good luck in Carolina.
Quote from: webny99 on October 06, 2021, 04:18:47 PM
FiveThirtyEight on the greatness of the NFC West:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-nfc-west-the-toughest-division-in-nfl-history/
The NFC as a whole is awful this year, just like it was in 2015 (which is why the Panthers steamrolled everyone that year). So at this point, the Rams, Cardinals, and Seahawks should all make the playoffs. The 49ers would be with them if they had any hope of stopping a team with a passing game.
Jets 33, Falcons 13
Patriots 34, Texans 0
Vikings 45, Lions 20
Panthers 27, Eagles 23
Saints 24, Washington 13
Titans 28, Jaguars 27
Buccaneers 31, Dolphins 26
Bengals 24, Packers 20
Steelers 20, Broncos 10
Bears 25, Raiders 17
Chargers 38, Browns 14
Cowboys 28, Giants 20
49ers 27, Cardinals 14
Chiefs 40, Bills 27
My opinions on the Bears and 49ers have not changed, I just think that the Raiders and Cardinals will struggle offensively against the pass rush of those two defenses, and force key turnovers to change the game.
Interestingly, the Bills actually have to face a quarterback who is not either a) a backup, or b) a shell of his former self. The lid comes off, and people realize that the Chiefs aren't actually that bad.
Quote from: thspfc on October 07, 2021, 10:40:05 AM
Chiefs 40, Bills 27
...
Interestingly, the Bills actually have to face a quarterback who is not either a) a backup, or b) a shell of his former self. The lid comes off, and people realize that the Chiefs aren't actually that bad.
Bills may lose, but come on. 40 points? They've only given up 37 points
all season, and I know it's been against bad opponents, but the difference is the Chiefs might score 25 or 30 instead of 10.
We probably won't learn anything new about the Chiefs no matter the outcome: They've got one of the best offenses in the league and one of the worst defenses. It's not talked about enough that Eagles had three TD's called back by penalty, kicked FG's on all three drives, and lost by 12. So that game is an all-time shootout going to overtime at 42-42 if not for those penalties.
It's a massive game for both teams, though. :paranoid:
Quote from: thspfc on October 06, 2021, 09:51:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 06, 2021, 04:18:47 PM
FiveThirtyEight on the greatness of the NFC West:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-nfc-west-the-toughest-division-in-nfl-history/
The NFC as a whole is awful this year, just like it was in 2015 (which is why the Panthers steamrolled everyone that year). So at this point, the Rams, Cardinals, and Seahawks should all make the playoffs. The 49ers would be with them if they had any hope of stopping a team with a passing game.
Or even worse 2010. Hard to beleive it was the Chicago Bears that hosted the NFC Championship game that year.
Not surprised that the Patriots kept it competitive against the Bucs. Coach Belichick seemed to know all about Tom Brady's tendencies and weaknesses and I am willing to bet that he'd been staying up all night diagramming defensive plays to counter-punch the Bucs offense. He seems to be great at playing "chess" on the field making the right moves at the right times; no wonder he is considered to be one of the all-time greatest coaches in any sport.
Quote from: jgb191 on October 08, 2021, 04:52:20 AM
Not surprised that the Patriots kept it competitive against the Bucs. Coach Belichick seemed to know all about Tom Brady's tendencies and weaknesses and I am willing to bet that he'd been staying up all night diagramming defensive plays to counter-punch the Bucs offense. He seems to be great at playing "chess" on the field making the right moves at the right times; no wonder he is considered to be one of the all-time greatest coaches in any sport.
NFL coaches watch film for hours seeking out every little nuance of an opposing player. They will notice every blink, every step, every movement.
Bellchick coached Brady for over a decade. But don't forget, in a different meaning, Brady was coached by Bellchick. The two know each others patterns and tendencies. Brady just needed to make minute changes...ones that Bellchick has never seen before...to throw his team off just a hair.
After last night's loss to the Rams, could this be the beginning of the end for the Seahawks as we know it?
Quote from: Henry on October 08, 2021, 10:13:04 AM
After last night's loss to the Rams, could this be the beginning of the end for the Seahawks as we know it?
Maybe. There's a very real chance they don't make the playoffs given the tough division.
A lot of the traditional "good teams" don't have the greatest playoff odds this year... Patriots, Steelers, Saints...
Quote from: webny99 on October 08, 2021, 10:37:39 AM
Quote from: Henry on October 08, 2021, 10:13:04 AM
After last night's loss to the Rams, could this be the beginning of the end for the Seahawks as we know it?
Maybe. There's a very real chance they don't make the playoffs given the tough division.
A lot of the traditional "good teams" don't have the greatest playoff odds this year... Patriots, Steelers, Saints...
The Pats are a different team after the TB era. The Steelers don't have a strong running game, and the Saints... you know why they're so bad.
Quote from: Henry on October 08, 2021, 10:13:04 AM
After last night's loss to the Rams, could this be the beginning of the end for the Seahawks as we know it?
First, how do we know them? The Legion of Boom has been dead for more than 6 years. Since then they haven't made it past the divisional. Here are all the teams that have at least made a conference championship game more recently than the Seahawks:
Patriots (x4)
Bills
Steelers
Jaguars
Titans
Chiefs (x3)
Broncos
Eagles
Packers (x3)
Vikings
Buccaneers
Saints
Falcons
Panthers
49ers
Rams
Cardinals
That's 17 of the 32 teams. So the Seahawks have been just as bad in the playoffs recently as a team like the Ravens or Saints, and they've been significantly worse than the Packers, who they often get compared to. Since 2016 they have the same number of playoff wins as the Cowboys (counting a first round bye as a playoff win, which I think should be the standard).
I wonder how much the shadow of the Legion of Boom hangs over this team today. Because the defense straight up sucks, and pretty much has ever since the end of the third quarter of Super Bowl 49. Imagine how much more criticism they would be getting if there wasn't the narrative that they would eventually figure it out. Towards the end of last season they were better than they ever have been since 2015, but the problem was that the offense declined because opposing defenses learned how to stop their go-to plays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opdh_aJhmME&feature=emb_err_woyt
Right now the Seahawks rank dead last in offensive plays per game. For reference, the Texans are 30th, Bears 29th, Saints and WFT tied for 27th, Jaguars 26th, and Jets 25th. So that is clearly somewhat important. I've always thought that any good offense can't be reliant on the big play. The 50-yard bomb is an important piece, but it can never be the only thing that will get you yardage, because if it is then defenses will just drop 7-8 guys in coverage with two deep safeties. When the Seahawks are scoring, they're scoring quickly, and therefore putting their defense right back on the field with very little rest. That leads to opposing offenses wearing them down with long drives. This was most evident in the Titans game. The Seahawks offense couldn't stay on the field long enough to give the defense a break. From the point they were up 24-9 at halftime, they punted, scored a touchdown on a 3-play drive, punted, and punted again. Meanwhile, the Titans had drives of 8, 12, 2, 10, and 12 plays.
I'm not going to write off the Seahawks yet, mostly because the NFC sucks. They're better than the teams they're contending with for a wild card spot, like the Saints, WFT, and 49ers IMO. So I think they'll make the playoffs, but no way they make it past the divisional.
This era of 10-6/11-5/12-4 seasons with early playoff exits is getting stale, and many people think a coaching change is the answer - I don't. Step 1 is getting an offensive line, step 2 is getting a defense, and step 3 is getting an offensive coordinator who fits with Wilson. It's not easy to find someone better than Pete Carroll.
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
The Lions haven't done anything really of note since 1957. I'm hardly in agony given years like this are the general expectation for the team. At minimum the Lions are largely offset by UofM football and the three other major sports teams having won championships in my lifetime.
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
Hey a win is a win, Brady is gone I'll take anything.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 06:36:43 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
The Lions haven't done anything really of note since 1957. I'm hardly in agony given years like this are the general expectation for the team. At minimum the Lions are largely offset by UofM football and the three other major sports teams having won championships in my lifetime.
Saying that the Lions are offset by the Tigers, Red Wings, and Pistons is the lowest possible bar. All four play within 1/4 mile of each other and right now all four suck.
Speaking of Brady - 30-41, 411 yards, 5 touchdowns. The guy is leading the NFL in just about every passing category.
There will never be another football player who can even be compared to Brady. At this point there are no words left to describe Brady's career.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 10, 2021, 07:17:19 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 06:36:43 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
The Lions haven't done anything really of note since 1957. I'm hardly in agony given years like this are the general expectation for the team. At minimum the Lions are largely offset by UofM football and the three other major sports teams having won championships in my lifetime.
Saying that the Lions are offset by the Tigers, Red Wings, and Pistons is the lowest possible bar. All four play within 1/4 mile of each other and right now all four suck.
The Pistons and Red Wings had some of the greatest dynasties in their respective sports. We had season tickets to the Red Wings (family tickets) when they were winning Stanley Cups in the late 1990s. I attended numerous Pistons games the year they beat Lakers and went to a ton of other games during earlier the Bad Boys era. My Dad and I went to seven UofM games the year they won the National Championship in 1997. One of my first living memories was watching the Tigers win the World Series in 1984 with my Dad.
Sure there isn't a ton great going on in Detroit sports at the moment, but I've seen a lot of great moments. Why should I be angry about the Lions when the best they have ever done in my lifetime was get blown out but the Redskins (now Football Team) when the player in the NFC Championship in 1991? I see no reason to be "in agony" over the Detroit Lions as a fan. They suck, they always have and I really have no expectations that will change any time soon. I'm actually going to see them play at SoFi later this month when they play the Rams and Matt Stafford.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 07:42:20 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 10, 2021, 07:17:19 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 06:36:43 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
The Lions haven't done anything really of note since 1957. I'm hardly in agony given years like this are the general expectation for the team. At minimum the Lions are largely offset by UofM football and the three other major sports teams having won championships in my lifetime.
Saying that the Lions are offset by the Tigers, Red Wings, and Pistons is the lowest possible bar. All four play within 1/4 mile of each other and right now all four suck.
The Pistons and Red Wings had some of the greatest dynasties in their respective sports. We had season tickets to the Red Wings (family tickets) when they were winning Stanley Cups in the late 1990s. I attended numerous Pistons games the year they beat Lakers and went to a ton of other games during earlier the Bad Boys era. My Dad and I went to seven UofM games the year they won the National Championship in 1997. One of my first living memories was watching the Tigers win the World Series in 1984 with my Dad.
Sure there isn't a ton great going on in Detroit sports at the moment, but I've seen a lot of great moments. Why should I be angry about the Lions when the best they have ever done in my lifetime was get blown out but the Redskins (now Football Team) when the player in the NFC Championship in 1991? I see no reason to be "in agony" over the Detroit Lions as a fan. They suck, they always have and I really have no expectations that will change any time soon. I'm actually going to see them play at SoFi later this month when they play the Rams and Matt Stafford.
The Tigers drafted Patrick Mahomes in 2014 (he was a 2 sport player in college and his dad was a major league pitcher). This is one more Super Bowl winning QB than the Lions have drafted.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 10, 2021, 07:52:02 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 07:42:20 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 10, 2021, 07:17:19 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 10, 2021, 06:36:43 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 10, 2021, 06:06:53 PM
Yes go Pats! Big win!
Beating the Texans on a last-second field goal while giving up 300 yards, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers to a rookie quarterback who just threw 4 interceptions last week sounds less like "big win" and more like "the Texans shot themself in the foot with penalties, 2 missed extra points, and a 0-yard punt; we were so lucky to win" if you ask me.
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
The Lions haven't done anything really of note since 1957. I'm hardly in agony given years like this are the general expectation for the team. At minimum the Lions are largely offset by UofM football and the three other major sports teams having won championships in my lifetime.
Saying that the Lions are offset by the Tigers, Red Wings, and Pistons is the lowest possible bar. All four play within 1/4 mile of each other and right now all four suck.
The Pistons and Red Wings had some of the greatest dynasties in their respective sports. We had season tickets to the Red Wings (family tickets) when they were winning Stanley Cups in the late 1990s. I attended numerous Pistons games the year they beat Lakers and went to a ton of other games during earlier the Bad Boys era. My Dad and I went to seven UofM games the year they won the National Championship in 1997. One of my first living memories was watching the Tigers win the World Series in 1984 with my Dad.
Sure there isn't a ton great going on in Detroit sports at the moment, but I've seen a lot of great moments. Why should I be angry about the Lions when the best they have ever done in my lifetime was get blown out but the Redskins (now Football Team) when the player in the NFC Championship in 1991? I see no reason to be "in agony" over the Detroit Lions as a fan. They suck, they always have and I really have no expectations that will change any time soon. I'm actually going to see them play at SoFi later this month when they play the Rams and Matt Stafford.
The Tigers drafted Patrick Mahomes in 2014 (he was a 2 sport player in college and his dad was a major league pitcher). This is one more Super Bowl winning QB than the Lions have drafted.
Considering how good Matt Stafford has looked in most of the Rams games this year I wouldn't totally discount the possibility he still might be one.
Browns-Chargers might have been the game of the year. Pretty incredible that it ended with a final score of 47-42, identical to the Browns-Ravens game from last year.
Quote from: webny99 on October 10, 2021, 08:20:36 PM
Browns-Chargers might have been the game of the year. Pretty incredible that it ended with a final score of 47-42, identical to the Browns-Ravens game from last year.
That's now twice in the first 5 weeks that Baker Mayfield played great almost the entire game, and then couldn't get the job done when he most needed to. Baker will win a lot of games, but Baker will never make a Super Bowl, much less win one, in Cleveland or elsewhere. Of course, there's not really a better option out there at QB for the Browns, so they'll give him a big contract (which is the right decision).
Chiefs not looking so good.
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2021, 12:40:20 AM
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
They are good but the Chiefs are 2-3, somethings wrong with them.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 11, 2021, 12:40:55 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2021, 12:40:20 AM
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
They are good but the Chiefs are 2-3, somethings wrong with them.
It's mostly their defense. They've also had turnover issues in all three losses.
I think they will still make the playoffs, probably as a wild card though. We know they can make in-game comebacks, now it will be interesting to see if they can make a season comeback.
Quote from: CoreySamson on October 10, 2021, 06:15:04 PM
At least as a Texan fan I'm not in the agony Lions fans are experiencing right now.
Never should have been in that position. Vikings let the Lions hang around through stupid playcalling, and then the Lions got some late breaks to put themselves in position to win.
What's with all these missed field goals and extra points today???
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2021, 12:40:20 AM
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
The Bills are my Super Bowl pick.
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2021, 12:40:20 AM
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
Yes. I thought the Bills defense would struggle in their first game playing against a legit offense, and I thought that this would be the week the Chiefs figure it out. Neither. Buffalo is first in total defense and points allowed. The Steelers game looks like more of a fluke every week.
Going into the season, I expected the Browns to be Super Bowl contenders. They're not. With a porous secondary and a passing game that shuts down once the Browns are behind late, they're not going to win multiple playoff games. Mayfield has not taken as much of a step forward as hoped, the shoulder injury could be part of that.
Even though I actually made a somewhat intelligent prediction for once on the Bears/Raiders game, I'm going pull a page out of webny99's playbook and say that the Bears are the worst 3-2 team of all time.
Gruden resigning. Good.
Chris
It was a fun 3 weeks of relevancy for the Raiders. I guess they're still relevant, but not in the way a team would ever want to be.
Quote from: thspfc on October 11, 2021, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2021, 12:40:20 AM
... or maybe the Bills are good!? :paranoid:
Yes. I thought the Bills defense would struggle in their first game playing against a legit offense, and I thought that this would be the week the Chiefs figure it out. Neither. Buffalo is first in total defense and points allowed. The Steelers game looks like more of a fluke every week.
Going into the season, I expected the Browns to be Super Bowl contenders. They're not. With a porous secondary and a passing game that shuts down once the Browns are behind late, they're not going to win multiple playoff games. Mayfield has not taken as much of a step forward as hoped, the shoulder injury could be part of that.
Even though I actually made a somewhat intelligent prediction for once on the Bears/Raiders game, I'm going pull a page out of webny99's playbook and say that the Bears are the worst 3-2 team of all time.
The Bears beat the 3-2 Bengals, so maybe not.
How about that game in Baltimore????????
Quote from: KCRoadFan on October 11, 2021, 11:33:24 PM
How about that game in Baltimore????????
I would have liked to see the Colts at least attempt to match the TD scored by the Ravens that won the game. If the Colts answered back with a TD, they would still be alive in the game, or if the Colts fail to match the TD or turn it over, the game could then be over. This is for any OT game for that matter. At least a FG scored by the winner of the coin toss doesn't end the game right away, the other team gets a chance to either match the FG to continue the game or score a TD to win.
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 11, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Gruden resigning. Good.
Chris
Now if Urb can also go away that would be doubly good.
Snyder and Allen are scumbags too
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 11, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Gruden resigning. Good.
Chris
I always thought that contract that Gruden had with the Raiders was destined to fail honestly (beyond what led it to actually failing).
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 12, 2021, 07:10:21 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 11, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Gruden resigning. Good.
Chris
I always thought that contract that Gruden had with the Raiders was destined to fail honestly (beyond what led it to actually failing).
With how rarely coaches last 10+ years with the same team these days, I figured from the moment that contract was announced in 2018 that Gruden wouldn't actually last 10 years.
(I also low-key wonder if Mark Davis saw this as an opportunity to get out from Gruden anyway, considering his track record over the last 3 1/4 seasons. Admittedly a lot of the contract stuff goes over my head, but I wonder if Gruden resigning versus being fired affects how much of the contract is ultimately paid out?)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 12, 2021, 01:02:45 AM
Snyder and Allen are scumbags too
You're just learning this?
I want the Football Team destroyed over this. Forcing Snyder to sell would be a start. But it won't be enough until every single person who enabled or saw this behavior and did nothing about it is out of the league forever.
And so long as we're on the topic of awful franchises, the Saints need to do three things: 1) clean house, starting with the people who tried cover up mass child abuse, 2) fire their malicious coach who actively tried to injure opposing players, and 3) move out of New Orleans.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on October 11, 2021, 11:33:24 PM
How about that game in Baltimore????????
That was one of the most bizarre games I've seen in a while. Colts need to fire Matt Eberflus.
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 11, 2021, 09:23:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 11, 2021, 10:34:56 AM
Even though I actually made a somewhat intelligent prediction for once on the Bears/Raiders game, I'm going pull a page out of webny99's playbook and say that the Bears are the worst 3-2 team of all time.
The Bears beat the 3-2 Bengals, so maybe not.
I'll pull another page out of the webny99 playbook: The 3-2 Bengals are better than the 3-2 Bears even though they lost to them. :-P
Quote from: webny99 on October 12, 2021, 09:40:23 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 11, 2021, 09:23:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 11, 2021, 10:34:56 AM
Even though I actually made a somewhat intelligent prediction for once on the Bears/Raiders game, I'm going pull a page out of webny99's playbook and say that the Bears are the worst 3-2 team of all time.
The Bears beat the 3-2 Bengals, so maybe not.
I'll pull another page out of the webny99 playbook: The 3-2 Bengals are better than the 3-2 Bears even though they lost to them. :-P
:spin: :spin: :spin:
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 11, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Gruden resigning. Good.
Chris
Good riddance to awful rubbish. Now Mike Mayoch and Raiders brass can go find a coach worthy enough to work with Derick Carr. Just make sure he doesn't land another Monday Night Football gig. I kind of figured that 10 years for however many dollars just didn't fit the results. That's what one email can do to wreck a guy's tenure. And Gruden's email did just that.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 12, 2021, 05:47:50 PM
Just make sure he doesn't land another Monday Night Football gig.
I am pretty sure he obliterated his chance of any public-facing gig regarding football ever again.
Not sure if anyone else here follows/listens to the Around the NFL podcast, but before the season Marc Sessler predicted that a coach would resign this season, and that a top story in the league would involve an NFL cheerleader. Both things just happened in a span of 24 hours :wow:
https://www.gogetmylunch.org/2021offseason
Quote from: webny99 on October 12, 2021, 09:34:49 PM
Not sure if anyone else here follows/listens to the Around the NFL podcast, but before the season Marc Sessler predicted that a coach would resign this season, and that a top story in the league would involve an NFL cheerleader. Both things just happened in a span of 24 hours :wow:
https://www.gogetmylunch.org/2021offseason
Wait, what was the cheerleader story? I missed that, or was it part of Gruden's deal?
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 12, 2021, 10:25:03 PM
Wait, what was the cheerleader story? I missed that, or was it part of Gruden's deal?
Yes, it is/was one of the more disturbing parts of the Gruden resignation, involving some pictures exchanged between Gruden and Bruce Allen...
see here (https://www.thedailybeast.com/after-jon-gruden-resigns-cheerleaders-demand-nfl-release-report-on-washington-football-teams-boys-club).
Dolphins 35, Jaguars 19
Vikings 27, Panthers 24
Chargers 28, Ravens 21
Rams 33, Giants 20
Colts 38, Texans 26
Chiefs 37, Washington 32
Packers 23, Bears 14
Lions 34, Bengals 27
Cardinals 35, Browns 23
Cowboys 26, Patriots 20
Raiders 19, Broncos 14
Seahawks 21, Steelers 13
Bills 45, Titans 21
The Lions are going to catch the Bengals sleeping after Cincy's predictable yet also incomprehensible loss to the Packers last week. The Seahawks will be motivated and the rest of the team will step up for the time that Wilson is injured.
Finally! Jags win in London.
The Jacksonville Dolphins pass the "Football Team" designation to Miami.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 17, 2021, 12:54:08 PM
The Jacksonville Dolphins pass the "Football Team" designation to Miami.
Not to be confused with the actual Dolphins at the university of the same name.
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Dolphins 35, Jaguars 19
Vikings 27, Panthers 24
Chargers 28, Ravens 21
Rams 33, Giants 20
Colts 38, Texans 26
Chiefs 37, Washington 32
Packers 23, Bears 14
Lions 34, Bengals 27
Cardinals 35, Browns 23
Cowboys 26, Patriots 20
Raiders 19, Broncos 14
Seahawks 21, Steelers 13
Bills 45, Titans 21
The Lions are going to catch the Bengals sleeping after Cincy's predictable yet also incomprehensible loss to the Packers last week. The Seahawks will be motivated and the rest of the team will step up for the time that Wilson is injured.
That Bengals prediction didn't age well.
Wow, a lot of blowouts today. In fact Dolphins-Jags and Vikings-Panthers were the only close games.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2021, 06:41:50 PM
Wow, a lot of blowouts today. In fact Dolphins-Jags and Vikings-Panthers were the only close games.
Patriots Cowboys looking to be a nailbiter
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 17, 2021, 06:29:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Dolphins 35, Jaguars 19
Vikings 27, Panthers 24
Chargers 28, Ravens 21
Rams 33, Giants 20
Colts 38, Texans 26
Chiefs 37, Washington 32
Packers 23, Bears 14
Lions 34, Bengals 27
Cardinals 35, Browns 23
Cowboys 26, Patriots 20
Raiders 19, Broncos 14
Seahawks 21, Steelers 13
Bills 45, Titans 21
The Lions are going to catch the Bengals sleeping after Cincy's predictable yet also incomprehensible loss to the Packers last week. The Seahawks will be motivated and the rest of the team will step up for the time that Wilson is injured.
That Bengals prediction didn't age well.
No it did not.
On the other hand, I think I'm becoming something of a Bears genius, with two nearly spot-on predictions of theirs, and I picked them to win the Raiders game which they were underdogs in.
Cowboys/Patriots has been quite the fourth quarter. Trevon Diggs is so odd, he leads the league in interceptions by far, yet he gives up a lot of yards and big plays.
Mac Jones threw touchdown passes to both teams on consecutive plays.
Wow, well Cowboys-Pats was a bit of a saving grace for this day in the NFL!
The Browns loss to the Cardinals sets up a hugely important TNF game against the Broncos in which the loser will have a losing record... Yikes. Tough spot for both teams, but the Browns had much higher preseason expectations, so they better win this one or they're in rough shape - not only in the division, with the Ravens and Bengals both ahead of them now, but also in the wild card race, since that would put them behind the entire AFC West, with head to head losses to three AFC West teams.
My feelings about the NFC North wrapped up into one way-too-early prediction: the Bears are going to beat the Packers in Lambeau in Week 14 (Dec 12th).
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2021, 12:32:15 AM
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
He was the worst decision of any of the QBs the Jets have
ruined picked.
Quote from: Alps on October 18, 2021, 12:44:37 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2021, 12:32:15 AM
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
He was the worst decision of any of the QBs the Jets have ruined picked.
They picked Darnold ahead of Josh Allen and Lamar. At least in Geno's draft there were no other real options.
I know that Darnold seemed like the right decision at the time; doesn't change the fact that he's not even an NFL caliber starting QB while Allen and Lamar will win/have won MVPs.
Quote from: thspfc on October 18, 2021, 10:27:32 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 18, 2021, 12:44:37 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2021, 12:32:15 AM
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
He was the worst decision of any of the QBs the Jets have ruined picked.
They picked Darnold ahead of Josh Allen and Lamar. At least in Geno's draft there were no other real options.
I know that Darnold seemed like the right decision at the time; doesn't change the fact that he's not even an NFL caliber starting QB while Allen and Lamar will win/have won MVPs.
On the other hand, at least they selected Darnold ahead of Josh Rosen! :-D
Quote from: thspfc on October 18, 2021, 10:27:32 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 18, 2021, 12:44:37 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2021, 12:32:15 AM
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
He was the worst decision of any of the QBs the Jets have ruined picked.
They picked Darnold ahead of Josh Allen and Lamar. At least in Geno's draft there were no other real options.
I know that Darnold seemed like the right decision at the time; doesn't change the fact that he's not even an NFL caliber starting QB while Allen and Lamar will win/have won MVPs.
Look at the teams that developed them. Switch the teams that drafted Josh Allen and Sam Darnold and I bet you'd have the exact same post with the names switched.
Quote from: Alps on October 18, 2021, 06:15:16 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 18, 2021, 10:27:32 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 18, 2021, 12:44:37 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2021, 12:32:15 AM
And Geno Smith single-handedly loses the game for Seattle. Once a Jet, always a Jet.
He was the worst decision of any of the QBs the Jets have ruined picked.
They picked Darnold ahead of Josh Allen and Lamar. At least in Geno's draft there were no other real options.
I know that Darnold seemed like the right decision at the time; doesn't change the fact that he's not even an NFL caliber starting QB while Allen and Lamar will win/have won MVPs.
Look at the teams that developed them. Switch the teams that drafted Josh Allen and Sam Darnold and I bet you'd have the exact same post with the names switched.
Ah yes, the Bills. The pinnacle of NFL excellence, to the tune of one playoff berth from 2000 to 2018.
Last time I checked, Darnold isn't exactly flourishing for the Panthers either, who have a track record of being more competent than both the Bills and Jets.
For the second straight year, the Bills head into their bye on a terrible, gut punch loss.
It really was almost worse than the Hail Murray, and yet I can't even be that mad about it because it was a great game and I respect the heck out of the decision to go for it on 4th & inches.
And the Bills have yet to win a close game. Four blowout wins and two close losses.
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2021, 11:40:51 PM
I respect the heck out of the decision to go for it on 4th & inches.
I don't. That was just a dumb play call as far as I'm concerned. Going for it there is probably what, a 50% play? Kicking a FG from there gets you three points probably 90% of the time, and then it's extremely unlikely the Titans score again before overtime, which is more or less a toss-up. Plus even if you go for it on that 4th down and get it, you still only have 20 seconds and one timeout, and there's a decent chance you end up kicking the FG anyway to end the half.
Quote from: thspfc on October 18, 2021, 07:15:18 PM
Last time I checked, Darnold isn't exactly flourishing for the Panthers either, who have a track record of being more competent than both the Bills and Jets.
Because the Jets got to him first. As I said earlier, once a Jet, always a Jet.
Quote from: US 89 on October 19, 2021, 12:45:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2021, 11:40:51 PM
I respect the heck out of the decision to go for it on 4th & inches.
I don't. That was just a dumb play call as far as I'm concerned. Going for it there is probably what, a 50% play? Kicking a FG from there gets you three points probably 90% of the time, and then it's extremely unlikely the Titans score again before overtime, which is more or less a toss-up. Plus even if you go for it on that 4th down and get it, you still only have 20 seconds and one timeout, and there's a decent chance you end up kicking the FG anyway to end the half.
The analytics numbers I saw call it a 75% chance of success if they went for it. Let's use a more conservative number and say 60% for argument's sake. Tennessee would have then had a 1% chance of returning the kickoff or a hail Mary, so then going for it has a 59% chance of winning, or 41% chance of losing.
If they kick the field goal, let's use your number and say it has a 90% success rate. There's a 10% chance of losing.
You telling me that there's less than a 31% chance of losing if it goes to overtime? (41% chance from going for it minus 10% chance of missing FG)
At best, the Bills would have been 55/45 in OT, so by kicking a FG, you'd be giving up a 9.5% edge by the most conservative estimation. (59% chance of winning in regulation or 90% x 55% = 49.5% chance of winning in overtime)
Going for it was 100% the right call.
Chris
Quote from: US 89 on October 19, 2021, 12:45:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2021, 11:40:51 PM
I respect the heck out of the decision to go for it on 4th & inches.
I don't. That was just a dumb play call as far as I'm concerned. Going for it there is probably what, a 50% play? Kicking a FG from there gets you three points probably 90% of the time, and then it's extremely unlikely the Titans score again before overtime, which is more or less a toss-up. Plus even if you go for it on that 4th down and get it, you still only have 20 seconds and one timeout, and there's a decent chance you end up kicking the FG anyway to end the half.
The play itself could have been better, obviously, but you should absolutely go for it there. If it works, it's 1st and goal from the two yard line and no one would be questioning it.
https://twitter.com/NextGenStats/status/1450303039194087424
You could argue 75% is a little high, but then there's the fact that Josh Allen was 13 of 14 (93%) on 4th & 1 entering the game.
I'll just continue to be the contrarian and disagree that it was a bad play call. I think it was the right play and he just slipped. If he doesn't, he gets the first down.
Chris
Quote from: US 89 on October 19, 2021, 12:45:06 AM
once a Jet, always a Jet.
When I saw this, I thought this was a quote from West Side Story. A Google search in quotes doesn't seem to have the exact phrase as part of the script, though... (though some of the results are
still about the play/movie, just not with that phrase)
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 19, 2021, 07:50:38 AM
I'll just continue to be the contrarian and disagree that it was a bad play call. I think it was the right play and he just slipped. If he doesn't, he gets the first down.
Chris
From Twitter:
"Josh Allen is 29 of 32 lifetime on 3rd/4th down QB sneaks. One of the 3 failures was that game-defining play."
Even more of a reason to have gone for it.
Chris
Quote from: 1 on October 19, 2021, 07:52:33 AM
Quote from: US 89 on October 19, 2021, 12:45:06 AM
once a Jet, always a Jet.
When I saw this, I thought this was a quote from West Side Story. A Google search in quotes doesn't seem to have the exact phrase as part of the script, though... (though some of the results are still about the play/movie, just not with that phrase)
"When you're a Jet, you're a Jet all the way
From your first cigarette to your last dyin' day.
"Then you are set, with a capital J,
Which you'll never forget 'til they cart you away.
When you're a Jet, you stay a Jet!"
Chiefs 39, Titans 30
Packers 42, Washington 20
Ravens 35, Bengals 13
Giants 31, Panthers 26
Dolphins 34, Falcons 27
Patriots 27, Jets 21
Raiders 32, Eagles 28
Rams 27, Lions 6
Buccaneers 27, Bears 0
Cardinals 24, Texans 20
Colts 23, 49ers 19
Saints 20, Seahawks 17
The Buccaneers' #1 ranked run defense + the Bears' #32 ranked passing offense is as obvious of a recipe for a shutout as I've ever seen. This is a trap game for the Cardinals. Coming off a dominating win at Cleveland last week, with Green Bay looming large a week from today. Their talent gets them the win in a game that ends up being way closer than expected. The Giants manage to save Joe Judge's job for at least one more week, though in my opinion he should have been fired immediately after his post-week 17 press conference in January.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 04:05:25 PM
Chiefs 39, Titans 30
Packers 42, Washington 20
Ravens 35, Bengals 13
Giants 31, Panthers 26
Dolphins 34, Falcons 27
Patriots 27, Jets 21
Raiders 32, Eagles 28
Rams 27, Lions 6
Buccaneers 27, Bears 0
Cardinals 24, Texans 20
Colts 23, 49ers 19
Saints 20, Seahawks 17
The Buccaneers' #1 ranked run defense + the Bears' #32 ranked passing offense is as obvious of a recipe for a shutout as I've ever seen. This is a trap game for the Cardinals. Coming off a dominating win at Cleveland last week, with Green Bay looming large a week from today. Their talent gets them the win in a game that ends up being way closer than expected. The Giants manage to save Joe Judge's job for at least one more week, though in my opinion he should have been fired immediately after his post-week 17 press conference in January.
If you give me +22 on the Bengals, I'll throw my house on it. :)
Chris
Seems pretty likely that we'll have...
Titans>Bills
Bills>Chiefs
Chiefs>Titans
Which leads to an interesting question: Are the Titans a Super Bowl contender? They're probably going to win the terrible AFC South as the #4 seed in the AFC, but I wouldn't say they're one of the four best teams in the conference, even after beating the Bills.
The Broncos tonight vs the Browns will likely get many turnovers. With the trash that is Case Keenum and Von Miller and Justin Simmons on the Broncos Defense, it will be an offensive struggle for the Browns.
Quote from: webny99 on October 21, 2021, 04:44:29 PM
Seems pretty likely that we'll have...
Titans>Bills
Bills>Chiefs
Chiefs>Titans
Which leads to an interesting question: Are the Titans a Super Bowl contender? They're probably going to win the terrible AFC South as the #4 seed in the AFC, but I wouldn't say they're one of the four best teams in the conference, even after beating the Bills.
Agreed, I think the Bills, Ravens, Chargers, and Chiefs (in that order) are the four best in the AFC.
A third of the way through, my top ten would be:
1. Rams
2. Cardinals
3. Buccaneers
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. Cowboys
7. Packers
8. Chargers
9. Chiefs
10. Titans
I think I'd personally switch the Ravens and Cowboys. Ravens D this year isn't what they've been in the past. Otherwise I don't disagree a ton. I might put the Vikings above the Titans. Partly because they're the only team that has kept it close with Arizona (and should have one) and partly because I am an unashamed homer.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 21, 2021, 05:40:42 PM
I think I'd personally switch the Ravens and Cowboys. Ravens D this year isn't what they've been in the past. Otherwise I don't disagree a ton. I might put the Vikings above the Titans. Partly because they're the only team that has kept it close with Arizona (and should have one) and partly because I am an unashamed homer.
Chris
I'd say the Vikings are #12, with the Bengals being #11. But there's really not much separation between the Bengals, Vikings, Raiders, Colts, and Seahawks once Wilson gets back. Maybe the Saints but they're really inconsistent.
I think the Colts are on a major upswing - they're getting some players back from injury, Wentz is getting familiar with Reich again, and they've been really solid over the last three weeks with the exception of the fourth quarter against the Ravens. They played a really tough schedule to start the season also.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 05:30:43 PM
A third of the way through, my top ten would be:
1. Rams
2. Cardinals
3. Buccaneers
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. Cowboys
7. Packers
8. Chargers
9. Chiefs
10. Titans
Order them as you wish, but these are a pretty clear top 10 - I feel like much clearer than at this point in previous seasons. These are also only the 10 real Super Bowl contenders IMO (although the Titans could be debated). Interestingly, three of these teams (Cowboys, Cardinals and Chargers) didn't even make the playoffs last year.
That's also at least one team from each division, so you're basically looking at the likely division winners plus the 2nd place teams in the AFC/NFC West.
If you assume that these ten all make the playoffs, that leaves two spots in each conference up for grabs. I'd probably go Raiders and either Browns/Bengals in the AFC (or sure, maybe even the Colts, reading your previous post), and Vikings/Saints in the NFC, although both are so unpredictable that I could see the 49ers or Seahawks getting things turned around enough to grab the #7 seed.
But I would say that basically every other team is still in the playoff mix, at least on the fringes, except for the Jets, Jaguars, Lions, and Texans. And I guess the Giants and Dolphins are pretty much out of it as well, at 1-5 it's just not their year even though both had potential coming into the season.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 05:30:43 PM
A third of the way through, my top ten would be:
1. Rams
2. Cardinals
3. Buccaneers
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. Cowboys
7. Packers
8. Chargers
9. Chiefs
10. Titans
Titans are ruled out by virtue of losing to the Jets
Quote from: webny99 on October 21, 2021, 06:04:24 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 05:30:43 PM
A third of the way through, my top ten would be:
1. Rams
2. Cardinals
3. Buccaneers
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. Cowboys
7. Packers
8. Chargers
9. Chiefs
10. Titans
Order them as you wish, but these are a pretty clear top 10 - I feel like much clearer than at this point in previous seasons. These are also only the 10 real Super Bowl contenders IMO (although the Titans could be debated). Interestingly, three of these teams (Cowboys, Cardinals and Chargers) didn't even make the playoffs last year.
That's also at least one team from each division, so you're basically looking at the likely division winners plus the 2nd place teams in the AFC/NFC West.
If you assume that these ten all make the playoffs, that leaves two spots in each conference up for grabs. I'd probably go Raiders and either Browns/Bengals in the AFC (or sure, maybe even the Colts, reading your previous post), and Vikings/Saints in the NFC, although both are so unpredictable that I could see the 49ers or Seahawks getting things turned around enough to grab the #7 seed.
But I would say that basically every other team is still in the playoff mix, at least on the fringes, except for the Jets, Jaguars, Lions, and Texans. And I guess the Giants and Dolphins are pretty much out of it as well, at 1-5 it's just not their year even though both had potential coming into the season.
I put the Rams over the Cardinals because they're a more complete and experienced team, with a better chance of winning the Super Bowl. It feels like last year when I kept putting Clemson over Notre Dame in my college football rankings even after ND beat Clemson, and Clemson ended up destroying them the second time they faced each other.
Even as a Cowboys fan, I don't think the Cowboys defense is as good as people believe. They're giving up a lot of yards and big plays, especially through the air. The Cowboys offense, on the other hand, is the most well-rounded offense in the league, with a great QB, solid offensive line, two starting-caliber RBs, three very solid WRs (one of whom has been injured most of the season thus far), and a solid TE.
Similarly to 2019, the Packers aren't firing on all cylinders, but they're still winning. They're heavily reliant on the Rodgers to Adams connection.
I think there's 8 legitimate Super Bowl contenders right now: the teams that I have ranked 1-7 plus the Chiefs. Right now the Chargers are better than the Chiefs, but I'm not about to say that the team that has been to back-to-back SBs is not a contender.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 08:55:36 PM
I think there's 8 legitimate Super Bowl contenders right now: the teams that I have ranked 1-7 plus the Chiefs. Right now the Chargers are better than the Chiefs, but I'm not about to say that the team that has been to back-to-back SBs is not a contender.
But doesn't that mean that the Chargers are also a legitimate contender? They beat the Chiefs, and they have to be favorites or at least co-favorites to win the division.
Quote from: webny99 on October 21, 2021, 10:12:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 08:55:36 PM
I think there's 8 legitimate Super Bowl contenders right now: the teams that I have ranked 1-7 plus the Chiefs. Right now the Chargers are better than the Chiefs, but I'm not about to say that the team that has been to back-to-back SBs is not a contender.
But doesn't that mean that the Chargers are also a legitimate contender? They beat the Chiefs, and they have to be favorites or at least co-favorites to win the division.
The Titans beat the Bills, who are legit contenders, and they're obvious favorites to win their division. Contenders?
Quote from: thspfc on October 22, 2021, 08:13:45 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 21, 2021, 10:12:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 08:55:36 PM
I think there's 8 legitimate Super Bowl contenders right now: the teams that I have ranked 1-7 plus the Chiefs. Right now the Chargers are better than the Chiefs, but I'm not about to say that the team that has been to back-to-back SBs is not a contender.
But doesn't that mean that the Chargers are also a legitimate contender? They beat the Chiefs, and they have to be favorites or at least co-favorites to win the division.
The Titans beat the Bills, who are legit contenders, and they're obvious favorites to win their division. Contenders?
It's debatable - in fact this whole conversation started with me saying exactly that. They beat the Bills, but also lost to the Jets. They're right there with the Vikings and Saints as the top 3 most unpredictable teams in the league.
But that's not apples-to-apples with the Chiefs and Chargers, because the Titans aren't in the same division as the Bills. The Bills and Titans can both win their division. The Chiefs and Chargers can't, so you can't really say one is a contender and one isn't when either one could win the division.
Quote from: webny99 on October 22, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
It's debatable - in fact this whole conversation started with me saying exactly that. They beat the Bills, but also lost to the Jets. They're right there with the Vikings and Saints as the top 3 most unpredictable teams in the league.
But that's not apples-to-apples with the Chiefs and Chargers, because the Titans aren't in the same division as the Bills. The Bills and Titans can both win their division. The Chiefs and Chargers can't, so you can't really say one is a contender and one isn't when either one could win the division.
I don't think the Vikings are particularly unpredictable. We just "Vikings" games at the end of the games because it's in our genes apparently. Our offense and defense have actually been fairly consistent all year. The three games we lost were a dubious fumble against the Bengals, a missed game winning 37 yard FG against the Bengals, and then admittedly a not great offensive performance (the D still played fine) against the Browns. Cook was still nursing a sore ankle too in that game (not that that's an excuse).
The Saints go from crushing the Packers Week 1 looking like world beaters to not being able to move the ball on a week to week basis.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 22, 2021, 10:25:50 AM
I don't think the Vikings are particularly unpredictable. We just "Vikings" games at the end of the games because it's in our genes apparently. Our offense and defense have actually been fairly consistent all year. The three games we lost were a dubious fumble against the Bengals, a missed game winning 37 yard FG against the Bengals, and then admittedly a not great offensive performance (the D still played fine) against the Browns. Cook was still nursing a sore ankle too in that game (not that that's an excuse).
It's a different type of unpredictable than the Saints, to be sure... but I would still put them in that category along with the Saints and Titans in terms of being able to beat or lose to literally any team in the league.
If you think about it this way, the Vikings are the only reason we have a 6-0 team and an 0-6 team remaining in the league. If they make the Cardinals field goal and miss the Lions one, there would be 0 winless and 0 undefeated teams remaining. That's literally as extreme as it gets in terms of being able to beat or lose to anyone.
Quote from: webny99 on October 22, 2021, 11:31:21 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 22, 2021, 10:25:50 AM
I don't think the Vikings are particularly unpredictable. We just "Vikings" games at the end of the games because it's in our genes apparently. Our offense and defense have actually been fairly consistent all year. The three games we lost were a dubious fumble against the Bengals, a missed game winning 37 yard FG against the Bengals, and then admittedly a not great offensive performance (the D still played fine) against the Browns. Cook was still nursing a sore ankle too in that game (not that that's an excuse).
It's a different type of unpredictable than the Saints, to be sure... but I would still put them in that category along with the Saints and Titans in terms of being able to beat or lose to literally any team in the league.
If you think about it this way, the Vikings are the only reason we have a 6-0 team and an 0-6 team remaining in the league. If they make the Cardinals field goal and miss the Lions one, there would be 0 winless and 0 undefeated teams remaining. That's literally as extreme as it gets in terms of being able to beat or lose to anyone.
Thank the Ravens instead of the Vikings for the winless Lions.
An installment of the comic strip Frazz by Jef Mallet, circa 2006. Still applicable today.
(https://i.imgur.com/6K4Iwe2.jpg)
The Lions are a very entertaining 0-7 team. I really, really wanted them to beat the Rams today. And it really looked like it was going to happen, too... for 3 quarters.
Their only blowout loss has been to the Bengals, who delivered a statement win of their own today. Bengals atop the AFC North in Week 7... who saw that coming? :cool:
The Lions are 0-7, yet they're clearly only the 3rd worst team in the league after the Texans and Jets. Plus there's also the Dolphins and Jaguars, though I still think the Dolphins are going to get to at least 6 wins - Tua has quietly been pretty solid so far, going 32/40 for 291 yards and 4 TDs. If he makes sure to not turn it over in key situations, I think he could be a top 12 QB by the end of this year.
I will admit, I thought for about a week in late September that Sam Darnold was really making a turnaround and becoming a solid franchise QB. Silly me. In hindsight, trading for Sam Darnold and thinking that he could make something out of this Panthers team ruined their season, and now they're right back into the rebuilding lottery before they really even left. Bad times to be a Panthers fan.
Not going to bail on the Chiefs quite yet. The Titans, Cowboys, and Buccaneers are the only teams in the league that have offenses capable of controlling time of possession the way that Tennessee did yesterday.
That was an impressive result for the Bengals, but they're still 28th in the league in first downs per game. Over-reliance on the downfield bomb to Ja'Marr Chase will be what hurts them the most in the end.
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2021, 08:04:39 AM
I will admit, I thought for about a week in late September that Sam Darnold was really making a turnaround and becoming a solid franchise QB. Silly me. In hindsight, trading for Sam Darnold and thinking that he could make something out of this Panthers team ruined their season, and now they're right back into the rebuilding lottery before they really even left. Bad times to be a Panthers fan.
As a Panthers fan, I was unhappy when the Panthers made the trade for Darnold. He was a turnover machine not only for the Jets, but also when he was playing for the University of Spoiled Children (from which I took great comfort, as a fan of one of USC's intrastate rivals). He looked good at the start of this season, but it now seems like he and the Panthers needed more help than they could count on from the fragile Christian McCaffrey.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 05:27:59 PM
Keep in mind that I'm trying to predict these games exactly - down to the point. If the line was Ravens -22 I would bet the Bengals as well. But I'm not simply trying to get close, I'm trying to get one exactly right :-D
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 21, 2021, 05:40:42 PM
I think I'd personally switch the Ravens and Cowboys. Ravens D this year isn't what they've been in the past.
Looks like my thoughts were prescient, and I'm glad I threw a little bit of money on Burrow over 1.5 TDs and Bengals moneyline.
Chris
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 04:05:25 PM
Chiefs 39, Titans 30
Packers 42, Washington 20
Ravens 35, Bengals 13
Giants 31, Panthers 26
Dolphins 34, Falcons 27
Patriots 27, Jets 21
Raiders 32, Eagles 28
Rams 27, Lions 6
Buccaneers 27, Bears 0
Cardinals 24, Texans 20
Colts 23, 49ers 19
Saints 20, Seahawks 17
The Buccaneers' #1 ranked run defense + the Bears' #32 ranked passing offense is as obvious of a recipe for a shutout as I've ever seen. This is a trap game for the Cardinals. Coming off a dominating win at Cleveland last week, with Green Bay looming large a week from today. Their talent gets them the win in a game that ends up being way closer than expected. The Giants manage to save Joe Judge's job for at least one more week, though in my opinion he should have been fired immediately after his post-week 17 press conference in January.
Well, I've picked the Chiefs to win every single week, and they're now 3-4. The Ravens' defense imploding made for an ugly prediction.
On the contrary, I was somewhat close on Bears/Bucs, Eagles/Raiders, and Colts/49ers.
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2021, 08:04:39 AM
Not going to bail on the Chiefs quite yet. The Titans, Cowboys, and Buccaneers are the only teams in the league that have offenses capable of controlling time of possession the way that Tennessee did yesterday.
The Chiefs have had a tough schedule so far, but it doesn't really get any better from here. After next week against the Giants, they run out of opportunities to get back on track against bad NFC East opponents. They've got the Packers, Raiders, and Cowboys back-to-back-to-back after that, plus the Bengals, the Chargers again, and the Raiders again down the stretch. And even the Broncos and Steelers are probably thinking they can beat the Chiefs at this point. I don't want to overreact in Week 7, but it's starting to look like 10-7 and a wild-card berth is a best-case scenario.
Falcons 36, Panthers 21
Titans 31, Colts 23
Bills 28, Dolphins 19
Bengals 27, Jets 10
Browns 29, Steelers 23
Eagles 34, Lions 14
Rams 31, Texans 9
49ers 27, Bears 17
Patriots 19, Chargers 10
Jaguars 21, Seahawks 20
Saints 26, Buccaneers 14
Washington 29, Broncos 13
Cowboys 38, Vikings 31
Chiefs 27, Giants 20
Belichick and the Patriots defense destroyed Justin Herbert and the Chargers offense last time around. They won 45-0 despite Cam Newton only throwing for 69 yards. It won't be 45-0 this time, but I do expect the Patriots to pull off the upset.
Seems like the Lions are on an every-other-week basis of losing close and being blown out; week 1 was close, week 2 was a blowout, week 3 was close, week 4 was a blowout, etc.
I expect the Saints to upset the Buccaneers. Tom Brady has one "is this actually Tom Brady?" game every season, and it will be this one. Probably not as bad as two weeks short of a year ago vs. the Saints. The media panic on Monday (could the Saints be the best team in the NFC South?) will be hilarious, only for the Bucs to clinch the division by week 15.
Quote from: thspfc on October 28, 2021, 11:26:48 AM
The media panic on Monday (could the Saints be the best team in the NFC South?) will be hilarious, only for the Bucs Falcons to clinch the division by week 15.
FTFY! :-D :-D
Quote from: webny99 on October 28, 2021, 11:37:57 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 28, 2021, 11:26:48 AM
The media panic on Monday (could the Saints be the best team in the NFC South?) will be hilarious, only for the Bucs Falcons to clinch the division by week 15.
FTFY! :-D :-D
I wish. I want the Falcons to be good because Matt Ryan is one of my favorite players and I feel bad for their fans, but I'm not buying into a team that has gone 3-3 against a schedule of opponents with a combined record of 14-27.
Quote from: thspfc on October 28, 2021, 11:26:48 AM
Falcons 36, Panthers 21
Titans 31, Colts 23
Bills 28, Dolphins 19
Bengals 27, Jets 10
Browns 29, Steelers 23
Eagles 34, Lions 14
Rams 31, Texans 9
49ers 27, Bears 17
Patriots 19, Chargers 10
Jaguars 21, Seahawks 20
Saints 26, Buccaneers 14
Washington 29, Broncos 13
Cowboys 38, Vikings 31
Chiefs 27, Giants 20
To be contrary, I'll take the Colts over the Titans, the Steelers over the Browns, the Chargers over the Pats, the Bucs over the Saints, and the Vikings over the Cowboys.
Chris
Jeez that was the most entertaining Thursday night game I've seen in many years. What a 4th quarter roller coaster!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 29, 2021, 03:32:01 PM
Jeez that was the most entertaining Thursday night game I've seen in many years. What a 4th quarter roller coaster!
Albeit AJ Green for the last Arizona offensive snap looked like a Madden character that just glitched at the worst possible time if you were a cards fan. As a Packer fan I'll take it as we've seen Packers lose that way often enough
How about them Packers! GO PACK GO!
Carolina wins! FINALLY! After 4 game loss, they come back! :ded: :wow: :colorful:
The Redskins signed a new kicker before last week's game. Chris Blewitt.
Perhaps appropriately, three of his first five field goal attempts, including two today, have been blocked.
Troy Aikman near the end of Bucs vs Saints:
There's nobody you would want to have the ball in this type of situation more than Tom Brady
Tom Brady:
**Throws a Pick 6**
The Bengals blowing a 31-20 late fourth quarter lead to the Jets and letting Mike White (who?) complete 37 of 45 passes for 405 yards and 3 touchdowns is a meltdown so bad it's meme-worthy. Lol
Quote from: thspfc on October 28, 2021, 11:26:48 AM
I expect the Saints to upset the Buccaneers. Tom Brady has one "is this actually Tom Brady?" game every season, and it will be this one. Probably not as bad as two weeks short of a year ago vs. the Saints. The media panic on Monday (could the Saints be the best team in the NFC South?) will be hilarious, only for the Bucs to clinch the division by week 15.
Higher scoring than I expected, but nonetheless, the clown show of "Saints gonna win the division" begins?
The gap between Jameis Winston and Trevor Siemian is small. Not saying that Siemian should be the long-term solution, but I am saying that barring a major improvement, Jameis should not get any sort of significant contract this offseason.
Some rumblings the Saints might look at Cam.
Chris
Yay go Pats
Quote from: thspfc on October 31, 2021, 07:48:39 PM
The Bengals blowing a 31-20 late fourth quarter lead to the Jets and letting Mike White (who?) complete 37 of 45 passes for 405 yards and 3 touchdowns is a meltdown so bad it's meme-worthy. Lol
The Jets dialed back the long game and were content to just complete passes and get first downs. They should do this more often.
Back in winter 1997, 7-year old me watched the Vikings pull out a miracle playoff win over the NY Giants. I thought "Wow! That's my team!" They got blown out the next week to end their season, but the 49ers were way better, so...whatever. Then came 1998, which we will never speak of again. We went into 1999 with mostly the same players, so 9-year old me thinks, this is a championship team soon! Then 2000, then some crappier years, and ups and downs since then, and still waiting.
31-year old me wonders if they hadn't pulled off that crazy win over the Giants, I would have just gone "that team stinks" and found a different team...and not hate everything now.
Quote from: Alps on November 01, 2021, 12:28:06 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 31, 2021, 07:48:39 PM
The Bengals blowing a 31-20 late fourth quarter lead to the Jets and letting Mike White (who?) complete 37 of 45 passes for 405 yards and 3 touchdowns is a meltdown so bad it's meme-worthy. Lol
The Jets dialed back the long game and were content to just complete passes and get first downs. They should do this more often.
I haven't watched any Jets games, but I wonder if Zach Wilson has been ignoring the type of throws that made White successful yesterday and trying to bomb it on every play like he could do last year at BYU playing against Southeast Northwest Carolina State.
Wilson will probably return in week 10 against the Bills. White is going to start again on Thursday. If he plays well again, he should be the starter in week 10 and thereafter.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 01, 2021, 01:33:53 AM
Back in winter 1997, 7-year old me watched the Vikings pull out a miracle playoff win over the NY Giants. I thought "Wow! That's my team!" They got blown out the next week to end their season, but the 49ers were way better, so...whatever. Then came 1998, which we will never speak of again. We went into 1999 with mostly the same players, so 9-year old me thinks, this is a championship team soon! Then 2000, then some crappier years, and ups and downs since then, and still waiting.
31-year old me wonders if they hadn't pulled off that crazy win over the Giants, I would have just gone "that team stinks" and found a different team...and not hate everything now.
Thankfully, giving up 325 yards and a game-winning touchdown drive to Cooper Rush is only the second most embarrassing defensive performance this week.
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 28, 2021, 12:28:59 PM
To be contrary, I'll take the Colts over the Titans, the Steelers over the Browns, the Chargers over the Pats, the Bucs over the Saints, and the Vikings over the Cowboys.
Chris
Colts - Wentz choked
Steelers - Nailed it
Chargers - Didn't play well
Bucs - Brady choked
Vikings - Went all Vikingy. Being a Vikings fan is like zipping up too fast. (I am deciding whether or not I want my son-to-be to be a Vikings fan. I wouldn't choose it had I not been born into it).
Chris
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2021, 08:43:40 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 01, 2021, 12:28:06 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 31, 2021, 07:48:39 PM
The Bengals blowing a 31-20 late fourth quarter lead to the Jets and letting Mike White (who?) complete 37 of 45 passes for 405 yards and 3 touchdowns is a meltdown so bad it's meme-worthy. Lol
The Jets dialed back the long game and were content to just complete passes and get first downs. They should do this more often.
I haven't watched any Jets games, but I wonder if Zach Wilson has been ignoring the type of throws that made White successful yesterday and trying to bomb it on every play like he could do last year at BYU playing against Southeast Northwest Carolina State.
Wilson will probably return in week 10 against the Bills. White is going to start again on Thursday. If he plays well again, he should be the starter in week 10 and thereafter.
Disagree. Wilson can be given the same game plan. He has the talent and flexibility to do more. When he hits it's great (Titans). I don't think White is the answer if he can't pass over 20 yards.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 01, 2021, 12:05:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 28, 2021, 12:28:59 PM
To be contrary, I'll take the Colts over the Titans, the Steelers over the Browns, the Chargers over the Pats, the Bucs over the Saints, and the Vikings over the Cowboys.
Chris
Colts - Wentz choked
Steelers - Nailed it
Chargers - Didn't play well
Bucs - Brady choked
Vikings - Went all Vikingy. Being a Vikings fan is like zipping up too fast. (I am deciding whether or not I want my son-to-be to be a Vikings fan. I wouldn't choose it had I not been born into it).
Chris
You and the Vikings is clearly a toxic relationship. Drop it. My advice is to pick a team that is not good right now but has the potential to be, so that you don't get called a bandwagoner :-D. I will shamelessly admit that that was my main reasoning in picking the Cowboys several years ago.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 01, 2021, 01:33:53 AM
Back in winter 1997, 7-year old me watched the Vikings pull out a miracle playoff win over the NY Giants. I thought "Wow! That's my team!" They got blown out the next week to end their season, but the 49ers were way better, so...whatever. Then came 1998, which we will never speak of again. We went into 1999 with mostly the same players, so 9-year old me thinks, this is a championship team soon! Then 2000, then some crappier years, and ups and downs since then, and still waiting.
31-year old me wonders if they hadn't pulled off that crazy win over the Giants, I would have just gone "that team stinks" and found a different team...and not hate everything now.
I'm just speak about the Vikings vs Falcons game them :P
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2021, 06:38:12 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 01, 2021, 12:05:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on October 28, 2021, 12:28:59 PM
To be contrary, I'll take the Colts over the Titans, the Steelers over the Browns, the Chargers over the Pats, the Bucs over the Saints, and the Vikings over the Cowboys.
Chris
Colts - Wentz choked
Steelers - Nailed it
Chargers - Didn't play well
Bucs - Brady choked
Vikings - Went all Vikingy. Being a Vikings fan is like zipping up too fast. (I am deciding whether or not I want my son-to-be to be a Vikings fan. I wouldn't choose it had I not been born into it).
Chris
You and the Vikings is clearly a toxic relationship. Drop it. My advice is to pick a team that is not good right now but has the potential to be, so that you don't get called a bandwagoner :-D. I will shamelessly admit that that was my main reasoning in picking the Cowboys several years ago.
The problem is we're co-dependent at this point. I need them to make me look forward to Sundays and those brief glimpses of a happy future together keep me coming back. They need me because... well... I buy a new hat every once in a while. When you feel the pain of all the letdowns, it will make whatever successes come even happier I suppose. The Minneapolis Miracle, even though we didn't even make the Superbowl much less win it, is one of my top 5 sporting fandom moments.
Chris
Raiders' WR Henry Ruggs' professional career is over as he's being charged with DUI that resulted in death. I don't understand why these guys that make millions can't pay one of their buddies 80K a year to be their sober driver. So ridiculous.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 02, 2021, 02:23:55 PM
Raiders' WR Henry Ruggs' professional career is over as he's being charged with DUI that resulted in death. I don't understand why these guys that make millions can't pay one of their buddies 80K a year to be their sober driver. So ridiculous.
Chris
Millionaires or not, DUI is a huge problem in this country. Part of the problem is that we are results-oriented and only bring the hammer down when someone gets killed. Give someone 6 months in jail for their first DUI, regardless of whether or not anybody was injured, and things will change.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 02:56:16 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 02, 2021, 02:23:55 PM
Raiders' WR Henry Ruggs' professional career is over as he's being charged with DUI that resulted in death. I don't understand why these guys that make millions can't pay one of their buddies 80K a year to be their sober driver. So ridiculous.
Chris
Millionaires or not, DUI is a huge problem in this country. Part of the problem is that we are results-oriented and only bring the hammer down when someone gets killed. Give someone 6 months in jail for their first DUI, regardless of whether or not anybody was injured, and things will change.
Don't disagree.
Chris
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 02:56:16 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 02, 2021, 02:23:55 PM
Raiders' WR Henry Ruggs' professional career is over as he's being charged with DUI that resulted in death. I don't understand why these guys that make millions can't pay one of their buddies 80K a year to be their sober driver. So ridiculous.
Chris
Millionaires or not, DUI is a huge problem in this country. Part of the problem is that we are results-oriented and only bring the hammer down when someone gets killed. Give someone 6 months in jail for their first DUI, regardless of whether or not anybody was injured, and things will change.
On a societal level, people just don't think it's a big deal despite decades of deadly newsmaking incidents, even directly affecting them or people they know, and PSAs spamming our media constantly. Everybody knows multiple people who have driven drunk and no one bats an eye. Americans just don't care. To most people, all the excuses for doing it are considered valid or at least understandable as long as no one dies. Until that changes, this crap will never stop.
Six months for a first time DUI? Careful, you're making the prison-industrial complex drool, so don't slip on the ooze.
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 02, 2021, 04:04:22 PMSix months for a first time DUI?
Obviously didn't happen in Wisconsin... /snark
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
This.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
Drugs are an addiction. Incarceration doesn't cure that. Also, most people incarcerated for drugs are of a socioeconomic status where jail just isn't a deterrent.
DUI offenders are a broader spectrum of society. I wouldn't compare the two.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
What's your solution? Mine would be at least six months in jail and a permanent termination of their driver's license.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 05:02:59 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
Drugs are an addiction. Incarceration doesn't cure that. Also, most people incarcerated for drugs are of a socioeconomic status where jail just isn't a deterrent.
DUI offenders are a broader spectrum of society. I wouldn't compare the two.
Exactly, DUI's and drug addictions is a false equivalency.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 05:02:59 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
Drugs are an addiction. Incarceration doesn't cure that. Also, most people incarcerated for drugs are of a socioeconomic status where jail just isn't a deterrent.
DUI offenders are a broader spectrum of society. I wouldn't compare the two.
I agree with this. If you're an alcoholic, it's tough to control your need for booze. You can, however, drink yourself stupid and not drive. There's no addiction to driving while drunnk.
Chris
^^^
I had a Grandfather and several other family members who were raging alcoholics. They certainly had an addiction problem they couldn't shake, it actually killed one of them when she died from alcohol poisoning. Granted, none of them to my knowledge were attempting to drive while drunk either...so there's that.
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2021, 05:06:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
What's your solution? Mine would be at least six months in jail and a permanent termination of their driver's license.
Something that doesn't involve sending even more people into the failed shit storm that is the corrections system. I'm not saying I have answer to the problem, but the solution being proposed isn't going to help anything.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 05:34:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2021, 05:06:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
What's your solution? Mine would be at least six months in jail and a permanent termination of their driver's license.
Something that doesn't involve sending even more people into the failed shit storm that is the corrections system. I'm not saying I have answer to the problem, but the solution being proposed isn't going to help anything.
How about this for a first offense? Your car is seized. It immediately gets towed and becomes property of the state. If you can beat the charge in court you get it back. Otherwise it's auctioned off. If you still owe money on it then you're making payments without a car. Think of all the highway improvements we could make with the money from all the auctioned cars.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 05:37:59 PM
How about this for a first offense? Your car is seized. It immediately gets towed and becomes property of the state. If you can beat the charge in court you get it back. Otherwise it's auctioned off. If you still owe money on it then you're making payments without a car. Think of all the highway improvements we could make with the money from all the auctioned cars.
If you can't get to court without a car?
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 02, 2021, 05:37:59 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 05:34:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 02, 2021, 05:06:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 02, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
How did mass incarceration for drug offenses work out? Did it actually stop anyone?
What's your solution? Mine would be at least six months in jail and a permanent termination of their driver's license.
Something that doesn't involve sending even more people into the failed shit storm that is the corrections system. I'm not saying I have answer to the problem, but the solution being proposed isn't going to help anything.
How about this for a first offense? Your car is seized. It immediately gets towed and becomes property of the state. If you can beat the charge in court you get it back. Otherwise it's auctioned off. If you still owe money on it then you're making payments without a car. Think of all the highway improvements we could make with the money from all the auctioned cars.
I can see something along those lines. The ignition lock devices and associated costs in Arizona usually were heavy enough of a burden that they tended to act in the way you are describing. That law came into effect when DUIs were getting out of control in the early 2000s.
Let's keep this on the topic of the NFL please.
Quote from: Alps on November 02, 2021, 06:54:17 PM
Let's keep this on the topic of the NFL please.
Thank you, @Alps, for the Public Service Announcement!
*the more you know tone plays*
Aaron Rodgers tested positive for Covid19, out versus the Chiefs.
Quote from: Big John on November 03, 2021, 11:45:42 AM
Aaron Rodgers tested positive for Covid19, out versus the Chiefs.
Aw snap! Looks like the Packers are :ded: for now! :pan: :no:
So much for the State Farm bowl...
Quote from: jlam on November 03, 2021, 12:20:40 PM
So much for the State Farm bowl...
whats wrong with the state farm bowl
Quote from: thspfc on November 03, 2021, 05:07:25 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 03, 2021, 04:25:08 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 03, 2021, 01:10:46 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 03, 2021, 01:07:42 PM
Quote from: jlam on November 03, 2021, 12:20:40 PM
So much for the State Farm bowl...
whats wrong with the state farm bowl
No discount double check.
Chris
That was in jeopardy anyways.
Unlike how switching to State Farm can get you the Patrick Price.
Mustn't forget about the Rodgers rate...
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
My kitty cats wont win Sunday. :no:
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
My contrary picks (maybe they'll all finish the job this week) - Raiders over Giants, Bengals over Browns, Packers to keep it real close with the Chiefs but lose
Chris
Bengals probably beat Browns
Quote from: snowc on November 04, 2021, 12:40:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
My kitty cats wont win Sunday. :no:
I could see that one going either way, Patriots are the slightly better team though IMO.
Somehow the 49ers still have the T-12th best odds (+3500) to win the Super Bowl. At this point it's egregious. They're not good. Accept it. Their secondary stinks, their coach doesn't believe in their QB, nobody else on the team really believes in their QB, and their skill players are meh at best, except for Deebo Samuel and occasionally George Kittle. Oh, and the institutional injury problem that they seemingly refuse to address.
If I hear "they went to the Super Bowl two years ago" one more time I will annihilate my TV.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2021, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Thursdays are too unpredictable, no point in predicting these games.
Quote from: snowc on November 04, 2021, 12:40:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
My kitty cats wont win Sunday. :no:
but won't lose (nor tie) either.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 06:22:14 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2021, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Thursdays are too unpredictable, no point in predicting these games.
How's your record for Sunday games?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2021, 07:21:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 06:22:14 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2021, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Thursdays are too unpredictable, no point in predicting these games.
How's your record for Sunday games?
In terms of picking winners, 62 of 109 (57%). That's not very good, but in my defense I'm 35 of 53 (66%) over the last four weeks, compared to an abysmal 27 of 56 (48%) over the first four.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 07:57:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2021, 07:21:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 06:22:14 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2021, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Thursdays are too unpredictable, no point in predicting these games.
How's your record for Sunday games?
In terms of picking winners, 62 of 109 (57%). That's not very good, but in my defense I'm 35 of 53 (66%) over the last four weeks, compared to an abysmal 27 of 56 (48%) over the first four.
And that's not even factoring in the spread!
The first few weeks are always going to be tough because, no matter what expectations
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2021, 08:02:32 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 07:57:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2021, 07:21:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 06:22:14 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 04, 2021, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Giants 30, Raiders 27
Saints 24, Falcons 16
Bills 31, Jaguars 20
Browns 28, Bengals 25
Patriots 23, Panthers 20
Cowboys 41, Broncos 25
Ravens 38, Vikings 17
Dolphins 29, Texans 21
Chargers 27, Eagles 16
Chiefs 36, Packers 17
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
Rams 24, Titans 14
Steelers 17, Bears 10
I don't expect nearly as many upsets this week compared to last week.
You don't pick Thursdays or why no Jets/Colts?
Thursdays are too unpredictable, no point in predicting these games.
How's your record for Sunday games?
In terms of picking winners, 62 of 109 (57%). That's not very good, but in my defense I'm 35 of 53 (66%) over the last four weeks, compared to an abysmal 27 of 56 (48%) over the first four.
And that's not even factoring in the spread!
The first few weeks are always going to be tough because, no matter what expectations
It would be interesting to know what I am against the spread. At a glance I was 7/14 last week. Thank you to the Texans for one of the most classic backdoor covers ever.
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 08:09:36 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2021, 08:02:32 PM
The first few weeks are always going to be tough because, no matter what expectations
It would be interesting to know what I am against the spread. At a glance I was 7/14 last week. Thank you to the Texans for one of the most classic backdoor covers ever.
Apparently my comment never got completed, but you probably knew where I was going with that.
The first few weeks are always going to be tough because, no matter what expectations are at the beginning of the season, it takes a few weeks of real playing time to see how a team works together, how the coaches operate (especially newbies), etc. Week 1, everyone goes in at 0-0. After week 1, every game had to produce a winner and loser (excluding ties), so no matter how good a team is, they could be beat by a better team and be 0-1. But by this point in the season, the records are a generally good indicator of how good the team is. A betting man, at the very least, would pick the team with a better record to win. Of course, there's variables such as a team with a good running offense playing a team with a lousy defense against the run may change things regardless of their records, and teams with easier schedules may have a win-loss total that gets slammed in the 2nd half, but overall, betting on a team with a poorer record to win is chancy.
But then again...as they say...Any Given Sunday. Eventually, it's likely even the Lions will win one game this season.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 05, 2021, 12:26:31 PM
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
What bothers me about the whole thing isn't that he wasn't vaccinated. It's that he was deceptive about his vaccination status, and then went to the league to try to flout the rules so he could act as if he was vaccinated when he wasn't. Get the shot, don't get the shot, I don't care. But rules are rules and he didn't follow protocols for unvaccinated players, and now it could potentially cost the Packers a game or two. But on the bright side, at least it gives them a chance to see what they have in Jordan Love. Hopefully he surprises everyone and the Packers pull off a win.
Edit: flout not flaunt
OBJ got cut today by Cleveland. Which team will make a waiver claim on him?
Quote from: Big John on November 05, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
OBJ got cut today by Cleveland. Which team will make a waiver claim on him?
We have quite a few options. It would either be New Orleans, the Saints, or that team that plays in Ceasars Superdome.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 05, 2021, 12:26:31 PM
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/11/05/aaron-rodgers-interview-pat-mcafee-vaccination-status-covid-19-immunized-ivermectin-joe-rogan
Well apparently Aaron Rogers decided to politicize COVID-19. Also Aaron Rogers took Ivermectin the anti-parasite drug.
I'm a Chiefs fan now
Quote from: jlam on November 05, 2021, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 05, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
OBJ got cut today by Cleveland. Which team will make a waiver claim on him?
We have quite a few options. It would either be New Orleans, the Saints, or that team that plays in Ceasars Superdome.
The Giants should've kept him. I know he has his antics but he's still a good WR. I doubt he'll come back to the Giants but damnit we need help! DJ can't do it on his own (I hated when we picked Jones up so early in that draft after we gave up OBJ for a better pick but I must admit, he definitely has talent).
It's popular to hate Odell nowadays, and I understand why. But man, I'll always have a soft spot for him. The way he took the league by storm his rookie year was something that we had never seen before and will probably never see again from a rookie. His name became a well-known verb. How many players can say that? OBJ and Randy Moss might be the entire list. From that catch against the Cowboys in 2014 to 2016 or 2017, he got people to turn on the television for Giants games in a way that no other player for that storied franchise ever has. People playing catch in their backyard, middle school kids playing football at recess would say, "throw it high so I can Odell it." The dude was captivating and you could count on him for a crazy highlight just about every week.
Quote from: bing101 on November 05, 2021, 08:24:45 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 05, 2021, 12:26:31 PM
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/11/05/aaron-rodgers-interview-pat-mcafee-vaccination-status-covid-19-immunized-ivermectin-joe-rogan
Well apparently Aaron Rogers decided to politicize COVID-19. Also Aaron Rogers took Ivermectin the anti-parasite drug.
If I was that doofenshmirtz GM of the Packers, I'd sack his ass. They waited too long to get Love onboard.
Quote from: jlam on November 05, 2021, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 05, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
OBJ got cut today by Cleveland. Which team will make a waiver claim on him?
We have quite a few options. It would either be New Orleans, the Saints, or that team that plays in Ceasars Superdome.
How about Las Vegas, Da Raidas, or the team that plays at Allegiant Stadium?
Come on, Browns release him just after Ruggs kills someone driving drunk? Almost like it is scripted, sometimes
And no, I don't think the NFL would script any fatal motor vehicle incident
Quote from: tchafe1978 on November 05, 2021, 01:37:48 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 05, 2021, 12:26:31 PM
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
What bothers me about the whole thing isn't that he wasn't vaccinated. It's that he was deceptive about his vaccination status, and then went to the league to try to flout the rules so he could act as if he was vaccinated when he wasn't. Get the shot, don't get the shot, I don't care. But rules are rules and he didn't follow protocols for unvaccinated players, and now it could potentially cost the Packers a game or two. But on the bright side, at least it gives them a chance to see what they have in Jordan Love. Hopefully he surprises everyone and the Packers pull off a win.
Edit: flout not flaunt
https://people.com/sports/aaron-rodgers-says-fatherhood-is-his-next-great-chapter-worries-covid-vaccine-may-cause-infertility/
Heres more Rodgers decided to pull the infertility card on vaccines once the NFL decided to investigate him for no verified vaccine records.
Quote from: bing101 on November 05, 2021, 11:39:11 PM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on November 05, 2021, 01:37:48 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 05, 2021, 12:26:31 PM
I didn't know Rodgers was such a fucking idiot! :banghead:
Bunch of fake medicine bullshit; what a dumbass! Be lucky if he's back next week since he was completely unvaxxed. God, what a shitiot. That's my new word; combining shithead and idiot.
What bothers me about the whole thing isn't that he wasn't vaccinated. It's that he was deceptive about his vaccination status, and then went to the league to try to flout the rules so he could act as if he was vaccinated when he wasn't. Get the shot, don't get the shot, I don't care. But rules are rules and he didn't follow protocols for unvaccinated players, and now it could potentially cost the Packers a game or two. But on the bright side, at least it gives them a chance to see what they have in Jordan Love. Hopefully he surprises everyone and the Packers pull off a win.
Edit: flout not flaunt
https://people.com/sports/aaron-rodgers-says-fatherhood-is-his-next-great-chapter-worries-covid-vaccine-may-cause-infertility/
Heres more Rodgers decided to pull the infertility card on vaccines once the NFL decided to investigate him for no verified vaccine records.
And I can't believe that something like ivermectin wouldn't contain something on the banned drugs list for the NFL.
While I have picked the Chiefs to win every week, I have never said, "This is the week that Kansas City puts it together and starts looking like the Super Bowl team we know."
I am saying it now: this is the week Kansas City puts it together and starts looking like the Super Bowl team we know.
Go Pats
Nice win by the Browns today after all drama leading up to it.
Right after that CBS switched over just in time for me to see Jacksonville run out the clock with a punt to preserve a 9-6 win over Buffalo. There's some NFL parody for you.
An extremely needed win for the Broncos today. Playoff hopes still alive!
Quote from: jlam on November 07, 2021, 04:49:06 PM
An extremely needed win for the Broncos today. Playoff hopes still alive!
Head-scratcher for the Cowboys. When the schedule first came out this might have been the game that I was the most certain would be a W. And the Cowboys have turned out to be better than I expected (so far, anyways). During McCarthy's tenure in Green Bay I don't think his record was particularly good coming off a loss - I remember a lot of stretches where the Packers lost 2-4 games in a row, even in the years they were good. So we'll see how the team responds.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2021, 12:27:56 PM
Cardinals 38, 49ers 14
I need a touchdown and extra point from the Cardinals, and no more points from the 49ers. One quarter to go. This would make my entire week.
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2021, 11:40:51 PM
And the Bills have yet to win a close game. Four blowout wins and two close losses.
And it gets worse... now
five blowout wins and
three close losses, and the Bills are still +117 in point differential!! They've basically clinched the top point differential in the league for the entire season... and yet they're 5-3. I don't know what to make of it.
What I do know is that was probably the worst loss of the McDermott era in Buffalo. Doesn't change my feelings about the defense, which played well in a tough situation, but it's incredibly frustrating that the offense couldn't find the end zone and get points on the board against one of the worst teams in the league despite doubling them up in passing yards and having almost 100 more total yards. Allen's stats weren't terrible, but he couldn't get anything going that led to points, the O-line was a big problem all day, and the run game was terrible.
People are going to remember it as the Josh Allen-Josh Allen game, and rightly so, but I'm going to remember it as a further cementing of the Jaguars as my least-favorite team in the league. The Jaguars and maybe the Steelers are the closest things the Bills have to an out-of-division "rivalry"... the Bills always play gritty, defensive slugfests with those teams (including the 10-3 playoff loss to the Jaguars a few years ago), and today was no exception.
A few more Week 9/midseason thoughts...
The two teams I was most confident in today, the Browns and the Falcons, both won. I knew the Bengals weren't going 3-0 against their three division opponents, and I figured the Saints could have a let down game. To the Saints credit, they fought back from a 24-6 deficit (blown by the Falcons in typical fashion), only for the Falcons to immediately get back in FG range for the win.
The AFC is shaping up to be pretty wild this season, with
11 teams over .500. That's the entire AFC except the four "worst" teams (Jags, Texans, Jets, Dolphins) and the Colts, who are 4-5. That includes the
entire AFC West and AFC North. It's truly anyone's guess how a field this crowded is going to shake out. The only AFC teams I am positive will make the playoffs are the Ravens and Titans... and I guess I'll still put the Bills in there even after today's performance. I'd give the edge to the Chargers in the AFC West after their win today, a game that previous Chargers teams probably would have blown. Likely multiple playoff teams from that division, though, and the wild card spots are totally wide open.
The NFC is shaping up a little differently, with heavy favorites in all the divisions except the West, where both the Rams and Cardinals are near-locks for the playoffs. The final two spots are pretty wide open, though, especially with Winston out for the Saints and the Vikings losing today. I don't know how Vikings fans do this every week... literally every game comes down to the wire. I could definitely still see them making the playoffs though. And there's a bunch of other teams that will probably be in the mix until late in the season... Falcons, Seahawks, Eagles, 49ers, maybe even the Giants. The Lions and Washington are the only NFC teams that are completely out of the playoff hunt; everyone else has at least three wins and that's enough to keep them in the crowded mix for the #7 seed.
So in short, all but about 5 or 6 teams should be thinking they have a shot at the playoffs, so that should make for an exciting and interesting second half to the season.
Here were my pre-season predictions:
AFC East
1. Bills (12-5)
2. Dolphins (11-6)
3. Patriots (7-10)
4. Jets (3-14)
Midseason analysis: Whiffed on Dolphins. Looks like we can switch the 'Phins and Patriots, but otherwise I had top and bottom likely right (I think Miami will finish above the Jets)
AFC North
1. Ravens (12-5)
2. Steelers (11-6)
3. Browns (9-8)
4. Bengals (7-10)
Midseason analysis: I feel like this is about right. Bengals not horrible, but not good. Steelers won't probably have quite as good of a record.
AFC South
1. Titans (13-4)
2. Jaguars (7-10)
3. Colts (6-11)
4. Texans (2-15)
Midseason analysis: Top and bottom quite correct. I still think the Jags can make a little run to make a better record, but Colts should finish above them.
AFC West
1. Chiefs (16-1)
2. Chargers (11-6)
3. Broncos (9-8)
4. Raiders (5-12)
Midseason analysis: Obviously Chiefs not going to have that killer of a record, and the Raiders with a higher record than I thought, but I very well might still get the order correct. I was one who was mildly bullish on the Broncos. Huge win yesterday.
NFC East
1. Washington (12-5)
2. Cowboys (9-8)
3. Eagles (6-11)
4. Giants (4-13)
Midseason analysis: Obviously way off on Washington. Their D went from scary to scary - the other kind. Move them down to the bottom and then the rest of the order is probably still accurate.
NFC North
1. Packers (12-5)
2. Vikings (11-6)
3. Bears (6-11)
4. Lions (3-14)
Midseason analysis: This will be the order, but my Vikes won't make the playoffs unless they sneak in as the 7. So many coaching issues this year, and for the first time I'm thinking Zimmer might have to go.
NFC South
1. Buccaneers (14-3)
2. Panthers (8-9)
3. Falcons (7-10)
4. Saints (5-12)
Midseason analysis: Panthers had me feeling good after the first few weeks, but no longer. I underrated Sean Payton, but we'll see how Simien does going forward. I still feel like I might have gotten the order correct.
NFC West
1. Rams (12-5)
2. Seahawks (12-5)
3. Cardinals (11-6)
4. 49ers (6-11)
Midseason analysis: I had the top three bunched, and had Russ not gotten hurt, it might have ended up that way. I was one of the few people I've seen (thspfc another) who had SF not being any good this year. I never quite understood what people were optimistic about.
Overall grade for myself: B-
Chris
So Miami beat Houston, thereby passing "Football Team" back to where it began the season and taking "Jaguars" from Houston. First time "Football Team" went back to a prior holder.
Jordon Love debut was underwhelming to say the least. Yeah the Chiefs blitzed the hell out of him, but you gotta know that if they send the kitchen sink, you've got one-on-one everywhere with the middle of the field wide open, yet he kept hucking it at the sidelines. An experienced quarterback would've picked that defense apart with 6-10 yard completions over the middle.
Chiefs offense was mediocre in that game at best. Hell if not for a blocked and missed field goal, it would have been a one score game. In a world where Rodgers isn't a fucking fake medicine idiot, the Pack steamrolls the KC team that played yesterday.
(Infertility? Really? You went to college, dumbass! Didn't they make you take any biology? Christ on a stick, I've never lost so much respect for a person so fast in my life.)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 08, 2021, 03:00:56 PM
Jordon Love debut was underwhelming to say the least. Yeah the Chiefs blitzed the hell out of him, but you gotta know that if they send the kitchen sink, you've got one-on-one everywhere with the middle of the field wide open, yet he kept hucking it at the sidelines. An experienced quarterback would've picked that defense apart with 6-10 yard completions over the middle.
Chiefs offense was mediocre in that game at best. Hell if not for a blocked and missed field goal, it would have been a one score game. In a world where Rodgers isn't a fucking fake medicine idiot, the Pack steamrolls the KC team that played yesterday.
(Infertility? Really? You went to college, dumbass! Didn't they make you take any biology? Christ on a stick, I've never lost so much respect for a person so fast in my life.)
As someone else has said, Rodgers thinks he's the smartest person in the room all the time. Obviously that ain't the case.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 08, 2021, 03:12:06 PM
As someone else has said, Rodgers thinks he's the smartest person in the room all the time. Obviously that ain't the case.
Well.... I'm sure that won't help him get the Jeopardy job now. </mostly sarcasm>
Quote from: Mr_Northside on November 08, 2021, 04:06:28 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 08, 2021, 03:12:06 PM
As someone else has said, Rodgers thinks he's the smartest person in the room all the time. Obviously that ain't the case.
Well.... I'm sure that won't help him get the Jeopardy job now. </mostly sarcasm>
Fairly sure that Prevea money Rodgers is out will cause sleepless nights.
Regardless of peoples stance on Rodgers luckily most sports fans will forget this in three week when someone else does something stupid.
Officiating in the NFL (and college football for that matter) has just gotten worse and worse. Way too many bad/missed calls having major impact on games. I never was a big sports bettor, but I wouldn't place any bets right now with bad calls changing the outcomes of so many games.
Holy refball last night
The ending sure got interesting, until the Steelers kicked a FG for the final points of the game and the Bears missed theirs.
This weekend will always be remembered for that one game where Josh Allen sacked, intercepted and recovered a fumble from Josh Allen.
That Bears game is probably going to be remembered for a while too... really tough loss and it's hard to argue the refs didn't cost the Bears the game.
But ultimately, Fields' development is much more important than the outcome of that one game, and he played great, especially in the second half, so that has to be encouraging.
On second thought I think I'll go with the Titans.
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 09, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
On second thought I think I'll go with the Titans.
...second thought of what? You haven't posted in this thread in about
six months.Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 09, 2021, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 09, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
On second thought I think I'll go with the Titans.
...second thought of what? You haven't posted in this thread in about six months.
Maybe this, from last Friday:
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 05, 2021, 08:33:42 PM
I'm a Chiefs fan now
Quote from: webny99 on November 09, 2021, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 09, 2021, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 09, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
On second thought I think I'll go with the Titans.
...second thought of what? You haven't posted in this thread in about six months.
Maybe this, from last Friday:
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 05, 2021, 08:33:42 PM
I'm a Chiefs fan now
Gotcha. Went back a couple of pages, didn't see anything. Did a search and only pulled up stuff in May.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 09, 2021, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 09, 2021, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 09, 2021, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 09, 2021, 01:45:43 PM
On second thought I think I'll go with the Titans.
...second thought of what? You haven't posted in this thread in about six months.
Maybe this, from last Friday:
Quote from: MinecraftNinja on November 05, 2021, 08:33:42 PM
I'm a Chiefs fan now
Gotcha. Went back a couple of pages, didn't see anything. Did a search and only pulled up stuff in May.
I found it from his profile. That's my go-to for finding posts from a particular user.
They call him the most loyal Chiefs fan
Great take from Kyle Brandt on the whole "free OBJ" thing. It's honestly the Browns that have been freed IMO.
https://twitter.com/gmfb/status/1458419180433149960
Couldn't agree with this more. He was out there in my fantasy league and I didn't bother picking him up. I know he's going to go to the Saints, Packers, or Chiefs, two of which are high powered offenses. I don't care. He's underperformed since his 2nd year where he thought he was hot shit. I also have friends who have personal run-ins with him and said he's an absolute ass, which makes sense since he thinks he's the best WR ever but hasn't performed above replacement level for several years now.
CHris
https://twitter.com/CSimmsQB/status/1458410605149368321
This seems unbelieveable, until you remember that nearly all of the owners of NFL teams are old, rich, white men
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 10, 2021, 10:20:35 AM
I know he's going to go to the Saints, Packers, or Chiefs ...
Knowing there's a few Packers fans/followers here, I'm curious what their sentiment is on this.
It just seems completely bizarre that the Browns would release OBJ essentially because he has such a huge ego, wants more targets, and can't get along with Mayfield, and then the Packers would sign him and expect things to go smoothly with the one quarterback that has a
bigger ego than Baker Mayfield!? Something about the whole thing just doesn't add up.
The Saints make more sense from the perspective of OBJ going somewhere where he would be the most famous star/biggest name on the team, but for that very reason (not having a star QB) I'm not sure they're a true Super Bowl contender either.
Quote from: webny99 on November 10, 2021, 03:07:48 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 10, 2021, 10:20:35 AM
I know he's going to go to the Saints, Packers, or Chiefs ...
Knowing there's a few Packers fans/followers here, I'm curious what their sentiment is on this.
It just seems completely bizarre that the Browns would release OBJ essentially because he has such a huge ego, wants more targets, and can't get along with Mayfield, and then the Packers would sign him and expect things to go smoothly with the one quarterback that has a bigger ego than Baker Mayfield!? Something about the whole thing just doesn't add up.
The Saints make more sense from the perspective of OBJ going somewhere where he would be the most famous star/biggest name on the team, but for that very reason (not having a star QB) I'm not sure they're a true Super Bowl contender either.
And the Saints have less cap space, so couldn't may him as much. That said, he went to LSU, so maybe Louisiana is calling him home.
Chris
Seattle seems like a good fit to me, but I don't think OBJ wants that because of Metcalf and Lockett getting a lot of targets, and Pete Carroll wanting to run the ball more than he probably should.
Tennessee isn't being talked about much, but I think that could work.
OBJ would put up huge stats in Atlanta, but they're not contenders.
Quote from: thspfc on November 10, 2021, 03:27:23 PM
OBJ would put up huge stats in Atlanta, but they're not contenders.
They're actually in playoff position now after literally every result went their way in Week 9.
That doesn't mean they're a Super Bowl contender though, and like the Saints, they have very little cap space.
(Packer homer) No thanks, a headcase.
Quote from: Big John on November 10, 2021, 06:09:12 PM
(Packer homer) No thanks, a headcase.
More of a headcase than a conspiracy-theorist who lied about getting vaccinated?
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 10, 2021, 06:10:41 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 10, 2021, 06:09:12 PM
(Packer homer) No thanks, a headcase.
More of a headcase than a conspiracy-theorist who lied about getting vaccinated?
Let's try to keep this less political. Keep it as liar only.
Cam's back with the Panthers! FINALLY! :clap: :clap:
Quote from: snowc on November 11, 2021, 12:45:51 PM
Cam's back with the Panthers! FINALLY! :clap: :clap:
I'd give it a year.
Quote from: snowc on November 11, 2021, 12:45:51 PM
Cam's back with the Panthers! FINALLY! :clap: :clap:
To celebrate this, he will be dressed as The Rock circa 1999 during his next press conference.
OBJ signs with the Rams.
Titans 26, Saints 13
Bills 38, Jets 17
Steelers 27, Lions 14
Colts 42, Jaguars 24
Buccaneers 28, Washington 13
Browns 19, Patriots 14
Falcons 37, Cowboys 21
Cardinals 33, Panthers 8
Chargers 34, Vikings 30
Packers 24, Seahawks 16
Broncos 25, Eagles 22
Chiefs 26, Raiders 17
Rams 37, 49ers 10
I'm counting on the Bills to rebound from that ugly loss, which means that they're probably going to lay another egg.
Here's my thought process on the Falcons this season:
Week 1 predictions: they're going to blow out the Eagles because the Eagles stink
Week 1: they got blown out by the Eagles
Week 3 predictions: they're losing to the Giants
Week 3: they beat the Giants
Week 4 predictions: that was a nice comeback last week, they should be able to beat Washington
Week 4: they lost to Washington
Week 5 predictions: they're probably better than the Jets, but this feels like a game that they would lose for no reason
Week 5: they beat the Jets
Week 7 predictions: they have a better record than the Dolphins, but I think the Dolphins are the better team with Tua back
Week 7: they beat the Dolphins
Week 8 predictions: they've strung together a couple wins, surely they can beat the slumping Panthers
Week 8: they lost to the Panthers
Week 9: that was ugly last week, no way they beat the Saints
Week 9: they beat the Saints
I'm 1-7 picking them, only successful pick was week 2 against the Buccaneers (who, interestingly, is the only team that I'm perfect on at 6-0).
So anyways, I'm picking the Falcons to beat the Cowboys by a wide margin because that is the potential outcome that makes the least sense to me.
After Monday night, Kyle Shanahan will officially be on the hot seat.
Quote from: Big John on November 11, 2021, 05:19:16 PM
OBJ signs with the Rams.
A lil of a surprise as the Saints, Packers, and Chiefs were the main teams in the discussion before.......but Packers offered veterans minimum, Rams offered with a chance for Odell to make 4.5 million. Not surprised.
^^ The Packers are known for being cheap.
Quote from: Big John on November 12, 2021, 04:34:28 PM
^^ The Packers are known for being cheap.
Yep, and they've massively underachieved in the last 25 years as a result. Imagine if they had actually invested in putting consistently good teams around Rodgers and Favre. They'd have a bigger dynasty than the Patriots.
Quote from: I-39 on November 12, 2021, 05:29:14 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 12, 2021, 04:34:28 PM
^^ The Packers are known for being cheap.
Yep, and they've massively underachieved in the last 25 years as a result. Imagine if they had actually invested in putting consistently good teams around Rodgers and Favre. They'd have a bigger dynasty than the Patriots.
What a prisoner of the moment take. No chance they would have had a Patriots-level dynasty.
Quote from: thspfc on November 12, 2021, 06:49:43 PM
Quote from: I-39 on November 12, 2021, 05:29:14 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 12, 2021, 04:34:28 PM
^^ The Packers are known for being cheap.
Yep, and they've massively underachieved in the last 25 years as a result. Imagine if they had actually invested in putting consistently good teams around Rodgers and Favre. They'd have a bigger dynasty than the Patriots.
What a prisoner of the moment take. No chance they would have had a Patriots-level dynasty.
Yeah because they don't hire cheaters
The Packers haven't been cheap, they just recognize that a great quarterback can make an average receiver look amazing. Name one receiver that left the Packers in the last 30 years to be hot shit somewhere else with a middling quarterback.
I think the best one can do is Greg Jennings going to Minnesota. And compared to his time in Green Bay, he was underwhelming in a purple jersey.
Now there is a limit to this philosophy of course. There were years where the Pack was starved for talent at wide receiver because the new guys were still developing. But I think part of the reason Green Bay has been able to remain relevant for so long is their willingness to nurture the talent they draft rather than blow their wad on established offensive skill player free agents. Especially when it comes to wide receiver where there are dudes like OBJ that are total head cases. Much easier to groom rookie wide outs than wrangle the ego of an established guy. And as a bonus, you have way more salary cap to pay offensive linemen and D-backs and MVP quarterbacks; the guys that actually win you games.
RIP Sam Huff. Hall of Fame linebacker for the Redskins and Giants and longtime Redskins radio commentator died today at age 87.
Cowboys up 36-3 at halftime. Probably the best half that any team has played all season. And I give up on the Falcons. Not even going to pick their games anymore.
Buffalo weasels out of YET another blowout! 45-16! :pan:
Just had our first tie of the season, with neither Pittsburgh nor Detroit able to score in miserable weather in overtime.
With Pittsburgh now 5-3-1, my dream of an 8-8-1 team is very much alive.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 14, 2021, 04:42:47 PM
Just had our first tie of the season, with neither Pittsburgh nor Detroit able to score in miserable weather in overtime.
That game was so bad it was good. Neither team deserved to win.
For all of the idiocy around the NFL these days, it sure is entertaining on a week to week basis.
At the beginning of the season, a team going 0-16-1 was a joke that was tossed around. Now it's a serious possibility (though I expect the Lions to win at least once).
To my surprise I was almost dead on about the Bills/Jets game. Do me a favor and don't look at any of my other predictions. After a solid 44-22 run, I'm 4-6-1 so far this week.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 14, 2021, 04:42:47 PM
Just had our first tie of the season, with neither Pittsburgh nor Detroit able to score in miserable weather in overtime.
With Pittsburgh now 5-3-1, my dream of an 8-8-1 team is very much alive.
Lions' front office will tell us this is the Turnaround Point, and the sheeple will follow. Don't miss out on tickets for the Thanksgiving Day game vs. the Bears!
I would be betting on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl right now. The odds are not going to get any longer than this.
A few week 10 thoughts...
-Teams without a one-score win this season: Bills, Lions, and Texans :confused:
-Washington's 19-play, 80-yard drive that took 10:26 of game clock and ended with a 4th down Gibson TD run to end the Buc's chances at a comeback was the most impressive drive of the season and it's not even close. You know everyone was waiting to say "they left too much time for Brady!" but the Bucs defense just could not get off the field.
-Cam Newton is back, but don't overlook that PJ Walker is 2-0 and has outscored opponents 51-10 in his two starts! :-D
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
At this point in the season, the AFC has much stiffer competition compared to the NFC. In the AFC North and AFC West, every team is at .500 or better, while in the NFC East and NFC North, the second-place team has a losing record. So this means...
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2021, 10:42:40 PM
I would be betting on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl right now. The odds are not going to get any longer than this.
...that prediction is anything but certain. The way things are going right now, the AFC is up for grabs, while in the NFC, the Buccaneeers are surprisingly the weakest of the four division leaders. Hell, even the second-place Rams, who are chasing the Cardinals in the West, have a better record than Tampa Bay.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
Sounds like somebody who left them for dead and is now just a
little bit worried that they're not . . .
Something about the Chiefs feels different today. Something has felt different over the course of the last week, but it's now very different. Or, perhaps more accurately, something about the Chiefs feels familiar.
Quote from: thspfc on November 15, 2021, 12:23:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
Sounds like somebody who left them for dead and is now just a little bit worried that they're not . . .
I don't think they're dead. I think they're a likely playoff team that's dangerous when they're clicking. My point is that the Raiders, unlike most/all of the Chiefs' previous 9 opponents, simply had no concept whatsoever of how to stop them.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 02:45:23 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 15, 2021, 12:23:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
Sounds like somebody who left them for dead and is now just a little bit worried that they're not . . .
I don't think they're dead. I think they're a likely playoff team that's dangerous when they're clicking. My point is that the Raiders, unlike most/all of the Chiefs' previous 9 opponents, simply had no concept whatsoever of how to stop them.
The Browns, Ravens, Eagles, Football Team, and now Raiders have all been Chiefs-ed by the Chiefs offense. Subtract stupid turnovers off dropped passes from the equation, and Kansas City would have scored more than 40 points in all five of those games.
Just me or a lot more trick plays this year than past years?
Quote from: thspfc on November 11, 2021, 09:33:06 PM
After Monday night, Kyle Shanahan will officially be on the hot seat.
... except that Shanahan OWNS McVay, so he's safe for at least one more week. :biggrin:
Quote from: Alps on November 15, 2021, 10:24:44 PM
Just me or a lot more trick plays this year than past years?
Not just you, maybe part of the trend towards more aggressiveness in general?
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2021, 12:00:52 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 11, 2021, 09:33:06 PM
After Monday night, Kyle Shanahan will officially be on the hot seat.
... except that Shanahan OWNS McVay, so he's safe for at least one more week. :biggrin:
Yeah that was another brutally bad pick by me.
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2021, 12:04:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 15, 2021, 10:24:44 PM
Just me or a lot more trick plays this year than past years?
Not just you, maybe part of the trend towards more aggressiveness in general?
Certainly see more teams going for it on 4th down early in games.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 16, 2021, 12:39:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2021, 12:04:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 15, 2021, 10:24:44 PM
Just me or a lot more trick plays this year than past years?
Not just you, maybe part of the trend towards more aggressiveness in general?
Certainly see more teams going for it on 4th down early in games.
That's mostly a result of statistical models that show that punting is very often the worst option. I think you'll see less and less punting in the future.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 16, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 16, 2021, 12:39:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2021, 12:04:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 15, 2021, 10:24:44 PM
Just me or a lot more trick plays this year than past years?
Not just you, maybe part of the trend towards more aggressiveness in general?
Certainly see more teams going for it on 4th down early in games.
That's mostly a result of statistical models that show that punting is very often the worst option. I think you'll see less and less punting in the future.
In certain situations, yes, especially on 4th and short in opponent territory.
But punting usually still makes sense on 4th and long in your own territory.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Teams without a one-score win this season: Bills, Lions, and Texans :confused:
I just can't get over how crazy this is.
Quote from: webny99 on November 17, 2021, 10:18:16 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Teams without a one-score win this season: Bills, Lions, and Texans :confused:
I just can't get over how crazy this is.
And a 4-5 team beating a 7-1 team! CAR and ARI expected to be a blowout against the Panthers but BOY I was Wrong! Panthers destroyed them! :pan: :pan: :no:
Ravens 33, Bears 17
Packers 34, Vikings 27
Colts 23, Bills 17
Browns 41, Lions 19
Panthers 20, Washington 17
Texans 21, Titans 20
49ers 26, Jaguars 23
Dolphins 27, Jets 20
Saints 19, Eagles 10
Bengals 27, Raiders 24
Chiefs 38, Cowboys 24
Seahawks 24, Cardinals 19
Chargers 28, Steelers 17
Buccaneers 49, Giants 14
I got too confident last week, leading to some really bad misses. This week I'm going more conservative, except for picking the Texans in the upset of the year over the Titans. Tennessee has already lost to the Jets this season, and it seems like the best team in the NFL ranking (or even top 3) is a hot potato nowadays. Plus, the Titans are probably the most injured team in the league right now.
This is a classic get-right game for the Browns. But if they somehow lose, they're done. Season over.
Tampa will come out playing angry. It'll be the newest "on to Cincinnati" game.
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2021, 07:09:23 PM
Ravens 33, Bears 17
Packers 34, Vikings 27
Colts 23, Bills 17
Browns 41, Lions 19
Panthers 20, Washington 17
Texans 21, Titans 20
49ers 26, Jaguars 23
Dolphins 27, Jets 20
Saints 19, Eagles 10
Bengals 27, Raiders 24
Chiefs 38, Cowboys 24
Seahawks 24, Cardinals 19
Chargers 28, Steelers 17
Buccaneers 49, Giants 14
I got too confident last week, leading to some really bad misses. This week I'm going more conservative, except for picking the Texans in the upset of the year over the Titans. Tennessee has already lost to the Jets this season, and it seems like the best team in the NFL ranking (or even top 3) is a hot potato nowadays. Plus, the Titans are probably the most injured team in the league right now.
This is a classic get-right game for the Browns. But if they somehow lose, they're done. Season over.
Tampa will come out playing angry. It'll be the newest "on to Cincinnati" game.
You overestimated the Jets by about 20 points
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2021, 07:09:23 PM
Ravens 33, Bears 17
Packers 34, Vikings 27
Colts 23, Bills 17
Browns 41, Lions 19
Panthers 20, Washington 17
Texans 21, Titans 20
49ers 26, Jaguars 23
Dolphins 27, Jets 20
Saints 19, Eagles 10
Bengals 27, Raiders 24
Chiefs 38, Cowboys 24
Seahawks 24, Cardinals 19
Chargers 28, Steelers 17
Buccaneers 49, Giants 14
I got too confident last week, leading to some really bad misses. This week I'm going more conservative, except for picking the Texans in the upset of the year over the Titans. Tennessee has already lost to the Jets this season, and it seems like the best team in the NFL ranking (or even top 3) is a hot potato nowadays. Plus, the Titans are probably the most injured team in the league right now.
This is a classic get-right game for the Browns. But if they somehow lose, they're done. Season over.
Tampa will come out playing angry. It'll be the newest "on to Cincinnati" game.
Gimme the Vikings, Bills, Football Team, Titans, Jaguars, Eagles, and Cardinals.
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2021, 07:09:23 PM
Colts 23, Bills 17
...
I got too confident last week, leading to some really bad misses. This week I'm going more conservative, except for picking the Texans in the upset of the year over the Titans. Tennessee has already lost to the Jets this season, and it seems like the best team in the NFL ranking (or even top 3) is a hot potato nowadays. Plus, the Titans are probably the most injured team in the league right now.
This is a classic get-right game for the Browns. But if they somehow lose, they're done. Season over.
Tampa will come out playing angry. It'll be the newest "on to Cincinnati" game.
I disagree with your Bills-Colts pick, not because I think the Colts can't win, but because it seems highly improbable that the score will be identical to their final score last week. "Rock paper scissors" games like this, where each team has just played a common opponent, are always interesting, and both the Bills and Colts really need this game, so it should be a good one.
There's actually a lot of good games this week. Pretty much every matchup has some intrigue and some important playoff picture implications.
I am with you on the Titans. They VERY easily could have lost to the Saints between missed Saints extra points, a terrible roughing the passer call that voided a Tannehill INT, and the penalty on the 2pt conversion. Five straight wins over 2020 playoff teams is very impressive no doubt, but they did get really lucky in the Bills and Saints wins, and the Rams and Colts wins felt a little fluky as well with Stafford gifting them 14 points and Wentz throwing that bizarre pick that ended up being the reason that game went to OT.
Speaking of games decided on a failed 2pt conversion... I'm not so sure about the Bucs. Brady vs. the Giants obviously has some history, and looking at that history, including the 2pt win last year, it would certainly be a surprise if the Bucs put up 49.
Quote from: Alps on November 17, 2021, 11:02:24 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2021, 07:09:23 PM
Dolphins 27, Jets 20
...
You overestimated the Jets by about 20 points
Or maybe underestimated the Dolphins by about 20 points. The Jets have given up 175 points in the last 4 weeks, which is apparently the
2nd worst 4-game stretch (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/jets/2021/11/14/new-york-jets-defense-historic-low/8621066002/) in NFL history. For context, the Bills have only given up 135 points
all season. Not the greatest look for a defensive head coach. Gulp.
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2021, 12:51:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2021, 07:09:23 PM
Colts 23, Bills 17
...
I got too confident last week, leading to some really bad misses. This week I'm going more conservative, except for picking the Texans in the upset of the year over the Titans. Tennessee has already lost to the Jets this season, and it seems like the best team in the NFL ranking (or even top 3) is a hot potato nowadays. Plus, the Titans are probably the most injured team in the league right now.
This is a classic get-right game for the Browns. But if they somehow lose, they're done. Season over.
Tampa will come out playing angry. It'll be the newest "on to Cincinnati" game.
I disagree with your Bills-Colts pick, not because I think the Colts can't win, but because it seems highly improbable that the score will be identical to their final score last week...
This is the same fallacy where someone doesn't think the correct answer on a test will appear 3 times in a row, or the same lottery number won't appear twice in a row. Last week's score has absolutely no effect on this week's game.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 18, 2021, 01:34:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2021, 12:51:37 PM
I disagree with your Bills-Colts pick, not because I think the Colts can't win, but because it seems highly improbable that the score will be identical to their final score last week...
This is the same fallacy where someone doesn't think the correct answer on a test will appear 3 times in a row, or the same lottery number won't appear twice in a row. Last week's score has absolutely no effect on this week's game.
Of course it doesn't... but also, when was the last time a team had the same final score two weeks in a row? There are a lot more potential game scores than there are answers on a multiple choice test. The odds of it happening have to be inestimably small even if there's no direct bearing of one on the other.
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2021, 02:50:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 18, 2021, 01:34:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2021, 12:51:37 PM
I disagree with your Bills-Colts pick, not because I think the Colts can't win, but because it seems highly improbable that the score will be identical to their final score last week...
This is the same fallacy where someone doesn't think the correct answer on a test will appear 3 times in a row, or the same lottery number won't appear twice in a row. Last week's score has absolutely no effect on this week's game.
Of course it doesn't... but also, when was the last time a team had the same final score two weeks in a row? There are a lot more potential game scores than there are answers on a multiple choice test. The odds of it happening have to be inestimably small even if there's no direct bearing of one on the other.
The odds of the game ending 23-17 are larger than the odds of the game ending in the vast majority of other past NFL scores. 23-17 is one of the most common scorlines. The score of the previous Colts game does not change anything. In case you haven't noticed, I haven't been exactly correct on a score even one time this season, and while I'm by no means an expert, that still shows how unlikely ANY predicted score is to happen in that game, period.
If anything, the Colts winning 23-17 in week 10 could be a very small indicator of their tendencies/skill level on offense and defense, making it slightly more likely that their next game will end in that scoreline. Of course, I don't believe that a team has played to back-to-back identical scorlines this season or anytime in my memory, but that doesn't mean that there's anything to that fact.
So the bottom line is, webny99's post doesn't make any sense.
So, looks like we need a probability 101 lesson here. Things like lottery numbers are independent events. The previous outcome has absolutely zero impact on the probability of the next outcome.
Football scores are, to a certain extent, dependent events. Teams achieve certain scores because of their abilities, so unless last week's score was a total outlier, that score is at least somewhat MORE likely to occur than the average outcome. Add on top of that 23-17 is a fairly common outcome in football and back to back 23-17 scores is not terribly unlikely.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Washington's 19-play, 80-yard drive that took 10:26 of game clock and ended with a 4th down Gibson TD run to end the Buc's chances at a comeback was the most impressive drive of the season and it's not even close. You know everyone was waiting to say "they left too much time for Brady!" but the Bucs defense just could not get off the field.
Had the 49ers ended their 20-play, 13-minute drive just now against the Jags with a touchdown, it might have taken the top spot. But no, that deadly Shanahan offense kicked a field goal on 4th & 1 from the 2 yard line.
Hey, there we go! We actually got a win today! Granted, it was very ugly, but a win's a win. Nice prediction, thspfc.
Some fast facts:
- Tyrod Taylor's first rushing touchdown of the day was the Texan's first road touchdown in two months.
- The Texans had a +5 turnover differential and were outgained by 230 yards (I wonder if a team has ever done both of those in a game before), and still won 22-13.
- The Texans now have a 2-1 record against division opponents.
- The Texans went 3-and-out 6 times.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 08, 2021, 01:28:45 PM
So Miami beat Houston, thereby passing "Football Team" back to where it began the season and taking "Jaguars" from Houston. First time "Football Team" went back to a prior holder.
Houston beats Tennessee. Houston Titans (how amusing, in view of NFL history) and Tennessee Football Team.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 01:24:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Washington's 19-play, 80-yard drive that took 10:26 of game clock and ended with a 4th down Gibson TD run to end the Buc's chances at a comeback was the most impressive drive of the season and it's not even close. You know everyone was waiting to say "they left too much time for Brady!" but the Bucs defense just could not get off the field.
Had the 49ers ended their 20-play, 13-minute drive just now against the Jags with a touchdown, it might have taken the top spot. But no, that deadly Shanahan offense kicked a field goal on 4th & 1 from the 2 yard line.
But context matters, and in this case the context HEAVILY favors Washington, regardless of whether the 49ers score a TD there.
Every team now has at least three losses.
Buffalo is the most inconsistent team ever. Mind-blowing. The only team worth anything that they've beaten is Kansas City, and that was early on. Today they are officially removed from my Super Bowl contenders list. That list now contains the Patriots, Colts, Chiefs, Cowboys, Packers, Buccaneers, Cardinals, and Rams.
It appears jayhawkco's picks have beat mine this week, unless the Seahawks figure it out. I will still wear my "predicted the Texans to beat the Titans" badge for the rest of the season.
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 06:25:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 01:24:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Washington's 19-play, 80-yard drive that took 10:26 of game clock and ended with a 4th down Gibson TD run to end the Buc's chances at a comeback was the most impressive drive of the season and it's not even close. You know everyone was waiting to say "they left too much time for Brady!" but the Bucs defense just could not get off the field.
Had the 49ers ended their 20-play, 13-minute drive just now against the Jags with a touchdown, it might have taken the top spot. But no, that deadly Shanahan offense kicked a field goal on 4th & 1 from the 2 yard line.
But context matters, and in this case the context HEAVILY favors Washington, regardless of whether the 49ers score a TD there.
That's true.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
Every team now has at least three losses.
Buffalo is the most inconsistent team ever. Mind-blowing. The only team worth anything that they've beaten is Kansas City, and that was early on. Today they are officially removed from my Super Bowl contenders list. That list now contains the Patriots, Colts, Chiefs, Cowboys, Packers, Buccaneers, Cardinals, and Rams.
It appears jayhawkco's picks have beat mine this week, unless the Seahawks figure it out. I will still wear my "predicted the Texans to beat the Titans" badge for the rest of the season.
And that was indeed a hell of a pick.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
Every team now has at least three losses.
Cards are 9-2 still
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2021, 08:24:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
Every team now has at least three losses.
Cards are 9-2 still
Ah, right. I've kind of forgotten about them ever since Kyler got hurt, but they've got two big divisional wins without him. Impressive.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
Buffalo is the most inconsistent team ever. Mind-blowing. The only team worth anything that they've beaten is Kansas City, and that was early on. Today they are officially removed from my Super Bowl contenders list. That list now contains the Patriots, Colts, Chiefs, Cowboys, Packers, Buccaneers, Cardinals, and Rams.
Yeah, they are STILL sitting there with the Lions and Texans as the only teams without a one-score win this season. They had a chance to be all alone, but of course the Texans got another two-score win (barely, as they won by 9), and the Lions had another close loss.
Here's the Bills' season in one sentence: They're 1-3 against the AFC South, while outscoring them 92-84. That should be 2-2 in the absolute worst-case scenario... but they somehow found a way to lose three of those games.
What frustrates me about this week in particular is the defensive game plan. The Bills CAN stop the run if they commit to it. They've done it to the Ravens twice, including in the playoffs last season. But they obviously didn't take the Colts' run game seriously, and Jonathan Taylor goes off for over 200 total yards and 5 TD's. So frustrating.
I'll check back in after Thanksgiving in terms of the Bills' Super Bowl aspirations. This is their third straight season in which they had one - and
only one - blowout loss. 2019 was to the Eagles, 2020 was to the Titans. So I give them one per season, but if they get blown out again, I might have to reassess.
Obviously, the two games against the Patriots are going to be MASSIVE. The "Pats are back!" narratives are already getting out of control, with their first showdown with the Bills in two weeks on MNF. Ahhhh! I'm starting to hyperventilate just thinking about it! Undoubtedly the most important regular season game in Bills franchise history, and it's not remotely close.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 21, 2021, 06:43:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
It appears jayhawkco's picks have beat mine this week, unless the Seahawks figure it out. I will still wear my "predicted the Texans to beat the Titans" badge for the rest of the season.
And that was indeed a hell of a pick.
Titans are now 7-0 against playoff teams from last year, but 1-3 against non-playoff teams. :confused:
Certainly up there in terms of being inconsistent, but I maintain that they stole a win from the Saints last week... it was even more egregious than the Steelers' win over the Bears, and that's saying something.
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 10:21:34 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 06:39:38 PM
Obviously, the two games against the Patriots are going to be MASSIVE. The "Pats are back!" narratives are already getting out of control, with their first showdown with the Bills in two weeks on MNF. Ahhhh! I'm starting to hyperventilate just thinking about it! Undoubtedly the most important regular season game in Bills franchise history, and it's not remotely close.
I feel like I underreact to breakout teams more than I overreact, and even I think that there's a ton to like about the Patriots right now. They've given up one touchdown and 13 points in their last three games. Since you're a big point differential guy, they're a ridiculous +125 over their last five games (+123 on the season). And I think they're even better than their 7-4 record indicates. A quick analysis of their four losses:
- By a point to the Dolphins (with Tua), in Jones' first game, with tons of brand new pieces on both sides of the ball playing in their first game together. All things considered that's not that bad of a loss.
- Saints game, that one was ugly, but worth noting that it was probably the first time in his career that Jones faced a pass rush that could consistently penetrate his offensive line.
- On a doink to the Bucs
- In overtime to the Cowboys
They're forcing a ton of turnovers on defense. They've embarrassed Justin Herbert,
(Sam Darnold), Baker, and Matt Ryan in their last four games. And it's not like they're conceding a lot of first downs and then bailing themselves out with turnovers (a.k.a. what the Cowboys have been doing); their last four opponents are averaging less than 250 yards of offense per game.
Obviously the concern is whether Mac Jones can lead the team to victory in a game where the defense doesn't play great, or they fall behind, or things just aren't going well in general. So far he hasn't shown that he can, but one day he will. The question is whether that's in two weeks or in two years.
Oh, by the way, the Chiefs have given up a total of 30 points in their last 3 games.
The narrative is that the Chiefs offense is "back". It can't be back, because it never left. With the exception of the Titans game and the Chargers game to an extent, defense was always the problem. I mentioned in this thread after the Chiefs/Titans game that the Titans, Buccaneers, and Cowboys are the only teams in the league capable of dominating time of possession against Kansas City, and dominating time of possession is probably the best way to beat the Chiefs. Most people will look at only 19 points against a mediocre Cowboys defense as a bad outing; I disagree, because they outgained the Cowboys, picked up more first downs than the Cowboys, and controlled time of possession. Against one of the best offenses in the league, an offense that can beat you in so many different ways, and can first-down and time-of-possession you to death. It was the same way the Broncos beat the Cowboys two weeks ago. Both the Broncos and Chiefs came up with big drives when they needed them. Neither of the Chiefs' last two drives ended in points, but more importantly, they ate a combined 8:30 off the clock.
Right now the Chiefs are my Super Bowl pick. Just as they were at the beginning of the season. But what I saw today from both their offense and defense makes me feel the most confident that I have felt about it.
As for my Cowboys, not much to say, just got beaten pretty good.
Serious cracks in the drywall appearing in Cleveland. Baker skipped his media conference yesterday, and his wife ranted on social media about how his teammates - the same teammates who fooled people into thinking that Baker is a top 12 quarterback - need to "get tougher" . And of course, Cleveland's fans and media would defend Baker if he turned into Henry Ruggs ("so many dropped passes" , "he's injured" , "something something OBJ something" ). There are some parallels to the 2019 Browns, who were 5-6 and at this exact point in the playoff race at this time.
Wowwww... we got another 2 game of the year candidates yesterday with Packers-Vikings and Steelers-Chargers.
At least four of the Chargers' six wins (Chiefs, Browns, Eagles, Steelers) are games that previous Chargers teams would have blown (and to be clear, they did blow it last night in embarrassing fashion, but they still got the win) so even though their offense has struggled at times this season, I think you have to say the coaching change has been a big success on balance.
Quote from: thspfc on November 22, 2021, 08:23:11 AM
And of course, Cleveland's fans and media would defend Baker if he turned into Henry Ruggs ("so many dropped passes" , "he's injured" , "something something OBJ something" ). There are some parallels to the 2019 Browns, who were 5-6 and at this exact point in the playoff race at this time.
I get where you're coming from, but that is still a little extreme. It's easy to forget what a complete train wreck they were before drafting Baker. Even if he's not one of the best QB's in the league, he's still an improvement over what they had for most of the century before him.
But of course they are built to win now, so I think they take a hard look at moving on from Baker if they miss the playoffs. In a weird scheduling quirk they've got Ravens>BYE>Ravens the next three weeks. The Ravens have some really great wins, but they haven't looked like world-beaters this season, so those two games will tell us a lot about where the Browns are at.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2021, 10:45:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 21, 2021, 10:21:34 PM
Obviously, the two games against the Patriots are going to be MASSIVE. The "Pats are back!" narratives are already getting out of control, with their first showdown with the Bills in two weeks on MNF. Ahhhh! I'm starting to hyperventilate just thinking about it! Undoubtedly the most important regular season game in Bills franchise history, and it's not remotely close.
I feel like I underreact to breakout teams more than I overreact, and even I think that there's a ton to like about the Patriots right now. They've given up one touchdown and 13 points in their last three games. Since you're a big point differential guy, they're a ridiculous +125 over their last five games (+123 on the season). And I think they're even better than their 7-4 record indicates. A quick analysis of their four losses:
...
- On a doink to the Bucs
...
Obviously the concern is whether Mac Jones can lead the team to victory in a game where the defense doesn't play great, or they fall behind, or things just aren't going well in general. So far he hasn't shown that he can, but one day he will. The question is whether that's in two weeks or in two years.
Yeah, and that's exactly why this MNF game is
so huge.
I maintain that they still would have lost to the Bucs even if they made that field goal, but in any case, yeah, they have not been blown out all season unless you count the Saints game. But neither had the Bills until yesterday - both teams have 3 close losses and 1 not close loss - which is why it feels strange to say the Patriots have been more consistent team all season but it's undoubtedly the case.
Of the Vikings' 10 games, 8 have been decided by the last play.
A look at the projected playoff picture through 11 weeks:
(https://imgur.com/TPdih69.jpg)
Saints and Eagles are still right there in the NFC with the Panthers and Washington also on the fringe. The entire AFC North is still in the mix too, but it is starting to look like we might only have 1 playoff team from that division after having 3 last year.
Below I'm starting a list of teams that are, to use an Around the NFL term, "forked" (out of the playoff picture). The idea is to be aggressive and fork a team early, well before they're mathematically eliminated, and to get all 18 forks correct before the final week of the season.
Before this week, the unstated (but fairly obvious) list:
Jets, Texans, Jaguars, Lions, Dolphins
Added to the list today after a "season-ending" loss this week:
Bears, Seahawks
My forked list prior to the season was:
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
I'm going to subtract the Bengals and Eagles from that list, and add the Raiders, Browns, Giants, Football Team, Bears, and Saints.
The Dolphins are 2.5 games out of playoff position. Their remaining schedule is:
vs Panthers
vs Giants
vs Jets
at Saints
at Titans
vs Patriots
Tua is back, and he's playing a lot better than people give him credit for. Their defense has given up 12 points/game over the last three weeks. They can easily win their next four games to get to 8-7. After that if they win one out of their last two, which is doable considering that the Titans and/or Patriots may have clinched their respective divisions by then, they're 9-8 and right in the thick of it.
Browns remaining schedule:
at Ravens
vs Ravens (ick, NFL needs to make sure this doesn't happen again)
vs Raiders
at Packers
at Steelers
vs Bengals
There are no free wins there. With Baker playing badly, the defense slumping, and a lot of drama, I don't see them going any better than 2-4 down the stretch.
I would be surprised if the Bears manage to finish with more than four wins.
Raiders have checked out.
Saints have too many injuries.
I expect the Giants and Football Team to improve down the stretch, but if they can't at least beat out the Eagles for second in the division, they have no chance. Even if either of them do get second in the East, they're probably still out.
Quote from: thspfc on November 22, 2021, 12:45:13 PM
My forked list prior to the season was:
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 01:01:20 PM
I feel very confident saying that the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Broncos, Eagles, Lions, and Panthers will not make the playoffs. In fact I would be shocked if any of those eight made it.
I'm going to subtract the Bengals and Eagles from that list, and add the Raiders, Browns, Giants, Football Team, Bears, and Saints.
Leaving the Broncos and Panthers on the list? I'm a hold on both for now, but I respect it.
Quote from: thspfc on November 22, 2021, 12:45:13 PM
The Dolphins are 2.5 games out of playoff position. Their remaining schedule is:
...
Tua is back, and he's playing a lot better than people give him credit for. Their defense has given up 12 points/game over the last three weeks. They can easily win their next four games to get to 8-7. After that if they win one out of their last two, which is doable considering that the Titans and/or Patriots may have clinched their respective divisions by then, they're 9-8 and right in the thick of it.
Sure, I think the Dolphins could easily stack some wins and get to 8-9, maybe even 9-8. But they'll have to win out and finish 10-7 to have a shot at the playoffs. I don't think 9-8 is going to cut it.
I'm a hold on the Browns, but definitely forking them if they get swept by the Ravens.
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 11:29:07 AM
Below I'm starting a list of teams that are, to use an Around the NFL term, "forked" (out of the playoff picture). The idea is to be aggressive and fork a team early, well before they're mathematically eliminated, and to get all 18 forks correct before the final week of the season.
Before this week, the unstated (but fairly obvious) list:
Jets, Texans, Jaguars, Lions, Dolphins
Added to the list today after a "season-ending" loss this week:
Bears, Seahawks
Since Aaron Rodgers can only beat the Bears in the NFC Championship game and not anybody else, the Packers are now eliminated from Super Bowl contention.
Giants just gave Jason Garrett the boot.
https://www.giants.com/news/jason-garrett-relieved-of-duties-as-offensive-coordinator-new-york-giants (https://www.giants.com/news/jason-garrett-relieved-of-duties-as-offensive-coordinator-new-york-giants)
Quote from: LM117 on November 23, 2021, 05:24:09 PM
Giants just gave Jason Garrett the boot.
https://www.giants.com/news/jason-garrett-relieved-of-duties-as-offensive-coordinator-new-york-giants (https://www.giants.com/news/jason-garrett-relieved-of-duties-as-offensive-coordinator-new-york-giants)
Shiiiiiiit we need to give Gettleman the boot.
Thought this was interesting. This is what Tua would look like as a right handed thrower . . .
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V8R4C4Ly_Wo&feature=emb_err_woyt
Looks good, doesn't it?
Boring day at work, so I'll pre-empt thspfc in picking this week. I won't bother going into scoring.
CHI over DET
DAL over LV
BUF over NO
JAX over ATL
SF over MIN (sadly)
PIT over CIN (biggest upset compared to Vegas odds)
TB over IND
MIA over CAR
NE over TEN
PHI over NYG
DEN over LAC
NYJ over HOU
GB over LAR
BAL over CLE
SEA over WAS
A couple quick schedule notes...
-Chiefs-Broncos flexed to SNF in Week 13, Seahawks-49ers moved back to 4:25 ET.
-Saturday doubleheader for Week 15: Raiders-Browns at 4:30, Pats-Colts at 8:20
-Eagles have at Giants, at Jets, a bye, two home games, at Washington, and home vs. Cowboys to end their season. They won't have to travel more than a few hours again for the rest of the season.
-The AFC North has 27 total games remaining, and there is not one single easy win in ANY of those 27 games. They've each got at least 4 division games left (Ravens have 5) so they're going to beat up on each other bad and I could EASILY see a 9-8 or 10-7 division winner as the only playoff team from that division.
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 11:29:07 AM
Below I'm starting a list of teams that are, to use an Around the NFL term, "forked" (out of the playoff picture). The idea is to be aggressive and fork a team early, well before they're mathematically eliminated, and to get all 18 forks correct before the final week of the season.
Before this week, the unstated (but fairly obvious) list:
Jets, Texans, Jaguars, Lions, Dolphins
Added to the list today after a "season-ending" loss this week:
Bears, Seahawks
Going forward I'm going to refrain from forking teams mid-week, but right now I am going to add the Giants after their MNF loss to the Bucs.
That brings me up to 8 forked teams, 4 from each conference.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 24, 2021, 12:56:58 PM
Boring day at work, so I'll pre-empt thspfc in picking this week. I won't bother going into scoring.
CHI over DET
DAL over LV
BUF over NO
JAX over ATL
SF over MIN (sadly)
PIT over CIN (biggest upset compared to Vegas odds)
TB over IND
MIA over CAR
NE over TEN
PHI over NYG
DEN over LAC
NYJ over HOU
GB over LAR
BAL over CLE
SEA over WAS
At this point I hope the Jets lose. I want draft position.
Quote from: Alps on November 24, 2021, 04:39:41 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 24, 2021, 12:56:58 PM
Boring day at work, so I'll pre-empt thspfc in picking this week. I won't bother going into scoring.
CHI over DET
DAL over LV
BUF over NO
JAX over ATL
SF over MIN (sadly)
PIT over CIN (biggest upset compared to Vegas odds)
TB over IND
MIA over CAR
NE over TEN
PHI over NYG
DEN over LAC
NYJ over HOU
GB over LAR
BAL over CLE
SEA over WAS
At this point I hope the Jets lose. I want draft position.
That was probably my toughest game to pick. More of a who wants it less kind of thing.
Steelers 27, Bengals 13
Dolphins 23, Panthers 20
Eagles 37, Giants 17
Patriots 24, Titans 20
Buccaneers 34, Colts 16
Jets 28, Texans 14
Chargers 38, Broncos 17
Vikings 30, 49ers 22
Packers 26, Rams 13
Ravens 19, Browns 3
Seahawks 28, Washington 16
Seems like the Giants are in a full-blown nosedive now, for the fourth time in the last five seasons. All of the optimism from *checks notes* a four game stretch in November last year that included narrow wins over the Football Team, Eagles, Bengals, and Seahawks has long vanished. Every week that Joe Judge is still their head coach is automatically a wasted week.
I've been saying since mid-October that the Colts are pretty dang good, but the one thing I worry about is Wentz having to throw more than 40 passes to keep them in the game. In that regard, it's a favorable matchup for the Buccaneers and their #1 run defense.
I'm realizing now that the Seahawks playing badly isn't as fun as I thought it would be. At this point in the season I usually get sick of them and think they're overrated, but now that they're not doing well I just want them to start winning again.
I feel awful for the lions. What is this, three winning field goals against Detroit now?
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
Quote from: jlam on November 25, 2021, 04:00:18 PM
I feel awful for the lions. What is this, three winning field goals against Detroit now?
For a while, it looked like they were going to get their first win, but then the Bears kicked the game-winner at the very end. I don't blame any of Detroit's teams for being as shitty as the city they play in.
Quote from: jlam on November 25, 2021, 04:00:18 PM
I feel awful for the lions. What is this, three winning field goals against Detroit now?
Coaching lost this game for them. Turned 3rd and 9 into 3rd and 4 AND burned a timeout.
My biggest concern about the Cowboys reared its head today. If the defense doesn't force turnovers, they're going to give up a lot of points. Outside of Trevon Diggs and occasionally Jourdan Lewis, it's a putrid secondary. Lots of missed tackles. Honestly the most striking thing was simply how much faster the Raiders were - even Carr outran half the defense on that scramble in the second half. Anthony Brown alone got called for pass interference/holding 4 times. The offense played great without Cooper and Lamb, but not enough to compensate for the defense.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about
this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the
way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
The tie game was infinitely worse to watch than today's game.
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Quote from: thspfc on November 25, 2021, 08:55:37 PM
My biggest concern about the Cowboys reared its head today. If the defense doesn't force turnovers, they're going to give up a lot of points. Outside of Trevon Diggs and occasionally Jourdan Lewis, it's a putrid secondary. Lots of missed tackles. Honestly the most striking thing was simply how much faster the Raiders were - even Carr outran half the defense on that scramble in the second half. Anthony Brown alone got called for pass interference/holding 4 times. The offense played great without Cooper and Lamb, but not enough to compensate for the defense.
The Cowboys pass defense was absolutely horrible.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
And missed one other walkoff FG attempt, but the Vikings won that game in OT regardless.
Even still, we've walked off two teams with FGs ourselves, so it's a wash I suppose.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 11:39:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Being a Detroit sports fan in every major sport the last four decades really helped blunt how bad Lions have been. The Pistons and Red Wings had all-time great teams during my life time. The Tigers winning the World Series is one of my earliest memories and Michigan having a couple significant National Championships is pretty nice too.
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 01:58:51 PM
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
Next? There never has been a 17 game season.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2021, 02:22:30 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 01:58:51 PM
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
Next? There never has been a 17 game season.
I was wondering the same thing myself.....but would be very Detroit Lions to be both on the 0-16 and 0-16-1 list.
That being said I was hoping they would have won yesterday
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 26, 2021, 02:48:08 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2021, 02:22:30 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 01:58:51 PM
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
Next? There never has been a 17 game season.
I was wondering the same thing myself.....but would be very Detroit Lions to be both on the 0-16 and 0-16-1 list.
That being said I was hoping they would have won yesterday
FWIW that 0-16 team was way better than the current iteration of the Lions.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2021, 03:16:43 PM
FWIW that 0-16 team was way better than the current iteration of the Lions.
I do believe that team went 4-0 in the preseason.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on November 26, 2021, 03:34:14 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2021, 03:16:43 PM
FWIW that 0-16 team was way better than the current iteration of the Lions.
I do believe that team went 4-0 in the preseason.
Correct, the 2017 Browns did go 4-0 in preseason. How ironic! :-D
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 11:39:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 04:03:46 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on November 26, 2021, 03:34:14 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 26, 2021, 03:16:43 PM
FWIW that 0-16 team was way better than the current iteration of the Lions.
I do believe that team went 4-0 in the preseason.
Correct, the 2017 Browns did go 4-0 in preseason. How ironic! :-D
I had a Detroit Lions pre-season champions shirt from that year. It was a niche custom item that someone was making back in those days.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 26, 2021, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 11:39:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).
But the Lions do have four NFL Championships. The Vikings have nada.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 26, 2021, 04:29:50 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 26, 2021, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 11:39:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).
But the Lions do have four NFL Championships. The Vikings have nada.
The Browns have quite a few NFL Championships in the pre-Super Bowl era. A championship still is better than not having any.
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
Fun stat presented during lions game: Goff has played for 4 coaches and has only won games for one of them
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 26, 2021, 04:29:50 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 26, 2021, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 11:39:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 25, 2021, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 25, 2021, 04:10:00 PM
Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers. I don't feel bad. They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff). They reap what they sow.
You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.
And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.
Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan. We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.
Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).
But the Lions do have four NFL Championships. The Vikings have nada.
That's a fair point. I had focused on Super Bowls not because I don't count pre—Super Bowl championships but rather because of your reference to the Minnesota Football Team not having been to a Super Bowl in around 50 years (coming up on 45 years, actually–Super Bowl XI was Minnesota's most recent one, in January 1977; they lost to Oakland 32—14).
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
OTOH, the Redskins' loss to the Bears in the 1940 NFL Championship Game remains infamous.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
So, old people don't matter?
My Grandpa sure thought it mattered when the Baltimore Colts were winning NFL Championships.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2021, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
So, old people don't matter?
They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 08:29:23 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2021, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
So, old people don't matter?
They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.
But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 27, 2021, 08:36:54 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 08:29:23 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2021, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
So, old people don't matter?
They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.
But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)
I don't think he's caught onto the fact that Joe Namath is still in a lot of commercials.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 27, 2021, 08:36:54 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 08:29:23 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2021, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2021, 05:48:42 PM
Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.
So, old people don't matter?
They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.
But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)
In this case, I used the term "Super Bowl era" to mean "about 50 years", since that's what it happens to coincide with. Basically what I'm saying is anything more than 50 years ago doesn't really matter to anyone anymore. In your case, the Super Bowls 30+ years ago are still relevant historical context, since there is still at least one generation of fans that remembers that success. But in another 25 years (50+ years total), there will be very few people that were old enough to clearly remember that success, and that's the point at which it goes from barely relevant to not relevant at all.
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 01:58:51 PM
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
The Baltimore Colts are not the same team as the Baltimore Ravens. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis in 1984. Twelve years later, the first Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, in tribute to Edgar Allen Poe.
Tua completes 27 of 31 passes today. Sure, 230 yards isn't a ton, but that's still very good efficiency, and it clearly worked well, as the Dolphins totally dominated the Panthers. Over the last two games, he's a combined 54 of 64. That's ridiculous. Not hard to see why the Dolphins are slowly but surely climbing back into the playoff hunt.
Another Jets touchdown would have been nice, but then again it's the Jets. I'm still doing well with Texans games over the last two weeks.
Eagles, Steelers, and Chargers on the other hand . . .
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2021, 07:19:27 PM
Another Jets touchdown would have been nice, but then again it's the Jets. I'm still doing well with Texans games over the last two weeks.
Eagles, Steelers, and Chargers on the other hand . . .
I wish the Jets would lose for draft position, but they manage to screw even that up.
Quote from: jlam on November 27, 2021, 06:22:56 PM
Quote from: snowc on November 26, 2021, 01:58:51 PM
The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! :pan:
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike :banghead:), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. :clap:
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s :no: :spin: :clap:
The Baltimore Colts are not the same team as the Baltimore Ravens. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis in 1984. Twelve years later, the first Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, in tribute to Edgar Allen Poe.
You're right about the Colts/Ravens not being the same franchise. However, the Ravens are technically an expansion franchise, despite retaining the ownership and players from the 95 Browns. The Browns records remained in Cleveland, and the Browns franchise is considered to have been dormant from 1996-1998.
-That's 3 straight wins for the Bengals over the Steelers, and each one has been more impressive. The Steelers needed that win bad and got blown out of the building. That's probably the Steelers' season... I don't see a single win left on their schedule, much less enough of them to make a playoff push. 8-8-1 still very much in play (which would keep the darn "Tomlin's never had a losing record" thing alive in unbelievable fashion), but so is 5-11-1.
-Falcons are probably the worst 5-6 team in NFL history. They're sort of like the anti-Bills... the Bills either win blowouts or lose close games, while the Falcons either win close games or lose blowouts. The Falcons have been boat-raced 4 times this season (Weeks 1, 2, 10, and 11), but their remaining games have all been one-score games and they're 5-2 in those games. This is not a good team, but it's also a franchise known for choking, so if they can learn to consistently close out games and maybe even get to 8 or 9 wins with a first-year head coach, I think you have to consider it a successful season.
-What are the Chargers this season? They're in every game, but they've been maddeningly inconsistent at times. They've started to shed their reputation for blowing games at the end, and yet they've still had several head-scratchers this season. They needed to beat the Broncos to be viewed seriously as a contender. Now they're right there with the Raiders and Broncos at 6-5 in an improved but muddled AFC West.
NFL fans are really quick to trash on teams that they were anointing as possible Super Bowl champions a few weeks earlier. The Cowboys lose to the team that should be Super Bowl favorites, and then lose by a field goal overtime while missing their top two WRs and two of their top three pass rushers, and all of a sudden everyone thinks they're average. The Rams have a stretch of frequent costly turnovers and failing to convert in the red zone, leading to three losses, and now nobody thinks they're relevant.
Don't freak out. The Rams and Cowboys are still title contenders.
Also, that was a bluntly bad call on the David Njoku touchdown that just happened.
The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.
Quote from: jlam on November 28, 2021, 11:09:21 PM
The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.
Broncos are actually 2-1, correct? I believe Broncos-Cowboys was after the trade.
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 08:29:40 AM
Quote from: jlam on November 28, 2021, 11:09:21 PM
The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.
Broncos are actually 2-1, correct? I believe Broncos-Cowboys was after the trade.
Yes, I forgot about that game.
Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining? Created a lot of unnecessary drama leaving it a one-score game, and of course Seattle goes down the field and gets a late TD... only to miss the 2pt conversion... only to recover the onside kick... only to have the onside kick called back because of an illegal formation.
Obviously, it was a must-win game for Seattle, now at 3-8 their playoff odds are down to 1%. They'd have to win out and get a lot of help to make it. Even worse... their 3-8 record is the same as the Jets, and the Jets also have Seattle's first-round pick next year. Yikes.
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 11:35:08 PM
Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining?
Their kicker hurt his hamstring.
Russ can't cook anymore
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 29, 2021, 11:38:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 11:35:08 PM
Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining?
Their kicker hurt his hamstring.
WFT Kicker got hurt on the Blocked XP Kick that the Seahawks returned for a Defensive 2-Point Conversion, to make the game 9-9 at halftime
Quote from: ilpt4u on November 29, 2021, 11:58:39 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 29, 2021, 11:38:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 11:35:08 PM
Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining?
Their kicker hurt his hamstring.
WFT Kicker got hurt on the Blocked XP Kick that the Seahawks returned for a Defensive 2-Point Conversion, to make the game 9-9 at halftime
OK, I missed that. Makes sense too why they went for 2 after the TD in the third quarter.
Apparently the coaches didn't feel confident in the punter, Tress Way, stepping in to placekick (except kickoffs) because he has minimal experience and they believe his range is somewhere around 30 yards, which is shorter than the extra point distance. Funny thing is, that two-point conversion made the difference and likely decided the game–had they kicked the PAT, Seattle would have tied the game and forced overtime with a PAT kick, but as it was they had to go for two.
From the replay, it looked like he slipped and twisted his left leg awkwardly resulting in a hamstring injury.
I remember in the first game of the 1987 season, the Redskins' placekicker, Jess Atkinson, got hurt and the punter, Steve Cox, stepped in to placekick. He occasionally kicked super-long field goals (55+ yards) but had never kicked short ones; while he made the PATs and some field goals, he said it was an utterly awkward experience for him and they signed Ali Haji-Sheikh the next week and went on to win the Super Bowl. Strangely, the following year Cox got hurt in the season opener and then a few weeks later the new punter, Tommy Barnhardt, got hurt during pregame in Dallas and the placekicker, Chip Lohmiller, had to punt.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2021, 09:01:20 AM
Apparently the coaches didn't feel confident in the punter, Tress Way, stepping in to placekick (except kickoffs) because he has minimal experience and they believe his range is somewhere around 30 yards, which is shorter than the extra point distance. Funny thing is, that two-point conversion made the difference and likely decided the game–had they kicked the PAT, Seattle would have tied the game and forced overtime with a PAT kick, but as it was they had to go for two.
I was thinking that. It's a good thing they got that 2pt conversion because if they had failed there, or attempted a PAT and missed, Seattle could have not only tied, but stolen a 1-point win with a PAT of their own. Can't help but wonder if Washington would have tried the short field goal at the end if they were only up by 6 points instead of 8.
I had thought Way was a former rugby or Aussie rules punter and it made me wonder whether he might be able to dropkick the ball, but apparently I'm thinking of someone else–I looked up his biography and it has no mention of any such. I think it'd be very interesting to see that happen. I seem to recall Baltimore's punter dropkicking an onside kick last year or the year before.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 24, 2021, 12:56:58 PM
Boring day at work, so I'll pre-empt thspfc in picking this week. I won't bother going into scoring.
CHI over DET
DAL over LV
BUF over NO
JAX over ATL
SF over MIN (sadly)
PIT over CIN (biggest upset compared to Vegas odds)
TB over IND
MIA over CAR
NE over TEN
PHI over NYG
DEN over LAC
NYJ over HOU
GB over LAR
BAL over CLE
SEA over WAS
A meh 10-5.
Here goes this week.
NO over DAL
IND over HOU
MIN over DET
MIA over NYG
TB over ATL
NYJ over PHI
ARI over CHI
CIN over LAC
JAX over LAR
LV over WAS
BAL over PIT
SF over SEA
KC over DEN
NE over BUF
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2021, 09:01:20 AM
Apparently the coaches didn't feel confident in the punter, Tress Way, stepping in to placekick (except kickoffs) because he has minimal experience and they believe his range is somewhere around 30 yards, which is shorter than the extra point distance. Funny thing is, that two-point conversion made the difference and likely decided the game–had they kicked the PAT, Seattle would have tied the game and forced overtime with a PAT kick, but as it was they had to go for two.
From the replay, it looked like he slipped and twisted his left leg awkwardly resulting in a hamstring injury.
I remember in the first game of the 1987 season, the Redskins' placekicker, Jess Atkinson, got hurt and the punter, Steve Cox, stepped in to placekick. He occasionally kicked super-long field goals (55+ yards) but had never kicked short ones; while he made the PATs and some field goals, he said it was an utterly awkward experience for him and they signed Ali Haji-Sheikh the next week and went on to win the Super Bowl. Strangely, the following year Cox got hurt in the season opener and then a few weeks later the new punter, Tommy Barnhardt, got hurt during pregame in Dallas and the placekicker, Chip Lohmiller, had to punt.
If they made the PAT then they would have been able to kick the game-sealing field goal instead of going for it on 4th down.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 30, 2021, 10:30:47 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2021, 09:01:20 AM
Apparently the coaches didn't feel confident in the punter, Tress Way, stepping in to placekick (except kickoffs) because he has minimal experience and they believe his range is somewhere around 30 yards, which is shorter than the extra point distance. Funny thing is, that two-point conversion made the difference and likely decided the game–had they kicked the PAT, Seattle would have tied the game and forced overtime with a PAT kick, but as it was they had to go for two.
From the replay, it looked like he slipped and twisted his left leg awkwardly resulting in a hamstring injury.
I remember in the first game of the 1987 season, the Redskins' placekicker, Jess Atkinson, got hurt and the punter, Steve Cox, stepped in to placekick. He occasionally kicked super-long field goals (55+ yards) but had never kicked short ones; while he made the PATs and some field goals, he said it was an utterly awkward experience for him and they signed Ali Haji-Sheikh the next week and went on to win the Super Bowl. Strangely, the following year Cox got hurt in the season opener and then a few weeks later the new punter, Tommy Barnhardt, got hurt during pregame in Dallas and the placekicker, Chip Lohmiller, had to punt.
If they made the PAT then they would have been able to kick the game-sealing field goal instead of going for it on 4th down.
Maybe. Maybe not. They had a PAT blocked (and returned for two points), so there's nothing to say they'd have made the field goal!
FedEx Field has been notorious for the poor turf condition for years. I wonder to what extent that contributed to the kicker getting injured. They've already gone through three placekickers this year–they released Hopkins for performance reasons, then Blewitt lived up to the sound of his last name, and now the new guy is hurt.
Seahawks = forked
A fun stat that I read yesterday. The Jets have more wins over teams with winning records than the Rams do.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 01:08:12 PM
A fun stat that I read yesterday. The Jets have more wins over teams with winning records than the Rams do.
Last year the Jets had as many wins over such teams as the Packers did in the regular season.
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Quote from: thspfc on November 30, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 30, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
I don't know the answer to your main question, but in soccer, that's why they play the last two games in the group stage at the World Cup at the same time, so you can't collude to tie as easily.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 02:06:26 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 30, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
I don't know the answer to your main question, but in soccer, that's why they play the last two games in the group stage at the World Cup at the same time, so you can't collude to tie as easily.
France and Denmark still figured it out.
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 30, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
Not the answer to your question, but it reminded me of another unique situation: In week 17 of the 2018 season, the Colts & Titans faced each other on SNF. Both entered at 9-6, and the winner would earn the 6th seed in the AFC (I think the Texans had already clinched the AFC South a week or 2 earlier). However if the Colts & Titans tied and finished 9-6-1 each, then both would be eliminated and the Steelers (who did finish 9-6-1) would have snuck in as the 6th seed. Ultimately the Colts won that game and eliminated both the Titans & Steelers - imagine being a Steelers fan during that game and cheering for a tie!
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 02:06:26 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 30, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
I remember thinking about that Jets and Packers thing before the Packers' week 17 game against the Bears. It was an interesting paradox. The Bears were 8-7, and the Packers had beaten them earlier in the season. Therefore, if the Packers beat them again, they would end the season with 2 wins over above .500 teams (Saints and Titans). But if the Packers lost to the Bears, they would end with 3 such wins. So losing the game would have meant winning the "battle" with the Jets.
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
I don't know the answer to your main question, but in soccer, that's why they play the last two games in the group stage at the World Cup at the same time, so you can't collude to tie as easily.
That's one of the big complaints about the new format being implemented in 2026 as part of the change to a 48-team World Cup: There will be 16 groups of three teams each, thus making it impossible to play the last two games at the same time. I presume part of the issue is that (a) 12 groups of four teams each might be problematic in countries that don't have as many stadiums available as the US, Canada, and Mexico (the 2026 joint hosts) unless you lengthen the tournament's duration to allow for more games per venue and (b) eight groups of six teams each would require lengthening the group stage because of the need to play five games per team instead of the current three.
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 29, 2021, 11:38:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2021, 11:35:08 PM
Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining?
Their kicker hurt his hamstring.
This afternoon the local media are reporting he'll be out for at least three weeks.
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
Again, not an exact answer to your question... but last year the Rams and Cardinals would have both been in if they tied. It wasn't guaranteed, though, as it also required the Bears to lose to the Packers. That did happen, but the Cardinals lost, so the Bears got in on a tiebreaker over the Cardinals.
In that case, it was an advantage to the Cardinals to tie, but it didn't mean anything to the Rams one way or another. The Bears' loss clinched their spot even if they lost. Of course, the games were going on at the same time, so the Rams still had an incentive to win.
BTW, I saw a local reporter make another point about why Washington's punter didn't take over placekicking duties last night: As is common around the league, he's the regular holder for placekicks, and I gather the backup holder (backup QB Kyle Allen) and the punter just haven't practiced that much to the point where the coaches felt any level of confidence.
A fun thing I'm doing this week: all predictions will be loosely based on past scores from the same matchup of teams within the past few years. There's almost certainly not a correlation, but whatever.
Colts 31, Texans 13 (31-3 Colts earlier this year)
Vikings 30, Lions 23 (30-23 Vikings in 2017)
Dolphins 34, Giants 20 (36-20 Giants in 2019)
Buccaneers 41, Falcons 24 (44-27 Buccaneers in 2020)
Eagles 27, Jets 17 (24-17 Eagles in 2015)
Cardinals 16, Bears 14 (16-14 Bears in 2018)
Bengals 29, Chargers 24 (24-19 Bengals in 2015)
Rams 45, Jaguars 7 (this is not based on anything, but it gets an exception because I predicted a 45-7 final for this game before the season)
Washington 30, Raiders 17 (27-10 Washington in 2017)
Steelers 24, Ravens 14 (23-16 Steelers in 2018, 19-14 Steelers in 2020)
Seahawks 28, 49ers 17 (28-21 Seahawks earlier this year)
Chiefs 24, Broncos 20 (27-24 Chiefs in 2017, 27-23 Chiefs in 2018, 22-16 Chiefs in 2020)
Patriots 19, Bills 16 (20-13 Patriots in 2015)
All six remaining Bengals games are going to have big time playoff implications, which is not something I thought I'd be saying entering the season.
If it was any other team besides the Cowboys, the main story from last night would be how the defense picked off Taysom Hill four times. Instead, the stories are, the offense "struggled mightily" (i.e. gained 377 total yards and only had one turnover), "couldn't run the ball" (i.e. 146 rush yards), and "the refs handed them the game" (entirely based off of one bad call in the third quarter that, had the correct decision been made, it would have granted a first down in minus territory to an offense that sucked until the fourth quarter. Also conveniently ignores the missed roughing the passer on the interception Dak threw.)
By the way, the Cowboys were missing their head coach, their #2 WR, and their top RB was banged up.
Don't really care, any day that the Saints lose is a good day. Not having to listen to their fans cry about referees in the playoffs will be nice.
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
I perceived much greater crowd noise/cheering for the C'Boys than for the Saints during the game.
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
If it was any other team besides the Cowboys, the main story from last night would be how the defense picked off Taysom Hill four times. Instead, the stories are, the offense "struggled mightily" (i.e. gained 377 total yards and only had one turnover), "couldn't run the ball" (i.e. 146 rush yards), and "the refs handed them the game" (entirely based off of one bad call in the third quarter that, had the correct decision been made, it would have granted a first down in minus territory to an offense that sucked until the fourth quarter. Also conveniently ignores the missed roughing the passer on the interception Dak threw.)
By the way, the Cowboys were missing their head coach, their #2 WR, and their top RB was banged up.
Don't really care, any day that the Saints lose is a good day. Not having to listen to their fans cry about referees in the playoffs will be nice.
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
If you watched though, the Cowboys
couldn't run the ball, and when they do run it, they run it with their 2nd best RB. Take away two long runs (one my Pollard and one by CeeDee), they had 55 yards on 22 carries. A solid 2.5 yards per carry. If you can't run the ball consistently, you shouldn't make it a focus of your offensive game plan. It will come back to bite them in the playoffs.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/32772245/tampa-bay-buccaneers-wr-antonio-brown-suspended-3-games-covid-19-violation
I would've never expected him to do something like that!
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
Looked like a pretty strong Bills Mafia showing on Thanksgiving as well. But then again maybe hostile environments in general are becoming a thing of the past. I believe home teams have a losing record so far this season, which would be the first time in a while (maybe ever?) if it holds.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 03, 2021, 03:04:15 PM
I would've never expected him to do something like that!
[/s] :D
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2021, 03:06:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
Looked like a pretty strong Bills Mafia showing on Thanksgiving as well. But then again maybe hostile environments in general are becoming a thing of the past. I believe home teams have a losing record so far this season, which would be the first time in a while (maybe ever?) if it holds.
Home teams also had a losing record last year, obviously with little to no fans. I believe that away teams are winning even more often this year than they were last year though.
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 05:03:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 03, 2021, 03:06:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
Looked like a pretty strong Bills Mafia showing on Thanksgiving as well. But then again maybe hostile environments in general are becoming a thing of the past. I believe home teams have a losing record so far this season, which would be the first time in a while (maybe ever?) if it holds.
Home teams also had a losing record last year, obviously with little to no fans. I believe that away teams are winning even more often this year than they were last year though.
Sorry, was thinking historically and forgot about last year, but yes.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211205/a05a3a2e132801112279b1aebb53289d.jpg)
Quote from: thspfc on August 19, 2021, 08:01:28 PM
Rams 45, Jaguars 7 in week 13: Rams defense will destroy the Jags young offense, and the Jags defense won't stop the Rams offense
Not bad . . .
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2021, 04:48:27 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211205/a05a3a2e132801112279b1aebb53289d.jpg)
Lmmfaoooo
The BAL/PIT game should've went to overtime. That was not a good decision by John Harbaugh.
Seahawks survived.
And the Giants is terrible yet again.
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2021, 07:43:04 PM
The BAL/PIT game should've went to overtime. That was not a good decision by John Harbaugh.
Disagree. I'd rather control my own Fate, + or -, than let a Coin Toss have input on the W or L
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2021, 07:52:36 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2021, 07:43:04 PM
The BAL/PIT game should've went to overtime. That was not a good decision by John Harbaugh.
Disagree. I'd rather control my own Fate, + or -, than let a Coin Toss have input on the W or L
Yeah, I'm in the "go for two" camp. Don't let a coin toss decide anything. Not the best play call though.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 05, 2021, 08:00:18 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2021, 07:52:36 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2021, 07:43:04 PM
The BAL/PIT game should've went to overtime. That was not a good decision by John Harbaugh.
Disagree. I'd rather control my own Fate, + or -, than let a Coin Toss have input on the W or L
Yeah, I'm in the "go for two" camp. Don't let a coin toss decide anything. Not the best play call though.
I thought the play call/design was good - the problem was the execution. Andrews was all alone to waltz in, but the throw was slightly off-target and Andrews, still having a chance, just couldn't come up with it.
I found it slightly humorous hearing Romo say "awww, wish the Ravens would go for 2, but they'll just kick the extra point" immediately after the cameras showed Harbaugh holding up 2 fingers. He was beside himself as soon as Nantz corrected him :-D
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2021, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2021, 04:48:27 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211205/a05a3a2e132801112279b1aebb53289d.jpg)
Lmmfaoooo
you know washington has had a decent season
The ravens lost their starting cornerbacks during the game and the coach didn't want the defense on the field again that game.
I'm just still on the fence about the whole thing. The Ravens have been struggling in the Red Zone as of late and they have Justin Tucker just in case. Even if they let it go into overtime, just try to hold Ben off in case the coin flip goes south and maybe they could get in FG range. That throw was indeed off and something like that is what I was thinking about when they went for it.
Quote from: Lukeisroads on December 05, 2021, 08:16:19 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2021, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2021, 04:48:27 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211205/a05a3a2e132801112279b1aebb53289d.jpg)
Lmmfaoooo
you know washington has had a decent season
Who said they didn't? They're at least doing better than the Giants. I just thought the pic was hilarious.
You guys aren't talking about the Lions not going winless? Between that and Michigan winning the Big Ten championship it basically was my ideal football weekend.
I sorta had a feeling the Vikings weren't going to pull two wins out of the fire against the Lions, nor were the Lions going to lose another game in disastrous fashion. So if you told me it was close, I would have guessed the Lions won. I feel like 1-15-1 is the perfect Lions record. The win didn't even cost them draft position since everyone else has at least two wins.
As for the Ravens going for two, I view it as a gutsy call, but not necessarily the wrong call especially if you don't think your defense can get off the field. It basically means the game hinges on that single play instead of being decided by multiple plays, so it definitely shows confidence in your offense as well. I don't have a big problem with it though. Obviously it's one of those things where no one is questioning it if it works, and everyone is questioning it if it doesn't work. So there's certainly less risk of criticism by kicking the PAT even if you end up losing in OT.
Huh. Everyone told me that the Rams are falling apart and might not even make the playoffs (yes, I've heard/seen multiple people say that). Weird that they're 8-4, have a top 10 quarterback, a top 5 coach, a top 5 group of skill players, a solid offensive line, and a defense that is malleable at its worst but dominant at its best.
News flash: good teams can have bad stretches.
Ravens/Steelers was one of those games that made so little sense, yet also made so much sense. The Steelers had given up an average of nearly 200 rush yards in their previous three games. Facing the Ravens' offense, it should have been an obvious loss. But Tomlin clearly outcoached Harbaugh, and the Steelers have more playmakers on offense and defense than the Ravens.
It's time to face the unthinkable reality that Tom Brady is going to win the MVP award at 44 years old. He's leading the league in pass completions, attempts, yards, and touchdowns. We need to start really appreciating this guy's career because it will never be replicated in any sport ever. This is far, far beyond anything Michael Jordan accomplished during his time in the NBA.
Today was also Jared Goff's first win with a coach other than Sean McVay, which is pretty unbelievable.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2021, 10:49:50 PM
Today was also Jared Goff's first win with a coach other than Sean McVay, which is pretty unbelievable.
Why? Jared Goff isn't all that good and might not last as a starter in the NFL much longer. Whatever happened to him after the 2018 season who knows but he's regressed heavily. He dragged the Rams down with him the last two seasons.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2021, 10:43:48 PM
I feel like 1-15-1 is the perfect Lions record. The win didn't even cost them draft position since everyone else has at least two wins.
But if they're not careful, they're now within a half-game of losing the #1 overall 2022 draft pick to the Jaguars and/or Texans.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2021, 10:46:39 PM
Huh. Everyone told me that the Rams are falling apart and might not even make the playoffs (yes, I've heard/seen multiple people say that). Weird that they're 8-4, have a top 10 quarterback, a top 5 coach, a top 5 group of skill players, a solid offensive line, and a defense that is malleable at its worst but dominant at its best.
News flash: good teams can have bad stretches.
Ravens/Steelers was one of those games that made so little sense, yet also made so much sense. The Steelers had given up an average of nearly 200 rush yards in their previous three games. Facing the Ravens' offense, it should have been an obvious loss. But Tomlin clearly outcoached Harbaugh, and the Steelers have more playmakers on offense and defense than the Ravens.
It's time to face the unthinkable reality that Tom Brady is going to win the MVP award at 44 years old. He's leading the league in pass completions, attempts, yards, and touchdowns. We need to start really appreciating this guy's career because it will never be replicated in any sport ever. This is far, far beyond anything Michael Jordan accomplished during his time in the NBA.
Jordan never cheated.
Personally, I was surprised that the Lions even won yesterday, seeing that the Lions lost all except one game where they tied.
Quote from: CoolAngrybirdsrio4 on December 06, 2021, 02:14:52 AM
Personally, I was surprised that the Lions even won yesterday, seeing that the Lions lost all except one game where they tied.
I think this is the most steaming hot take in this thread (/s)
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2021, 11:04:30 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2021, 10:49:50 PM
Today was also Jared Goff's first win with a coach other than Sean McVay, which is pretty unbelievable.
Why? Jared Goff isn't all that good and might not last as a starter in the NFL much longer. Whatever happened to him after the 2018 season who knows but he's regressed heavily. He dragged the Rams down with him the last two seasons.
He's had
four head coaches. I know that situation matters, but to be the #1 overall pick and be 0-17-1 (now 1-17-1) under coaches not named Sean McVay is pretty crazy.
And it's not like he's a downright terrible player. He's been bad at times, especially this season, but he has a lot more playoff experience (6 appearances, 3 wins) than Matthew Stafford (3 appearances, 0 wins), which is something that isn't talked about enough. He also helped the Rams to a Wild Card victory with an injured thumb last season, which I certainly wouldn't call dragging them down.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2021, 10:46:39 PM
Huh. Everyone told me that the Rams are falling apart and might not even make the playoffs (yes, I've heard/seen multiple people say that). Weird that they're 8-4, have a top 10 quarterback, a top 5 coach, a top 5 group of skill players, a solid offensive line, and a defense that is malleable at its worst but dominant at its best.
News flash: good teams can have bad stretches.
The Rams are a very good team, but they have to beat the Cardinals next week or the division race is basically over. And do you really trust Matthew Stafford (who, as mentioned, has zero career playoff wins) to win three straight
road playoff games (including most likely one in Lambeau) to get to the Super Bowl? Of course the Rams are going to make the playoffs, but to go "all-in" with a QB lacking playoff experience and not win your own division is basically setting yourself up for disappointment.
Jared Goff wasn't a terrible player but he's a borderline starter now. Compare his statistics last year to what Matt Stafford is doing now with the Rams.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2021, 11:04:30 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2021, 10:49:50 PM
Today was also Jared Goff's first win with a coach other than Sean McVay, which is pretty unbelievable.
Why? Jared Goff isn't all that good and might not last as a starter in the NFL much longer. Whatever happened to him after the 2018 season who knows but he's regressed heavily. He dragged the Rams down with him the last two seasons.
FWIW, here's my 2 theories on what happened with Goff as it relates to the 2 points I bolded:
-It all started in week 14 of the 2018 season, Rams @ Bears on SNF (a game where the only offensive TD was scored by an offensive lineman): Vic Fangio, then-DC of the Bears, crafted a gameplan of first stonewalling the run (Todd Gurley at the time, IIRC) in order to force Goff to carry the offense, then relentlessly harassed Goff with the pass-rush once the Rams were forced to abandon the run - he wound up finishing with 4 INT's & 3 sacks taken (one in the endzone for a safety). He recovered in the games after that, but then fast-forward 2 months to February 2019 and the Super Bowl: Bill Belichick, as he often does, did his homework and used Fangio's blueprint to completely shutdown the Rams on the biggest stage and put the recipe out there for everyone to see.
-I recall reading this somewhere once but can't remember where & when I found it: Supposedly McVay would take advantage of a rule allowing coaches to continue speaking into the QB's headset until 0:15 on the playclock to help Goff diagnose defenses at the line pre-snap. Once DC's figured this out, they started countering by initially showing one look until the headset cut out at 0:15, and then instantly shifting to something else once McVay could no longer speak to Goff. Wouldn't surprise me if it was also Fangio & Belichick at the forefront of this.
As I've posted multiple times in this thread, I have a very love/hate relationship with my Vikings. Obviously, currently they're in the doghouse. Thankfully, they were favored by 7.5 points and all of their games are within a TD, so I bet a grand on the Lions to cover, and my Vikings didn't let me down. So... it's not all bad. $ :)$ :)$
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 09:39:55 AM
NO over DAL
JAX over LAR
Looks like a bad case of overreactionitis.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 10:17:50 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 09:39:55 AM
NO over DAL
JAX over LAR
Looks like a bad case of overreactionitis.
Not really. Dallas' defense is terrible and they'll get got sooner rather than later. The Jags I just took a random shot on since I think the Rams are overrated. Obviously missed badly. Next time the Rams play a team with a winning record, I'll pick against them again.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 10:24:02 AM
Next time the Rams play a team with a winning record, I'll pick against them again.
That's this week against the Cardinals, and as I mentioned they better win if they don't want to have to play 3 road games in January.
Meanwhile, the Texans are absolutely pathetic. I watched a couple drives yesterday and they look dreadful. The running game is completely pointless at this point, and costly penalties and turnovers take away any positive gains the offense gets. I really wanted Tyrod Taylor to blossom into a franchise quarterback, but it doesn't look like that's the case. At least the defense can play somewhat decently at times.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 10:24:02 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 10:17:50 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on November 30, 2021, 09:39:55 AM
NO over DAL
JAX over LAR
Looks like a bad case of overreactionitis.
Not really. Dallas' defense is terrible and they'll get got sooner rather than later. The Jags I just took a random shot on since I think the Rams are overrated. Obviously missed badly. Next time the Rams play a team with a winning record, I'll pick against them again.
Dallas will finish the regular season no worse than 11-6. That will mean a date with the Rams or Cardinals in the wild card round, which they will probably lose. This has seemed possible for a while now, and in the last few weeks it's started to look likely.
With that being said, Dallas can beat anyone. When healthy and when running the ball well, their offense is the best in the league, and we saw that in the Bucs, Chargers, Eagles, Panthers, Giants, Patriots, and Falcons games. Against the Raiders Dak threw for 375 yards and 2 TDs with no turnovers - without Cooper and Lamb.
The defense has been up and down, and is very reliant on turnovers. But they're forcing a lot of them. They lead the league in interceptions with 19. Keep in mind that the defensive front has been banged up recently. The Raiders game was really, really bad, one of the worst defensive performances by any team this season, but they rebounded nicely against the Saints with four interceptions.
I know that every team in the league is banged up right now. But, if the Cowboys can get and stay healthy, can run the ball the way they did early on, and can keep intercepting passes, they have as much of a shot as anyone to win the Super Bowl. But those are all big ifs.
It's at least good that people are doubling down on the Rams being a disaster instead of doing the usual disownment of previous takes.
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
In order:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams
5. Cardinals
6. Patriots
7. Cowboys
Bills are way too inconsistent, they won't go three playoff games without laying an egg. Colts will make the playoffs and might well win in the wild card, but they haven't beaten enough of the playoff teams they've faced.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 12:51:31 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
In order:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams
5. Cardinals
6. Patriots
7. Cowboys
Bills are way too inconsistent, they won't go three playoff games without laying an egg. Colts will make the playoffs and might well win in the wild card, but they haven't beaten enough of the playoff teams they've faced.
I almost left Buffalo off the list for the same reasons you note, but if you leave them off for consistency, in my opinion you have to leave off the Cowboys too whose defense is worse. I still think McDermott is a much better coach than McCarthy and can get them evened out.
Indy hasn't lost to a bad team. Their losses are Seattle (Week 1 when they were fully healthy), Rams, Titans, Ravens, and Bucs. Two of those losses were in overtime and two others were within 7 points. Best running game, decent passing game, and good defense will be a tough out for anyone.
I posted this upthread, but the Rams have beaten exactly
one now two teams with a winning record. And none of their losses were within 7 points. I just don't see it with them.
For the record, FanDuel has the odds for Super Bowl victory in the following order:
Tampa Bay
Kansas City
Arizona
Green Bay
Buffalo
New England
Rams
Baltimore
Dallas
Chargers
Tennessee
Cinci
Indy
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 01:02:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 12:51:31 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
In order:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams
5. Cardinals
6. Patriots
7. Cowboys
Bills are way too inconsistent, they won't go three playoff games without laying an egg. Colts will make the playoffs and might well win in the wild card, but they haven't beaten enough of the playoff teams they've faced.
I almost left Buffalo off the list for the same reasons you note, but if you leave them off for consistency, in my opinion you have to leave off the Cowboys too whose defense is worse. I still think McDermott is a much better coach than McCarthy and can get them evened out.
Dallas hasn't lost to the Jags or anyone nearly as bad as them. If you rank the ugliness of the Cowboys and Bills losses, three of the worst four are Bills losses.
We'll agree to disagree. I still say the Bills make it farther in the playoffs than Dallas will.
Go Pats beat the Bills
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 03:35:00 PM
Dallas hasn't lost to the Jags or anyone nearly as bad as them. If you rank the ugliness of the Cowboys and Bills losses, three of the worst four are Bills losses.
Aaargh I was determined not to comment on the Bills until after tonight but you got me with this one! :-D
I disagree. The top three are pretty obvious, but I think Cowboys-Chiefs was uglier than Bills-Steelers. The Steelers are a defense-first team and the Bills held the Steelers offense to 16 points. Bills probably win or at least go to OT if not for a blocked punt returned for a touchdown. You can argue that the Bills are inconsistent, but that's entirely based on the Jags and Colts games. One was the other Josh Allen's statement game (made possible due to OL injuries), and the other was a classic "everything that can go wrong will" game, including two missed field goals and a head-scratching kickoff return fumble that gifted the Colts 7 points.
In short, the Bills have two really ugly losses, but they're also three plays away from 10-1.
The weather for tonight's game looks aaammmaaazzziiinggg.
https://twitter.com/PFF/status/1467983299092037636
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2021, 04:56:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 03:35:00 PM
Dallas hasn't lost to the Jags or anyone nearly as bad as them. If you rank the ugliness of the Cowboys and Bills losses, three of the worst four are Bills losses.
QuoteI disagree. The top three are pretty obvious, but I think Cowboys-Chiefs was uglier than Bills-Steelers. The Steelers are a defense-first team and the Bills held the Steelers offense to 16 points. Bills probably win or at least go to OT if not for a blocked punt returned for a touchdown.
The Chiefs as of late have been a heavily defense-first team, and the Cowboys held the Chiefs offense, which is better than the Steelers offense, to 19 points. And believe it or not, the Chiefs defense as of late has been way better than the Steelers defense. The Chiefs defense right now is even better than the Steelers defense was early in the season.
I don't entertain the "if things were different, then they would be different" argument. The Steelers ran past the Bills blockers and stuffed the punt. And frankly, that mishap plus the one in the Colts game that you describe
contribute to, not detract from, my argument that the Bills are inconsistent; they're prone to lapses on special teams.
QuoteYou can argue that the Bills are inconsistent, but that's entirely based on the Jags and Colts games. One was the other Josh Allen's statement game (made possible due to OL injuries), and the other was a classic "everything that can go wrong will" game, including two missed field goals and a head-scratching kickoff return fumble that gifted the Colts 7 points.
If things were different, then they would be different. If the Jaguars didn't beat the Bills, then the Bills wouldn't have lost to the Jaguars. If the Bills kicker didn't miss two field goals, the Bills would have had 6 more points. If the Colts didn't return a fumble on a kickoff for a touchdown, they would have had 7 fewer points.
Almost as if having a good kicker and a special teams unit that doesn't make mistakes is part of a good football team!
At least there won't be a winless team this year, as the Lions finally won their first game. Not only that, they dedicated it to the victims of the Oxford shooting, which was a very nice gesture.
Quote from: Henry on December 06, 2021, 08:15:21 PM
At least there won't be a winless team this year, as the Lions finally won their first game. Not only that, they dedicated it to the victims of the Oxford shooting, which was a very nice gesture.
In case I sounded dismissive with my earlier take, I agree with this. That was a really impressive comeback win by the Lions and easily the best moment of the week, if not the season. Almost teared up a little re-watching.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 05:42:08 PM
The weather for tonight's game looks aaammmaaazzziiinggg.
Currently 36 degrees and very windy with clearing skies here in WNY. It rained almost all day, but no more precipitation in the forecast.
Disgusting performance by the Bills. New England basically ran the exact same play 30 times in a row on offense, and it worked almost every time. Mac Jones threw 3 passes. For 19 yards. Buffalo's offense wasn't much better. The Patriots could've sent all 11 players on a blitz on that last 4th down, and the Bills still might not have scored. They've laid 3 eggs in their last 5 games. Tell me with a straight face that that team has a shot at the Super Bowl.
I'm looking forward to hearing about what would have happened if things were different.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 11:19:10 PM
Disgusting performance by the Bills. New England basically ran the exact same play 30 times in a row on offense, and it worked almost every time.
Hey, that's cheating!
I would have rooted for no pass plays at all, to see which web devs didn't test for division by zero in their QB stats code.
Quote from: kurumi on December 07, 2021, 01:27:08 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 11:19:10 PM
Disgusting performance by the Bills. New England basically ran the exact same play 30 times in a row on offense, and it worked almost every time.
Hey, that's cheating!
I would have rooted for no pass plays at all, to see which web devs didn't test for division by zero in their QB stats code.
QB rating: INF
Coming off an excellent week 13, I'm prepared for a letdown.
Saints 24, Jets 9
Seahawks 27, Texans 20
Chiefs 26, Raiders 10
Ravens 35, Browns 19
Cowboys 31, Washington 27
Titans 28, Jaguars 23
Giants 23, Chargers 20
Broncos 22, Lions 20
49ers 33, Bengals 20
Buccaneers 38, Bills 24
Packers 42, Bears 17
Cardinals 30, Rams 29
The last four weeks, I've been 7, 6, 7, and 7 total points off on Jets games, which is an outstanding run. Hopefully it continues this week against the Saints.
Nothing like a date with the Browns to get the Ravens offense back on track.
Giants/Chargers is a battle of two of the weirdest teams in the league. You would think that the Giants possibly starting a quarterback from the street dramatically increases the Chargers' chances of winning, but the Chargers don't follow the usual rules.
Take what the Patriots did to the Bills last week, add the MVP-led #1 passing offense, add even more dominance over the Bills at the line of scrimmage, add good weather, and you get the Bills' fourth highly embarrassing loss in six games. It won't be as close as my 38-24 prediction indicates, Buffalo will get a couple late touchdowns as the Bucs' undermanned secondary wears down.
I would not be surprised if the Rams won, but I give them a slightly less than 50% chance.
Quote from: thspfc on December 09, 2021, 12:45:34 PM
Coming off an excellent week 13, I'm prepared for a letdown.
Saints 24, Jets 9
Seahawks 27, Texans 20
Chiefs 26, Raiders 10
Ravens 35, Browns 19
Cowboys 31, Washington 27
Titans 28, Jaguars 23
Giants 23, Chargers 20
Broncos 22, Lions 20
49ers 33, Bengals 20
Buccaneers 38, Bills 24
Packers 42, Bears 17
Cardinals 30, Rams 29
The last four weeks, I've been 7, 6, 7, and 7 total points off on Jets games, which is an outstanding run. Hopefully it continues this week against the Saints.
Nothing like a date with the Browns to get the Ravens offense back on track.
Giants/Chargers is a battle of two of the weirdest teams in the league. You would think that the Giants possibly starting a quarterback from the street dramatically increases the Chargers' chances of winning, but the Chargers don't follow the usual rules.
Take what the Patriots did to the Bills last week, add the MVP-led #1 passing offense, add even more dominance over the Bills at the line of scrimmage, add good weather, and you get the Bills' fourth highly embarrassing loss in six games. It won't be as close as my 38-24 prediction indicates, Buffalo will get a couple late touchdowns as the Bucs' undermanned secondary wears down.
I would not be surprised if the Rams won, but I give them a slightly less than 50% chance.
I'll take CLE over BAL, LAC over NYG, WAS over DAL, and CIN over SF. Since you didn't pick them, I'll also take MIN over PIT and CAR over ATL.
There are like 4-5 Vikings wins this season where I have sat there and go "what the actual fuck" and feel like a loss. Lions I, Panthers, Steelers were three of them.
That was a top 3 worst fourth quarter collapse that I've ever seen. Vikings just forgot how to play football in every aspect of the game. However, I disagree with the narrative that the win should "feel like a loss" . The fourth quarter will be all that anyone remembers, but let's not totally forget about how dominant the Vikings were in the first 2.5. And the Steelers, while not great, are a lot better than the Lions.
Joe Burrow leads the league in interceptions thrown. I just heard that this morning, and I was astonished that I hadn't heard about it before. He's also only 17th in pass attempts. This season there's been a ton of chatter about Mahomes throwing interceptions. He's thrown 12, on 478 passes, the second most in the league. Yet when Burrow throws picks, crickets.
Makes you think.
Get a load of this angered and motivated Washington team, huh? How dare McCarthy speak confidently! Those silly words are going to make them start trying, because they certainly didn't already need to play well in order to feed their families.
Quote from: thspfc on December 12, 2021, 01:54:09 PM
Get a load of this angered and motivated Washington team, huh? How dare McCarthy speak confidently! Those silly words are going to make them start trying, because they certainly didn't already need to play well in order to feed their families.
How about the Cowboys bringing in their own benches?
Quote from: Big John on December 12, 2021, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 12, 2021, 01:54:09 PM
Get a load of this angered and motivated Washington team, huh? How dare McCarthy speak confidently! Those silly words are going to make them start trying, because they certainly didn't already need to play well in order to feed their families.
How about the Cowboys bringing in their own benches?
Hey, it worked!
Quote from: Big John on December 12, 2021, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 12, 2021, 01:54:09 PM
Get a load of this angered and motivated Washington team, huh? How dare McCarthy speak confidently! Those silly words are going to make them start trying, because they certainly didn't already need to play well in order to feed their families.
How about the Cowboys bringing in their own benches?
You know the NFL apparently works differently than most businesses. Broken benches on the visitor side and good ones on the home side. We don't see a Motel-6 and a Hilton in the same building...
Solid showing by the Cowboys defense. Their top pass rushers are healthy now, and they got the best of Washington's line. Offense was suspect, but at least Zuerlein made his field goals. And I'm not as concerned about the offense as I am about the defense down the stretch. The win should pretty much lock up the NFC East, but unless they can beat Arizona, the #4 seed is likely.
Chargers decided to be normal for once.
I don't understand why the Jags haven't fired Urban yet.
My run of oddly impressive Jets predictions continues. I legitimately don't think I've watched a single Jets game in my life. Yet I watch the Cowboys all the time, and I'm still consistently wrong.
Wow, a lot to get to in this thread, including some shots fired in my direction that I might... or might not... come back and address at some point. But for now, a fork update:
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 11:29:07 AM
Below I'm starting a list of teams that are, to use an Around the NFL term, "forked" (out of the playoff picture). The idea is to be aggressive and fork a team early, well before they're mathematically eliminated, and to get all 18 forks correct before the final week of the season.
Existing list of forked teams (bold indicates team has been eliminated from postseason contention):
AFC:
Jaguars, Jets, Texans, Dolphins
NFC:
Lions, Bears, Giants, Seahawks
Added 12/13/2021:
AFC: Steelers, Raiders
The race for the NFC #7 is weird as hell. 5 teams are 6-7 tied for that spot with Washington currently holding it. Washington and Philly still haven't played either of their games against each other. The two NFCS teams will beat on each other, plus the Bucs and Bills will probably get some licks in on those three. Vikings have Bears twice, Rams, Packers at Lambeau. I know the Vikings will screw it up but...they seem to have the schedule least full of other teams going for the same thing.
Including the #7 seed in the playoffs does make the playoff race a lot more interesting. It's shaping up similar to last year where a mediocre to bad team will probably make it in the NFC, but a decent team or two might still get left out in the AFC.
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2021, 05:33:37 PM
Including the #7 seed in the playoffs does make the playoff race a lot more interesting. It's shaping up similar to last year where a mediocre to bad team will probably make it in the NFC, but a decent team or two might still get left out in the AFC.
I know money is all they care about, but I saw zero need for additional playoff teams.
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2021, 04:09:13 PM
Wow, a lot to get to in this thread, including some shots fired in my direction that I might... or might not... come back and address at some point. But for now, a fork update:
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2021, 11:29:07 AM
Below I'm starting a list of teams that are, to use an Around the NFL term, "forked" (out of the playoff picture). The idea is to be aggressive and fork a team early, well before they're mathematically eliminated, and to get all 18 forks correct before the final week of the season.
Existing list of forked teams (bold indicates team has been eliminated from postseason contention):
AFC: Jaguars, Jets, Texans, Dolphins
NFC: Lions, Bears, Giants, Seahawks
Added 12/13/2021:
AFC: Steelers, Raiders
How about my Carolina Panthers?
Maybe also the others in the NFC South besides the Bucs, though I'm not yet ready to write off the Saints.
Quote from: oscar on December 13, 2021, 08:39:50 PM
How about my Carolina Panthers?
I decided not to jinx it given their opponent next week. :D
Falcons and Saints are on the verge too, but decided to give them one more week as they currently have the same record as the #7 seed!
As a Washington fan, but lifelong resident of the Baltimore metro and forced observer of the Ravens, I've been treated to much discourse from the Ravens' fanbase this year.
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2021, 05:33:37 PM
Including the #7 seed in the playoffs does make the playoff race a lot more interesting. It's shaping up similar to last year where a mediocre to bad team will probably make it in the NFC, but a decent team or two might still get left out in the AFC.
The playoff race is equally interesting, it's just dumbed down one more peg.
Thought the Rams were going to lose a close one, but as I said, not as surprised as most that they won. Stat Padford went 23/30 for 287 yds, 3 touchdowns, and no turnovers in a great garbage time performance, locker-room-chemistry-destroyer OBJ caught a touchdown, some scrub named Cooper Kupp had 13 catches, and a couple other scrubs named Donald and Miller had a field day on the Cardinals' offensive line.
Quote from: Alps on December 13, 2021, 10:52:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 13, 2021, 05:33:37 PM
Including the #7 seed in the playoffs does make the playoff race a lot more interesting. It's shaping up similar to last year where a mediocre to bad team will probably make it in the NFC, but a decent team or two might still get left out in the AFC.
The playoff race is equally interesting, it's just dumbed down one more peg.
More interesting in the sense that more teams are in the mix later in the season. Under the old format there would be basically zero intrigue in the NFC right now: division leaders plus Rams and 49ers and there's your field.
Man, four successful onside kicks this past week. Haven't seen anything close to that since they changed the rules about lining up for an onside.
Quote from: thspfc on December 10, 2021, 07:59:26 AM
Joe Burrow leads the league in interceptions thrown. I just heard that this morning, and I was astonished that I hadn't heard about it before. He's also only 17th in pass attempts. This season there's been a ton of chatter about Mahomes throwing interceptions. He's thrown 12, on 478 passes, the second most in the league. Yet when Burrow throws picks, crickets.
Makes you think.
And then he was the highest rated passer this past weekend. The NFL is weird this year.
Quote from: webny99 on November 28, 2021, 10:06:16 PM
-Falcons are probably the worst 5-6 team in NFL history. They're sort of like the anti-Bills... the Bills either win blowouts or lose close games, while the Falcons either win close games or lose blowouts. The Falcons have been boat-raced 4 times this season (Weeks 1, 2, 10, and 11), but their remaining games have all been one-score games and they're 5-2 in those games. This is not a good team, but it's also a franchise known for choking, so if they can learn to consistently close out games and maybe even get to 8 or 9 wins with a first-year head coach, I think you have to consider it a successful season.
Wow, an article foretold by me several weeks ago. Another two-score loss, another one-score win, and voila!
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-the-falcons-the-best-bad-team-ever/
Aaaaaaaaaand Urban Meyer is finally gone about 6 weeks too late.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 16, 2021, 01:38:06 AM
Aaaaaaaaaand Urban Meyer is finally gone about 6 weeks too late.
More like 10 weeks if you think the bar incident after Week 4 was the point of no return.
I can't believe the Bills lost to that team. That has to be the low point of a season that has had many. Had Urban lasted the entire season, I would have said with zero hesitation that the wind game loss to the Patriots was the low point. But now that we know Urban is done after 13 games, and one of his only two wins, his only home win, and only win on US soil, was over the Bills? I mean, that takes the cake. You just can't make this stuff up. :crazy:
Ultimately though, aside from all the drama and off-the-field nonsense, I think the Jaguars offense is a much bigger issue than their defense. They haven't scored more than 17 points since their bye, and the offense didn't play well against the Bills either. My one silver lining is that a 9-6 final is one of the lowest scoring games in recent memory, so it's likely to be remembered more as the Josh Allen on Josh Allen game in which both sides played really good defense more so than Urban's only career home win... at least I hope so.
Disaster. Worst coaching tenure I've ever seen. Urban forgot he was dealing with grown men who are getting paid millions, and he tried to treat them the same way he treated his 19 year olds at Ohio State.
I have a general theory about coaches: relaxed personality + winning = players really like you and you can keep your job for a while even after things go south. "Tough guy" personality + winning = might not be the players' best friend, but as long as the team is winning, it works. Relaxed personality + losing = gone after two years. "Tough guy" personality + losing = one and done, or should have been one and done (ahem, Joe Judge, Matt Patricia).
Good thing that Urban and his bullying and drama are out of the league. Unfortunately now he's do the same thing at some university knowing that it will go completely unpunished.
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:20:23 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 16, 2021, 01:38:06 AM
Aaaaaaaaaand Urban Meyer is finally gone about 6 weeks too late.
More like 10 weeks if you think the bar incident after Week 4 was the point of no return.
I can't believe the Bills lost to that team. That has to be the low point of a season that has had many. Had Urban lasted the entire season, I would have said with zero hesitation that the wind game loss to the Patriots was the low point. But now that we know Urban is done after 13 games, and one of his only two wins, his only home win, and only win on US soil, was over the Bills? I mean, that takes the cake. You just can't make this stuff up. :crazy:
Ultimately though, aside from all the drama and off-the-field nonsense, I think the Jaguars offense is a much bigger issue than their defense. They haven't scored more than 17 points since their bye, and the offense didn't play well against the Bills either. My one silver lining is that a 9-6 final is one of the lowest scoring games in recent memory, so it's likely to be remembered more as the Josh Allen on Josh Allen game in which both sides played really good defense more so than Urban's only career home win... at least I hope so.
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 08:24:54 AM
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
My guess is it hasn't happened yet. The closer you get to the playoffs, the more fun a big upset is.
2019, for example, had to be Fins over Pats in Week 17.
Last year is tougher. Bengals over Steelers with Brandon Allen, maybe. Or Giants over Seahawks with Colt McCoy. Made funnier by the fact that because of this year's win with the Cardinals, at one point Colt McCoy was the only QB to have won a game in Seattle in both 2020 and 2021. :-D (no longer true after Russell Wilson beat the 49ers last week)
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
The gap between Baker and Case Keenum is, in my opinion, one of the smallest gaps between starting and backup quarterback for any team in the league. The only smaller ones are Fields and Dalton, Wilson and whoever the Jets backup is now, and the mess that the Panthers are in at QB.
Broncos/Bengals is my "I have no clue" game of the week.
I seem to know when the Buccaneers are going to click - my only bad prediction for them was week 10 against Washington. This week, it's going to be a massacre for the ages. They'll get at least four sacks and four interceptions en route to a reversal of what the score was the last time these two teams played in Tampa.
How come you all aren't talking more about Urban Meyer getting "kicked" out of the head coaching position with the Jaguars? Now buddy can take a night out whenever he needs it.
Urban Meyer's firing is further proof that college coaches really shouldn't be in the pros. Look at Billy Donovan who at one point coached the Thunder, but was later fired and is now trying again with the Bulls; or John Beilein, who didn't last even a full season with the Cavaliers; or Rick Pitino, who failed to restore the Celtics to their former glory a couple of decades ago.
No matter who the coach was, we all knew the Jaguars would suck this year, but Trevor Lawrence deserves better. A Joe Burrow-esque turnaround will not happen either, since the Jags don't know what the hell they're doing (though I'm not saying the Bengals do either, as their current positioning is a complete fluke).
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:20:23 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 16, 2021, 01:38:06 AM
Aaaaaaaaaand Urban Meyer is finally gone about 6 weeks too late.
More like 10 weeks if you think the bar incident after Week 4 was the point of no return.
I've seen some online speculation that the Jags owner actually delayed Meyer's firing until after all the college HC slots were filled...just to ensure Meyer couldn't land.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Thursday games make no sense. It could be 49-14 Chiefs, or it could be 49-14 Chargers. Honestly, when judging how good a team is, I tend to value Thursday games less than Sunday or Monday games.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 05:25:01 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Thursday games make no sense. It could be 49-14 Chiefs, or it could be 49-14 Chargers. Honestly, when judging how good a team is, I tend to value Thursday games less than Sunday or Monday games.
Case Keenum out now too.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 16, 2021, 05:50:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 05:25:01 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Thursday games make no sense. It could be 49-14 Chiefs, or it could be 49-14 Chargers. Honestly, when judging how good a team is, I tend to value Thursday games less than Sunday or Monday games.
Case Keenum out now too.
Well, it looks like this game is in serious jeopardy of being 2020'ed. Maybe the pandemic isn't over after all? (/insensitive joke) Anyways, I just looked up who the Browns' third stringer is. Nick Mullens. Who is 2nd all time in passing yards for a QB through their first 16 starts, trailing only Mahomes. So, the Browns have maybe the best third string QB in the league. FWIW, Mullens' first career start was against the Raiders in 2018, and he went 16/22 for 262 yards, 3 TDs, and 0 INTs in a 34-3 victory, one of just four 49ers wins that season.
At this point, I give it no better than 50/50 chance of finishing the season all the way through the Super Bowl.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Well, look at that! I was just one point off for both teams - turns out it was 34-28 Chiefs in OT, Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 16, 2021, 10:11:28 PM
At this point, I give it no better than 50/50 chance of finishing the season all the way through the Super Bowl.
*Scoffs*
Patrick Mahomes is really, really good. Chargers are too aggressive on 4th down. Chiefs offense is back to 2018-2020 form, and their defense has been top 3 in the league since the beginning of November. Don't know what more evidence there needs to be to prove that they're at least 2nd favorites for the Super Bowl after Tampa, and perhaps even above them.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on December 16, 2021, 01:50:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Browns 20, Raiders 17
Patriots 16, Colts 14
Steelers 27, Titans 17
Bills 23, Panthers 6
Washington 20, Eagles 14
Jaguars 37, Texans 14
Cowboys 30, Giants 20
Cardinals 48, Lions 10
Dolphins 34, Jets 17
Broncos 31, Bengals 13
49ers 38, Falcons 22
Rams 35, Seahawks 27
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Buccaneers 38, Saints 3
Vikings 33, Bears 28
I see you left off Chiefs vs. Chargers tonight. What is your prediction?
Mine is 33-27 Chiefs in OT. Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Well, look at that! I was just one point off for both teams - turns out it was 34-28 Chiefs in OT, Mahomes to Kelce for the winning touchdown.
Wow. I have made over 170 predictions this season. Only twice have I been closer than that in terms of the score - Bucs/Rams in week 3, and Packers/Bears in week 6. Yours was far more specific though. Well done.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 16, 2021, 10:11:28 PM
At this point, I give it no better than 50/50 chance of finishing the season all the way through the Super Bowl.
50%? I'm pessimistic and I would have put it at 99.9% a few weeks ago and maybe 99.5% now. When you factor in that it was completed last year under much worse circumstances, plus the fact that most players are vaccinated and most cases are mild, it would take a
shocking turn of events for the season not to be completed.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 11:39:09 PM
Chargers are too aggressive on 4th down.
They went from blowing games by being too conservative... to blowing games by being too aggressive. :angry:
I get that you're going to need touchdowns to beat the Chiefs, but when you already have the lead? Take the points! They had
three chances to kick FG's and came away with nothing. The third one was the worst, they almost certainly win in regulation if they kick the FG there.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 11:39:09 PM
Chiefs offense is back to 2018-2020 form, and their defense has been top 3 in the league since the beginning of November. Don't know what more evidence there needs to be to prove that they're at least 2nd favorites for the Super Bowl after Tampa, and perhaps even above them.
For the same reasons mentioned above, I felt like the Chiefs were extremely lucky to win that game. Their offense wasn't really clicking until the 4th quarter and OT, and the Chargers had endless chances to put the game away and blew it. So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites. If anything, last night proved that they are beatable when their defense has a meh performance... the Chargers just blew it on 4th downs.
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 10:57:28 AM
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Not specific to this game, but there are some very basic advantages that aren't getting exploited. I talked to a college friend of mine who is a HS coach. If they get to a 4th down and 1 (or less) the coach yells "black, black" and the entire team rushes to the line and quick snaps a QB sneak. Often times they get an offsides or too many men penalty. Most of the time they get an easy 4-5 yards against a defense that isn't set. In his years as coach, "Code Black" has only failed one out of 48 times. A couple of the smarter teams have caught on and burned timeouts, but then they take the time to re-evaluate the situation and still end up going for it most of the time.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 10:57:28 AM
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Not saying they should have kicked
all the field goals. Just one was all they would've needed to win in regulation. I agree that the execution was poor as well, but I don't know, I feel like being aggressive in going for it and then having a bad play call makes the decision even
more questionable. I think what's happening is blind confidence in "numbers and analytics" is fooling teams into thinking their chances are higher than they really are on a given play. It just seems inevitable that the more teams go for it on 4th down, the more success rates will drop.
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 11:21:25 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 10:57:28 AM
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Not saying they should have kicked all the field goals. Just one was all they would've needed to win in regulation. I agree that the execution was poor as well, but I don't know, I feel like being aggressive in going for it and then having a bad play call makes the decision even more questionable. I think what's happening is blind confidence in "numbers and analytics" is fooling teams into thinking their chances are higher than they really are on a given play. It just seems inevitable that the more teams go for it on 4th down, the more success rates will drop.
Why do you say that last statement? It's not like they're fake punting where doing it more will have other teams practicing against it more. 3rd and 1 is effectively the same play call as 4th and 1. The odds of success are trackable because there are so many data points. There is no real reason why it would become any less successful over time just because the down is different.
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 09:47:17 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 11:39:09 PM
Chargers are too aggressive on 4th down.
They went from blowing games by being too conservative... to blowing games by being too aggressive. :angry:
I get that you're going to need touchdowns to beat the Chiefs, but when you already have the lead? Take the points! They had three chances to kick FG's and came away with nothing. The third one was the worst, they almost certainly win in regulation if they kick the FG there.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 11:39:09 PM
Chiefs offense is back to 2018-2020 form, and their defense has been top 3 in the league since the beginning of November. Don't know what more evidence there needs to be to prove that they're at least 2nd favorites for the Super Bowl after Tampa, and perhaps even above them.
For the same reasons mentioned above, I felt like the Chiefs were extremely lucky to win that game. Their offense wasn't really clicking until the 4th quarter and OT, and the Chargers had endless chances to put the game away and blew it. If anything, last night proved that they are beatable when their defense has a meh performance... the Chargers just blew it on 4th downs.
They gained almost 500 yards of total offense, scored 34 points, and won. Don't care when they scored most of their points.
Brandon Staley acting like a six year old playing Madden had something to do with it, for sure, but you still have to credit the Chiefs' defense for stopping LA on fourth down all those times, and forcing the fumble on the goal line.
Quote
So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites.
Today I learned that completely discarding two full games - 1/7th of the season at this point for a team - is acceptable.
Week 1: W
33-29 vs Browns
Week 2: L 36-
35 vs Ravens
Week 3: L 30-24 vs Chargers
Week 4: W
42-30 vs Eagles
Week 5: L 38-20 vs Bills
Week 6: W
31-13 vs Washington
Week 7: L 27-3 vs Titans
Week 8: W 20-17 vs Giants
Week 9: W 13-7 vs Packers
Week 10: W
41-14 vs Raiders
Week 11: W 19-9 vs Cowboys
Week 13: W 22-9 vs Broncos
Week 14: W
48-9 vs Raiders
Week 15: W
34-28 vs Chargers; 28/34 points in regulation
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 10:57:28 AM
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 11:21:25 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 10:57:28 AM
I disagree that the Chargers should have kicked the field goals. In a multi billion dollar industry like options trading, you use small mathematical edges to make money. In this multi billion dollar industry, you want them to go against probability? Seems very -EV. What they did wrong on fourth down was execute poorly. They have a 6'6" athletic QB and never tried a QB sneak.
Not saying they should have kicked all the field goals. Just one was all they would've needed to win in regulation. I agree that the execution was poor as well, but I don't know, I feel like being aggressive in going for it and then having a bad play call makes the decision even more questionable. I think what's happening is blind confidence in "numbers and analytics" is fooling teams into thinking their chances are higher than they really are on a given play. It just seems inevitable that the more teams go for it on 4th down, the more success rates will drop.
Why do you say that last statement? It's not like they're fake punting where doing it more will have other teams practicing against it more. 3rd and 1 is effectively the same play call as 4th and 1. The odds of success are trackable because there are so many data points. There is no real reason why it would become any less successful over time just because the down is different.
Yes, there is. Many teams use the opportunity of a 3rd and 1 to take a deep shot through the air, since the defense is expecting a run or shallow underneath pass. Defenses have adjusted to this, and now get burned less frequently over the top on 3rd and short. Nobody is going to be throwing it deep on 4th and 1 because of the low likelihood of a completion. One less thing for the defense to account for.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 11:21:25 AM
... It just seems inevitable that the more teams go for it on 4th down, the more success rates will drop.
Why do you say that last statement? It's not like they're fake punting where doing it more will have other teams practicing against it more. 3rd and 1 is effectively the same play call as 4th and 1. The odds of success are trackable because there are so many data points. There is no real reason why it would become any less successful over time just because the down is different.
It could take years before we know for sure, but it sort of feels like that's what's happening. If offenses are having success doing one thing, it's only a matter of time before defenses find a way to respond. I think part of it is
because teams are treating 4th and 1 just like 3rd and 1. I don't think they should! The stakes are way higher on 4th down, so the play call and execution on both sides becomes way more important. Historically speaking, that's probably partly why the data supports going for it: teams save their best play calls for those situations. But if you're going to treat it just like a normal play, the historical odds are probably artificially inflated. In other words, as the novelty and uniqueness of going for it on 4th down wears off, its effectiveness goes down.
There's also a situational aspect where sometimes it just feels like you're playing into the defense's hands by committing to being aggressive. I can't explain it very well, but it seems like there's some sort of intangible effect of knowing they have 4 chances to stop you instead of 3.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
Quote
So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites.
Today I learned that completely discarding two full games - 1/7th of the season at this point for a team - is acceptable.
The Raiders games count in the standings, but what the Raiders do defensively doesn't work against the Chiefs and all 31 other teams know it, so those games are not predictive. My point is that outside of the Raiders games, we haven't seen the Chiefs offense
and defense both playing their best for a full game this season. They have the talent to play even better down the stretch, but I don't think they're Super Bowl favorites
right now.
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 01:26:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
Quote
So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites.
Today I learned that completely discarding two full games - 1/7th of the season at this point for a team - is acceptable.
The Raiders games count in the standings, but what the Raiders do defensively doesn't work against the Chiefs and all 31 other teams know it, so those games are not predictive. My point is that outside of the Raiders games, we haven't seen the Chiefs offense and defense both playing their best for a full game this season. They have the talent to play even better down the stretch, but I don't think they're Super Bowl favorites right now.
Them vs Tampa is a toss-up. Other than Tampa, who do you think is more likely to win it all?
The Redskins placed QB Taylor Heinicke on the covid list this morning after he tested positive. His backup, Kyle Allen, was already on the list as of Wednesday. They've signed QB Garrett Gilbert (whoever he is) off New England's practice squad, and there are reports he may actually start the game Sunday. The other QBs they have are Jordan Ta'amu, who played for St. Louis in the XFL last year, and Kyle Shurmur, who has been on the practice squad since September 13. Overall, 21 players are on the covid list, almost all of them vaccinated and several of them with no symptoms.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 02:20:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 01:26:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
Quote
So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites.
Today I learned that completely discarding two full games - 1/7th of the season at this point for a team - is acceptable.
The Raiders games count in the standings, but what the Raiders do defensively doesn't work against the Chiefs and all 31 other teams know it, so those games are not predictive. My point is that outside of the Raiders games, we haven't seen the Chiefs offense and defense both playing their best for a full game this season. They have the talent to play even better down the stretch, but I don't think they're Super Bowl favorites right now.
Them vs Tampa is a toss-up. Other than Tampa, who do you think is more likely to win it all?
I'd probably have the Packers at #2 mostly because they have a better shot at a first round bye and if they're at home, they're heavy favorites over everyone except the Bucs. I'd have the Chiefs at #3 and the Patriots at #4, but the AFC feels so wide open that I don't view those two as heavy favorites over anyone else. Titans also have a decent shot at a first round bye, so they're probably #5, and then Cardinals, Rams, Cowboys, Bills, Chargers in that order.
Put it this way: if the Chiefs have to play on Wild Card weekend, I wouldn't view them as a heavy favorite over anyone currently in playoff position.
The Bucs and Packers will both make the NFC Championship game because Brady and Rodgers are the darlings of the league and the officials do everything they can for them. Once they both make it there, it should be a fair fight.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:42:21 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 12:06:23 PM
Why do you say that last statement? It's not like they're fake punting where doing it more will have other teams practicing against it more. 3rd and 1 is effectively the same play call as 4th and 1. The odds of success are trackable because there are so many data points. There is no real reason why it would become any less successful over time just because the down is different.
Yes, there is. Many teams use the opportunity of a 3rd and 1 to take a deep shot through the air, since the defense is expecting a run or shallow underneath pass. Defenses have adjusted to this, and now get burned less frequently over the top on 3rd and short. Nobody is going to be throwing it deep on 4th and 1 because of the low likelihood of a completion. One less thing for the defense to account for.
I disagree. Like I said above, the reason to go for it is not only limited to the % of success. It's related to the % of success your opponents will have if you're unsuccessful. I've seen plenty of teams throw on 4th and 1, because who gives a shit? If you don't connect on the pass, it's the same thing as getting stuffed on a run. If they pick it off? Who gives a shit? They're probably getting worse field position than they would have had if they intentionally dropped it. I'd argue there's even MORE of a reason to throw it on 4th and 1 because of the lack of fear of interceptions.
Three games were just postponed.
Las Vegas at Cleveland moved from Saturday to Monday (5:00 PM ET so as not to conflict with the regular Monday night game).
Washington at Philadelphia and Seattle at Los Angeles (NFC) moved from Sunday to Tuesday (7:00 PM ET).
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 02:52:56 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 02:20:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2021, 01:26:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
Quote
So I'd like to see the Chiefs offense put up 30+ in regulation against someone other than the Raiders before I'm ready to crown them Super Bowl favorites.
Today I learned that completely discarding two full games - 1/7th of the season at this point for a team - is acceptable.
The Raiders games count in the standings, but what the Raiders do defensively doesn't work against the Chiefs and all 31 other teams know it, so those games are not predictive. My point is that outside of the Raiders games, we haven't seen the Chiefs offense and defense both playing their best for a full game this season. They have the talent to play even better down the stretch, but I don't think they're Super Bowl favorites right now.
Them vs Tampa is a toss-up. Other than Tampa, who do you think is more likely to win it all?
I'd probably have the Packers at #2 mostly because they have a better shot at a first round bye and if they're at home, they're heavy favorites over everyone except the Bucs. I'd have the Chiefs at #3 and the Patriots at #4, but the AFC feels so wide open that I don't view those two as heavy favorites over anyone else. Titans also have a decent shot at a first round bye, so they're probably #5, and then Cardinals, Rams, Cowboys, Bills, Chargers in that order.
Put it this way: if the Chiefs have to play on Wild Card weekend, I wouldn't view them as a heavy favorite over anyone currently in playoff position.
The Chiefs are the #1 seed in the AFC today. Packers are tied for #1 with the Bucs and Cardinals. Chiefs have won 7 in a row, while the Packers have lost 2 of their last 5.
We just had the ''home field advantage" discussion after the Cowboys/Saints game. Home field advantage is a myth. It does not exist. What DOES exist is the advantage of the first round bye. But home field does not matter.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 17, 2021, 03:14:00 PM
The Bucs and Packers will both make the NFC Championship game because Brady and Rodgers are the darlings of the league and the officials do everything they can for them. Once they both make it there, it should be a fair fight.
🤡
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
You're changing more than one thing though. I didn't say, "if the Chargers kicked the FG to go up 17-13 and then Mahomes didn't throw that interception, they would have won". If all that was changed about the game was that they kicked the field goal to go up 17-13, they would have won.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:23:23 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
You're changing more than one thing though. I didn't say, "if the Chargers kicked the FG to go up 17-13 and then Mahomes didn't throw that interception, they would have won". If all that was changed about the game was that they kicked the field goal to go up 17-13, they would have won.
How on earth is
that not changing more than one thing? You don't think play calls change when the scores change? At a bare minimum, the Chiefs' playcalling would be different on the subsequent drive because they're starting with different field position.
"If all that changed about the game was that they succeeded on going for it on fourth and scored a TD to go up 21-13, they would have..." done something, because lots of things change after that point.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 05:27:13 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:23:23 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
You're changing more than one thing though. I didn't say, "if the Chargers kicked the FG to go up 17-13 and then Mahomes didn't throw that interception, they would have won". If all that was changed about the game was that they kicked the field goal to go up 17-13, they would have won.
How on earth is that not changing more than one thing? You don't think play calls change when the scores change? At a bare minimum, the Chiefs' playcalling would be different on the subsequent drive because they're starting with different field position.
"If all that changed about the game was that they succeeded on going for it on fourth and scored a TD to go up 21-13, they would have..." done something, because lots of things change after that point.
Play calls change when the score changes. That particular play call on the interception, however, would likely not have changed.
You realize that two can play this game, right? You're arguing that the Chargers being up 17-13 rather than 14-13
at that moment could have changed the game in a way that favored the Chiefs in the end; it could also have changed the game in a way that favored the Chargers in the end.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:44:01 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 05:27:13 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:23:23 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
You're changing more than one thing though. I didn't say, "if the Chargers kicked the FG to go up 17-13 and then Mahomes didn't throw that interception, they would have won". If all that was changed about the game was that they kicked the field goal to go up 17-13, they would have won.
How on earth is that not changing more than one thing? You don't think play calls change when the scores change? At a bare minimum, the Chiefs' playcalling would be different on the subsequent drive because they're starting with different field position.
"If all that changed about the game was that they succeeded on going for it on fourth and scored a TD to go up 21-13, they would have..." done something, because lots of things change after that point.
Play calls change when the score changes. That particular play call on the interception, however, would likely not have changed.
You realize that two can play this game, right? You're arguing that the Chargers being up 17-13 rather than 14-13 at that moment could have changed the game in a way that favored the Chiefs in the end; it could also have changed the game in a way that favored the Chargers in the end.
You're proving my point for me though. What I am saying is that if analytics say to go for it, you are averaging
all of the possibilities/probabilities based on tons of empirical data. So it doesn't matter what actually happens when judging whether the decision was sound.
If you're flipping a coin and you tell me if I call it correctly, you'll give me $50, but if I'm wrong, I give you $47, I'm an idiot if I don't play that game as long as you let me. I might go on a bad streak and lose the first three, six, a hundred, etc. But eventually I
will win. Hence why casinos are profitable. You can't be results oriented when it comes to probability, otherwise that's a very exploitable strategy.
Analytics take all the available data - time remaining in the game, skill of the other team, down and distance, yard line, success rate for your average play on 4th and 1, whatever, and then spit out a number for all choices you can make -- going for it, kicking a FG, punting, etc. Whatever number is highest is the unexploitable strategy and the one that should be followed.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 05:53:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:44:01 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 05:27:13 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:23:23 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 17, 2021, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:37:44 PM
Would they have won the game if they kicked a field goal even one of those times?
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 12:39:15 PM
I'll answer that question: the answer is yes. They were clearly struggling to convert on 4th down. What they were doing was not working. Why did they keep doing it?
How can you be so sure? The rest of the game plays out differently when the score is different. I'll give you one very clear example. At 12:24 in the 4th quarter, the Chargers went for it on 4th and 1 and got it when Kelley ran for 7 yards. A couple of plays later, Kelley fumbled when he tried to Marcus Allen a TD from the 1 from the KC11. Right after that though, because the Chiefs were pinned back and the Chargers could bring pressure, Mahomes threw the pick where Nwosu made a huge play. The Chargers ended up scoring a TD on an Ekeler run on the first play after getting the ball back.
Had the Chargers kicked the 28 yard FG instead of going for it in the first place, they would have been winning by 4, not 8. Scoring less points seems bad. The REASON that analytics tells you to go for it more often on short yardage deep in your opponents' territory is not so much that it's guaranteed to be good for you; it's also that it's less bad if you don't succeed. That's the part the talking heads on TV that claim to know even the slightest bit about the topic seem to forget every time.
You're changing more than one thing though. I didn't say, "if the Chargers kicked the FG to go up 17-13 and then Mahomes didn't throw that interception, they would have won". If all that was changed about the game was that they kicked the field goal to go up 17-13, they would have won.
How on earth is that not changing more than one thing? You don't think play calls change when the scores change? At a bare minimum, the Chiefs' playcalling would be different on the subsequent drive because they're starting with different field position.
"If all that changed about the game was that they succeeded on going for it on fourth and scored a TD to go up 21-13, they would have..." done something, because lots of things change after that point.
Play calls change when the score changes. That particular play call on the interception, however, would likely not have changed.
You realize that two can play this game, right? You're arguing that the Chargers being up 17-13 rather than 14-13 at that moment could have changed the game in a way that favored the Chiefs in the end; it could also have changed the game in a way that favored the Chargers in the end.
You're proving my point for me though. What I am saying is that if analytics say to go for it, you are averaging all of the possibilities/probabilities based on tons of empirical data. So it doesn't matter what actually happens when judging whether the decision was sound.
If you're flipping a coin and you tell me if I call it correctly, you'll give me $50, but if I'm wrong, I give you $47, I'm an idiot if I don't play that game as long as you let me. I might go on a bad streak and lose the first three, six, a hundred, etc. But eventually I will win. Hence why casinos are profitable. You can't be results oriented when it comes to probability, otherwise that's a very exploitable strategy.
Analytics take all the available data - time remaining in the game, skill of the other team, down and distance, yard line, success rate for your average play on 4th and 1, whatever, and then spit out a number for all choices you can make -- going for it, kicking a FG, punting, etc. Whatever number is highest is the unexploitable strategy and the one that should be followed.
The coin flip example is apples to oranges because all coins are the same. All NFL games are not the same.
No, but math is math. Doesn't matter if you're counting apples or counting oranges.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FG02D1SXsAsSADv.png)
I can see your smirk behind your screen at the "math is math" line.
They had failed to convert on 4th and short inside field goal range twice already. I don't have an issue with the first two 4th down attempts; I do have an issue with the third.
I think you're choosing to ignore my reasoning: in this particular game, going for it on 4th down was not working. When your gameplan isn't working, you make adjustments. That helps you win. Had the Chargers chosen to kick the field goal that third time, they most likely would have won the game.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 05:16:14 PM
We just had the ''home field advantage" discussion after the Cowboys/Saints game. Home field advantage is a myth. It does not exist. What DOES exist is the advantage of the first round bye. But home field does not matter.
It means less than it used to in general, but I think Lambeau is the one stadium out of 30 where it definitely still exists.
(edited to fix error)
^^ There are 30 NFL stadiums, NY and LA share stadiums.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 10:14:57 PM
I can see your smirk behind your screen at the "math is math" line.
They had failed to convert on 4th and short inside field goal range twice already. I don't have an issue with the first two 4th down attempts; I do have an issue with the third.
I think you're choosing to ignore my reasoning: in this particular game, going for it on 4th down was not working. When your gameplan isn't working, you make adjustments. That helps you win. Had the Chargers chosen to kick the field goal that third time, they most likely would have won the game.
I'm not ignoring your reasoning. I fully admit they didn't do very well on 4th down in that game. I just believe that the mistake made my the coaching staff wasn't the decision to go for it; it was maybe the plays that they called. As per the quote I posted above, they regressed to the mean in the game, but it doesn't mean that it was fundamentally the wrong decision to go for it. To win, you cannot be results oriented; if your process is good, you will eventually succeed.
If the first five times you run the ball, you gain no yardage despite you having one of the best RBs in the game (not relating this specifically to this game), you don't stop running the ball just 'cuz it didn't work. If Steph Curry misses the first five 3's he takes, he doesn't stop shooting them. If Tiger Woods hit his first four drives into the rough, he doesn't stop using his driver. There's enough track record for all of those scenarios to understand that is incredibly unlikely for the unwanted result to continue.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 18, 2021, 12:06:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2021, 10:14:57 PM
I can see your smirk behind your screen at the "math is math" line.
They had failed to convert on 4th and short inside field goal range twice already. I don't have an issue with the first two 4th down attempts; I do have an issue with the third.
I think you're choosing to ignore my reasoning: in this particular game, going for it on 4th down was not working. When your gameplan isn't working, you make adjustments. That helps you win. Had the Chargers chosen to kick the field goal that third time, they most likely would have won the game.
I'm not ignoring your reasoning. I fully admit they didn't do very well on 4th down in that game. I just believe that the mistake made my the coaching staff wasn't the decision to go for it; it was maybe the plays that they called. As per the quote I posted above, they regressed to the mean in the game, but it doesn't mean that it was fundamentally the wrong decision to go for it. To win, you cannot be results oriented; if your process is good, you will eventually succeed.
If the first five times you run the ball, you gain no yardage despite you having one of the best RBs in the game (not relating this specifically to this game), you don't stop running the ball just 'cuz it didn't work. If Steph Curry misses the first five 3's he takes, he doesn't stop shooting them. If Tiger Woods hit his first four drives into the rough, he doesn't stop using his driver. There's enough track record for all of those scenarios to understand that is incredibly unlikely for the unwanted result to continue.
Gaining 0 yards on a run is not going to give the ball to the other team unless it's 4th down. Steph missing a 3 gives the ball to the other team - in a game where each team has a million possessions. A golfer choosing to stop hitting with a driver would be like Steph choosing to shoot underhanded, so that doesn't make any sense.
This debate has been interesting and I'm enjoying it because I'm not firmly on one side or the other.
I'm with thespfc that they should have kicked the field goal the third time instead of going for it. The reasons being mostly situational: they needed 2 yards, not 1, they had the lead at the time, and they weren't even to the red zone so a TD was far from a sure thing even if they converted.
I'm with jayhawkco that the play calls were a bigger issue than the decision to go for it. The decision was technically sound, but only if they call a high-probability run play or QB sneak. And that matters a ton, because going for it and then treating it just like 3rd and short is basically fooling yourself into thinking you have a higher conversion probability than you really do, which negates the advantage of going for it.
I think both things can be true, but ultimately the coaching staff is still accountable for what happened and I think they would be extremely misguided to just blame it on analytics and "the numbers" when that ignores the most important factor - they called three 4th down plays that didn't work. That's a play calling problem, not an analytics problem.
I think very few coaches and teams have remotely figured out how to balance analytics with human elements (this is especially egregious in baseball). The Chargers actually got roasted a bit by stat geeks earlier this season when they elected to kick a field goal down 27-17 with 4th and 1 or 2 inside the Vikings 10 and about 6 minutes left in the game. It was a situation where the Chargers could not afford to come away with nothing. They lost the game 27-20 regardless.
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2021, 07:46:53 AMGaining 0 yards on a run is not going to give the ball to the other team unless it's 4th down. Steph missing a 3 give the ball to the other team - in a game where each team has a million possessions.
But missing a 3 often produces longer rebounds, giving the offensive team a higher likelihood of keeping possession since no one blocks out backward when it's a 3 vs. a 2. That's why
basketball analytics rates a 3-pointer as "worth" more than one point greater than a 2-pointer.
What is happening in Detroit?
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
Lions upset the Cardinals last year, too. Kicked me out of a survivor pool
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
They're ruining their draft pick and helping the Packers get the #1 seed. Detroit fans must be thrilled.
Funny that two Detroit Lions quarterbacks have come up clutch for the Rams this season: Stafford by being the Rams QB, and Goff by beating the Cardinals.
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 04:31:54 PM
Funny that two Detroit Lions quarterbacks have come up clutch for the Rams this season: Stafford by being the Rams QB, and Goff by beating the Cardinals.
Funny how the Lions are suddenly not in position for the 1st pick. I guess the Jags are too Urban (game show reference) for their own good.
I was surprised that the Lions are in the lead against the Cardinals.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 19, 2021, 04:34:46 PM
Funny how the Lions are suddenly not in position for the 1st pick. I guess the Jags are too Urban (game show reference) for their own good.
Tying the Steelers made all the difference. Now they're at 2.5 wins, higher than the Jags at 2 and lower than the Texans at 3.
Too bad the Jags and the Texans didn't tie in today's Toilet Bowl. That would have put the Lions in a three-way tie for last place (before applying any tiebreakers).
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 19, 2021, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
They're ruining their draft pick and helping the Packers get the #1 seed. Detroit fans must be thrilled.
If I were a fan and dropping serious coin to attend a game, I would want them to play their best and go for the win. I don't understand so-called fans rooting for their team to lose solely for the mythos of "just wait 'til next year."
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 19, 2021, 04:49:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 19, 2021, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
They're ruining their draft pick and helping the Packers get the #1 seed. Detroit fans must be thrilled.
If I were a fan and dropping serious coin to attend a game, I would want them to play their best and go for the win. I don't understand so-called fans rooting for their team to lose solely for the mythos of "just wait 'til next year."
I remember 10 years ago the 2-12 Vikings beat the Redskins on Christmas Eve ending any chance of Minnesota getting the #1 pick. I put the Vikings postgame show on my car radio and you'd have think the team lost the Super Bowl that day the way the hosts and callers were openly mourning and raging..
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 19, 2021, 04:55:43 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 19, 2021, 04:49:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 19, 2021, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
They're ruining their draft pick and helping the Packers get the #1 seed. Detroit fans must be thrilled.
If I were a fan and dropping serious coin to attend a game, I would want them to play their best and go for the win. I don't understand so-called fans rooting for their team to lose solely for the mythos of "just wait 'til next year."
I remember 10 years ago the 2-12 Vikings beat the Redskins on Christmas Eve ending any chance of Minnesota getting the #1 pick. I put the Vikings postgame show on my car radio and you'd have think the team lost the Super Bowl that day the way the hosts and callers were openly mourning and raging..
To be clear, I never root against the Lions to lose any game nor strive for the first pick. I'm just amused and kind of shocked that they just throttled the Cardinals out of nowhere more than anything.
Since relegation isn't going to happen: what if the two worst teams and the loser of the 3rd vs. 4th worst team get a 2-game penalty in next year's standings toward the playoffs? (The 2-game penalty only applies to the playoffs and not for determining which team is the worst.)
The 3rd vs. 4th worst team game can be called the Tank Bowl. Just for fun, it would include pictures of actual tanks, and since advertising is everywhere, the tanks would have brand logos on them, advertising current car companies that also made tanks back when they were used in WWII.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 19, 2021, 04:55:43 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 19, 2021, 04:49:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 19, 2021, 03:18:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2021, 03:05:15 PM
What is happening in Detroit?
They're ruining their draft pick and helping the Packers get the #1 seed. Detroit fans must be thrilled.
If I were a fan and dropping serious coin to attend a game, I would want them to play their best and go for the win. I don't understand so-called fans rooting for their team to lose solely for the mythos of "just wait 'til next year."
I remember 10 years ago the 2-12 Vikings beat the Redskins on Christmas Eve ending any chance of Minnesota getting the #1 pick. I put the Vikings postgame show on my car radio and you'd have think the team lost the Super Bowl that day the way the hosts and callers were openly mourning and raging..
A similar story: I went to the Bears-Jaguars game in Jacksonville week 16 last season. While getting a beer at halftime (at which point the game was still close), all the Jaguars fans around me were saying "cmon guys, put this thing away so we can get Trevor!"
After the Bears put the game away in the 2nd half, many female Jaguars fans were observed professing their love for Trevor Lawrence while exiting the stadium :-D
Quote from: 1 on December 19, 2021, 05:02:53 PM
Since relegation isn't going to happen: what if the two worst teams and the loser of the 3rd vs. 4th worst team get a 2-game penalty in next year's standings toward the playoffs? (The 2-game penalty only applies to the playoffs and not for determining which team is the worst.)
The 3rd vs. 4th worst team game can be called the Tank Bowl. Just for fun, it would include pictures of actual tanks, and since advertising is everywhere, the tanks would have brand logos on them, advertising current car companies that also made tanks back when they were used in WWII.
The Tank Bowl, brought to you by The General Insurance, at Pfangle Stadium in the heart of Quindaro.
The Packers won the final 2 games in 1988 to finish 4-12, causing them to lose the #1 pick. So instead of Aikman, they drafted Mandarich. How the fortunes would have been different it that was the case.
I was impressed with Jared Goff's press conference, and how he was honest about the Lions talent level, rather than talking about how great the team is while (2-11-1) sits on the bottom of the screen.
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 08:24:54 AM
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
My guess is it hasn't happened yet. The closer you get to the playoffs, the more fun a big upset is.
Not a bad guess, I think Lions 30, Cardinals 12 definitely takes the crown (at least for now). And not just the fact that the Lions won, but the setup of them finally getting their first win, then getting blown out by the Broncos, and then dominating today in the way they did. Certainly the most surprising final score of the season.
I think it flies under the radar that the Lions have been competitive in all but 2 or 3 games this season. There's the mismanaged Thanksgiving game, the longest field goal in NFL history, the 4th quarter against the Rams where they were driving for the lead before Goff threw an INT, the Vikings' last second FG drive, and the missed FG in OT against the Steelers... they're not a talented team, but they could easily be 7-7 right now.
Quote from: webny99 on May 12, 2021, 01:34:26 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 12, 2021, 01:21:24 PM
I feel very confident that the Texans won't win 3 games.
You were very careful to word it that way, because you're covered if they win 4 or 5. :-P
That was kind of a dumb prediction. I don't see another win on their schedule this year. Plus we probably won't get the first overall pick (maybe 2nd is within reach?).
On the upside, I'm liking what I'm seeing from Davis Mills. Excluding the Cardinals, Colts, and Bills games (especially the Bills), he has 10 touchdowns and 3 picks in 6 (cherrypicked) games. However, in those 4 games, he went for 0 and 6 instead. Including all of them, that's a better TD/INT ratio than Trevor Lawrence, Zach Wilson, Sam Darnold, and Justin Fields. His completion rate is better than Patrick Mahomes and Ben Roethlisberger. The team just needs a much better rushing attack and offensive line so that he can reach his full potential. The rushing is probably one of the most pitiful ones I've ever seen.
I'm normally not one to criticize playcalling - I think that NFL coaches might know a little bit more about playcalling than I do. However, I was not impressed with Harbaugh's playcall on the two point conversion. Huntley's scrambling had been a nuisance for the Packers defense the entire 4th quarter, and was the main reason they got back in the game. So why did they have him roll out, effectively shrinking the field in half, pulling all the Packers defenders to one side, and rendering his running ability useless?
With today's results, the Cowboys move up to the #3 seed in the NFC, for now at least. If that holds it would be huge, as I would much rather them play the 49ers in the wild card rather than the Cardinals or Rams.
Speaking of the 49ers, they've impressively turned it around recently. They're still not the Super Bowl contenders that a lot of people made them out to be, though.
Quote from: webny99 on December 19, 2021, 08:10:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 08:24:54 AM
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
My guess is it hasn't happened yet. The closer you get to the playoffs, the more fun a big upset is.
Not a bad guess, I think Lions 30, Cardinals 12 definitely takes the crown (at least for now). And not just the fact that the Lions won, but the setup of them finally getting their first win, then getting blown out by the Broncos, and then dominating today in the way they did. Certainly the most surprising final score of the season.
I think it flies under the radar that the Lions have been competitive in all but 2 or 3 games this season. There's the mismanaged Thanksgiving game, the longest field goal in NFL history, the 4th quarter against the Rams where they were driving for the lead before Goff threw an INT, the Vikings' last second FG drive, and the missed FG in OT against the Steelers... they're not a talented team, but they could easily be 7-7 right now.
The Lions win today probably speaks well to the fact that any of the NFL teams can beat each other any given week. That's why I never understood why people flip out when ever the best teams usually have a bad loss or two every year. The talent level across the NFL is pretty evenly distributed.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 19, 2021, 10:58:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 19, 2021, 08:10:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 08:24:54 AM
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
My guess is it hasn't happened yet. The closer you get to the playoffs, the more fun a big upset is.
Not a bad guess, I think Lions 30, Cardinals 12 definitely takes the crown (at least for now). And not just the fact that the Lions won, but the setup of them finally getting their first win, then getting blown out by the Broncos, and then dominating today in the way they did. Certainly the most surprising final score of the season.
I think it flies under the radar that the Lions have been competitive in all but 2 or 3 games this season. There's the mismanaged Thanksgiving game, the longest field goal in NFL history, the 4th quarter against the Rams where they were driving for the lead before Goff threw an INT, the Vikings' last second FG drive, and the missed FG in OT against the Steelers... they're not a talented team, but they could easily be 7-7 right now.
The Lions win today probably speaks well to the fact that any of the NFL teams can beat each other any given week. That's why I never understood why people flip out when ever the best teams usually have a bad loss or two every year. The talent level across the NFL is pretty evenly distributed.
Parity is one of three big reasons why the NFL is the best sports league in the world. The others are 2) almost every game matters, and 3) the games are mostly consolidated into one day, which makes it so that by the time you're sick of watching, there's a 6 day break, and after that you're excited to watch again.
Quote from: webny99 on December 19, 2021, 08:10:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2021, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 08:24:54 AM
I wonder what the best upset of the season so far is. Either the Josh Allen game, the Lions beating the Vikings, or the Texans beating the Titans. Though none of those scorelines were as astonishing as the Saints' drubbing of the Packers way back in week 1.
My guess is it hasn't happened yet. The closer you get to the playoffs, the more fun a big upset is.
Not a bad guess, I think Lions 30, Cardinals 12 definitely takes the crown (at least for now). ... Certainly the most surprising final score of the season.
Saints 9, Bucs 0 certainly has a case for most surprising final score. I knew the Saints D would come to play, but that was next level. Brady hadn't been shutout in 15 years and until tonight had never lost a game where the opponent didn't score a TD.
That loss was almost worse than the 38-3 loss last year because the game was right there for the taking for 3.5 quarters! The Bucs defense played well, all the offense needed was one drive and they couldn't do it. Unbelievable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 21, 2021, 06:09:32 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 08, 2021, 01:28:45 PM
So Miami beat Houston, thereby passing "Football Team" back to where it began the season and taking "Jaguars" from Houston. First time "Football Team" went back to a prior holder.
Houston beats Tennessee. Houston Titans (how amusing, in view of NFL history) and Tennessee Football Team.
I missed last week, when Tennessee beat Jacksonville and took "Dolphins" from them. Second time this season Jacksonville has gotten "Football Team." Houston avoided getting it for a third time by beating Jacksonville yesterday.
Interesting Texans note: They have more wins over the Jaguars (4) than everyone else in the league (3) over the past two seasons. Their only non-Jaguars wins are over the Lions and Patriots last year and the Titans in Week 11 of this year.
I was serious about the two-game penalty idea as a replacement for relegation. It probably got lost in the tank bowl joke.
Quote from: 1 on December 20, 2021, 08:25:50 AM
I was serious about the two-game penalty idea as a replacement for relegation. It probably got lost in the tank bowl joke.
In that case, let me say: it's a bad idea and just about everyone, from Goodell down to the fans, would hate it.
More excessive negativity about the Cowboys. Three straight wins by an average of 10.7 points, two of which came against divisional opponents, yet you would think they're a reincarnation of last year's 6-10 team based off the media. The defense has forced at least four turnovers in each of their last three games. The offense has not been what it was early in the season, but it hasn't been dreadful, and doesn't need to improve a whole lot (beyond better clock management) in order to go deep in the playoffs if the defense continues playing at the level it has been in December. And the Cowboys are now the 2 seed in the NFC because three of their four losses came against AFC teams, so they have an 8-1 record against NFC teams.
Quote from: thspfc on December 20, 2021, 08:43:09 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 20, 2021, 08:25:50 AM
I was serious about the two-game penalty idea as a replacement for relegation. It probably got lost in the tank bowl joke.
In that case, let me say: it's a bad idea and just about everyone, from Goodell down to the fans, would hate it.
No, but how about this: coinciding with the playoffs, the four worst teams play a four-team tournament. The winner gets the #1 pick.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 20, 2021, 08:50:15 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 20, 2021, 08:43:09 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 20, 2021, 08:25:50 AM
I was serious about the two-game penalty idea as a replacement for relegation. It probably got lost in the tank bowl joke.
In that case, let me say: it's a bad idea and just about everyone, from Goodell down to the fans, would hate it.
No, but how about this: coinciding with the playoffs, the four worst teams play a four-team tournament. The winner gets the #1 pick.
That's less crazy than it may sound: For two years (2012—13 and 2013—14), the KHL had a playoff tournament for the Nadezhda Cup. The KHL's championship trophy is the Gagarin Cup (I guess you could call it the Russian equivalent to the Stanley Cup). Sixteen teams make the Gagarin Cup Playoffs. In the two seasons noted, the ten teams that
failed to qualify for the Gagarin Cup Playoffs competed in a tournament for the Nadezhda Cup. The league ultimately cancelled it due in part to the cost–the participating teams tended to be the farther-flung teams geographically, which imposed a financial burden in terms of the travel costs, so the league had to reimburse the costs or else the teams wouldn't be interested in participating in what you might consider a Russian version of the NIT.
Obviously the NFL is in a better financial situation top to bottom than the KHL and the travel burdens are a lot less severe.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Packers 26, Ravens 24
Unsurprisingly didn't get the score correct. However, the Packers had 26 first downs and the Ravens had 24. :hmmm:
Blech! Another division title for the archrivals to the north... ("Puck the Fackers", anyone?)
Meanwhile, the rest of the NFC South continues to make things hard for Tom Brady, as he loses a potential division-clinching game for the second time in a row.
Chris Godwin's ACL tear seems like a huge blow to the Buccaneers, as I don't know who else on their team can play the Wes Welker/Julian Edelman/Chris Godwin role. But of course it's Tom Brady, so, does it really matter?
Quote from: webny99 on November 24, 2021, 01:44:27 PM
-The AFC North has 27 total games remaining, and there is not one single easy win in ANY of those 27 games. They've each got at least 4 division games left (Ravens have 5) so they're going to beat up on each other bad and I could EASILY see a 9-8 or 10-7 division winner as the only playoff team from that division.
You know it's bad when a last second field goal sends the Browns from first in the division to last! :crazy:
This take seemed spicy at the time, but ended up being pretty spot-on, as now there's basically no chance of multiple playoff teams from the AFC North. Each team has two division games remaining, and look at the third game for each team:
Bengals-
ChiefsRavens-
RamsSteelers-
ChiefsBrowns-
PackersOoof. No idea how this plays out, but nobody's going 3-0 against that schedule so I still like the Browns' chances even after the loss tonight. Winner of Ravens-Bengals and winner of Browns-Steelers likely playing for the division in Week 18. A 9-8 record (or 9-7-1 for the Steelers) should be enough to win it.
Quote from: Henry on December 20, 2021, 11:42:40 AM
Meanwhile, the rest of the NFC South continues to make things hard for Tom Brady, as he loses a potential division-clinching game for the second time in a row.
Only the Saints. The Panthers and Falcons are already forked, with the former a hot mess (normally my team, but I gave up on them for this season, in favor of the Patriots and Saints).
^ And on that note... time for another fork update! Final forks must be done before Week 17 starts (otherwise you're basically just picking the Week 18 games), so with that in mind, this will be the penultimate update.
Existing list of forked teams:
AFC: Jaguars, Jets, Texans, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders
NFC: Lions, Bears, Giants, Seahawks
Added 12/20/2021: Panthers, Falcons, Broncos
That leaves 19 teams, saving the final five forks for next week.
Wow, and the Vikings keep their streak of one-score games alive with a Bears TD on the last play of the game. Could have been closer if the Bears kicked FG's on some of their earlier drives. That's now 13 of 14 Vikings games that have been decided by one score this season, only exception being vs. the Seahawks in Week 3. Several of them had no business being that close, but I mean, that is just unbelievable.
Now here's a question: Is it more frustrating to be 6-7 in one score games, or to be 0-5, as the Bills are?
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Also, I'm not saying the Bears deserved to win because they didn't, but both of Minnesota's TD drives were aided by personal foul calls that the announcing crew and their referee analyst all agreed were bad calls.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Even though it's very rarely needed, point differential is a tiebreaker. All extra points should be attempted. If they want to exempt overtime, that's fine, but if you're going to do it sometimes in regulation (when the extra point wins the game) then you should do it every time.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 08:06:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Even though it's very rarely needed, point differential is a tiebreaker. All extra points should be attempted. If they want to exempt overtime, that's fine, but if you're going to do it sometimes in regulation (when the extra point wins the game) then you should do it every time.
A two-point conversion attempt is also allowed if the score is within two. I have no issue with disallowing it on the final play only if the margin is more than two. The teams know the rule, if they're really worried about point differential for the season or covering the spread (which I imagine most teams/coaching staffs aren't as much as the fans are), then they should try to score with time left on the clock and if they don't, that's a clock management problem, not a rules problem. Ultimately if you're trailing by two scores you should be doing that anyways if you want time for an onside kick.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 08:06:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Even though it's very rarely needed, point differential is a tiebreaker. All extra points should be attempted. If they want to exempt overtime, that's fine, but if you're going to do it sometimes in regulation (when the extra point wins the game) then you should do it every time.
There's no reason extra points need to be attempted. See baseball, where the game ends in the bottom of the 9th or any later inning as soon as the home team leads.
Quote from: 1 on December 21, 2021, 08:56:00 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 08:06:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Even though it's very rarely needed, point differential is a tiebreaker. All extra points should be attempted. If they want to exempt overtime, that's fine, but if you're going to do it sometimes in regulation (when the extra point wins the game) then you should do it every time.
There's no reason extra points need to be attempted. See baseball, where the game ends in the bottom of the 9th or any later inning as soon as the home team leads.
Which is fine since run differential is not a tiebreaker in MLB. If you score a touchdown, you've earned the opportunity to get the extra point.
The necessity for point differential as a tiebreaker is so low it doesn't justify wasting time at the end of a game for the score to change by just one point.
Also, remember this game (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fail_Mary)? That would have been a great time for that rule. Packers got robbed of a game-ending interception by the replacement refs and then were forced to bring 11 men back onto the field for a meaningless play just to rub it in.
Quote from: webny99 on December 20, 2021, 09:48:31 PM
You know it's bad when a last second field goal sends the Browns from first in the division to last! :crazy:
I can't get over how crazy the AFC is. Browns get dropped from 4 seed to 12 seed on a single kick. 13 of 16 teams at or above .500. It doesn't get much more muddled than that!
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 09:00:31 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 21, 2021, 08:56:00 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 08:06:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 21, 2021, 07:47:31 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 21, 2021, 07:05:00 AM
Everybody who bet the Vikings -7 benefits from the ridiculous rule that extra points aren't attempted after a scoring play at the end of the game unless it impacts the winner of the game.
Of course, it was the Vikings themselves that caused that rule with the Minneapolis miracle. I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, though. Makes total sense for the same reason extra points are not attempted on walkoff TD's in overtime. There's zero need for another play to occur.
Even though it's very rarely needed, point differential is a tiebreaker. All extra points should be attempted. If they want to exempt overtime, that's fine, but if you're going to do it sometimes in regulation (when the extra point wins the game) then you should do it every time.
There's no reason extra points need to be attempted. See baseball, where the game ends in the bottom of the 9th or any later inning as soon as the home team leads.
Which is fine since run differential is not a tiebreaker in MLB. If you score a touchdown, you've earned the opportunity to get the extra point.
From what I've seen, the players usually don't care. Otherwise, they wouldn't be taking a knee at the end of the game or giving themselves up so the clock can keep running. They're leaving at least 6 points on the board in those instances.
There would also be a lot more 2 point conversion attempts if they really wanted those extra single points.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
This would be my list:
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
Dallas
Kansas City
Buffalo
Indianapolis
Tennessee (if D Henry comes back healthy)
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
If you don't mind me asking, why now? It should be noted that since the Patriots lost to the Colts, Bills-Patriots is basically a division title game. Whoever wins takes control and should win it barring something crazy.
That's not the case for the Colts though.. they'd still need to finish two games better than the Titans over the final three to win the division.
But in any case, I would think the Cardinals would be the team to remove from the list at this juncture. I'd have them 5th in the NFC right now, behind the Packers, Bucs, Rams, and Cowboys. They also have a tough remaining schedule (Colts, Cowboys, Seahawks) and can't afford to slip up in a suddenly tight division race.
Lost 2 of the last 3 since I posted it. Seemed clueless how to win in the Snow Bowl, were getting crushed by the Bucs before finally kicking into gear, but in their D isn't the same without White.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2021, 12:51:31 PM
In order:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams
5. Cardinals
6. Patriots
7. Cowboys
Revised list:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams
5. Cardinals
6. Cowboys
7. Patriots
I don't trust Wentz when needing to come from behind/lead a huge drive late in a playoff game. A great passing game is more important than a great running game. And the Colts don't have one. I'm not crazy about Mac Jones in that situation either, but I trust Belichick to make the right situational decisions significantly more than I do Reich, the guy who made the worst fourth down decision since that Colts fake punt in 2015. (in case anyone is wondering, it was going for it on 4th and 4 from their own 35 yard line with mere seconds left in a tied overtime).
Quote from: webny99 on December 22, 2021, 12:48:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
If you don't mind me asking, why now? It should be noted that since the Patriots lost to the Colts, Bills-Patriots is basically a division title game. Whoever wins takes control and should win it barring something crazy.
That's not the case for the Colts though.. they'd still need to finish two games better than the Titans over the final three to win the division.
But in any case, I would think the Cardinals would be the team to remove from the list at this juncture. I'd have them 5th in the NFC right now, behind the Packers, Bucs, Rams, and Cowboys. They also have a tough remaining schedule (Colts, Cowboys, Seahawks) and can't afford to slip up in a suddenly tight division race.
You're right, not winning the division is a death blow to a team's Super Bowl hopes. Not even the Buccaneers could win the title as a wild card.
And my view that the Bills are too inconsistent to make the Super Bowl stands.
It doesn't seem right that it's almost Christmas and there's still three weeks of regular season left.
Packers 27, Browns 24
Cardinals 38, Colts 17
Falcons 32, Lions 30
Rams 28, Vikings 21
Jets 23, Jaguars 17
Eagles 21, Giants 13
Patriots 24, Bills 21
Bengals 34, Ravens 20
Chargers 31, Texans 14
Panthers 20, Buccaneers 14
Seahawks 38, Bears 10
Raiders 16, Broncos 13
Chiefs 27, Steelers 17
Cowboys 31, Washington 17
Dolphins 30, Saints 13
I'll take the Cardinals to rebound in a big way. People haven't been as quick to bail on them as they were on the Cowboys and Rams a few weeks ago (though maybe because there was more skepticism about the Cardinals to begin with). So, maybe, lessons were learned?
I worry about the Buccaneers in their first game without Chris Godwin. Still have them as second favorites to win the Super Bowl, but I think it could be ugly this Sunday.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:11:48 PM
You're right, not winning the division is a death blow to a team's Super Bowl hopes. Not even the Buccaneers could win the title as a wild card.
I sense sarcasm. I never said they had to win the division to win the Super Bowl. I just think the Cardinals are a team that needs the division title and especially the first round bye more than some other teams, as it would give them more favorable matchups and a chance to get Hopkins back.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
I'll take the Cardinals to rebound in a big way. People haven't been as quick to bail on them as they were on the Cowboys and Rams a few weeks ago (though maybe because there was more skepticism about the Cardinals to begin with). So, maybe, lessons were learned?
The lesson learned is this: don't trust a team that lost to the Panthers and Lions by a combined 42 points and has zero playoff experience to win multiple playoff games.
Quote from: webny99 on December 22, 2021, 03:49:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:11:48 PM
You're right, not winning the division is a death blow to a team's Super Bowl hopes. Not even the Buccaneers could win the title as a wild card.
I sense sarcasm. I never said they had to win the division to win the Super Bowl. I just think the Cardinals are a team that needs the division title and especially the first round bye more than some other teams, as it would give them more favorable matchups and a chance to get Hopkins back.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
I'll take the Cardinals to rebound in a big way. People haven't been as quick to bail on them as they were on the Cowboys and Rams a few weeks ago (though maybe because there was more skepticism about the Cardinals to begin with). So, maybe, lessons were learned?
The lesson learned is this: don't trust a team that lost to the Panthers and Lions by a combined 42 points and has zero playoff experience to win multiple playoff games.
Everyone needs the first round bye a roughly equal amount.
The Buccaneers lost by a combined 46 points to the Saints last year, and beat that very team in the playoffs. The 2018 Patriots lost to the 5-11 Jags, 6-10 Lions, 7-9 Dolphins, and 9-7 Titans by a combined 64 points.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
Green Bay should never be amongst the favorites for the Super Bowl. They nearly always choke when it matters.
I tweeted Sunday that Tyler Huntley was better than Lamar Jackson and someone replied "Didn't know Huntley was a unanimous MVP."
Quote from: I-39 on December 22, 2021, 04:33:57 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
Green Bay should never be amongst the favorites for the Super Bowl. They nearly always choke when it matters.
That's certainly the elephant in the room with the Packers. They really do have all the pieces to finally win an NFC championship. Yes, that was the case last year and in 2014 (I don't think they were good enough in '16 or '19 so those weren't really "chokes"). But the fact that they've underperformed in years past doesn't change the fact that they have a great roster and a top 5 coach.
By the way, it's crazy how similar the last three Packers seasons have been, especially if they win out in this regular season. Looking at their three losses per year, you have an embarrassing early season loss to an out of division NFC team (Eagles in 2019, Bucs in 2020, Saints in 2021). Then, an ugly loss on the first Sunday of November in which their offense struggled quite a bit (Chargers in 2019, Vikings in 2020, Chiefs in 2021). Then, a road loss in late November (49ers in 2019, Colts in 2020, Vikings in 2021). They even lost 34-31 in week 11 of 2020 and 2021.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
It doesn't seem right that it's almost Christmas and there's still three weeks of regular season left.
Packers 27, Browns 24
Cardinals 38, Colts 17
Falcons 32, Lions 30
Rams 28, Vikings 21
Jets 23, Jaguars 17
Eagles 21, Giants 13
Patriots 24, Bills 21
Bengals 34, Ravens 20
Chargers 31, Texans 14
Panthers 20, Buccaneers 14
Seahawks 38, Bears 10
Raiders 16, Broncos 13
Chiefs 27, Steelers 17
Cowboys 31, Washington 17
Dolphins 30, Saints 13
I'll take the Cardinals to rebound in a big way. People haven't been as quick to bail on them as they were on the Cowboys and Rams a few weeks ago (though maybe because there was more skepticism about the Cardinals to begin with). So, maybe, lessons were learned?
I worry about the Buccaneers in their first game without Chris Godwin. Still have them as second favorites to win the Super Bowl, but I think it could be ugly this Sunday.
I'll take Colts, Bucs, and Saints. Tempted to take Broncos over Raiders, but then I remembered Drew Lock, a family friend alas.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 05:07:28 PM
Quote from: I-39 on December 22, 2021, 04:33:57 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
Green Bay should never be amongst the favorites for the Super Bowl. They nearly always choke when it matters.
That's certainly the elephant in the room with the Packers. They really do have all the pieces to finally win an NFC championship. Yes, that was the case last year and in 2014 (I don't think they were good enough in '16 or '19 so those weren't really "chokes"). But the fact that they've underperformed in years past doesn't change the fact that they have a great roster and a top 5 coach.
But they still don't win when it matters. Doesn't matter if they have a top 5 coach or all the right pieces. They should've been just as dominate as the Patriots in the last decade and instead, they lose in the playoffs and make excuse after excuse.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 04:24:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 22, 2021, 03:49:37 PM
...
The lesson learned is this: don't trust a team that lost to the Panthers and Lions by a combined 42 points and has zero playoff experience to win multiple playoff games.
The Buccaneers lost by a combined 46 points to the Saints last year, and beat that very team in the playoffs. The 2018 Patriots lost to the 5-11 Jags, 6-10 Lions, 7-9 Dolphins, and 9-7 Titans by a combined 64 points.
That's apples to oranges, for two reasons.
The first one is a parallel to my point that's been in your signature line for so long that I'm convinced you think it's a good take despite calling it awful: The 2018 Patriots had the greatest coach and QB of all time, and the 2020 Buccaneers had that same QB. Brady and Belichick have earned the benefit of the doubt that when the season ends, they will have done what they needed to do to get to the playoffs and win when they got there. They had combined for 27 playoff wins prior to 2018. Meanwhile Kyler Murray and Kliff Kingsbury have a combined 0 playoff appearances and are 0-3 in their 3 most important games over the past 2 seasons. They have not proved anything when it comes to
getting to the playoffs, much less having success when they get there.
Secondly, the 2018 (and 2019) Patriots did not have extremely talented rosters. You could argue that they were roughly equivalent talent-wise to some of the teams they lost to, just with a much better coach and quarterback. You can't tell me the Cardinals are roughly equivalent talent-wise to the Panthers and Lions. They're way more talented than both teams, especially the Lions. The Brady/Belichick Patriots were also known for finding their groove later in the season, with the 3 losses that contribute to that large point differential coming in Week 2, Week 3, and Week 10 (to a Titans team that finished with a winning record). They did not have a multi-score loss after their bye, and the loss to Miami is literally called "Miami Miracle". Nothing even
remotely close to losing by 18 points to a 1-10-1 Lions team in Week 15 in terms of laying a massive egg in a so called "trap game"... notice how the term "trap game" itself is reserved for teams riding high that haven't proved anything yet.
So forgive me for looking at the body of work and not believing the Cardinals can win the Super Bowl by beating four straight teams with more experience than them until I see it happen.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 09:53:28 PM
Tempted to take Broncos over Raiders, but then I remembered Drew Lock, a family friend alas.
Really? OK, I guess I won't share this, then...
https://twitter.com/SquintsJrr/status/1472722507224338434
(Whoops, I think I just did! :-D)
Quote from: webny99 on December 22, 2021, 10:36:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 04:24:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 22, 2021, 03:49:37 PM
...
The lesson learned is this: don't trust a team that lost to the Panthers and Lions by a combined 42 points and has zero playoff experience to win multiple playoff games.
The Buccaneers lost by a combined 46 points to the Saints last year, and beat that very team in the playoffs. The 2018 Patriots lost to the 5-11 Jags, 6-10 Lions, 7-9 Dolphins, and 9-7 Titans by a combined 64 points.
That's apples to oranges, for two reasons.
The first one is a parallel to my point that's been in your signature line for so long that I'm convinced you think it's a good take despite calling it awful: The 2018 Patriots had the greatest coach and QB of all time, and the 2020 Buccaneers had that same QB. Brady and Belichick have earned the benefit of the doubt that when the season ends, they will have done what they needed to do to get to the playoffs and win when they got there. They had combined for 27 playoff wins prior to 2018. Meanwhile Kyler Murray and Kliff Kingsbury have a combined 0 playoff appearances and are 0-3 in their 3 most important games over the past 2 seasons. They have not proved anything when it comes to getting to the playoffs, much less having success when they get there.
Secondly, the 2018 (and 2019) Patriots did not have extremely talented rosters. You could argue that they were roughly equivalent talent-wise to some of the teams they lost to, just with a much better coach and quarterback. You can't tell me the Cardinals are roughly equivalent talent-wise to the Panthers and Lions. They're way more talented than both teams, especially the Lions. The Brady/Belichick Patriots were also known for finding their groove later in the season, with the 3 losses that contribute to that large point differential coming in Week 2, Week 3, and Week 10 (to a Titans team that finished with a winning record). They did not have a multi-score loss after their bye, and the loss to Miami is literally called "Miami Miracle". Nothing even remotely close to losing by 18 points to a 1-10-1 Lions team in Week 15 in terms of laying a massive egg in a so called "trap game"... notice how the term "trap game" itself is reserved for teams riding high that haven't proved anything yet.
So forgive me for looking at the body of work and not believing the Cardinals can win the Super Bowl by beating four straight teams with more experience than them until I see it happen.
That's fair. The line in my signature is still an all-time bad paragraph though.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 09:53:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
It doesn't seem right that it's almost Christmas and there's still three weeks of regular season left.
Packers 27, Browns 24
Cardinals 38, Colts 17
Falcons 32, Lions 30
Rams 28, Vikings 21
Jets 23, Jaguars 17
Eagles 21, Giants 13
Patriots 24, Bills 21
Bengals 34, Ravens 20
Chargers 31, Texans 14
Panthers 20, Buccaneers 14
Seahawks 38, Bears 10
Raiders 16, Broncos 13
Chiefs 27, Steelers 17
Cowboys 31, Washington 17
Dolphins 30, Saints 13
I'll take the Cardinals to rebound in a big way. People haven't been as quick to bail on them as they were on the Cowboys and Rams a few weeks ago (though maybe because there was more skepticism about the Cardinals to begin with). So, maybe, lessons were learned?
I worry about the Buccaneers in their first game without Chris Godwin. Still have them as second favorites to win the Super Bowl, but I think it could be ugly this Sunday.
I'll take Colts, Bucs, and Saints. Tempted to take Broncos over Raiders, but then I remembered Drew Lock, a family friend alas.
Rescinding my Saints pick with the QB situation.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Packers 27, Browns 24
Best prediction since week 6 in terms of points.
I'm not into the complaining about referees business. The NFL is not rigged; to suggest that it is is akin to taping a piece of paper to your forehead that says "I'm stupid".
That said, pass interference needs to be made challengeable and reviewable again. It's by far the most significant penalty in football, and it's also the most subjective. Those two traits don't mix well. Yes, it will add time to games that are already bordering on too long; that's a sacrifice that needs to be made in order to make a higher quality product for fans.
It's similar to the VAR debate in soccer. VAR has its issues, but if you actually use your brain and think about all the tough calls it's gotten right that referees missed instead of the few it's gotten wrong, you realize that it's had an overwhelmingly positive impact on soccer.
I don't believe I've voiced my pure disdain for Browns fans (particularly their creepy attraction to Baker Mayfield no matter how bad he plays) before on this fourm. But that's been a thing for a good year now. Ever since the Browns became relevant again, they've become one of the most delusional groups of people I've ever seen. All of Baker Mayfield's "swagger" and "confidence" has translated to what has been an awful season. His numbers are what you would expect from a backup for a below average team, not a #1 overall pick starter for a team that is pretty solid outside of him. Anytime an actual statistical argument is used, some Browns fan will talk about how bad the team was before Baker. As if Baker is the reason why they've been mediocre over the past few years. Take Baker away from this team from the beginning of the season. With Keenum at quarterback the whole year, I'm guessing they would have the exact same record they do now. Jared Goff would do as much or more than Baker with this squad.
I know I said earlier in the thread (after the Browns/Chargers game maybe) that giving Baker a large contract would be a good decision. I rescind that take. Baker is dragging this team down, and no amount of "swagger", "confidence", or even unfunny commercials can change that.
What's wrong with the Cardinals?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 01:32:01 AM
What's wrong with the Cardinals?
Injuries, for one. Deandre Hopkins has been out, and Kyler Murray isn't 100% from his ankle issues (though tonight he looked pretty close).
But in the first two years of the Murray and Kingsbury era, they got off to a good start, then defenses figured them out and shut them down leading the Cardinals to fade out of the picture. Could be that too. At this point the Cardinals need about 500 bad results to go their way to miss the playoffs entirely, so they will almost certainly make the playoffs no matter what.
Something like:
-Lose out
-Vikings, Eagles, Saints win out (with the Vikings playing LAR and GB, and the Saints starting a 3rd string QB Monday night, this will be the day)
-Rams finish ahead of Arizona to win the West title
I'm moving the Cardinals down to 7th on my list. Not bumping them off entirely however. Huge game next week against the Cowboys.
Baker Mayfield should be sent to Detroit, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago or the Jets
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 07:49:00 AM
I'm moving the Cardinals down to 7th on my list. Not bumping them off entirely however. Huge game next week against the Cowboys.
Colts not on the list yet?
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 26, 2021, 09:53:49 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 07:49:00 AM
I'm moving the Cardinals down to 7th on my list. Not bumping them off entirely however. Huge game next week against the Cowboys.
Colts not on the list yet?
Nope
Reportedly, the Giants will continue to stumble (iykyk) with Daniel Jones and Joe Judge in 2022. So I'm forking their 2022 playoff chances before 2021 is over.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 26, 2021, 09:32:17 AM
Baker Mayfield should be sent to Detroit, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago or the Jets
He gets plenty of Progressive commercial air time so any of those cities could work.
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Packers 27, Browns 24
Best prediction since week 6 in terms of points.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Rams 28, Vikings 21
So that's already outdated. I guess my several solid picks this week offset my whiffs on the Bucs/Panthers and Colts/Cardinals games.
The Eagles are 8-7. I am not a big fan of theirs, but I am really impressed. They might have their guys in Sirianni and Hurts. Remarkable that they have the same record as teams like the Chargers, Ravens, and 49ers, and they're only one game worse than the Colts, Bills, and Patriots. Even if they go one and done in the playoffs (which they probably will), this has to be considered a massive success of a season for them.
Looks like Joe Burrow might have played a half decent game today?
We get our first true snow game of the year, in Seattle of all places.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 26, 2021, 09:32:17 AM
Baker Mayfield should be sent to Detroit, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago or the Jets
The Texans have their man already. Davis Mills is impressing me more and more these days. Today, he managed 250 yards, two touchdowns, and no turnovers while basically the entire offensive line is out with COVID. He seems like the best rookie QB this year after Mac Jones. Somehow, the Texans' future looks... bright? (if anything, it looks brighter than the Jags, Bears, Lions, Giants, and Jets)
Speaking of the Lions, they lost again today in heartbreaking fashion.
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 04:17:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Packers 27, Browns 24
Best prediction since week 6 in terms of points.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Rams 28, Vikings 21
So that's already outdated.
Quote from: thspfc on December 22, 2021, 03:13:55 PM
Raiders 16, Broncos 13
So THAT's already outdated.
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
I don't believe I've voiced my pure disdain for Browns fans (particularly their creepy attraction to Baker Mayfield no matter how bad he plays) before on this fourm. But that's been a thing for a good year now. Ever since the Browns became relevant again, they've become one of the most delusional groups of people I've ever seen. All of Baker Mayfield's "swagger" and "confidence" has translated to what has been an awful season. His numbers are what you would expect from a backup for a below average team, not a #1 overall pick starter for a team that is pretty solid outside of him. Anytime an actual statistical argument is used, some Browns fan will talk about how bad the team was before Baker. As if Baker is the reason why they've been mediocre over the past few years. Take Baker away from this team from the beginning of the season. With Keenum at quarterback the whole year, I'm guessing they would have the exact same record they do now. Jared Goff would do as much or more than Baker with this squad.
I know I said earlier in the thread (after the Browns/Chargers game maybe) that giving Baker a large contract would be a good decision. I rescind that take. Baker is dragging this team down, and no amount of "swagger", "confidence", or even unfunny commercials can change that.
There must be something about Baker Mayfield that causes this behavior, because people went apeshit over him in exactly the same way when he was at OU.
I used to troll this security guard at work by telling him these grandiose stories about how Baker Mayfield was about to get arrested, for unspecified reasons, usually by Robert Mueller coming out and cuffing him on the 50-yard line in the middle of the next game. This was all extremely silly and obviously made up, but the guy would get really mad to the point that he got red in the face and started yelling about how Baker Mayfield wasn't going to get arrested, and how I shouldn't say things like that, and how Baker Mayfield was the best quarterback ever (which shouldn't keep you from getting arrested if you actually did something wrong, but whatever).
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 26, 2021, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
I don't believe I've voiced my pure disdain for Browns fans (particularly their creepy attraction to Baker Mayfield no matter how bad he plays) before on this fourm. But that's been a thing for a good year now. Ever since the Browns became relevant again, they've become one of the most delusional groups of people I've ever seen. All of Baker Mayfield's "swagger" and "confidence" has translated to what has been an awful season. His numbers are what you would expect from a backup for a below average team, not a #1 overall pick starter for a team that is pretty solid outside of him. Anytime an actual statistical argument is used, some Browns fan will talk about how bad the team was before Baker. As if Baker is the reason why they've been mediocre over the past few years. Take Baker away from this team from the beginning of the season. With Keenum at quarterback the whole year, I'm guessing they would have the exact same record they do now. Jared Goff would do as much or more than Baker with this squad.
I know I said earlier in the thread (after the Browns/Chargers game maybe) that giving Baker a large contract would be a good decision. I rescind that take. Baker is dragging this team down, and no amount of "swagger", "confidence", or even unfunny commercials can change that.
There must be something about Baker Mayfield that causes this behavior, because people went apeshit over him in exactly the same way when he was at OU.
I used to troll this security guard at work by telling him these grandiose stories about how Baker Mayfield was about to get arrested, for unspecified reasons, usually by Robert Mueller coming out and cuffing him on the 50-yard line in the middle of the next game. This was all extremely silly and obviously made up, but the guy would get really mad to the point that he got red in the face and started yelling about how Baker Mayfield wasn't going to get arrested, and how I shouldn't say things like that, and how Baker Mayfield was the best quarterback ever (which shouldn't keep you from getting arrested if you actually did something wrong, but whatever).
That sounds more like a typical Cleveland fan base thing rather than a Baker Mayfield. Cleveland had a lot of "I support Cleveland no matter what" homer types that make up a lot of the fan base. It kind of always was amusing to me given most of the Detroit fan base is of the "fire everyone" mentality.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 22, 2021, 12:44:09 PM
This would be my list:
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
Dallas
Kansas City
Buffalo
Indianapolis
Tennessee (if D Henry comes back healthy)
I'm going to stick with this list. Tennessee is iffy, but the other six teams all have real chances to win it all.
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 11:02:54 AM
Reportedly, the Giants will continue to stumble (iykyk) with Daniel Jones and Joe Judge in 2022. So I'm forking their 2022 playoff chances before 2021 is over.
Alright, I'll bite. The Giants WILL make the playoffs in 2022.
Not that I really have that much confidence, but there's something sort of Cinderella-like about the Giants franchise that it wouldn't shock me at all if they have one or two playoff runs out of nowhere, maybe even Super Bowl runs, sometime in the next few years. That's the tradeoff for some really bad football in their down years, injuries obviously being a huge factor recently.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 26, 2021, 09:04:40 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 26, 2021, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
I don't believe I've voiced my pure disdain for Browns fans (particularly their creepy attraction to Baker Mayfield no matter how bad he plays) before on this fourm. But that's been a thing for a good year now. Ever since the Browns became relevant again, they've become one of the most delusional groups of people I've ever seen. All of Baker Mayfield's "swagger" and "confidence" has translated to what has been an awful season. His numbers are what you would expect from a backup for a below average team, not a #1 overall pick starter for a team that is pretty solid outside of him. Anytime an actual statistical argument is used, some Browns fan will talk about how bad the team was before Baker. As if Baker is the reason why they've been mediocre over the past few years. ...
There must be something about Baker Mayfield that causes this behavior ...
That sounds more like a typical Cleveland fan base thing rather than a Baker Mayfield. Cleveland had a lot of "I support Cleveland no matter what" homer types that make up a lot of the fan base. It kind of always was amusing to me given most of the Detroit fan base is of the "fire everyone" mentality.
A couple of things on this...
-I think it's more of a Rust Belt thing than something specific to Cleveland. Buffalo and Pittsburgh are pretty much the same way with people being loyal to their city/team even when they're bad... but it just gets magnified with Cleveland because they were so bad for so long before the past few seasons.
-I think Baker
is part of the reason why the Browns are mediocre. He's the reason they're not better... and the reason they're not worse. He's pretty much an average QB, and I think that's partly why some Browns fans are so loyal to him, because an average QB is a lot more than they've had for decades.
-For what a disappointing season it's been, the Browns showed no quit the last couple of weeks. I think you could argue that the offensive play calling on the final series cost them both games. And they can absolutely still win the division if they win next week.
I'm knocking the Patriots off my Super Bowl contenders list. So now it looks like this:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers/Rams/Cowboys, can't decide how to order those three
In my opinion, that's the quite obvious top five. All five of them won this week/are going to win this week by an average of 20-ish points. Stafford played his worst game of the year, and the Rams still, fairly comfortably, beat a not awful Vikings team. That's a sign of a well-rounded squad.
After them, the Cardinals hang on by a thread at #6. One more week of this tailspin and they're off.
More Week 16 thoughts...
-A lot of playoff clinching happening today, mostly in the NFC, where five spots are now sealed up (division winners plus Rams and Cardinals), leaving just two wild cards available. The AFC is still a mess, with the Chiefs locking up the AFC West but the other six spots likely to come down to Week 18.
-The Bengals SWEEPING the Ravens and Steelers by a combined 89 points is one of the most shocking things to happen this season.
-Vikings have tied the NFL record with 14 one-score games this season. Just unbelievable how it comes down to the wire week after week.
-I feel sick for Chargers fans (the few that exist). That loss to the Texans is in contention for upset of the year, but it is also just a terrible, terrible loss all around. Way worse even than the Cardinals loss to the Lions. That just cannot happen at this point in the season. Their playoff odds took possibly the sharpest single-week nosedive of any team all season. They're down to just 35% after being at 75% entering today, per FiveThirtyEight. Now they HAVE to win two tough division games to have any chance at all. Say what you want about Staley's coaching style, but I genuinely thought this team wasn't going to blow games like this anymore. Just unbelievable.
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 10:48:54 PM
I'm knocking the Patriots off my Super Bowl contenders list. So now it looks like this:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers/Rams/Cowboys, can't decide how to order those three
In my opinion, that's the quite obvious top five. All five of them won this week/are going to win this week by an average of 20-ish points. Stafford played his worst game of the year, and the Rams still, fairly comfortably, beat a not awful Vikings team. That's a sign of a well-rounded squad.
After them, the Cardinals hang on by a thread at #6. One more week of this tailspin and they're off.
I don't think five of the top six Super Bowl contenders can be from a single conference. The Chiefs just aren't that heavily favored in the AFC for no one else in the AFC to crack the top five, keeping in mind that all four of their losses have been in-conference.
The NFC is definitely a more top-heavy conference, but that's part of the point: that means at least two of your top five will not be playing in the conference championship, while at least one other AFC team will be playing.
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 10:48:54 PM
I'm knocking the Patriots off my Super Bowl contenders list. So now it looks like this:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers/Rams/Cowboys, can't decide how to order those three
In my opinion, that's the quite obvious top five. All five of them won this week/are going to win this week by an average of 20-ish points. Stafford played his worst game of the year, and the Rams still, fairly comfortably, beat a not awful Vikings team. That's a sign of a well-rounded squad.
After them, the Cardinals hang on by a thread at #6. One more week of this tailspin and they're off.
Considering the Packers barely beat the .500 Browns, I'd say they should be at the bottom of the list, if on there at all.
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
The Packers seem to be doing that thing they often do where they run out of steam late in the 3rd or early in the 4th where they could put a team away, but instead, string together a bunch of 3 and outs and leave the door open for teams to come back on them. Exactly the kind of shit that bit them in the ass in the NFC Championship Game last winter. That's the groundwork for an upset early in the playoffs.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 27, 2021, 06:36:26 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
It's still not a good look for the Bills to lose a game where the winning QB only had three pass attempts.
I'm going to need plenty of popcorn to watch this feud between the Ravens' and Bengals' fanbases play out
Quote from: epzik8 on December 27, 2021, 11:40:37 AM
I'm going to need plenty of popcorn to watch this feud between the Ravens' and Bengals' fanbases play out
Ravens fans don't really have much room to talk, at least as it comes to this year's games.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 27, 2021, 10:43:22 AM
The Packers seem to be doing that thing they often do where they run out of steam late in the 3rd or early in the 4th where they could put a team away, but instead, string together a bunch of 3 and outs and leave the door open for teams to come back on them. Exactly the kind of shit that bit them in the ass in the NFC Championship Game last winter. That's the groundwork for an upset early in the playoffs.
??? Were they not trailing for that entire game against the Bucs?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 27, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 27, 2021, 06:36:26 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
It's still not a good look for the Bills to lose a game where the winning QB only had three pass attempts.
That has nothing to do with Mac Jones being a rookie, but OK, I'll play: it's still not a good look for a Bill Belichick defense to allow 7 red zone trips in 7 drives and force zero punts for the first time in his 474 career games. :poke:
The Eagles, starting the season 2 - 5 with a 1st year head coach, rookie QB playing a full season, and several other new coaches, were destinated to get an early draft pick. Now, they can clinch a Wildcard spot Sunday if...
A win vs. WTF, plus a Vikings loss, plus either a 49ers win or Saints loss.
They are also guaranteed a spot if they win their final two games, regardless of any other outcome.
It appears they can either secure the #5 seed if they win both their final 2 games and the Cardinals lose both their final 2 games. Otherwise, they secure the #7 seed as long as they clinch otherwise. (Not sure if there's a possibility for a #6 seed; that may depend on all the Week 17 results.)
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2021, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 27, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 27, 2021, 06:36:26 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
It's still not a good look for the Bills to lose a game where the winning QB only had three pass attempts.
That has nothing to do with Mac Jones being a rookie, but OK, I'll play: it's still not a good look for a Bill Belichick defense to allow 7 red zone trips in 7 drives and force zero punts for the first time in his 474 career games. :poke:
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2021, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 27, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 27, 2021, 06:36:26 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
It's still not a good look for the Bills to lose a game where the winning QB only had three pass attempts.
That has nothing to do with Mac Jones being a rookie, but OK, I'll play: it's still not a good look for a Bill Belichick defense to allow 7 red zone trips in 7 drives and force zero punts for the first time in his 474 career games. :poke:
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2021, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 27, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 27, 2021, 06:36:26 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 26, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Mac Jones showing why he's a rookie today.
Cuz he was drafted this year?
It's still not a good look for the Bills to lose a game where the winning QB only had three pass attempts.
That has nothing to do with Mac Jones being a rookie, but OK, I'll play: it's still not a good look for a Bill Belichick defense to allow 7 red zone trips in 7 drives and force zero punts for the first time in his 474 career games. :poke:
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
It wouldn't be a total non-sequitur. Had the Bills won that winnable game against a rookie quarterback in a wind storm they would be pretty much be insurmountable control of the AFC East. As it stands right now they have the same record as the Patriots and the Division is very much still up for grabs.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:21:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
It wouldn't be a total non-sequitur. Had the Bills won that winnable game against a rookie quarterback in a wind storm they would be pretty much be insurmountable control of the AFC East. As it stands right now they have the same record as the Patriots and the Division is very much still up for grabs.
But the QB was a total non-factor because they had the lead all game and didn't have to pass. It could have been Tom Brady that threw three passes and it wouldn't have made any difference.
Now, the Bills do have the tiebreaker as it stands right now, so they will win the division if they win out. Sure, it would be nice to have that one game back, but they took care of business this week and are still in great position to win the division, so that's all you can really ask for in terms of putting the narrative of the previous game to bed.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2021, 12:55:06 PM
A win vs. WTF
Not sure if that was intentional or not... although it may be appropriate given their performance against Dallas! :-D
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:21:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
It wouldn't be a total non-sequitur. Had the Bills won that winnable game against a rookie quarterback in a wind storm they would be pretty much be insurmountable control of the AFC East. As it stands right now they have the same record as the Patriots and the Division is very much still up for grabs.
But the QB was a total non-factor because they had the lead all game and didn't have to pass. It could have been Tom Brady that threw three passes and it wouldn't have made any difference.
Now, the Bills do have the tiebreaker as it stands right now, so they will win the division if they win out. Sure, it would be nice to have that one game back, but they took care of business this week and are still in great position to win the division, so that's all you can really ask for in terms of putting the narrative of the previous game to bed.
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win. The Bills probably will still win the division but it would be a lock otherwise. Yeah sure, the Bills "probably" will win the division but never really do know when an upset or major injury is going to happen in the NFL. Games like that wind game tend have a way of defining regular seasons for good or bad.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
And now Arizona and New England are gone too.
I only have four teams I think can win it - Tampa Bay, Green Bay, Kansas City, or Indy. I'll stick to my guns there. (I might reevaluate Tennessee if Henry comes back, but that's the only "honorable mention".)
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:48:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:21:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
It wouldn't be a total non-sequitur. Had the Bills won that winnable game against a rookie quarterback in a wind storm they would be pretty much be insurmountable control of the AFC East. As it stands right now they have the same record as the Patriots and the Division is very much still up for grabs.
But the QB was a total non-factor because they had the lead all game and didn't have to pass. It could have been Tom Brady that threw three passes and it wouldn't have made any difference.
Now, the Bills do have the tiebreaker as it stands right now, so they will win the division if they win out. Sure, it would be nice to have that one game back, but they took care of business this week and are still in great position to win the division, so that's all you can really ask for in terms of putting the narrative of the previous game to bed.
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win. The Bills probably will still win the division but it would be a lock otherwise. Yeah sure, the Bills "probably" will win the division but never really do know when an upset or major injury is going to happen in the NFL. Games like that wind game tend have a way of defining regular seasons for good or bad.
Are you suggesting that Alabama being too chicken to schedule road games in the north might come back to haunt their QBs once they turn pro?
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2021, 03:56:41 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:48:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:21:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Are the Bills generally not considered the superior of the two teams? I know weather played a factor in the first game, but to lose to a team who had three pass attempts is pretty historically bad.
Of course it's historically bad, but the Patriots still had only 240 yards and 14 points. It was the Bills' offense that cost them that game by fumbling and going 1 for 4 in the red zone. And yes, I do believe the Bills are a better team in normal weather conditions. But really I just don't know what any of this has to do with Mac Jones. Jones being drafted this year and the wind game being a bad look for the Bills is a total non-sequitur.
It wouldn't be a total non-sequitur. Had the Bills won that winnable game against a rookie quarterback in a wind storm they would be pretty much be insurmountable control of the AFC East. As it stands right now they have the same record as the Patriots and the Division is very much still up for grabs.
But the QB was a total non-factor because they had the lead all game and didn't have to pass. It could have been Tom Brady that threw three passes and it wouldn't have made any difference.
Now, the Bills do have the tiebreaker as it stands right now, so they will win the division if they win out. Sure, it would be nice to have that one game back, but they took care of business this week and are still in great position to win the division, so that's all you can really ask for in terms of putting the narrative of the previous game to bed.
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win. The Bills probably will still win the division but it would be a lock otherwise. Yeah sure, the Bills "probably" will win the division but never really do know when an upset or major injury is going to happen in the NFL. Games like that wind game tend have a way of defining regular seasons for good or bad.
Are you suggesting that Alabama being too chicken to schedule road games in the north might come back to haunt their QBs once they turn pro?
I think that's what Bill Belichick was suggesting with the offensive play calling in that game.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2021, 03:56:41 PM
Are you suggesting that Alabama being too chicken to schedule road games in the north might come back to haunt their QBs once they turn pro?
Not commenting on their scheduling wussiness, but look at all these awesome Alabama QBs that have been starters in the NFL recently:
Mac Jones (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
Tua Tagovailoa (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
Jalen Hurts (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
A.J. McCarron (lifetime backup)
Greg McElroy (one start, 185 yards, 1 INT, and a fumble while being sacked 11 times)
Brodie Croyle (six starts, all losses)
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:03:19 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2021, 03:56:41 PM
Are you suggesting that Alabama being too chicken to schedule road games in the north might come back to haunt their QBs once they turn pro?
Not commenting on their scheduling wussiness, but look at all these awesome Alabama QBs that have been starters in the NFL recently:
Mac Jones (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
Tua Tagovailoa (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
Jalen Hurts (jury still out, but certainly not great so far)
A.J. McCarron (lifetime backup)
Greg McElroy (one start, 185 yards, 1 INT, and a fumble while being sacked 11 times)
Brodie Croyle (six starts, all losses)
If I'm a college coach of a school north of the 39th parallel trying to recruit against southern schools for elite QBs, I'm showing them the lack of northern locales on the schedule of southern teams and then showing them tape of the NE-BUF game.
If you are a fan of Nick Wright on Fox Sports, he's been saying all year that Belichick has zero trust in Jones. Davis Mills has been the best rookie QB for sure, and one of the least hyped. Fields from the Bears hasn't given me any reason to think his arm will be NFL caliber, Lance looked completely clueless in SF, and Lawrence will be good eventually, but it might take a couple of years to wipe the Urban Meyer stank off his career.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
If you are a fan of Nick Wright on Fox Sports ...
Nick Wright is probably the single most disliked sports media figure here in WNY because of his apparent distrust of Josh Allen. Bills Twitter even
got involved (https://www.sportscasting.com/buffalo-bills-twitter-account-savagely-trolls-fs1-nick-wright-indefensible-josh-allen-takes/), trolling him after the Chiefs game.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
... he's been saying all year that Belichick has zero trust in Jones.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:48:24 PM
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win.
I couldn't disagree more. The Pats play calling had everything to do with their success in the run game and the fact that they were playing with the lead the entire game. And it worked, so there was zero reason to start calling passes. The only reason Brady or any other QB might have had more than three passes would be because of their ego, not because of the game plan. If the Bills could have scored to take the lead at any point, the Patriots would have had to start calling some passing plays. They only kept calling running plays because they had the lead and trusted their defense. Rookie or no rookie, 100 degrees or 0 degrees, it's just common sense that there was zero reason to be throwing passes in 50 mph winds when you have the lead. And that's why I put the loss 90% on the Bills offense for their lack of run game, lack of designed Allen runs, and red zone failures; and only about 10% on the defense, which did everything possible to put the offense in position to win.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
If you are a fan of Nick Wright on Fox Sports ...
Nick Wright is probably the single most disliked sports media figure here in WNY because of his apparent dislike/distrust of Josh Allen. Bills Twitter even got involved (https://www.sportscasting.com/buffalo-bills-twitter-account-savagely-trolls-fs1-nick-wright-indefensible-josh-allen-takes/) after the Chiefs game.
I love Nick, but I was listening to him a long time ago when he was just the local guy in Kansas City. I'm happy for his success while I obviously note the fact that he takes some more Bayless and Stephen A.- like lines on some topics.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
... he's been saying all year that Belichick has zero trust in Jones.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:48:24 PM
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win.
I couldn't disagree more. The Pats play calling had everything to do with their success in the run game and the fact that they were playing with the lead the entire game. And it worked, so there was zero reason to start calling passes. The only reason Brady or any other QB might have had more than three passes would be because of their ego, not because of the game plan. If the Bills could have scored to take the lead at any point, the Patriots would have had to start calling some passing plays. They only kept calling running plays because they had the lead and trusted their defense. Rookie or no rookie, 100 degrees or 0 degrees, it's just common sense that there was zero reason to be throwing passes in 50 mph winds when you have the lead. And that's why I put the loss 95% on the Bills offense for their lack of run game and red zone failures, and only about 5% on the defense, which did everything possible to put the offense in position to win.
And this is one of the reasons why the Bills aren't on my list of teams that can win it all. Their run game is abysmal minus Allen.
But re: NE, you reeeallly don't think if, say, Kirk Cousins was the Pats QB, that they wouldn't have thrown
some passes in that game? It's not only that one game that makes me think Bill doesn't have a lot of faith. There have been many other play calling choices this year.
I think Bill Belichick is old school in that he trusts the run game and the defense more than most "modern" NFL coaches. You could call that a lack of faith in Jones, but I see it as Belichick just doing what he thinks maximizes win probability. So no, I don't think Cousins or Brady or anyone else throws more than a handful of passes, unless like I said, it was because of their ego. In that one regard, a run heavy game plan is easier with a rookie QB that hasn't proved much yet.. and that gets in to a chicken and egg question. But ultimately I think the weather was a much bigger factor in the game plan than the QB was.
There were also times in 2019 when Belichick was very conservative and didn't trust his offense in key situations, which I think you could argue was part of the reason Brady ended up leaving. I just see it as a fundamental belief in defense more so than a lack of faith in the QB.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 26, 2021, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2021, 11:02:20 PM
I don't believe I've voiced my pure disdain for Browns fans (particularly their creepy attraction to Baker Mayfield no matter how bad he plays) before on this fourm. But that's been a thing for a good year now. Ever since the Browns became relevant again, they've become one of the most delusional groups of people I've ever seen. All of Baker Mayfield's "swagger" and "confidence" has translated to what has been an awful season. His numbers are what you would expect from a backup for a below average team, not a #1 overall pick starter for a team that is pretty solid outside of him. Anytime an actual statistical argument is used, some Browns fan will talk about how bad the team was before Baker. As if Baker is the reason why they've been mediocre over the past few years. Take Baker away from this team from the beginning of the season. With Keenum at quarterback the whole year, I'm guessing they would have the exact same record they do now. Jared Goff would do as much or more than Baker with this squad.
I know I said earlier in the thread (after the Browns/Chargers game maybe) that giving Baker a large contract would be a good decision. I rescind that take. Baker is dragging this team down, and no amount of "swagger", "confidence", or even unfunny commercials can change that.
There must be something about Baker Mayfield that causes this behavior, because people went apeshit over him in exactly the same way when he was at OU.
I used to troll this security guard at work by telling him these grandiose stories about how Baker Mayfield was about to get arrested, for unspecified reasons, usually by Robert Mueller coming out and cuffing him on the 50-yard line in the middle of the next game. This was all extremely silly and obviously made up, but the guy would get really mad to the point that he got red in the face and started yelling about how Baker Mayfield wasn't going to get arrested, and how I shouldn't say things like that, and how Baker Mayfield was the best quarterback ever (which shouldn't keep you from getting arrested if you actually did something wrong, but whatever).
Fayetteville PD would agree with you on that. And probably tackled him during his arrest quicker than most Big 12 defenses did back in his OU days.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 05:08:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
If you are a fan of Nick Wright on Fox Sports ...
Nick Wright is probably the single most disliked sports media figure here in WNY because of his apparent dislike/distrust of Josh Allen. Bills Twitter even got involved (https://www.sportscasting.com/buffalo-bills-twitter-account-savagely-trolls-fs1-nick-wright-indefensible-josh-allen-takes/) after the Chiefs game.
I love Nick, but I was listening to him a long time ago when he was just the local guy in Kansas City. I'm happy for his success while I obviously note the fact that he takes some more Bayless and Stephen A.- like lines on some topics.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 04:13:05 PM
... he's been saying all year that Belichick has zero trust in Jones.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 03:48:24 PM
If Tom Brady was on the Patriots during that game they weren't going with three passes. Josh Allen had 30 pass attempts during that game and completed 15 if I recall correct. Suffice to say the Patriots went with a one dimensional safe offense likely because of Mac Jone's inexperience in cold weather and the Bills still couldn't find a way to win.
I couldn't disagree more. The Pats play calling had everything to do with their success in the run game and the fact that they were playing with the lead the entire game. And it worked, so there was zero reason to start calling passes. The only reason Brady or any other QB might have had more than three passes would be because of their ego, not because of the game plan. If the Bills could have scored to take the lead at any point, the Patriots would have had to start calling some passing plays. They only kept calling running plays because they had the lead and trusted their defense. Rookie or no rookie, 100 degrees or 0 degrees, it's just common sense that there was zero reason to be throwing passes in 50 mph winds when you have the lead. And that's why I put the loss 95% on the Bills offense for their lack of run game and red zone failures, and only about 5% on the defense, which did everything possible to put the offense in position to win.
And this is one of the reasons why the Bills aren't on my list of teams that can win it all. Their run game is abysmal minus Allen.
But re: NE, you reeeallly don't think if, say, Kirk Cousins was the Pats QB, that they wouldn't have thrown some passes in that game? It's not only that one game that makes me think Bill doesn't have a lot of faith. There have been many other play calling choices this year.
The feeling I got was that almost any other quarterback in the same situation was getting three passes. And yes, the Patriots did out coach the Bills playing a weird keep away game. The Bills totally are at fault they couldn't stop an obviously run oriented offensive game plan and countered it with their ability to kind of still pass the ball. I couldn't picture say the Chiefs, Packers and Buccaneers (unless it's against the Saints) being completely stone walled like that. But that's part of why the Bills quite aren't the same level as those teams.
It also couldn't have been more obvious that the team built to pass and stop the pass was at a disadvantage in 50 mph winds. The Bills spent the offseason bettering their passing game and pass rush, which paid off really well in the Chiefs game... not so much against the run-heavy Colts and Patriots.
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
It also couldn't have been more obvious that the team built to pass and stop the pass was at a disadvantage in 50 mph winds. The Bills spent the offseason bettering their passing game and pass rush, which paid off really well in the Chiefs game... not so much against the run-heavy Colts and Patriots.
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
The fact that the Bills and Josh Allen couldn't overcome that scenario speaks to the fact that neither are elite. Whether they will be eventually elite or just remain a Top 10 Team/QB remains to be seen. The way it stands now the Bills aren't a serious Super Bowl contender.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
And now Arizona and New England are gone too.
I only have four teams I think can win it - Tampa Bay, Green Bay, Kansas City, or Indy. I'll stick to my guns there. (I might reevaluate Tennessee if Henry comes back, but that's the only "honorable mention".)
I'd remove Cardinals from that list and insert the Cowboys. While I believe the Cowboys history and McCarthy getting to ultra conservative at the wrong time will likely doom the Cowboys at some point, they have all the pieces there to make a run and their roster makeup is built to win a road game if needed. For those that believe in conspiracy theories the Dallas Cowboys would be one of those teams people would say that the NFL wouldn't mind having in their biggest game(s).
John Madden died at the age of 85. As far as I'm concerned, he's the gold standard for football announcing analysts. RIP Coach.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 05:43:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
...
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
The fact that the Bills and Josh Allen couldn't overcome that scenario speaks to the fact that neither are elite. Whether they will be eventually elite or just remain a Top 10 Team/QB remains to be seen. The way it stands now the Bills aren't a serious Super Bowl contender.
You're just proving my point: that's an overreaction to a single result. And that would be the
last result you'd want to overreact to because it's extremely unlikely that those same conditions will be encountered in the playoffs. It wasn't some sort of Patriots masterpiece or blowout victory, it was an extremely close game that could have gone either way, and the Patriots probably lose if not for a missed Bills field goal.
The Bills as a whole have their share of things to work on, including the run game, run defense, and offensive line play, but you can't re-watch the last two Bills games and tell me that those things aren't improving and Josh Allen isn't one of the best QB's in the league.
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 07:35:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 05:43:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
...
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
The fact that the Bills and Josh Allen couldn't overcome that scenario speaks to the fact that neither are elite. Whether they will be eventually elite or just remain a Top 10 Team/QB remains to be seen. The way it stands now the Bills aren't a serious Super Bowl contender.
You're just proving my point: that's an overreaction to a single result. And that would be the last result you'd want to overreact to because it's extremely unlikely that those same conditions will be encountered in the playoffs. It wasn't some sort of Patriots masterpiece or blowout victory, it was an extremely close game that could have gone either way, and the Patriots probably lose if not for a missed Bills field goal.
The Bills as a whole have their share of things to work on, including the run game, run defense, and offensive line play, but you can't re-watch the last two Bills games and tell me that those things aren't improving and Josh Allen isn't one of the best QB's in the league.
Josh Allen may be a Top Five quarterback but he isn't Patrick Mahomes, Aaron Rogers or Tom Brady. The Bills aren't as good this year and haven't really given any indication that they will be. I might be wrong but I kind feel like the Bills and Josh Allen are about as good as they are going to get. I mean hey, I would be happy (as a Lions fan) competing for Division titles annually and being in the mix but I don't know if Bills fans will be.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 07:44:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 07:35:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 05:43:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
...
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
The fact that the Bills and Josh Allen couldn't overcome that scenario speaks to the fact that neither are elite. Whether they will be eventually elite or just remain a Top 10 Team/QB remains to be seen. The way it stands now the Bills aren't a serious Super Bowl contender.
You're just proving my point: that's an overreaction to a single result. And that would be the last result you'd want to overreact to because it's extremely unlikely that those same conditions will be encountered in the playoffs. It wasn't some sort of Patriots masterpiece or blowout victory, it was an extremely close game that could have gone either way, and the Patriots probably lose if not for a missed Bills field goal.
The Bills as a whole have their share of things to work on, including the run game, run defense, and offensive line play, but you can't re-watch the last two Bills games and tell me that those things aren't improving and Josh Allen isn't one of the best QB's in the league.
Josh Allen may be a Top Five quarterback but he isn't Patrick Mahomes, Aaron Rogers or Tom Brady. The Bills aren't as good this year and haven't really given any indication that they will be. I might be wrong but I kind feel like the Bills and Josh Allen are about as good as they are going to get. I mean hey, I would be happy (as a Lions fan) competing for Division titles annually and being in the mix but I don't know if Bills fans will be.
Josh Allen is averaging 270 passing yards/game and 40 rushing yards/game, behind what is at best a B-/C+ offensive line. Put him behind the offensive lines in Dallas, Tampa Bay, Kansas City or Green Bay and nobody is questioning his status.
Fans underrate the impact an offensive line has by an immeasurable amount.
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
And now Arizona and New England are gone too.
I only have four teams I think can win it - Tampa Bay, Green Bay, Kansas City, or Indy. I'll stick to my guns there. (I might reevaluate Tennessee if Henry comes back, but that's the only "honorable mention".)
How about you put your money where your mouth is (figuratively speaking), and bet me on who gets further in the playoffs: Indy, Dallas, or the Rams. If they tie or one of Dallas/Rams gets further and the other not as far, it's a push and nothing happens. If both Dallas and the Rams get further or one gets further and the other the same as Indy, I win. If Indy gets further than both or the same as one and further than the other, you win.
Loser has to put something in their signature of the other person's choice (within forum rules of course).
You up?
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2021, 07:58:42 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 07:44:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 07:35:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2021, 05:43:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 28, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
...
Then again, those particular conditions were extreme and almost certainly aren't going to happen again, even in Buffalo, so I think people (including myself) tend to read into that one result way more than they should. The fact that we're still talking about that game instead of the one the Bills dominated two days ago, is proof of that.
The fact that the Bills and Josh Allen couldn't overcome that scenario speaks to the fact that neither are elite. Whether they will be eventually elite or just remain a Top 10 Team/QB remains to be seen. The way it stands now the Bills aren't a serious Super Bowl contender.
You're just proving my point: that's an overreaction to a single result. And that would be the last result you'd want to overreact to because it's extremely unlikely that those same conditions will be encountered in the playoffs. It wasn't some sort of Patriots masterpiece or blowout victory, it was an extremely close game that could have gone either way, and the Patriots probably lose if not for a missed Bills field goal.
The Bills as a whole have their share of things to work on, including the run game, run defense, and offensive line play, but you can't re-watch the last two Bills games and tell me that those things aren't improving and Josh Allen isn't one of the best QB's in the league.
Josh Allen may be a Top Five quarterback but he isn't Patrick Mahomes, Aaron Rogers or Tom Brady. The Bills aren't as good this year and haven't really given any indication that they will be. I might be wrong but I kind feel like the Bills and Josh Allen are about as good as they are going to get. I mean hey, I would be happy (as a Lions fan) competing for Division titles annually and being in the mix but I don't know if Bills fans will be.
Josh Allen is averaging 270 passing yards/game and 40 rushing yards/game, behind what is at best a B-/C+ offensive line. Put him behind the offensive lines in Dallas, Tampa Bay, Kansas City or Green Bay and nobody is questioning his status.
Fans underrate the impact an offensive line has by an immeasurable amount.
He still has to actually beat someone substantial. To that end Josh Allen's situation isn't dissimilar to Dak Prescott or Matt Staff in that he has been very good (I would say Josh Allen is better than both ever were) but never quite great. That won't change unless he and the Bills do something to beat the elite teams. Losing games head to head against Patrick Mahomes and Tom Brady isn't the best indicator he will surpass either. But that just speaks to whatever that missing ingredient is that also came up in the Windy Game with the Patriots.
I mean hey, I would love to see Josh Allen become a next level guy. My wife is from Firebaugh and there is a huge local following second only to the Rams. The Bills are a likeable team and fan base, it would be nice to actually see them get a Super Bowl title finally.
Well, the Bills did beat the Chiefs earlier this season, but they have yet to do it in the playoffs...
My personal thought is that anything short of a Super Bowl win would be a disappointment for the Bills. Sure, it's fun to be relevant in December, but after decades of mediocrity since the Jim Kelly days, the Bills finally have a solid QB again and it's time to finally get over the hump. Until that happens, the Bills will just be the team that lost four straight Super Bowls and haven't been back since.
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 28, 2021, 07:58:42 PM
Josh Allen is averaging 270 passing yards/game and 40 rushing yards/game, behind what is at best a B-/C+ offensive line. Put him behind the offensive lines in Dallas, Tampa Bay, Kansas City or Green Bay and nobody is questioning his status.
Fans underrate the impact an offensive line has by an immeasurable amount.
Certainly agreed, the Bills' O-line hasn't been as good as it was last year for whatever reason. The injuries haven't helped, but it's been an issue in all of their losses this year.
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2021, 08:07:51 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 28, 2021, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 22, 2021, 12:11:03 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 06, 2021, 12:46:18 PM
I would be very surprised if the Super Bowl winner came from anyone outside this list:
NFC
Arizona
Green Bay
Tampa Bay
AFC
Kansas City
New England
Buffalo
Indianapolis
I'll relent and take Buffalo off of this list, but my Colts inclusion stands.
And now Arizona and New England are gone too.
I only have four teams I think can win it - Tampa Bay, Green Bay, Kansas City, or Indy. I'll stick to my guns there. (I might reevaluate Tennessee if Henry comes back, but that's the only "honorable mention".)
How about you put your money where your mouth is (figuratively speaking), and bet me on who gets further in the playoffs: Indy, Dallas, or the Rams. If they tie or one of Dallas/Rams gets further and the other not as far, it's a push and nothing happens. If both Dallas and the Rams get further or one gets further and the other the same as Indy, I win. If Indy gets further than both or the same as one and further than the other, you win.
Loser has to put something in their signature of the other person's choice (within forum rules of course).
You up?
For sure, once I see matchups. (Not that it's a lot to risk if I'm wrong.) And keep in mind, I'm not saying Indy will win the Superbowl. I'm saying the other teams will not. I'm not even necessarily saying that Indy will make it farther than the Rams or Cowboys. I
am saying that the Colts are better equipped to win four games than the other two are.
I think Josh Allen's problem is less his talent, and more than he can't be their de facto RB as well as the QB if the team is going to go deep into January.
Bears 14, Giants 13
Patriots 39, Jaguars 10
Rams 27, Ravens 17
Buccaneers 20, Jets 13
Bills 35, Falcons 17
Chiefs 33, Bengals 21
Titans 24, Dolphins 20
Raiders 23, Colts 17
Eagles 24, Washington 10
Chargers 22, Broncos 17
49ers 34, Texans 20
Lions 26, Seahawks 17
Cowboys 34, Cardinals 24
Saints 10, Panthers 3
Packers 38, Vikings 20
Steelers 28, Browns 14
My almost two-month run of being a Jets genius meets my two-week run of being a Buccaneers idiot. One of those streaks will be snapped.
I haven't missed a Dolphins pick since week 7, and this is the first time I'm picking them to lose since week 8.
The Raiders keep getting lucky with their opponents having a ton of injuries/a covid outbreak.
Can't wait for the NFC South battle of two offenses that have scored a combined two touchdowns in four games.
As long as the Steelers don't lose out, Tomlin's "fluky" streak of non-losing seasons will continue.
I'm sticking the fork in the Falcons and Vikings. That brings the list to:
Lions
Texans
Panthers
Broncos
Jets
Jaguars
Washington
Giants
Bears
Saints
Raiders
Browns
Seahawks
Falcons
Vikings
The three un-forked teams currently outside the playoffs are the Chargers, Ravens, and Steelers. Chargers and Ravens are tied on record for the 7th seed. I'm waiting on the Steelers because it's not at all out of the question that they win out - they've already beaten the Browns and Ravens this season, and both those teams have been slumping recently.
I'll take Colts, Seahawks, Texans, and Browns.
Alright, time for my final fork update. I said I would do my final forks before Week 17 starts, and I'll stick to it even though I don't feel very good about it. There's 24 teams still alive, and forking 10 of them is no easy task, not to mention that there's a ton of games with major implications this week, so the picture could look totally different before Week 18. Even so, here goes:
Existing list of forked teams (bold=eliminated):
AFC: Jaguars, Jets, Texans, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders, Broncos
NFC: Lions, Bears, Giants, Seahawks, Panthers, Falcons
Added 12/30/2021: Saints, Washington, Ravens ...
[rolls dice] Eagles
[rolls dice again] Bengals
No comment on those last two, but as for the other teams, I'm not worried about any of them except maybe the Dolphins, which ironically were one of the very first teams to be forked. Going from 1-7 to 8-7 is impressive, and it would be a heck of a fun story for them to steal the Patriots' playoff spot in Week 18... unfortunately, the Chargers ruined those odds, so the Patriots are probably in regardless. The Raiders also lurk as a potential spoiler candidate, but they'd have to win out. It could happen, but I'd be really surprised.
So here are my 2021 playoff teams (bold=clinched):
AFC: Chiefs, Titans, Bills, Browns, Colts, Patriots, Chargers
NFC: Cowboys, Packers, Rams, Bucs, Cardinals, 49ers, Vikings
Kirk Cousins has Covid. RIP 2021 Vikings.
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2021, 11:01:52 AM
Kirk Cousins has Covid. RIP 2021 Vikings.
You held out more hope for my guys than I did if you're just writing them off now. :D
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2021, 11:01:52 AM
Kirk Cousins has Covid. RIP 2021 Vikings.
The Packers thank him for his belated Christmas gift: an easy win!
Wentz and a few other Colts are off the Covid list, so my new prediction for that game is 27-20 Colts.
Antonio Brown took off his jersey and pads then ran off the field while the game was going on. The Bucs immediately cut him. With all the other things he, hope he gets serious mental help.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2022, 02:29:38 PM
Wentz and a few other Colts are off the Covid list, so my new prediction for that game is 27-20 Colts.
Little bit off there. Raiders win 23-20.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 02, 2022, 06:02:26 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2022, 02:29:38 PM
Wentz and a few other Colts are off the Covid list, so my new prediction for that game is 27-20 Colts.
Little bit off there. Raiders win 23-20.
My original prediction was closer. Should've stuck with it.
One of the referees left the game with an injury. The Packers will be playing a man down the rest of the game.
My slightly adjusted Super Bowl list:
1. Chiefs - not worried about the loss today
2. Buccaneers - seems like a lot of stuff is going wayward with this team right now, but, Tom Brady . . .
3. Packers - pending result tonight, should be a comfortable win
4. Rams - at this time, Cooper Kupp is the best football player in the world
5. Cardinals - figured they were capable of rebounding with all the talent they have, very impressive win today
6. Cowboys - really struggling to run the ball as of late, but we saw them run it well early in the season and nothing tangible has changed since then. Their offensive struggles might be something to do with some defensive schematics that certain teams figured out, but 1) I'm not smart enough for that, and 2) Washington's defense handled them fine the first time around, then gave up 42 in the first half in their second matchup.
Two 50-burgers this week: the Patriots' 50 and the Seahawks' 51. Belichick's dominance of rookie quarterbacks never fails. Except for when it's Davis Mills.
I'm as much of a 49ers hater as anyone, but not sure why so many people picked the Texans to win today, beyond just wanting to go for an upset. The Niners are still a half-decent team without Garoppolo, and Davis Mills is still a third round rookie playing for a team that will have a top 5 draft pick.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
One of the referees left the game with an injury. The Packers will be playing a man down the rest of the game.
That's actually a good joke, though the implied "refs favor the Packers" narrative is wrong.
Quote from: thspfc on January 02, 2022, 08:54:10 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
One of the referees left the game with an injury. The Packers will be playing a man down the rest of the game.
That's actually a good joke, though the implied "refs favor the Packers" narrative is wrong.
I've watched every game they've played against the Bears plus every Sunday night game they've played for several years now and they clearly get favored in nearly every game.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:56:38 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 02, 2022, 08:54:10 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
One of the referees left the game with an injury. The Packers will be playing a man down the rest of the game.
That's actually a good joke, though the implied "refs favor the Packers" narrative is wrong.
I've watched every game they've played against the Bears plus every Sunday night game they've played for several years now and they clearly get favored in nearly every game.
Not even engaging in this.
Quote from: Big John on January 02, 2022, 05:59:41 PM
Antonio Brown took off his jersey and pads then ran off the field while the game was going on. The Bucs immediately cut him. With all the other things he, hope he gets serious mental help.
And on a Super Bowl contender. Truly bizarre.
A Bills player retired mid-game back in 2018 (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24703207/buffalo-bills-cb-vontae-davis-abruptly-retires-football-half-vs-los-angeles-chargers), but that was nothing like this.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:56:38 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 02, 2022, 08:54:10 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 02, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
One of the referees left the game with an injury. The Packers will be playing a man down the rest of the game.
That's actually a good joke, though the implied "refs favor the Packers" narrative is wrong.
I've watched every game they've played against the Bears plus every Sunday night game they've played for several years now and they clearly get favored in nearly every game.
From my limited observation, the team with (a) the more marketable quarterback and (b) home field, tend to get more favorable calls. Most Packers SNF games are at home, which hits both criteria. It certainly seemed to be the case against Cleveland (that was Saturday night, but same idea).
Quote from: thspfc on January 02, 2022, 08:53:21 PM
My slightly adjusted Super Bowl list:
1. Chiefs - not worried about the loss today
2. Buccaneers - seems like a lot of stuff is going wayward with this team right now, but, Tom Brady . . .
3. Packers - pending result tonight, should be a comfortable win
4. Rams - at this time, Cooper Kupp is the best football player in the world
5. Cardinals - figured they were capable of rebounding with all the talent they have, very impressive win today
6. Cowboys - ...
I maintain that if there's only 6 teams on the list, 5 can't be from a single conference.
I think AB already gave us a winner for best sports meme of 2022. 2021's contenders are Cam Newton's "I'M BAAAAACK!", Immunized, Kirk Cousins' plexiglass, Innocent until proven Gylfi, and Factos.
This is such a depressing, yet somehow extremely fitting, way for this 2021 Vikings season to end. Zero multi-score losses until tonight. 14 of 15 one-score games. Never been above .500 all season, yet bounced back from 1-3, 3-5, and 5-7. And when they need to do it one more time, their QB gets Covid. Ugh. Their streak of making the playoffs every other year, active since 2014, will end at 7 years.
Today had to be just as disappointing for the Browns as it was for the Vikings, especially with the Rams doing their part to beat the Ravens at the last second, but then the absolute bonkers ending of Chiefs-Bengals ruining their playoff hopes, then remaining mathematically alive for a few more hours until Chargers-Broncos went final... all without playing a single snap themselves. Deflating to say the least.
Dolphins, Broncos, Falcons, and Washington were also eliminated from the playoffs today, while the Bills, Patriots, Bengals, Titans, and now Eagles have all clinched.
I was rooting for a Browns-Bengals division title game in Week 18, but even though that didn't happen, I'm still happy for the Bengals. In any case, with 6 of 8 divisions now clinched, there will be no division title games in Week 18. Only the AFC East and NFC West are still unclinched, but all four teams in contention have clinched playoff berths and none of them play each other next week.
With the Raiders somehow still alive, it looks like Chargers-Raiders, Saints-Falcons, and 49ers-Rams are the biggest Week 18 matchups, and almost all of the other games will have seeding implications.
Quote from: webny99 on January 02, 2022, 11:39:37 PM
With the Raiders somehow still alive, it looks like Chargers-Raiders, Saints-Falcons, and 49ers-Rams are the biggest Week 18 matchups, and almost all of the other games will have seeding implications.
Full Week 18 schedule is out: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-announces-week-18-saturday-games-sunday-nighter
NFL showing zero respect for the AFC South here: Titans can clinch the AFC #1 seed with a win while the Colts can clinch a playoff berth, but both games were left at 1 PM. Those are the only games with a clinching scenario not to be flexed.
I get there's usually a lot of meaningless games the last week of the season, but with 17 games, it seems like that number is up. This is pretty much what I figured would happen. Place your bets now for how many substantive injuries will be suffered by playoff teams next weekend.
Also, don't forget to throw out all of the stats from the last 50 years or whenever it was they went from 14 games to 16. You won't need those anymore since they will be meaningless in a couple of days.
I like football, don't get me wrong, but screw week 18; let's start the goddamn playoffs already.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 03, 2022, 05:25:20 PM
I get there's usually a lot of meaningless games the last week of the season, but with 17 games, it seems like that number is up. This is pretty much what I figured would happen. Place your bets now for how many substantive injuries will be suffered by playoff teams next weekend.
Also, don't forget to throw out all of the stats from the last 50 years or whenever it was they went from 14 games to 16. You won't need those anymore since they will be meaningless in a couple of days.
I like football, don't get me wrong, but screw week 18; let's start the goddamn playoffs already.
Exactly how I feel. The only positive of the 17 game season is more cross-conference matchups that we don't get often (i.e. Packers/Chiefs, Cowboys/Patriots, Rams/Ravens to name a few from this season).
Alright, so speaking of which, here are the results of the extra games now that they've all been played:
Bills 43, Washington 21
Patriots 29, Cowboys 35 (OT)
Dolphins 20, Giants 9
Jets 18, Eagles 33
Bengals 23, 49ers 26 (OT)
Ravens 19, Rams 20
Steelers 23, Seahawks 20 (OT)
Browns 14, Cardinals 37
Titans 23, Saints 21
Colts 31, Bucs 38
Texans 9, Panthers 24
Jaguars 14, Falcons 21
Chiefs 13, Packers 7
Chargers 20, Vikings 27
Raiders 9, Bears 20
Broncos 38, Lions 10
By my count, at least half of those were pretty decent games, including three overtime games. Add in the fact that no one division swept another in the extra game, and it would be tough to convince me that those games didn't matter or didn't add anything to the season.
There's also the fact that 14 of 16 regular season finale games have playoff/seeding implications this year, which is actually up from only 12 of 16 last year. So the argument that there are less meaningful games doesn't hold up, at least not this year.
With all that said, I didn't have any issues with a 16-game season. I would certainly prefer an even number of games, so if things are headed in the direction of more games, I wouldn't be opposed to an 18-game season that starts earlier in the year. You could maybe even have a 20-week season with two bye weeks per team, with the season starting in mid-August.
Quote from: webny99 on January 03, 2022, 06:10:56 PM
Alright, so speaking of which, here are the results of the extra games now that they've all been played:
Bills 43, Washington 21
Patriots 29, Cowboys 35 (OT)
Dolphins 20, Giants 9
Jets 18, Eagles 33
Bengals 23, 49ers 26 (OT)
Ravens 19, Rams 20
Steelers 23, Seahawks 20 (OT)
Browns 14, Cardinals 37
Titans 23, Saints 21
Colts 31, Bucs 38
Texans 9, Panthers 24
Jaguars 14, Falcons 21
Chiefs 13, Packers 7
Chargers 20, Vikings 27
Raiders 9, Bears 20
Broncos 38, Lions 10
By my count, at least half of those were pretty decent games, including three overtime games. Add in the fact that no one division swept another in the extra game, and it would be tough to convince me that those games didn't matter or didn't add anything to the season.
There's also the fact that 14 of 16 regular season finale games have playoff/seeding implications this year, which is actually up from only 12 of 16 last year. So the argument that there are less meaningful games doesn't hold up, at least not this year.
With all that said, I didn't have any issues with a 16-game season. I would certainly prefer an even number of games, so if things are headed in the direction of more games, I wouldn't be opposed to an 18-game season that starts earlier in the year. You could maybe even have a 20-week season with two bye weeks per team, with the season starting in mid-August.
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
I wonder if keeping the 16 game schedule but adding a 2nd bye for each team to expand the season to 18 weeks would have produced the same TV revenue windfall as going to 17 games.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
I wonder if keeping the 16 game schedule but adding a 2nd bye for each team to expand the season to 18 weeks would have produced the same TV revenue windfall as going to 17 games.
I will maintain once again that my preference would be for an 18-game season, although an early start may not be what the owners wanted. No matter what sport, an even number of games just works better, because at least you'd have a breakeven point of .500 (e.g. 9-9 would be the old 16-game equivalent of 8-8). The current schedule is just an unnecessary change for me.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
When the NFL regular season started on the Labor Day weekend, ratings were lower.
Quote from: Big John on January 03, 2022, 08:19:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
When the NFL regular season started on the Labor Day weekend, ratings were lower.
If the season gets any longer, I think we end up with an even later start to the season, a 2-week break from December 25-January 8, and a Super Bowl in March.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 09:26:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 03, 2022, 08:19:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
When the NFL regular season started on the Labor Day weekend, ratings were lower.
If the season gets any longer, I think we end up with an even later start to the season, a 2-week break from December 25-January 8, and a Super Bowl in March.
If it is too late in March, it would conflict with March Madness.
What about having the games slightly closer than a week apart? For example, a team plays five consecutive games on Sunday, Friday, Thursday, Monday, and Sunday. (This would also be made easier if games existed on all seven days of the week.)
Quote from: jlam on January 03, 2022, 09:30:57 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 09:26:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 03, 2022, 08:19:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
When the NFL regular season started on the Labor Day weekend, ratings were lower.
If the season gets any longer, I think we end up with an even later start to the season, a 2-week break from December 25-January 8, and a Super Bowl in March.
If it is too late in March, it would conflict with March Madness.
The Super Bowl is the #1 American sporting event. It can be whenever it wants.
Quote from: 1 on January 03, 2022, 09:32:56 PM
What about having the games slightly closer than a week apart? For example, a team plays five consecutive games on Sunday, Friday, Thursday, Monday, and Sunday. (This would also be made easier if games existed on all seven days of the week.)
The players union would object since it would decrease recovery time.
Quote from: 1 on January 03, 2022, 09:32:56 PM
What about having the games slightly closer than a week apart? For example, a team plays five consecutive games on Sunday, Friday, Thursday, Monday, and Sunday. (This would also be made easier if games existed on all seven days of the week.)
I personally would object because I like how the NFL has almost all of its weekly games on one day.
Quote from: Big John on January 03, 2022, 09:36:35 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 03, 2022, 09:32:56 PM
What about having the games slightly closer than a week apart? For example, a team plays five consecutive games on Sunday, Friday, Thursday, Monday, and Sunday. (This would also be made easier if games existed on all seven days of the week.)
The players union would object since it would decrease recovery time.
Scheduling would be a nightmare. Teams and players already hate the Sunday-Thursday turnaround, so you couldn't logistically schedule every day of the week without taking 20+ weeks to play 17 games.
I'd actually like to see the NFL schedule fewer nights. I pretty much only watch Thursday games if the Bears or Colts are playing, but I watch most Sunday and Monday night games regardless of who's playing.
Quote from: thspfc on December 30, 2021, 10:28:43 AM
Steelers 28, Browns 14
A pretty solid prediction.
The Harris touchdown run on Big Ben's last meaningful snap at Heinz will go down as one of the lasting images of this season and one of the great career sendoff moments ever. Especially if the stadium is renamed once the naming rights contract expires this offseason.
On a non-sentimental note, that atrocity was the cherry on top of a failed season for the Browns. The Browns is the Browns, I guess?
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 10:30:12 PM
Scheduling would be a nightmare. Teams and players already hate the Sunday-Thursday turnaround, so you couldn't logistically schedule every day of the week without taking 20+ weeks to play 17 games.
What I described above requires a single 4-day gap (Thursday to Monday) if no Tuesday or Wednesday games are allowed. If all seven days are allowed, go 5, 6, 6, 5, and 6, and you've gone from Sunday to Sunday with an extra game in there and no two games 4 days part.
Regarding most teams playing on the same day, if we're talking 18 games instead of 17, each team would only have to do this once per season, and they could play mostly on Sunday the rest of the season.
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
🔔 Just realized there is a potential situation where this could happen next week 🔔
IF the Jaguars beat the Colts (massive IF, as they will be big underdogs, although they did beat them last year and played them close earlier this year), the Chargers and Raiders would both clinch a playoff berth by tying each other on Sunday Night Football. That scenario would eliminate the Colts and Ravens, and both the Chargers and Raiders have a head-to-head tiebreaker over the Steelers, so they're both in even if the Steelers also finish 9-7-1. We will know by kickoff if this could happen, as the Colts and Jaguars play at 1 PM ET.
Obviously, the NFL would not want this to happen, but that's the risk they take by putting Chargers-Raiders on SNF without knowing the results of Colts-Jaguars. My guess is that if the NFL had any respect for the Jaguars' chances, they would have put 49ers-Rams on SNF instead.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:07:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
🔔 Just realized there is a potential situation where this could happen next week 🔔
IF the Jaguars beat the Colts (massive IF, as they will be big underdogs, although they did beat them last year and played them close earlier this year), the Chargers and Raiders would both clinch a playoff berth by tying each other on Sunday Night Football. That scenario would eliminate the Colts and Ravens, and both the Chargers and Raiders have a head-to-head tiebreaker over the Steelers, so they're both in even if the Steelers also finish 9-7-1. We will know by kickoff if this could happen, as the Colts and Jaguars play at 1 PM ET.
Obviously, the NFL would not want this to happen, but that's the risk they take by putting Chargers-Raiders on SNF without knowing the results of Colts-Jaguars. My guess is that if the NFL had any respect for the Jaguars' chances, they would have put 49ers-Rams on SNF instead.
There's no way two teams could orchestrate a tie without making it obvious, and if that happened the league would just boot them both our of the playoffs and put the next two teams in.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
I wonder if keeping the 16 game schedule but adding a 2nd bye for each team to expand the season to 18 weeks would have produced the same TV revenue windfall as going to 17 games.
This might be knowable somewhere...the NFL had 2 bye weeks per team in the 1993 season.
I always wonder why the bye weeks are so spread out over most of the season. Why not have them all occur over a 2-week span mid-season? This would greatly reduce advantage/disadvantages for teams that get theirs really early or really late.
Quote from: Mapmikey on January 04, 2022, 08:20:06 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
I wonder if keeping the 16 game schedule but adding a 2nd bye for each team to expand the season to 18 weeks would have produced the same TV revenue windfall as going to 17 games.
This might be knowable somewhere...the NFL had 2 bye weeks per team in the 1993 season.
I always wonder why the bye weeks are so spread out over most of the season. Why not have them all occur over a 2-week span mid-season? This would greatly reduce advantage/disadvantages for teams that get theirs really early or really late.
In a typical week, you have 1 game each on Thursday, Sunday and Monday nights, so if nobody is on a bye week that leaves 13 games to spread over 2 time slots Sunday afternoon. Having 4 teams on a bye reduces that to 11 games. Having half of the league on a bye reduces that to just 5 games. You end up with large chunks of the country getting a Jacksonville-Houston game or a Detroit-Carolina game and people find something else to watch.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 04, 2022, 08:16:23 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:07:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
🔔 Just realized there is a potential situation where this could happen next week 🔔
...
There's no way two teams could orchestrate a tie without making it obvious, and if that happened the league would just boot them both our of the playoffs and put the next two teams in.
Have you seen the Chargers and the Raiders? If there's any two teams that could do it, those would be the two. :D
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 11:44:59 PM
On a non-sentimental note, that atrocity was the cherry on top of a failed season for the Browns. The Browns is the Browns, I guess?
Zero positives from the past two days for that franchise (except the fact that Big Ben is retiring, if you can count that). I was holding out hope that they would have a chance to win the division by beating the Bengals next week, but with the way they played last night, it wouldn't have mattered even if the Bengals hadn't beat the Chiefs.
I continue to be confused by their play calling. No idea why they wouldn't run it more against the worst run defense in the league. It's almost like Stefanski is giving Mayfield a chance to prove himself or something, but it couldn't be more clear that it just isn't working. He could end up costing himself his job while not really doing anything for Mayfield except putting more bad tape out there. Very strange to say the least.
Quote from: Mapmikey on January 04, 2022, 08:20:06 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 03, 2022, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2022, 06:46:16 PM
For the record, my main opposition to the 17th game is that the players didn't want it. You're right that the final week this year is still important as ever.
If the season were to go to 18 games per team, it would most definitely have to start earlier. In my opinion, the last day of the regular season should be the first Sunday after Christmas. This year that was the 26th, which was week 16 in reality. For a 16 game season, that would mean starting Labor Day weekend. For a 17 game season, the last weekend of August. Some might argue starting earlier isn't feasible because it's too hot or because of the hurricane risk in the southeast. But in that case the Florida teams and the Saints could just play more away games early in the season, and more home games later on. (or the Saints could, you know, move out of New Orleans :poke:)
I wonder if keeping the 16 game schedule but adding a 2nd bye for each team to expand the season to 18 weeks would have produced the same TV revenue windfall as going to 17 games.
This might be knowable somewhere...the NFL had 2 bye weeks per team in the 1993 season.
I always wonder why the bye weeks are so spread out over most of the season. Why not have them all occur over a 2-week span mid-season? This would greatly reduce advantage/disadvantages for teams that get theirs really early or really late.
One of the things I thought was dumb in 1993 was that the schedule was not set up so that each team had one bye week in each half of the season. For example, the Redskins had their byes in Weeks 4 and 8. I thought it would have made more sense if each team got one bye during Weeks 1—8 and the other bye during Weeks 9—18, perhaps with further restrictions like no team getting a bye in Week 1 (no reason for it that early) or Week 18 (so that no team would have an additional week's rest prior to the playoffs).
With the proliferation of fantasy football, there would be unfortune results if there were late-season byes. Fantasy football managers were complaining about week 14 byes this year.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:32:08 AM
I continue to be confused by [the Browns'] play calling. No idea why they wouldn't run it more against the worst run defense in the league. It's almost like Stefanski is giving Mayfield a chance to prove himself or something, but it couldn't be more clear that it just isn't working. He could end up costing himself his job while not really doing anything for Mayfield except putting more bad tape out there. Very strange to say the least.
I subjected myself to some of Stefanski's post game press conference and have concluded that he's a bigger problem than Baker. He seems almost like a zombie; zero leadership, zero accountability, zero emotion. That can work for an OC, but it can't work for a head coach.
And every time I think about his COTY campaign last year, it seems less and less impressive. Won a bunch of close games, some of which had no business even being close. Got swept by the Ravens. Lost to the Jets. Barely clinched the playoffs against a team of backups. Wasn't even on the sideline for their playoff win. Seemed decent at the time because the bar is so low, but I definitely don't think he's the reason they made the playoffs. I think they should move on.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 12:12:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:32:08 AM
I continue to be confused by [the Browns'] play calling. No idea why they wouldn't run it more against the worst run defense in the league. It's almost like Stefanski is giving Mayfield a chance to prove himself or something, but it couldn't be more clear that it just isn't working. He could end up costing himself his job while not really doing anything for Mayfield except putting more bad tape out there. Very strange to say the least.
I subjected myself to some of Stefanski's post game press conference and have concluded that he's a bigger problem than Baker. He has zero leadership, accountability, or emotion. That can work for an OC, but it can't work for a head coach.
And every time I think about his COTY campaign last year, it seems less and less impressive. Won a bunch of close games, some of which had no business even being close. Got swept by the Ravens. Lost to the Jets. Barely clinched the playoffs against a team of backups. Wasn't even on the sideline for their playoff win. Seemed decent at the time because the bar is so low, but I definitely don't think he's the reason they made the playoffs. I think they should move on.
I wasn't sad to lose him as the Vikings' offensive coordinator a couple years back. Not that we replaced him with anyone better however...
Joe Judge's second annual highly embarrassing postgame conference included an anecdote about the 2018 Patriots:
Quote
"Lessons I've learned, I'll tell you right now alright? In 2018 I was part of a team who halfway through the season we were all pretty convinced we were getting fired. We didn't think we were going to make the playoffs. Had no concept of anything that was coming. We just knew we were going to keep showing up and improving week after week. And on the outside, we were all terrible. We didn't care about any of that noise on the outside."
Halfway through the season, that team was 6-2 and on a five game win streak which included victories over the Colts, Chiefs, and Bears, all of whom would go on to make the playoffs. That was the franchise that had made the playoffs 9 straight times. They had the greatest player and the greatest coach of all time. They were probably the betting favorites to win the Super Bowl, and if not they were at least top 3.
It's also telling about Judge that, despite getting hired when he was a special teams coordinator, the Giants' special teams currently rank 19th and had a couple of pretty embarrassing plays this past week. They also were losing almost the whole game this week and still didn't try to throw the ball. Granted, they had Glennon, who sucks, but they at least have to try.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 04, 2022, 12:13:14 PM
I wasn't sad to lose him as the Vikings' offensive coordinator a couple years back. Not that we replaced him with anyone better however...
The problem isn't the OCs, the problem is Zimmer wanting the offense run his way or the highway. You can't run your way out of 3rd and 9 because running on 1st and 2nd netted you one yard.
Some tricky ones because for a few teams we don't know who is playing and for how long.
Chiefs 28, Broncos 9
Cowboys 17, Eagles 14
Washington 27, Giants 10
Bengals 38, Browns 14
Ravens 26, Steelers 24
Packers 20, Lions 19
Colts 41, Jaguars 13
Bears 25, Vikings 23
Titans 30, Texans 23
Falcons 24, Saints 14
Cardinals 21, Seahawks 20
Bills 28, Jets 13
Buccaneers 38, Panthers 21
Dolphins 23, Patriots 17
Rams 37, 49ers 21
Chargers 27, Raiders 24
The last regular season game of 2021-22 will undoubtedly be the most important. Half of me wants to see the Steelers win, the Colts lose, and Chargers/Raiders end in a tie. More than half of me, actually. The meltdown would be hilarious.
I'm going to do an in-depth review of my predictions from August next week. But at a glance, it looks like I went 3/7 on AFC playoff teams and 5/7 on NFC playoff teams. Overall, I was middling to quite bad with the AFC, and pretty solid with the NFC. I still think that the Seahawks would've made it if not for Russ suffering the first major injury of his career. The couple weeks that it took them when he got back to get their offense back in sync was really what costed them the season. They scored 28 points total in three games over that stretch, and since then have scored an average of 29.6 per game over their last five.
I'll take Pats over Dolphins, but otherwise I agree with all your other picks.
Here was what I predicted before the season:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XqWgYkxz/NFL-Stuff.png)
AFC - Either 3 or 4 playoff teams (depending on the Chargers), but I'm pretty happy about my awards. Mahomes shouldn't win, but the other three I feel like are winners. Gruden already got fired but Culley likely won't.
NFC - 5 out of 7 playoff teams. Nagy likely going to get fired. Pitts probably a winner, but none of the other awards correct there.
Kyle Brandt from GMFB picked the Eagles to make the playoffs before the season. Great prediction that almost no one else saw coming.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 04, 2022, 04:38:58 PM
AFC - Either 3 or 4 playoff teams (depending on the Chargers), but I'm pretty happy about my awards.
Could be 5 if the Steelers or Ravens somehow get in. I'd say having 6 of 7 mathematically alive entering Week 18 isn't too bad.
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PM
The last regular season game of 2021-22 will undoubtedly be the most important. Half of me wants to see the Steelers win, the Colts lose, and Chargers/Raiders to end in a tie. More than half of me, actually. The meltdown would be hilarious.
I was going to say the result of Steelers-Ravens doesn't matter as long as the Jaguars beat the Colts, but that's not quite true. If the Ravens won, the Raiders would clinch a playoff spot, so that would leave them with nothing to play for (Chargers would still be win and in).
The Steelers winning would eliminate the loser of Chargers-Raiders
unless they tie, so that's obviously a much more dramatic scenario. I would have thought this was something only nerds like me care about, but it's definitely been out there this week.
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PMI still think that the Seahawks would've made it if not for Russ suffering the first major injury of his career. The couple weeks that it took them when he got back to get their offense back in sync was really what costed them the season. They scored 28 points total in three games over that stretch, and since then have scored an average of 29.6 per game over their last five.
I think going 1-2 with Geno when they could have very easily gone 3-0 was the killer. Both losses were decided by a late FG, one caused by a Geno fumble in overtime. Would have been less pressure on Russ to come back if they had a better record too (although he seemed to be determined to come back ASAP regardless).
Texans aren't firing Culley
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 04, 2022, 08:09:17 PM
Texans aren't firing Culley
Makes sense, it would be crazy to create more drama by firing a coach who seems to have calmed things down and gotten as much as possible out of a bad roster. They've already matched last year's win total and Mills has been decent, so there's not much more you could ask out of a coach that knowingly walked into a terrible situation. Besides, not a lot can change until the Watson situation is resolved, so it makes sense to keep things as stable as possible.
The Jaguars, on the other hand, have a massive offseason ahead.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 06:17:26 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PM
The last regular season game of 2021-22 will undoubtedly be the most important. Half of me wants to see the Steelers win, the Colts lose, and Chargers/Raiders to end in a tie. More than half of me, actually. The meltdown would be hilarious.
I was going to say the result of Steelers-Ravens doesn't matter as long as the Jaguars beat the Colts, but that's not quite true. If the Ravens won, the Raiders would clinch a playoff spot, so that would leave them with nothing to play for (Chargers would still be win and in).
The Steelers winning would eliminate the loser of Chargers-Raiders unless they tie, so that's obviously a much more dramatic scenario. I would have thought this was something only nerds like me care about, but it's definitely been out there this week.
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PMI still think that the Seahawks would've made it if not for Russ suffering the first major injury of his career. The couple weeks that it took them when he got back to get their offense back in sync was really what costed them the season. They scored 28 points total in three games over that stretch, and since then have scored an average of 29.6 per game over their last five.
I think going 1-2 with Geno when they could have very easily gone 3-0 was the killer. Both losses were decided by a late FG, one caused by a Geno fumble in overtime. Would have been less pressure on Russ to come back if they had a better record too (although he seemed to be determined to come back ASAP regardless).
I need the Steelers to lose for all the people who told me that the best thing about a 17-game schedule was that nobody would finish with a .500 record.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:59:58 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 04, 2022, 08:09:17 PM
Texans aren't firing Culley
Makes sense, it would be crazy to create more drama by firing a coach who seems to have calmed things down and gotten as much as possible out of a bad roster. They've already matched last year's win total and Mills has been decent, so there's not much more you could ask out of a coach that knowingly walked into a terrible situation. Besides, not a lot can change until the Watson situation is resolved, so it makes sense to keep things as stable as possible.
The Jaguars, on the other hand, have a massive offseason ahead.
Yeah, I'm actually very pleased with how they played this year.
I see the Eagles got a chance being the Vikings lost. A team that had a 2-5 record at one point got in at the end.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 04, 2022, 10:20:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 06:17:26 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PM
The last regular season game of 2021-22 will undoubtedly be the most important. Half of me wants to see the Steelers win, the Colts lose, and Chargers/Raiders to end in a tie. More than half of me, actually. The meltdown would be hilarious.
I was going to say the result of Steelers-Ravens doesn't matter as long as the Jaguars beat the Colts, but that's not quite true. If the Ravens won, the Raiders would clinch a playoff spot, so that would leave them with nothing to play for (Chargers would still be win and in).
The Steelers winning would eliminate the loser of Chargers-Raiders unless they tie, so that's obviously a much more dramatic scenario. I would have thought this was something only nerds like me care about, but it's definitely been out there this week.
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2022, 04:28:10 PMI still think that the Seahawks would've made it if not for Russ suffering the first major injury of his career. The couple weeks that it took them when he got back to get their offense back in sync was really what costed them the season. They scored 28 points total in three games over that stretch, and since then have scored an average of 29.6 per game over their last five.
I think going 1-2 with Geno when they could have very easily gone 3-0 was the killer. Both losses were decided by a late FG, one caused by a Geno fumble in overtime. Would have been less pressure on Russ to come back if they had a better record too (although he seemed to be determined to come back ASAP regardless).
I need the Steelers to lose for all the people who told me that the best thing about a 17-game schedule was that nobody would finish with a .500 record.
Yes, if the Steelers lose, they will be 8-8-1, which translates to .500. But the way the Ravens have been playing lately (five straight losses), it would have to take a miracle for them to make it happen.
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2022, 10:29:55 AM
Yes, if the Steelers lose, they will be 8-8-1, which translates to .500. But the way the Ravens have been playing lately (five straight losses), it would have to take a miracle for them to make it happen.
On the other hand, 4 of those 5 losses are by a COMBINED 5 points. One-point games are rare to begin with, but to lose three in five weeks is just unbelievable.
Of course, three of the losses also involved some questionable 2-pt conversion situations which could have changed the outcome. All that is to say, they've been competitive with Huntley and have not at any point played like an 0-5 team. They could just as easily be 3-2 or even 4-1 in that stretch.
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 10:53:46 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2022, 10:29:55 AM
Yes, if the Steelers lose, they will be 8-8-1, which translates to .500. But the way the Ravens have been playing lately (five straight losses), it would have to take a miracle for them to make it happen.
On the other hand, 4 of those 5 losses are by a COMBINED 5 points. One-point games are rare to begin with, but to lose three in five weeks is just unbelievable. :wow:
Of course, three of the losses also involved some questionable 2-pt conversion situations which could have changed the outcome. All that is to say, they've been competitive with Huntley and have not at any point played like an 0-5 team. They could just as easily be 3-2 or even 4-1 in that stretch.
So what?
Quote from: thspfc on January 06, 2022, 12:16:59 PM
So what?
So I'll take them to beat the Steelers. They're a much better team even with Huntley. The only reason the Steelers have won any games at all is good coaching and good luck. They're about five plays away from being 2-14.
I'm a bit concerned about the Bengals' decision not to start Burrow in Week 18. I keep having flashbacks to the 2019 Bills, a similarly young team lacking playoff experience, who rested their starters against the Jets and then imploded in the Wild Card Round. I couldn't help but wonder if that week off got them out of sync at the worst possible time. For the Bengals, there's also the fact that if they lose, they could fall to the #4 seed and likely end up with a worse opponent in the playoffs.
My nominations for game of the year:
Cowboys 29, Buccaneers 31 - Week 1
Ravens 27, Raiders 33 (OT) — Week 1
Chiefs 35, Ravens 36 — Week 2
Colts 25, Ravens 31 (OT) — Week 5
Browns 42, Chargers 47 — Week 5
Bills 31, Titans 34 — Week 6
Packers 31, Vikings 34 — Week 11
Bills 27, Buccaneers 33 (OT) — Week 14
Chiefs 34, Chargers 28 (OT) — Week 15
Chiefs 31, Bengals 34 — Week 17
And my personal favorite game: 49ers 41, Lions 33 — Week 1
My nominations for Coach of the Year:
1. Mike Vrabel, Titans
2. Matt LaFleur, Packers
3. Bill Belichick, Patriots
4. Zac Taylor, Bengals
5. Frank Reich, Colts
You could also make a case for Brandon Staley, Nick Sirianni, and maybe a few others. And if there was ever going to be an interim coach win coach of the year, I don't think there will ever be a more deserving candidate than Rich Bisaccia after all the Raiders have been through this season.
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 04:50:31 PM
My nominations for game of the year:
Ravens 27, Raiders 33 (OT) — Week 1
Chiefs 35, Ravens 36 — Week 2
Titans 33, Seahawks 30 (OT) — Week 2
Colts 25, Ravens 31 (OT) — Week 5
Browns 42, Chargers 47 — Week 5
Bills 31, Titans 34 — Week 6
Packers 31, Vikings 34 — Week 11
Bills 27, Buccaneers 33 (OT) — Week 14
Chiefs 34, Chargers 28 (OT) — Week 15
Chiefs 31, Bengals 34 — Week 17
And my personal favorite game: 49ers 41, Lions 33 — Week 1
Not sure how one could leave Cowboys/Buccaneers off the list. Maybe it's just me, but that night was one of my favorite sports memories ever. Seeing a full NFL stadium for the first time since Super Bowl LIV, Dak playing an incredible game in his return from a devastating injury, some of the best quarterback and wide receiver play I've ever seen in a game, and Brady leading a game-winning drive to punctuate it.
I would also add Vikings/Cardinals, Cowboys/Patriots, Vikings/Ravens, Raiders/Cowboys, and Steelers/Vikings. (wow, that's a lot of Vikings games :-D) I'd probably take off Titans/Seahawks because I didn't find that one particularly interesting as far as overtime games go - I was more intrigued by Cowboys/Chargers which was in the same time slot of the same week.
Packers/49ers, Packers/Bengals, Bengals/Jets, Vikings/Lions, and Packers/Ravens deserve honorable mentions for having glued-to-your-seat endings, but they weren't super entertaining games all the way through.
My vote for absolute best, period, goes to Browns/Chargers.
My personal favorites (as in, I found them fascinating for a variety of different reasons):
- Cowboys/Buccaneers, aforementioned
- Bengals/Jets because of the Mike White story and resulting memes
- Chiefs/Raiders first edition because it was the turning point for the Chiefs
- Cowboys/Chiefs because it was the day I knew that the Chiefs were going to win the Super Bowl (we'll see how this ages)
- Texans/Titans first edition because, I called it!
- Steelers/Vikings because I love big comebacks and late rallies, even if they fall inches short like that one did
- Washington/Cowboys second edition because it's always nice when Washington takes an old-fashioned whupping
- Every Saints loss
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 05:15:02 PM
My nominations for Coach of the Year:
1. Mike Vrabel, Titans
2. Matt LaFleur, Packers
3. Bill Belichick, Patriots
4. Zac Taylor, Bengals
5. Frank Reich, Colts
You could also make a case for Brandon Staley, Nick Sirianni, and maybe a few others. And if there was ever going to be an interim coach win coach of the year, I don't think there will ever be a more deserving candidate than Rich Bisaccia after all the Raiders have been through this season.
Agree with this list except I would add Sirianni and Bisaccia to the actual real list, add Tomlin as well, subtract Reich, and I don't think you can make a case for Staley.
Quote from: thspfc on January 06, 2022, 05:34:40 PM
Not sure how one could leave Cowboys/Buccaneers off the list. Maybe it's just me, but that night was one of my favorite sports memories ever. Seeing a full NFL stadium for the first time since Super Bowl LIV, Dak playing an incredible game in his return from a devastating injury, some of the best quarterback and wide receiver play I've ever seen in a game, and Brady leading a game-winning drive to punctuate it.
I would also add Vikings/Cardinals, Cowboys/Patriots, Vikings/Ravens, Raiders/Cowboys, and Steelers/Vikings. (wow, that's a lot of Vikings games :-D) I'd probably take off Titans/Seahawks because I didn't find that one particularly interesting as far as overtime games go - I was more intrigued by Cowboys/Chargers which was in the same time slot of the same week.
I guess I'll replace Titans-Seahawks with the season opener.
I still thought that was a really impressive win for the Titans with the way they came back from down 2 scores to force OT. That was also when we thought the Seahawks were good and expected them to win those type of close games. Probably the #1 game on Vrabel's COTY resume.
I mostly had Colts-Ravens in there because of Lamar's incredible individual performance, so you could probably replace that one too in terms of being a great game from start to finish. I might throw in Steelers-Chargers in terms of the total madness that ensued in the 4th quarter, similar to Steelers-Vikings, but even crazier because the Steelers actually had a lead at one point and the Chargers had to come back after blowing a big lead.
Quote from: thspfc on January 06, 2022, 05:38:11 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 05:15:02 PM
My nominations for Coach of the Year:
1. Mike Vrabel, Titans
2. Matt LaFleur, Packers
3. Bill Belichick, Patriots
4. Zac Taylor, Bengals
5. Frank Reich, Colts
You could also make a case for Brandon Staley, Nick Sirianni, and maybe a few others. And if there was ever going to be an interim coach win coach of the year, I don't think there will ever be a more deserving candidate than Rich Bisaccia after all the Raiders have been through this season.
Agree with this list except I would add Sirianni and Bisaccia to the actual real list, add Tomlin as well, subtract Reich, and I don't think you can make a case for Staley.
Reich depends on if they make the playoffs. The Colts started 0-3 and then went 9-3, with really impressive wins over three playoff teams (Bills, Pats, Cardinals), which I do think matters. Beating the Raiders would have helped, but Wentz had been out all week too.
I'd put John Harbaugh and Sean Payton on the list ahead of Mike Tomlin. Both the Ravens and Saints have been incredibly injury-ravaged and have still been competitive almost every week, and have scraped together enough wins to still be in the playoff mix, which is a credit to coaching.
The case for Staley is that he seems to be well-liked and respected, he brought a clear vision and much-needed change to the Chargers organization, and he has a chance to make the playoffs as a first-year head coach. The Chargers have had a couple head-scratchers this year, but they haven't "choked" like they have in previous years, and the one game where they did choke (against the Steelers), they still won! I'd put him in the same tier as Sirianni: a decent nominee, but very unlikely to win it.
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 04:50:31 PM
My nominations for game of the year:
Ravens 27, Raiders 33 (OT) — Week 1
Chiefs 35, Ravens 36 — Week 2
Titans 33, Seahawks 30 (OT) — Week 2
Colts 25, Ravens 31 (OT) — Week 5
Browns 42, Chargers 47 — Week 5
Bills 31, Titans 34 — Week 6
Packers 31, Vikings 34 — Week 11
Bills 27, Buccaneers 33 (OT) — Week 14
Chiefs 34, Chargers 28 (OT) — Week 15
Chiefs 31, Bengals 34 — Week 17
And my personal favorite game: 49ers 41, Lions 33 — Week 1
I will say that Jets/Titans was a pretty memorable game.
Quote from: Alps on January 06, 2022, 11:37:09 PM
I will say that Jets/Titans was a pretty memorable game.
Actually Jets-Bengals aka the Mike White game was pretty good too.
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 04:05:51 PM
I'm a bit concerned about the Bengals' decision not to start Burrow in Week 18. I keep having flashbacks to the 2019 Bills, a similarly young team lacking playoff experience, who rested their starters against the Jets and then imploded in the Wild Card Round. I couldn't help but wonder if that week off got them out of sync at the worst possible time. For the Bengals, there's also the fact that if they lose, they could fall to the #4 seed and likely end up with a worse opponent in the playoffs.
Well it is the Bengals, after all. They've got a playoff losing streak going long enough to demoralize even the most ardent fan. I have my doubts about them no matter what they do in Week 18. They got some young talent, but I don't think they break that streak this winter.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 07, 2022, 06:28:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2022, 04:05:51 PM
I'm a bit concerned about the Bengals' decision not to start Burrow in Week 18. I keep having flashbacks to the 2019 Bills, a similarly young team lacking playoff experience, who rested their starters against the Jets and then imploded in the Wild Card Round. I couldn't help but wonder if that week off got them out of sync at the worst possible time. For the Bengals, there's also the fact that if they lose, they could fall to the #4 seed and likely end up with a worse opponent in the playoffs.
Well it is the Bengals, after all. They've got a playoff losing streak going long enough to demoralize even the most ardent fan. I have my doubts about them no matter what they do in Week 18. They got some young talent, but I don't think they break that streak this winter.
The 2019 Bills just weren't that good. IIRC they were up 16-0 on the Texans at one point, and that was a surprise because most agreed that they made the playoffs by virtue of being an average team that played a weak schedule.
And in the end, it's one of those situations where the coach, or whoever else is making those descisons, just can't win. If they rest their starters week 18 and come out flat in the playoffs, people will say they should have played week 18. If they play their starters week 18 and one of them gets hurt (God forbid it's Burrow), people will say they should have rested. I don't think there's a golden rule. As with almost everything in life, decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis. If I was the Bengals head coach I would probably be resting them this week, but there are situations where I wouldn't (for example, if a team is on a 2+ game losing streak going into week 18, and needs to flush that bad taste out).
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2022, 10:05:40 PM
The 2019 Bills just weren't that good. IIRC they were up 16-0 on the Texans at one point, and that was a surprise because most agreed that they made the playoffs by virtue of being an average team that played a weak schedule.
Come on now. The 2019 Bills had the #2 scoring defense, beat your Cowboys by double digits on Thanksgiving, clinched a playoff spot in Week 15, would have likely been 11-5 if they didn't rest starters, and would have been in the divisional playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty. Josh Allen also led the league in comeback/game winning drives that season, was injured in one of their losses, another loss was on a missed field goal, and they took the Ravens down to the wire in Lamar's MVP season.
No question the offense wasn't good enough to make them a true Super Bowl contender, which was a major factor in the loss to the Texans and the subsequent Diggs trade, but they were absolutely better than "average".
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
So there was a Buffalo-Houston game from before you were born that was actually more crazy than that one.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 08, 2022, 02:57:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
So there was a Buffalo-Houston game from before you were born that was actually more crazy than that one.
Ah, darn, I forgot that was a Wild Card game as well. Because the same two cities were involved, some called the 2020 game Houston's revenge for the original Comeback. The games were eerily similar, with the trailing team taking a 3 pt lead, giving up a field goal to force OT, and then winning in OT. Houston's comeback was only half the size (16 pts instead of 32 pts), but I still think the game as a whole was equally crazy. Aside from the comeback factor, it was total chaos and every other play was absolutely bonkers.
Those two and the Colts' 28-point comeback against the Chiefs in 2014 are definitely top three.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2022, 10:05:40 PM
The 2019 Bills just weren't that good. IIRC they were up 16-0 on the Texans at one point, and that was a surprise because most agreed that they made the playoffs by virtue of being an average team that played a weak schedule.
Come on now. The 2019 Bills had the #2 scoring defense, beat your Cowboys by double digits on Thanksgiving, clinched a playoff spot in Week 15, would have likely been 11-5 if they didn't rest starters, and would have been in the divisional playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty. Josh Allen also led the league in comeback/game winning drives that season, was injured in one of their losses, another loss was on a missed field goal, and they took the Ravens down to the wire in Lamar's MVP season.
No question the offense wasn't good enough to make them a true Super Bowl contender, which was a major factor in the loss to the Texans and the subsequent Diggs trade, but they were absolutely better than "average".
Wow wow wow, if they "likely would have been in the playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty" , then isn't your argument that they shouldn't have rested starters in week 17 irrelevant? You just negated your own original point.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
Chiefs/Colts in 2013
Packers/Cardinals in 2010
Cowboys outscore the Eagles 92-47 in two games this season. Don't care if one of them was against backups. Dallas sweeps the NFC East and enters the playoffs having won 5 of their last 6 and scored 129 points in their last three games.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:22:26 AM
Cowboys outscore the Eagles 92-47 in two games this season. Don't care if one of them was against backups. Dallas sweeps the NFC East and enters the playoffs having won 5 of their last 6 and scored 129 points in their last three games.
They've been a good second half of the gsme team too.
But...they still have to play next week. And their playoff history of late isn't great. Will not giving their starters a rest help or hurt? Could they even be a little too confident going in to the playoffs?
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:18:26 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:09:19 PM
The 2019 Bills had the #2 scoring defense, beat your Cowboys by double digits on Thanksgiving, clinched a playoff spot in Week 15, would have likely been 11-5 if they didn't rest starters, and would have been in the divisional playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty. ...
Wow wow wow, if they "likely would have been in the playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty" , then isn't your argument that they shouldn't have rested starters in week 17 irrelevant? You just negated your own original point.
They would have been in the
divisional playoffs. They were in FG range in OT of the Wild Card game before the blindside block penalty cost them the game, which if they had won, they would have advanced.
But it never would have been that close if they didn't blow a 16-0 lead and Allen wasn't off the wall in the second half, which I attribute to conservative coaching and Allen not playing in Week 17.
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2022, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:18:26 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:09:19 PM
The 2019 Bills had the #2 scoring defense, beat your Cowboys by double digits on Thanksgiving, clinched a playoff spot in Week 15, would have likely been 11-5 if they didn't rest starters, and would have been in the divisional playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty. ...
Wow wow wow, if they "likely would have been in the playoffs if not for a blindside block penalty" , then isn't your argument that they shouldn't have rested starters in week 17 irrelevant? You just negated your own original point.
They would have been in the divisional playoffs. They were in FG range in OT of the Wild Card game before the blindside block penalty cost them the game, which if they had won, they would have advanced.
But it never would have been that close if they didn't blow a 16-0 lead and Allen wasn't off the wall in the second half, which I attribute to conservative coaching and Allen not playing in Week 17.
You'd think that not playing for two weeks would lead to struggles in the first half, not the second.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:19:34 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
Chiefs/Colts in 2013
Packers/Cardinals in 2010
Yeah, from an unbiased perspective I remember almost nothing specific about that 2019 BUF/HOU game, and when it's brought up it doesn't register with me as overly memorable despite going to OT.
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Jacksonville finishes the season as the Colts and passes "Football Team" to Indianapolis.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Colts are out since Pittsburgh won. Steelers are in unless Chargers-Raiders tie.
And the stars have aligned for the Chargers and Raiders to purposefully tie. Otherwise, the Steelers will, inexplicably, make the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:49:39 PM
And the stars have aligned for the Chargers and Raiders to purposefully tie. Otherwise, the Steelers will, inexplicably, make the playoffs.
I'm going to the game...
I'll be slightly upset if both teams decided to take 3 knees and punt every possession
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
And the Jags continue their home winning streak over the Colts
I think there's enough incentive for the Chargers and Raiders to send their hated rivals home that they'll play to win. They're thinking "win and in" not about all this other weird shit that could align.
The end of this 49ers/Rams game could get very interesting if the Rams are in field goal range with less than a minute left, and McVay has to choose between a tie and playing to win but risking a loss.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 07:34:31 PM
The end of this 49ers/Rams game could get very interesting if the Rams are in field goal range with less than a minute left, and McVay has to choose between a tie and playing to win but risking a loss.
Unfortunately we won't ever know what he would have chosen. But the Saints are out, so that's great news.
Cowboys luck out and get the 3 seed. There's going to be a lot of conversation as to whether it would have been beneficial for them to be the 4 seed and face the Cardinals rather than the 49ers. I for one would rather them face the Niners. Dallas is 0-2 with a -31 point differential against Murray and Kingsbury Cardinals teams.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 07:34:31 PM
The end of this 49ers/Rams game could get very interesting if the Rams are in field goal range with less than a minute left, and McVay has to choose between a tie and playing to win but risking a loss.
With the outcomes of the other games having gone final, there was nothing to be gained from a tie, so the right decision would have been to go for the TD no matter what.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 01:59:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:19:34 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
Chiefs/Colts in 2013
Packers/Cardinals in 2010
Yeah, from an unbiased perspective I remember almost nothing specific about that 2019 BUF/HOU game, and when it's brought up it doesn't register with me as overly memorable despite going to OT.
I have no problem with you or anyone else not remembering anything about a random Saturday afternoon wild card game that you had no vested interest in. But those that did watch, and did care, got treated to a crazy second half and overtime. It wasn't really one play in particular (well, sure, maybe
this one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHM0Ven6SKk)), but there were so
many crazy plays that it didn't need to have one highlight play that everyone remembers. There's a difference between crazy and memorable, and I said crazy for a reason.
Yikes, I never thought about the irony of the Eagles trading Wentz and rebounding to make the playoffs, while the Colts missed the playoffs with Wentz. They finished with the same record, but the Colts are just unlucky to be in a much tougher conference.
I really do feel for Colts fans, because they're a solid playoff team that's unquestionably way better than the Steelers. But at the end of the day, they had a 98% chance of making it, and blew both their opportunities. The Jags are now 2-2 against them the past 2 seasons, and 2-27 against everyone else.
By the way, if you're ever looking for a laugh, the Twitter page of a team that suffered a bad loss is usually a good place to look, and Colts Twitter today was no exception.
I may be in the minority here, but I'm actually happy that the Chargers and Raiders aren't doing the "kneel to a tie" thing. What I wanted to see was a great game, and it looks like we're getting one.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 09, 2022, 09:40:10 PM
I may be in the minority here, but I'm actually happy that the Chargers and Raiders aren't doing the "kneel to a tie" thing. What I wanted to see was a great game.
I don't think there was ever a chance they would actually do it. They're long-time division rivals that do NOT like each other and would certainly be happy to end the other's season. So it's more of a historical footnote than anything else.
Now, if it gets to overtime, it could definitely be a factor, because playing to tie gets the same result as playing to win. I would be very amused if a tie happens organically, with both teams going on long field goal drives in overtime.
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2022, 09:48:32 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 09, 2022, 09:40:10 PM
I may be in the minority here, but I'm actually happy that the Chargers and Raiders aren't doing the "kneel to a tie" thing. What I wanted to see was a great game.
I don't think there was ever a chance they would actually do it. They're long-time division rivals that do NOT like each other and would certainly be happy to end the other's season. So it's more of a historical footnote than anything else.
Now, if it gets to overtime, it could definitely be a factor, because playing to tie gets the same result as playing to win. I would be very amused if a tie happens organically, with both teams going on long field goal drives in overtime.
I understand, but if that's true, then I guess Germany and Austria weren't feeling the same way in the 1982 World Cup. Then again, I don't know much about European soccer rivalries...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 09, 2022, 10:07:49 PM
I understand, but if that's true, then I guess Germany and Austria weren't feeling the same way in the 1982 World Cup. Then again, I don't know much about European soccer rivalries...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n
Quick note about the World Cup - after that happened, the scheduling got changed so that the final Group Stage games were played simultaneously, to eliminate something like this. However, in 2026 the World Cup is moving to 3-team groups so the simultaneous matches will be gone and the door will be open to this again.
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2022, 09:48:32 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 09, 2022, 09:40:10 PM
I may be in the minority here, but I'm actually happy that the Chargers and Raiders aren't doing the "kneel to a tie" thing. What I wanted to see was a great game.
I don't think there was ever a chance they would actually do it. They're long-time division rivals that do NOT like each other and would certainly be happy to end the other's season. So it's more of a historical footnote than anything else.
Now, if it gets to overtime, it could definitely be a factor, because playing to tie gets the same result as playing to win. I would be very amused if a tie happens organically, with both teams going on long field goal drives in overtime.
Yeah, that's very realistic. In a normal game, if you're facing 4th and 1 from the 20, you probably go for it because you want to score a touchdown and end the game. In this game, you probably kick the FG, knowing that unless your defense gives up a really long TD play, the other team is likely to kick a FG and take the tie rather than take the risk to go for the win.
Chargers went for it on 4th-and-1 from their own 18 - didn't get it. Interesting play call there...
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2022, 08:56:07 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 01:59:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 08:19:34 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM
Speaking of game of the year, nothing will ever top that Bills-Texans game for the absolute insanity that ensued in the second half and overtime. Craziest wild-card game in NFL history and it's not particularly close. I can't believe that was 2 years ago already, I remember it like it was yesterday.
Chiefs/Colts in 2013
Packers/Cardinals in 2010
Yeah, from an unbiased perspective I remember almost nothing specific about that 2019 BUF/HOU game, and when it's brought up it doesn't register with me as overly memorable despite going to OT.
I have no problem with you or anyone else not remembering anything about a random Saturday afternoon wild card game that you had no vested interest in. But those that did watch, and did care, got treated to a crazy second half and overtime. It wasn't really one play in particular (well, sure, maybe this one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHM0Ven6SKk)), but there were so many crazy plays that it didn't need to have one highlight play that everyone remembers. There's a difference between crazy and memorable, and I said crazy for a reason.
I suppose there's a difference between "craziest" and "best" . I remember that game being very weird, definitely crazy at the end. But IIRC there were a lot of stupid mistakes, like when Allen tried to backhandedly lateral the ball with plenty of time left having already picked up the 1st down. It was definitely a great watch at the end.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 09, 2022, 09:40:10 PM
I may be in the minority here, but I'm actually happy that the Chargers and Raiders aren't doing the "kneel to a tie" thing. What I wanted to see was a great game, and it looks like we're getting one.
It was never a real possibility, but it would have been funny.
I don't know what to do with my hands
Brandon Staley needs to be fired tomorrow. Unbelievably awful timeout. He literally sold away the season. Not an exaggeration at all.
Can't write a script better than that though. Best ending to a regular season of all time.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:31:12 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 04, 2022, 08:16:23 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2022, 08:07:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 02:03:53 PM
Have there been any situations in the past where it's the last week and two teams playing each other would both be guaranteed playoff spots if they tie? (It's happened in soccer before.)
🔔 Just realized there is a potential situation where this could happen next week 🔔
...
There's no way two teams could orchestrate a tie without making it obvious, and if that happened the league would just boot them both our of the playoffs and put the next two teams in.
Have you seen the Chargers and the Raiders? If there's any two teams that could do it, those would be the two. :D
And what we just witnessed is
exactly why! Total madness!
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 12:18:22 AM
Can't write a script better than that though. Best ending to a regular season of all time.
I agree, that was an all-time classic, and what a strange and crazy experience it must have been for Steelers fans.
I'm disappointed with the result, since I think both teams are more deserving than the Steelers, and it killed my prediction that only one AFC North team would make it. Plus I would have much preferred Bills-Chargers over Bills-Patriots (and I imagine Pats fans probably would have preferred Cincinnati over Buffalo too).
But ultimately I think the Raiders made the right decision to go for the win: Not only were they deciding between eliminating the Chargers or the Steelers, they were also deciding which playoff opponent they preferred, Chiefs or Bengals. That combined with the strange timeout made it a pretty obvious choice. Even without the timeout I think they would have tried a long FG anyways, but I guess we'll never know.
And the Raiders end the season with a 4th overtime victory. That seems like it could be a record.
I was wishing for a tie in the Chargers at Raiders game for TWO reasons:
#1 -- For the last several years, I had wished for an LA vs LA in LA Super Bowl this February (no visiting teams allowed!!). Chargers vs Rams co-hosting the Super Bowl would have been a fun game to watch. But now with the Chargers eliminated, that dream could be gone forever as (just as in the mid 90s) there is no guarantee that LA could keep both or either team in the city.
#2 -- Big Ben Rothlissberger finishes his career in a high note, a two-game winning streak. I will not like seeing him walk off a football field for his last time in a loss. I wanted his final game to be a win, so another wish of mine gone!
As far as my Houston Texans, I vote David Culley coach of the year simply because our Texans matched last year's four wins, when not a soul alive even predicted a single win. Every prediction I have heard during training camp was a winless season. So he exceeded all expectations. Our players love playing for him and believe in his style. Everybody had been telling me the Texans' offense was believed to be the absolute worst in NFL history so much so that many people thought a high school defense could easily stop them from scoring. So to match last year's win total was an amazing accomplishment and I am so proud of our players and staff for their immense effort all season long.
Now I am rooting for the Tennessee Titans for represent our AFC South Division in the Super Bowl and bring the Vince Lombardi trophy back to the AFC South division for the first time since February 2007.
Playoff predictions:
Wild Card:
AFC: Bengals over Raiders, Bills over Patriots, Chiefs over Steelers
NFC: Eagles over Bucs, Cowboys over 49ers, Rams over Cardinals
Divisional:
AFC: Titans over Bengals, Bills over Chiefs
NFC: Packers over Eagles, Cowboys over Rams
Championship:
AFC: Bills over Titans
NFC: Cowboys over Bills
Super Bowl, Double Revenge Edition:
Bills over Cowboys
Here's another scenario that I thought of.
It's the middle of the season. You're heavily favored to lose today's game. Your next game is in just four days. Should you play as usual, or should you just not show up, take the loss that you were likely going to get anyway, and give your team some more rest?
Quote from: 1 on January 10, 2022, 08:12:57 AM
Here's another scenario that I thought of.
It's the middle of the season. You're heavily favored to lose today's game. Your next game is in just four days. Should you play as usual, or should you just not show up, take the loss that you were likely going to get anyway, and give your team some more rest?
That's one of the reasons I don't like having Thursday games. You're just asking teams to not be at their best. Keep the Thanksgiving games in Detroit and Dallas because of the tradition, but ditch the rest of the Thursday games. If you want to make up the TV revenue, have 2 games on Monday.
In head coach news...
Matt Nagy fired - definitely expected, although he does finish with a winning record as Bears head coach
Mike Zimmer fired - somewhat expected, time for a change for the Vikings
Brian Flores fired - What!?!? Now that is a shocker. Flores had two winning seasons, was 4-2 against the Patriots, and was the first coach in NFL history to come back from 7 losses with 7 wins. You can argue the Dolphins have been worse than their record in all three of his seasons, which is a credit to coaching. I can't even comprehend that he was somehow viewed as a problem.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 10:02:40 AM
In head coach news...
Matt Nagy fired - definitely expected, although he does finish with a winning record as Bears head coach
Mike Zimmer fired - somewhat expected, time for a change for the Vikings
Brian Flores fired - What!?!? Now that is a shocker. Flores had two winning seasons, was 4-2 against the Patriots, and was the first coach in NFL history to come back from 7 losses with 7 wins. You can argue the Dolphins have been worse than their record in all three of his seasons, which is a credit to coaching. I can't even comprehend that he was somehow viewed as a problem.
Bears GM Ryan Pace follows Nagy out the door. Should have been fired the minute he gave up a first round pick to trade up from 3rd to 2nd in the draft, and then drafting Trubisky instead of Mahomes.
When two hated rivals go down to the wire with a playoff berth up for grabs, you know it's going to be a terrific end to the season. Kudos to the Raiders and Chargers for writing that storybook ending!
Comparison of all the most hyped starting rookie quarterbacks this year:
Trey Lance: 97.3 QBR, 57.7% Comp Pct, 100.5 Yds/G, 5 TD, 2 INT, 6 games
Mac Jones: 92.5 QBR, 67.6% Comp Pct, 223.6 Yds/G, 22 TD, 13 INT, 17 games
Davis Mills: 88.8 QBR, 66.8% Comp Pct, 204.9 Yds/G, 16 TD, 10 INT, 13 games
Justin Fields: 73.2 QBR, 58.9% Comp Pct, 155.8 Yds/G, 7 TD, 10 INT, 12 games
Trevor Lawrence: 71.9 QBR, 59.6% Comp Pct, 214.2 Yds/G, 12 TD, 17 INT, 17 games
Zach Wilson: 69.7 QBR, 55.6% Comp Pct, 179.5 Yds/G, 9 TD, 11 INT, 13 games
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Bizarre end to the year for the Colts. I thought Taylor and the running game would be enough to offset Wentz's Wentziness. I think the bet should be null and void since I said I would essentially decide if I thought it was going to work out once I saw the matchups, but alas, no need now. Out of sportsmanship though, you get to invade my signature for a week. Let me know.
Playoff Prediction Time:
AFC Wild Card - Chiefs over Steelers, Bills over Patriots, Raiders over Bengals
AFC Divisional Round - Titans over Raiders, Chiefs over Bills
AFC Championship - Chiefs over Titans
NFC Wild Card - Bucs over Eagles, Cowboys over 49ers, Rams over Cardinals
NFL Divisional Round - Packers over Rams, Cowboys over Bucs
NFC Championship - Packers over Cowboys
Super Bowl - Packers over Chiefs
Feels gross to say it as a Vikings fan, but it is what it is.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 12:43:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Bizarre end to the year for the Colts. I thought Taylor and the running game would be enough to offset Wentz's Wentziness. I think the bet should be null and void since I said I would essentially decide if I thought it was going to work out once I saw the matchups, but alas, no need now. Out of sportsmanship though, you get to invade my signature for a week. Let me know.
Eh, I'll respect the specific wording and say that it's a no-contest.
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:15:15 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 12:43:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Bizarre end to the year for the Colts. I thought Taylor and the running game would be enough to offset Wentz's Wentziness. I think the bet should be null and void since I said I would essentially decide if I thought it was going to work out once I saw the matchups, but alas, no need now. Out of sportsmanship though, you get to invade my signature for a week. Let me know.
Eh, I'll respect the specific wording and say that it's a no-contest.
Nah, fair is fair. The intent was that the Colts weren't up to snuff, and clearly, they weren't.
I'm still recovering from that game last night, and yesterday in general. Mostly the Colts losing, Steelers sneaking into the playoffs, then all of a sudden almost not sneaking into the playoffs, then sneaking back in due to Staley's stupid timeout.
I agree with the general sentiment that the Chargers "feel" like more of a playoff team than the Steelers do. But that's mostly because the Chargers are very pretty when they win and usually still watchable when they lose, whereas the Steelers are ugly when they win and terrible when they lose. The Chargers might be a better team, but they did only beat the Steelers by 4.
Only change to the Super Bowl list this week is swapping the Cowboys and Cardinals, putting the Cowboys at 5 and Cardinals at 6.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 04:22:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:15:15 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 12:43:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Bizarre end to the year for the Colts. I thought Taylor and the running game would be enough to offset Wentz's Wentziness. I think the bet should be null and void since I said I would essentially decide if I thought it was going to work out once I saw the matchups, but alas, no need now. Out of sportsmanship though, you get to invade my signature for a week. Let me know.
Eh, I'll respect the specific wording and say that it's a no-contest.
Nah, fair is fair. The intent was that the Colts weren't up to snuff, and clearly, they weren't.
If you insist. I'll come up with something . . .
My playoff bracket:
(4) Bengals defeat (5) Raiders
(3) Bills defeat (6) Patriots
(2) Buccaneers defeat (7) Eagles
(3) Cowboys defeat (6) 49ers
(2) Chiefs defeat (7) Steelers
(4) Rams defeat (5) Cardinals
I do feel like a coward picking no upsets in the wild card, especially considering that higher-seeded teams are a dismal 4-10 in the wild card round since 2018. But the only two that I feel are "givens" are Bucs over Eagles and Chiefs over Steelers.
(4) Bengals defeat (1) Titans
(2) Chiefs defeat (3) Bills
(2) Buccaneers defeat (3) Cowboys
(1) Packers defeat (4) Rams
(2) Chiefs defeat (4) Bengals
(2) Buccaneers defeat (1) Packers
Chiefs defeat Buccaneers
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 12:52:32 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 12:18:22 AM
Can't write a script better than that though. Best ending to a regular season of all time.
I agree, that was an all-time classic, and what a strange and crazy experience it must have been for Steelers fans.
I'm disappointed with the result, since I think both teams are more deserving than the Steelers, and it killed my prediction that only one AFC North team would make it. Plus I would have much preferred Bills-Chargers over Bills-Patriots (and I imagine Pats fans probably would have preferred Cincinnati over Buffalo too).
But ultimately I think the Raiders made the right decision to go for the win: Not only were they deciding between eliminating the Chargers or the Steelers, they were also deciding which playoff opponent they preferred, Chiefs or Bengals. That combined with the strange timeout made it a pretty obvious choice. Even without the timeout I think they would have tried a long FG anyways, but I guess we'll never know.
It's time for round 3. May the Patriots win.
My annual "what if there were no conferences" post. I maintain that there is no good reason to separate the league into conferences, even less so now that an inter-conference game has been added to the schedule. Outside of the six divisional games, teams play six intra-conference games and five inter-conference games. The playoff should just be one large tournament with division winners seeded 1-8 and wild cards seeded 9-14. Tiebreakers would be 1) Head to head [2 team ties only], 2) Division record [intra-division ties only], 3) Strength of Victory, 4) Strength of Schedule, 5) Point Differential, 6) Coin Toss
This year, the seeding would have been:
1) Green Bay
2) Tampa Bay
3) Kansas City
4) Tennessee
5) Dallas
6) LA Rams
7) Buffalo
8) Cincinnati
9) Arizona
10) Las Vegas
11) San Francisco
12) New England
13) Pittsburgh
14) New Orleans [wins SOV tiebreaker among the five 9-8 teams]
First round matchups:
New Orleans at Kansas City
Pittsburgh at Tennessee
New England at Dallas
San Francisco at LA Rams
Las Vegas at Buffalo
Arizona at Cincinnati
I think you get a better quality playoff tournament with this format. Fewer games with division opponents playing for the third time. When the two best teams are from the same conference, you have the possibility that both get byes and both reach the Super Bowl.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 10, 2022, 05:02:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 12:52:32 AM
I agree, that was an all-time classic, and what a strange and crazy experience it must have been for Steelers fans.
I'm disappointed with the result, since I think both teams are more deserving than the Steelers, and it killed my prediction that only one AFC North team would make it. Plus I would have much preferred Bills-Chargers over Bills-Patriots (and I imagine Pats fans probably would have preferred Cincinnati over Buffalo too).
It's time for round 3. May the Patriots win.
Yep, definitely a "here we go again..." factor which hasn't happened in the AFC East for a while. I'm not sure who will win this one, but I have a feeling it will be close.
Taking a look at the bigger picture...
I think that was one of the best last weeks of the season ever. There was a big upset out of nowhere, a bunch of close games, and the three most important games all went to overtime. Unlike last year, no teams with a losing record made the playoffs, while 4 teams with a winning record missed the playoffs (Saints, Colts, Dolphins, Chargers).
Only 3 AFC teams (and only 7 teams total) finished with fewer than 7 wins this season, 10/16 AFC teams finished with a winning record and 12/16 finished with at least 8 wins. And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record. Just an unbelievable level of parity.
The Steelers somehow making the playoffs means the playoff field is split 7-7 between repeat teams from last year and new teams. That means 21 of 32 teams have made the playoffs the last 2 seasons, including 2 entire divisions (AFC North and NFC West).
With so many teams regularly in the mix, I'd say the two New York (City) teams are the biggest outliers in terms of how bad they've been in recent years. Jets are the only team with a playoff drought longer than 5 years, and Giants are the only team not to have a winning record at any point in the last 5 years. The Jets have some things to feel good about, but I think the Giants are the worst team in the NFL right now. Joe Judge is supposedly safe, which is just absurd when you consider that he lost to three fired coaches (Fangio, Flores, and Nagy) by a combined score of 25-76 this season.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 09, 2022, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:49:39 PM
And the stars have aligned for the Chargers and Raiders to purposefully tie. Otherwise, the Steelers will, inexplicably, make the playoffs.
I'm going to the game...
I'll be slightly upset if both teams decided to take 3 knees and punt every possession
I think that game justified your ticket cost and then some.
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:25:36 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 04:22:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:15:15 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2022, 12:43:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:47:35 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 09, 2022, 03:48:45 PM
Colts getting hammered by Jacksonville. Any given Sunday, folks.
Colts are OUT? Like, OUT-OUT?
Upset of the season.
Guess I won the bet with jayhawkco? Or is it null? I mean, he said it would be official once he saw playoff matchups . . . oh wait!
Bizarre end to the year for the Colts. I thought Taylor and the running game would be enough to offset Wentz's Wentziness. I think the bet should be null and void since I said I would essentially decide if I thought it was going to work out once I saw the matchups, but alas, no need now. Out of sportsmanship though, you get to invade my signature for a week. Let me know.
Eh, I'll respect the specific wording and say that it's a no-contest.
Nah, fair is fair. The intent was that the Colts weren't up to snuff, and clearly, they weren't.
If you insist. I'll come up with something . . .
Here's your new signature . . .
Limon, Colorado should not be a primary Interstate control city, and anyone who suggests it should be is wrong.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
Taking a look at the bigger picture...
I think that was one of the best last weeks of the season ever. There was a big upset out of nowhere, a bunch of close games, and the three most important games all went to overtime. Unlike last year, no teams with a losing record made the playoffs, while 4 teams with a winning record missed the playoffs (Saints, Colts, Dolphins, Chargers).
Only 3 AFC teams (and only 7 teams total) finished with fewer than 7 wins this season, 10/16 AFC teams finished with a winning record and 12/16 finished with at least 8 wins. And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record. Just an unbelievable level of parity.
The Steelers somehow making the playoffs means the playoff field is split 7-7 between repeat teams from last year and new teams. That means 21 of 32 teams have made the playoffs the last 2 seasons, including 2 entire divisions (AFC North and NFC West).
With so many teams regularly in the mix, I'd say the two New York (City) teams are the biggest outliers in terms of how bad they've been in recent years. Jets are the only team with a playoff drought longer than 5 years, and Giants are the only team not to have a winning record at any point in the last 5 years. The Jets have some things to feel good about, but I think the Giants are the worst team in the NFL right now. Joe Judge is supposedly safe, which is just absurd when you consider that he lost to three fired coaches (Fangio, Flores, and Nagy) by a combined score of 25-76 this season.
Yup, the parity is insane. Even the Texans, playing with expansion-level talent, managed to go 3-3 in their division (and were just a 0-yard punt or a 3rd down stop away from fulfilling
thspfc's prediction of 5 wins). Your point about the Giants is very interesting, and I agree with you on that. It seems to me that a lot of the bad teams this year showed some promise for the future (Texans, Lions, Jets), while the teams around 5-12 or so seem destined for failure for the next few years. I can see the Giants, Falcons, Broncos, and Seahawks becoming the next batch of bad teams.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record...
The Eagles did not.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:10:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record...
The Eagles did not.
Saints, no?
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 11:15:44 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:10:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record...
The Eagles did not.
Saints, no?
It's been widely reported numerous times they didn't beat a team with a winning record. Were the Saints .500 at the time of that game?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:53:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 11:15:44 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:10:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record...
The Eagles did not.
Saints, no?
It's been widely reported numerous times they didn't beat a team with a winning record. Were the Saints .500 at the time of that game?
The Saints were 5-4 coming into that game. It was when they were in their long midseason slide after losing Jameis Winston for the season.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 11, 2022, 12:22:23 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:53:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 11:15:44 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2022, 11:10:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
And this may be a first: all 32 teams had at least one win over a team with a winning record...
The Eagles did not.
Saints, no?
It's been widely reported numerous times they didn't beat a team with a winning record. Were the Saints .500 at the time of that game?
The Saints were 5-4 coming into that game. It was when they were in their long midseason slide after losing Jameis Winston for the season.
I recall that being reported as well. The fine print was that the Eagles hadn't beaten a team that
currently had a winning record, which was true at the time.
But considering the Saints finished 9-8 and were one Rams first down away from making the playoffs, that ended up being a really important tiebreaker for the Eagles. If they didn't have it, they might have missed the playoffs. So I would absolutely say it counts.
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 10, 2022, 10:27:02 PM
Your point about the Giants is very interesting, and I agree with you on that. It seems to me that a lot of the bad teams this year showed some promise for the future (Texans, Lions, Jets), while the teams around 5-12 or so seem destined for failure for the next few years. I can see the Giants, Falcons, Broncos, and Seahawks becoming the next batch of bad teams.
Another point about the Giants and Jets: They both have 2 top-10 picks in this year's draft, so 4 of 10 will be coming to the NYC teams.
I was actually impressed with the Falcons this year. They won a bunch of close games and were somehow in the playoff mix until the end despite their lack of talent, which is a credit to coaching and a big improvement from previous Falcons seasons. The Panthers, on the other hand, are right up there with the Giants as one of the most depressing teams in the league.
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2022, 08:39:21 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 10, 2022, 10:27:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2022, 06:53:13 PM
Taking a look at the bigger picture...
The Steelers somehow making the playoffs means the playoff field is split 7-7 between repeat teams from last year and new teams. That means 21 of 32 teams have made the playoffs the last 2 seasons, including 2 entire divisions (AFC North and NFC West).
Your point about the Giants is very interesting, and I agree with you on that. It seems to me that a lot of the bad teams this year showed some promise for the future (Texans, Lions, Jets), while the teams around 5-12 or so seem destined for failure for the next few years. I can see the Giants, Falcons, Broncos, and Seahawks becoming the next batch of bad teams.
Another point about the Giants and Jets: They both have 2 top-10 picks in this year's draft, so 4 of 10 will be coming to the NYC teams.
... The Panthers, on the other hand, are right up there with the Giants as one of the most depressing teams in the league.
Joe Judge now officially done for the Giants.
And, to my earlier point, the Panthers are now the only team in the NFL to miss the playoffs the last two years and not make a coaching change. That is just unbelievable.
Judge finally fired, only 372 days too late.
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2022, 09:21:26 PM
And, to my earlier point, the Panthers are now the only team in the NFL to miss the playoffs the last two years and not make a coaching change. That is just unbelievable.
Apparently his contract makes it cost-prohibitive to fire him.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33043779/police-seahawks-qb-geno-smith-driving-96-mph-erratic-arrest-suspicion-dui
yikes especially after what happened with Ruggs
Quote from: Big John on January 11, 2022, 10:41:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2022, 09:21:26 PM
And, to my earlier point, the Panthers are now the only team in the NFL to miss the playoffs the last two years and not make a coaching change. That is just unbelievable.
Apparently his contract makes it cost-prohibitive to fire him.
Right, the unbelievable part isn't Rhule, it's that there's only 10 other teams with no playoff appearances and all 10 have had a coaching change.
Quote from: Alps on January 10, 2022, 07:29:13 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 09, 2022, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2022, 04:49:39 PM
And the stars have aligned for the Chargers and Raiders to purposefully tie. Otherwise, the Steelers will, inexplicably, make the playoffs.
I'm going to the game...
I'll be slightly upset if both teams decided to take 3 knees and punt every possession
I think that game justified your ticket cost and then some.
The extra hotel nights in Sin City, the plane ticket change fare, and the ticket price. $$$ well spent!
I already was out there for New Years...stayed a few more days for a heck of a game
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 04, 2022, 04:38:58 PM
I'll take Pats over Dolphins, but otherwise I agree with all your other picks.
Here was what I predicted before the season:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XqWgYkxz/NFL-Stuff.png)
AFC - Either 3 or 4 playoff teams (depending on the Chargers), but I'm pretty happy about my awards. Mahomes shouldn't win, but the other three I feel like are winners. Gruden already got fired but Culley likely won't.
NFC - 5 out of 7 playoff teams. Nagy likely going to get fired. Pitts probably a winner, but none of the other awards correct there.
Nevermind. Called the Culley one and done.
Quite shocked at my Texans actually. David Culley overachieved this year winning four games when everyone had expected a winless year. Why would you fire a coach who exceeded all expectations? I was expecting him to be in the Coach of the Year conversation in light of winning four games with the worst roster in NFL history. I thought he was a keeper; players seemed to love playing for him and it showed all season, and I thought he brought the best out of the players. Our team did better than the Jaguars and Lions, and matched the Jets and Giants win totals with the least amount of talent of any team.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 14, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quite shocked at my Texans actually. David Culley overachieved this year winning four games when everyone had expected a winless year. Why would you fire a coach who exceeded all expectations? I was expecting him to be in the Coach of the Year conversation in light of winning four games with the worst roster in NFL history. I thought he was a keeper; players seemed to love playing for him and it showed all season, and I thought he brought the best out of the players. Our team did better than the Jaguars and Lions, and matched the Jets and Giants win totals with the least amount of talent of any team.
Not even close to the worst roster in NFL history.
I wouldn't have fired him, but I also would have never even thought about hiring him. He was the Ravens WRs coach in 2020 and the Chiefs WRs coach in 2014. The 2020 Ravens WRs stunk. The 2014 Chiefs had the worst wide receivers of all time, after adjusting for the evolution of the passing game. They didn't catch a touchdown all season.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 14, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quite shocked at my Texans actually. David Culley overachieved this year winning four games when everyone had expected a winless year. Why would you fire a coach who exceeded all expectations? I was expecting him to be in the Coach of the Year conversation in light of winning four games with the worst roster in NFL history. I thought he was a keeper; players seemed to love playing for him and it showed all season, and I thought he brought the best out of the players. Our team did better than the Jaguars and Lions, and matched the Jets and Giants win totals with the least amount of talent of any team.
Maybe a lot of grumbling fans excepted a winless year, or tongue-in-cheek columnists. I would seriously doubt even those that didn't except the team to do well would have a winless year. What the Browns did a few years ago is absolutely tough to do.
While a coach of the year doesn't necessarily have to be a coach that guided its team to the playoffs, a coach with 4 wins winning coach of the year? That would be the laughingstock of the NFL.
That all said, I don't think it's fair to fire a coach after one year. Unless there were some unknown/unreported issues in the front office, gotta give a coach some time to build a team to their liking. In cities whose news reporters tend to dig deep, those issues either get reported, or become known after the fact. I'm not sure how deep Houston's news reporters will dig here to understand what happened.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 14, 2022, 09:26:49 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 14, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quite shocked at my Texans actually. David Culley overachieved this year winning four games when everyone had expected a winless year. Why would you fire a coach who exceeded all expectations? I was expecting him to be in the Coach of the Year conversation in light of winning four games with the worst roster in NFL history. I thought he was a keeper; players seemed to love playing for him and it showed all season, and I thought he brought the best out of the players. Our team did better than the Jaguars and Lions, and matched the Jets and Giants win totals with the least amount of talent of any team.
Maybe a lot of grumbling fans excepted a winless year, or tongue-in-cheek columnists. I would seriously doubt even those that didn't except the team to do well would have a winless year. What the Browns did a few years ago is absolutely tough to do.
While a coach of the year doesn't necessarily have to be a coach that guided its team to the playoffs, a coach with 4 wins winning coach of the year? That would be the laughingstock of the NFL.
That all said, I don't think it's fair to fire a coach after one year. Unless there were some unknown/unreported issues in the front office, gotta give a coach some time to build a team to their liking. In cities whose news reporters tend to dig deep, those issues either get reported, or become known after the fact. I'm not sure how deep Houston's news reporters will dig here to understand what happened.
two words.
panthers. suck. :-D
however,
the bills are my #1 pick. :D
If anyone needed to fired, it was the OC Kelly (who was actually just fired yesterday), not Culley. His offensive playcalls were usually predictable and didn't play to the Texans' strengths (i.e, run the ball up the middle on first and second down even though the O-line wasn't very good). I would personally like to see the Texans promote Lovie Smith or Pep Hamilton to the head coaching job.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2022, 09:46:04 PM
Judge finally fired, only 372 days too late.
Now we wait for the next legendary coach that will call to qb sneaks in Judge fashion.
Not that that was the reason he was fired, but I can see that as a final straw for many people that were originally willing to give him one more season
Some interesting narratives going on in the run-up to Wild Card weekend.
A lot of people think the Packers are clear favorites in the NFC. I listen to a lot of Wisconsin sports radio, but it's not just that. Many national media figures, and of course a lot of fans, would probably take the Packers against the NFC field right now if given the choice.
It blows my mind that people are counting out Brady. Seriously, the Bucs are like an afterthought to most right now. Maybe it's blissful ignorance ("I know deep down that they're going to the Super Bowl again, but I don't want them to, so I won't talk about it'). It seems to me like everyone saw the ugly loss to the Saints, the Godwin injury, and the AB chaos, and just wrote off the Bucs.
Brady has shown time and time again throughout his career that he can lead an efficient offense with just about any receivers who are remotely capable and know the ins and outs of the offense. Brady's worst season in recent memory, and maybe ever, was 2019. In 2019, he threw for 4000 yards with a 3:1 TD/INT ratio with the corpse of Julian Edelman, Josh Gordon, Philip Dorsett, and Mohamed Sanu as his top receivers, with basically no tight ends and a significantly weaker running back room than he has now. (FWIW, I have a conspiracy theory that Brady was dealing with a significant injury the second half of that season, but he kept it under wraps like he did his 2020 knee injury.) And I know that it defies biology, but if you compare Brady's throws from 2019 to today, he legitimately is a better QB today than he was two years ago, no matter how impossible that seems. Moral of the story is, Brady will find new targets, and it's not like Tampa is totally deficient right now anyways. Cyril Grayson had one single NFL reception prior to Godwin's injury. In the next two weeks after it, he caught 9 passes for 162 yards and the game-winning touchdown against the Jets. Tyler Johnson has caught 13 passes in his three games since Godwin went down.
Oh, and the Buccaneers beat the Packers at Lambeau last year. Brady threw three interceptions in that game, and they still won. Rest assured, Brady is not going to throw three interceptions in a playoff game again.
So, it already annoys me when people say that the Packers are NFC favorites. What annoys me even more is when people say that the Niners are their biggest threat. Oh, boy. The entirety of the argument for that is that the Niners are peaking at the right time. Which, of course, they are. But somehow that "getting hot" logic is not applied to the Bucs. The Niners are 6-2 in their last eight; the Bucs are 7-1.
Every year a team is dubbed "the team no one wants to play in the postseason". This year, it was the Colts. (!) Until it was the 49ers. That title is earned by playing badly early on, and then stringing together wins down the stretch. For some reason, teams that run the ball well but can't throw it well consistently enough get bonus points. Don't ask, those are the rules I guess. So let's go back through a few years, and look at the teams who everyone was dreading to face:
2020: Ravens (11-5), lost divisional
2019: Titans (9-7), lost AFC Championship
2018 there were quite a few: Cowboys (10-6), lost divisional; Colts (10-6), lost divisional; Ravens (10-6), lost wild card
2017: Chiefs (10-6), lost wild card
One of those six made the conference title game. Those six had an average record of 10-6, and the Niners are 10-7. Five of the six were built the same way: run-heavy, can occasionally win games by throwing, but not often enough (the 2018 Colts being the exception). I'd say that's an accurate description of the Niners this year.
Contrast the 10-6 average of those teams to the average record of the last 8 Super Bowl teams, which is 12.5-3.5. The last 16 conference finalists are 12.25-3.75.
Conclusion: I'll bet my house on the Niners not making it past the divisional. I wouldn't be shocked if they beat the Cowboys though.
There is rain in the forecast for Sunday in Tampa. No, that does not mean that Brady is going to turn into Nathan Peterman. So long as it's not a downpour, rain has very little effect on throwing and catching a football. There might be one or two drops/missed throws. The game won't be close enough for those to matter.
Great defensive fronts (Tampa) against young QBs who aren't great from the pocket (Hurts) and run heavy-teams (Eagles) is a recipe for defensive domination.
The Cowboys offense has not been falling off. They've hit 50 points in two of their last three games. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know who they were playing against; remind me how many other teams have scored 50 points twice in a three game stretch in NFL history. I recall the 2014 Packers scored 50+ in back-to-back games, that might be the entire list.
Finally, the big reason why a lot of people are picking the Cardinals to beat the Rams is because the Rams have declined lately on offense. And, uh, the Cardinals . . . apparently have not?
So there's my rant about the NFC. Don't really have any hot takes about the AFC.
The Packers have probably lost more home playoff games in the last 20 years than any other team. They've lost to dome teams (Falcons, Vikings) and warm weather teams (Bucs, 49ers, while I wouldn't call the Niners warm weather they fit here better than elsewhere) Some of those Packers teams weren't great (2004. 2013) but the fact that every national pundit can't talk about the playoff seeds without emphasizing how much better Green Bay's HFA is when it's hardly been a death sentence for visiting teams.
Quote from: thspfc on January 14, 2022, 06:15:16 PM
Some interesting narratives going on in the run-up to Wild Card weekend.
A lot of people think the Packers are clear favorites in the NFC. ...
It blows my mind that people are counting out Brady. Seriously, the Bucs are like an afterthought to most right now. Maybe it's blissful ignorance ("I know deep down that they're going to the Super Bowl again, but I don't want them to, so I won't talk about it'). It seems to me like everyone saw the ugly loss to the Saints, the Godwin injury, and the AB chaos, and just wrote off the Bucs. ...
Oh, and the Buccaneers beat the Packers at Lambeau last year. Brady threw three interceptions in that game, and they still won. Rest assured, Brady is not going to throw three interceptions in a playoff game again.
So, it already annoys me when people say that the Packers are NFC favorites. What annoys me even more is when people say that the Niners are their biggest threat. Oh, boy. The entirety of the argument for that is that the Niners are peaking at the right time. Which, of course, they are. But somehow that "getting hot" logic is not applied to the Bucs. The Niners are 6-2 in their last eight; the Bucs are 7-1.
A couple things on this...
First, the Bucs needed some Brady magic to beat the Jets and were in a close game with the Panthers for three quarters. They're still a clear favorite to knock off the Packers IMO, but at no point in the last month plus have they looked dominant. I think they're as vulnerable as they've ever been since Brady arrived given the injuries etc.
Second, because of the seeding, the Bucs and Packers can't meet until the championship. But the Packers have to win a divisional game first, and I do think the 49ers are the most likely team to knock them off there,
if they beat the Cowboys (obviously a huge qualifier). Unless the Eagles win, it will be an NFC West team going to Lambeau, and I like the 49ers' chances there more than the Rams or Cardinals given their unique style of play and run-heavy, clock control offense. We've seen that match up poorly with the Packers in the past, as recently as Christmas Day when they nearly lost to the Browns.
And finally, recency bias favors the 49ers because their Week 18 win was probably the most impressive win by any team all season. Down 17 points. Win probability as low as 0.4%. QB playing with an injured finger. Opponent playing for the division title. And in a must-win game, they became the first team
ever to beat Sean McVay when trailing at halftime. I don't want to overreact, but there literally couldn't be a gutsier, more stirring way to enter the playoffs.
My hottest 49ers take is that Kyle Shanahan wouldn't mind losing in the first round or two of the playoffs. If they go on another championship or Super Bowl run with Jimmy G, the massive haul they gave up for Trey Lance starts to look kind of strange.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 14, 2022, 06:33:32 PM
The Packers have probably lost more home playoff games in the last 20 years than any other team. They've lost to dome teams (Falcons, Vikings) and warm weather teams (Bucs, 49ers, while I wouldn't call the Niners warm weather they fit here better than elsewhere)
From a quick search, it appears that the Packers are tied with the Steelers with 6 home playoff losses since 2001. Chiefs have 5, Bengals and Ravens have 4.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 14, 2022, 06:33:32 PM
Some of those Packers teams weren't great (2004. 2013) but the fact that every national pundit can't talk about the playoff seeds without emphasizing how much better Green Bay's HFA is when it's hardly been a death sentence for visiting teams.
I don't know, that's been true in years past, but in the Matt LaFleur era I feel like the Lambeau effect has gotten stronger even as home field advantages elsewhere have diminished. The Packers have only lost 3 home games
total under Matt LaFleur, counting last year's NFC Championship. To go 24-3 at home in a three-year stretch is almost unbelievable.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 14, 2022, 06:33:32 PM
The Packers have probably lost more home playoff games in the last 20 years than any other team. They've lost to dome teams (Falcons, Vikings) and warm weather teams (Bucs, 49ers, while I wouldn't call the Niners warm weather they fit here better than elsewhere) Some of those Packers teams weren't great (2004. 2013) but the fact that every national pundit can't talk about the playoff seeds without emphasizing how much better Green Bay's HFA is when it's hardly been a death sentence for visiting teams.
The Packers have lost a lot of playoff games in general recently, they have famous collapses and losses on the road.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 14, 2022, 09:26:49 AMWhile a coach of the year doesn't necessarily have to be a coach that guided its team to the playoffs, a coach with 4 wins winning coach of the year? That would be the laughingstock of the NFL.
You have a good point, but while four wins doesn't sound like much on paper, my team matched last year's win total with a crumbled-down roster. Basically I'm saying the Davis Mills/Tyrod Taylor pair won the same number of games this year as Deshaun Watson did last year. If you look at our team's roster this year compared to last year, you can see why every prediction I heard all preseason was expected to be a winless year. And yes I was constantly told by so many people this is the worst assembled offense in NFL history.
And not saying David Culley will win the Coach of the Year, but in my opinion (for what it's worth) his name should at least be mentioned in the consideration for it. When a team overachieves (or underachieves), that typically due to the coaching.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 15, 2022, 03:54:51 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 14, 2022, 09:26:49 AMWhile a coach of the year doesn't necessarily have to be a coach that guided its team to the playoffs, a coach with 4 wins winning coach of the year? That would be the laughingstock of the NFL.
You have a good point, but while four wins doesn't sound like much on paper, my team matched last year's win total with a crumbled-down roster. Basically I'm saying the Davis Mills/Tyrod Taylor pair won the same number of games this year as Deshaun Watson did last year. If you look at our team's roster this year compared to last year, you can see why every prediction I heard all preseason was expected to be a winless year. And yes I was constantly told by so many people this is the worst assembled offense in NFL history.
And not saying David Culley will win the Coach of the Year, but in my opinion (for what it's worth) his name should at least be mentioned in the consideration for it. When a team overachieves (or underachieves), that typically due to the coaching.
Uh he got fired
Quote from: webny99 on January 14, 2022, 11:36:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 14, 2022, 06:15:16 PM
Some interesting narratives going on in the run-up to Wild Card weekend.
A lot of people think the Packers are clear favorites in the NFC. ...
It blows my mind that people are counting out Brady. Seriously, the Bucs are like an afterthought to most right now. Maybe it's blissful ignorance ("I know deep down that they're going to the Super Bowl again, but I don't want them to, so I won't talk about it'). It seems to me like everyone saw the ugly loss to the Saints, the Godwin injury, and the AB chaos, and just wrote off the Bucs. ...
Oh, and the Buccaneers beat the Packers at Lambeau last year. Brady threw three interceptions in that game, and they still won. Rest assured, Brady is not going to throw three interceptions in a playoff game again.
So, it already annoys me when people say that the Packers are NFC favorites. What annoys me even more is when people say that the Niners are their biggest threat. Oh, boy. The entirety of the argument for that is that the Niners are peaking at the right time. Which, of course, they are. But somehow that "getting hot" logic is not applied to the Bucs. The Niners are 6-2 in their last eight; the Bucs are 7-1.
A couple things on this...
First, the Bucs needed some Brady magic to beat the Jets and were in a close game with the Panthers for three quarters. They're still a clear favorite to knock off the Packers IMO, but at no point in the last month plus have they looked dominant. I think they're as vulnerable as they've ever been since Brady arrived given the injuries etc.
Second, because of the seeding, the Bucs and Packers can't meet until the championship. But the Packers have to win a divisional game first, and I do think the 49ers are the most likely team to knock them off there, if they beat the Cowboys (obviously a huge qualifier). Unless the Eagles win, it will be an NFC West team going to Lambeau, and I like the 49ers' chances there more than the Rams or Cardinals given their unique style of play and run-heavy, clock control offense. We've seen that match up poorly with the Packers in the past, as recently as Christmas Day when they nearly lost to the Browns.
And finally, recency bias favors the 49ers because their Week 18 win was probably the most impressive win by any team all season. Down 17 points. Win probability as low as 0.4%. QB playing with an injured finger. Opponent playing for the division title. And in a must-win game, they became the first team ever to beat Sean McVay when trailing at halftime. I don't want to overreact, but there literally couldn't be a gutsier, more stirring way to enter the playoffs.
My hottest 49ers take is that Kyle Shanahan wouldn't mind losing in the first round or two of the playoffs. If they go on another championship or Super Bowl run with Jimmy G, the massive haul they gave up for Trey Lance starts to look kind of strange.
The Niners stunk in the first half of the Rams game. The most impressive win this season is more like the Bengals over Ravens, Cowboys over Falcons, or Cowboys over Washington where it was domination all the way through.
The Bucs lost 38-3 to the Saints last year, and then lost two more in a row in late November, dropping their record to 7-5. They were three games behind the Saints in the division. I think they were a little more vulnerable then.
And we've all forgot that it's Tom Brady.
Sorry but your take about Shanahan is pretty stupid. Football coaches want to win Super Bowls. End of story. Whatever publicity they get for "strange" decisions is just noise if they win it all.
Quote from: thspfc on January 15, 2022, 08:25:54 AM
The Niners stunk in the first half of the Rams game. The most impressive win this season is more like the Bengals over Ravens, Cowboys over Falcons, or Cowboys over Washington where it was domination all the way through.
I guess we have different ideas of impressive. The three things I look for are high stakes, a comeback factor, and an underdog factor. In other words, finding a way to win when you very easily could have lost. The 49ers win over the Rams was a home run in all three categories.
To me, teams piling on when the outcome isn't in doubt doesn't really tell me anything. Since you mention two Cowboys games, sure, those were total laughers, but that was exactly what they should have been given the talent disparity. I think the most impressive Cowboys win of the season was Week 8 over the Vikings with Cooper Rush. That was the type of gutsy performance that will be remembered if they go on a playoff run.
Quote from: thspfc on January 15, 2022, 08:25:54 AM
Sorry but your take about Shanahan is pretty stupid. Football coaches want to win Super Bowls. End of story. Whatever publicity they get for "strange" decisions is just noise if they win it all.
Of course he wants to win Super Bowls. And he obviously convinced the GM and ownership that he needed a better quarterback to do it, which is why they gave up two first-rounders to get Trey Lance. But Lance hardly played this season, so it seems reasonable that Shanahan isn't necessarily all-in on winning a Super Bowl
this season. They're sort of like the anti-Rams... for the Rams, anything short of a Super Bowl is a disappointment, whereas the 49ers are kind of playing with house money as long as it's Jimmy G starting.
let's go Pats!
Congrats to the Bengals for snapping their 31 year playoff drought.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 15, 2022, 08:11:59 PM
Congrats to the Bengals for snapping their 31 year playoff drought.
Yes! It's been awhile. #WhoDey
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 15, 2022, 03:51:52 PM
let's go Pats!
Only place they're going to tonight is the woodshed :ded:
What was that defense
Bellichick deserves some consideration for coach of the year because he won 10 games and made the playoffs with very mediocre talent.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 16, 2022, 11:04:03 AM
Bellichick deserves some consideration for cheater of the millennium
the only award i'll consider
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bills-become-the-first-team-in-nfl-history-to-pitch-a-perfect-offensive-game-in-playoff-win-over-patriots/
QuoteIn the Bills' 47-17 blowout victory over the New England Patriots, Buffalo never punted, kicked a field goal, nor turned the ball over -- the first team in league history to go an entire game with no kicks, punts, or turnovers.
Drizzling rain didn't turn Brady into Peterman. Absolute shocker in Tampa.
Cowboys penalties killed them today
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 16, 2022, 08:04:37 PM
Cowboys penalties killed them today
They did, and this isn't an excuse for the Cowboys losing, but there were two times when the refs' unnecessary delay in getting the ball spotted cost them. Once was after the fake punt when they Cowboys wanted to run another pay quickly with the SF punt return team on the field, and the second was after the last play that prevented them from getting another play off.
Add this to the inadvertent whistle fiasco from last night and that's two playoff examples of what has been a really bad year for refs. Lots of high profile blown calls and major inconsistencies. The same hit by a defender is unnecessary roughness against Brady, Rodgers or Allen, but not unnecessary roughness against Mahomes, Prescott or Wilson.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 16, 2022, 03:40:40 PM
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bills-become-the-first-team-in-nfl-history-to-pitch-a-perfect-offensive-game-in-playoff-win-over-patriots/
QuoteIn the Bills' 47-17 blowout victory over the New England Patriots, Buffalo never punted, kicked a field goal, nor turned the ball over -- the first team in league history to go an entire game with no kicks, punts, or turnovers.
No field goals; not "no kicks." There were several PAT kicks, not all of them successful.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJRKC15WQAco1kf.jpg)
With how much I've been hating on the 49ers, it's fitting that they knock my Cowboys out. The Dallas fanbase is in a meltdown right now, I don't feel that way. 1), this team did not have Super Bowl expectations at the start of the year, and most would have considered 12-5 with a loss in the wild card a success, or just not a failure. 2), it has been made apparent that Trevon Diggs and Micah Parsons are outstanding players. 3), the salary cap is going to increase significantly in 2022. 4), I don't often think this way, but fingers crossed this is the nail in McCarthy's coffin, and Kellen Moore takes over. Moore has had three great seasons calling plays for the Cowboys, and I thought did pretty well today as well.
Dallas' #1 problem this year was not McCarthy, it was not Zeke, and it most certainly was not Dak. It was the lack of depth on defense. Outside of Diggs and swiss army knife Parsons, the team is just slow in the secondary. It was obvious against the Raiders, obvious against the Chiefs, obvious against the Cardinals, and obvious today. The copious numbers of penalties are not just a symptom of poor coaching, but also a by-product of inferior talent and speed. IMO, the needs of the Cowboys in the draft are as follows:
1. cornerback
2. safety
3. interior defensive line
4. offensive tackle
The salary cap going up next season is huge for the Cowboys, as Dak's previously record-setting contract won't be as large. Same for Zeke, DeMarcus Lawrence, Cooper, and Tyron Smith.
I'm saying that the window for this Cowboys team as we know it is 2022 and 2023. After that, all the young stars will demand bigger contracts, and some of the veterans will demand even larger ones.
I am confident in this team, and I think they WILL end the drought and make it to the NFC title game in either 2022 or 2023. They probably won't make the Super Bowl though.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 16, 2022, 08:52:26 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 16, 2022, 03:40:40 PM
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bills-become-the-first-team-in-nfl-history-to-pitch-a-perfect-offensive-game-in-playoff-win-over-patriots/
QuoteIn the Bills' 47-17 blowout victory over the New England Patriots, Buffalo never punted, kicked a field goal, nor turned the ball over -- the first team in league history to go an entire game with no kicks, punts, or turnovers.
No field goals; not "no kicks." There were several PAT kicks, not all of them successful.
No kicks from scrimmage (which was implied). PATs and kickoffs are not plays from scrimmage.
The Divisional Round matchups are all set! (well, mostly)
Saturday 1/22
Bengals at Titans
Niners at Packers
Sunday 1/23
Rams or Cardinals (whoever wins tomorrow) at Bucs
Bills at Chiefs
Who ya got winning those?
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 16, 2022, 11:38:50 PM
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
That is, if the Vikings or the Lions haven't won it all before then...
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 16, 2022, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 16, 2022, 11:38:50 PM
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
That is, if the Vikings or the Lions haven't won it all before then...
Even longer streaks if you want to go with the Browns and Cardinals.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2022, 11:45:03 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 16, 2022, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 16, 2022, 11:38:50 PM
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
That is, if the Vikings or the Lions haven't won it all before then...
Even longer streaks if you want to go with the Browns and Cardinals.
Or, because you mentioned the Cubs, we can do baseball too - there's also the Cleveland Indians (ahem,
Guardians).
Bye bye Big Ben
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 03, 2021, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2021, 02:06:48 PM
If it was any other team besides the Cowboys, the main story from last night would be how the defense picked off Taysom Hill four times. Instead, the stories are, the offense "struggled mightily" (i.e. gained 377 total yards and only had one turnover), "couldn't run the ball" (i.e. 146 rush yards), and "the refs handed them the game" (entirely based off of one bad call in the third quarter that, had the correct decision been made, it would have granted a first down in minus territory to an offense that sucked until the fourth quarter. Also conveniently ignores the missed roughing the passer on the interception Dak threw.)
By the way, the Cowboys were missing their head coach, their #2 WR, and their top RB was banged up.
Don't really care, any day that the Saints lose is a good day. Not having to listen to their fans cry about referees in the playoffs will be nice.
The Superdome is not a hOsTiLe EnViOrNmEnT. Not sure why this objectively false narrative continues to be perpetuated. The Saints are 1-4 at home and 4-3 away from home. Since 2018 they are 21-13 at home and 24-7 away from home. In three consecutive seasons they've lost a playoff game in their own building, and now they've lost two games that were effectively playoff games in their own building in a week, because they're for sure done now.
If you watched though, the Cowboys couldn't run the ball, and when they do run it, they run it with their 2nd best RB. Take away two long runs (one my Pollard and one by CeeDee), they had 55 yards on 22 carries. A solid 2.5 yards per carry. If you can't run the ball consistently, you shouldn't make it a focus of your offensive game plan. It will come back to bite them in the playoffs.
Looks like the Cowboys won as many games as the Colts did in the playoffs.
Let's see what Zeke averaged running the ball. Oh. 2.6 yards per carry. And look, Pollard averaged more.
Called it almost exactly back in early December.
I like the 7 team per conference playoffs from a regular season standpoint, because it makes the competition for playoff spots more interesting. But 7 seeds are now 0-4 vs. 2 seeds. Compare that to 6 seeds being 3-1 against 3 seeds, and 5 seeds being 2-1 against 4 seeds pending tonight's result.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 16, 2022, 11:38:50 PM
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
(https://virginia.sportswar.com/post_images/football/00/00/00/16/73/04/23/16730423_0.jpg)
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2022, 08:21:39 AM
I like the 7 team per conference playoffs from a regular season standpoint, because it makes the competition for playoff spots more interesting. But 7 seeds are now 0-4 vs. 2 seeds. Compare that to 6 seeds being 3-1 against 3 seeds, and 5 seeds being 2-1 against 4 seeds pending tonight's result.
Not to mention that of the 4 7 vs. 2 games so far, only 1 of them was really competitive (Colts @ Bills last year) - The other 3 clearly showed the talent gap between the 7 & the 2.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 16, 2022, 11:56:12 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2022, 11:45:03 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 16, 2022, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 16, 2022, 11:38:50 PM
Thank You Niners for restoring peace to my home state of Texas! Let's see that's 26 years down, 83 more years to go before the Cowboys break the Cubs' record for the longest drought in all of sports.
That is, if the Vikings or the Lions haven't won it all before then...
Even longer streaks if you want to go with the Browns and Cardinals.
Or, because you mentioned the Cubs, we can do baseball too - there's also the Cleveland Indians (ahem, Guardians).
And in basketball, we have the Sacramento Kings (nee Rochester Royals).
Guess I'll be counting on the 49ers to knock out Aaron Rodgers on the frozen tundra in the divisional round. Next to the Packers losing in the postseason, I'm also happy when the Cowboys get eliminated.
The other 28 fan bases will enjoy this one...
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1482940026128408579
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 10:18:26 AM
The other 28 fan bases will enjoy this one...
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1482940026128408579
I'd swap in the Browns for the Steelers, but other than that, yes.
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:24:50 PM
Only change to the Super Bowl list this week is swapping the Cowboys and Cardinals, putting the Cowboys at 5 and Cardinals at 6.
No more Cowboys. The loser of the game tonight will obviously be off the list as well, the winner will stay on it. So here's the pre-divisonal update:
1. Chiefs
2. Buccaneers
3. Packers
4. Rams/Cardinals
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2022, 09:42:21 PM
Dallas' #1 problem this year was not McCarthy, it was not Zeke, and it most certainly was not Dak. It was the lack of depth on defense.
I... disagree. The defense allowed 23 points. If you had told me that before the game, I would have said the Cowboys win 9 times out of 10. For the offense to only score one touchdown through three quarters with all that star power is just inexcusable. That's on coaching, quarterback, o-line, lack of success in the run game... all of the above.
Even with all that said, they still had a chance at the end, and just blew it in spectacular fashion. That might have been the most bizarre, disorganized ending to any game in NFL history.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2022, 09:42:21 PM
I am confident in this team, and I think they WILL end the drought and make it to the NFC title game in either 2022 or 2023. They probably won't make the Super Bowl though.
Sorry, I can't help myself...
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1482926177920733184
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 10:18:26 AM
The other 28 fan bases will enjoy this one...
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1482940026128408579
Probably a result of where I live, but I'd replace Philly on that list with Green Bay, but I agree 100% on the rest. Steelers/Cowboys/Patriots all very obnoxious, Patriots slightly less so since Brady left.
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 11:37:49 AM
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Technically, because they lost, but I wouldn't put them that high on the list of obnoxious fan bases.
Being obnoxious seems to correlate with success on the field ... but with just two playoff appearances in the last 20 years, the Raiders are about as far removed from from the spotlight as any team in the league.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 11:46:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 11:37:49 AM
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Technically, because they lost, but I wouldn't put them that high on the list of obnoxious fan bases.
Being obnoxious seems to correlate with success on the field ... but with just two playoff appearances in the last 20 years, the Raiders are about as far removed from from the spotlight as any team in the league.
You haven't lived in an AFC West town. You'd change your mind on that somewhat.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 11:46:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 11:37:49 AM
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Technically, because they lost, but I wouldn't put them that high on the list of obnoxious fan bases.
Being obnoxious seems to correlate with success on the field ... but with just two playoff appearances in the last 20 years, the Raiders are about as far removed from from the spotlight as any team in the league.
I think obnoxiousness also correlates with having large numbers of fans outside your home area. In Indiana there have always been lots of Packers, Steelers and Cowboys fans. Patriots and Bucs fans really only came about due to Tom Brady. I can't remember the last time I encountered a Raiders fan.
I once played poker with a guy who was a fan of the Yankees, Cowboys, Lakers, and U of Kentucky basketball. As you might expect, he was someone you constantly wanted to punch right in the face. He's the only guy ever to get banned from my (now defunct) home game, and that game included multiple people who have done time.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 10:44:46 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2022, 09:42:21 PM
Dallas' #1 problem this year was not McCarthy, it was not Zeke, and it most certainly was not Dak. It was the lack of depth on defense.
I... disagree. The defense allowed 23 points. If you had told me that before the game, I would have said the Cowboys win 9 times out of 10. For the offense to only score one touchdown through three quarters with all that star power is just inexcusable. That's on coaching, quarterback, o-line, lack of success in the run game... all of the above.
Even with all that said, they still had a chance at the end, and just blew it in spectacular fashion. That might have been the most bizarre, disorganized ending to any game in NFL history.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2022, 09:42:21 PM
I am confident in this team, and I think they WILL end the drought and make it to the NFC title game in either 2022 or 2023. They probably won't make the Super Bowl though.
Sorry, I can't help myself...
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1482926177920733184
Does this not apply to like 30 fanbases in the league? With the other two being the teams who are actually in "their year"?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 12:05:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 11:46:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 11:37:49 AM
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Technically, because they lost, but I wouldn't put them that high on the list of obnoxious fan bases.
...
You haven't lived in an AFC West town. You'd change your mind on that somewhat.
Of course any fan of an AFC West team is going to say their divisional opponents fans are the worst. Same with any other division. That's just a given. Nationally I think most people, including myself, would rank the Chiefs light years ahead of the Raiders.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 17, 2022, 12:55:44 PM
I think obnoxiousness also correlates with having large numbers of fans outside your home area. In Indiana there have always been lots of Packers, Steelers and Cowboys fans. Patriots and Bucs fans really only came about due to Tom Brady. I can't remember the last time I encountered a Raiders fan.
Yeah, that is definitely another factor. I think the Raiders have a fairly widespread fanbase too, but mostly in the western half of the country.
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2022, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 10:44:46 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2022, 09:42:21 PM
I am confident in this team, and I think they WILL end the drought and make it to the NFC title game in either 2022 or 2023. They probably won't make the Super Bowl though.
Sorry, I can't help myself...
[NFL Memes tweet]
Does this not apply to like 30 fanbases in the league? With the other two being the teams who are actually in "their year"?
I can't think of another team where it happens so consistently and predictably. Partly because the Cowboys are the best team in a mediocre division, so they can drop a few 50 burgers per season and are never bad enough for anyone to jump ship... but never good enough to put it all together on a deep playoff run.
Absolutely relished seeing all the depressed faces on the stands inside Jerry's World; many of those faces probably are not even from Texas but still traveled long distances to see their Cowboys get knocked out in due time.
I also wonder if there are any Cowboys fans left that still think Dak is worth the money he demanded. Here in our local areas, a lot of people have been skeptical about Dak living up to his demands and today, they don't think he's worth that.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 17, 2022, 03:09:22 PM
Absolutely relished seeing all the depressed faces on the stands inside Jerry's World; many of those faces probably are not even from Texas but still traveled long distances to see their Cowboys get knocked out in due time.
I also wonder if there are any Cowboys fans left that still think Dak is worth the money he demanded. Here in our local areas, a lot of people have been skeptical about Dak living up to his demands and today, they don't think he's worth that.
The choices were sign Dak for that amount of money, franchise tag him for almost as much, or get rid of him. Without Dak, this team would not have made the playoffs. Sometimes the perfect option does not exist. Dak is overpaid, I've been saying that from the moment I heard about that contract. I also fully supported signing him, and still believe it was the right decision, because securing good quarterback play was the only way for this team to be good, and if it meant overpaying then they'd have to overpay. If you're constantly in search of the next Mahomes through the draft, all your good players are going to leave, no free agents will want to sign with you, and you'll be bad for years unless you catch lightning in a bottle.
If Dak is not a franchise QB, then by that same logic, there have been only four or five franchise QBs drafted since 2013: Herbert, Burrow, Murray, Allen, and Mahomes. And I don't know if Kyler is that much better than Dak; you're going to use the inverse Wentz theory for Dak, then you have to apply that to Kyler as well.
^ I totally get your point and you're correct that a franchise player is almost a necessity for scaling the heights to the summitt (so to speak).
My thing is Dak made it public by not only rejecting the initial contract offer which was already massive to begin with, but demanded higher contract -- that's where he began to lose his complete support I've noticed among the Cowboys fans. Now having been knocked out yesterday, that support is teetering. He could have simply accepted the initial offer and in my opinion the pressure would have been a lot lighter off his shoulder and maybe yesterday's outcome might have been different.
Also my opinion: face of the franchise doesn't always have to be QBs. As a Texans lover since their franchise opener, JJ Watt to me was the face of my team for years and I would say greatest player in Texans history followed by Andre Johnson. When I think of the Chicago Bears, Brian Urlacher immediately comes to mind still to this day. In Tennessee, Derrick Henry is the face of the Titans franchise now.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 01:16:03 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 12:05:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 11:46:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 11:37:49 AM
Raiders fans are in the conversation too.
Technically, because they lost, but I wouldn't put them that high on the list of obnoxious fan bases.
...
You haven't lived in an AFC West town. You'd change your mind on that somewhat.
Of course any fan of an AFC West team is going to say their divisional opponents fans are the worst. Same with any other division. That's just a given. Nationally I think most people, including myself, would rank the Chiefs light years ahead of the Raiders.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 17, 2022, 12:55:44 PM
I think obnoxiousness also correlates with having large numbers of fans outside your home area. In Indiana there have always been lots of Packers, Steelers and Cowboys fans. Patriots and Bucs fans really only came about due to Tom Brady. I can't remember the last time I encountered a Raiders fan.
Yeah, that is definitely another factor. I think the Raiders have a fairly widespread fanbase too, but mostly in the western half of the country.
I'm a Vikings fan if you remember correctly, so me calling Raiders fans obnoxious is not related to being the rival of my team. Whenever you go a game where they're playing, there's a non-zero chance you're going to see a brawl outside the stadium.
And re: the widespread fanbase, that's for sure a factor, and as you alluded to, most of their fans are west of the Appalachians. Hence why you might not think they're that annoying based on where you live. For me, having not really lived out east, I don't have the same notion about Eagles fans as you do.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 04:54:12 PMFor me, having not really lived out east, I don't have the same notion about Eagles fans as you do.
Actually, the Eagles would be the first team I'd take off the graphic if I had to pick. From what I know they're a really passionate fanbase, but not so much obnoxious as one that embraces more of an underdog role (they won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles, after all).
The Cowboys are the closest team to New York Yankees in the NFL. Big money, big attitude, big egos, big signings, year after year.....and little to show for it since the 1990s.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 05:07:47 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 04:54:12 PMFor me, having not really lived out east, I don't have the same notion about Eagles fans as you do.
Actually, the Eagles would be the first team I'd take off the graphic if I had to pick. From what I know they're a really passionate fanbase, but not so much obnoxious as one that embraces more of an underdog role (they won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles, after all).
Agreed...with the unfortunate luck of the very few stupid fans getting caught whatever stupid thing they were doing.
One thing that can be said for their fans...they travel well. Especially true for Phillies fans, where an abnormal number of fans can be found at visiting team's ballparks.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 17, 2022, 06:10:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2022, 05:07:47 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2022, 04:54:12 PMFor me, having not really lived out east, I don't have the same notion about Eagles fans as you do.
Actually, the Eagles would be the first team I'd take off the graphic if I had to pick. From what I know they're a really passionate fanbase, but not so much obnoxious as one that embraces more of an underdog role (they won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles, after all).
Agreed...with the unfortunate luck of the very few stupid fans getting caught whatever stupid thing they were doing.
One thing that can be said for their fans...they travel well. Especially true for Phillies fans, where an abnormal number of fans can be found at visiting team's ballparks.
Cardinals fans I generally have seen the most.
Ranking the road teams' chances in the divisional round:
Should be favored to win:
1) Bills
Underdogs but could pull it off:
2) 49ers
3) Rams
Not much change:
4) Bengals
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 18, 2022, 07:01:27 AM
Ranking the road teams' chances in the divisional round:
Should be favored to win:
1) Bills
Underdogs but could pull it off:
2) 49ers
3) Rams
Not much change:
4) Bengals
I think the Bengals are more likely to win than the Bills.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 16, 2022, 11:21:53 PM
The Divisional Round matchups are all set! (well, mostly)
Saturday 1/22
Bengals at Titans
Niners at Packers
Sunday 1/23
Rams or Cardinals (whoever wins tomorrow) at Bucs
Bills at Chiefs
Who ya got winning those?
Well, the Wild Card round ended with a thud as the Rams cruised to a 34-11 victory over the Cardinals in Matthew Stafford's first career playoff win. Prayers up for Cardinals safety Budda Baker who suffered a scary injury at the end.
Even when there was only 4 games, I can't ever remember a Wild Card round where there were so few upsets. There were only two truly competitive games, and every favorite won except for the 49ers who were a lot of people's upset pick, so it would have been extremely easy to go 6-0. Not very often that happens!
But I do think it sets up for a great divisional round which will legitimately feature the best 8 teams in the league, unlike most years where there's a Cinderella team or two and some really good teams that lose in the wild card. The Cowboys were probably the best team that lost, and I'd still have them 9th, right behind the remaining teams.
I'm not going to pick all the games, but like
cabiness42 I do think the Titans will win, so that will be my one pick of the week.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 18, 2022, 07:03:18 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 18, 2022, 07:01:27 AM
Ranking the road teams' chances in the divisional round:
Should be favored to win:
1) Bills
Underdogs but could pull it off:
2) 49ers
3) Rams
Not much change:
4) Bengals
I think the Bengals are more likely to win than the Bills.
With Tannehill as QB Titans will not be a lock. If Bengals are on their game they win, it's just that people just expect them to let their Lions-like DNA to cause them to screw it up sooner than later.
Chiefs/Bills and Bucs/Rams could be classics.
Packers/49ers I see a tough fought Packers win with Packers just outlasting 49ers. Packers seem to be getting back many of their key players are right time to not have their defense be looking as bad as it did last month of the season.
Bills/Chiefs is pretty simple to me: if the Bills are +2 or better in turnovers, they win. If they're not, they lose. Also, the team that misses fewer extra points/field goals will probably win. I trust Butker more, he's proven himself as a clutch kicker.
I'll take the Packers by double digits.
Hard for me to pick against either the Rams or Buccaneers, but it's Brady so basic logic says I have to take the Bucs.
I think Bengals/Titans is going to be low-scoring, and Henry will not be at full strength.
KC 31, BUF 21
TB 27, LAR 21
TEN 30, CIN 28
GB 24, SF 20
I think all the games will be much closer this weekend.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 18, 2022, 12:46:15 PM
KC 31, BUF 21
TB 27, LAR 21
TEN 30, CIN 28
GB 24, SF 20
I think all the games will be much closer this weekend.
I figure I'll make some predictions of my own.
BUF 26, KC 21
TB 30, LAR 27
CIN 33, TEN 21
GB 34, SF 24
Josh Allen isn't as good this year as he was last year, but the Bills Defense is amazing against the pass. They can hold Pat to about 2 TDs.
As for the Titans, well, they lost to the Jets. Ryan Tannehill isn't very persistent. And if Joe Burrow plays like he did against the Ravens and Chiefs, the Bengals should easily win.
I cannot ever bet against Tom Brady, else I would most likely go broke. Since 2014, Tom has only missed the Super Bowl once (his last year with Patriots). It's hard to imagine seeing him missing another Super Bowl as long as he's stays in the NFL.
I would love to see the Lombardi Trophy return to our AFC South division this year (or any year for that matter), so I am rooting for the Titans all the way. If not my Texans, then I cheer for the Jaguars or Titans....none of them have ever won the Lombardi Trophy, probably due to them being some of the relatively new additions (Jaguars 1995, Titans 1999, Texans 2002).
Also why not name the AFC Championship trophy after the legendary Jon Madden?
Quote from: jgb191 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:22 PM
I cannot ever bet against Tom Brady, else I would most likely go broke. Since 2014, Tom has only missed the Super Bowl once (his last year with Patriots). It's hard to imagine seeing him missing another Super Bowl as long as he's stays in the NFL.
I would love to see the Lombardi Trophy return to our AFC South division this year (or any year for that matter), so I am rooting for the Titans all the way. If not my Texans, then I cheer for the Jaguars or Titans....none of them have ever won the Lombardi Trophy, probably due to them being some of the relatively new additions (Jaguars 1995, Titans 1999, Texans 2002).
Also why not name the AFC Championship trophy after the legendary Jon Madden?
He also missed the Super Bowl in 2015, though he was by far the best quarterback in the AFC that year.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:22 PM
I would love to see the Lombardi Trophy return to our AFC South division this year (or any year for that matter), so I am rooting for the Titans all the way. If not my Texans, then I cheer for the Jaguars or Titans....none of them have ever won the Lombardi Trophy, probably due to them being some of the relatively new additions (Jaguars 1995, Titans 1999, Texans 2002).
Speaking of the Titans, I saw a fun stat the other day that the last team Cincinnati had beaten in the playoffs was the Houston Oilers back in 1990.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:22 PM
....
Also why not name the AFC Championship trophy after the legendary John Madden?
Because it's already named the Lamar Hunt Trophy. Hunt founded the American Football League, which became the AFC after the merger. No offense to John Madden, but in terms of NFL history I'd suggest Hunt's role is far more significant in terms of turning the NFL into what it is today.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 18, 2022, 04:22:16 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:22 PM
....
Also why not name the AFC Championship trophy after the legendary John Madden?
Because it's already named the Lamar Hunt Trophy. Hunt founded the American Football League, which became the AFC after the merger. No offense to John Madden, but in terms of NFL history I'd suggest Hunt's role is far more significant in terms of turning the NFL into what it is today.
I don't think the coach of the year has a coach's name attached to that to the best of my knowledge, maybe that award? Or call the all pro team the all madden team?
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 18, 2022, 06:57:06 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 18, 2022, 04:22:16 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 18, 2022, 01:08:22 PM
....
Also why not name the AFC Championship trophy after the legendary John Madden?
Because it's already named the Lamar Hunt Trophy. Hunt founded the American Football League, which became the AFC after the merger. No offense to John Madden, but in terms of NFL history I'd suggest Hunt's role is far more significant in terms of turning the NFL into what it is today.
I don't think the coach of the year has a coach's name attached to that to the best of my knowledge, maybe that award? Or call the all pro team the all madden team?
As a head coach I don't think John Madden would be the guy who ought to have his name attached to said trophy. Madden is a Hall of Fame Head Coach but there a lot of guys I would put ahead of him on the list of best all-time NFL Head Coachees.
Criminally long post warning . . . AFC coming immediately after.
Quote1. Cowboys (9-8): This might be wishful thinking, but there's absolutely no reason why this team can't get to 9 wins this season, and 9 wins will be good enough for first place in the division. Yes, the run defense is not very good, but Micah Parsons should help matters. The secondary will be much better than last season with the additions of Keanu Neal and Malik Hooker. So if the defense can simply be serviceable, Dak Prescott and the offense can get the Cowboys to the playoffs. Ezekiel Elliott is primed for a bounce-back season. Amari Cooper and CeeDee Lamb are both going to have huge seasons with Prescott back.
It wasn't wishful thinking. Parsons had an outstanding rookie season. The defense as a whole improved by leaps and bounds (I know they haven't been lights out this year, but compared to 2020, they're miles better). In fact, the defense was the main reason for a few wins down the stretch. Other than the Buccaneers game, Dak didn't have to throw a million passes in order for the team to stay competitive. Zeke bounced back to an extent. 1300 scrimmage yards and 12 total touchdowns would be great if he wasn't being paid $15 million a year. Tony Pollard has been one of the surprise players of the season.
Quote2. Giants (8-9): They made a lot of good moves in the offseason, but this is still a below average team with a below average quarterback and a below average head coach. Daniel Jones cannot be trusted with the game on the line, and neither can their defense. Their best player, Saquon Barkley, has had injury issues for the majority of his time in the league.
I'm not sure how the "game on the line" statements aged, as the Giants were blown out so often that we barely ever saw them in a tight game in the 4th quarter. Jones was pretty solid early in the season. I'm on the fence about what I would do with him if I was the one making those decisions. He's had three years to prove that he can be an NFL starter and hasn't, but on the other hand, he's shown improvement and has been dealt some tough cards.
Quote3. Washington (8-9): Dysfunctional organization with big question marks at quarterback. A tale as old as time. Outside of Terry McLaurin they don't have any great skill players. A great defensive front will only get you so far if your offense is terrible. I have them below the Giants because they are 0-4 against the Giants over the last two seasons.
My assessment of McLaurin being their only offensive threat was accurate, as he had nearly 600 more receiving yards than their #2 receiver, JD McKissic, who is a running back. Their defense wasn't very good either. They were probably worse than their record would indicate. They did beat the Giants twice though.
Quote4. Eagles (4-13): My money is on the Eagles being the least entertaining team to watch this season, because they have literally not a single player that will draw people to a TV. We'll find out if Jalen Hurts is the guy. If he's not, they'll use their shiny top 5 pick on a QB.
I suppose I was right about them not being interesting to watch, because they weren't. But what they were was a winning team that made the playoffs. Hurts should be their starter in 2022. They have three first round picks, which is unheard of for a playoff team, and it speaks of the good decisions that have been made in that organization. If they use them right, they could be a real threat within the next couple years.
Quote1. Packers (13-4): Aaron Rodgers is back and it seems like there won't be any more animosity, until the 2022 offseason at least. This is, once again, a Super Bowl-caliber team that will dominate in the regular season. When they do lose it's because of bad offensive line play and stupid mistakes at the worst possible time.
Yeah, pretty much. I suppose Immunized counts as a "stupid mistake at the worst possible time" , and it costed them the Chiefs game.
Quote2. Vikings (11-6): I expect the Vikings to bounce back this year. Kirk Cousins was, quietly, one of the best quarterbacks in the league down the stretch in 2020. Justin Jefferson and Adam Thielen might just be the second best receiving duo in the NFL this season, after Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelce. The defense is still suspect but it should be better than last season. During his time in Minnesota Mike Zimmer has earned a reputation of cooling his seat right back off when it seems to get hot, like he did in 2017 and 2019.
11-6 ended up being two games off, but I feel like what I said here was in large part correct. The reason why they're not at least 11-6 is defensive implosions at the wrong time. IIRC, they would be something like 13-4 if the last two minutes of each half were taken out. Zimmer didn't cool his seat off at all.
Quote3. Bears (7-10): A very hard team to predict, as I could see the season going one of a few very different ways. It was a questionable offseason for the Bears. Their quarterback situation this season is unclear - will Andy Dalton start as long as he plays well? Is it predetermined that Justin Fields will take over at some point? Will Fields start right away? That uncertainty scares me. Their pass rush is still very good, as is their receiving core. But they have a frontloaded schedule and if they start poorly, Matt Nagy could get fired and teams that fire their coach mid-season rarely finish with more than 6 wins. I think Nagy will hold onto his job for at least the duration of the season.
As I expected, the transition between Dalton and Fields was awkward, unprepared, and embarrassing. Dalton was playing okay, not good, not awful, until he got hurt. Fields took over and flat-out stunk for like five weeks. It was obvious that Dalton was the better quarterback at that point, but Nagy, with his job on the line, continued to put Fields out there. Fields finally gained some traction starting with the 49ers game. But if the theme of the season was keeping Nagy and letting him develop Fields, then why didn't Fields start right away? It felt like Nagy was coaching to win immediately at all costs, but then got bullied into playing Fields when he clearly wasn't the best option to win games. And then, of course, Nick Foles stumbled in, third-wheeled the story, put forth the Bears' best quarterback performance all season in a comeback victory, then promptly went back to the bench. Nick Foles things.
Quote4. Lions (4-13): Just not much to like about this team. First year head coach. The few great players that they do have are very young.
Yep.
Quote1. Buccaneers (14-3): They're the most complete team in the league. Really not much to say. The weak division helps them out.
Back in July, I remember looking at the Buccaneers schedule to contemplate if they could go 17-0. I picked out two games that I thought would be losses: week 3 at the Rams and week 8 at the Saints. When making this prediction I added one more because Brady's teams, while always great, tend to lose at least one game per year that they should have won by a lot (turned out to be the Washington game and the second Saints game). In hindsight I should have put that part in writing, though they ended up 13-4 rather than 14-3.
Quote2. Falcons (6-11): They will have a great passing offense, and probably not much else. The run game will be below average. The defense will be below average. First year head coach. I have them being better than last year because they would have been 7-9 last year if they could consistently hold a 16+ point lead.
Middle of the pack passing offense. I had a feeling that all the super unlucky/epic meltdown close losses would even out, but not to the degree that they have this year, with all of their wins being close and almost all of their losses being by double digits.
Quote3. Saints (5-12): Had the worst offseason of any team in the league in terms of talent lost. Neither Taysom Hill nor Jameis Winston is a reliable replacement for Drew Brees, and a shell-of-his-former-self 2020 Drew Brees at that. They were gutted in free agency. Alvin Kamara and Michael Thomas (if/when he's healthy) will put points on the board, but not enough in most cases.
Winston wasn't really playing that well before he got hurt. I feel like people saw that he wasn't throwing as many picks as he did in Tampa, and just assumed that it was all of the yards and touchdowns but without the mistakes. The Saints were leaning heavily on their defense even before Winston got hurt, and their downfall wasn't due to his injury as much as it was their defense declining. And the numerous injuries to other players didn't help. Still impressive that they got to 9 wins.
Quote4. Panthers (4-13): Probably the most overrated team in the league headed into this season. Sam Darnold is not it. He's just not. Their defense will be terrible. They need Christian McCaffrey to stay healthy. They have a couple decent receivers and they might have a good coach.
Sam Darnold wasn't it. He just wasn't. Their defense was actually pretty good. Opposing teams' point totals were deceiving because the Panthers offense couldn't keep the ball and turned it over so often. McCaffrey can't stay healthy. It's sad because he's such an exciting player, but his contract is way too much. Get rid of Darnold, get rid of McCaffrey, get rid of Rhule, and start over.
Quote1. Rams (13-4): Seems like people are overthinking the Rams. They have one of the best defenses, if not the outright best. They have a great group of skill players. The Cam Akers injury doesn't scare me as much as it does other people, since it's obvious that Sean McVay's offense can work with the vast majority of capable running backs. The expectations are sky high for Matthew Stafford, but even if he doesn't meet them, keep in mind that this team went 10-6 last season with the mediocre at best Jared Goff.
I'd say this is spot on. Sony Michel and Darrell Henderson have combined for over 1500 rush yards. No Akers, no problem. One of the best skill groups in the league. Some argue that Stafford hasn't met expectations, and they still won the division at 12-5.
Quote2. Seahawks (11-6): Their tendency to always play down to the level of their competition will finally bite them this year. Russell Wilson will be great in September and October, then fall off significantly late in the season like he's done four of the past five seasons. The defense will be better than last year, but they now have quite possibly the league's most overrated player, Jamal Adams, locked into a huge contract.
Not sure how much can be taken from this. The Russ injury and the subsequent reboot of the offense killed their season. Kyler Murray was out for the same amount of time, but by that point the Cardinals had amassed a 7-1 record, affording them a loss or two. It's going to be quite an interesting offseason in Seattle. Jamal Adams' contract is still bad, so there's that.
Quote3. Cardinals (10-7): Kyler Murray and DeAndre Hopkins will have huge seasons in their second year together. AJ Green is a good addition to an already very good receiving core. Their secondary has a few good young players, though the loss of Patrick Peterson will hurt. The thing I don't like is the JJ Watt signing, that will turn out to be one of the worst free agent signings of the decade.
After a great start, Murray and Hopkins both trailed off significantly, with injuries playing a part in both cases. Green had a decent season, albeit a season that will be remembered for the blunder at the end of the Packers game. So far so good on the JJ Watt take. They paid him $15 million per sack and almost $1 million per tackle this season. Terrible.
Quote4. 49ers (7-10): The best injured reserve list of all time, except now there's a quarterback controversy. Woohoo!
I've ripped them all season, and . . . I've been proven wrong. Seems like Garoppolo has handled the Lance situation very well. The injury bug bit them alright, but this year it was early on, which allowed them time to make a run up the barren wasteland that was the NFC wild card race.
QuoteNFC Playoffs
1. Buccaneers
2. Packers
3. Rams
4. Cowboys
5. Seahawks
6. Vikings
7. Cardinals
Wild Card
Packers beat Cardinals - Packers tend to turn it on going into the playoffs, so Rodgers will gash this Cards defense
Rams beat Vikings - Rams pass rush will give the Vikings major trouble, similar to what the 49ers did in the 2019 Divisional
Seahawks beat Cowboys - These two teams always play each other very close, but the Seahawks are the better team overall
Divisional
Buccaneers beat Seahawks - Bucs pass rush and run defense will be too much for the Seahawks to handle
Rams beat Packers - Somebody on the Packers will commit a stupid penalty at the worst time
NFC Championship
Buccaneers beat Rams - Comes down to the 7-time Super Bowl champion vs a guy playing in his first conference championship game
NFC offensive player of the year: DeAndre Hopkins
NFC defensive player of the year: Aaron Donald
NFC offensive rookie of the year: Kyle Pitts
NFC defensive rookie of the year: Jaycee Horn
Fired coaches: Matt Nagy (CHI)
5/7 playoff teams and perfect on the division winners. Rodgers or Brady would be NFC OPOY, definitely not Hopkins. Donald would be NFC DPOY. Not sure who besides Pitts would be in the NFC OROY conversation. Parsons will be DROY. Nagy fired.
Quote1. Bills (13-4): My one big concern with the Bills is running the ball. It was the reason why their offense fizzled out in the playoffs, playing poorly against the Ravens and then getting blown out by the Chiefs. If Josh Allen has an off game, or even a mediocre game, they're in trouble. Case in point: the Titans and Chiefs games last season. Their defense also struggled against the better passing offenses they played last year. But the Bills' passing offense will carry them to a great regular season.
The Bills were actually top 10 in rushing this year. That surprised me even just now, looking at team rushing stats. Looking at Josh Allen's game log, the statement about his "off games" pretty much held up; his bad games were the Steelers, Dolphins in week 2, Jaguars, Colts, Patriots in week 13, the first half of the Buccaneers game, and Falcons. They went 2-5 in those games. As expected, Allen was top 10 in pass completions, attempts, yards, and touchdowns.
Quote2. Dolphins (11-6): I was very anti-Dolphins last season but I'm coming around on them now. The two reasons why I don't think they will win the division are a) we don't know if Tua is the answer at QB, and b) the Bills absolutely gashed them last year to the tune of 87 points over two games. But they have an excellent group of skill players and a good secondary.
Tua had his moments this year, such as the Falcons game (32/40, 291 yds, 4 TDs, 2 INTs), and the stretch from weeks 11-13 when he completed 84 of 105 passes (80%) with 5 TDs and only one pick. But overall he was underwhelming, and some injury concerns continued to mount. If I was the Dolphins, I would give him one more year and one more year only to prove himself. We'll see what happens. I was initially a big fan of the Will Fuller acquisition, but injuries limited him to 4 receptions for 26 yards on the season. Jaylen Waddle is one of several 2021 draft class WRs that could be a star. I was at least right about their struggles against the Bills, as they lost by a combined score of 61-11 in their two meetings.
Quote3. Patriots (9-8): I'm always skeptical of teams who draft QBs in the first round, but I don't think Belichick will be rushing to get Mac Jones in there too soon. The problem is that Cam Newton can't throw the ball downfield, yet all New England has are deep ball WRs. They have two good tight ends, but tight ends do not win you a lot of games. Overall it's a decent team but they have no "it factor", nobody who is going to scare opposing teams.
Ha, ha ha . . . Belichick got Jones in there pretty quick, but he was ready. His only performance early in the season that resembled a traditional "rookie QB game" was against the Saints. Either I was wrong about their lack of a death by 1,000 paper cuts WR, or Belichick made great adjustments with the players he had to fit Jones' strengths. Probably both. They didn't have an "it factor" , and that's why they didn't last a quarter in the playoffs.
Quote4. Jets (2-15): They'll go 0-6 in the division because in terms of talent and experience they are far inferior everywhere on the field compared to the other three teams in the division. With a first year coaching staff, a bad offensive line, and a below average skill group, Zach Wilson will have a rough time in year 1.
As expected, the Jets were terrible. I was right about 0-6 in the division. But I have to say, I feel more optimistic about their future than I have in at least six or seven years. They have two first round picks, two second round picks, a third round pick, and two fourth round picks. If they can hit on a few of those, I would not be surprised to see this team in the playoff hunt in 2022. Wilson has found a little traction lately. Whether Robert Saleh will work out long term is still anyone's guess, but it at least hasn't been a total disaster. And hey, they gave us one of the iconic moments of this season: Mike White's 405 passing yards and shocking comeback victory against a playoff team in his first career start.
Quote1. Ravens (13-4): They will once again have the best rushing offense in the league by far. Lamar Jackson's passing stats will improve with the addition of a few wide receivers including Sammy Watkins. But the best rushing offense doesn't get you far in the playoffs if you can't consistently throw for 250-350 yards a game.
They ended up 3rd in the league in rushing, and that was with their top two RBs going down early in the season, and their part-time RB starting quarterback also missing a few games. Lamar's passing stats improved in some areas and declined in others, but to me it was obvious that he threw the ball much better in 2021 than he did in 2020. Had they not been ravaged by injuries all season long, they undoubtedly would have gotten closer to the 13-4 mark I predicted, though perhaps not all the way there.
Quote2. Browns (13-4): I have them second in the division because they struggled against the Ravens last year, giving up a total of 85 points in those two games. Baker Mayfield will take another step forward, but he won't by any means be an elite quarterback. They have the best offensive line and probably the best duo of running backs in Nick Chubb and Kareem Hunt. Their secondary was atrocious last year but they improved it in the offseason, with John Johnson from the Rams and Greg Newsome from Northwestern. Even so I think they get ripped apart by the Chiefs in week 1 because it's not good to play the Chiefs with a brand new secondary.
No, no, and no. Except for the improvement of their secondary. That part was correct, as they were top 10 in pass defense this year. They did lose to the Chiefs in week 1, but it was a much closer game than I expected. Baker took about 4 steps backwards. Chubb and Hunt were not the best duo in the league, though D'Ernest Johnson came out of nowhere and finished with more yards than Hunt. A combination of very poor quarterback play, injuries, and questionable coaching at times made them the most disappointing team of the year. It was mostly the quarterback play though.
Quote3. Steelers (11-6): The only thing people remember about the Steelers is how they slumped to end the season, not how they started 11-0. But they did start 11-0. Big Ben is still better than people think. They have three great young receivers. They have improved their running game with Najee Harris. Their pass rush is really good. The problem is that I don't think they will do any better than 1-3 against the top two teams in the division.
Take everything I said here, and bump it down one single notch. That's basically how the Steelers' season went. Big Ben wasn't completely awful, but it was still one of the worst, if not the worst, season of his career. They have three good young receivers, one of which probably won't be with the team in 2022. They led the league in sacks again, but it seemed like they came in bunches; there were games when that great defensive front was not much of a factor at all. They even came up one round short of my prediction - I had them losing to the Chiefs in the divisional, and they lost to the Chiefs in the wild card. The only pleasant surprise was Najee Harris' outstanding rookie season. Hopefully he stays healthy and doesn't turn into another Saquon Barkley. Despite the mediocre record, this season also spoke to how great of a coach Tomlin is. There were numerous occasions where it seemed like this team was going to crumble for good (1-3 start, blowout loss to the Bengals, down 29-0 to the Vikings, blowout loss to the Chiefs), but they came back fighting every time.
Quote4. Bengals (5-12): Similar to the Jets but not as bad, the Bengals will be the obvious runt of the litter in this division. They might snatch an upset win over Pittsburgh or Cleveland. Joe Burrow is still recovering from injury, their offensive line is still bad, and their defense is still really bad.
Oh, boy. In my defense, a lot of people were thinking this same way before the season. Defense could still use plenty of improvement though.
Quote1. Titans (10-7): Their offense will be top 6-8 in the league, and their defense will be bottom 10. They benefit from being in a weak division.
Their offense was top 6-8 before Henry got hurt, now they're middle of the pack. Their defense is also middle of the pack. I feel that they haven't been quite as good as their record indicates, but they're definitely a playoff team. They did indeed benefit from being in a weak division, with almost half their wins coming inside of it.
Quote2. Colts (7-10): They are better than their record will show, but the fact is there are so many good teams in the AFC that it has to be like that for some teams. Carson Wentz's foot injury is concerning, even if he's ready to go in week 1. Let's not forget that Wentz was less than impressive in 2020. They had a tendency to play down to the level of their opponent last year, I think they'll lose some close games that they should have won.
I believe they were better than their record indicates, as most of their losses came early in the season when they were trying to find their stride. Good to see that there weren't any injury concerns for Wentz. I thought they had fixed the downplaying to inferior opponents problem, until week 18 rolled around. Wentz rebounded from his awful 2020, but as I've said several times, he doesn't have what it takes to win three playoff games in a row, and in 2021 he didn't even have what it took to make the playoffs. Let this be a lesson: don't go cheap at quarterback when you have a Super Bowl roster at all the other positions. The Colts had every opportunity to land Matt Stafford last offseason, but didn't want to give up the necessary capital, so instead they went with Wentz. This team led the league in pro bowlers, led the league in all-pro selections, had by far the best running back in the league, and missed the playoffs. Moral of the story is get a top 12 quarterback first and worry about the rest afterwards.
Quote3. Texans (5-12): Deshaun Watson is sadly going to be starting for the Texans this season. The majority of their losses in 2020 were close, they were better than their record would indicate. With no cap room and no draft picks until the third round, they didn't improve much in the offseason. The defense is still awful.
Hey, no Watson! Hopefully it stays that way next year. I had a feeling that they wouldn't be as bad as most expected, and they weren't. Davis Mills has a real shot to succeed in the league, which would be a great story.
Quote4. Jaguars (4-13) Below average offensive line, rookie quarterback, and first year head coach. They do have decent RBs and WRs. They'll be exciting for the first few games, but everyone will soon realize that they're not very good. That being said I do expect Trevor Lawrence to have a decent rookie season.
They were exciting for about a quarter. Lawrence had a bad rookie season. Urban Meyer STINKS. On to year 3 of the rebuild, they probably won't be competitive next year either, but I'm not giving up on Lawrence anytime soon.
Quote1. Chiefs (15-2): Their offense is ridiculous and the addition of Orlando Brown should make it one level higher still than last season. They are the best two minute drill team ever, other than perhaps the '07 Patriots. Mahomes will put up MVP stats yet again. One thing they had issues with last season was, oddly, red zone offense.
It took them until week 10 to be the team I expected them to be, but they got there. Mahomes has had the worst season of his career. Mahomes has been great once again. They've got some red zone issues for the second year in a row, which is puzzling, but they move the ball so well that it doesn't matter most of the time.
Quote2. Chargers (9-8): I think they will struggle at the beginning of the season with a first year head coach, a brand new offensive line, and a heavily frontloaded schedule. But they'll pick it up later on in the season. Justin Herbert will have a great year, but the pressure on him will increase during the offseason, with no playoff appearences.
The timeline was the opposite of what I expected - they started 4-1 and were a .500 team afterwards. Herbert indeed had a great year, but with no playoff appearances, he, Staley, and this team will enter next season under a huge amount of pressure. My way-too-early bold prediction is that Staley will be canned if they don't make it past the wild card in 2022-23.
Quote3. Broncos (6-11): I hope they start Drew Lock rather than Teddy Bridgewater because Bridgewater is a ticket straight to 6 wins without fail, whereas with Lock they will at least see once and for all whether or not he has a future as a starter. Their receivers, tight ends, and running backs are pretty good (so long as they don't have to play quarterback :-D). Defense is a far cry from the No Fly Zone, to say the least.
It ended up being 7 wins instead of 6. Bridgewater was slightly better than I expected, but not great by any means. Lock is not the guy. I just laughed at my own joke there.
Quote4. Raiders (5-12): They don't have anybody or any group of players that will go out and win the team the game. There are questions about the head coach. Their offensive line was gutted. They're always bad in November and December. Really there's not too much to like about this team, aside from their stadium I guess.
This season has proven that Derek Carr is that guy, someone who will go out and win the team the game. He did that on numerous occasions this year. Similar to the Steelers, there were a lot of moments that seemed like season-killers (though those moments for the Raiders were mostly off the field), but they bounced back every time, which speaks to good leadership and good culture. They certainly fell off after their 3-0 and 5-2 start, but it wasn't the full-blown collapse that the 2019 and 2020 Raiders underwent, as they managed to pull their season from the rubble with five huge wins down the stretch.
QuoteAFC Playoffs
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Ravens
4. Titans
5. Browns
6. Steelers
7. Dolphins
Wild Card
Bills beat Dolphins - As I mentioned, the Dolphins had trouble with the Bills last season
Steelers beat Ravens - Steelers are the more complete team, and that's important in the playoffs
Browns beat Titans - Titans defense was really bad against the Browns last season
Divisional
Chiefs beat Steelers - Chiefs offense coming off a bye will be too much for even the Steelers defense to handle
Browns beat Bills - Browns running game will power through the Bills defense
AFC Championship
Chiefs beat Browns - the only reason why the divisional round game last season wasn't a blowout was the Mahomes injury
AFC offensive player of the year: Patrick Mahomes
AFC defensive player of the year: TJ Watt
AFC offensive rookie of the year: Trevor Lawrence
AFC defensive rookie of the year: Patrick Surtain
Fired coaches: Zac Taylor (CIN), Vic Fangio (DEN), Jon Gruden (LV)
4/7 playoff teams, 3/4 division winners. None of the AFC teams I had making the playoffs finished worse than 8-9. No such award exists, but one could make a solid argument for Mahomes being the AFC OPOY. Watt would be the obvious AFC DPOY. Chase, not Lawrence, for AFC ROTY. Didn't follow the Broncos much, but according to oddsmakers Surtain is second favorite for DROY after Parsons, so there ya go. Fangio out, Gruden out, Taylor rightfully still employed.
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 31, 2021, 11:54:32 AM
BUF 13 4 MIA 10 7 NE 10 7 NYJ 3 14
BAL 11 6 CLE 11 6 PIT 9 8 CIN 3 14
TEN 11 6 IND 9 8 JAX 7 10 HOU 2 15
KC 13 4 LAC 12 5 DEN 8 9 LV 7 10
NYG 9 8 DAL 8 9 WAS 8 9 PHI 7 10
GB 11 6 CHI 8 9 MIN 7 10 DET 4 13
TB 13 4 NO 6 11 ATL 6 11 CAR 4 13
LAR 13 4 SEA 12 5 SF 11 6 ARI 6 11
(2) KC over (7) MIA, (6) CLE over (3) BAL, (5) LAC over (4) TEN
(2) LAR over (7) CHI, (6) SF over (3) GB, (5) SEA over (4) NYG
(1) BUF over (6) CLE, (5) LAC over (2) KC
(1) TB over (6) SF, (2) LAR over (5) SEA
(1) BUF over (5) LAC
(2) LAR over (1) TB
Buffalo finally wins their first Super Bowl in 5 attempts by completing the LA double in LA.
I got 6/8 division winners right, 7/14 playoff teams, 5/8 division round teams.
Could still get 3/4 championship round teams and both Super Bowl teams.
Really overestimated the Chargers, Seahawks and Giants. Really underestimated the Bengals, Eagles and Cardinals.
Unlike others here I didn't really make a lot of predictions. I remembered why when I played the fork game and got 3 AFC teams wrong with only 2 weeks left! But I did pose a bunch of preseason questions which I plan to go back and answer after the Super Bowl.
In the big picture, there were definitely some surprises:
Per FiveThirtyEight, 3 of the bottom 10 teams in the preseason ended up making the playoffs: Bengals, Raiders, and Eagles. All three had preseason playoff odds of less than 25%, and the first two ended up playing each other in the playoffs!
Meanwhile, 3 of the top 10 teams in the preseason ended up missing the playoffs: Browns, Ravens, and Seahawks. The Seahawks ended up being only team in their division not to make the playoffs, and the AFC North was just complete craziness, with the final standings ending up almost the exact reverse of what most people predicted.
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2022, 08:18:12 PM
Quote1. Packers (13-4) ...
Yeah, pretty much. I suppose Immunized counts as a "stupid mistake at the worst possible time" , and it costed them the Chiefs game.
It may have cost them the game, but it did save your 13-4 prediction!
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2022, 08:18:55 PM
This season has proven that Derek Carr is that guy, someone who will go out and win the team the game. He did that on numerous occasions this year. ...
If you need a field goal drive to win it, there might not be a QB I'd rather have than Derek Carr. He did it what, 5 or 6 times this season? It's a bit of a different story needing a touchdown though, as we saw against the Bengals. Settling for field goals in the red zone was a problem for them all season and it cost them in the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on January 18, 2022, 10:36:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2022, 08:18:12 PM
Quote1. Packers (13-4) ...
Yeah, pretty much. I suppose Immunized counts as a "stupid mistake at the worst possible time" , and it costed them the Chiefs game.
It may have cost them the game, but it did save your 13-4 prediction!
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2022, 08:18:55 PM
This season has proven that Derek Carr is that guy, someone who will go out and win the team the game. He did that on numerous occasions this year. ...
If you need a field goal drive to win it, there might not be a QB I'd rather have than Derek Carr. He did it what, 5 or 6 times this season? It's a bit of a different story needing a touchdown though, as we saw against the Bengals. Settling for field goals in the red zone was a problem for them all season and it cost them in the playoffs.
I'd rather have Brady, Rodgers, and Mahomes. So Carr would be #4.
Wow, get this... Tom Brady is older than all the remaining opposing NFC head coaches (McVay, Shanahan, and LaFleur):
https://twitter.com/SportsCenter/status/1483552993748389889
Brady old
Quote from: CoreySamson on August 19, 2021, 10:06:14 PM
My predictions:
AFC East:
1. Bills (14-3)
2. Dolphins (11-6)
3. Patriots (9-7-1)
4. Jets (2-15)
AFC North:
1. Browns (11-6)
2. Ravens (11-6)
3. Steelers (8-9)
4. Bengals (5-12)
AFC South:
1. Titans (12-5)
2. Colts (8-9)
3. Jaguars (7-10)
4. Texans (1-16)
AFC West:
1. Chiefs (15-2)
2. Chargers (11-6)
3. Broncos (6-11)
4. Raiders (6-11)
AFC Playoff Seeds:
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Titans
4. Browns
5. Chargers
6. Ravens
7. Dolphins
AFC Championship:
Bills over Chiefs, 35-31
NFC East:
1. Cowboys (10-7)
2. Washington (8-9)
3. Giants (8-9)
4. Eagles (3-14)
NFC North:
1. Bears (10-7)
2. Packers (10-7)
3. Vikings (9-8)
4. Lions (2-15)
NFC South:
1. Buccaneers (13-4)
2. Saints (6-10-1)
3. Falcons (6-11)
4. Panthers (4-13)
NFC West:
1. Rams (16-1)
2. Cardinals (12-5)
3. 49ers (10-7)
4. Seahawks (9-8)
NFC Playoff Seeds:
1. Rams
2. Buccaneers
3. Cowboys
4. Bears
5. Cardinals
6. 49ers
7. Packers
NFC Championship:
Rams over Cardinals, 34-13
Super Bowl:
Rams over Bills, 30-21
HOT TAKES:
-Bears win NFC North
-Cardinals and Chargers surprise positively
-NFC West has no losing teams, with Seahawks in last place
Looks like my predictions weren't too great, except for the NFC West, which other than the Rams not winning 16 games, I pretty much nailed, right down to the score between the Cardinals and Rams in the wild-card game! (admittedly, I predicted it as the Championship game, but whatever)
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2022, 12:26:01 PM
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
The cold weather thing is overhyped in general. The players are playing, not the team name. If a team in a southern city has a number of players from Northern climates, any so-called advantage the cold weather team has is significantly reduced.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2022, 12:26:01 PM
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
During the Rodgers era, here are the Packers home losses in December and January:
Texans (2008)
Giants (2011)
Steelers (2013)
49ers (2013)
Vikings (2015)
Vikings (2017)
Cardinals (2018)
Lions (2018)
Buccaneers (2020)
So, four warm/mild weather teams, two northern dome teams (the '15 Vikings played at TCF Bank Stadium), and three true cold weather teams. If the Giants count as a true cold weather team, that is; NYC's average December/January high of 42 is almost as close to San Francisco's 58 as it is Green Bay's 28.
The 49ers/Cowboys game unsurprisingly drew huge ratings. Most watched wild card game in 7 years.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2022, 12:26:01 PM
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
I stand by my statement that the Packers should never be the favorites in the playoffs, home or away, until they prove they can win when it matters. The last decade has been consistent failure when it counts, why should any team fear them in the postseason?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 19, 2022, 12:34:25 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2022, 12:26:01 PM
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
The cold weather thing is overhyped in general. The players are playing, not the team name. If a team in a southern city has a number of players from Northern climates, any so-called advantage the cold weather team has is significantly reduced.
I think the largest impact of cold temperature is that the field freezes over after a while. Lambeau's grass is always half-dead by playoff time. I've never been on the surface, but I imagine the ground is harder and bumpier now than it was in September and October.
But when it comes to throwing and catching the ball, even single digit temps don't make much of an impact. It takes a good 5-10 consecutive minutes for your hands to start freezing, and QBs and receivers have several minutes to warm their hands on the sideline between possessions.
Crazy fact: the Steelers have allowed 40+ points as many times in the playoffs (3) as they have in the regular season (3) over the past five seasons! I don't think it gets talked about enough how bad their defense has been in the playoffs... 45, 48, and 42 points (135 total!) in their last three appearances. Even more crazy when you think about all the ugly, low-scoring games they win on the strength of their defense in the regular season.
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2022, 06:39:12 PM
Crazy fact: the Steelers have allowed 40+ points as many times in the playoffs (3) as they have in the regular season (3) over the past five seasons! I don't think it gets talked about enough how bad their defense has been in the playoffs... 45, 48, and 42 points (135 total!) in their last three appearances. Even more crazy when you think about all the ugly, low-scoring games they win on the strength of their defense in the regular season.
The Steelers are also the only team in the history of the NFL to lose a playoff game to Tim Tebow.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 20, 2022, 08:19:25 PM
The Steelers are also the only team in the history of the NFL to lose a playoff game to Tim Tebow.
A feat that will never be matched! :bigass:
Quote from: thspfc on January 19, 2022, 12:49:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 19, 2022, 12:34:25 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2022, 12:26:01 PM
The game in Green Bay Saturday night isn't going to break any cold records, but it's going to be a bit nippy. Upper teens at kickoff. Looking breezy, so wind chill is going to make it feel like low singles.
The home field weather advantage at Lambeau seems to be of another era, so I'm not reading too much into that forecast.
The cold weather thing is overhyped in general. The players are playing, not the team name. If a team in a southern city has a number of players from Northern climates, any so-called advantage the cold weather team has is significantly reduced.
I think the largest impact of cold temperature is that the field freezes over after a while. Lambeau's grass is always half-dead by playoff time. I've never been on the surface, but I imagine the ground is harder and bumpier now than it was in September and October.
But when it comes to throwing and catching the ball, even single digit temps don't make much of an impact. It takes a good 5-10 consecutive minutes for your hands to start freezing, and QBs and receivers have several minutes to warm their hands on the sideline between possessions.
The technology of today takes away most of what cold weather teams could have had advantages on. The jackets, handwarmers, etc are that much better. And correct me if I'm wrong but they also keep the footballs warm too so the old stories of kicking the football with it feeling like a brick and not going as far are more stories of the past.
Honestly the only players that would more be affected would be those farther down on the depth chart that barely do anything, but if called into action then maybe it affects them as they had barely been doing much(and that's stretching a maybe).
The best way to bring frigid temps into play is get up by three scores or more and then losing team starts getting thoughts of "Why are they out here?" or "Please get this over with".......which hit's losing team regardless of where they are from. Winning is a great distraction from the weather lol
Giants hire Bills assistant GM Joe Schoen as their GM:
https://www.giants.com/news/giants-hire-joe-schoen-as-general-manager
Reaction seems to be overwhelmingly positive. And Bills OC Brian Daboll would make sense as a head coach candidate, especially if he can help develop Daniel Jones in the same way he did for Josh Allen.
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Derrick Henry will play today. He's been activated.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Ranking most to least:
Bills vs Rams
Bills vs 49ers
Chiefs vs Rams
Chiefs vs 49ers
Bengals vs Rams
Bengals vs 49ers
Titans vs Rams
Titans vs 49ers
Bills vs Bucs
Chiefs vs Bucs
Bengals vs Bucs
Titans vs Bucs
Bills vs Packers
Chiefs vs Packers
Bengals vs Packers
Titans vs Packers
Titans vs Rams: The Rematch of XXXIV at LVI
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Bills, Bengals, Titans vs. any NFC team. Chiefs have won a SB, as have all NFC teams.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Most: Bills vs. 49ers. Either the local team wins or a likeable team breaks its curse
Second: Titans vs. Rams, with a last-second stop at the 1 yard line either way
Third: Bills v. Brady, and this might move to 2nd
Last: Titans vs. Rams, not because dislike either team, but I'd have no rooting interest for or against
Quote from: kurumi on January 22, 2022, 02:40:20 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Most: Bills vs. 49ers. Either the local team wins or a likeable team breaks its curse
Second: Titans vs. Rams, with a last-second stop at the 1 yard line either way
Third: Bills v. Brady, and this might move to 2nd
Last: Titans vs. Rams, not because dislike either team, but I'd have no rooting interest for or against
Rams vs Bills simply because my Wife is from Firebaugh but everyone in her family are Rams fans. Added bonus for me that Matt Stafford was the Lions Quarterback for so long. The amount of free food and booze that would be at my disposal would be epic in scale.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Bengals vs. 49ers
Bengals vs. Buccaneers
Bengals vs. Packers
Bengals vs. Rams
Bills vs. 49ers
Bills vs. Buccaneers
Bills vs. Packers
Bills vs. Rams
Chiefs vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Buccaneers
Chiefs vs. Packers
Chiefs vs. Rams
Titans vs. 49ers
Titans vs. Buccaneers
Titans vs. Packers
Titans vs. Rams
Packers vs. anybody. As long as the Packers make it, and then win, I'll be happy.
Glad that the Titans are out. I don't think anyone outside of Tennessee really wanted to watch their 4-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust offense any longer. Worst 1 seed of all time?
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 20, 2022, 08:19:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2022, 06:39:12 PM
Crazy fact: the Steelers have allowed 40+ points as many times in the playoffs (3) as they have in the regular season (3) over the past five seasons! I don't think it gets talked about enough how bad their defense has been in the playoffs... 45, 48, and 42 points (135 total!) in their last three appearances. Even more crazy when you think about all the ugly, low-scoring games they win on the strength of their defense in the regular season.
The Steelers are also the only team in the history of the NFL to lose a playoff game to Tim Tebow.
Demaryius Thomas was the hero of that one.
Quote from: webny99 on January 18, 2022, 08:10:44 AM
... I do think the Titans will win, so that will be my one pick of the week.
This is why I stay away from making predictions :-D
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 07:44:57 PM
Glad that the Titans are out. I don't think anyone outside of Tennessee really wanted to watch their 4-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust offense any longer. Worst 1 seed of all time?
This is the type of "process over results" debate that's always interesting. They beat 7 teams that finished with a winning record, including both the Bills and Chiefs, who were their main competition for the 1 seed. They have a great coach. They managed the regular season really well despite a ton of injuries to set themselves up for the bye. I don't think they're the worst 1 seed ever... they just profile as more of a 3 or 4 seed with a QB that's solid, but not top 5.
It was also about as ugly a loss as possible... bizarre decision not to kick the extra point, which would have allowed them to run out clock at the end instead of having to get in FG range, came back from 10 points down, the defense was excellent with 9 sacks and just one TD allowed... exactly the type of game that they usually find a way to win... but then the 3rd Tannehill interception basically cost them their season.
And congrats to the Bengals, who have a stud QB and a rookie kicker that just nailed a 52 yard field goal to seal the first road playoff win in franchise history and send them to their first AFC title game since 1988!
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2022, 10:21:15 PM
And congrats to the Bengals, who have a stud QB and a rookie kicker that just nailed a 52 yard field goal to seal the first road playoff win in franchise history and send them to their first AFC title game since 1988!
2019: 2-14
2020: 4-11-1
2021: AFC title game (and King of the [AFC] North)
ROBBIE GOULD!!
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 09:46:00 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Ranking most to least:
Bills vs Rams
Bills vs 49ers
Chiefs vs Rams
Chiefs vs 49ers
Bengals vs Rams
Bengals vs 49ers
Titans vs Rams
Titans vs 49ers
Bills vs Bucs
Chiefs vs Bucs
Bengals vs Bucs
Titans vs Bucs
Bills vs Packers
Chiefs vs Packers
Bengals vs Packers
Titans vs Packers
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
They tried. Called penalties on SF both times their offense got into the red zone, but hard to do anything about a blocked punt.
Who placed a bet that both #1 seeds would lose today?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Quote
7. 49ers get last in the NFC West (shouldn't be a hot take because they were last in 2020, but people like them for some reason)
To be fair to my past self, I was only one spot off. But clearly they're at least the second best team, even if they got 3rd in the regular season.
Quote
4. 49ers (7-10): The best injured reserve list of all time, except now there's a quarterback controversy. Woohoo!
Not much of a quarterback controversy.
Quote
Everyone knows what the definition of insanity is, that's how I feel when it comes to the 49ers. If you assume that nobody is going to injure even a hangnail all season, they MIGHT be like the 7th best team in the conference. Don't talk to me about how they were in the Super Bowl in 2019 - 1), they've lost several key pieces from that team, and 2), the NFC was terrible in 2019. Now you factor in how the Rams, Buccaneers, Packers, Seahawks, Cardinals, etc. have improved in that timeframe. So if the Niners went the entire year without a single injury, they would be like 7th. But, they have been one of the three most injured teams in the league for 3 of the last 4 seasons. That is not bad luck, that is a problem. It's anyone's guess as to whose fault it is. But it's not by chance.
QuoteSomehow the 49ers still have the T-12th best odds (+3500) to win the Super Bowl. At this point it's egregious. They're not good. Accept it. Their secondary stinks, their coach doesn't believe in their QB, nobody else on the team really believes in their QB, and their skill players are meh at best, except for Deebo Samuel and occasionally George Kittle. Oh, and the institutional injury problem that they seemingly refuse to address.
If I hear "they went to the Super Bowl two years ago" one more time I will annihilate my TV.
QuoteEvery year a team is dubbed "the team no one wants to play in the postseason". This year, it was the Colts. (!) Until it was the 49ers. That title is earned by playing badly early on, and then stringing together wins down the stretch. For some reason, teams that run the ball well but can't throw it well consistently enough get bonus points. Don't ask, those are the rules I guess. So let's go back through a few years, and look at the teams who everyone was dreading to face:
2020: Ravens (11-5), lost divisional
2019: Titans (9-7), lost AFC Championship
2018 there were quite a few: Cowboys (10-6), lost divisional; Colts (10-6), lost divisional; Ravens (10-6), lost wild card
2017: Chiefs (10-6), lost wild card
One of those six made the conference title game. Those six had an average record of 10-6, and the Niners are 10-7. Five of the six were built the same way: run-heavy, can occasionally win games by throwing, but not often enough (the 2018 Colts being the exception). I'd say that's an accurate description of the Niners this year.
Contrast the 10-6 average of those teams to the average record of the last 8 Super Bowl teams, which is 12.5-3.5. The last 16 conference finalists are 12.25-3.75.
Conclusion: I'll bet my house on the Niners not making it past the divisional. I wouldn't be shocked if they beat the Cowboys though.
I'm now homeless :-D.
Disaster for the Packers.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
They tried. Called penalties on SF both times their offense got into the red zone, but hard to do anything about a blocked punt.
They do tend to call a penalty when the running back stiff arms a defender using the defender's facemask.
What did I tell ya? NEVER trust the Packers in the playoffs, they always find a way to mess things up.
Something is seriously wrong in Green Bay.
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:30:47 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
They tried. Called penalties on SF both times their offense got into the red zone, but hard to do anything about a blocked punt.
They do tend to call a penalty when the running back stiff arms a defender using the defender's facemask.
That happens several times a game and I can't remember the last time it got called.
Several of the FOX personalities nailed it - I think both Terry & Howie predicted 49ers by 3 pregame (with Terry specifically mentioning a last-second FG), and then right out of the opening kickoff Joe & Troy agreed the game would likely come down to special teams.
lol Packers
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
It surely won't last long, but someone edited his Wikipedia page to note he's the owner of the Green Bay Packers :-D
Aaron Rodgers has as many NFC Championship wins as Rex Grossman: 1
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:35:47 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:30:47 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
They tried. Called penalties on SF both times their offense got into the red zone, but hard to do anything about a blocked punt.
They do tend to call a penalty when the running back stiff arms a defender using the defender's facemask.
That happens several times a game and I can't remember the last time it got called.
🤡
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:35:47 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:30:47 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2022, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:09:52 PM
ROBBIE GOULD!!
I must've missed the part where the NFL rigged the game for the Packers.
They tried. Called penalties on SF both times their offense got into the red zone, but hard to do anything about a blocked punt.
They do tend to call a penalty when the running back stiff arms a defender using the defender's facemask.
That happens several times a game and I can't remember the last time it got called.
Runner can place open hand on facemask for a stiff arm but cannot wrap fingers around it. Saw this called 3-4 times this season.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 22, 2022, 11:26:12 PM
Who placed a bet that both #1 seeds would lose today?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
My good friend didn't take the money line, but bet a parlay on the spreads for both of the underdogs.
Today will be the 5th time the Chiefs and Bills have met in the playoffs. In each of the 4 previous meetings the winner went on to lose the Super Bowl
1966-67 - Chiefs
1991-92 - Bills
1993-94 - Bills
2020-21 - Chiefs
The LA Rams beat the Tampa Buccaneers 30-27! The LA Rams will be playing against the 49ers next weekend.
Visiting teams who have kicked a game winning field goal that was snapped with exactly 4 seconds left in a tie game this weekend:
- Bengals
- 49ers
- Rams
Lets see if the Bills can join the club
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 11:19:39 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 22, 2022, 09:46:00 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 22, 2022, 03:43:19 AM
All right, which of these potential Super Bowl matchups would you like to see most (or, for that matter, least)?
Ranking most to least:
Bills vs Rams
Bills vs 49ers
Chiefs vs Rams
Chiefs vs 49ers
Bengals vs Rams
Bengals vs 49ers
Titans vs Rams
Titans vs 49ers
Bills vs Bucs
Chiefs vs Bucs
Bengals vs Bucs
Titans vs Bucs
Bills vs Packers
Chiefs vs Packers
Bengals vs Packers
Titans vs Packers
Fixed that for ya since the Bucs and the Bills are not going to the Superbowl.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 23, 2022, 06:31:23 PM
The LA Rams beat the Tampa Buccaneers 30-27! The LA Rams will be playing against the 49ers next weekend.
Brady used to be able to come back from 27 or 28 to 3 and win :-)
Quote from: kurumi on January 23, 2022, 08:58:36 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 23, 2022, 06:31:23 PM
The LA Rams beat the Tampa Buccaneers 30-27! The LA Rams will be playing against the 49ers next weekend.
Brady used to be able to come back from 27 or 28 to 3 and win :-)
Sure helped the Rams kept fumbling the ball at almost every opportunity to let Tampa back in the game.
The Buffalo Bills lost to the KC Cheifs at a nail-biting 42-36 in OT.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 23, 2022, 09:58:05 PM
The Buffalo Bills lost to the KC Cheifs at a nail-biting 42-36 in OT.
NFL overtime rules are awful to not give both teams a chance to have the ball. That said, there's no excuse for giving up points when there are 13 seconds left. Bad decision not to squib kick on the kickoff and then horrible defensive alignment on the two plays after that.
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a great win for my Chiefs!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I guess that my rooting interest will be Rams-Bengals now.
I'll have the Chiefs winning the Super Bowl.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on January 23, 2022, 10:07:04 PM
I'll have the Chiefs winning the Super Bowl.
Whoever won that game was going to be the favorite. Not saying the other teams can't win but those two are clearly better.
Shame that we can't get this as a Super Bowl matchup.
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
I hate it when the coin flip decides who wins. I wish both QBs would have had the chance to snap the ball at least once in OT....just unfortunate that Josh Allen didn't get the opportunity to attempt to match the TD by KC. Just like I wished Patrick could have tried to match the TD by the Patriots in the 2019 AFC Championship.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
On top of that, there's a 50% chance that for the second straight year a home team plays the Super Bowl in their own stadium (although they will have to wear their road jerseys.) And there's a 100% chance that a team from the state hosting the Super Bowl plays in the Super Bowl.
California went 2-0 vs Bay this weekend
Quote from: jgb191 on January 23, 2022, 10:39:09 PM
I hate it when the coin flip decides who wins. I wish both QBs would have had the chance to snap the ball at least once in OT....just unfortunate that Josh Allen didn't get the opportunity to attempt to match the TD by KC. Just like I wished Patrick could have tried to match the TD by the Patriots in the 2019 AFC Championship.
Supposedly it's to prevent injuries from extreme fatigue. I agree though, the OT rules need to be changed. If injuries are the main concern, then give each team the ball at the 50 or opponent's 25 or something, like they do in college.
No doubt that was the best divisional weekend ever. Fans have been blessed this season: best season-opening game ever, best final regular season game ever, and best divisional weekend ever.
I was at work so I didn't watch Rams/Tampa. I just hope that wasn't Brady's last game. I doubt it was. I think he's saying that he's considering retirement so that all the other teams will get their hopes up, only for him to crush their dreams once again. But on the off chance that that was
it . . . well, I might shed a tear or two if it's announced. Football and sports as a whole will never be the same once Brady's gone, and there's never going to be another Brady.
This was the weekend of "that can't happen, right?" moments. Both 1 seeds can't lose in the divisional, right? The Bengals can't win two playoff games in a row, right? The Bengals can't win a road playoff game, right? (that had literally never happened before yesterday). The Packers can't lose in the snow at Lambeau in what was quite possibly Rodgers' last season with them, right? The 49ers can't beat the Packers without scoring an offensive touchdown, right? Brady can't lose in the divisional, right?
Frankly, I don't think the four teams left are the four best teams. The Bengals went 10-7, narrowly beat a Raiders team that went 4-0 in overtime games just to get to the playoffs, and narrowly beat the Titans, who were the worst 1 seed in a long time. The 49ers made the playoffs by the skin of their teeth and have scored three touchdowns in two playoff games.
That said, it doesn't matter. Nobody cares if the best team to lose in the divisional was better than the worst team to win in the divisional.
My ordering of remaining Super Bowl possibilities:
1) Chiefs/Rams
2) Bengals/Rams
3) Chiefs/49ers
4) Bengals/49ers
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2022, 11:21:01 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 23, 2022, 10:39:09 PM
I hate it when the coin flip decides who wins. I wish both QBs would have had the chance to snap the ball at least once in OT....just unfortunate that Josh Allen didn't get the opportunity to attempt to match the TD by KC. Just like I wished Patrick could have tried to match the TD by the Patriots in the 2019 AFC Championship.
Supposedly it's to prevent injuries from extreme fatigue. I agree though, the OT rules need to be changed. If injuries are the main concern, then give each team the ball at the 50 or opponent's 25 or something, like they do in college.
Absolutely not on changing the OT rules
36-All tie at the end of regulation, both teams had multiple chances to score more points than the opponent and prevent their opponent from scoring that many points. That neither did, that is where the Coin Toss comes in. Don't like it? Go for 2 more often, or go for it on 4th down to get a TD instead of punting or settling for a FG, or stop opponent scoring chances by forcing a turnover, all doable while still in regulation. If it gets to an OT, it is what it is. Play better.
College Football OT Innings is not football, and is frankly embarrassing that CFB allows games to have a winner declared by that clown-show
What the Bills really needed to try: Not kicking off for a Touchback with 13 seconds on the clock. Kick it shorter and on the ground to force a return and run some time off the clock
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2022, 12:38:07 PM
Bills/Chiefs is pretty simple to me: if the Bills are +2 or better in turnovers, they win. If they're not, they lose. Also, the team that misses fewer extra points/field goals will probably win. I trust Butker more, he's proven himself as a clutch kicker.
Neither team turned it over at all, so I was technically correct. Butker came up clutch as expected.
QuoteI'll take the Packers by double digits.
Nope.
QuoteHard for me to pick against either the Rams or Buccaneers, but it's Brady so basic logic says I have to take the Bucs.
It was a classic Brady comeback, except without the victory. As I said, picking against the Rams was hard.
Quote
I think Bengals/Titans is going to be low-scoring, and Henry will not be at full strength.
Yep.
Of course the weekend I'm busy the whole time with a conference is the weekend with the good playoff football. :/
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 11:45:17 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2022, 11:21:01 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 23, 2022, 10:39:09 PM
I hate it when the coin flip decides who wins. I wish both QBs would have had the chance to snap the ball at least once in OT....just unfortunate that Josh Allen didn't get the opportunity to attempt to match the TD by KC. Just like I wished Patrick could have tried to match the TD by the Patriots in the 2019 AFC Championship.
Supposedly it's to prevent injuries from extreme fatigue. I agree though, the OT rules need to be changed. If injuries are the main concern, then give each team the ball at the 50 or opponent's 25 or something, like they do in college.
Absolutely not on changing the OT rules
36-All tie at the end of regulation, both teams had multiple chances to score more points than the opponent and prevent their opponent from scoring that many points. That neither did, that is where the Coin Toss comes in. Don't like it? Go for 2 more often, or go for it on 4th down to get a TD instead of punting or settling for a FG, or stop opponent scoring chances by forcing a turnover, all doable while still in regulation. If it gets to an OT, it is what it is. Play better.
College Football OT Innings is not football, and is frankly embarrassing that CFB allows games to have a winner declared by that clown-show
What the Bills really needed to try: Not kicking off for a Touchback with 13 seconds on the clock. Kick it shorter and on the ground to force a return and run some time off the clock
I agree that they should have squib kicked had they been playing against 30 out of 32 offenses. KC is one of the two (other being Green Bay) where kicking it deep is a better choice IMO. Hill is so fast and Kelce is so good at getting open over the middle. If they had given the Chiefs the ball at the 40 with, say, 8 seconds, that would have been worse than at the 25 with 13 seconds.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
Good one!
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
US 62, a major route in the Buffalo area, at least goes somewhat near Cincinnati, even though it doesn't actually reach the city itself.
If they want to reduce overtime: eliminate it entirely. If it's tied at the end of regulation, whoever was ahead most recently wins.
Quote from: 1 on January 24, 2022, 07:25:48 AM
If they want to reduce overtime: eliminate it entirely. If it's tied at the end of regulation, whoever was ahead most recently wins.
That sounds horrible. Overtime is exciting. Modify it, sure. Eliminate it? Get rid of some of the best moments in sports.
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Listen, I don't want to hear anything from any other fanbase about heartbreak ever again. 4 straight SB losses. Music City Miracle. Crazy overtime loss to the Texans. And now this.
0-6 in one-score games this year. Overtime losses to BOTH defending conference champs. First team in NFL history to win 12+ games by 12+ points and not win the Super Bowl. THREE STRAIGHT YEARS that the Bills have been the ONLY underdog not to advance in the weekend they lost (other underdogs are now 7-0 in the weekend the Bills lost). That's why I knew it was over as soon as the Rams beat the Bucs. I actually started to get a sinking feeling that the Bills were done as soon as the Bengals won. Saw the 49ers and Rams upsets coming and knew underdogs wouldn't go 4-0. So it became a matter of how hard the knife was going to twist, and twist it did, in the hardest and most unfathomable way possible. 😖
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 07:44:23 AM
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Of course. The coin toss is what you get for giving up a field goal with 13 seconds left. The Bills had their chance in regulation and couldn't do it. Once you go to OT, you have to assume you're going to lose. I can't say I love the OT rules, but that's not what cost the Bills the game. That final Chiefs FG drive simply defied all odds in nightmarish fashion.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 07:34:21 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 24, 2022, 07:25:48 AM
If they want to reduce overtime: eliminate it entirely. If it's tied at the end of regulation, whoever was ahead most recently wins.
That sounds horrible. Overtime is exciting. Modify it, sure. Eliminate it? Get rid of some of the best moments in sports.
I agree that you can't get rid of overtime... but disagree that it's particularly exciting. Almost all of the best NFL moments that I can think of happened at the end of regulation. That's why the Bills scoring a TD with 17 seconds left was such a great finish... until it wasn't. I think that game is a lot LESS memorable BECAUSE it went to overtime. It takes away from what happened at the end of regulation when it's decided by a coin toss. No one's going to remember anything except the fact that it was back and forth and went to overtime and the Chiefs won the coin toss and won in OT. Unfortunate, but true.
What a weekend.
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 08:33:36 AM
Listen, I don't want to hear anything from any other fanbase about heartbreak ever again. 4 straight SB losses. Music City Miracle. Crazy overtime loss to the Texans. And now this.
0-6 in one-score games this year. Overtime losses to BOTH defending conference champs. First team in NFL history to win 12+ games by 12+ points and not win the Super Bowl. THREE STRAIGHT YEARS that the Bills have been the ONLY underdog not to advance in the weekend they lost (other underdogs are now 7-0 in the weekend the Bills lost). That's why I knew it was over as soon as the Rams beat the Bucs. I actually started to get a sinking feeling that the Bills were done as soon as the Bengals won. Saw the 49ers and Rams upsets coming and knew underdogs wouldn't go 4-0. So it became a matter of how hard the knife was going to twist, and twist it did, in the hardest and most unfathomable way possible. 😖
Vikings fans are the only ones in the ballpark when it comes to playoff angst.
Quote from: 1 on January 24, 2022, 07:25:48 AM
If they want to reduce overtime: eliminate it entirely. If it's tied at the end of regulation, whoever was ahead most recently wins.
Not the best idea, but still better than what we currently have.
My idea:
Team that gets the ball first in OT starts with the ball at their own 25. If they score a TD, they MUST kick the PAT for 1 point. Going for 2 not allowed. Team that gets the ball second in OT starts with the ball at their own 25. If they score a TD, they MUST go for 2 points. Kicking for 1 point not allowed. If you're tied because neither team scored, both got FG, or both got TD but missed their respective extra points, then in regular season games it ends in a tie and in playoff games you repeat.
That Bills-Chiefs game is a prime advertisement for my plan to eliminate conferences and just seed all division winners 1-8 and wild cards 9-14. Allows any two teams to meet in the Super Bowl.
For the current OT haters, I kinda like this idea - https://arcticdark.com/fieldpositionauction/index.html (https://arcticdark.com/fieldpositionauction/index.html).
Also, just a reminder that the Chiefs proposed an OT format where each team got the ball after they got burned against NE a couple of years ago. They were the only team that voted for it.
So glad to see my hated rivals lose on Saturday, thanks to the 49ers!
Which brings up the question: Since I now live in another NFC West city (the one where Russell Wilson is, for now), I wonder who those up there will be rooting against more, because both teams can't lose? Although Rams-49ers doesn't quite carry the same vibe as, say, Dodgers-Giants, this is sure to be a very heated championship game.
As for the AFC, the Bengals are far more intriguing and have a great future ahead of them, but the Chiefs are still the class of that conference, and will probably go to their third Super Bowl in a row.
I saw a comment saying that Josh Allen guessed tails and lost the game, to which someone else responded that instead of chasing tail, he should ask for head next time.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:52:51 AM
Also, just a reminder that the Chiefs proposed an OT format where each team got the ball after they got burned against NE a couple of years ago. They were the only team that voted for it.
Oh yeah... remember this?
Quote from: kphoger on January 26, 2021, 04:42:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2021, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 26, 2021, 04:11:39 PM
The friend whose house we go to for the Super Bowl is a big Chiefs fan. We were there when he broke the armrest of his sofa by punching it during a game once. So yeah, he has a very good reason to cheer against the Buccaneers this year. But, back in 2019, he had zero reason to choose one team over the other, yet he rooted against the Patriots anyway simply because they "always win".
Well, considering the Chiefs had just lost to the Patriots in the championship that season, isn't that reason enough to root against them?
Yeah, remember that broken sofa incident I mentioned? Guess what day that happened...
So as much as I feel like the end of last night's game was an injustice, it is one small piece of justice that the Chiefs have been there too... that 2018 AFC title game loss was equally crushing.
The other small justice is that the teams that lost this weekend lost in the correct order... Bills>Bucs>Packers>Titans. Bills absolutely deserved to be one of the last 5 teams in the race for the Super Bowl. It's too bad for them that they had to play the Chiefs in this round, but I'm glad they at least got the final time slot.
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
I don't necessarily either, but then some star pulls his hamstring because of overexertion and everyone cries then too.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
I don't necessarily either, but then some star pulls his hamstring because of overexertion and everyone cries then too.
Here's my crazy idea instead of a 2nd OT (for playoffs only):
If still tied at the end of OT, go to a soccer/hockey-style shootout: each team attempts a 2-pt conversion back-and-forth until one converts + the other doesn't.
^^^
Personally I'm not a fan of shootout play. It is a totally different dynamic than the regulation game and not a good representation of how a contest should be decided. It actually bothers me a lot that it made into the NHL because people got upset there was regular season ties. The college football system of overtime's really illustrates how poorly it works in deciding a game.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
I don't necessarily either, but then some star pulls his hamstring because of overexertion and everyone cries then too.
That's the breaks I say to that. The likeliness of an NFL game going multiple overtime's is minimal given there is multiple ways to score.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 24, 2022, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
I don't necessarily either, but then some star pulls his hamstring because of overexertion and everyone cries then too.
Here's my crazy idea instead of a 2nd OT (for playoffs only):
If still tied at the end of OT, go to a soccer/hockey-style shootout: each team attempts a 2-pt conversion back-and-forth until one converts + the other doesn't.
Basically go college football at that point.
I don't know if anyone read the link I posted above, but one person's suggestion was an auction system. Both teams submit an auction of where they're willing to start the drive if they got the ball first. Say McDermott says he'll take it on the 18 and Reid picks the 14. Chiefs get the ball first since they were more aggressive. I thought that was interesting.
The other suggestion I've seen is something the Ravens submitted where one team picks the yard line where the drive will start, and the other team picks if they want to be on offense or defense. Kind of similar, but basically Reid says, "We'll start on the 14," and then McDermott counters with "We can score from there, we'll take ball first.".
Considering that only six NFL/AFL games have gone to a second overtime, no NFL game has gone beyond 22:40 of overtime (the 1971 Christmas Day playoff game in which Miami beat Kansas City 27—24 at 7:40 of the second overtime), and only one pro football game has ever made it to a third overtime (a 1984 USFL playoff game in which the LA Express beat the Michigan Panthers 27—21 at 3:33 of the third overtime), there's no reason not to keep playing until someone wins. You don't change the rules to eliminate the possibility of multiple overtime periods when they're that statistically rare.
It's sort of like the people who complain about unlimited overtime in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. About 15 years ago, there was a proposal from some reporters to use a shootout if a game wasn't decided by the end of the third overtime. But (as of the end of last season's playoffs) only 14 games have ever gone beyond a third overtime–barely one percent of all NHL playoff overtime games in league history–and approximately 94 percent of games are decided in the first two overtimes (and, again, those percentages refer to the percentage of total overtime games, so they're far lower than the percentage of total playoff games–which is obviously also true in the NFL example). It makes no sense to change the rules to avoid the possibility of something that is so rare.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
Right, my overtime suggestion would be playoffs-only. I think the current format is fine for the regular season.
In the playoffs, I'd be fine with just adding 10 minutes to the clock if it's still tied after 1 OT period and keeping the game going sudden death style from wherever the teams are on the field. Can't think of any reason why that wouldn't work.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 11:13:56 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
Right, my overtime suggestion would be playoffs-only. I think the current format is fine for the regular season.
In the playoffs, I'd be fine with just adding 10 minutes to the clock if it's still tied after 1 OT period and keeping the game going sudden death style from wherever the teams are on the field. Can't think of any reason why that wouldn't work.
Teams would stall post 8:00 in the OT period likely. I don't know that it's a detriment, but it's something that would for sure happen.
Quote from: 1 on January 24, 2022, 07:25:48 AM
If they want to reduce overtime: eliminate it entirely. If it's tied at the end of regulation, whoever was ahead most recently wins.
If the team who scored first scored on their opening drive, and were never losing after that and the game ended in a tie, they won as a result...of a coin flip.
Most other proposals either have downsides that people aren't considering that cour occur throughout a game, not just in the final few minutes, or overly complicate OT. Other than allowing both teams to have the ball in OT, regardless if the first score is a TD ot FG, I don't see any option that doesn't have a downside.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2022, 09:20:19 AM
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
How so?
The Chiefs are the big bad winners 😡 while Bills are the team that was bad for so long and has never won a title. Therefore, everyone wants the Bills to win because NFL fans have the patience of grasshoppers with ADHD, and when the Bills lose, they automatically must have gotten robbed by the refs because the big bad winners won.
Also missed the part where the game was rigged for Brady yesterday. First the Packers, then the Bucs don't get help from the refs? Seriously, NFL?
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 12:25:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2022, 09:20:19 AM
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
How so?
The Chiefs are the big bad winners 😡 while Bills are the team that was bad for so long and has never won a title. Therefore, everyone wants the Bills to win because NFL fans have the patience of grasshoppers with ADHD, and when the Bills lose, they automatically must have gotten robbed by the refs because the big bad winners won.
Also missed the part where the game was rigged for Brady yesterday. First the Packers, then the Bucs don't get help from the refs? Seriously, NFL?
I think I saw it on Twitter, but last night was the best reffed game I've seen this year. Those guys should be in charge of the Superbowl. No dumb calls. Everything that was called was pretty obvious, not ticky tack stuff. You maybe could argue Tyreek could have been called for taunting, but I hate that penalty so much anyway that good riddance.
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 12:25:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2022, 09:20:19 AM
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
How so?
The Chiefs are the big bad winners 😡 while Bills are the team that was bad for so long and has never won a title. Therefore, everyone wants the Bills to win because NFL fans have the patience of grasshoppers with ADHD, and when the Bills lose, they automatically must have gotten robbed by the refs because the big bad winners won.
My guess is "screwed" was referring to the overtime rules, not the refs. There really wasn't anything egregious on the reffing front.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 12:31:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 12:25:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2022, 09:20:19 AM
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
How so?
The Chiefs are the big bad winners 😡 while Bills are the team that was bad for so long and has never won a title. Therefore, everyone wants the Bills to win because NFL fans have the patience of grasshoppers with ADHD, and when the Bills lose, they automatically must have gotten robbed by the refs because the big bad winners won.
My guess is "screwed" was referring to the overtime rules, not the refs. There really wasn't anything egregious on the reffing front.
I just saw this: after the Chiefs lost to the Patriots in the '18 AFC title game, there was a proposal by the Chiefs at an owners' meeting to change the overtime rules. The Bills were reportedly against changing the rules . . .
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 12:51:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 12:31:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 12:25:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 24, 2022, 09:20:19 AM
Bills got screwed last night. Enough said.
How so?
The Chiefs are the big bad winners 😡 while Bills are the team that was bad for so long and has never won a title. Therefore, everyone wants the Bills to win because NFL fans have the patience of grasshoppers with ADHD, and when the Bills lose, they automatically must have gotten robbed by the refs because the big bad winners won.
My guess is "screwed" was referring to the overtime rules, not the refs. There really wasn't anything egregious on the reffing front.
I just saw this: after the Chiefs lost to the Patriots in the '18 AFC title game, there was a proposal by the Chiefs at an owners' meeting to change the overtime rules. The Bills were reportedly against changing the rules . . .
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 09:52:51 AM
For the current OT haters, I kinda like this idea - https://arcticdark.com/fieldpositionauction/index.html (https://arcticdark.com/fieldpositionauction/index.html).
Also, just a reminder that the Chiefs proposed an OT format where each team got the ball after they got burned against NE a couple of years ago. They were the only team that voted for it.
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2022, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 10:35:06 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 10:18:33 AM
My personal feeling is that overtime should be one 10-minute period that's just like regulation. You play all 10 minutes, if someone's ahead at the end of the 10 minutes they win, if it's still tied it becomes sudden death with any score.
But how do you determine who gets the ball for the 2nd OT? Coin toss? Then you get the same bitching. (Not from you. From others.)
Or just play another ten minute overtime with no sudden death. I don't think that it is unreasonable to play until there is an actual decisive winner in the playoffs.
Or...just have coaches who have common sense clock management and, with 13 seconds left and the lead, kick the ball off to force a return instead of kicking out of the end zone. :clap:
The level of whining from western NY is out of control.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
You can't. They changed the rules back in 2017 that if you commit a penalty on the same down, that the penalty yards will be enforced and then they'll bring the clock back to what it was when the play started. You'd get a couple seconds for one penalty, but then the next penalty would not have any time run out.
The NFL did this in response to the Ravens beating the Bengals similarly in 2016.
Edit - Section 3, Article 3.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 01:34:08 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
You can't. They changed the rules back in 2017 that if you commit a penalty on the same down, that the penalty yards will be enforced and then they'll bring the clock back to what it was when the play started. You'd get a couple seconds for one penalty, but then the next penalty would not have any time run out.
The NFL did this in response to the Ravens beating the Bengals that way in 2016.
In addition, I believe the game cannot end on a defensive penalty by rule.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 01:34:08 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
You can't. They changed the rules back in 2017 that if you commit a penalty on the same down, that the penalty yards will be enforced and then they'll bring the clock back to what it was when the play started. You'd get a couple seconds for one penalty, but then the next penalty would not have any time run out.
The NFL did this in response to the Ravens beating the Bengals similarly in 2016.
Edit - Section 3, Article 3.
Well, then at least do it once. Chiefs would have had the ball at the 30 with 8-9 seconds left.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 07:44:23 AM
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Exactly my point: the winner of coin toss needs to play their defense too at least once, not just their opponent. The coin is still deciding which defense gets a free pass just because the offense scored first. Both teams need to play both offense and defense at least once in OT, and then sudden death if both defenses successfully stop the other offense.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:58:30 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 01:34:08 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
You can't. They changed the rules back in 2017 that if you commit a penalty on the same down, that the penalty yards will be enforced and then they'll bring the clock back to what it was when the play started. You'd get a couple seconds for one penalty, but then the next penalty would not have any time run out.
The NFL did this in response to the Ravens beating the Bengals similarly in 2016.
Edit - Section 3, Article 3.
Well, then at least do it once. Chiefs would have had the ball at the 30 with 8-9 seconds left.
Yeah. They should have tried to kick it to the 5, high in the air, and then held once on the next play. KC likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2022, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 07:44:23 AM
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Exactly my point: the winner of coin toss needs to play their defense too at least once, not just their opponent. The coin is still deciding which defense gets a free pass just because the offense scored first. Both teams need to play both offense and defense at least once in OT, and then sudden death if both defenses successfully stop the other offense.
What I was saying is not your "point" at all. What I was saying is that if you lose the coin toss and go on defense, your defense has to step up and do its job. I don't think both teams "need" to play both offense and defense. (Among other possible scenarios, the team winning the toss can lose due to a turnover that's returned for a touchdown, or due to giving up a safety.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 02:25:59 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2022, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 07:44:23 AM
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Exactly my point: the winner of coin toss needs to play their defense too at least once, not just their opponent. The coin is still deciding which defense gets a free pass just because the offense scored first. Both teams need to play both offense and defense at least once in OT, and then sudden death if both defenses successfully stop the other offense.
What I was saying is not your "point" at all. What I was saying is that if you lose the coin toss and go on defense, your defense has to step up and do its job. I don't think both teams "need" to play both offense and defense. (Among other possible scenarios, the team winning the toss can lose due to a turnover that's returned for a touchdown, or due to giving up a safety.)
And moreover, if your defense is such a weakness that this is "unfair", then if your offense is so good (and in theory this is why you have made it to overtime), it should have been just a little bit better.
Look up the Miracle In The Meadowlands II to see what could happen on a kick to a returner...as time expired.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_at_the_New_Meadowlands
https://youtu.be/JFP8ei5exzU
No matter what nearly impossible possibility exist, it can happen...
^^^^
I believe the 1971 AFC Divisional game in Kansas City (won by Miami in double overtime) was one where the Chiefs fair-caught a punt right before regulation ended and had the opportunity to send out Jan Stenerud to try a 68-yard fair catch kick, but Hank Stram was afraid Mercury Morris might run it all the way back if the kick came up short.
People saying Bills should have had ball, no sympathy. OT rules were tweaked to make sure teams didn't just settle for FG's and then walk off on first possession.
Watching the Bills at end of game
#1- why no a squib kick that they'd have to field in the field of play and run time
#2- Your team burned two timeouts on defense just to allow Chiefs to move the ball like that?
#3- If you want to give Allen a shot to win it, hold KC to a field goal or less in overtime.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2022, 02:31:10 PM
Look up the Miracle In The Meadowlands II to see what could happen on a kick to a returner...as time expired.
No matter what nearly impossible possibility exist, it can happen...
Tyreek Hill did return a punt 45 yards earlier in the game, so I wouldn't be surprised if that exact worst-case-scenario was part of McDermott's decision.
(I don't think Hill was the one waiting deep for the final kickoff, but KC's return team probably hadn't yet taken the field as of when the decision had to be made.)
I'm also really glad that the Chiefs' decision to take the ball out of Mahomes' hands and run an option with the backup TE on 3rd and goal didn't come back to bite them later, since they had to settle for a FG after losing yardage. This OT nonsense all could have been moot if they punched it in for a TD there.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 02:08:27 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:58:30 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 01:34:08 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
And if Josh Allen's comments are any indication, the Bills might not support it even now. As much as I'd like to see it, I don't expect any change to the overtime rules.
Ultimately, I think you have to assume a loss if you let it get to OT, especially for a franchise as heartbreak-prone as the Bills. The Bills' chance to win was to not allow a FG with 13 seconds. As much as it pains me to say this, "13 seconds is too much time for Mahomes!" is undoubtedly going to be a much more enduring narrative than "Allen didn't get a chance in OT!".
This isn't specific to the Bills, because I haven't seen anybody try this, but the defense really ought to deliberately commit defensive holding on every play in that situation. Unlike pass interference, holding is just a 5 yard penalty. 13 seconds isn't enough time to get very far down the field in 5 yard chunks. I'd have defensive players flat out tackling every eligible receiver right at the snap.
You can't. They changed the rules back in 2017 that if you commit a penalty on the same down, that the penalty yards will be enforced and then they'll bring the clock back to what it was when the play started. You'd get a couple seconds for one penalty, but then the next penalty would not have any time run out.
The NFL did this in response to the Ravens beating the Bengals similarly in 2016.
Edit - Section 3, Article 3.
Well, then at least do it once. Chiefs would have had the ball at the 30 with 8-9 seconds left.
Yeah. They should have tried to kick it to the 5, high in the air, and then held once on the next play. KC likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Downing a kickoff on the 5 is basically impossible. If you kicked it such that it was on track to land at the 5, it would either be caught and returned at least 15-20 yards, left to bounce into the end zone for a touchback, or it would go out of bounds and give them the ball at the 40.
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 02:08:27 PM
Yeah. They should have tried to kick it to the 5, high in the air, and then held once on the next play. KC likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Downing a kickoff on the 5 is basically impossible. If you kicked it such that it was on track to land at the 5, it would either be caught and returned at least 15-20 yards, left to bounce into the end zone for a touchback, or it would go out of bounds and give them the ball at the 40.
You can eliminate the out of bounds pretty easily by just kicking it to the middle of the field. If it goes for a touchback, no harm no foul as that's the same result they got anyway but at least they tried, but it's also a bit dangerous to not try and field a kickoff as the other team gets possession if they get to it first (on the off chance it didn't bounce into the end zone). If it gets returned 15-20 yards, GREAT!, because they get it back to the 25 while wasting 4 or 5 seconds. Not sure of the downsides you're trying to bring up...
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 02:08:27 PM
Yeah. They should have tried to kick it to the 5, high in the air, and then held once on the next play. KC likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Downing a kickoff on the 5 is basically impossible. If you kicked it such that it was on track to land at the 5, it would either be caught and returned at least 15-20 yards, left to bounce into the end zone for a touchback, or it would go out of bounds and give them the ball at the 40.
You can eliminate the out of bounds pretty easily by just kicking it to the middle of the field. If it goes for a touchback, no harm no foul as that's the same result they got anyway but at least they tried, but it's also a bit dangerous to not try and field a kickoff as the other team gets possession if they get to it first (on the off chance it didn't bounce into the end zone). If it gets returned 15-20 yards, GREAT!, because they get it back to the 25 while wasting 4 or 5 seconds. Not sure of the downsides you're trying to bring up...
I'm moreso responding to you saying that the Chiefs "likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so."
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 04:51:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 24, 2022, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 24, 2022, 02:08:27 PM
Yeah. They should have tried to kick it to the 5, high in the air, and then held once on the next play. KC likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
Downing a kickoff on the 5 is basically impossible. If you kicked it such that it was on track to land at the 5, it would either be caught and returned at least 15-20 yards, left to bounce into the end zone for a touchback, or it would go out of bounds and give them the ball at the 40.
You can eliminate the out of bounds pretty easily by just kicking it to the middle of the field. If it goes for a touchback, no harm no foul as that's the same result they got anyway but at least they tried, but it's also a bit dangerous to not try and field a kickoff as the other team gets possession if they get to it first (on the off chance it didn't bounce into the end zone). If it gets returned 15-20 yards, GREAT!, because they get it back to the 25 while wasting 4 or 5 seconds. Not sure of the downsides you're trying to bring up...
I'm moreso responding to you saying that the Chiefs "likely would have had it at the 10 with only 5 seconds or so."
Fair enough. My thought is that it might be more prudent for the Chiefs to fair catch it than waste time juking to try and gain more yardage.
How good is Coach Andy Reid of KC? He has certainly changed the entire culture of the Chiefs as evident when he first arrived there, they've been title contenders every year of his tenure. I heard from a couple of sports fans that he is almost as good a coach as NE's Bill Belichick. Andy seems to know how to make the best use of his players and know how to make the right decisions at the right times.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2022, 04:59:44 PM
How good is Coach Andy Reid of KC? He has certainly changed the entire culture of the Chiefs as evident when he first arrived there, they've been title contenders every year of his tenure. I heard from a couple of sports fans that he is almost as good a coach as NE's Bill Belichick. Andy seems to know how to make the best use of his players and know how to make the right decisions at the right times.
HOFer without question. And he was doing a lot of this before Mahomes too. Alex Smith is fine, but certainly not a legendary QB.
The Chiefs had a terrible playoff track record before Mahomes. Since he became the starter though, the Chiefs have hosted 4 straight AFC title games... first time in NFL history that's ever happened (although some of that is luck since the 1 seeds lost in 2019 and 2021).
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 05:47:32 PM
The Chiefs had a terrible playoff track record before Mahomes. Since he became the starter though, the Chiefs have hosted 4 straight AFC title games... first time in NFL history that's ever happened (although some of that is luck since the 1 seeds lost in 2019 and 2021).
Funny enough the Titans were involved in both of those examples - eliminated the #1 seed Ravens in 2019, lost as the #1 seed this year.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 02:25:59 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2022, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2022, 07:44:23 AM
Regarding overtime, defense is part of the game too, not just offense.
Exactly my point: the winner of coin toss needs to play their defense too at least once, not just their opponent. The coin is still deciding which defense gets a free pass just because the offense scored first. Both teams need to play both offense and defense at least once in OT, and then sudden death if both defenses successfully stop the other offense.
What I was saying is not your "point" at all. What I was saying is that if you lose the coin toss and go on defense, your defense has to step up and do its job. I don't think both teams "need" to play both offense and defense. (Among other possible scenarios, the team winning the toss can lose due to a turnover that's returned for a touchdown, or due to giving up a safety.)
I think the issue here is that the Bills' defense had to step up, but the Chiefs' didn't. Their defense wasn't really any better than the Bills', as they literally gave up a touchdown on the last play they were on the field. But they still won without having to do anything.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 24, 2022, 06:09:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 05:47:32 PM
The Chiefs had a terrible playoff track record before Mahomes. Since he became the starter though, the Chiefs have hosted 4 straight AFC title games... first time in NFL history that's ever happened (although some of that is luck since the 1 seeds lost in 2019 and 2021).
Funny enough the Titans were involved in both of those examples - eliminated the #1 seed Ravens in 2019, lost as the #1 seed this year.
They can definitely thank the Titans for 2019 - that was one of the biggest stunners in NFL history. But this year, the Titans were only in position for the #1 seed because they beat the Chiefs, so that's more of a wash.
The Titans were also involved in perhaps the ugliest playoff loss of the Reid era in KC pre-Mahomes... the 2017 Wild Card opener in which they were leading by 18 at halftime and lost, 22-21, to extend KC's home playoff losing streak to 6 straight games. (I'm starting to think it's good therapy to talk about KC's playoff losses! :-P)
Quote from: ET21 on January 23, 2022, 12:54:19 AM
Aaron Rodgers has as many NFC Championship wins as Rex Grossman: 1
And that one win came against a Bears team with Caleb Hannie at qb.
Quote from: dvferyance on January 24, 2022, 06:49:03 PM
Quote from: ET21 on January 23, 2022, 12:54:19 AM
Aaron Rodgers has as many NFC Championship wins as Rex Grossman: 1
And that one win came against a Bears team with Caleb Hannie at qb.
Hanie didn't start the game. Both Cutler and backup Todd Collins were knocked out. Even if Cutler stayed in I don't know if the Bears would have won.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 06:12:26 PM
... I think the issue here is that the Bills' defense had to step up, but the Chiefs' didn't. Their defense wasn't really any better than the Bills', as they literally gave up a touchdown on the last play they were on the field. But they still won without having to do anything.
And at the end of the day, teams that won the coin toss are 10-1 in the playoffs since the rule change that required a TD on the first possession. Yes, defense is important too. But it should be important for both teams, not just one.
The 2018 Saints in the NFC title game (the infamous PI no-call game) are the only team to win the overtime coin toss and lose the game. Here's a closer look at all the overtime playoff games since the 2010 rule change: https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-overtime-playoff-games-history/v2ac7w5vi1xr1ufwe68uu37d8
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 08:58:16 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2022, 06:12:26 PM
... I think the issue here is that the Bills' defense had to step up, but the Chiefs' didn't. Their defense wasn't really any better than the Bills', as they literally gave up a touchdown on the last play they were on the field. But they still won without having to do anything.
And at the end of the day, teams that won the coin toss are 10-1 in the playoffs since the rule change that required a TD on the first possession. Yes, defense is important too. But it should be important for both teams, not just one.
The 2018 Saints in the NFC title game (the infamous PI no-call game) are the only team to win the overtime coin toss and lose the game. Here's a closer look at all the overtime playoff games since the 2010 rule change: https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-overtime-playoff-games-history/v2ac7w5vi1xr1ufwe68uu37d8
This isn't college anymore. These guys get paid on both sides. The rule when it was put in was to stop teams from just getting into FG range and ending game there. And if teams still want to play soft prevent(playing not to lose, not playing to win) style defenses in OT, that is their consequence on this. If we're gonna keep going with participation trophy style rules, do we then if the team that gets the ball first uses more than half of the quarter in OT also give other team at least just as much time to try and get a score back? When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
The original XFL had a neat rule that the team with the ball second got as many plays as the first team got. If the team with the ball first scored on two plays, the second team had two plays to match or the game was over.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game.
Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance
in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case
regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game. Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
I've been through a few different ideas, and this is what I've settled on:
Both teams get one possession from their own 25 yard line. If the first team scores a TD, they can only go for 1, not for 2. The second team is not allowed to attempt a game-tying score. If the first team got a FG, the second team must get a TD or nothing. If the first team got a TD+1, the second team must go for 2 after a TD. In other words, you're not allowed to have both teams scoring 3 points or both teams scoring 7 points. The only way the game ends up tied is if both teams end up with 0 points from failing to score or with 6 points from both having failed PAT attempts, in which case you do it again.
Sean Payton is stepping away. The Saints need a full rebuild from the bottom to the very top. Now is the time for them to hire a coach who didn't pay his players to injure others, find leadership that didn't help cover up a child sexual abuse scandal, redo their awful uniforms, find a quarterback who completes more than 50% of his throws, find a no. 1 wide receiver that has played more than 5 games in the last two seasons, find a stadium that isn't a dark, aging, and ugly hole, and find a city that isn't under major threat of being washed away each year. I propose Salt Lake City, Portland, or Oklahoma City.
Another OT option that I've seen proposed. First team to 8 in overtime wins. So you can kick a FG on the first possession and a TD doesn't automatically beat you. Getting a TD and missing the 2-pointer on the opening drive doesn't automatically doom you either as the other team still has to get their 2-pointer.
Also, good riddance Payton.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 02:24:01 PM
Sean Payton is stepping away. The Saints need a full rebuild from the bottom to the very top. Now is the time for them to hire a coach who didn't pay his players to injure others, find leadership that didn't help cover up a child sexual abuse scandal, redo their awful uniforms, find a quarterback who completes more than 50% of his throws, find a no. 1 wide receiver that has played more than 5 games in the last two seasons, find a stadium that isn't a dark, aging, and ugly hole, and find a city that isn't under major threat of being washed away each year. I propose Salt Lake City, Portland, or Oklahoma City.
I will agree with everything except the uniforms part. The Saints have one of the best uniforms in the league. They really need to get rid of the black pants though. The gold pants are amazing.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game. Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
Difference between regular season and playoffs-That's also why in week 2 overtime is 10 minutes and games can end in ties......and if we are hooked on this idea of "fairness" then shouldn't second team to have ball in that scenario have just as much time to score? Many teams in a ten minute OT could have near all of the OT as a possession, kick a FG and leave barely any time for other team. The current OT rule was the "fair to both teams" rule when it was made. So we went from crying from when one team kicks a FG and our team/or other team didn't another shot to inserting TD into that instead. Should I put you down for having to play a full quarter in the near future because team that plays defense first will always keep pushing gripe they never had a shot to respond back?
But NFL and networks like the extra $$ and ratings, this appeases fanbases and teams who get a 2nd chance(so more prevent defense, yay.....hence a lot of my opposition as when you play not to lose ball, you lose and at that point it's excuses), and sports seems to have the participation culture finding it's way in to make people think things are more fair(just to cry about new unfairness sooner than later) so good luck to me here(outside of NFLPA and such wanting more compensation if more minutes of football needing to be played).
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 03:13:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game. Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
Difference between regular season and playoffs-That's also why in week 2 overtime is 10 minutes and games can end in ties......and if we are hooked on this idea of "fairness" then shouldn't second team to have ball in that scenario have just as much time to score? Many teams in a ten minute OT could have near all of the OT as a possession, kick a FG and leave barely any time for other team. The current OT rule was the "fair to both teams" rule when it was made. So we went from crying from when one team kicks a FG and our team/or other team didn't another shot to inserting TD into that instead. Should I put you down for having to play a full quarter in the near future because team that plays defense first will always keep pushing gripe they never had a shot to respond back?
But NFL and networks like the extra $$ and ratings, this appeases fanbases and teams who get a 2nd chance(so more prevent defense, yay.....hence a lot of my opposition as when you play not to lose ball, you lose and at that point it's excuses), and sports seems to have the participation culture finding it's way in to make people think things are more fair(just to cry about new unfairness sooner than later) so good luck to me here(outside of NFLPA and such wanting more compensation if more minutes of football needing to be played).
Bottom line, if you don't want to get into a situation where you don't touch the ball in overtime, get your business done in regulation. Don't mess around to the point where you need a rule change to get your business done.
If you gripe about a pass interference no call at the end of a game, don't blame the whole game on that. Do more before that so if you get hosed on a call you are 14 points ahead instead of tied.
Take care of your own stuff. Don't put the game in the hands of the officials or the rules committee. Most of the time when you lose the blame is staring back at you in the mirror regardless if you think you got jammed.
That's sports. Sports imitates life. Sometimes it's just not fair. Sometimes you benefit while it's not fair to the next guy. You can't take the time it worked out and complain about the times it didn't. For every pass interference no call that went against you, there were a dozen pass interference no calls that went in your favor.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2022, 04:10:18 PM
You can't take the time it worked out and complain about the times it didn't. For every pass interference no calls that went against you, there were a dozen pass interference no calls that went in your favor.
This, exactly.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2022, 04:10:18 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 03:13:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game. Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
Difference between regular season and playoffs-That's also why in week 2 overtime is 10 minutes and games can end in ties......and if we are hooked on this idea of "fairness" then shouldn't second team to have ball in that scenario have just as much time to score? Many teams in a ten minute OT could have near all of the OT as a possession, kick a FG and leave barely any time for other team. The current OT rule was the "fair to both teams" rule when it was made. So we went from crying from when one team kicks a FG and our team/or other team didn't another shot to inserting TD into that instead. Should I put you down for having to play a full quarter in the near future because team that plays defense first will always keep pushing gripe they never had a shot to respond back?
But NFL and networks like the extra $$ and ratings, this appeases fanbases and teams who get a 2nd chance(so more prevent defense, yay.....hence a lot of my opposition as when you play not to lose ball, you lose and at that point it's excuses), and sports seems to have the participation culture finding it's way in to make people think things are more fair(just to cry about new unfairness sooner than later) so good luck to me here(outside of NFLPA and such wanting more compensation if more minutes of football needing to be played).
Bottom line, if you don't want to get into a situation where you don't touch the ball in overtime, get your business done in regulation. Don't mess around to the point where you need a rule change to get your business done.
If you gripe about a pass interference no call at the end of a game, don't blame the whole game on that. Do more before that so if you get hosed on a call you are 14 points ahead instead of tied.
Take care of your own stuff. Don't put the game in the hands of the officials or the rules committee. Most of the time when you lose the blame is staring back at you in the mirror regardless if you think you got jammed.
That's sports. Sports imitates life. Sometimes it's just not fair. Sometimes you benefit while it's not fair to the next guy. You can't take the time it worked out and complain about the times it didn't. For every pass interference no call that went against you, there were a dozen pass interference no calls that went in your favor.
Exactly.
And if we remember when Pass interference was a reviewable call, because you know "fairness" nobody was happy with that rule as was written or enforced. I think only during a Packers/Vikings game did something happen with PI replay(which if I remember as a Packers fan, that Vikings got hosed on that call) and then everyone hated it until that was removed from being reviewable.
And system isn't perfect as is either.....forget the player but in my mind the INT in the Bengals/Titans game to me was an incomplete pass, but it's up to players to not get themselves in situations that a refs interpretation of the rule or a sudden death period/quarter has your whole season on the line.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 05:51:51 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2022, 04:10:18 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 03:13:58 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 25, 2022, 09:29:33 AM
When you can't win your games in regulation no feeling sorry if your teams fails to have the pride to make a stop.
A few things on this...
Pride has nothing to do with it. It takes endurance to play an entire NFL season, all the more so in the playoffs. In this particular game, the Chiefs offense dominated time of possession. That meant that in their 19th game of the season (and 13th straight game), the Bills defense, without one of their best players, had been on the field for nearly 40 minutes. They had to have been gassed by the time it got to OT.
And don't confuse "Bills deserved a chance in OT" with "Bills deserved to win". Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened in regulation, it's still a tie game. Of course they should have stopped the Chiefs with 13 seconds left. No one is debating that. But they didn't. The Chiefs didn't stop the Bills with 1:02 remaining to win in regulation either. Neither team was stopping anything in the final minutes. Doesn't matter. The Chiefs got a FG, and now the game is tied. Even. 36-36. Both teams have had equal opportunity, both teams scored equal points. So the debate isn't about what should have happened in regulation, it's about how to give both teams an equal chance in overtime.
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. If you're still saying "but defense..."... remember that we're talking about the playoffs, not some Week 2 showdown between the Bears and Giants. You can't say it's better for the sport, in a win-or-go-home game, for one offense and one defense to never take the field in overtime. There's simply no case that that's a fair way to decide the outcome of a tie game. It was an extremely predictable and extremely disappointing ending to an otherwise spectacular game - and that would have been the case regardless of which team won the toss.
Result of the game is what it is, but if you want as fair of a contest as possible, the overtime rules need to be changed.
Difference between regular season and playoffs-That's also why in week 2 overtime is 10 minutes and games can end in ties......and if we are hooked on this idea of "fairness" then shouldn't second team to have ball in that scenario have just as much time to score? Many teams in a ten minute OT could have near all of the OT as a possession, kick a FG and leave barely any time for other team. The current OT rule was the "fair to both teams" rule when it was made. So we went from crying from when one team kicks a FG and our team/or other team didn't another shot to inserting TD into that instead. Should I put you down for having to play a full quarter in the near future because team that plays defense first will always keep pushing gripe they never had a shot to respond back?
But NFL and networks like the extra $$ and ratings, this appeases fanbases and teams who get a 2nd chance(so more prevent defense, yay.....hence a lot of my opposition as when you play not to lose ball, you lose and at that point it's excuses), and sports seems to have the participation culture finding it's way in to make people think things are more fair(just to cry about new unfairness sooner than later) so good luck to me here(outside of NFLPA and such wanting more compensation if more minutes of football needing to be played).
Bottom line, if you don't want to get into a situation where you don't touch the ball in overtime, get your business done in regulation. Don't mess around to the point where you need a rule change to get your business done.
If you gripe about a pass interference no call at the end of a game, don't blame the whole game on that. Do more before that so if you get hosed on a call you are 14 points ahead instead of tied.
Take care of your own stuff. Don't put the game in the hands of the officials or the rules committee. Most of the time when you lose the blame is staring back at you in the mirror regardless if you think you got jammed.
That's sports. Sports imitates life. Sometimes it's just not fair. Sometimes you benefit while it's not fair to the next guy. You can't take the time it worked out and complain about the times it didn't. For every pass interference no call that went against you, there were a dozen pass interference no calls that went in your favor.
Exactly.
And if we remember when Pass interference was a reviewable call, because you know "fairness" nobody was happy with that rule as was written or enforced. I think only during a Packers/Vikings game did something happen with PI replay(which if I remember as a Packers fan, that Vikings got hosed on that call) and then everyone hated it until that was removed from being reviewable.
And system isn't perfect as is either.....forget the player but in my mind the INT in the Bengals/Titans game to me was an incomplete pass, but it's up to players to not get themselves in situations that a refs interpretation of the rule or a sudden death period/quarter has your whole season on the line.
As a diehard Cowboys fan, I should be upset that the Umpire got in the way to spot the ball a yard back and Dak couldn’t spike the ball at the end of the game. No, in real time I just accepted it because I watched that whole game. It was frustrating. The Cowboys could have scored 14 points but stupid penalties and dumb play calling got in the way. The way that game ended sucked for the Cowboys, but it’s was their fault for being there to begin with. With 1 second left they should have been kneeling the ball instead of scrambling around to try and snap it for a spike.
This all to say the Umpire more than did his job correctly. They blame was on the coaches and players.
https://mobile.twitter.com/EliApple/status/1485500825854259204
https://mobile.twitter.com/EliApple/status/1485468234405097473
https://mobile.twitter.com/LakeShowOrlando/status/1485466001030352896
I think Eli Apple is my new favorite player?
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 09:35:01 PM
I think Eli Apple is my new favorite player?
Although I'm not sure randomly trolling the Saints on Twitter is the best thing to do when you've got a championship game to prepare for...
We've had plenty of Bills-Chiefs talk and overtime rules talk, but...
I think Packers-49ers was almost as classic, in a very different way. Maybe my favorite stat of the weekend is that 49ers-Packers had 23 points total, Bills-Chiefs had 25 points in the final two minutes! But I still can't believe the Packers lost that game. A complete gag job in all three phases in the final minutes. To lose at home with the MVP quarterback while only allowing 2 field goals on defense is almost incomprehensible.
And now the 49ers are somehow back in the title game. Just crazy that the Rams were one first down away from keeping the 49ers out of the playoffs entirely... and now three weeks later, here they are again for a rematch. If the Rams lose again, it would be disastrous. They have to look at that regular season finale as a massive missed opportunity to end the 49ers season and get a higher seed... and yet, they also have to be thankful that the 49ers saved them from going to Lambeau. A strange dichotomy to say the least!
And then there's this weird thing with the Rams limiting tickets to people from the LA area to avoid a repeat of Week 18 when the stadium was packed with 49ers fans... I don't get it. Not only is it a bad look, I don't think it's going to change anything. LA literally didn't have an NFL team until 6 years ago, so most of those 49ers fans are probably from the LA area.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 09:35:01 PM
I think Eli Apple is my new favorite player?
Although I'm not sure randomly trolling the Saints on Twitter is the best thing to do when you've got a championship game to prepare for...
You want him to be practicing/studying film 24/7? Burnout is a thing, you know. And football is a very physical and very emotional game. If you're not excited to play, you're not going to play well.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 10:46:56 PM
And then there's this weird thing with the Rams limiting tickets to people from the LA area to avoid a repeat of Week 18 when the stadium was packed with 49ers fans... I don't get it. Not only is it a bad look, I don't think it's going to change anything. LA literally didn't have an NFL team until 6 years ago, so most of those 49ers fans are probably from the LA area.
The Washington Nationals have done this in the past to prevent Phillies fans from buying up the tickets when the Phils were Divison winners for several years.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 10:46:56 PM
And then there's this weird thing with the Rams limiting tickets to people from the LA area to avoid a repeat of Week 18 when the stadium was packed with 49ers fans... I don't get it. Not only is it a bad look, I don't think it's going to change anything. LA literally didn't have an NFL team until 6 years ago, so most of those 49ers fans are probably from the LA area.
I don't think it's a bad decision honestly. Whatever bad PR this gives them is nothing compared to their shiny stadium being full of Niners fans like it was a couple weeks ago.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 11:06:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 10:46:56 PM
And then there's this weird thing with the Rams limiting tickets to people from the LA area to avoid a repeat of Week 18 when the stadium was packed with 49ers fans... I don't get it. Not only is it a bad look, I don't think it's going to change anything. LA literally didn't have an NFL team until 6 years ago, so most of those 49ers fans are probably from the LA area.
I don't think it's a bad decision honestly. Whatever bad PR this gives them is nothing compared to their shiny stadium being full of Niners fans like it was a couple weeks ago.
But that's my point... it's probably going to be full of 49ers fans anyways. Most of the fans at that Week 18 game had to have been from the LA area, and I'm sure most 49ers fans from elsewhere in the state have connections and could get in if they wanted.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2022, 11:05:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 10:46:56 PM
And then there's this weird thing with the Rams limiting tickets to people from the LA area to avoid a repeat of Week 18 when the stadium was packed with 49ers fans... I don't get it. Not only is it a bad look, I don't think it's going to change anything. LA literally didn't have an NFL team until 6 years ago, so most of those 49ers fans are probably from the LA area.
The Washington Nationals have done this in the past to prevent Phillies fans from buying up the tickets when the Phils were Divison winners for several years.
Nashville Predators do this whenever they get in a playoff series with Chicago. Ticket sales to Tennessee addresses only.
In the Rams' case, this is what you get when you keep moving. Moved from LA to Saint Louis where most were Bears fans. Then while they're gone from LA most people became 49ers fans so now they come back and reap what they sowed.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
https://fox5sandiego.com/sports/nfl-sued-over-chargers-relocation-from-san-diego/
The NFL Sues the LA Chargers over the relocation of the team.
Quote from: bing101 on January 26, 2022, 10:24:08 AM
https://fox5sandiego.com/sports/nfl-sued-over-chargers-relocation-from-san-diego/
The NFL Sues the LA Chargers over the relocation of the team.
The NFL is the party being sued.
Vikings hired Kwesi Adofo-Mensah as GM. Princeton grad, former finance guy. Only came into the NFL 9 years ago and moved up very quickly. Apparently he's very big on analytics, so watch out people who don't like teams going for it on 4th down like the Chargers do. Vikings are going to play the math. I think it's a great hire.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 26, 2022, 10:51:30 AM
Vikings hired Kwesi Adofo-Mensah as GM. Princeton grad, former finance guy. Only came into the NFL 9 years ago and moved up very quickly. Apparently he's very big on analytics, so watch out people who don't like teams going for it on 4th down like the Chargers do. Vikings are going to play the math. I think it's a great hire.
Meanwhile down in Chicago, Ryan Poles is the new GM (supposedly Poles & Adofo-Mensah were the 2 finalists in both Chicago & Minnesota and it just so happened that each wound up with their preferred finalist) which made for some easy jokes summed up by the following:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJ_cK7HXoAcMx9o.jpg)
Someone happened to notice Bears chairman George McCaskey (fully decked out in Bears gear, I should note) picking up Poles at O'Hare on Monday night, which reminded me of the Seinfeld joke about driving to the airport being a huge step in male relationships. So I had a feeling Poles would be the guy as soon as that happened, and sure enough the hire was first reported Tuesday afternoon and confirmed Tuesday night.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
No, it is indeed a fact that, in order for the game to be decided in a fair manner (or at the very least, as close to fair as possible), both teams must play both units in overtime.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:03:04 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
No, it is indeed a fact that, in order for the game to be decided in a fair manner (or at the very least, as close to fair as possible), both teams must play both units in overtime.
No, that is very definitely your opinion. Put differently, suppose the other day Mahomes had thrown a pick-six on the first play in overtime. Buffalo would not have been required to go on offense, nor Kansas City on defense, but I don't think anyone would deem that "unfair"–yet your argument says it would have been unfair (perhaps because you'd theorize that Kansas City should likewise have had the chance to return a fumble or an interception for a touchdown to tie the game?).
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:03:04 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
No, it is indeed a fact that, in order for the game to be decided in a fair manner (or at the very least, as close to fair as possible), both teams must play both units in overtime.
No sir. That is still an opinion. (Unless my sarcasm meter is broken, but I don't think it is in this case.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 11:11:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:03:04 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
No, it is indeed a fact that, in order for the game to be decided in a fair manner (or at the very least, as close to fair as possible), both teams must play both units in overtime.
No, that is very definitely your opinion. Put differently, suppose the other day Mahomes had thrown a pick-six on the first play in overtime. Buffalo would not have been required to go on offense, nor Kansas City on defense, but I don't think anyone would deem that "unfair"–yet your argument says it would have been unfair (perhaps because you'd theorize that Kansas City should likewise have had the chance to return a fumble or an interception for a touchdown to tie the game?).
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because
the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
7 of 11 teams that have won the coin toss in overtime in the playoffs have scored a TD on the opening possession. Great offense beats great defense. It's usually only among the best offenses that are playing in the playoffs. That makes it objectively an advantage to win the coin toss, and not as close to 50/50 as possible.
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
10 of 11 if you count the coin toss winner winning on their second possession.
But it was extremely predictable in all 7 of the cases where a TD was scored on the opening possession. The games where there
was at least one defensive stop were much more surprising. Case in point that the team on defense needed something surprising to happen to have any chance at all... and still lost three times out of four.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
10 of 11 if you count the coin toss winner winning on their second possession.
But it was extremely predictable in all 7 of the cases where a TD was scored on the opening possession. The games where there was at least one defensive stop were much more surprising. Case in point: the team on defense needed something surprising to happen to have any chance at all.
Not quite true. One of the games, BAL vs. DEN in 2013 went to a second overtime period because no one scored in the first. The Ravens won the toss and the game, but you clearly can't say that one caused the other.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 11:11:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:03:04 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 01:57:47 PM
....
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know believe that both teams should have to play both their offense and defense in overtime in the playoffs. ....
Difference between opinion and fact noted above!
No, it is indeed a fact that, in order for the game to be decided in a fair manner (or at the very least, as close to fair as possible), both teams must play both units in overtime.
No, that is very definitely your opinion. Put differently, suppose the other day Mahomes had thrown a pick-six on the first play in overtime. Buffalo would not have been required to go on offense, nor Kansas City on defense, but I don't think anyone would deem that "unfair"–yet your argument says it would have been unfair (perhaps because you'd theorize that Kansas City should likewise have had the chance to return a fumble or an interception for a touchdown to tie the game?).
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. Put differently, a lot of Europeans think sudden-death overtime is unfair and complained bitterly when FIFA adopted it for international soccer (it was later dropped), yet it's well-accepted in hockey–many European leagues have the same rule as the NHL allowing unlimited sudden-death overtime periods in the playoffs (indeed the longest NHL game ended at 16:30 of the sixth overtime–116:30 of overtime, 176:30 total game time–but the longest game ever was in the Norwegian league and ended at 17:14 of the
eighth overtime–157:14 of overtime, 217:14 total game time). Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion. (It sure stinks when your team is eliminated from the Stanley Cup Playoffs in sudden-death overtime, though.)
Maybe if these teams that were on defense first actually played defense then we'd not have so many people whine about fairness(which is peoples opinion). The reason these teams keep losing first possession is the defending teams keep playing soft coverages because they are afraid of a quick explosive play ending the game. The offenses aren't trying to do two minute drills here so when you play a defense playing a two minute drill prevent defense the offense is going to literally be getting 5-15 yards at will. If you play in a not to lose fashion.....you have no right to complain about "fairness".
The Bill Belichick/Mike Vrabel clock rule(taking all those delay of games, but game clock still ran) rule change is a rule that was complained about nut changed because teams were exploiting this rule in a fashion that anyone that competes would say was bush league and against competitive spirit. So are teams exploiting others and competitive spirit by scoring touchdowns?
(https://www.thedrawplay.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022-01-26-PackersFailure2.png)
The conference championships have lots of possibilities galore, especially the NFC one, because if the Rams win, it'll be the second straight year that a team plays the Super Bowl in its own home stadium. But if the 49ers come out victorious, they'd be headed for a Super Bowl rematch with either the Bengals (who they beat in both meetings) or the Chiefs (who beat them two years ago). Neither AFC opponent has faced the Rams in the Super Bowl, and because the Rams moved back to L.A. in 2016, this means that there won't be a Show-Me (or I-70 for the roadgeeks) matchup against the Chiefs.
Quote from: Henry on January 26, 2022, 01:18:16 PM
The conference championships have lots of possibilities galore, especially the NFC one, because if the Rams win, it'll be the second straight year that a team plays the Super Bowl in its own home stadium. But if the 49ers come out victorious, they'd be headed for a Super Bowl rematch with either the Bengals (who they beat in both meetings) or the Chiefs (who beat them two years ago). Neither AFC opponent has faced the Rams in the Super Bowl, and because the Rams moved back to L.A. in 2016, this means that there won't be a Show-Me (or I-70 for the roadgeeks) matchup against the Chiefs.
That would be a trip to have back-to-back teams playing in their home stadiums for the Super Bowl after going 54 Super Bowls with not having one. The closet were the 49ers at Stanford Stadium and the Rams at the Rose Bowl. Its crazy to think that there have been so many opportunities and yet it never happened:
Take the Orange Bowl hosting quite a few of the first wave of Super Bowls falling in line with the Dolphins hey-day. Of course they couldn't be on a Super Bowl trajectory in a year the game was played at the Orange Bowl.
New Orleans hosted quite a few of the first wave of Super Bowls, but it has helped that the Saints until about 2008 have been absolute trash (they sucked according to Jim Mora)
Rice Stadium hosted on in the 70s, but the Oilers 60's dynasty was over by then, plus they played in the Astrodome by then.
San Diego made the Super Bowl in 1994, missing their home field by just a few years.
Looking back, I guess it did help that there was a smattering of older Super Bowls played in non-NFL Stadiums. The Rose Bowl hosted 5 Super Bowls never once being an NFL venue. The aforementioned Stanford Stadium and Rice Stadium. It also helps that about half (or more, I didn't do the math) the Super Bowls were played by at least one team that plays in a cold climate so they would never host a Super Bowl anyway (not counting that weird one played at Metlife Stadium). It is just weird the amount of times a host team had a good few years or decade and in the middle of it, their stadium was up to host, and for whatever reason, they couldn't get it done that year.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 12:09:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. ... Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion.
There's a difference between whether or not someone objects to it, and whether or not it's actually fair in practice. Anyone can think whatever they want about the rule. It doesn't change the fact that each team did not have an
equal opportunity to win in overtime.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 01:52:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 12:09:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. ... Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion.
There's a difference between whether or not someone objects to it, and whether or not it's actually fair in practice. Anyone can think whatever they want about the rule. It doesn't change the fact that each team did not have an equal opportunity to win in overtime.
Sure they did. A coin is 50:50. :awesomeface:
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 26, 2022, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 01:52:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 12:09:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. ... Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion.
There's a difference between whether or not someone objects to it, and whether or not it's actually fair in practice. Anyone can think whatever they want about the rule. It doesn't change the fact that each team did not have an equal opportunity to win in overtime.
Sure they did. A coin is 50:50. :awesomeface:
To add if the defending team intercepted a pass or returned a fumble for a TD, or returned a kickoff for a TD that's also game over(Rodgers lost on a fumble vs Cardinals years back and Packers lost game that way).
So despite webny99's naivety here......a game could be won be either team in OT so equal chances for either team to win. He should just be glad being 22 years old(if he told truth to this page) that he didn't have to deal with some of the losses our teams dealt with in the the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 26, 2022, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 26, 2022, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 01:52:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 12:09:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. ... Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion.
There's a difference between whether or not someone objects to it, and whether or not it's actually fair in practice. Anyone can think whatever they want about the rule. It doesn't change the fact that each team did not have an equal opportunity to win in overtime.
Sure they did. A coin is 50:50. :awesomeface:
To add if the defending team intercepted a pass or returned a fumble for a TD, or returned a kickoff for a TD that's also game over(Rodgers lost on a fumble vs Cardinals years back and Packers lost game that way).
So despite webny99's naivety here......a game could be won be either team in OT so equal chances for either team to win. He should just be glad being 22 years old(if he told truth to this page) that he didn't have to deal with some of the losses our teams dealt with in the the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's
Word on that.
1982 NFC Championship Game. Also known as The Catch Game. The Catch happens, but little known fact is there was still 58 seconds on the clock and the 49ers kicked off to the Cowboys. So my team starts to drive. Danny White hits Drew Pearson on a beautiful slant and gets taken down on a horse collar tackle. Granted it would be three decades before that tackle was outlawed, but still aggravating that he was that close from breaking that play and The Catch would have been a small footnote in NFL history, because if he slips that tackle he was gone. Next play Danny White muffs the snap and the 49ers jumped on the ball. That game was not only heartbreaking, but changed the face of the NFL from the Cowboys dominance to the 49ers dominance. All over one play that if it had been played in 2010, there would have been a 15 yard penalty added to it (the game was decided by a point so the Cowboys only needed a field goal).
1994 NFC Championship Game. Again, my Cowboys against the 49ers. the play in that game was Deion Sanders interfering with Michael Irvin while there was a no-call. I didn't care then and don't care now. The Cowboys did that themselves starting the game with Troy Aikman throwing a pick-six and Michael Irvin fumbling the ball which led to another touchdown. They simply dug a hole they couldn't get out of. That's the way it was then. You didn't cry for a tackle to be outlawed and you didn't cry about a no-call. You simply looked at the facts. Both games the Cowboys didn't do enough to win the game.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
10 of 11 if you count the coin toss winner winning on their second possession.
But isn't your argument that both teams should possess the ball in OT?
Using those ratios, the team that wins the coin toss has a 64% chance of winning on their opening drive. The team that wins the coin toss, after both teams have possessed the ball, has a 75% chance of winning on their second drive. Overall, the coin toss winner won 91% of the time regardless.
So what's the point to making sure both teams touch the ball in OT, unless we all just want a cozy huggy feeling that both teams had a chance to win.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 26, 2022, 06:25:21 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 26, 2022, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 26, 2022, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 01:52:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2022, 12:09:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:18:48 AM
Yes, it would still be unfair. It's unfair no matter how many interceptions are thrown, stops are made, or field goals are kicked. It's unfair because the rule itself is unfair, regardless of the actual outcome of the game.
....
That is still only your opinion that the rule is unfair. ... Recognizing, of course, that the sport is fundamentally different from gridiron football in terms of how possession and scoring chances work, I still think the fact that some people object to sudden-death overtime generally as a matter of principle and other people have no problem with it just underscores that whether a rule is "unfair" is a matter of opinion.
There's a difference between whether or not someone objects to it, and whether or not it's actually fair in practice. Anyone can think whatever they want about the rule. It doesn't change the fact that each team did not have an equal opportunity to win in overtime.
Sure they did. A coin is 50:50. :awesomeface:
To add if the defending team intercepted a pass or returned a fumble for a TD, or returned a kickoff for a TD that's also game over(Rodgers lost on a fumble vs Cardinals years back and Packers lost game that way).
So despite webny99's naivety here......a game could be won be either team in OT so equal chances for either team to win. He should just be glad being 22 years old(if he told truth to this page) that he didn't have to deal with some of the losses our teams dealt with in the the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's
Word on that.
1982 NFC Championship Game. Also known as The Catch Game. The Catch happens, but little known fact is there was still 58 seconds on the clock and the 49ers kicked off to the Cowboys. So my team starts to drive. Danny White hits Drew Pearson on a beautiful slant and gets taken down on a horse collar tackle. Granted it would be three decades before that tackle was outlawed, but still aggravating that he was that close from breaking that play and The Catch would have been a small footnote in NFL history, because if he slips that tackle he was gone. Next play Danny White muffs the snap and the 49ers jumped on the ball. That game was not only heartbreaking, but changed the face of the NFL from the Cowboys dominance to the 49ers dominance. All over one play that if it had been played in 2010, there would have been a 15 yard penalty added to it (the game was decided by a point so the Cowboys only needed a field goal).
1994 NFC Championship Game. Again, my Cowboys against the 49ers. the play in that game was Deion Sanders interfering with Michael Irvin while there was a no-call. I didn't care then and don't care now. The Cowboys did that themselves starting the game with Troy Aikman throwing a pick-six and Michael Irvin fumbling the ball which led to another touchdown. They simply dug a hole they couldn't get out of. That's the way it was then. You didn't cry for a tackle to be outlawed and you didn't cry about a no-call. You simply looked at the facts. Both games the Cowboys didn't do enough to win the game.
Packers fans will remember the Jan. 3, 1999 playoff game vs the 49ers game. Jerry Rice fumbled the ball and the Packers picked ball right away, was no replay in that day. If LeRoy Butler still had not whiffed on the tackle and they didn't let Owens get open(guy couldn't catch anything that day, but hung on to that catch getting belted) the Packers would still have won.
Issue being every time you think you make it fair and equal, there will always be something else to replace it that somehow will become just as important to the fair and equal crowd.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 26, 2022, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
10 of 11 if you count the coin toss winner winning on their second possession.
But isn't your argument that both teams should possess the ball in OT?
Using those ratios, the team that wins the coin toss has a 64% chance of winning on their opening drive. The team that wins the coin toss, after both teams have possessed the ball, has a 75% chance of winning on their second drive. Overall, the coin toss winner won 91% of the time regardless.
So what's the point to making sure both teams touch the ball in OT, unless we all just want a cozy huggy feeling that both teams had a chance to win.
So much this. The Millennials and GenZ's are infecting the NFL with their 5th grade soccer club "everyone gets a participation trophy" mentality.
Both teams had a equal chance to win in
the first 60 minutes of regulation. Both teams forfeit any sense of "equal opportunity" if they can't muster more points than the other team in
the actual game.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 26, 2022, 02:58:10 PM
So despite webny99's naivety here......a game could be won be either team in OT so equal chances for either team to win. He should just be glad being 22 years old(if he told truth to this page) that he didn't have to deal with some of the losses our teams dealt with in the the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's
The only naivety I see here is false equivalency between a chance and an equal chance.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 26, 2022, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
7 out of 11 isn't that far from even, especially with a small sample size.
10 of 11 if you count the coin toss winner winning on their second possession.
But isn't your argument that both teams should possess the ball in OT?
Using those ratios, the team that wins the coin toss has a 64% chance of winning on their opening drive. The team that wins the coin toss, after both teams have possessed the ball, has a 75% chance of winning on their second drive. Overall, the coin toss winner won 91% of the time regardless.
So what's the point to making sure both teams touch the ball in OT, unless we all just want a cozy huggy feeling that both teams had a chance to win.
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 26, 2022, 08:40:18 PM
So much this. The Millennials and GenZ's are infecting the NFL with their 5th grade soccer club "everyone gets a participation trophy" mentality.
No, speaking for myself at least, I'm just interested in making overtime better. I find it really disappointing to get such a predictable ending to a classic game. You simply can't have one team score to force OT, immediately score again in OT, and that's ball game. It's a terrible injustice to the crazy back-and-forth game that occurred to have it end with two straight possessions by one team. That's why personally I pretty much automatically remove any game that went to OT from "all time classic" list, except maybe 28-3 because, well, you know. But the most profitable sports league in the world can do better with its overtime rules... playoffs in particular.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 26, 2022, 08:40:18 PM
Both teams had a equal chance to win in the first 60 minutes of regulation. Both teams forfeit any sense of "equal opportunity" if they can't muster more points than the other team in the actual game.
Overtime
is "the actual game". Both teams had equal chance in regulation, they should have roughly equal chance in overtime too.
Ben Roethlisberger just confirmed he's retiring.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
Yes, because it's going to be approximately equal (11 total drives is towards the low end of the spectrum) and it's not decided in advance. You're almost certainly going to have stops, punts, turnovers, etc. over the course of an entire game. It's not nearly as likely on a single drive.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I'd be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
Quote from: thspfc on January 27, 2022, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I'd be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201311180car.htm#all_vis_drives
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 27, 2022, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I'd be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201311180car.htm#all_vis_drives
I'm impressed, but the fact that you linked to a game from 8 years ago that had 12 possessions - still more than your outrageous number of 11 - is more of an indictment on your point about the 11 possessions than it is on webny99's point about overtime being "unfair".
For the record, I'm neutral on this, just pointing out how this is kinda odd.
Edit: I counted wrong. There were actually 14 possessions in that game. And, that game is apparently famous for having very few possessions. The average number of possessions in a game is 24.
Lol
Quote from: thspfc on January 28, 2022, 12:27:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 27, 2022, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I'd be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201311180car.htm#all_vis_drives
I'm impressed, but the fact that you linked to a game from 8 years ago that had 12 possessions - still more than your outrageous number of 11 - is more of an indictment on your point about the 11 possessions than it is on webny99's point about overtime being "unfair".
For the record, I'm neutral on this, just pointing out how this is kinda odd.
Edit: I counted wrong. There were actually 14 possessions in that game. And, that game is apparently famous for having very few possessions. The average number of possessions in a game is 24.
Lol
Whoops. I looked at it wrong too. :D My point I was making, more than anything arbitrary about 11 possessions is that any time a team has one more possession, in theory following webny's logic, it's "unfair".
Quote from: thspfc on January 28, 2022, 12:27:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 27, 2022, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I’d be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201311180car.htm#all_vis_drives
I'm impressed, but the fact that you linked to a game from 8 years ago that had 12 possessions - still more than your outrageous number of 11 - is more of an indictment on your point about the 11 possessions than it is on webny99's point about overtime being "unfair".
For the record, I'm neutral on this, just pointing out how this is kinda odd.
Edit: I counted wrong. There were actually 14 possessions in that game. And, that game is apparently famous for having very few possessions. The average number of possessions in a game is 24.
Lol
The point isn't how many possessions in a given game there are. The point is if there is an odd number, being 84 possessions vs. 85, you could say that's unfair.
Does it make it unfair that if you are the visiting team in baseball and you go into the 9th tied and you break the tie in the top of the 9th, but you still have to face the home team in the bottom of the 9th as opposed to the same scenario playing you, you as the visiting team score nothing in the top of the 9th, but all the home team has to do is score one run and the game automatically ends without you getting a chance to even the score or best it? No, you had your chance and you blew it. You know those are the breaks when you go into the game.
I swear, so many times I hear about football when a person's team loses "they just ran out of time!" No they didn't. They had the same amount of time as every other game they have ever played, just this game they chose to mess around at the beginning of the game.
It reminds me of people who says the plays at the end of the game are important. Incorrect. They are all as important as all of them. That run for a loss with 13:22 left in the 1st quarter is just as important as that run for a loss with 0:21 left in the 4th. You can't just throw away all the times during the game you screwed up and just say that doesn't count, then miraculously get into overtime and get bent that you didn't get a shot to tie or best the other guy. You had all game to tie or best them.
It's a generation of people playing rock/paper/scissors who play one time, loses then says "best two out of three". You can't go into something knowing it has a chance to not go your way, then when it doesn't change the rules.
That's the point. You can always have a disparity in possessions, making things "not fair". Sports aren't fair. You try the best you can, but if you go up against someone better, you just lose no matter how hard you try.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 12:51:54 PM
The point isn't how many possessions in a given game there are. The point is if there is an odd number, being 84 possessions vs. 85, you could say that's unfair.
Does it make it unfair that if you are the visiting team in baseball and you go into the 9th tied and you break the tie in the top of the 9th, but you still have to face the home team in the bottom of the 9th as opposed to the same scenario playing you, you as the visiting team score nothing in the top of the 9th, but all the home team has to do is score one run and the game automatically ends without you getting a chance to even the score or best it? No, you had your chance and you blew it. You know those are the breaks when you go into the game.
I swear, so many times I hear about football when a person's team loses "they just ran out of time!" No they didn't. They had the same amount of time as every other game they have ever played, just this game they chose to mess around at the beginning of the game.
It reminds me of people who says the plays at the end of the game are important. Incorrect. They are all as important as all of them. That run for a loss with 13:22 left in the 1st quarter is just as important as that run for a loss with 0:21 left in the 4th. You can't just throw away all the times during the game you screwed up and just say that doesn't count, then miraculously get into overtime and get bent that you didn't get a shot to tie or best the other guy. You had all game to tie or best them.
It's generation of people playing rock/paper/scissors who play one time, loses then says "best two out of three". You can't go into something knowing it has a chance to not go your way, then when it doesn't change the rules.
That's the point. You can always have a disparity in possessions, making things "not fair". Sports aren't fair. You try the best you can, but if you go up against someone better, you just lose no matter how hard you try.
Exactly. Now, I'm okay with switching the overtime format if it's more exciting, but it's not inherently "unfair".
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 12:51:54 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 28, 2022, 12:27:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 27, 2022, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 27, 2022, 01:04:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2022, 09:43:51 PM
The point is that 64% is still not 50% (I know it's a small sample size, but it seems about right). You're never going to get exactly 50%, but you can certainly get a lot closer than 64%.
I mean, if there are 11 possessions in a game and one team gets 6 and one team gets 5, that means one team gets 10% more of the possessions in regulation (55% to 45%). Is that fair? It's obviously easier to score on offense.
I'd be impressed if you found a game in the last 15 years that had fewer than like 13 possessions.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201311180car.htm#all_vis_drives
I'm impressed, but the fact that you linked to a game from 8 years ago that had 12 possessions - still more than your outrageous number of 11 - is more of an indictment on your point about the 11 possessions than it is on webny99's point about overtime being "unfair".
For the record, I'm neutral on this, just pointing out how this is kinda odd.
Edit: I counted wrong. There were actually 14 possessions in that game. And, that game is apparently famous for having very few possessions. The average number of possessions in a game is 24.
Lol
The point isn't how many possessions in a given game there are. The point is if there is an odd number, being 84 possessions vs. 85, you could say that's unfair.
Does it make it unfair that if you are the visiting team in baseball and you go into the 9th tied and you break the tie in the top of the 9th, but you still have to face the home team in the bottom of the 9th as opposed to the same scenario playing you, you as the visiting team score nothing in the top of the 9th, but all the home team has to do is score one run and the game automatically ends without you getting a chance to even the score or best it? No, you had your chance and you blew it. You know those are the breaks when you go into the game.
I swear, so many times I hear about football when a person's team loses "they just ran out of time!" No they didn't. They had the same amount of time as every other game they have ever played, just this game they chose to mess around at the beginning of the game.
It reminds me of people who says the plays at the end of the game are important. Incorrect. They are all as important as all of them. That run for a loss with 13:22 left in the 1st quarter is just as important as that run for a loss with 0:21 left in the 4th. You can't just throw away all the times during the game you screwed up and just say that doesn't count, then miraculously get into overtime and get bent that you didn't get a shot to tie or best the other guy. You had all game to tie or best them.
It's generation of people playing rock/paper/scissors who play one time, loses then says "best two out of three". You can't go into something knowing it has a chance to not go your way, then when it doesn't change the rules.
That's the point. You can always have a disparity in possessions, making things "not fair". Sports aren't fair. You try the best you can, but if you go up against someone better, you just lose no matter how hard you try.
I agree, I just think it might be worth pointing out two things: 1) teams can control the number of possessions they get (they can't control a coin flip), and 2), 11 or 85 or 1,000,001 possessions is nearly impossible so I don't see why that example should be used. If you want to say 23, then fine.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2022, 01:02:16 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 12:51:54 PM
...
It's generation of people playing rock/paper/scissors who play one time, loses then says "best two out of three". You can't go into something knowing it has a chance to not go your way, then when it doesn't change the rules.
That's the point. You can always have a disparity in possessions, making things "not fair". Sports aren't fair. You try the best you can, but if you go up against someone better, you just lose no matter how hard you try.
Exactly. Now, I'm okay with switching the overtime format if it's more exciting, but it's not inherently "unfair".
Nobody's saying that any number of possessions in regulation is unfair. However, one coin flip, one possession, game over... I think that
is inherently unfair. This isn't a new thing. People, including me, have recognized this for a long time.
Now, that's also not to be confused with saying that either team should have won in regulation. Of course they should have. But both teams could have, and neither did. That's why overtime has to exist.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 12:51:54 PM
It reminds me of people who says the plays at the end of the game are important. Incorrect. They are all as important as all of them. That run for a loss with 13:22 left in the 1st quarter is just as important as that run for a loss with 0:21 left in the 4th. You can't just throw away all the times during the game you screwed up and just say that doesn't count, then miraculously get into overtime and get bent that you didn't get a shot to tie or best the other guy. You had all game to tie or best them.
This is absolutely 100% true. Too many people focus on the last quarter, or the final few minutes of the last quarter. There are people that won't even tune in to a game until there's a few minutes remaining.
About the only time earlier actions in the game (be it plays, penalties, etc) are brought up is when a team uses a timeout (or loses a challenge) early in a half, and they'll remark that that's one less timeout they'll have available later. But otherwise, plays and penalties early in a game, or even in the 3rd quarter, are often overlooked.
Quote from: thspfc on January 28, 2022, 01:03:50 PM...teams can control the number of possessions they get (they can't control a coin flip)...
They can to a point. But a team (or both teams) that run short plays can take 8 or more minutes off the clock in a single possession. A team that goes 3 and out with incomplete passes takes very little time off the clock. A quarter can quickly flow with just a few possessions, or as we saw at the end of the Bills/Chiefs game, several possessions can happen in a very little bit of time.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 01:50:29 PM
Nobody's saying that any number of possessions in regulation is unfair. However, one coin flip, one possession, game over... I think that is inherently unfair. This isn't a new thing. People, including me, have recognized this for a long time.
Many people have recognized this. The solution though is much harder to figure out, that is *still fair*. Several solutions have been brought up on this forum, every one of which has pros and cons to them. And you yourself, with your very own numbers, show that even if the 1st team doesn't score a TD, they are still highly likely to win. What we need to see would be stats from college football where both teams must touch the ball, to see who wins more often. If it's still roughly 70% or above for the team that has possession first in OT, then, again, this is all a cozy fuzzy feel-good option that isn't any better than what we have now.
With regards to Bills-Chiefs specifically... this is probably unpopular, but I think the Bills should have gone for two after their final touchdown. If you get it, you're up 4 and they need a TD. If you don't get it, you're only up 2, but still in great position and at least you know overtime is out of the picture. It would have saved this whole overtime debate and been WAY easier to stomach than what actually happened... and it would have been a better ending for neutral fans, too.
And to come full circle, it's kind of funny that the saying is "whoever gets the ball last is going to win" only applies in regulation, and then suddenly in overtime, it becomes "whoever gets the ball first is going to win". In this case, Chiefs went 2-0, Bills went 0-2. You simply cannot have overtime rules that allow that to happen to end a game, especially in a playoff game.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 02:04:24 PM
With regards to Bills-Chiefs specifically... this is probably unpopular, but I think the Bills should have gone for two after their final touchdown. If you get it, you're up 4 and they need a TD. If you don't get it, you're only up 2, but still in great position and at least you know overtime is out of the picture. It would have saved this whole overtime debate and been WAY easier to stomach than what actually happened... and it would have been a better ending for neutral fans, too.
But if you go for 2 and miss it, a FG beats you entirely.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 02:04:24 PM
With regards to Bills-Chiefs specifically... this is probably unpopular, but I think the Bills should have gone for two after their final touchdown. If you get it, you're up 4 and they need a TD. If you don't get it, you're only up 2, but still in great position and at least you know overtime is out of the picture. It would have saved this whole overtime debate and been WAY easier to stomach than what actually happened... and it would have been a better ending for neutral fans, too.
And to come full circle, it's kind of funny that the saying is "whoever gets the ball last is going to win" only applies in regulation, and then suddenly in overtime, it becomes "whoever gets the ball first is going to win". In this case, Chiefs went 2-0, Bills went 0-2. You simply cannot have overtime rules that allow that to happen to end a game, especially in a playoff game.
The Ravens tried that this season and were unsuccessful. Twice, if I recall.
If they went for 1, and then dealt with OT, they may have won. And winning just one of those 2 games may have allowed them to make the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 02:04:24 PM
...You simply cannot have overtime rules that allow that to happen to end a game, especially in a playoff game.
OK, we get the point.
I just want to hear about equal chances to win at hockey now.
Obviously people like webny99 have made up their mind for wanting both teams having a possession in OT(I'm fine with college and high school doing this, pros you get paid to score or prevent it) and those like myself that think rules are file as they are.
Will give you some advise though webny99 being you are 22(assuming you are telling the truth), people have been trying to make all sports equal/fair in rules long before you and me so be ready for the next so call unequal or unfair thing to arise.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2022, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 01:50:29 PM
Nobody's saying that any number of possessions in regulation is unfair. However, one coin flip, one possession, game over... I think that is inherently unfair. This isn't a new thing. People, including me, have recognized this for a long time.
Many people have recognized this. The solution though is much harder to figure out, that is *still fair*. Several solutions have been brought up on this forum, every one of which has pros and cons to them. And you yourself, with your very own numbers, show that even if the 1st team doesn't score a TD, they are still highly likely to win. What we need to see would be stats from college football where both teams must touch the ball, to see who wins more often. If it's still roughly 70% or above for the team that has possession first in OT, then, again, this is all a cozy fuzzy feel-good option that isn't any better than what we have now.
College football is closer to 50/50... but I think their system, starting at the opponent's 25 yard line, is too bush league for the NFL.
Personally, I would support either a full 10 minute overtime that's played to its conclusion and then sudden death if it's still tied, or just sudden death (or the rules we have now) beginning after each team gets a possession.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2022, 03:00:20 PM
The Ravens tried that this season and were unsuccessful. Twice, if I recall.
If they went for 1, and then dealt with OT, they may have won. And winning just one of those 2 games may have allowed them to make the playoffs.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 28, 2022, 02:30:38 PM
But if you go for 2 and miss it, a FG beats you entirely.
Yeah, I know... for those saying you should win in regulation, I think going for two is a decision that would increase your odds of winning in regulation and avoid the whole overtime saga entirely. If the Chiefs then get a FG, they win, and so be it. Easy to say in hindsight, but I think pretty much any Bills fan - and probably many neutral fans, too - would have preferred it to end that way rather than the drawn-out pain of them scoring 9 straight without Josh Allen touching the ball. And the way the offense was playing, it was going to be the offense that won the game, so they probably get the 2 and then it doesn't matter.
Slightly different situation with the Ravens since the entire game(s) came down to the 2-pt play, but same basic idea. There was also footage of I believe the Packers game where you could see Harbaugh asking his players if they wanted to go for two and they said yes, so that was obviously a factor.
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
So when you get to overtime, basically you get what you get. If the rules are unfair, tough. Shouldn't have been there in the first place. You should have won the game in regulation instead if blowing the lead or if you came back, you really should have lost if the other team didn't let you back in. Basically all rules and bets are off in overtime. Hell, let the officials leave the field in overtime and you just get what you get. Again, don't want an unfair shake in overtime, don't allow yourself to be in a position for the game to go to overtime. Win the game 30-0. If you can't do that, you weren't good enough to begin with.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 28, 2022, 03:07:29 PM
...
Obviously people like webny99 have made up their mind for wanting both teams having a possession in OT(I'm fine with college and high school doing this, pros you get paid to score or prevent it) and those like myself that think rules are file as they are.
Will give you some advise though webny99 being you are 22(assuming you are telling the truth), people have been trying to make all sports equal/fair in rules long before you and me so be ready for the next so call unequal or unfair thing to arise.
In case it wasn't clear, I don't object to webny99 having the opinion he does or to his expressing that opinion–I only objected to the way he presented it as though it were an inarguable fact.
If you support a 10-minute overtime that plays normally, and then sudden death after that..then why not just support a 60-minute regular game that plays normally, and then sudden death after that?
I agree with the rock/paper/scissors analogy. The loser will ALWAYS want another chance. By the logic of some on this board, you'd have NFL players out on the field for 8 or 12 hours. Baseball players can do that; football players cannot.
In seeing all the alternatives, I'm tending towards one of two options:
1) Change the rules so that if a team wins the opening coin toss and defers to the second half, it immediately sets their choice for any potential OT to give the other team the choice in OT. That introduces an interesting strategy element into the game, giving control to the coaches, and everyone would know from the opening kickoff who would get the ball first if the game falls into a tie.
2) Tie-break at the end of regulation for any number of stats. Total yards by each team; time of possession; percentage of each team's total points that were scored by touchdown; fewest penalty yards. Put three or four of these in whatever order is fair, have a coin toss if by some miracle all three or four stats are tied along with the end-of-regulation score.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2022, 06:14:14 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 28, 2022, 03:07:29 PM
...
Obviously people like webny99 have made up their mind for wanting both teams having a possession in OT(I'm fine with college and high school doing this, pros you get paid to score or prevent it) and those like myself that think rules are file as they are.
Will give you some advise though webny99 being you are 22(assuming you are telling the truth), people have been trying to make all sports equal/fair in rules long before you and me so be ready for the next so call unequal or unfair thing to arise.
In case it wasn't clear, I don't object to webny99 having the opinion he does or to his expressing that opinion–I only objected to the way he presented it as though it were an inarguable fact.
Ditto. If sports has shown anything is there are always things that people think would make the whole thing more fair and equal. But for arguing just saying the same thing again or saying louder or just electing yourself as the king/queen or what is fair and/or equal usually ends out badly(hence the trolling of webny99 that followed).
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 28, 2022, 06:57:32 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2022, 06:14:14 PM
In case it wasn't clear, I don't object to webny99 having the opinion he does or to his expressing that opinion–I only objected to the way he presented it as though it were an inarguable fact.
Ditto. If sports has shown anything is there are always things that people think would make the whole thing more fair and equal. But for arguing just saying the same thing again or saying louder or just electing yourself as the king/queen or what is fair and/or equal usually ends out badly(hence the trolling of webny99 that followed).
Look, I never said what the best solution is, nor do I claim to have an answer for what's best. Only that the current system does not give each team an equal chance to win in overtime - and yes, I do believe that is a fact, not an opinion.
It's not equal - fact
It needs to be changed - opinion
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 05:47:39 PM
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
I totally get what you're saying here.
I would say this: Everything in
green is true of Bills-Chiefs. Everything in
red is true of the 49ers-Cowboys game from the prior week.
In other words, the "glorious" version is a perfectly accurate description of a great game. It's not revisionist history at all to say that what happened at the end of the Bills-Chiefs game was incredible. Meanwhile, your version is accurate if incompetence is on display... which was definitely the case at times in the 49ers-Cowboys game. Now, those are two extreme examples. Most games are somewhere in between.
Perhaps best summarized by this tweet, which made perfect sense when it was posted (during 49ers-Cowboys) but would have made no sense at all if posted during Bills-Chiefs:
https://twitter.com/PabloTorre/status/1482880237713121280
Quote from: gr8daynegb on January 28, 2022, 03:07:29 PM
I just want to hear about equal chances to win at hockey now.
Obviously people like webny99 have made up their mind for wanting both teams having a possession in OT(I'm fine with college and high school doing this, pros you get paid to score or prevent it) and those like myself that think rules are file as they are.
Will give you some advise though webny99 being you are 22(assuming you are telling the truth), people have been trying to make all sports equal/fair in rules long before you and me so be ready for the next so call unequal or unfair thing to arise.
Again, I'm mostly impartial on this topic, but the "overtime is fine" crowd is making some outlandish points.
Why does it matter if they're getting paid to score or prevent scoring? It's still sports. It's the same game.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 05:47:39 PM
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
So when you get to overtime, basically you get what you get. If the rules are unfair, tough. Shouldn't have been there in the first place. You should have won the game in regulation instead if blowing the lead or if you came back, you really should have lost if the other team didn't let you back in. Basically all rules and bets are off in overtime. Hell, let the officials leave the field in overtime and you just get what you get. Again, don't want an unfair shake in overtime, don't allow yourself to be in a position for the game to go to overtime. Win the game 30-0. If you can't do that, you weren't good enough to begin with.
This is such nonsense lol. By your logic, pretty much the only "good enough" football team ever was the 1985 Bears.
Quote from: thspfc on January 28, 2022, 08:59:47 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 05:47:39 PM
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
So when you get to overtime, basically you get what you get. If the rules are unfair, tough. Shouldn't have been there in the first place. You should have won the game in regulation instead if blowing the lead or if you came back, you really should have lost if the other team didn't let you back in. Basically all rules and bets are off in overtime. Hell, let the officials leave the field in overtime and you just get what you get. Again, don't want an unfair shake in overtime, don't allow yourself to be in a position for the game to go to overtime. Win the game 30-0. If you can't do that, you weren't good enough to begin with.
This is such nonsense lol. By your logic, pretty much the only "good enough" football team ever was the 1985 Bears.
I thought that was standard knowledge.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 28, 2022, 06:30:26 PM
2) Tie-break at the end of regulation for any number of stats. Total yards by each team; time of possession; percentage of each team's total points that were scored by touchdown; fewest penalty yards. Put three or four of these in whatever order is fair, have a coin toss if by some miracle all three or four stats are tied along with the end-of-regulation score.
This is basically what I said before, just with a different criterion (most recently ahead). The only time it won't work is if the score is 0-0. It also works for basketball.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 28, 2022, 06:30:26 PM
If you support a 10-minute overtime that plays normally, and then sudden death after that..then why not just support a 60-minute regular game that plays normally, and then sudden death after that?
Because of the coin toss. My original thought was that, if still tied after a 10-minute overtime, more time would simply be added to the clock and the game would continue from wherever the teams were at. That's not perfect either, but it could provide some interesting clock management scenarios, where any team in scoring position would try to bleed the clock out before scoring.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 28, 2022, 06:30:26 PM
In seeing all the alternatives, I'm tending towards one of two options:
1) Change the rules so that if a team wins the opening coin toss and defers to the second half, it immediately sets their choice for any potential OT to give the other team the choice in OT. That introduces an interesting strategy element into the game, giving control to the coaches, and everyone would know from the opening kickoff who would get the ball first if the game falls into a tie.
I actually like that idea. Or, if regulation ends on a scoring play, the team that's on defense automatically gets the ball first in OT. This would at least avoid the scenario where a team can score twice in a row to end the game. It would also prevent the defense from having to defend two drives in a row.
In other news... Giants officially announce Bills OC Brian Daboll as their new head coach.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 10:44:23 PM
I actually like that idea. Or, if regulation ends on a scoring play, the team that's on defense automatically gets the ball first in OT. This would at least avoid the scenario where a team can score twice in a row to end the game. It would also prevent the defense from having to defend two drives in a row.
How is this different from a team kicking a successful onsides kick?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 10:44:23 PM
I actually like that idea. Or, if regulation ends on a scoring play, the team that's on defense automatically gets the ball first in OT. This would at least avoid the scenario where a team can score twice in a row to end the game. It would also prevent the defense from having to defend two drives in a row.
How is this different from a team kicking a successful onsides kick?
You actually sparked an idea that the team losing the coin toss in overtime might consider an onside kick, especially if the opponent has Mahomes/Brady/Rodgers/Allen
Quote from: 1 on January 28, 2022, 09:14:06 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 28, 2022, 06:30:26 PM
2) Tie-break at the end of regulation for any number of stats. Total yards by each team; time of possession; percentage of each team's total points that were scored by touchdown; fewest penalty yards. Put three or four of these in whatever order is fair, have a coin toss if by some miracle all three or four stats are tied along with the end-of-regulation score.
This is basically what I said before, just with a different criterion (most recently ahead). The only time it won't work is if the score is 0-0. It also works for basketball.
I'm not really a fan of stats deciding games, because stats don't always tell the game's story accurately. Maybe Team A was vastly superior in all the stats, but turned the ball over 4 times. The stats say they deserve to win. The game story says they did not.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 08:12:35 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 05:47:39 PM
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
I totally get what you're saying here.
I would say this: Everything in green is true of Bills-Chiefs. Everything in red is true of the 49ers-Cowboys game from the prior week.
In other words, the "glorious" version is a perfectly accurate description of a great game. It's not revisionist history at all to say that what happened at the end of the Bills-Chiefs game was incredible. Meanwhile, your version is accurate if incompetence is on display... which was definitely the case at times in the 49ers-Cowboys game. Now, those are two extreme examples. Most games are somewhere in between.
Perhaps best summarized by this tweet, which made perfect sense when it was posted (during 49ers-Cowboys) but would have made no sense at all if posted during Bills-Chiefs:
https://twitter.com/PabloTorre/status/1482880237713121280
I will agree with everything you said, except, the Bills/Chiefs game was punctuated by the worst defense played in the league in the last 40 years. You could argue it was great offense, but I think it was bad defense. In my opinion, that fails to make it an "instant classic". Even as a Cowboys fan I agree with your assessment of the 49ers/Cowboys game. That whole game was hard to watch and if the Cowboys did somehow pull out a win I would have been disgusted because it was an awful game.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 29, 2022, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 08:12:35 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 28, 2022, 05:47:39 PM
I must go back and say I am not a fan of overtime in the first place. Not saying I don't want to see it because there has to be a winner, just not a fan of the process to get there.
Let me explain.
There seems to be some muddy water in the thinking of how you reach overtime/extra innings. Most people think "it was an equal played game and they were tied at the end" and some people say "That was an amazing comeback by Team X to tie Team Y". This is the glorious version, or also known as revisionist history. I instead say "What where you doing all game?" or "How can you blow that lead??" It's the same way I feel about the current NFL parity. Some think the games are ultra-competitive and make them very entertaining. I say the games are close because they are played horribly on both sides.
I totally get what you're saying here.
I would say this: Everything in green is true of Bills-Chiefs. Everything in red is true of the 49ers-Cowboys game from the prior week.
In other words, the "glorious" version is a perfectly accurate description of a great game. It's not revisionist history at all to say that what happened at the end of the Bills-Chiefs game was incredible. Meanwhile, your version is accurate if incompetence is on display... which was definitely the case at times in the 49ers-Cowboys game. Now, those are two extreme examples. Most games are somewhere in between.
Perhaps best summarized by this tweet, which made perfect sense when it was posted (during 49ers-Cowboys) but would have made no sense at all if posted during Bills-Chiefs:
https://twitter.com/PabloTorre/status/1482880237713121280
I will agree with everything you said, except, the Bills/Chiefs game was punctuated by the worst defense played in the league in the last 40 years. You could argue it was great offense, but I think it bas bad defense. In my opinion, that fails to make it an "instant classic". Even as a Cowboys fan I agree with your assessment of the 49ers/Cowboys game. That whole game was hard to watch and if the Cowboys did somehow pull out a win I would have been disgusted because it was an awful game.
Crazy idea: it could have been both great offense and bad defense?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2022, 11:08:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2022, 10:44:23 PM
I actually like that idea. Or, if regulation ends on a scoring play, the team that's on defense automatically gets the ball first in OT. This would at least avoid the scenario where a team can score twice in a row to end the game. It would also prevent the defense from having to defend two drives in a row.
How is this different from a team kicking a successful onsides kick?
Because unlike a coin flip, an onside kick is an actual play that the players are responsible to execute. It's also usually done by a team that's trailing, not tied.
I just thought of a nightmare scenario that's even worse than what happened to the Bills... a team is down by two scores. They get a touchdown, successful onside kick recovery, another touchdown on the final play to force OT, get the ball first in OT, and score a touchdown to end the game. That would be 20 points without the other team touching the ball.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 28, 2022, 11:10:44 PM
You actually sparked an idea that the team losing the coin toss in overtime might consider an onside kick, especially if the opponent has Mahomes/Brady/Rodgers/Allen
Another advantage would be that the defense wouldn't have to defend as long of a drive, so they might be more likely to get a stop/force a FG.
Tom Brady to retire, according to ESPN's Scheftler
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2022, 12:22:15 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 28, 2022, 11:10:44 PM
You actually sparked an idea that the team losing the coin toss in overtime might consider an onside kick, especially if the opponent has Mahomes/Brady/Rodgers/Allen
Another advantage would be that the defense wouldn't have to defend as long of a drive, so they might be more likely to get a stop/force a FG.
Yeah, you're essentially conceding the FG, but you still have roughly the same opportunity to stop the TD plus the 10% chance of actually getting the ball.
Quote from: Big John on January 29, 2022, 02:49:01 PM
Tom Brady to retire, according to ESPN's Scheftler
Wow! I sort of figured this might be it for Brady regardless of how this season ended. There wasn't a lot left for him to do after winning the Super Bowl last year. And even though he lost his final game, it was still a fairly good way to end it, coming back from down 27-3.
And to go out leading the league in passing yards and touchdowns at age 44... that might be among the most impressive accomplishments of his career.
Noooo
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 29, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Noooo
Does it matter? Brady doesn't play for your team anymore and they still name the playoffs.
Until the NFL schedule changes again, Tom Brady will remain one of only two quarterbacks to lose a football game on my birthday.
The NFL will never be the same.
I'm disappointed that he left at the top of his game because even as a huge Brady fan, it would have been funny to see him finally fall off the Kellerman Cliff after almost 10 years of his play not significantly declining.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 29, 2022, 03:47:42 PM
Until the NFL schedule changes again, Tom Brady will remain one of only two quarterbacks to lose a football game on my birthday.
According to my forum profile, my birthday is October 19, 0007, which I believe was Brady's rookie year :-D.
Brady's father is now saying the reports are incorrect.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2022, 04:59:12 PM
So the nature of the calendar singles out certain football season dates when few NFL games are played: September 14, September 21, September 28, October 5, October 12, October 19, October 26, November 2, November 9, November 16, November 23, November 30, December 7, December 14, December 21, December 28.
No, it doesn't. Calendars starting any day of the week are about equally likely. The calendar where those days are on Sunday is just in the middle of an 11-year gap right now (2014, 2025).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_year_starting_on_Wednesday
Quote from: 1 on January 29, 2022, 05:16:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2022, 04:59:12 PM
So the nature of the calendar singles out certain football season dates when few NFL games are played: September 14, September 21, September 28, October 5, October 12, October 19, October 26, November 2, November 9, November 16, November 23, November 30, December 7, December 14, December 21, December 28.
No, it doesn't. Calendars starting any day of the week are about equally likely. The calendar where those days are on Sunday is just in the middle of an 11-year gap right now (2014, 2025).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_year_starting_on_Wednesday
Ah. Looks like 2014 was the last time those days were Sundays?
https://twitter.com/fightinhydrant/status/1487553863175520261?s=21
Whereas in the MLB, the official rules say that you must retire every time you get out as a batter or runner.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 29, 2022, 05:46:56 PM
https://twitter.com/fightinhydrant/status/1487553863175520261?s=21
Attention whore needs attention
Pulling a Favre on retirement?
Quote from: Big John on January 29, 2022, 05:59:35 PM
Pulling a Favre on retirement?
My guess is that he does intend to retire, but wants to announce it on his own time.
Although it would be classic Brady to come back and win another Super Bowl.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2022, 06:25:18 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 29, 2022, 05:59:35 PM
Pulling a Favre on retirement?
My guess is that he does intend to retire, but wants to announce it on his own time.
Although it would be classic Brady to come back and win another Super Bowl.
That's my thought, too. The speed with which Schefter & co. broke the story, followed by the it-so-fast reply from Brady's camp indicate that someone was a little too quick to jump on the what would be/will be the biggest sports story of the year.
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 30, 2022, 06:21:10 PM
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
Me, but against the Pack.
Oh boy. Overtime at Arrowhead for the 2nd week in a row. But this time, the defense does their job and gets an int. And the Bengals win!!!!!
I know the Bills defense didn't play well last week, but it sure would have been nice to get one quarter - or even 13 seconds! - of an out-of-sync Mahomes. An incredible job by the Bengals defense, as the Chiefs were on pace to score 42 points again and then got shut out in the 2nd half aside from the FG that forced OT.
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-10 before halftime.
(Edited incorrect halftime score)
The Chiefs choke was far worse.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:27:13 PM
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-3 before halftime.
As the higher seed, it's automatically the Chiefs.
(Edited since I messed up forgetting they weren't the #1 seed)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 30, 2022, 06:41:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:27:13 PM
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-3 before halftime.
As a number one seed, it's automatically the Chiefs.
Except that they weren't the #1 seed.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:27:13 PM
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-3 before halftime.
The Chiefs, definitely. They let the Bengals back into the game.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 30, 2022, 06:42:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 30, 2022, 06:41:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:27:13 PM
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-3 before halftime.
As a number one seed, it's automatically the Chiefs.
Except that they weren't the #1 seed.
Yeah I just realized that. Changing that comment!
Quote from: jlam on January 30, 2022, 06:23:02 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 30, 2022, 06:21:10 PM
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
Me, but against the Pack.
Before the playoffs though, right? A little easier to predict a 4 seed to make the Super Bowl than it is a 4-11-1 team to make the Super Bowl the following year.
What Cincy has done really is remarkable though. Classic 3 year rebuild: year 1, blow it up and get a bunch of solid draft picks, year 2, probably still terrible but you at least find out if you've got your guys, and year 3, contenders.
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2022, 06:49:05 PM
Quote from: jlam on January 30, 2022, 06:23:02 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 30, 2022, 06:21:10 PM
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
Me, but against the Pack.
Before the playoffs though, right? A little easier to predict a 4 seed to make the Super Bowl than it is a 4-11-1 team to make the Super Bowl the following year.
What Cincy has done really is remarkable though. Classic 3 year rebuild: year 1, blow it up and get a bunch of solid draft picks, year 2, probably still terrible but you at least find out if you've got your guys, and year 3, contenders.
Other than this was the 5th "classic rebuild" the Bungels, err, Bengals, had attempted since their last Super Bowl appearance. They finally got it right.
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2022, 06:49:05 PM
Quote from: jlam on January 30, 2022, 06:23:02 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 30, 2022, 06:21:10 PM
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
Me, but against the Pack.
Before the playoffs though, right? A little easier to predict a 4 seed to make the Super Bowl than it is a 4-11-1 team to make the Super Bowl the following year.
What Cincy has done really is remarkable though. Classic 3 year rebuild: year 1, blow it up and get a bunch of solid draft picks, year 2, probably still terrible but you at least find out if you've got your guys, and year 3, contenders.
Based on this site, Bengals were 120-1 odds to win the Superbowl prior to the season.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/super-bowl-2021-odds-favorites-chiefs-buccaneers/3h8myhws7vl91u8omlskk9124
49ers and Rams were 14-1 and 15-1, respectively.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 30, 2022, 06:43:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:27:13 PM
Now I have to ask... who do you think choked worse, the Bills or the Chiefs?
Bills gave up a FG with 13 seconds left. Chiefs blew a 21-3 lead and passed up an easy FG that would have made it 24-3 before halftime.
The Chiefs, definitely. They let the Bengals back into the game.
Definitely the Chiefs. Both games were at Arrowhead. Mahomes has never had to play a playoff game other than the SB anyplace but Arrowhead. He wigged out. I put the choke squarely on him.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 30, 2022, 06:21:10 PM
So who had the Bengals in the Super Bowl?
It's the year of the Tiger starting this week. The 49ers have an uphill battle against Fate
The LA Rams are going to the Superbowl! 17-20 final score
Nobody's going to the "Superbowl." :rolleyes:
So my preseason prediction was a Bills-Rams Super Bowl which wasn't too far away from actually happening.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 30, 2022, 09:54:14 PM
So my preseason prediction was a Bills-Rams Super Bowl which wasn't too far away from actually happening.
Ahh, those 13 seconds... If not for today's result, it would have truly felt like the Bills were 13 seconds away from the Super Bowl. But it's been a magical playoff run for Cincinnati. Truly well-deserved, for franchise and fanbase alike.
The fact that the Bills have outscored the Bengals 83-72 in the playoffs so far, despite being eliminated a week earlier, really just goes to show that anything can happen in any given week, and sometimes the playoffs are more about luck and matchups than they are about talent.
And the Rams... where to start. They finally ended their losing streak to the 49ers at the best time possible. They went all-in to win a Super Bowl, and it paid off, with playoff wins over Tom Brady and two divisional opponents. Now they have a chance to win it all on their home field. And I think the 49ers really won too... they had a great run with Jimmy G and they already have their QB of the future.
I actually figured the championships would be a let down after a great divisional weekend. Instead, we got two more great (or at least good) games today. 8 of the 12 games so far have come down to the wire, so I think you have to put these playoffs in the conversation for best ever.
If OBJ being a major part of a team making the Super Bowl after he was blamed for Cleveland's issues doesn't tell you how babied Baker Mayfield has been, I don't know what does.
Super Bowl is built different this year. One team that looked like they were going to miss the playoffs in mid-November. The other had perhaps the single worst month any Super Bowl team has ever had, when they got blown out by the Titans and 49ers, and lost to the Packers by 8.
Quite ironically, the Packers and 49ers become the first teams since the 2017 Chiefs to beat both Super Bowl teams in a given season.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 10:50:42 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 30, 2022, 09:54:14 PM
So my preseason prediction was a Bills-Rams Super Bowl which wasn't too far away from actually happening.
Ahh, those 13 seconds... If not for today's result, it would have truly felt like the Bills were 13 seconds away from the Super Bowl. But it's been a magical playoff run for Cincinnati. Truly well-deserved, for franchise and fanbase alike.
The fact that the Bills have outscored the Bengals 83-72 in the playoffs so far, despite being eliminated a week earlier, really just goes to show that anything can happen in any given week, and sometimes the playoffs are more about luck and matchups than they are about talent.
The Bills let the Chiefs march down the field and score a TD right away in overtime.
The Bengals intercepted Mahomes and kicked the game winning field goal.
That's the difference. Not sure how that can be disputed; the Bengals played better than the Bills did.
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2022, 11:03:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 10:50:42 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 30, 2022, 09:54:14 PM
So my preseason prediction was a Bills-Rams Super Bowl which wasn't too far away from actually happening.
Ahh, those 13 seconds... If not for today's result, it would have truly felt like the Bills were 13 seconds away from the Super Bowl. But it's been a magical playoff run for Cincinnati. Truly well-deserved, for franchise and fanbase alike.
The fact that the Bills have outscored the Bengals 83-72 in the playoffs so far, despite being eliminated a week earlier, really just goes to show that anything can happen in any given week, and sometimes the playoffs are more about luck and matchups than they are about talent.
The Bills let the Chiefs march down the field and score a TD right away in overtime.
The Bengals intercepted Mahomes and kicked the game winning field goal.
That's the difference. Not sure how that can be disputed; the Bengals played better than the Bills did.
I agree, obviously, that the Bengals played better against the Chiefs on defense in particular. I think the Bills played much better on offense - they had 5 touchdowns, including two go-ahead TD's in the 4th quarter; the Bengals had 2 touchdowns total - but it is a team game and the Bills defense did nothing in the final 13 seconds and overtime.
The 13 seconds was also really poor scheme, which is on the coaching staff just as much as the players. They had the safeties too deep and didn't focus nearly enough on the right area of the field to avoid giving up the mid-range completions/YAC. So it's obvious that the defense cost them the game and I hope it's addressed in the offseason, but the offense played a great game and still lost, so yeah, I think that supports my original point.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 30, 2022, 09:39:45 PM
The LA Rams are going to the Superbowl! 17-20 final score
Aren't they already there? :)
If the latest pattern (of the NFC Champions hosting their own Super Bowl) holds up next year, then the Cardinals could very well host the visiting AFC Champions (whomever that may be) in Super Bowl LVII in the Phoenix metro area..
Last Year: Tampa hosted KC in Super Bowl LV
This Year: LA Rams hosts Cincinati in Super Bowl LVI
Next Year: Arizona could host (TBD) in Super Bowl LVII
As for my Super Bowl prediction: I was half-right/half-wrong. My preseason prediction at the start of the season was for it to be LA Chargers vs LA Rams. The Rams did their part, but the Chargers wouldn't do theirs
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:24:58 PM
Oh boy. Overtime at Arrowhead for the 2nd week in a row. But this time, the defense does their job and gets an int. And the Bengals win!!!!!
I know the Bills defense didn't play well last week, but it sure would have been nice to get one quarter - or even 13 seconds! - of an out-of-sync Mahomes. An incredible job by the Bengals defense, as the Chiefs were on pace to score 42 points again and then got shut out in the 2nd half aside from the FG that forced OT.
No comment about the Chiefs winning the toss and still losing?
Quote from: jgb191 on January 31, 2022, 01:58:39 AM
If the latest pattern (of the NFC Champions hosting their own Super Bowl) holds up next year, then the Cardinals could very well host the visiting AFC Champions (whomever that may be) in Super Bowl LVII in the Phoenix metro area..
Last Year: Tampa hosted KC in Super Bowl LV
This Year: LA Rams hosts Cincinati in Super Bowl LVI
Next Year: Arizona could host (TBD) in Super Bowl LVII
Rams are the first team to play their conference championship game and Super Bowl in the same stadium.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 31, 2022, 06:21:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2022, 06:24:58 PM
Oh boy. Overtime at Arrowhead for the 2nd week in a row. But this time, the defense does their job and gets an int. And the Bengals win!!!!!
I know the Bills defense didn't play well last week, but it sure would have been nice to get one quarter - or even 13 seconds! - of an out-of-sync Mahomes. An incredible job by the Bengals defense, as the Chiefs were on pace to score 42 points again and then got shut out in the 2nd half aside from the FG that forced OT.
No comment about the Chiefs winning the toss and still losing?
Yeah, the defense did their job :sombrero:
Doesn't change how I feel about the overtime rules... although if the Chiefs
had scored a TD on the first possession of OT two weeks in a row, especially after having the ball for the last 6 minutes of regulation, that may have prompted a change to the rules. But I'm not holding my breath.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 07:21:36 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 31, 2022, 01:58:39 AM
If the latest pattern (of the NFC Champions hosting their own Super Bowl) holds up next year, then the Cardinals could very well host the visiting AFC Champions (whomever that may be) in Super Bowl LVII in the Phoenix metro area..
Last Year: Tampa hosted KC in Super Bowl LV
This Year: LA Rams hosts Cincinati in Super Bowl LVI
Next Year: Arizona could host (TBD) in Super Bowl LVII
Rams are the first team to play their conference championship game and Super Bowl in the same stadium.
I hope @oldtakesexposed catches up with everyone that said "the path to the Super Bowl goes through Lambeau". So much for that! It's pretty crazy that teams are 2-0 hosting the Super Bowl in their home stadium after going 0-54 the previous 54 years.
Even more crazy that the Rams were home for the wild card, on the road for the divisional, and then back home for the title game. Not sure that's ever happened before. They have to be thanking their lucky stars that the 49ers took out the Packers... I genuinely believe that the Rams would have lost if they had to go to Lambeau. Reminds me of
this meme (https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1398413-you-cant-defeat-me) - the Rams let the 49ers into the playoffs so they could take out the Packers :-D
LA will have the further distinction of being the designated visiting team in a Super Bowl played in their home stadium (this because the designations alternate between conferences each year and this year it's the AFC's turn to be the designated "home" team). I wonder whether the league will force them to use the visiting locker room. I believe typically when a team has played a "road game" at home (most commonly in baseball, both during the pandemic and when games have been moved due to ballpark problems or completion of suspended games) they don't use the other locker room for convenience reasons, but those situations are a bit different from a Super Bowl or all-star game or similar.
My Super Bowl score prediction: Rams 27, Bengals 13
Don't get me wrong, I want this to be a good game. Unlike past Super Bowls, I don't really care who wins. However, the Rams pass rush against the Bengals offensive line? And Jalen Ramsey covering Ja'Marr Chase? Chase hasn't faced anyone quite as good as Ramsey in his career. Burrow is going to have to get the ball out quickly, which mitigates Cincy's strong downfield passing game. Cincy has also scored only 5 touchdowns in the playoffs, compared to 12 field goals. Kicking four field goals per game worked when the Bengals were moving the ball into opposing territory on almost every drive, but I don't think they're going to move the ball as well against the Rams.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 08:44:55 AM
LA will have the further distinction of being the designated visiting team in a Super Bowl played in their home stadium (this because the designations alternate between conferences each year and this year it's the AFC's turn to be the designated "home" team). I wonder whether the league will force them to use the visiting locker room. I believe typically when a team has played a "road game" at home (most commonly in baseball, both during the pandemic and when games have been moved due to ballpark problems or completion of suspended games) they don't use the other locker room for convenience reasons, but those situations are a bit different from a Super Bowl or all-star game or similar.
Makes me wonder what happens when the Rams play the Chargers and the Chargers are the home team? I would guess both teams share the home locker room. Given the Rams/Chargers playing at the stadium I guess it is technically possible for the Rams to be the visiting team whenever the two teams play and the Chargers are the home team.
Quote from: tdindy88 on January 31, 2022, 09:25:07 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 08:44:55 AM
LA will have the further distinction of being the designated visiting team in a Super Bowl played in their home stadium (this because the designations alternate between conferences each year and this year it's the AFC's turn to be the designated "home" team). I wonder whether the league will force them to use the visiting locker room. I believe typically when a team has played a "road game" at home (most commonly in baseball, both during the pandemic and when games have been moved due to ballpark problems or completion of suspended games) they don't use the other locker room for convenience reasons, but those situations are a bit different from a Super Bowl or all-star game or similar.
Makes me wonder what happens when the Rams play the Chargers and the Chargers are the home team? I would guess both teams share the home locker room. Given the Rams/Chargers playing at the stadium I guess it is technically possible for the Rams to be the visiting team whenever the two teams play and the Chargers are the home team.
Same thing happens with Giants/Jets.
Quote from: tdindy88 on January 31, 2022, 09:25:07 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 08:44:55 AM
LA will have the further distinction of being the designated visiting team in a Super Bowl played in their home stadium (this because the designations alternate between conferences each year and this year it's the AFC's turn to be the designated "home" team). I wonder whether the league will force them to use the visiting locker room. I believe typically when a team has played a "road game" at home (most commonly in baseball, both during the pandemic and when games have been moved due to ballpark problems or completion of suspended games) they don't use the other locker room for convenience reasons, but those situations are a bit different from a Super Bowl or all-star game or similar.
Makes me wonder what happens when the Rams play the Chargers and the Chargers are the home team? I would guess both teams share the home locker room. Given the Rams/Chargers playing at the stadium I guess it is technically possible for the Rams to be the visiting team whenever the two teams play and the Chargers are the home team.
I just searched for this and found that SoFi has two separate home team locker rooms (at opposite ends of the stadium) for the two tenants, and then apparently there are two separate NFL-standard locker rooms for visiting teams that can be subdivided into smaller rooms if needed for an event like an NCAA Final Four. I assume the Meadowlands likewise has separate locker rooms, given that it was built for two tenants from the beginning, but I haven't looked that up to confirm.
Given that, it would seem to make sense that Cincinnati would just use the other "home" locker room for the Super Bowl, but who knows.
Here are 3 historical facts I find interesting about this Super Bowl matchup:
1. Both Super Bowl teams originated in Ohio. The Rams were founded in Cleveland in 1936 and played there though the 1945 season.
2. This will be the the 4th time that the Rams have played a championship game against a team from Ohio and also the 4th time that they have played a championship game in their home stadium:
1949 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Eagles 14 Rams 0
1950 NFL Championship at Cleveland Municipal Stadium: Browns 30 Rams 28
1951 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Rams 24 Browns 17
1955 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Browns 38 Rams 14
3. The Rams used to share a unique distinction with the Braves in that they were each franchises that had won 3 total championships with each one being in a different city:
Braves: 1914 Boston, 1957 Milwaukee, 1995 Altana
Rams: 1945 Cleveland, 1951 Los Angeles, 1999 St. Louis
But the Braves just ended that with their 2nd championship in Atlanta, so I guess it's only fitting that the Rams are now poised to get the 2nd championship in Los Angeles. Both franchises will still be the only ones to have won championships in 3 different cities.
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 11:24:29 AM
Here are 3 historical facts I find interesting about this Super Bowl matchup:
1. Both Super Bowl teams originated in Ohio. The Rams were founded in Cleveland in 1936 and played there though the 1945 season.
2. This will be the the 4th time that the Rams have played a championship game against a team from Ohio and also the 4th time that they have played a championship game in their home stadium:
1949 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Eagles 14 Rams 0
1950 NFL Championship at Cleveland Municipal Stadium: Browns 30 Rams 28
1951 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Rams 24 Browns 17
1955 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Browns 38 Rams 14
3. The Rams used to share a unique distinction with the Braves in that they were each franchises that had won 3 total championships with each one being in a different city:
Braves: 1914 Boston, 1957 Milwaukee, 1995 Altana
Rams: 1945 Cleveland, 1951 Los Angeles, 1999 St. Louis
But the Braves just ended that with their 2nd championship in Atlanta, so I guess it's only fitting that the Rams are now poised to get the 2nd championship in Los Angeles. Both franchises will still be the only ones to have won championships in 3 different cities.
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 11:24:29 AM
Here are 3 historical facts I find interesting about this Super Bowl matchup:
1. Both Super Bowl teams originated in Ohio. The Rams were founded in Cleveland in 1936 and played there though the 1945 season.
2. This will be the the 4th time that the Rams have played a championship game against a team from Ohio and also the 4th time that they have played a championship game in their home stadium:
1949 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Eagles 14 Rams 0
1950 NFL Championship at Cleveland Municipal Stadium: Browns 30 Rams 28
1951 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Rams 24 Browns 17
1955 NFL Championship at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum: Browns 38 Rams 14
3. The Rams used to share a unique distinction with the Braves in that they were each franchises that had won 3 total championships with each one being in a different city:
Braves: 1914 Boston, 1957 Milwaukee, 1995 Altana
Rams: 1945 Cleveland, 1951 Los Angeles, 1999 St. Louis
But the Braves just ended that with their 2nd championship in Atlanta, so I guess it's only fitting that the Rams are now poised to get the 2nd championship in Los Angeles. Both franchises will still be the only ones to have won championships in 3 different cities.
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 12:02:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
So from the nit picking stand point the Braves have already become the first team to win in 4 different cities/place names and the Rams can join them in that category.
Though that's not really my style. I'm fine with counting them for the city they have in their official name. I only really like to do the "stadium location within the metro" nit pick when state lines are involved (such as the Giants winning 4 titles for NY and 4 for NJ or Sporting Kansas City winning 1 title for MO and 1 for KS)
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 12:21:06 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 12:02:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
So from the nit picking stand point the Braves have already become the first team to win in 4 different cities/place names and the Rams can join them in that category.
Though that's not really my style. I'm fine with counting them for the city they have in their official name. I only really like to do the "stadium location within the metro" nit pick when state lines are involved (such as the Giants winning 4 titles for NY and 4 for NJ or Sporting Kansas City winning 1 title for MO and 1 for KS)
I hate that nit picking of actual stadium location. The team found cheap real-estate that was large enough outside of the city limits of the city they hail from. Everyone knows the Rams are based in Los Angeles and not Englewood, just as the Angles also have Los Angeles as their anchor city and not Anaheim. I don't even care about The Giants/Jets playing in New Jersey. They play in a suburb; that suburb happens to cross a state line. There is no question East Rutherford is in the New York metro area.
I have never once been to a Cowboys game in Arlington (or Irving before that) and wondered why they weren't called the Arlington Cowboys. I looked at the largest city in the Metroplex and said that city deserves the name it being the largest one, regardless if the team plays in a suburb.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 31, 2022, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 12:21:06 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 12:02:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
So from the nit picking stand point the Braves have already become the first team to win in 4 different cities/place names and the Rams can join them in that category.
Though that's not really my style. I'm fine with counting them for the city they have in their official name. I only really like to do the "stadium location within the metro" nit pick when state lines are involved (such as the Giants winning 4 titles for NY and 4 for NJ or Sporting Kansas City winning 1 title for MO and 1 for KS)
I hate that nit picking of actual stadium location. The team found cheap real-estate that was large enough outside of the city limits of the city they hail from. Everyone knows the Rams are based in Los Angeles and not Englewood, just as the Angles also have Los Angeles as their anchor city and not Anaheim. I don't even care about The Giants/Jets playing in New Jersey. They play in a suburb; that suburb happens to cross a state line. There is no question East Rutherford is in the New York metro area.
I have never once been to a Cowboys game in Arlington (or Irving before that) and wondered why they weren't called the Arlington Cowboys. I looked at the largest city in the Metroplex and said that city deserves the name it being the largest one, regardless if the team plays in a suburb.
Ridiculous and obsessive nitpicking has been a theme on this forum for its entire existence.
Quote from: thspfc on January 31, 2022, 01:00:41 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 31, 2022, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 12:21:06 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 12:02:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
So from the nit picking stand point the Braves have already become the first team to win in 4 different cities/place names and the Rams can join them in that category.
Though that's not really my style. I'm fine with counting them for the city they have in their official name. I only really like to do the "stadium location within the metro" nit pick when state lines are involved (such as the Giants winning 4 titles for NY and 4 for NJ or Sporting Kansas City winning 1 title for MO and 1 for KS)
I hate that nit picking of actual stadium location. The team found cheap real-estate that was large enough outside of the city limits of the city they hail from. Everyone knows the Rams are based in Los Angeles and not Englewood, just as the Angles also have Los Angeles as their anchor city and not Anaheim. I don't even care about The Giants/Jets playing in New Jersey. They play in a suburb; that suburb happens to cross a state line. There is no question East Rutherford is in the New York metro area.
I have never once been to a Cowboys game in Arlington (or Irving before that) and wondered why they weren't called the Arlington Cowboys. I looked at the largest city in the Metroplex and said that city deserves the name it being the largest one, regardless if the team plays in a suburb.
Ridiculous and obsessive nitpicking has been a theme on this forum for its entire existence.
Fair enough.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 31, 2022, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 31, 2022, 12:21:06 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 12:02:52 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 31, 2022, 11:46:08 AM
If you want to nit pick, Inglewood would be the 4th different city.
If you view it that way, the baseball team in question no longer plays in Atlanta, either–their current ballpark is outside the city limits in the unincorporated area of Cumberland, Georgia.
So from the nit picking stand point the Braves have already become the first team to win in 4 different cities/place names and the Rams can join them in that category.
Though that's not really my style. I'm fine with counting them for the city they have in their official name. I only really like to do the "stadium location within the metro" nit pick when state lines are involved (such as the Giants winning 4 titles for NY and 4 for NJ or Sporting Kansas City winning 1 title for MO and 1 for KS)
I hate that nit picking of actual stadium location. The team found cheap real-estate that was large enough outside of the city limits of the city they hail from. Everyone knows the Rams are based in Los Angeles and not Englewood, just as the Angles also have Los Angeles as their anchor city and not Anaheim. I don't even care about The Giants/Jets playing in New Jersey. They play in a suburb; that suburb happens to cross a state line. There is no question East Rutherford is in the New York metro area.
I have never once been to a Cowboys game in Arlington (or Irving before that) and wondered why they weren't called the Arlington Cowboys. I looked at the largest city in the Metroplex and said that city deserves the name it being the largest one, regardless if the team plays in a suburb.
Then you have the situation here, with a team named "Washington" that plays in Maryland and has its headquarters and training facility in Virginia. That last part was highly relevant in a 1990s lawsuit between 16 Redskins players and the NFL players' union–Virginia is a right-to-work state (meaning you cannot be compelled to pay union dues as a condition of employment), while Maryland and DC emphatically are not, and the 16 players contended that they could not be forced to pay union dues because the overwhelming majority of their "work" for the team was conducted in Virginia. The players won. (Maryland was irrelevant for lawsuit purposes because at the time the Redskins played at RFK Stadium in DC, but nowadays DC has basically no relevance beyond giving the team its name.)
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 31, 2022, 01:06:56 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 31, 2022, 01:00:41 PM
Ridiculous and obsessive nitpicking has been a theme on this forum for its entire existence.
Fair enough.
Ahem.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 31, 2022, 12:58:52 PM
Everyone knows the Rams are based in Los Angeles and not Englewood Inglewood
I'm so glad that the Rams are doing what the Buccaneers did last year (playing the Super Bowl on their own home field). And seeing that the Bengals are their opponents, it just made my prediction a lot easier: I have strong ties to L.A., so I'm picking the Rams to win it all. (Had the Chiefs won the AFC championship, it would've been more of a tossup, as they have been one of the most successful squads in the last three years, but no one can deny the great strides that Cincinnati has made in that timespan either, with the worst record in the league that led them to draft Joe Burrow, and after one more terrible season, getting his old college WR in the draft, after which they not only win their first division title in six years, but their first playoff win since 1990, and their first Super Bowl berth since 1988.)
I pick the Rams to win Super Bowl LVI for one reason only: If Tom Brady couldn't beat the Rams, what makes me believe the Bengals have any chance?
Brady has officially retired.
Quote from: jgb191 on February 01, 2022, 01:15:31 AM
I pick the Rams to win Super Bowl LVI for one reason only: If Tom Brady couldn't beat the Rams, what makes me believe the Bengals have any chance?
What chance did they have against KC?
On paper, the Rams have the edge, especially along the OL/DL, but the Bengals have been defying odds all year so I wouldn't count them out.
I'm just happy to have a Super Bowl where I'm not rooting against the Packers, Steelers or Tom Brady.
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 10:43:07 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Don't like it from the Bucs' perspective? Don't sign a 42-year-old to a contract that has escalators like that.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 10:43:07 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Don't like it from the Bucs' perspective? Don't sign a 42-year-old to a contract that has escalators like that.
The Bucs were perfectly willing to screw their salary cap for several years in order to win at least one Super Bowl and they've done that.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:54:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 10:43:07 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Don't like it from the Bucs' perspective? Don't sign a 42-year-old to a contract that has escalators like that.
The Bucs were perfectly willing to screw their salary cap for several years in order to win at least one Super Bowl and they've done that.
And now Gronk will re-retire, Godwin will leave in Free Agency, etc., etc. Not optimistic on their chances for the playoffs next year.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:54:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 10:43:07 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Don't like it from the Bucs' perspective? Don't sign a 42-year-old to a contract that has escalators like that.
The Bucs were perfectly willing to screw their salary cap for several years in order to win at least one Super Bowl and they've done that.
It's hard to argue that it didn't pay off consider they did get a Super Bowl win out of it.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:55:40 AM
And now Gronk will re-retire, Godwin will leave in Free Agency, etc., etc. Not optimistic on their chances for the playoffs next year.
Yeah, except that with Brady gone and Sean Payton gone, 6 or 7 wins might be enough for the NFC South crown.
It's obviously way too early, but right now I would give all four teams roughly equal chance. It could be like the 2020 NFC East, maybe worse if that's even mathematically possible.
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2022, 10:59:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:55:40 AM
And now Gronk will re-retire, Godwin will leave in Free Agency, etc., etc. Not optimistic on their chances for the playoffs next year.
Yeah, except that with Brady gone and Sean Payton gone, 6 or 7 wins might be enough for the NFC South crown.
It's obviously way too early, but I would honestly give all four teams roughly equal chance. It could be like the 2020 NFC East, maybe worse if that's even mathematically possible.
New Orleans just needed a solid QB situation to be competitive. They would have easily been the favorite in the Division if Sean Payton stuck around.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 11:00:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2022, 10:59:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:55:40 AM
And now Gronk will re-retire, Godwin will leave in Free Agency, etc., etc. Not optimistic on their chances for the playoffs next year.
Yeah, except that with Brady gone and Sean Payton gone, 6 or 7 wins might be enough for the NFC South crown.
It's obviously way too early, but I would honestly give all four teams roughly equal chance. It could be like the 2020 NFC East, maybe worse if that's even mathematically possible.
New Orleans just needed a solid QB situation to be competitive. They would have easily been the favorite in the Division if Sean Payton stuck around.
A solid QB situation is easier said than done. I can't help wonder if that factored into Sean Payton's decision. They also have a massive salary cap problem, so I could see them going full rebuild.
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2022, 11:17:18 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 11:00:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 01, 2022, 10:59:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:55:40 AM
And now Gronk will re-retire, Godwin will leave in Free Agency, etc., etc. Not optimistic on their chances for the playoffs next year.
Yeah, except that with Brady gone and Sean Payton gone, 6 or 7 wins might be enough for the NFC South crown.
It's obviously way too early, but I would honestly give all four teams roughly equal chance. It could be like the 2020 NFC East, maybe worse if that's even mathematically possible.
New Orleans just needed a solid QB situation to be competitive. They would have easily been the favorite in the Division if Sean Payton stuck around.
A solid QB situation is easier said than done. I can't help wonder if that factored into Sean Payton's decision. They also have a massive salary cap problem, so I could see them going full rebuild.
I guarantee it did. As it stood they were never going to be better than a 8-10 win team.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:54:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 01, 2022, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2022, 10:43:07 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 01, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 01, 2022, 10:13:18 AM
Brady has officially retired.
Timed perfectly to give sports media something to beat into the ground until kickoff in LA.
Wasn't Brady due $15,000,000 on 2/4? Kind of would be a total dick move to try to collect that and immediately announce your retirement.
Don't like it from the Bucs' perspective? Don't sign a 42-year-old to a contract that has escalators like that.
The Bucs were perfectly willing to screw their salary cap for several years in order to win at least one Super Bowl and they've done that.
Exactly. One Super Bowl championship is worth at least a decade of being terrible. Probably more. To put it another way, the benefits of one title outweigh the negatives of being bad for the next decade, if that scenario was ever to arise. Tampa is in a tough situation now, but they're more than okay with how things have turned out.
Let's see: The Manning brothers, gone. Kurt Warner, gone. Ben Roethlisberger, gone. Drew Brees, gone. And now the biggest thorn in the NFL's side that was Tom Brady has called it a career after 22 years.
Years from now when we take our grandkids to Canton and show them the aforementioned names, we can tell them that "They simply don't make QBs like this anymore." Then again, our own grandpas told us the same thing about guys like Bart Starr, Joe Namath, Johnny Unitas, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre and John Elway.
Quote from: Henry on February 01, 2022, 08:23:04 PM
Let's see: The Manning brothers, gone. Kurt Warner, gone. Ben Roethlisberger, gone. Drew Brees, gone. And now the biggest thorn in the NFL's side that was Tom Brady has called it a career after 22 years.
Years from now when we take our grandkids to Canton and show them the aforementioned names, we can tell them that "They simply don't make QBs like this anymore." Then again, our own grandpas told us the same thing about guys like Bart Starr, Joe Namath, Johnny Unitas, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre and John Elway.
If Aaron Rodgers retires or goes to Denver, you're going to have almost all the QB star power in the AFC: Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Jackson, Carr, Herbert
Who would be the biggest star QBs in the NFC after Matthew Stafford: Dak Prescott? Kirk Cousins? Matt Ryan?
More fuel for my argument that the NFL needs to abandon the conferences.
Quote from: Henry on February 01, 2022, 08:23:04 PM
Let's see: The Manning brothers, gone. Kurt Warner, gone. Ben Roethlisberger, gone. Drew Brees, gone. And now the biggest thorn in the NFL's side that was Tom Brady has called it a career after 22 years.
Years from now when we take our grandkids to Canton and show them the aforementioned names, we can tell them that "They simply don't make QBs like this anymore." Then again, our own grandpas told us the same thing about guys like Bart Starr, Joe Namath, Johnny Unitas, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre and John Elway.
I'm pledging to not be like the 90s Bulls nostalgics who think that those teams would beat today's average NBA team. While no QB will
accomplish more than Brady for a long, long time, there will come along at least one quarterback who is
better than Brady within the next 20 or 30 years.
And no, Rodgers is not better than Brady. Just because Rodgers can run around and throw crazy off balance passes does not mean he's a better quarterback.
Can't help but notice there's a lot less bitching about the overtime rules this week...
Quote from: thspfc on February 01, 2022, 09:22:56 PM
And no, Rodgers is not better than Brady. Just because Rodgers can run around and throw crazy off balance passes does not mean he's a better quarterback.
It depends on your definition of "better". I think Rodgers is more talented, but he's just not as good in big moments. I still can't believe his season ended scoring 10 points at home in the playoffs as the 1 seed.
There's actually quite a few quarterbacks that I think are more talented than Tom Brady. In terms of their overall body of work, consistency, and longevity though, no one will come close to Brady for a long time.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 09:11:21 PM
If Aaron Rodgers retires or goes to Denver, you're going to have almost all the QB star power in the AFC: Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Jackson, Carr, Herbert
Who would be the biggest star QBs in the NFC after Matthew Stafford: Dak Prescott? Kirk Cousins? Matt Ryan?
More fuel for my argument that the NFL needs to abandon the conferences.
I've been thinking about that recently too. It's crazy how stacked the AFC is, and the AFC West in particular. I'm not sure Rodgers would even want to go to Denver for that very reason. It would easily be the most stacked division of all time... great for casual fans, not so great for the teams trying to win championships.
With Brady gone, I do buy into your idea a little more because I do think it's borderline unfair. With all the talk during the season about how stacked and top heavy the NFC was... what NFC team really scares you in retrospect? It's just going to be way, way harder to win the AFC for the foreseeable future.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2022, 09:36:08 PM
Can't help but notice there's a lot less bitching about the overtime rules this week...
Well yeah, that's because both teams got a shot at the ball. Chiefs didn't score. Bengals did.
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
Quote from: jlam on February 01, 2022, 10:18:03 PM
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
That source was the team store at the stadium, which a news helicopter caught views of new merch before they could cut the lights.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:27:53 PM
Quote from: jlam on February 01, 2022, 10:18:03 PM
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
That source was the team store at the stadium, which a news helicopter caught views of new merch before they could cut the lights.
as per the below football thread:
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2022, 07:05:57 PM
On the 6:00 news tonight, Channel 4 in DC had their helicopter flying over FedEx Field and they said the pilot spotted "Commanders" signs in the team store. The lights in the store were cut off almost immediately when the report aired.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: tdindy88 on January 31, 2022, 09:25:07 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 31, 2022, 08:44:55 AM
LA will have the further distinction of being the designated visiting team in a Super Bowl played in their home stadium (this because the designations alternate between conferences each year and this year it's the AFC's turn to be the designated "home" team). I wonder whether the league will force them to use the visiting locker room. I believe typically when a team has played a "road game" at home (most commonly in baseball, both during the pandemic and when games have been moved due to ballpark problems or completion of suspended games) they don't use the other locker room for convenience reasons, but those situations are a bit different from a Super Bowl or all-star game or similar.
Makes me wonder what happens when the Rams play the Chargers and the Chargers are the home team? I would guess both teams share the home locker room. Given the Rams/Chargers playing at the stadium I guess it is technically possible for the Rams to be the visiting team whenever the two teams play and the Chargers are the home team.
I just searched for this and found that SoFi has two separate home team locker rooms (at opposite ends of the stadium) for the two tenants, and then apparently there are two separate NFL-standard locker rooms for visiting teams that can be subdivided into smaller rooms if needed for an event like an NCAA Final Four. I assume the Meadowlands likewise has separate locker rooms, given that it was built for two tenants from the beginning, but I haven't looked that up to confirm.
Given that, it would seem to make sense that Cincinnati would just use the other "home" locker room for the Super Bowl, but who knows.
I've gotta think Meadowlands has 2 separate locker rooms because otherwise do you want the other team clearing out your lockers during your away week? :D
Quote from: Big John on February 01, 2022, 10:33:28 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:27:53 PM
Quote from: jlam on February 01, 2022, 10:18:03 PM
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
That source was the team store at the stadium, which a news helicopter caught views of new merch before they could cut the lights.
as per the below football thread:
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2022, 07:05:57 PM
On the 6:00 news tonight, Channel 4 in DC had their helicopter flying over FedEx Field and they said the pilot spotted "Commanders" signs in the team store. The lights in the store were cut off almost immediately when the report aired.
I put that in the other thread because it seemed like something that's not specific to the 2021 season, so it seemed to belong there.
With that said, it hasn't taken long for people to realize that "Commanders" can be truncated to "Commies," so the jokes quickly started flying.
(https://virginia.sportswar.com/post_images/football/00/00/00/16/81/62/68/16816268_0.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 02, 2022, 07:58:46 AM
Quote from: Big John on February 01, 2022, 10:33:28 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:27:53 PM
Quote from: jlam on February 01, 2022, 10:18:03 PM
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
That source was the team store at the stadium, which a news helicopter caught views of new merch before they could cut the lights.
as per the below football thread:
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2022, 07:05:57 PM
On the 6:00 news tonight, Channel 4 in DC had their helicopter flying over FedEx Field and they said the pilot spotted "Commanders" signs in the team store. The lights in the store were cut off almost immediately when the report aired.
I put that in the other thread because it seemed like something that's not specific to the 2021 season, so it seemed to belong there.
Yeah, that made sense. But since we're here now...
I don't love the name, but I think everyone will get used to it in time. Imagine if "Packers" or "Browns" were unveiled today. Those are much worse names IMO, but no one really thinks about it much once the novelty wears off.
I wonder who Dan-the-shitstain-Snyder had to wrestle that name from such that it took two years to get it done?
At least "Commanders" is decent.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 02, 2022, 12:00:47 PM
I wonder who Dan-the-shitstain-Snyder had to wrestle that name from such that it took two years to get it done?
At least "Commanders" is decent.
They were Stalin for time while seeking a name that would hit the Marx.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 02, 2022, 07:58:46 AM
Quote from: Big John on February 01, 2022, 10:33:28 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 01, 2022, 10:27:53 PM
Quote from: jlam on February 01, 2022, 10:18:03 PM
The Washington Football Team is going with the name "Commanders," per sources.
That source was the team store at the stadium, which a news helicopter caught views of new merch before they could cut the lights.
as per the below football thread:
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 01, 2022, 07:05:57 PM
On the 6:00 news tonight, Channel 4 in DC had their helicopter flying over FedEx Field and they said the pilot spotted "Commanders" signs in the team store. The lights in the store were cut off almost immediately when the report aired.
I put that in the other thread because it seemed like something that's not specific to the 2021 season, so it seemed to belong there.
With that said, it hasn't taken long for people to realize that "Commanders" can be truncated to "Commies," so the jokes quickly started flying.
(https://virginia.sportswar.com/post_images/football/00/00/00/16/81/62/68/16816268_0.jpg)
Careful, you don't want Dan Snyder suing you into oblivion for that photo.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 02, 2022, 12:05:58 PM
Careful, you don't want Dan Snyder suing you into oblivion for that photo.
I'd be more concerned about a lawsuit from the North Koreans saying it's slander to compare their leaders to Snyder.
I guess they thought "Washington Lieutenant Colonels" was too clunky and went the Navy route instead
Aaron Rodgers building a house in Nashville: https://clutchpoints.com/titans-rumors-aaron-rodgers-latest-move-could-hint-at-tennessee-trade/ :colorful:
Quote from: Big John on February 02, 2022, 08:03:42 PM
Aaron Rodgers building a house in Nashville: https://clutchpoints.com/titans-rumors-aaron-rodgers-latest-move-could-hint-at-tennessee-trade/ :colorful:
Oh boy........ don't tell Avalanchez71
Quote from: Big John on February 02, 2022, 08:03:42 PM
Aaron Rodgers building a house in Nashville: https://clutchpoints.com/titans-rumors-aaron-rodgers-latest-move-could-hint-at-tennessee-trade/ :colorful:
Real estate choices often don't relate to player movements or lack thereof.
I'm not sure why Rodgers would even want to go to the Titans. Easy division, I suppose, but he already has that in Green Bay.
Quote from: jgb191 on February 01, 2022, 01:15:31 AM
I pick the Rams to win Super Bowl LVI for one reason only: If Tom Brady couldn't beat the Rams, what makes me believe the Bengals have any chance?
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1488707087282708480
From the Athletic (which I won't bother linking because it's paywalled) regarding a rules change for the Pro Bowl this weekend:
QuoteInstead of choosing to kick or receive, the team that wins the opening coin toss will instead choose anywhere on the field to place the ball, along with the direction. The team that loses the coin toss will then decide whether to start on offense or defense. The loser will also be able to choose between both privileges when the second half begins.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 03, 2022, 08:48:45 AM
From the Athletic (which I won't bother linking because it's paywalled) regarding a rules change for the Pro Bowl this weekend:
QuoteInstead of choosing to kick or receive, the team that wins the opening coin toss will instead choose anywhere on the field to place the ball, along with the direction. The team that loses the coin toss will then decide whether to start on offense or defense. The loser will also be able to choose between both privileges when the second half begins.
This is the rule proposed by the Ravens last year. Here's an article from the NFL:
https://www.nfl.com/news/2022-pro-bowl-to-feature-spot-and-choose-method-no-kickoffs
Quote from: webny99 on February 03, 2022, 09:06:44 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 03, 2022, 08:48:45 AM
From the Athletic (which I won't bother linking because it's paywalled) regarding a rules change for the Pro Bowl this weekend:
QuoteInstead of choosing to kick or receive, the team that wins the opening coin toss will instead choose anywhere on the field to place the ball, along with the direction. The team that loses the coin toss will then decide whether to start on offense or defense. The loser will also be able to choose between both privileges when the second half begins.
This is the rule proposed by the Ravens last year. Here's an article from the NFL:
https://www.nfl.com/news/2022-pro-bowl-to-feature-spot-and-choose-method-no-kickoffs
Good stuff in there. I'd also be in favor of trying to eliminate "half the distance" penalties, instead marking them for the full amount unless they're past the goal line, in which case the ball would be spotted just outside the end zone.
Quote from: Big John on February 02, 2022, 08:03:42 PM
Aaron Rodgers building a house in Nashville: https://clutchpoints.com/titans-rumors-aaron-rodgers-latest-move-could-hint-at-tennessee-trade/ :colorful:
I jumped the gun. The Titans are saying they are not interested in Rodgers: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/titans-dont-consider-aaron-rodgers-an-option-and-have-full-intentions-of-keeping-ryan-tannehill-per-report/ar-AATvXVw?ocid=uxbndlbing
Joe Burrow could become the 3rd QB to win both a college national championship and a Super Bowl. The other two are also named Joe--Namath and Montana.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2022, 10:17:24 PM
Joe Burrow could become the 3rd QB to win both a college national championship and a Super Bowl. The other two are also named Joe--Namath and Montana.
Only heard this one 327 times.
Quote from: thspfc on February 05, 2022, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2022, 10:17:24 PM
Joe Burrow could become the 3rd QB to win both a college national championship and a Super Bowl. The other two are also named Joe--Namath and Montana.
Only heard this one 327 times.
Just learned this from your post, cabiness - thanks!
Quote from: imref on February 05, 2022, 12:56:18 PM
Roger Goodell announces that to avoid the unfairness of teams playing the Super Bowl in their home stadium that we've seen over the last two years, all future Super Bowls will be held at AT&T Stadium in Dallas.
:)
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 05, 2022, 11:04:58 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 05, 2022, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 05, 2022, 10:17:24 PM
Joe Burrow could become the 3rd QB to win both a college national championship and a Super Bowl. The other two are also named Joe--Namath and Montana.
Only heard this one 327 times.
Just learned this from your post, cabiness - thanks!
Me too!
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
They can't go getting anybody injured from tackling now. It would be a step up if it was flag football. The Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the Big 4 All-Star games. They are trying out a couple of interesting rule changes regarding the coin flip and field position replacing kickoffs, though I don't think they're very likely to be implemented in regular season games anytime soon.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
Training Camp and Preseason Games are more competitive than the joke of this Pro Bowl. I watched about 2 plays, then switched to watch the US Mixed Curling team - the girl from Alaska - good eye candy, and obviously very talented.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 06, 2022, 04:52:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
They can't go getting anybody injured from tackling now. It would be a step up if it was flag football. The Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the Big 4 All-Star games. They are trying out a couple of interesting rule changes regarding the coin flip and field position replacing kickoffs, though I don't think they're very likely to be implemented in regular season games anytime soon.
It's stupid. Unlike the other 3 major sports, the NFL's All-Star game is played at the end of the season instead of the middle of the season, so if someone gets hurt, they have the entire offseason to rehab. Get out there and hit someone.
People say "He can't get hurt in an exhibition game" or "he got hurt in a game that didn't even count." First thing that comes to mind is everyone flipping out when Jordy Nelson was lost for the season because of an injury in a pre-season game. I have always thought, so if it happened in a real game, then no one cares? They only care if its a preseason game or other type of exhibition game? Like somehow its justified if he hurt himself in a regular season game? The way I look at it, it was a fluke injury that was bound to happen, and would have happened in a regular season game just as easily as it did in the preseason. Just that year he didn't quite make it that far in the season before getting hurt.
In conclusion, stop coddling these guys. They are professional football players. They shouldn't be scared of getting hurt that easily and as I pointed out, it's the same blow if they get hurt in a regular season game as it is in a preseason game. Stop acting like because it doesn't get put down as a win or loss in your official record that its suddenly a breading ground for injuries. Injuries are going to happen, its part of the game.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 06, 2022, 06:05:06 PM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 06, 2022, 04:52:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
They can't go getting anybody injured from tackling now. It would be a step up if it was flag football. The Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the Big 4 All-Star games. They are trying out a couple of interesting rule changes regarding the coin flip and field position replacing kickoffs, though I don't think they're very likely to be implemented in regular season games anytime soon.
It's stupid. Unlike the other 3 major sports, the NFL's All-Star game is played at the end of the season instead of the middle of the season, so if someone gets hurt, they have the entire offseason to rehab. Get out there and hit someone.
People say "He can't get hurt in an exhibition game" or "he got hurt in a game that didn't even count." First thing that comes to mind is everyone flipping out when Jordy Nelson was lost for the season because of an injury in a pre-season game. I have always thought, so if it happened in a real game, then no one cares? They only care if its a preseason game or other type of exhibition game? Like somehow its justified if he hurt himself in a regular season game? The way I look at it, it was a fluke injury that was bound to happen, and would have happened in a regular season game just as easily as it did in the preseason. Just that year he didn't quite make it that far in the season before getting hurt.
In conclusion, stop coddling these guys. They are professional football players. They shouldn't be scared of getting hurt that easily and as I pointed out, it's the same blow if they get hurt in a regular season game as it is in a preseason game. Stop acting like because it doesn't get put down as a win or loss in your official record that its suddenly a breading ground for injuries. Injuries are going to happen, its part of the game.
Same blow for them personally, maybe, but you have to think about this from a team perspective. If your star players gets hurt, you lose their talent while they're out recovering. You want to minimize the risk of that happening during the regular season or playoffs when you want your best talent available to win you games. So resting your best players during preseason games or other exhibition stuff, where the on-field product doesn't even matter, is generally the smart thing to do. Even regular-season games towards the end of the season that won't matter towards playoff standings will get this effect. The risk of injury per game is much greater in football than in any of the other major American sports, so it plays far more highly into the consideration of who plays and when.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Pro Bowl is stupid and watched the Olympics instead without even a second thought. But the solution is more complicated than just "man up and get out there".
Quote from: US 89 on February 06, 2022, 07:08:26 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 06, 2022, 06:05:06 PM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 06, 2022, 04:52:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
They can't go getting anybody injured from tackling now. It would be a step up if it was flag football. The Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the Big 4 All-Star games. They are trying out a couple of interesting rule changes regarding the coin flip and field position replacing kickoffs, though I don't think they're very likely to be implemented in regular season games anytime soon.
It's stupid. Unlike the other 3 major sports, the NFL's All-Star game is played at the end of the season instead of the middle of the season, so if someone gets hurt, they have the entire offseason to rehab. Get out there and hit someone.
People say "He can't get hurt in an exhibition game" or "he got hurt in a game that didn't even count." First thing that comes to mind is everyone flipping out when Jordy Nelson was lost for the season because of an injury in a pre-season game. I have always thought, so if it happened in a real game, then no one cares? They only care if its a preseason game or other type of exhibition game? Like somehow its justified if he hurt himself in a regular season game? The way I look at it, it was a fluke injury that was bound to happen, and would have happened in a regular season game just as easily as it did in the preseason. Just that year he didn't quite make it that far in the season before getting hurt.
In conclusion, stop coddling these guys. They are professional football players. They shouldn't be scared of getting hurt that easily and as I pointed out, it's the same blow if they get hurt in a regular season game as it is in a preseason game. Stop acting like because it doesn't get put down as a win or loss in your official record that its suddenly a breading ground for injuries. Injuries are going to happen, its part of the game.
Same blow for them personally, maybe, but you have to think about this from a team perspective. If your star players gets hurt, you lose their talent while they're out recovering. You want to minimize the risk of that happening during the regular season or playoffs when you want your best talent available to win you games. So resting your best players during preseason games or other exhibition stuff, where the on-field product doesn't even matter, is generally the smart thing to do. Even regular-season games towards the end of the season that won't matter towards playoff standings will get this effect. The risk of injury per game is much greater in football than in any of the other major American sports, so it plays far more highly into the consideration of who plays and when.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Pro Bowl is stupid and watched the Olympics instead without even a second thought. But the solution is more complicated than just "man up and get out there".
I get that mentality. I am more pointing out that the talking heads out there make a big deal about it if a player gets injured in a preseason game and they all start to talk about how "should we really have preseason games?" I guess my point is, Jordy Nelson was playing like maybe a series in the above example and happened to get hurt on one of the plays. It's not like the Packers sent him out there for every play of a preseason game. He just happened to get hurt on one of the few plays he was playing on.
Teddy Bridgewater suffered what many people say was the worst injury in the history of the NFL in a non-contact drill in practice. Should we outlaw practices now?
Saints RB Alvin Kamara arrested in Las Vegas for battery.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 06, 2022, 10:23:06 PM
Saints RB Alvin Kamara arrested in Las Vegas for battery.
Awful franchise.
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 06, 2022, 10:23:06 PM
Saints RB Alvin Kamara arrested in Las Vegas for battery.
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
- Paid players to injure opposing teams' players
- Gave out no repercussions to anyone for doing so
- Helped to cover up a child sexual abuse scandal
- Tried to hide the emails from said scandal, and fought to keep them from the public
- Refuses to move away from a dying stadium in a dying city
- Propped up by a great quarterback for 15 years, did basically nothing to maximize the time they had him
- Very often has seen former players flourish on different teams after sputtering in and leaving New Orleans
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 06, 2022, 10:23:06 PM
Saints RB Alvin Kamara arrested in Las Vegas for battery.
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
- Paid players to injure opposing teams' players
- Gave out no repercussions to anyone for doing so
- Helped to cover up a child sexual abuse scandal
- Tried to hide the emails from said scandal, and fought to keep them from the public
- Refuses to move away from a dying stadium in a dying city
- Propped up by a great quarterback for 15 years, did basically nothing to maximize the time they had him
- Very often has seen former players flourish on different teams after sputtering in and leaving New Orleans
You're right about them being a shit franchise for having a HOF QB for 15+ years and not winning more than one Super Bowl.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
...
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Alvin Kamara...
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 07, 2022, 09:56:37 AM
You're right about them being a shit franchise for having a HOF QB for 15+ years and not winning more than one Super Bowl.
But aside from the Patriots, what franchise with a HOF QB
isn't that true of?
Packers have had Favre and Rodgers for 30 years and only 2 SB's
Seahawks have had 10 years of Russell Wilson and just 1 SB
Colts had 13 years of Peyton Manning and just 1 SB
... etc. etc.
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:26:52 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 07, 2022, 09:56:37 AM
You're right about them being a shit franchise for having a HOF QB for 15+ years and not winning more than one Super Bowl.
But aside from the Patriots, what franchise with a HOF QB isn't that true of?
Packers have had Favre and Rodgers for 30 years and only 2 SB's
Seahawks have had 10 years of Russell Wilson and just 1 SB
Colts had 13 years of Peyton Manning and just 1 SB
... etc. etc.
Peyton did win a 2nd Super Bowl but with a different team, and at least get got to more than one with the Colts. If you only even make one Super Bowl with a first ballot HOF QB then that's pretty bad, especially if you only had to beat the other team's 2nd and 3rd string QBs to get to that one Super Bowl. Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger managed to win more than one during the Brady era.
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
...
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Alvin Kamara...
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
At least
7 wins? They were at least below average every year they had a top 10 all-time quarterback? What a feat.
The Packers have been more successful in that timeframe. The Seahawks and Broncos have both won and lost a Super Bowl in that timeframe. The Giants have somehow won two, but whether they've actually been more successful is a different story.
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
...
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Alvin Kamara...
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
I totally get what point you are trying to make, but what you said is one of the attitudes I have been singling out: "...would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call." When the flag was thrown, the game was tied. They kicked a field goal to go up by 3 and then kicked off to the Rams and their defense couldn't stop the Rams from marching down the field and kicking a game tying field goal to send the game to overtime. Brees throws an interception and the Rams score on that possession. I look at all that and say the Saints lost that game, not the officials.
I will be first to say, yes, that was a bad no-call. The guy wasn't playing ball and hit the receiver, that's DPI all day. Lets say they threw the flag. Now it's first and goal on that 4ish? They still have to score a touchdown on that drive and there is no givens that they actually do score a touchdown and end up kicking a field goal anyway just like it played out in reality. Or maybe after stopping them on 3rd down after the automatic first down, the Rams go in and block the field goal attempt in the alternate reality and the Saints can't even tie the game and Rams win anyway. I would say the chances are higher the Saints score a touchdown if the penalty was called, but to flat out say it would be a given in farce.
Again, I am not saying you are thinking this. I think you were pointing out that the Saints, with Brees won a Super Bowl and nearly went to or possibly won more if not for a few bad luck situations. I get it, but there are a lot of people who take what you said as gospel. They honestly think that if that flag was thrown, the Saints would have won. Does anyone see the arrogance in that statement? "We would have definitely got our job done had you just done yours!"...despite the fact that we messed around all game to the point where it was tied in the last minute. It's sports. There is no telling what would have happened. They could have had first and goal on the 4 after the DPI was called and Brees could have thrown a pick six. You don't know. This notion of "if you just gave me the chance, I would have definitely done what I was supposed to do then" is just false. You proved all game you can't always just score at will. If any team is good enough to say we would have 100% scored on X play, then they should have been winning 60-20 by that point and taking knees and not tied 20-20 needing a DPI to be called to have a shot to win.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 07, 2022, 10:50:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
...
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Alvin Kamara...
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
I totally get what point you are trying to make, but what you said is one of the attitudes I have been singling out: "...would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call." When the flag was thrown, the game was tied. They kicked a field goal to go up by 3 and then kicked off to the Rams and their defense couldn't stop the Rams from marching down the field and kicking a game tying field goal to send the game to overtime. Brees throws an interception and the Rams score on that possession. I look at all that and say the Saints lost that game, not the officials.
I will be first to say, yes, that was a bad no-call. The guy wasn't playing ball and hit the receiver, that's DPI all day. Lets say they threw the flag. Now it's first and goal on that 4ish? They still have to score a touchdown on that drive and there is no givens that they actually do score a touchdown and end up kicking a field goal anyway just like it played out in reality. Or maybe after stopping them on 3rd down after the automatic first down, the Rams go in and block the field goal attempt in the alternate reality and the Saints can't even tie the game and Rams win anyway.
Again, I am not saying you are thinking this. I think you were pointing out that the Saints, with Brees won a Super Bowl and nearly went to or possibly won more if not for a few bad luck situations. I get it, but there are a lot of people who take what you said as gospel. They honestly think that if that flag was thrown, the Saints would have won. Does anyone see the arrogance in that statement? "We would have definitely got our job done had you just done yours!"...despite the fact that we messed around all game to the point where it was ied in the last minute. It's sports. There is no telling what would have happened. They could have had first and goal on the 4 after the DPI was called and Brees could have thrown a pick six. You don't know. This notion of "if you just gave me the chance, I would have definitely done what I was supposed to do then" is just false. You proved all game you can't always just score at will. If any team is good enough to say we would have 100% scored on X play, then they should have been winning 60-20 by that point and taking knees and not tied 20-20 needing a DPI to be called to have a shot to win.
This is ridiculous. Just because they could have won by 40 doesn't mean that the game shouldn't be fair.
Did you even watch the game or look at the play-by-play at all? Had it been called correctly, the Saints would have had 1st and goal with 1:41 left, and the Rams would have had one timeout. Brees wouldn't have thrown another pass. They'd have kicked a chip shot field goal with about 20 seconds left.
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
They also didn't need a DPI called to have a chance to win. In fact, that statement goes against the entire narrative of your post ("they had so many chances to win without the DPI" . . . "they shouldn't have needed a DPI to have a chance to win")
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
True story: After Cody Parkey's double-doink (
shudders), Goose Island Brewing in Chicago held a contest where fans could attempt the same 43-yard field goal.
The result? 0 for 100 :-D
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/bears/ct-spt-bears-goose-island-field-goal-challenge-20190112-story.html
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
You really want to go down 0-2 on bets with me? :-D
(I'm not going to share any videos containing myself online, so not I'm not taking that bet. But I can make a 22 yard field goal and have done so many times.)
Quote from: jmacswimmer on February 07, 2022, 11:08:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
True story: After Cody Parkey's double-doink (shudders), Goose Island Brewing in Chicago held a contest where fans could attempt the same 43-yard field goal.
The result? 0 for 100 :-D
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/bears/ct-spt-bears-goose-island-field-goal-challenge-20190112-story.html
I definitely couldn't make a 43-yarder.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
At least 7 wins? They were at least below average every year they had a top 10 all-time quarterback? What a feat.
I would call 7-9 (and 9-7, for that matter) an average record. It's close enough to 8-8 that it's not really meaningfully above or below .500. But even if 7-9 was significantly below average, going 7-9 or better 15 straight seasons is still better than 29 other teams during that timeframe.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
The Packers have been more successful in that timeframe.
By what measure? I count a few more playoff appearances, but the same amount of SB appearances/wins, so you could argue the Saints got more out of their playoff appearances, going 1-for-8 while the Packers went 1-for-12. And the Packers had two 6-win seasons which is slightly worse than the Saints worst season.
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 11:13:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
At least 7 wins? They were at least below average every year they had a top 10 all-time quarterback? What a feat.
I would call 7-9 (and 9-7, for that matter) an average record. It's close enough to 8-8 that it's not really meaningfully above or below .500. But even if 7-9 was significantly below average, going 7-9 or better 15 straight seasons is still better than 29 other teams during that timeframe.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
The Packers have been more successful in that timeframe.
By what measure? I count a few more playoff appearances, but the same amount of SB appearances/wins, so you could argue the Saints got more out of their playoff appearances, going 1-for-8 while the Packers went 1-for-12. And the Packers had two 6-win seasons which is slightly worse than the Saints worst season.
The Packers got to 6 NFC title games, the Saints got to 3. The Packers got to the divisional 10 times, the Saints got there 7 times.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:10:41 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
You really want to go down 0-2 on bets with me? :-D
(I'm not going to share any videos containing myself online, so not I'm not taking that bet. But I can make a 22 yard field goal and have done so many times.)
You're welcome to wear a mask. :)
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 07, 2022, 10:50:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
I totally get what point you are trying to make, but what you said is one of the attitudes I have been singling out: "...would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call." When the flag was thrown, the game was tied. They kicked a field goal to go up by 3 and then kicked off to the Rams and their defense couldn't stop the Rams from marching down the field and kicking a game tying field goal to send the game to overtime. Brees throws an interception and the Rams score on that possession. I look at all that and say the Saints lost that game, not the officials.
I will be first to say, yes, that was a bad no-call. The guy wasn't playing ball and hit the receiver, that's DPI all day. Lets say they threw the flag. Now it's first and goal on that 4ish? They still have to score a touchdown on that drive and there is no givens that they actually do score a touchdown and end up kicking a field goal anyway just like it played out in reality. Or maybe after stopping them on 3rd down after the automatic first down, the Rams go in and block the field goal attempt in the alternate reality and the Saints can't even tie the game and Rams win anyway.
Again, I am not saying you are thinking this. I think you were pointing out that the Saints, with Brees won a Super Bowl and nearly went to or possibly won more if not for a few bad luck situations. ...
This is ridiculous. Just because they could have won by 40 doesn't mean that the game shouldn't be fair.
Did you even watch the game or look at the play-by-play at all? Had it been called correctly, the Saints would have had 1st and goal with 1:41 left, and the Rams would have had one timeout. Brees wouldn't have thrown another pass. They'd have kicked a chip shot field goal with about 20 seconds left.
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
They also didn't need a DPI called to have a chance to win. In fact, that statement goes against the entire narrative of your post ("they had so many chances to win without the DPI" . . . "they shouldn't have needed a DPI to have a chance to win")
Yeah, of course the Saints had other chances to win the game, but it should be pointed out that the clock was a MASSIVE factor in why that no-call is so infamous and will be remembered for basically changing the outcome of game. The Saints could have taken some shots at the end zone and/or run the clock basically down to 0 before trying the field goal. In all likelihood, the Rams would not have had enough time for a tying FG drive.
(I don't think I could make a 22 yard FG, by the way :D)
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 06, 2022, 04:52:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
I very briefly turned on the Pro Bowl and discovered it's now two-hand touch. I promptly turned it off in favor of Olympic curling.
They can't go getting anybody injured from tackling now. It would be a step up if it was flag football. The Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the Big 4 All-Star games. They are trying out a couple of interesting rule changes regarding the coin flip and field position replacing kickoffs, though I don't think they're very likely to be implemented in regular season games anytime soon.
Next year, they'll have all the Pro Bowlers play Madden instead.
Think about it. That's what the kids are into: watching other people play video games. So that's how you hook the next generation on football. ;)
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 07, 2022, 10:50:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 09:48:41 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 06, 2022, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2022, 11:02:32 PM
Awful franchise.
Awful rush to judgment.
...
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with Alvin Kamara...
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
I totally get what point you are trying to make, but what you said is one of the attitudes I have been singling out: "...would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call." When the flag was thrown, the game was tied. They kicked a field goal to go up by 3 and then kicked off to the Rams and their defense couldn't stop the Rams from marching down the field and kicking a game tying field goal to send the game to overtime. Brees throws an interception and the Rams score on that possession. I look at all that and say the Saints lost that game, not the officials.
I will be first to say, yes, that was a bad no-call. The guy wasn't playing ball and hit the receiver, that's DPI all day. Lets say they threw the flag. Now it's first and goal on that 4ish? They still have to score a touchdown on that drive and there is no givens that they actually do score a touchdown and end up kicking a field goal anyway just like it played out in reality. Or maybe after stopping them on 3rd down after the automatic first down, the Rams go in and block the field goal attempt in the alternate reality and the Saints can't even tie the game and Rams win anyway.
Again, I am not saying you are thinking this. I think you were pointing out that the Saints, with Brees won a Super Bowl and nearly went to or possibly won more if not for a few bad luck situations. I get it, but there are a lot of people who take what you said as gospel. They honestly think that if that flag was thrown, the Saints would have won. Does anyone see the arrogance in that statement? "We would have definitely got our job done had you just done yours!"...despite the fact that we messed around all game to the point where it was ied in the last minute. It's sports. There is no telling what would have happened. They could have had first and goal on the 4 after the DPI was called and Brees could have thrown a pick six. You don't know. This notion of "if you just gave me the chance, I would have definitely done what I was supposed to do then" is just false. You proved all game you can't always just score at will. If any team is good enough to say we would have 100% scored on X play, then they should have been winning 60-20 by that point and taking knees and not tied 20-20 needing a DPI to be called to have a shot to win.
This is ridiculous. Just because they could have won by 40 doesn't mean that the game shouldn't be fair.
Did you even watch the game or look at the play-by-play at all? Had it been called correctly, the Saints would have had 1st and goal with 1:41 left, and the Rams would have had one timeout. Brees wouldn't have thrown another pass. They'd have kicked a chip shot field goal with about 20 seconds left.
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
They also didn't need a DPI called to have a chance to win. In fact, that statement goes against the entire narrative of your post ("they had so many chances to win without the DPI" . . . "they shouldn't have needed a DPI to have a chance to win")
I watched the whole game on my porch while I put together our grill. I said all game the Saints offense was not firing on all cylinders. Sure would have been nice had one of those stalled out drives during the game actually panned out as a touchdown, then they would have been up by 7 when the "in-famous" no-call happened instead of needing it.
Again, take care of your own stuff first, bad calls are part of the game and have been a part of the game as long as the game has been around, and all of the reasons you lost are staring back at you in the mirror.
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 11:26:26 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 07, 2022, 10:50:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 10:17:10 AM
I don't disagree that certain aspects of the Saints franchise are questionable, but I do dispute that they did "basically nothing" with Drew Brees. They had at least 7 wins every season of his career there, won a Super Bowl, and would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call. Only the Pats and Steelers have had more sustained success in that time frame. And their great regular season run from 2017-2020 was mostly because of their defense, not Brees.
I totally get what point you are trying to make, but what you said is one of the attitudes I have been singling out: "...would have had another appearance if not for the infamous no-call." When the flag was thrown, the game was tied. They kicked a field goal to go up by 3 and then kicked off to the Rams and their defense couldn't stop the Rams from marching down the field and kicking a game tying field goal to send the game to overtime. Brees throws an interception and the Rams score on that possession. I look at all that and say the Saints lost that game, not the officials.
I will be first to say, yes, that was a bad no-call. The guy wasn't playing ball and hit the receiver, that's DPI all day. Lets say they threw the flag. Now it's first and goal on that 4ish? They still have to score a touchdown on that drive and there is no givens that they actually do score a touchdown and end up kicking a field goal anyway just like it played out in reality. Or maybe after stopping them on 3rd down after the automatic first down, the Rams go in and block the field goal attempt in the alternate reality and the Saints can't even tie the game and Rams win anyway.
Again, I am not saying you are thinking this. I think you were pointing out that the Saints, with Brees won a Super Bowl and nearly went to or possibly won more if not for a few bad luck situations. ...
This is ridiculous. Just because they could have won by 40 doesn't mean that the game shouldn't be fair.
Did you even watch the game or look at the play-by-play at all? Had it been called correctly, the Saints would have had 1st and goal with 1:41 left, and the Rams would have had one timeout. Brees wouldn't have thrown another pass. They'd have kicked a chip shot field goal with about 20 seconds left.
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
They also didn't need a DPI called to have a chance to win. In fact, that statement goes against the entire narrative of your post ("they had so many chances to win without the DPI" . . . "they shouldn't have needed a DPI to have a chance to win")
Yeah, of course the Saints had other chances to win the game, but it should be pointed out that the clock was a MASSIVE factor in why that no-call is so infamous and will be remembered for basically changing the outcome of game. The Saints could have taken some shots at the end zone and/or run the clock basically down to 0 before trying the field goal. In all likelihood, the Rams would not have had enough time for a tying FG drive.
(I don't think I could make a 22 yard FG, by the way :D)
I am not doubting it was MASSIVE, but again, you still have to make the field goal. Let's go talk to Scott Norwood about it.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 07, 2022, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 11:26:26 AM
... of course the Saints had other chances to win the game, but it should be pointed out that the clock was a MASSIVE factor in why that no-call is so infamous and will be remembered for basically changing the outcome of game. The Saints could have taken some shots at the end zone and/or run the clock basically down to 0 before trying the field goal. In all likelihood, the Rams would not have had enough time for a tying FG drive.
(I don't think I could make a 22 yard FG, by the way :D)
I am not doubting it was MASSIVE, but again, you still have to make the field goal. Let's go talk to Scott Norwood about it.
Of course, but there's also no comparison between a 47-yarder and a 22-yarder not to mention kickers have gotten better since the '90s and the Superdome is a closed roof.
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:10:41 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
You really want to go down 0-2 on bets with me? :-D
(I'm not going to share any videos containing myself online, so not I'm not taking that bet. But I can make a 22 yard field goal and have done so many times.)
How many times have you missed a 22 yard field goal?
I'm sort of neutral on the Pro Bowl: While it's the only one of the All-Star contests to be played in the postseason, in retrospect, moving it to the week before the Super Bowl was a huge mistake. This means that you won't be able to see the players on the teams that will play in the Big Game in Hawaii (this year, it would be the Rams and Bengals), and I don't know if all 32 teams are still required to have at least one representative on their respective conferences' rosters, like MLB's All-Star Game needing all 30 teams to have one on the two leagues' rosters. On the other side of things, if someone were to get injured in the Pro Bowl, at least he'll have plenty of time to recover in the offseason so as to be ready for the new season. That being said, I skipped it again this year because it doesn't mean a thing to me. Even when guys like Walter Payton, Richard Dent and William "The Refrigerator" Perry were elected, I never got to watch it, so no big deal here.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2022, 12:56:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:10:41 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 07, 2022, 11:02:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 07, 2022, 11:01:41 AM
Sure, it's not easy to score at will, but it's pretty easy to make a 22 yard field goal. I can make a 22 yard field goal, you probably can too.
I'll bet more than just a signature change on the fact you couldn't hit a 22 yard field goal if given 5 chances.
You really want to go down 0-2 on bets with me? :-D
(I'm not going to share any videos containing myself online, so not I'm not taking that bet. But I can make a 22 yard field goal and have done so many times.)
How many times have you missed a 22 yard field goal?
Quite a few I'm sure. I said I CAN make it, not that I ALWAYS make it.
Quote from: Henry on February 07, 2022, 01:07:41 PM
I'm sort of neutral on the Pro Bowl: While it's the only one of the All-Star contests to be played in the postseason, in retrospect, moving it to the week before the Super Bowl was a huge mistake. This means that you won't be able to see the players on the teams that will play in the Big Game in Hawaii (this year, it would be the Rams and Bengals), and I don't know if all 32 teams are still required to have at least one representative on their respective conferences' rosters, like MLB's All-Star Game needing all 30 teams to have one on the two leagues' rosters. On the other side of things, if someone were to get injured in the Pro Bowl, at least he'll have plenty of time to recover in the offseason so as to be ready for the new season. That being said, I skipped it again this year because it doesn't mean a thing to me. Even when guys like Walter Payton, Richard Dent and William "The Refrigerator" Perry were elected, I never got to watch it, so no big deal here.
The Pro Bowl is no longer played in Hawaii–this year it was at the Raiders' stadium. Aloha Stadium is closed for a variety of reasons, including structural concerns that raise serious safety questions. Even the University of Hawaii football team isn't playing there anymore.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 07, 2022, 02:21:12 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 07, 2022, 01:07:41 PM
I'm sort of neutral on the Pro Bowl: While it's the only one of the All-Star contests to be played in the postseason, in retrospect, moving it to the week before the Super Bowl was a huge mistake. This means that you won't be able to see the players on the teams that will play in the Big Game in Hawaii (this year, it would be the Rams and Bengals), and I don't know if all 32 teams are still required to have at least one representative on their respective conferences' rosters, like MLB's All-Star Game needing all 30 teams to have one on the two leagues' rosters. On the other side of things, if someone were to get injured in the Pro Bowl, at least he'll have plenty of time to recover in the offseason so as to be ready for the new season. That being said, I skipped it again this year because it doesn't mean a thing to me. Even when guys like Walter Payton, Richard Dent and William "The Refrigerator" Perry were elected, I never got to watch it, so no big deal here.
The Pro Bowl is no longer played in Hawaii–this year it was at the Raiders' stadium. Aloha Stadium is closed for a variety of reasons, including structural concerns that raise serious safety questions. Even the University of Hawaii football team isn't playing there anymore.
With the $$$ players can make, it's made the pro bowl an obsolete game.
MLB they still compete, but pitchers go no more than two innings and the big collisions rules have taken out. Their are the macho matchups you'll see(pitcher says I'm throwing 99 mph heat, try and hit it) that make it interesting.
NBA plays in spurts, but players with not hold themselves back from doing something really athletic.
NHL nice to see skills, but can be boring like NFL because they'll avoid hitting.
All major All Star games aren't what they used to be, baseball probably is the best going forward for how money changed it all
I'm not even going to try to speculate about the success of most of the coaching hires. But every year there is one head coaching hire that I despise. Last year it was Culley, and though he exceeded my expectations a little bit, it is once again the Texans who make the head-scratcher. As I've heard many people say, Lovie Smith feels like another unagressive stopgap. Davis Mills has a shot to become a long-term starter. From week 8 onwards, his average statline in games he started was 24/35 for 261 yards, 2 touchdowns, and 1 pick. Those are average to above average starting QB numbers, period. Factoring in how little talent Mills was surrounded by, it's not crazy to suggest that he was in the top half of all starting quarterbacks down the stretch.
So anyways, if I was the Texans, I would be going all in on Mills. I would have hired an offensive head coach who can properly develop him, gameplan with him, and maximize his talent. I would be drafting mostly offense. But instead it looks like they're settling for another year of bottom feeding.
I too really question what the Texans are doing. It feels completely planless to hire another coach "for 2022", almost in admission that he could be gone after one season. I get that there's a ton of unknowns until the Watson situation is resolved, but knowing that, what on earth was wrong with keeping David Culley?
I'm also not sure about Josh McDaniels to the Raiders. It's another Texans-like situation where there was simply no need to move on from Rich Bisaccia IMO, all the more so because they had a successful late season run and made the playoffs. That also means expectations for him are going to be way higher than for any of the other first-year coaches. And I'm just not sure it's a cultural fit either. In many ways the Raiders are kind of like the anti-Patriots. Something about McDaniels in silver and black in a division with Herbert and Mahomes just doesn't add up.
Brian Flores' attorney is saying his client wasn't hired by the Texans because of his lawsuit: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/07/brian-flores-claims-through-counsel-that-he-didnt-get-texans-job-due-to-lawsuit/
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 09:47:14 PM
I too really question what the Texans are doing. It feels completely planless to hire another coach "for 2022", almost in admission that he could be gone after one season. I get that there's a ton of unknowns until the Watson situation is resolved, but knowing that, what on earth was wrong with keeping David Culley?
The Texans have the worst ownership in football.
"But what about the Jags?" I think the Jags want to win. Their owner is just too stupid to know what to do to get there
The Texans know exactly what they're doing. They have zero interest in winning. Their ownership family are known to hate the players. They're going to do it on the cheap as long as the shared money keeps rolling in.
Quote from: Big John on February 07, 2022, 10:23:16 PM
Brian Flores' attorney is saying his client wasn't hired by the Texans because of his lawsuit: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/07/brian-flores-claims-through-counsel-that-he-didnt-get-texans-job-due-to-lawsuit/
This is a completely baseless claim. Flores shouldn't be watering down his legitimate accusations with other nonsense like this.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 08, 2022, 12:08:35 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 09:47:14 PM
I too really question what the Texans are doing. It feels completely planless to hire another coach "for 2022", almost in admission that he could be gone after one season. I get that there's a ton of unknowns until the Watson situation is resolved, but knowing that, what on earth was wrong with keeping David Culley?
The Texans have the worst ownership in football.
"But what about the Jags?" I think the Jags want to win. Their owner is just too stupid to know what to do to get there
The Texans know exactly what they're doing. They have zero interest in winning. Their ownership family are known to hate the players. They're going to do it on the cheap as long as the shared money keeps rolling in.
I agree, even though the Texans are 4-0 against the Jags the past two seasons it seems like their ownership and front office are much more malicious. And I think the Jags made a sensible, or at least not terrible, coach hire with Doug Pederson.
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2022, 07:56:42 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 08, 2022, 12:08:35 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 07, 2022, 09:47:14 PM
I too really question what the Texans are doing. It feels completely planless to hire another coach "for 2022", almost in admission that he could be gone after one season. I get that there's a ton of unknowns until the Watson situation is resolved, but knowing that, what on earth was wrong with keeping David Culley?
The Texans have the worst ownership in football.
"But what about the Jags?" I think the Jags want to win. Their owner is just too stupid to know what to do to get there
The Texans know exactly what they're doing. They have zero interest in winning. Their ownership family are known to hate the players. They're going to do it on the cheap as long as the shared money keeps rolling in.
I agree, even though the Texans are 4-0 against the Jags the past two seasons it seems like their ownership and front office are much more malicious. And I think the Jags made a sensible, or at least not terrible, coach hire with Doug Pederson.
The funniest thing was when the Oilers skipped town, everyone said "you got rid of Bud Adams! You are now better off." Only to get even more inept ownership.
Quote from: Big John on February 07, 2022, 10:23:16 PM
Brian Flores' attorney is saying his client wasn't hired by the Texans because of his lawsuit: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/07/brian-flores-claims-through-counsel-that-he-didnt-get-texans-job-due-to-lawsuit/
Would any company be interested in hiring a applicant who's suing the company?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 08, 2022, 01:29:41 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 07, 2022, 10:23:16 PM
Brian Flores' attorney is saying his client wasn't hired by the Texans because of his lawsuit: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/02/07/brian-flores-claims-through-counsel-that-he-didnt-get-texans-job-due-to-lawsuit/
Would any company be interested in hiring a applicant who's suing the company?
Yeah, I would think it would be obvious that that's why he didn't get the job
now.. especially for the Texans who are involved in plenty of legal issues even without this. I thought Flores basically already admitted as much.
On one of the more substantive claims though, I wouldn't be shocked if the Dolphins owner really did offer Flores money to tank. It's easy to forget what a total disaster the Dolphins were at the beginning the 2019 season. People were openly talking about them tanking and it reached a whole new level when they started the season 0-4 while being outscored
162-26. It looked like one of the most obvious tank jobs in NFL history even without any of these claims.
I think it's an incredible testament to Flores that he helped turn things around enough to finish the season on a 5-4 run and even playing spoiler to the Patriots, effectively ending the Brady era in New England. If that ends up being what
cost him his job, when it should have been what saved it long-term and established him as one of the best coaches in the league... I just don't know what you can say to defend the owner at that point.
I think the reason the Texans didn't hire Flores is because Deshaun Watson expressed great interest in playing under him. The Texans want to distance themselves from Deshaun as much as possible (as well as the fans), and bringing in a coach that he wanted to play for would add an extra layer of convolution to the whole situation. It would probably be extremely ugly. I'm going to reserve judgement on Lovie Smith until we see how the Texans perform under him, but he does seem like a transitory hire to me.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 09:00:21 AM
Quote from: imref on February 05, 2022, 12:56:18 PM
Roger Goodell announces that to avoid the unfairness of teams playing the Super Bowl in their home stadium that we've seen over the last two years, all future Super Bowls will be held at AT&T Stadium in Dallas.
:)
NFL Memes tweeted this too, dressed up as an official "statement":
link here (https://tinyurl.com/bdd6vsn4)
As you can imagine, the replies were a mess. It's sad how many people thought it was real.
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2022, 10:09:22 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 06, 2022, 09:00:21 AM
Quote from: imref on February 05, 2022, 12:56:18 PM
Roger Goodell announces that to avoid the unfairness of teams playing the Super Bowl in their home stadium that we've seen over the last two years, all future Super Bowls will be held at AT&T Stadium in Dallas.
:)
NFL Memes tweeted this too, dressed up as an official "statement": (tweet)
As you can imagine, the replies were a mess. It's sad how many people thought it was real.
Oh my goodness.
(Side note... I can't seem to figure out how to link to a tweet without the actual tweet showing up in the post. I'd like to avoid that since it slows things down taking extra time to load and scroll past. I've fixed my above reply to show the full tweet for now, but I'd appreciate any advice on this.)
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2022, 10:24:45 PM
(Side note... I can't seem to figure out how to link to a tweet without the actual tweet showing up in the post. I'd like to avoid that since it slows things down taking extra time to load and scroll past. I've fixed my above reply to show the full tweet for now, but I'd appreciate any advice on this.)
You should just be able to use the URL of the actual tweet, unless this software automatically converts anything with "Twitter" in it to the [ tweet ] tag. If that's the case, you'd have to use tinyurl or similar to shorten it to something BBCode can't parse, and then give us the shortlink.
Quote from: Alps on February 09, 2022, 12:26:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2022, 10:24:45 PM
(Side note... I can't seem to figure out how to link to a tweet without the actual tweet showing up in the post. I'd like to avoid that since it slows things down taking extra time to load and scroll past. I've fixed my above reply to show the full tweet for now, but I'd appreciate any advice on this.)
You should just be able to use the URL of the actual tweet, unless this software automatically converts anything with "Twitter" in it to the [ tweet ] tag. If that's the case, you'd have to use tinyurl or similar to shorten it to something BBCode can't parse, and then give us the shortlink.
Using the URL posts the tweet, in my experience. If I use the "share" button on Twitter and then copy the URL it gives me, a couple of extra characters apparently show up at the end and the forum software can't process them, which is why sometimes if I link a tweet it's followed by something like s=?21 or similar. On my PC I can avoid that by loading the tweet separately and copying the URL from the address bar, but I haven't found a way to do that from the app.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2022, 07:47:09 AM
but I haven't found a way to do that from the app.
You can go to the webpage in a browser instead of using the app.
Quote from: Alps on February 09, 2022, 12:26:46 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2022, 10:24:45 PM
(Side note... I can't seem to figure out how to link to a tweet without the actual tweet showing up in the post. I'd like to avoid that since it slows things down taking extra time to load and scroll past. I've fixed my above reply to show the full tweet for now, but I'd appreciate any advice on this.)
You should just be able to use the URL of the actual tweet, unless this software automatically converts anything with "Twitter" in it to the [ tweet ] tag. If that's the case, you'd have to use tinyurl or similar to shorten it to something BBCode can't parse, and then give us the shortlink.
OK, it seems to still post the actual tweet, so I will try tinyurl. Thanks!
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
In the Sixties we saw the NFL Pro Bowl as a game between the two teams who lost to those playing for the title while the AFL had their champion face the best players from the other 7 teams.
A Niners-Chiefs game would be more entertaining than a group of All Pro players taking it easy methinks.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on February 09, 2022, 10:50:46 AM
In the Sixties we saw the NFL Pro Bowl as a game between the two teams who lost to those playing for the title while the AFL had their champion face the best players from the other 7 teams.
A Niners-Chiefs game would be more entertaining than a group of All Pro players taking it easy methinks.
Rick
That wasn't the Pro Bowl, that was the "Playoff Bowl"–essentially a European-style third-place game. The Playoff Bowl's legacy, for many years, was that the coaches from the teams that lost the conference championships (whose teams would have competed in the Playoff Bowl when it existed) became the coaches for that season's Pro Bowl. I believe the Playoff Bowl games are now recorded as exhibition games in the league's records. Vince Lombardi famously called it a "hinky-dink" game.
The AFL's concept sounds similar to what the NHL did prior to the 1967 expansion, although they began the season with their all-star game–the NHL All-Stars played the defending season's Stanley Cup champion.
But what's the motivation for the players to go out there and play a game for third place? This isn't a youth basketball tournament.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 09:51:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
That is quite literally the stupidest idea I've ever heard! I'd rather the NFL do a draft lottery like the NBA and NHL do, with the 18 teams that failed to make the playoffs participating in it.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2022, 11:06:30 AM
But what's the motivation for the players to go out there and play a game for third place? This isn't a youth basketball tournament.
Agreed. I don't understand why the Europeans are so obsessed with determining third place, either–for example, the World Cup and other major soccer tournaments usually include a third place game. Why? Who cares? I get it at the Olympics where they award a bronze medal, but otherwise it seems like overkill. The NCAA basketball tournament used to have a third-place game but discontinued it in the early 1980s.
I think the NFL's motivation for the Playoff Bowl in the 1960s was TV money–it gave them another postseason TV game in a time when there weren't many games televised. That's obviously moot nowadays!
Quote from: Henry on February 09, 2022, 11:48:33 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 09:51:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
That is quite literally the stupidest idea I've ever heard! I'd rather the NFL do a draft lottery like the NBA and NHL do, with the 18 teams that failed to make the playoffs participating in it.
I don't think it's the stupidest. The stupidest sports idea I ever heard was one that really happened: For a couple of years, the KHL staged the Nadezhda Cup, a sort of playoff tournament involving all the teams that didn't qualify for the Gagarin Cup Playoffs. In North American terms, the equivalent would be the NHL staging a playoff tournament involving the sixteen teams that don't qualify for the Stanley Cup Playoffs, but you could extrapolate that to any of our other sports.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2022, 12:00:31 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2022, 11:06:30 AM
But what's the motivation for the players to go out there and play a game for third place? This isn't a youth basketball tournament.
Agreed. I don't understand why the Europeans are so obsessed with determining third place, either–for example, the World Cup and other major soccer tournaments usually include a third place game. Why? Who cares? I get it at the Olympics where they award a bronze medal, but otherwise it seems like overkill. The NCAA basketball tournament used to have a third-place game but discontinued it in the early 1980s.
I think the NFL's motivation for the Playoff Bowl in the 1960s was TV money–it gave them another postseason TV game in a time when there weren't many games televised. That's obviously moot nowadays!
Quote from: Henry on February 09, 2022, 11:48:33 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 09:51:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
That is quite literally the stupidest idea I've ever heard! I'd rather the NFL do a draft lottery like the NBA and NHL do, with the 18 teams that failed to make the playoffs participating in it.
I don't think it's the stupidest. The stupidest sports idea I ever heard was one that really happened: For a couple of years, the KHL staged the Nadezhda Cup, a sort of playoff tournament involving all the teams that didn't qualify for the Gagarin Cup Playoffs. In North American terms, the equivalent would be the NHL staging a playoff tournament involving the sixteen teams that don't qualify for the Stanley Cup Playoffs, but you could extrapolate that to any of our other sports.
World Cup also awards a bronze medal. Just doesn't get the same publicity as Olympic medals.
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
So for the "Tank Bowl", what commercials do we get?
- Car commercials by companies that also made tanks during wartime
- Army recruitment
- Products advertised on Shark Tank
- Pet stores, water filters, anything for fish tanks
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
Nope
Quote from: Henry on February 09, 2022, 11:48:33 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 09:51:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
That is quite literally the stupidest idea I've ever heard! I'd rather the NFL do a draft lottery like the NBA and NHL do, with the 18 teams that failed to make the playoffs participating in it.
There's not a whole lot of difference between the 1st and 2nd pick, and unless both teams desire the same position, they aren't going to really care their draft order. Any team can trade for one of these spots. And what motivation would many of the players have for their ownership and management to get a better draft pick, who will probably be paid more than most of the players on the field, some of whom won't even have a spot on the team the next year?
^^^^
The teams who picked first and second in 2012 might think there was some difference, at least in retrospect anyway.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2022, 01:10:55 PM
^^^^
The teams who picked first and second in 2012 might think there was some difference, at least in retrospect anyway.
Maybe 1998 also.
If the team picking 2nd wanted to move up to 1st, they would still have to pay a hefty price. Same as 3rd into 2nd, see Trubisky.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 01:31:47 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2022, 01:10:55 PM
^^^^
The teams who picked first and second in 2012 might think there was some difference, at least in retrospect anyway.
Maybe 1998 also.
Well, maybe it was the team more than the player. But the fact that we need to look back 9 years...then 30+ years, shows that the difference may not truly matter all that much.
The chances of getting a great pick down low, like Tom Brady, is more likely to happen than getting a star at number 1.
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.
Quote from: cwf1701 on February 09, 2022, 07:01:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.
Well do it so that the team with the worse record gets more "lottery balls." So a rotisserie of ping-pong balls, the lowest record teams get three, the higher record teams get two. So still it's still left up to chance, but the teams that have a lower record have a better chance.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 09, 2022, 06:39:41 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 01:31:47 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2022, 01:10:55 PM
The teams who picked first and second in 2012 might think there was some difference, at least in retrospect anyway.
Maybe 1998 also.
Well, maybe it was the team more than the player. But the fact that we need to look back 9 years...then 30+ years, shows that the difference may not truly matter all that much.
The chances of getting a great pick down low, like Tom Brady, is more likely to happen than getting a star at number 1.
It does depend on the season. The
average value of a #1 pick vs. a #2 pick may not be all that different, but if there's a generational prospect/QB you believe can change your franchise, the difference in that particular year is immeasurable. 2020 may be a better example in this regard... Chase Young was by all accounts a solid #2 pick and there's still no comparison to what Joe Burrow has done for the Bengals franchise.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 09, 2022, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: cwf1701 on February 09, 2022, 07:01:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.
Well do it so that the team with the worse record gets more "lottery balls." So a rotisserie of ping-pong balls, the lowest record teams get three, the higher record teams get two. So still it's still left up to chance, but the teams that have a lower record have a better chance.
You mean like the NBA draft lottery?
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 09, 2022, 09:51:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 09, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.
I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?
This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions
Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.
NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.
The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.
I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:
Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.
I like it. I've been thinking along similar lines to other sports: Forget the game and turn it into an exhibition. Get your top few at each position and have them face off against each other in drills. Every position has 3 drills that they have to complete and you score based on speed, accuracy, timing, whatever the case may be. That's day 1. Then day 2 you have "teams" - let's say you pick the top 4 around the league, 2 NFC and 2 AFC at each position. Two NFC teams face each other in a drill, whether 7/7 or 11/11, but it's expressly something that tests skill without being contact/injury risk. Same for AFC teams, winners face off to determine the best league.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 10:41:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).
Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.
I can't see any motivation or TV excitement for a draft lottery "bowl". What motivation do players have to vie for a better position so the team can better leverage getting new players to potentially replace them?
It makes more sense to have them play each other in Tecmo Bowl to decide the draft than having players risk injury almost certainly for someone else's gain.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 10, 2022, 09:56:56 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 10:41:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).
Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.
I think the best way would be I-71 south to Louisville, I-64 west to St. Louis, I-44 west to OKC, I-40 west to Barstow, I-15 south to San Bernardino, and I-10 west to Los Angeles. (Of course, there 's the option of replacing the first two routes with I-75 north to Dayton and I-70 west to St. Louis, but that would be more out of the way than the other trip.)
Or, as an even better alternative, you can take I-71 south to Louisville, I-65 south to Nashville, and then the last three routes from the first example.
(OT: That question reminds me of the movie Rain Man, where Tom Cruise's character was forced to use surface highways because Dustin Hoffman's character hated Interstates, but they detoured to Las Vegas at one point, so none of the above routings would've applied.)
EDIT: I just realized that I completely forgot about I-74 west to Indianapolis, where you could catch I-70 west to go to St. Louis. But as we know by now, there are several ways to get from Cincinnati to Los Angeles, none of which involve a single route number.
So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?
Quote from: Henry on February 10, 2022, 11:39:46 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 10, 2022, 09:56:56 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 10:41:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don’t know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that’s not even close to being an optimal route).
Of course, there’s also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.
I think the best way would be I-71 south to Louisville, I-64 west to St. Louis, I-44 west to OKC, I-40 west to Barstow, I-15 south to San Bernardino, and I-10 west to Los Angeles. (Of course, there 's the option of replacing the first two routes with I-75 north to Dayton and I-70 west to St. Louis, but that would be more out of the way than the other trip.)
Or, as an even better alternative, you can take I-71 south to Louisville, I-65 south to Nashville, and then the last three routes from the first example.
(OT: That question reminds me of the movie Rain Man, where Tom Cruise's character was forced to use surface highways because Dustin Hoffman's character hated Interstates, but they detoured to Las Vegas at one point, so none of the above routings would've applied.)
That's awesome because that's what I thought immediately as well. The Rain Man Bowl.
Although, there are lots of issues with the route in that movie since Raymond wouldn't let Charlie drive the interstates:
Why did they go from Amarillo to Tucumcari, but then drive through Las Vegas? Maybe in 1988 there were more surface streets between Amarillo and Tucumcari (I am thinking this because those are towns specifically named in the movie with an interstate running between them), but you would have to wind north through Colorado and then west through Utah to drive through Las Vegas from Tucumcari, or just follow around I-40 and go around to the north rim of the Grand Canyon or across Hover Dam. Maybe Raymond really wanted to see the Grand Canyon?
Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me. They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, TX, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 10, 2022, 01:23:58 PM
Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me. They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route.
That's a long-standing road trip movie trope. Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would
actually drive if they were actually making that trip. Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip. At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ;) ).
This might be a fun spin off thread, actually. Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 10, 2022, 02:18:05 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 10, 2022, 01:23:58 PM
Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me. They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route.
That's a long-standing road trip movie trope. Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip. Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip. At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ;) ).
This might be a fun spin off thread, actually. Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.
Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.
Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.
Quote from: formulanone on February 10, 2022, 04:35:15 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 10, 2022, 02:18:05 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 10, 2022, 01:23:58 PM
Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me. They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route.
That's a long-standing road trip movie trope. Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip. Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip. At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ;) ).
This might be a fun spin off thread, actually. Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.
Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.
Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.
Most movies aren't filmed on location anyway. Any 2 or 4 lane roadway in Canada where it's cheaper to film substitutes for most 2 or 4 lane roadways in the US.
These days you could CGI in pretty much any sort of scenery you wanted.
There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 10, 2022, 04:41:23 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 10, 2022, 04:35:15 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 10, 2022, 02:18:05 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 10, 2022, 01:23:58 PM
Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me. They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route.
That's a long-standing road trip movie trope. Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip. Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip. At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ;) ).
This might be a fun spin off thread, actually. Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.
Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.
Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.
Most movies aren't filmed on location anyway. Any 2 or 4 lane roadway in Canada where it's cheaper to film substitutes for most 2 or 4 lane roadways in the US.
That movie was an exception. Most of the areas they said they were in were actually filmed in those areas. All the Cincinnati scenes were filmed in Cincinnati or northern Kentucky, the Oklahoma senses were filmed in Oklahoma and of course Las Vegas and Los Angeles.
100 pages!
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 10, 2022, 09:56:56 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 10:41:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).
Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.
US 50 to US 66 done
Quote from: Alps on February 11, 2022, 09:25:03 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 10, 2022, 09:56:56 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 23, 2022, 10:41:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 23, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Next Sunday:
3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship
One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 23, 2022, 10:40:49 PM
I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.
I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation
Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).
Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.
US 50 to US 66 done
But the US 66 fandom refuses to believe parts of I-44 and I-40 were late alignments of the highway. Whatever are we to do?
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 10:43:51 PM
There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.
If you're referring to Devin Hester:
-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)
-- he's just in his first year of eligibility
This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.
Quote from: oscar on February 12, 2022, 02:04:20 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 10:43:51 PM
There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.
If you're referring to Devin Hester:
-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)
-- he's just in his first year of eligibility
This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.
Return specialist is a position, and he was the best ever. Special teams is 1/3 of the game and when the opponent has an entire game plan built around you, you're quite the game changer.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 12, 2022, 10:58:42 AM
Quote from: oscar on February 12, 2022, 02:04:20 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 10:43:51 PM
There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.
If you're referring to Devin Hester:
-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)
-- he's just in his first year of eligibility
This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.
Return specialist is a position, and he was the best ever. Special teams is 1/3 of the game and when the opponent has an entire game plan built around you, you're quite the game changer.
Hester should be in, no doubt.
As a Bears fan, Hester did things at the Returner postition that we will probably never see again, especially if Kickoffs are completely removed from the game, as has been proposed multiple times and tried in this year's Pro Bowl. Just moving the Kickoff line has greatly reduced the number of Returns
All that said, is Devin Hester a First Ballot Hall of Famer? The HoF committe said no. Will Hester get enough votes to make it as a semifinalist and finalist in the years to come? I hope so, but until the voters vote, we won't know
He should go in next year. I haven't looked ahead to see who will begin their eligibility next year
^^ 2023 eligible nominees: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/2023-pro-football-hall-of-fame-lookahead-james-harrison-joe-thomas-among-first-time-eligible-players/ar-AATJRDt
Darrell Revis and Joe Thomas should get in.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 12:31:45 PM
So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?
Or Jets-49ers
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 12, 2022, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 12:31:45 PM
So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?
Or Jets-49ers
that would be my dream super bowl for other reasons
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1208851209303580673/Mubo842q_400x400.jpg)
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 13, 2022, 12:17:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1208851209303580673/Mubo842q_400x400.jpg)
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 12:19:31 PM
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
Hard to be yelling "who dey?" when you're losing 31-7. :D
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 13, 2022, 01:34:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 12:19:31 PM
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
Hard to be yelling "who dey?" when you're losing 31-7. :D
That is true, they certainly were pretty bad when I attended Bengals home games.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 13, 2022, 12:17:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1208851209303580673/Mubo842q_400x400.jpg)
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
It is debatable who started their chant first, but the Saints chant is more famous.
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 13, 2022, 12:17:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1208851209303580673/Mubo842q_400x400.jpg)
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
It is debatable who started their chant first, but the Saints chant is more famous.
Definitely strikes me as more "Cajun" that what would expect out of the Midwest.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 02:01:40 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 13, 2022, 12:17:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1208851209303580673/Mubo842q_400x400.jpg)
When/why did the Bengals fandom adopt Louisiana slang? I'm told this has been something the fan base has done for decades but I never have actually witnessed it when I've attended past Bengals home games.
It is debatable who started their chant first, but the Saints chant is more famous.
Definitely strikes me as more "Cajun" that what would expect out of the Midwest.
Didn't have much of a chance to think of their own, with a surprise appearance in the Super Bowl. The best they could do is copy off someone else!
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 12, 2022, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 10, 2022, 12:31:45 PM
So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?
Or Jets-49ers
I think a US 66 Super Bowl would excite roadgeeks more than an I-80 Super Bowl.
Who Dat - popularized in 1983: https://www.nola.com/entertainment_life/movies_tv/article_d1dfedfa-3174-539e-8f05-c7ac471014a3.html#:~:text=The%20rise%20of%20the%20%22Who%20dat%3F%22%20chant%20in,Swoboda.%20HBOJohn%20Goodman%20in%20the%20upcoming%20%27%20Treme.%27
Who Dey - started sometime in the 1980s: https://blackchronicle.com/how-bengals-chant-started-and-what-it-means/:
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 02:28:29 PM
Who Dat - popularized in 1983: https://www.nola.com/entertainment_life/movies_tv/article_d1dfedfa-3174-539e-8f05-c7ac471014a3.html#:~:text=The%20rise%20of%20the%20%22Who%20dat%3F%22%20chant%20in,Swoboda.%20HBOJohn%20Goodman%20in%20the%20upcoming%20%27%20Treme.%27
Who Dey - started sometime in the 1980s: https://blackchronicle.com/how-bengals-chant-started-and-what-it-means/:
But "Who Dat" definitely is old school Cajun Slang:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Dat%3F
I'm not sure what's going with "Who Dey" other than it sounds Cajun but seemingly isn't.
Is there some sort of Ottoman Empire following in Cincinnati?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dey
What I find really vexing is how the Midwest dialect comes up with something like "who dey?" Having grown up in Michigan I would expect most people would just say "who are they?" over even something like "who they?"
Congrats to the LA Rams for winning the 56th annual Superbowl! 23-20
Nice to see that they gave the MVP to the most deserving guy and not just defaulting to the QB.
^^ I thought Aaron Donald deserved it more.
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 10:28:27 PM
^^ I thought Aaron Donald deserved it more.
He didn't really get going until the second half. Cupp was there all four quarters.
Typical whining about the lovable losers losing supposedly due to referees while the big bad talented perennial winners win. Had the facemask on Higgins been called correctly, that game would have been over well before the final Rams drive that included the PI call on Cincy that everyone is freaking out over (which FWIW was a good call). Long story short, the Rams lost one of their best players in the second quarter and still beat Cincy. Like every team in almost every NFL game to ever exist, they got no help whatsoever from the referees.
I might have been the only person who stayed on the Rams hype train the whole way. Turns out, losing three games doesn't spell death.
Quote from: thspfc on October 21, 2021, 05:30:43 PM
A third of the way through, my top ten would be:
1. Rams
2. Cardinals
3. Buccaneers
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. Cowboys
7. Packers
8. Chargers
9. Chiefs
10. Titans
I had them at #1 in October, and never wavered much. I think the lowest I ever had them was #4.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2021, 10:56:04 PM
Huh. Everyone told me that the Rams are falling apart and might not even make the playoffs (yes, I've heard/seen multiple people say that). Weird that they're 8-4, have a top 10 quarterback, a top 5 coach, a top 5 group of skill players, a solid offensive line, and a defense that is malleable at its worst but dominant at its best.
News flash: good teams can have bad stretches.
Quote from: thspfc on January 31, 2022, 08:50:59 AM
My Super Bowl score prediction: Rams 27, Bengals 13
Don't get me wrong, I want this to be a good game. Unlike past Super Bowls, I don't really care who wins. However, the Rams pass rush against the Bengals offensive line? And Jalen Ramsey covering Ja'Marr Chase? Chase hasn't faced anyone quite as good as Ramsey in his career. Burrow is going to have to get the ball out quickly, which mitigates Cincy's strong downfield passing game. Cincy has also scored only 5 touchdowns in the playoffs, compared to 12 field goals. Kicking four field goals per game worked when the Bengals were moving the ball into opposing territory on almost every drive, but I don't think they're going to move the ball as well against the Rams.
Pretty good I think. Game was closer than predicted, but it amounts to a total of 11 points off, which is solid. Chase had a quiet day by his standards. Cincy's o-line didn't stand a chance. And not scoring a touchdown after Stafford's second INT kept the Rams well within striking distance. Field goals worked when they were moving into opposing territory all the time, but they barely sniffed Rams territory after making it 20-13.
Better team won. Cincy needs to fix their o-line immediately. If they get that right they'll be around for a while. If they don't they could squander an era that seems very promising right now.
Can't wait for an offseason of endless Aaron Rodgers discussion and made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 10:28:27 PM
^^ I thought Aaron Donald deserved it more.
Kupp was basically Stafford's only major target after OBJ went down, with Higbee already out.
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Typical whining about the lovable losers losing supposedly due to referees while the big bad talented perennial winners win. Had the facemask on Higgins been called correctly, that game would have been over well before the final Rams drive that included the PI call on Cincy that everyone is freaking out over (which FWIW was a good call). Long story short, the Rams lost one of their best players in the second quarter and still beat Cincy. Like every team in almost every NFL game to ever exist, they got no help whatsoever from the referees.
I might have been the only person who stayed on the Rams hype train the whole way. Turns out, losing three games doesn't spell death.
The 3rd down defensive holding penalty before the PI penalty is the one that was bad, but as you noted, there was the missed face mask on the other side so the refs didn't decide this game.
My preseason pick was for the Rams to get to the Super Bowl (and lose to Buffalo).
Unless Rodgers and Adams are both willing to take ridiculous hometown discounts, the Packers don't have enough cap space for both. I think he ends up in Denver.
An unlikely path leads to a likely champion... Rams win!! I'd say that was a very good Super Bowl. Not an all-time classic, but still pretty good. We had two great storylines, a close game that came down to the wire, and the better team won in the end. Certainly the best Super Bowl since Pats-Eagles.
More on the Rams and Bengals later, but for now... I get to post my favorite stat of the 2021-22 playoffs, maybe of all time. This may never be topped:
Bills beat the Patriots by 30 points
The ENTIRE last three rounds of the playoffs (divisional round, championships, and Super Bowl) were decided by a COMBINED 24 points
(Oh, and I didn't have any issues with Kupp winning MVP. Kupp and Donald were both worthy IMO. Donald sealed the game, but that final TD drive was all Kupp, including a run for a first down. The Rams don't come close to winning without both players.)
That was a very hard fought win for the Rams, which was impressive given the injuries their players had (namely OBJ), especially the flag-filled last scoring drive at the end.
If the Bengals did make their first down in the last minute or so, they might have been able to:
-Get in field goal range
-Kick to tie the game
-Go into OT and maybe win from there
This Super Bowl was way better than the last one, which was not even close. This combined with the playoffs has been a post-season to remember. The wait for the Bengal's first ring continues.
It was pretty wild watching my extended family with this game given they are Rams fans. They looked totally dejected until the last couple minutes of the 4th quarter.
There are still a few Rams fans around here from when they were in St. Louis. Springfield is kinda a mix when it comes to the two larger MO city's sports teams. I say this because even when the Rams were in St. Louis, Springfield was pretty solidly Chiefs, yet we have always been solidly Cardinals (probably because we have a farm team for them here).
Anyway, what in Cincinnati do y'all think will happen first: Brent Spence Bridge replacement, or a Bengals Super Bowl win?
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 13, 2022, 11:27:22 PM
There are still a few Rams fans around here from when they were in St. Louis. Springfield is kinda a mix when it comes to the two larger MO city's sports teams. I say this because even when the Rams were in St. Louis, Springfield was pretty solidly Chiefs, yet we have always been solidly Cardinals (probably because we have a farm team for them here).
Anyway, what in Cincinnati do y'all think will happen first: Brent Spence Bridge replacement, or a Bengals Super Bowl win?
I think you can count on the Bengals staying in the mix for the foreseeable future so long as Joe Burrow stays healthy.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 13, 2022, 11:27:22 PM
There are still a few Rams fans around here from when they were in St. Louis. Springfield is kinda a mix when it comes to the two larger MO city's sports teams. I say this because even when the Rams were in St. Louis, Springfield was pretty solidly Chiefs, yet we have always been solidly Cardinals (probably because we have a farm team for them here).
How about midway places like Columbia and state capital Jefferson? half (KC) & half (STL) maybe?
Here in Texas I would say that anywhere beyond a hundred miles outside the Greater Houston metro, you're looking at the overwhelming majority Cowboys fans (sadly speaking); I'm pretty sure that Conroe and Willis are majority Texans, but once you get to Huntsville you start to get into Cowboys-majority territory. In my hometown of Corpus Christi, it is probably around 70% for Cowboys and 30% Texans (myself included).
Is Columbus, Ohio in the Bengals majority or Browns majority? Any Bengals fans in Toledo or Akron/Canton maybe?
If you live in the PA capital Harrisburg, are you more likely Steelers or Eagles fan?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 12:13:16 AM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 13, 2022, 11:27:22 PM
There are still a few Rams fans around here from when they were in St. Louis. Springfield is kinda a mix when it comes to the two larger MO city's sports teams. I say this because even when the Rams were in St. Louis, Springfield was pretty solidly Chiefs, yet we have always been solidly Cardinals (probably because we have a farm team for them here).
Anyway, what in Cincinnati do y'all think will happen first: Brent Spence Bridge replacement, or a Bengals Super Bowl win?
I think you can count on the Bengals staying in the mix for the foreseeable future so long as Joe Burrow stays healthy.
That OL needs upgrades, and they have the Chiefs and Bills in their conference, so I wouldn't make them favorites to reach another Super Bowl anytime soon.
If Rodgers retires or goes to Denver, the NFC will be wide open (and given his playoff failures it may be anyway).
FiveThirtyEight has the Rams finishing the season third in Elo rating, behind the Bills and Chiefs. I still believe either the Bills or Chiefs would have beat the Rams. The Bengals beating the Chiefs was probably the single most surprising result of the playoffs, but there was something magical in store for the Bengals this season.
A look at where all 32 teams finished the season...
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2021-nfl-predictions/
Interesting pattern in the Bengals 3 Super Bowl appearances:
Lost by 5
Lost by 4
Lost by 3
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 13, 2022, 11:27:22 PM
Anyway, what in Cincinnati do y'all think will happen first: Brent Spence Bridge replacement, or a Bengals Super Bowl win?
Great question!! :D I'll go with a Bengals Super Bowl win, but not by much.
A question that comes my mind now is Matt Stafford now in contention to be possibly be a Hall of Fame Quarterback. Before this season the answer in my mind was definitely no. Winning a Super Bowl does make his stats with the Lions look way more impressive. I kind of think it might be hard to keep him out if he retired with more than 400 Touchdowns and 60,000 passing yards.
I'm so happy for the Rams, especially since they finally won a Super Bowl in their rightful location (not that I have anything against the one championship from their St. Louis years). As for Cincinnati, anything can happen, but as long as Burrow stays healthy, I see a pretty good era for them, but then again, they've been known to mess everything up in the past, hence their derisive Bungles nickname.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 09:54:21 AM
A question that comes my mind now is Matt Stafford now in contention to be possibly be a Hall of Fame Quarterback. Before this season the answer in my mind was definitely no. Winning a Super Bowl does make his stats with the Lions look way more impressive. I kind of think it might be hard to keep him out if he retired with more than 400 Touchdowns and 60,000 passing yards.
It's an interesting question now, especially as compared to Philip Rivers and other QB's who had long successful careers but never won a Super Bowl. If he retired today I would lean towards no, but if he goes on to have more successful seasons with the Rams, he could definitely get there.
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2022, 10:30:41 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 09:54:21 AM
A question that comes my mind now is Matt Stafford now in contention to be possibly be a Hall of Fame Quarterback. Before this season the answer in my mind was definitely no. Winning a Super Bowl does make his stats with the Lions look way more impressive. I kind of think it might be hard to keep him out if he retired with more than 400 Touchdowns and 60,000 passing yards.
It's an interesting question now, especially as compared to Philip Rivers and other QB's who had long successful careers but never won a Super Bowl. If he retired today I would lean towards no, but if he goes on to have more successful seasons with the Rams, he could definitely get there.
Biggest problem with putting Stafford in the HoF: How could that HoF Offense (remember, Megatron is already in) never win a NFC Central/North Title or even a Playoff game? QB and #1 Wide Out from a team that won, what, should Stafford get in?
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 14, 2022, 10:34:36 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2022, 10:30:41 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 09:54:21 AM
A question that comes my mind now is Matt Stafford now in contention to be possibly be a Hall of Fame Quarterback. Before this season the answer in my mind was definitely no. Winning a Super Bowl does make his stats with the Lions look way more impressive. I kind of think it might be hard to keep him out if he retired with more than 400 Touchdowns and 60,000 passing yards.
It's an interesting question now, especially as compared to Philip Rivers and other QB's who had long successful careers but never won a Super Bowl. If he retired today I would lean towards no, but if he goes on to have more successful seasons with the Rams, he could definitely get there.
Biggest problem with putting Stafford in the HoF: How could that HoF Offense (remember, Megatron is already in) never win a NFC Central/North Title or even a Playoff game? QB and #1 Wide Out from a team that won, what, should Stafford get in?
Right, he didn't have any playoff wins with the Lions (although he should have had one against Dallas), so that's why I think his career with the Rams will determine whether he's a HOF'er or not.
I was hoping to see the Bengals pull it off as the underdog, but not upset about the Rams emerging victorious. Tyler Boyd will probably be haunted by that crucial drop for a while, and then Kupp & Donald took over the game from there.
As far as commercials...was not prepared for them to be dominated by EV's & cryptocurrency, but that aside I loved the Chevy ad remaking the Sopranos intro. The attention-to-detail of Meadow whizzing thru the E-ZPass lane versus Tony stopping for a ticket was top-notch (for a roadgeek, anyway), and at least this time Meadow got lucky and was able to nose straight into a parallel spot!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 09:54:21 AM
A question that comes my mind now is Matt Stafford now in contention to be possibly be a Hall of Fame Quarterback. Before this season the answer in my mind was definitely no. Winning a Super Bowl does make his stats with the Lions look way more impressive. I kind of think it might be hard to keep him out if he retired with more than 400 Touchdowns and 60,000 passing yards.
Not if he retired today. He needs at least two more years of top 10 stats.
One good season does not a hall-of-fame quarterback make. Sorry Stafford.
Plug in any experienced, slightly-above-average quarterback and the outcome for La Rams is probably the same.
Decent game for the general fan. Had some slow parts where they were trading three-and-outs, but we got there.
I'm sure all the old people were flummoxed by that halftime show. :-D
I noticed only one commercial for a vroom-vroom car. The rest of em were for EVs.
Lot of ads for crypto scams and degenerate gamblers this year.
Another sign of growing 2000s nostaglia with JD and Turk eating potato chips, there. (Scrubs was a great show, so I get it.)
Trailer for the next Jurassic Park movie made me cringe. Clearly made by people with no sense of humans' ability to decimate charismatic megafauna without even trying. I could do a deep dive on why humans would mop the floor with escaped dinosaurs, but that's beyond the scope of this thread.
Zero calorie beer; really Budweiser? That watery drivel you call beer isn't thin enough for people? Jesus Christ, that's what liquor is for.
Military flyover: that one plane cost 100 times as much as all of the others combined.
Pretty much got a preview of Peacock's entire catalogue there. Verdict? Meh.
^^^
Was Jared Goff not that average starting quarterback for the Rams a year ago?
Also, as a Lions fan I'll even concede some of those Matt Stafford playoff teams weren't "awful." I don't think anyone serious was under the impression the Lions had the wrong quarterback during Stafford's entire tenure.
That's pretty much my hypothesis. Stafford is a lot more experienced, but other than that, I viewed that trade as like-for-like. Yeah, there's always something about a change of scenery and getting out from the yoke of a losing organization, but I think you could have plugged any halfway decent arm into that team and gotten the same thing done. Stafford's a workhorse, not a superstar, I guess is my point and there's a lot of QB's that can effectively manage a game at that level. If this win hinges on the addition of Stafford, I would put most of it on him being invigorated by coming to a different team in a situation he liked.
Maybe a year from now I'll be eating these words and it turns out Stafford's second act really did launch him into the upper echelons of his position. But for now, I'm only a little impressed.
I didn't necessarily buy in to the idea that the Bengals' loss was entirely on their O-line and protection issues because they came so close to winning anyways, and if they had won, that would be a non-story. But still, I gotta say... this is pretty stark (https://tinyurl.com/mpcjdhwt)...
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 11:04:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2022, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2022, 09:35:01 PM
I think Eli Apple is my new favorite player?
Although I'm not sure randomly trolling the Saints on Twitter is the best thing to do when you've got a championship game to prepare for...
You want him to be practicing/studying film 24/7? Burnout is a thing, you know. And football is a very physical and very emotional game. If you're not excited to play, you're not going to play well.
An update: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/eli-apple-twitter-roast-super-bowl
Quote from: jgb191 on February 14, 2022, 12:59:48 AM
Is Columbus, Ohio in the Bengals majority or Browns majority? Any Bengals fans in Toledo or Akron/Canton maybe?
Columbus is pretty evenly split between the Bengals and the Browns. A significant amount of Columbus's growth over the last 30-40 years is due to Ohio State grads staying there after graduation; many of them are from either Cincinnati or Cleveland.
There are few Bengals fans in either Toledo or Akron/Canton.
Columbus also seems like more of a college football town because of Ohio State, although I'm sure there are some Browns and Bengals fans there too.
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2022, 10:28:27 PM
^^ I thought Aaron Donald deserved it more.
So did my coworker who bet on him for MVP. My counter was that they almost never pick defense for MVP. He'd have needed a strip sack or two or INTs to get it.
Interestingly, the last defensive player to win MVP was also on this Rams team. Von Miller became the second player in NFL history to have 2+ sacks in 2+ Super Bowls, and the first to do it with different teams.
Bengals sign Zac Taylor to a long extension . . . not a good choice. There were many moments all season when Cincy was undisciplined, inconsistent, overconfident, etc. Expectations are now Super Bowl or bust. Burrow, though a much better version of Baker, is about to become the new Baker Mayfield Theory, where he doesn't catch any blame for anything because he "saved the franchise" (which is not entirely true anyways, but much more true in Burrow's case than it is in Baker's). All things considered Cincy is probably 3rd favorites in the AFC to win the conference. They're going to lose some games next year. So when that happens and the fans refuse to blame Burrow for anything, Taylor's seat will get very hot very fast.
Quote from: thspfc on February 16, 2022, 11:36:15 AM
Bengals sign Zac Taylor to a long extension . . . not a good choice. There were many moments all season when Cincy was undisciplined, inconsistent, overconfident, etc. Expectations are now Super Bowl or bust.
I'm not sure it's a bad choice, and I don't think anyone can be sure for at least a few more seasons. He's probably not going to be an all-time great coach, but at no point was he a major problem. I actually think he outcoached McVay in the Super Bowl considering how much more talented the Rams are.
Being undisciplined and inconsistent... you could say that about all 32 teams at various points of the season. Being overconfident... huh? They nearly won the Super Bowl! If anything, that confidence helped them. Until the last two minutes of the Super Bowl when the Rams stars took over, the moment was never too big for the Bengals on offense or defense. I think that's a good thing.
And I don't think expectations are going to be Super Bowl or bust like they would for most Super Bowl teams. Everyone knows this was a magical, improbable run to the Super Bowl, they need to improve their o-line to be a long-term contender, and the AFC is stacked, not to mention their own division which is always a slugfest.
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2022, 09:22:44 PM
Columbus also seems like more of a college football town because of Ohio State, although I'm sure there are some Browns and Bengals fans there too.
That's very true; 99% of Columbus is Ohio State fans. You'll see a lot of people wearing shirts that have some version of "Buckeyes Fan on Saturday, Benglas Fan on Sunday" or "Buckeyes Fan on Saturday, Browns Fan on Sunday"
What about Harrisburg? It seems to me that it would be the dividing line between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, thus to the west it would be all-Steelers fans, and to the east all-Eagles. And they'd probably be Penn State fans/alumni too, since it's the closest major university to the capital.
Quote from: Henry on February 16, 2022, 04:57:45 PM
What about Harrisburg? It seems to me that it would be the dividing line between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, thus to the west it would be all-Steelers fans, and to the east all-Eagles. And they'd probably be Penn State fans/alumni too, since it's the closest major university to the capital.
The crazy thing is that Harrisburg is actually closer to Baltimore than Pittsburgh or Philly, so there's probably some Ravens fans there too.
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 05:11:04 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 16, 2022, 04:57:45 PM
What about Harrisburg? It seems to me that it would be the dividing line between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, thus to the west it would be all-Steelers fans, and to the east all-Eagles. And they'd probably be Penn State fans/alumni too, since it's the closest major university to the capital.
The crazy thing is that Harrisburg is actually closer to Baltimore than Pittsburgh or Philly, so there's probably some Ravens fans there too.
I was told by my friend that briefly lived in Lancaster that the Steelers-Eagles line may be even east of there.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 16, 2022, 05:16:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 05:11:04 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 16, 2022, 04:57:45 PM
What about Harrisburg? It seems to me that it would be the dividing line between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, thus to the west it would be all-Steelers fans, and to the east all-Eagles. And they'd probably be Penn State fans/alumni too, since it's the closest major university to the capital.
The crazy thing is that Harrisburg is actually closer to Baltimore than Pittsburgh or Philly, so there's probably some Ravens fans there too.
I was told by my friend that briefly lived in Lancaster that the Steelers-Eagles line may be even east of there.
Yeah, the Steelers seem to have a more widespread fanbase even outside of PA, so that makes some sense. But of course the Philly area itself is more populous, so that makes up for it some, especially factoring in Eagles fans in southern NJ and DE.
Reports are that Aaron Rodgers has broken up with his girlfriend. Bad news for Broncos fans.
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 04:48:28 PM
Justin Herbert will have the best overall stats of any rookie next year. (Helps he'll be picked later in the draft for a better team)
With the superb owl in the books, I went back to the beginning of the thread to change the title to 2022 and...
I have to give you your just due for this incredible prediction two years ago. A true gem in reply #1 to the thread... :cheers:
Alright, this is hard to believe, but it's already time to answer all the questions I asked
at the beginning of the season (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2571129#msg2571129). Fair warning — this got pretty long!
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Can teams that finished short of the playoffs make a postseason run next year? (Arizona Cardinals, Miami Dolphins, Minnesota Vikings)
This turned out to be a No for all three teams, who all came reasonably close, but...
-After a disastrous 1-7 start, the Dolphins needed everything to go their way to have any chance at the playoffs. Thanks to a soft schedule, an upset over the Ravens, and the Saints' 4th string QB, they won 7 straight to get to 8-7, and it seemed like it could happen... but then they laid a season-ending egg in Week 17 against the Titans
-Seemingly every Vikings game down to the wire, and they kept afloat, fighting back to a .500 record on three separate occasions. And then Kirk Cousins got covid at the worst possible time, and backup Sean Mannion couldn't save their season against the Packers... a crushing and yet somehow fitting end to the Spielman/Zimmer era
-The Cardinals had a promising 7-0 start and displayed dominance at times, but ended up getting blown out by the Lions before stumbling into the playoffs, and were largely non-competitive in a Wild Card loss to the eventual Super Bowl champion Rams
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Can teams that are a QB away from contention get the all-important position figured out? (Indianapolis Colts, Denver Broncos, San Francisco 49ers)
All three teams are a solid "hold" — yet in very different ways.
Despite a 1-4 to start the season, the Colts thought they had their guy in Carson Wentz until an ugly two week stretch cost them a playoff berth that looked like a virtual lock (98% playoff odds per FiveThirtyEight) after beating the Cardinals on Christmas. After a season-ending meltdown against the Jags, ownership is apparently unhappy with Wentz, so it's unclear where they go from here after cycling through 5 starting QB's in the past 5 seasons.
The Broncos had a 3-0 start and were mostly competitive with Teddy Bridgewater, but ended up stumbling to a 7-10 finish after a Bridgewater injury, a Drew Lock meltdown agains the Bengals, and a 13th straight loss to the Chiefs. 10 years ago, you could see this defense-first recipe being enough for a playoff berth and a tough out, but it just isn't going to cut it anymore in the stacked AFC. With Fangio out and new coach Nathaniel Hackett coming from the Packers, the prospect of landing Aaron Rodgers looms large.
Meanwhile, the 49ers gave up a ton of draft capital to secure the #3 pick and draft their QB of the future, but he spent most of the season on the sideline, as they got mostly competent play from Jimmy G, whose gutsy Week 18 comeback got them to the playoffs. They managed to win two strange playoff games without much help from Jimmy G, and all indications are that they are moving on to Trey Lance next year. On one hand, it seems strange when they came so close... but on the other, it was Jimmy G's limitations that cost them in the end, just as they did in the Super Bowl two years ago.
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Will the Chiefs run it back to the biggest stage?
Not quite. After scoring 42 points in their first two playoff games, and 21 in the first half of the third, their second half meltdown against the Bengals will go down as one of the most baffling in NFL history. At 21-3, the game looked completely over, but then a Bengals score and defensive stand set the tone for a second half in which the Chiefs were shut out before getting to 1st and goal... before a sack turned that into 3rd and very long... before kicking a FG to force OT, winning the coin toss, and Mahomes throwin a pick 13 seconds in. That
Bengals magic (https://www.nfl.com/videos/dan-hanzus-remembers-chris-wesseling-in-anticipation-of-rams-bengals-super-bowl) was truly something.
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Can the Bills and Packers get over the Championship hump?
No, in fact both teams lost in the divisional round, but the two games couldn't have been more different.
The Bills won four straight games to close the season, and came in to Kansas City on a high note coming off one of the greatest offensive performances in NFL history. And the offense kept right on rolling, going on
two potential game-winning drives in the final minutes... but the defense couldn't hold on for 13 seconds, Harrison Butker kicked the game to OT, the Bills lost the coin toss, and the rest is history. Crushing.
Meanwhile, the Packers hadn't won a meaningful game in almost a month after beating the Vikings' backup QB, losing to the Lions to end the season, and not playing in the Wild Card round thanks to the bye. Their defense was spectacular, holding the 49ers to 3 points through 55 minutes. But the offense couldn't take advantage before or after a special teams touchdown tied the game, and the 49ers drove for a game winning FG to win a classic in its own right. Unbelievable.
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Will the 2021 NFC South be among the league's best divisions?
LOL, it's crazy how fast things change. The 2021 NFC South was mediocre aside from the Buccanners, who rolled to a 13-4 record in what ended up being Brady's final season. The Saints got the most out of an injury-ravaged roster, the Falcons won a bunch of close games but ultimately overacheived, and the Panthers failed to solve their QB dilemma, with neither Darnold or Cam "I'm back!" Newton showing much promise. With Brady and Sean Payton retiring, the NFC South now looks like it could be one of the
worst divisions next year.
Quote from: webny99 on February 10, 2021, 01:42:42 PM
Will the Rams go on a Super Bowl run?
LOL, but for a different reason: it's crazy how much things stay the same even when they change.
I'm not sure there's ever been a more "all in" team than the 2021 Los Angeles Rams. After signing Stafford, OBJ, and (perhaps craziest of all) Von Miller, they
had to win a Super Bowl. And after squeaking past the GOAT, grinding out a win over their toughest division rival, and closing strong against the hottest team in the league, the entire organization can now breathe a massive sigh of relief. Somehow, some way, they are Super Bowl 56 champions!
They did it in about the most improbable fashion possible, losing Robert Woods in November, backing in to a division title thanks to a Cardinals meltdown, avoiding Lambeau by letting the 49ers into the playoffs, ending Tom Brady's career despite a crazy comeback, and losing OBJ during the Super Bowl... but they found a way and won the trophy, and that's all that matters... what happens next, we'll see!
And as per tradition...
A Look Ahead To 2022
With Super Bowl 56 in the books, time to look ahead to the 2022 offseason and upcoming season. And we're entering unchartered territory as the NFL calendar churns on without Tom Brady for the first time in 22 years!
After two straight years of QB's winning the Super Bowl on a new team (and countless teams desperate to find a QB), could we be in for a lot of QB movement? Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Jimmy Garoppolo, Deshaun Watson (pending significant legal issues), and even Carson Wentz are some of the QB's that could be on the move. And with a draft low on top prospects, the value of these veterans could increase even more. The AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 teams (!) have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 such teams in the NFC.
Will the race for the AFC East be exciting again with 4 young QB's? Will the Bills and Chiefs meet again in the postseason? Can an AFC North team make a run for the Super Bowl? Can Justin Herbert get the Chargers to the playoffs? Will the Broncos find an answer at QB? Will Trevor Lawrence take a big step forward in his second year?
Will three NFC West teams make it back to the postseason? Who will step up to claim the NFC South title? Can Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson get back to the mountaintop? Can the Cowboys end an 18-year drought of repeat NFC East champions? Can the Giants take a step forward with Daniel Jones? Is Justin Fields the real deal for the Bears?
So many questions, so few answers. Can't wait to see how this next season unfolds. :coffee:
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 11:03:49 PM
And as per tradition...
A Look Ahead To 2022
With Super Bowl 56 in the books, time to look ahead to the 2022 offseason and upcoming season. And we're entering unchartered territory as the NFL calendar churns on without Tom Brady for the first time in 22 years!
After two straight years of QB's winning the Super Bowl on a new team (and countless teams desperate to find a QB), could we be in for a lot of QB movement? Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Jimmy Garoppolo, Deshaun Watson (pending significant legal issues), and even Carson Wentz are some of the QB's that could be on the move. And with a draft low on top prospects, the value of these veterans could increase even more. The AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 teams (!) have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 such teams in the NFC.
Will the race for the AFC East be exciting again with 4 young QB's? Will the Bills and Chiefs meet again in the postseason? Can an AFC North team make a run for the Super Bowl? Can Justin Herbert get the Chargers to the playoffs? Will the Broncos find an answer at QB? Will Trevor Lawrence take a big step forward in his second year?
Will three NFC West teams make it back to the postseason? Who will step up to claim the NFC South title? Can Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson get back to the mountaintop? Can the Cowboys end an 18-year drought of repeat NFC East champions? Can the Giants take a step forward with Daniel Jones? Is Justin Fields the real deal for the Bears?
So many questions, so few answers. Can't wait to see how this next season unfolds. :coffee:
The race for the AFC East will be exciting for 3 of the 4 teams :|
Quote from: Alps on February 16, 2022, 11:55:31 PM
The race for the AFC East will be exciting for 3 of the 4 teams :|
In German, "jetzt" means Now, which is kind of ironic
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 11:03:49 PM
The AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 teams (!) have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 such teams in the NFC.
And with Big Ben and Brady retiring, we'll have at most just 3 starting QB's who have been in the league more than a decade. Calling this a new era would be an understatement! Here's a breakdown I created in table form:
| AFC |
| Division | Team | Quarterback | Draft Year |
| AFC West | Kansas City Chiefs | Patrick Mahomes | 2017 |
| AFC North | Cleveland Browns | Baker Mayfield | 2018 |
| AFC East | Buffalo Bills | Josh Allen | 2018 |
| AFC North | Baltimore Ravens | Lamar Jackson | 2018 |
| AFC North | Cincinnati Bengals | Joe Burrow | 2020 |
| AFC East | Miami Dolphins | Tua Tagavailoa | 2020 |
| AFC West | Los Angeles Chargers | Justin Herbert | 2020 |
| AFC South | Jacksonville Jaguars | Trevor Lawrence | 2021 |
| AFC East | New York Jets | Zach Wilson | 2021 |
| AFC East | New England Patriots | Mac Jones | 2021 |
The other likely QB's: Ryan Tannehill (2012), Derek Carr (2014), Davis Mills (2021)
Plus big question marks for the Broncos, Steelers, and now Colts.
| NFC |
| Division | Team | Quarterback | Draft Year |
| NFC West | Arizona Cardinals | Kyler Murray | 2019 |
| NFC East | New York Giants | Daniel Jones | 2019 |
| NFC West | San Francisco 49ers | Trey Lance | 2021 |
| NFC North | Chicago Bears | Justin Fields | 2021 |
The other likely QB's: Matt Ryan (2008), Matthew Stafford (2009), Kirk Cousins (2012), Jared Goff (2016), Dak Prescott (2016), Jalen Hurts (2020)
Plus Aaron Rodgers (2005) and Russell Wilson (2012) if they return
Plus big question marks for the Bucs, Commanders, Panthers, and Saints
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 11:03:49 PM
And as per tradition...
A Look Ahead To 2022
With Super Bowl 56 in the books, time to look ahead to the 2022 offseason and upcoming season. And we're entering unchartered territory as the NFL calendar churns on without Tom Brady for the first time in 22 years!
After two straight years of QB's winning the Super Bowl on a new team (and countless teams desperate to find a QB), could we be in for a lot of QB movement? Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Jimmy Garoppolo, Deshaun Watson (pending significant legal issues), and even Carson Wentz are some of the QB's that could be on the move. And with a draft low on top prospects, the value of these veterans could increase even more. The AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 teams (!) have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 such teams in the NFC.
Will the race for the AFC East be exciting again with 4 young QB's? Will the Bills and Chiefs meet again in the postseason? Can an AFC North team make a run for the Super Bowl? Can Justin Herbert get the Chargers to the playoffs? Will the Broncos find an answer at QB? Will Trevor Lawrence take a big step forward in his second year?
Will three NFC West teams make it back to the postseason? Who will step up to claim the NFC South title? Can Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson get back to the mountaintop? Can the Cowboys end an 18-year drought of repeat NFC East champions? Can the Giants take a step forward with Daniel Jones? Is Justin Fields the real deal for the Bears?
So many questions, so few answers. Can't wait to see how this next season unfolds. :coffee:
I'm sick of Aaron Rodgers and want him out of the league. Go host Jeopardy or something. Anything to get the media to stop crowning his team as the best team in the league when it's been proven time and time again that he's going to be humiliated in the playoffs.
Russ is staying in Seattle.
Jimmy G is going who knows where, but I think he will be starting somewhere week 1.
Watson better not be on an active roster this year.
Ranking the top 16 QBs in the league, IMO:
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Wilson
4. Burrow
5. Herbert
6. Allen
7. Stafford
8. Dak
9. Carr
10. Cousins
11. Kyler
12. Lamar
13. Ryan
14. Tannehill
15. Mac
16. Goff
So that's 8 in the AFC and 8 in the NFC. What round you're drafted in doesn't matter.
Buffalo should run away with the AFCE, Patriots should make the playoffs, Dolphins should be in playoff contention, Jets should have their best season since 2015 (which is not saying much)
Chargers might make the playoffs if they don't call a timeout to prevent themselves from making the playoffs
Dallas is so far ahead of the rest of that division, it would be a massive failure if they didn't repeat.
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
Dallas is so far ahead of the rest of that division, it would be a massive failure if they didn't repeat.
Only to lose in the first round of the playoffs again...
https://www.si.com/nfl/texans/news/report-brian-flores-houston-defendant-lawsuit-lovie-smith
Apparently the Flores drama isn't over for the Texans. He's included them in his lawsuit on racist hiring strategies in the NFL, despite the Texans having hired Lovie Smith, who is also black, which confuses me as to why Flores dragged the Texans into this. I stand by my presumption that the Texans didn't hire Flores because it would heighten the Watson situation, but who knows what the Texans' true motives are.
I'm otherwise optimistic about 2022 for the Texans. The Pep Hamilton move to OC is probably going to pay immediate positive dividends. Now all the Texans need to do on offense is to find Davis Mills some support and protection. The defense is young and improving; if they can find some pass rushers and more depth in the secondary they could make some noise. Plus if Watson does end up getting traded to some other team, the Texans would get something positive in return. I think 7-10 is well within the realm of possibility.
I also seriously wonder if the AFC South will be sneakily good in 2022. The Texans and Jaguars will improve, the Titans still have star power, and the Colts more than likely won't just fade away.
Also, given that this year will mark the Texans' 20th anniversary, I think they should rebrand to something like Toros or Stallions (the Texans moniker is just lazy) and revamp their uniforms. It literally hasn't changed at all for 20 years.
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
Anything to get the media to stop crowning his team as the best team in the league when it's been proven time and time again that he's going to be humiliated in the playoffs.
I agree, but then I'm not sure why you have him at #2.
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
What round you're drafted in doesn't matter.
Except for the fact that there are 16 likely 2022 starters drafted in the past 5 years, and 14 of 16 were drafted in the first round...
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 17, 2022, 12:54:08 PM
Apparently the Flores drama isn't over for the Texans. He's included them in his lawsuit on racist hiring strategies in the NFL, despite the Texans having hired Lovie Smith, who is also black, which confuses me as to why Flores dragged the Texans into this. I stand by my presumption that the Texans didn't hire Flores because it would heighten the Watson situation, but who knows what the Texans' true motives are.
My thought is that they were considering hiring Josh McCown before the lawsuit, and they switched to a minority candidate because they realized how terrible of a look it would be to hire Josh McCown right then. But like you say, who knows.
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:16:57 PM
...
Plus big question marks for the ... Commanders ...
You, sir, win an award for mega-understatement of the week!
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 17, 2022, 01:18:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:16:57 PM
...
Plus big question marks for the ... Commanders ...
You, sir, win an award for mega-understatement of the week!
I meant at the QB position, but yes, there are other big question marks as well. :-D
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 01:29:31 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 17, 2022, 01:18:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:16:57 PM
...
Plus big question marks for the ... Commanders ...
You, sir, win an award for mega-understatement of the week!
I meant at the QB position, but yes, there are other big question marks as well. :-D
I was referring to the QB position.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 17, 2022, 01:40:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 01:29:31 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 17, 2022, 01:18:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:16:57 PM
...
Plus big question marks for the ... Commanders ...
You, sir, win an award for mega-understatement of the week!
I meant at the QB position, but yes, there are other big question marks as well. :-D
I was referring to the QB position.
That's what I get for being cynical. I wasn't thinking of their QB question as being any bigger than any of the other teams I had listed in that category, but on second thought... yeah, I guess it is.
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
Anything to get the media to stop crowning his team as the best team in the league when it's been proven time and time again that he's going to be humiliated in the playoffs.
I agree, but then I'm not sure why you have him at #2.
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
What round you're drafted in doesn't matter.
Except for the fact that there are 16 likely 2022 starters drafted in the past 5 years, and 14 of 16 were drafted in the first round...
The round you're drafted in doesn't determine how good you are. If you're the 10th best quarterback in the league, then you're the 10th best quarterback in the league. Doesn't matter when you were drafted.
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 03:22:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
What round you're drafted in doesn't matter.
Except for the fact that there are 16 likely 2022 starters drafted in the past 5 years, and 14 of 16 were drafted in the first round...
The round you're drafted in doesn't determine how good you are. If you're the 10th best quarterback in the league, then you're the 10th best quarterback in the league. Doesn't matter when you were drafted.
A great example of correlation vs. causation. Being drafted highly does not mean you will be good, but there is still a clear relationship between the two.
Quote from: webny99 on February 18, 2022, 07:55:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 03:22:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 17, 2022, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 17, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
What round you're drafted in doesn't matter.
Except for the fact that there are 16 likely 2022 starters drafted in the past 5 years, and 14 of 16 were drafted in the first round...
The round you're drafted in doesn't determine how good you are. If you're the 10th best quarterback in the league, then you're the 10th best quarterback in the league. Doesn't matter when you were drafted.
A great example of correlation vs. causation. Being drafted highly does not mean you will be good, but there is still a clear relationship between the two.
But it doesn't matter that the AFC has more first round QBs than the NFC does. If you want to say that the AFC has better quarterbacks then that's an actual debate. But saying that the AFC is superior because it has more first round quarterbacks (which is exactly what you said) is not true. Four of the AFC's first round quarterbacks (Lawrence, Wilson, Baker, Lamar) combined for 41 touchdowns and 41 picks last year.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 12:27:39 PM
But it doesn't matter that the AFC has more first round QBs than the NFC does. If you want to say that the AFC has better quarterbacks then that's an actual debate.
But it's still relevant, because there's a strong correlation. The AFC has way more highly-drafted young quarterbacks, and that's significantly contributed to this idea that it's "stacked". It's "stacked" largely because of Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, and Herbert... all drafted in the top 10.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 12:27:39 PM
But saying that the AFC is superior because it has more first round quarterbacks (which is exactly what you said) is not true.
The AFC
is superior, and it
does have more first round quarterbacks. Even if one thing didn't directly cause the other, both things are true, and there's a very strong correlation between the two. But anyways, forget about the whole "first round" thing that's gotten way overblown. If it really means that much, let's include Jalen Hurts and Davis Mills in the analysis:
The AFC has 11 likely starters drafted in the past 5 years, while the NFC only has 5. That means nearly 70% of AFC teams have the potential QB of the future on their roster compared to just 30% of NFC teams. Part of that is just the randomness of which teams have veterans and which teams are in position to draft a QB. But it's completely fair to say the AFC looks likely to be a significantly tougher conference for the next 5-10 years, and the QB's drafted in the past 5 years are a significant reason why.
I guess it's safe to say that everybody underestimated the Bengals this past season, because nobody expected them to get as far as they did. Joe Burrow still has lots of work to do, because he got sacked too many times to count and still won three playoff games before losing to Matthew Stafford in the Super Bowl.
And speaking of Stafford, here's a fun fact about him and Sammy Kershaw of the Dodgers, who have just about everything in common: They grew up in the same town, graduated from the same high high school, and won their first championships in their 13th season, while playing for the same city's teams. As Alanis Morissette once said, isn't it ironic?
Quote from: webny99 on February 18, 2022, 12:58:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 12:27:39 PM
But it doesn't matter that the AFC has more first round QBs than the NFC does. If you want to say that the AFC has better quarterbacks then that's an actual debate.
But it's still relevant, because there's a strong correlation. The AFC has way more highly-drafted young quarterbacks, and that's significantly contributed to this idea that it's "stacked". It's "stacked" largely because of Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, and Herbert... all drafted in the top 10.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 12:27:39 PM
But saying that the AFC is superior because it has more first round quarterbacks (which is exactly what you said) is not true.
The AFC is superior, and it does have more first round quarterbacks. Even if one thing didn't directly cause the other, both things are true, and there's a very strong correlation between the two. But anyways, forget about the whole "first round" thing that's gotten way overblown. If it really means that much, let's include Jalen Hurts and Davis Mills in the analysis:
The AFC has 11 likely starters drafted in the past 5 years, while the NFC only has 5. That means nearly 70% of AFC teams have the potential QB of the future on their roster compared to just 30% of NFC teams. Part of that is just the randomness of which teams have veterans and which teams are in position to draft a QB. But it's completely fair to say the AFC looks likely to be a significantly tougher conference for the next 5-10 years, and the QB's drafted in the past 5 years are a significant reason why.
Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, and Allen are good because they're good at playing football. They're not good because they were drafted in the top 10. That's simply a by-product.
QuoteThe AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 teams (!) have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 such teams in the NFC.
By saying this you are clearly indicating that you believe the AFC is a better conference because they have more quarterbacks who were drafted in the top 10, which is nonsensical. If you want to argue that the AFC is better because they have quarterbacks who are better at playing football, then that's a reasonable debate.
I will agree with you that the AFC has a stronger outlook for the next ten years. For right now? Two of my top four, five of my top ten, and eight of my top 16 quarterbacks come from the NFC.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 02:49:13 PM
Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, and Allen are good because they're good at playing football. They're not good because they were drafted in the top 10. That's simply a by-product.
Uh... they were drafted in the top 10 because they were
good prospects. That correlates to
being good.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 02:49:13 PM
QuoteThe AFC continues to look like a much stronger conference, as 10 11 teams have a first-round QB from the past 5 drafts as their likely starter, compared to just 4 5 such teams in the NFC.
By saying this you are clearly indicating that you believe the AFC is a better conference because they have more quarterbacks who were drafted in the top 10, which is nonsensical. If you want to argue that the AFC is better because they have quarterbacks who are better at playing football, then that's a reasonable debate.
No, I said first round, not top 10. And the only reason I bothered to say first round is because of the stat that I already cited: 14 of 16 projected starters from the past five drafts
are first-rounders, so it's a largely meaningless distinction.
In any case, the comment was about the outlook for the future and really had nothing to do with when anyone was drafted, but see my edit if you insist: the point is still the same.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 02:49:13 PM
Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, and Allen are good because they're good at playing football. They're not good because they were drafted in the top 10. That's simply a by-product.
They're not good
because they were drafted in the top 10, of course. If someone decided to draft me in the top 10, it would not give me Herbert's cannon all of a sudden. But obviously there is a higher likelihood of top 10 drafted QBs to be good in the NFL because they a) have already demonstrated skill in college and b) highly paid scouts that are pretty good at this thought they would be good in the pros also.
Also, keep in mind that the reason that teams with good,
young QBs tend to be better is because those
young QBs are on their rookie deals and the team has a lot more salary cap space to surround that QB with more talent.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 04:50:04 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 02:49:13 PM
Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, and Allen are good because they're good at playing football. They're not good because they were drafted in the top 10. That's simply a by-product.
They're not good because they were drafted in the top 10, of course. If someone decided to draft me in the top 10, it would not give me Herbert's cannon all of a sudden. But obviously there is a higher likelihood of top 10 drafted QBs to be good in the NFL because they a) have already demonstrated skill in college and b) highly paid scouts that are pretty good at this thought they would be good in the pros also.
Also, keep in mind that the reason that teams with good, young QBs tend to be better is because those young QBs are on their rookie deals and the team has a lot more salary cap space to surround that QB with more talent.
Mahomes and Allen are not on rookie deals anymore. Herbert, Burrow, and Lamar won't be for much longer, a year at most.
Here is what I am saying:
"The AFC is better than has better quarterbacks" is a valid argument for the AFC being better than the NFC; "The AFC has higher drafted quarterbacks" is not. It does not matter when these players were drafted; it matters how good they are. Draft position is irrelevant to how good a player is at football at THIS point in time. If there were two equal players with one being a first round pick and the other a fourth round pick, the first round pick is not better. They're still equal.
I understand that players are drafted out of college based on how good scouts think they will be. However, none of that matters once everyone has seen how good a player actually is in the NFL. If he's a great NFL player, he's a great NFL player. If he's not, he's not.
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 05:15:03 PM
If there were two equal players with one being a first round pick and the other a fourth round pick, the first round pick is not better. They're still equal.
I don't think anyone is trying to dispute that.
Out of curiosity, how do you have your QBs ranked? (If it's upthread and I missed it, my apologies.)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:19:48 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 05:15:03 PM
If there were two equal players with one being a first round pick and the other a fourth round pick, the first round pick is not better. They're still equal.
I don't think anyone is trying to dispute that.
Out of curiosity, how do you have your QBs ranked? (If it's upthread and I missed it, my apologies.)
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Russ
4. Burrow
5. Herbert
6. Allen
7. Stafford
8. Dak
9. Carr
10. Cousins
11. Kyler
12. Lamar
13. Ryan
14. Tannehill
15. Mac
16. Goff
I am aware that most of those are first round picks; I do not care at all, because trying to use the number of first rounders in my rankings against me completely misses the point.
Anyways, with those rankings, I think the gap between #1 and #6 is tiny. Those are the six that I would consider "elite". Then #7 to #13 would be the "good" tier, with Stafford a cut above the rest of them. Then "average" starts with #14 and continues into the 20s.
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:19:48 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 05:15:03 PM
If there were two equal players with one being a first round pick and the other a fourth round pick, the first round pick is not better. They're still equal.
I don't think anyone is trying to dispute that.
Of course no one's disputing that if it's predetermined that they're equal players.
But that's not how it works in real life. In real life, the average first round pick is more likely to succeed than the average fourth round pick, because you have to draft a player
before you know for sure if they're good or not. That's why we have scouts, and that's why higher picks are more valuable - because the players most likely to be good are drafted first. And yes, it's partly self-fulfilling, because higher picks tend to get more chances.
Quote from: webny99 on February 18, 2022, 05:45:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:19:48 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 05:15:03 PM
If there were two equal players with one being a first round pick and the other a fourth round pick, the first round pick is not better. They're still equal.
I don't think anyone is trying to dispute that.
Of course no one's disputing that if it's predetermined that they're equal players.
But that's not how it works in real life. In real life, the average first round pick is more likely to succeed than the average fourth round pick, because you have to draft a player before you know for sure if they're good or not. That's why we have scouts, and that's why higher picks are more valuable - because the players most likely to be good are drafted first. And yes, it's partly self-fulfilling, because higher picks tend to get more chances.
This is all correct; none of it matters in this discussion.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Two things: why is Russ that low and why is Baker that high?
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Two things: why is Russ that low and why is Baker that high?
Russ' deep ball looked like trash this year. Mayfield isn't bad when healthy, which he certainly wasn't this year. I couldn't honestly find someone to put over him.
Since Kyler Murray is on these top-16 lists.... Here's my 3 craziest predictions for 2022:
1. Kyler Murray will return to MLB
2. Jimmy G will start for the Bucs Week 1
3. The Giants will make the playoffs
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 06:58:31 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 18, 2022, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Two things: why is Russ that low and why is Baker that high?
Russ' deep ball looked like trash this year. Mayfield isn't bad when healthy, which he certainly wasn't this year. I couldn't honestly find someone to put over him.
Interesting how you attribute Mayfield's struggles to an injury that forced him to miss two games, yet don't mention Russ's injury that forced him to miss three games.
Russ played three bad games last year: against the Packers in week 10, Cardinals in week 11, and Rams in week 15. I don't think it's coincidence that the first two of those three were his first two games back from an injury that he had rehabbed from in record time.
A) I think Russ is miles better than Baker. I just needed a 16th and couldn't find anyone better.
B) I think those other 11 QBs are better than Russ.
C) It's okay to disagree.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 10:36:28 PM
A) I think Russ is miles better than Baker. I just needed a 16th and couldn't find anyone better.
B) I think those other 11 QBs are better than Russ.
C) It's okay to disagree.
Of course it's okay to disagree, I just don't understand your side of this.
Quote from: webny99 on February 18, 2022, 08:05:02 PM
Since Kyler Murray is on these top-16 lists.... Here's my 3 craziest predictions for 2022:
1. Kyler Murray will return to MLB Wow!
2. Jimmy G will start for the Bucs Week 1 and Tom Brady will play week 1 for the 49ers
3. The Giants will make the playoffs absolutely not
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Interesting that you have the QB from the Super Bowl winning team that low. I think Herbert has the potential to be better than Matt Stafford but he sure wasn't this last year, I'd place Burrow ahead of Herbert for now. Dak Prescott hasn't really done anything much of consequence in the playoffs to be rated so highly. Watson was a top ten talent before his recent business, but I don't know about now. I would put Russel Wilson ahead of Derek Carr but I generally agree with the rest.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 19, 2022, 05:11:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Interesting that you have the QB from the Super Bowl winning team that low. I think Herbert has the potential to be better than Matt Stafford but he sure wasn't this last year, I'd place Burrow ahead of Herbert for now. Dak Prescott hasn't really done anything much of consequence in the playoffs to be rated so highly. Watson was a top ten talent before his recent business, but I don't know about now. I would put Russel Wilson ahead of Derek Carr but I generally agree with the rest.
Wilson below Kyler in particular is what I don't understand at all. Kyler is a shorter, faster, more nimble, and not as good at passing version of Wilson from 5 years ago. And Wilson 5 years ago was not as good as today's Wilson.
Quote from: thspfc on February 19, 2022, 06:04:02 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 19, 2022, 05:11:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 18, 2022, 05:35:12 PM
Just for discussion's sake, and since you and I always agree :-D, here's my top 16.
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Interesting that you have the QB from the Super Bowl winning team that low. I think Herbert has the potential to be better than Matt Stafford but he sure wasn't this last year, I'd place Burrow ahead of Herbert for now. Dak Prescott hasn't really done anything much of consequence in the playoffs to be rated so highly. Watson was a top ten talent before his recent business, but I don't know about now. I would put Russel Wilson ahead of Derek Carr but I generally agree with the rest.
Wilson below Kyler in particular is what I don't understand at all. Kyler is a shorter, faster, more nimble, and not as good at passing version of Wilson from 5 years ago. And Wilson 5 years ago was not as good as today's Wilson.
We talking Russell or Zach?
Re: Stafford and his ranking. I just don't feel like he makes throws that ever make me say "wow". Yeah, he won the Super Bowl, but that was way more due to Aaron Donald than it was to Matthew Stafford.
Re: Kyler. He does things that I think are special. His ability to run obviously limits how defenses can control him.
Re: Russell. The last two years that offense hasn't done nearly as much as it should with Metcalf and Lockett. He takes a lot of sacks that I don't feel he needs to. His deep ball in particular this past year (and yes, I know he was injured) looked terrible. I just tend to think he's on the downside of his career.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 20, 2022, 11:27:28 AM
Re: Stafford and his ranking. I just don't feel like he makes throws that ever make me say "wow".
Not even
this one (https://tinyurl.com/334twrut)?
It's a good throw. I've seen all of the guys I have ranked above him do that too.
Also re: Stafford, I've seen a lot of talk lately of him now being a lock HOFer. Has he ever once been one of the top 5 QBs in the league? I personally feel he's more in the Hall of Very Good.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 20, 2022, 11:35:19 AM
Also re: Stafford, I've seen a lot of talk lately of him now being a lock HOFer. Has he ever once been one of the top 5 QBs in the league? I personally feel he's more in the Hall of Very Good.
If Stafford gets into the HoF, then the Ford family needs to be forced to sell the Lions
HoF QB & WR can't win a Division Title nor even a single Playoff Game together? In the era when the rules were seriously changing to favor the passing game? GTFOH
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 20, 2022, 11:57:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 20, 2022, 11:35:19 AM
Also re: Stafford, I've seen a lot of talk lately of him now being a lock HOFer. Has he ever once been one of the top 5 QBs in the league? I personally feel he's more in the Hall of Very Good.
If Stafford gets into the HoF, then the Ford family needs to be forced to sell the Lions
HoF QB & WR can't win a Division Title nor even a single Playoff Game together? In the era when the rules were seriously changing to favor the passing game? GTFOH
Hey Barry Sanders was arguably the greatest running back that ever played and the best the Lions ever could do with him was one NFC Championship game. At least the Lions has two Division Titles (1991 and 1993) when Barry Sanders was around.
Regarding Stafford, it might surprise some people how many fourth quarter comebacks the guy has.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/comebacks_career.htm
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 20, 2022, 11:35:19 AM
It's a good throw. I've seen all of the guys I have ranked above him do that too.
Also re: Stafford, I've seen a lot of talk lately of him now being a lock HOFer. Has he ever once been one of the top 5 QBs in the league? I personally feel he's more in the Hall of Very Good.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MGHYqoemX3U
OK. He's done it twice... Is that supposed to sway me?
Stafford has three seasons with a QB rating above 98 out of his thirteen played. Deshaun Watson has four... in four seasons.
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 07:56:27 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 04:48:28 PM
Justin Herbert will have the best overall stats of any rookie next year. (Helps he'll be picked later in the draft for a better team)
With the superb owl in the books, I went back to the beginning of the thread to change the title to 2022 and...
I have to give you your just due for this incredible prediction two years ago. A true gem in reply #1 to the thread... :cheers:
If you're not going to make new threads for each season, why even have the year there?
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 28, 2022, 05:53:24 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 07:56:27 PM
Quote from: Alps on February 04, 2020, 04:48:28 PM
Justin Herbert will have the best overall stats of any rookie next year. (Helps he'll be picked later in the draft for a better team)
With the superb owl in the books, I went back to the beginning of the thread to change the title to 2022 and...
I have to give you your just due for this incredible prediction two years ago. A true gem in reply #1 to the thread... :cheers:
If you're not going to make new threads for each season, why even have the year there?
Good question. I guess the concept of a thread for the current year started because we already had a general football thread, but it was for
all football, not just the NFL. And after 1 year, there didn't seem to be a hard and fast cut off point other than my own arbitrary one, so I just changed the title.
But I'd certainly be OK with splitting each year into its own thread... or just calling this one "NFL".
I'm in favor of having a separate thread for each year, and also separate threads for NFL and College.
In other NFL news, the host teams of the 2022 International Games have been announced:
3 London games - Packers, Saints, Jaguars
1 Mexico City game - Cardinals
1 Munich game - Buccaneers
Quote from: webny99 on February 28, 2022, 12:44:35 PM
In other NFL news, the host teams of the 2022 International Games have been announced:
3 London games - Packers, Saints, Jaguars
1 Mexico City game - Cardinals
1 Munich game - Buccaneers
Very surprising that the Packers are giving up a home game. The others, not so much. Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater. Jags always play in London. Cardinals are near Mexico. Bucs are going to see a major dip in revenue and fan support next year, so it makes sense that they're attempting to stay relevant by being the first team to host a game in Germany.
I'm gonna guess that the Packers will play the Jets in London, the Jags will play the Giants, the Saints will play the Ravens, and the Cardinals will play the Chargers. It's been confirmed that the Bucs will play the Chiefs.
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Very surprising that the Packers are giving up a home game.
On the other hand, the NFC has the extra home game next year, so it makes sense that 4 of 5 are from the NFC. And of those 4, there's one team from each division, so if you're going to have an NFC North team, the Packers make a lot more sense than the other teams in that division IMO.
Quote from: webny99 on February 28, 2022, 12:44:35 PM
In other NFL news, the host teams of the 2022 International Games have been announced:
3 London games - Packers, Saints, Jaguars
1 Mexico City game - Cardinals
1 Munich game - Buccaneers
Ugh, still with these foreign games, eh? This just in: Europe doesn't give a shit about American Football. If they did, they'd have their own leagues and shit. Give it up, Goddell.
The only foreign NFL games I support are like when they tried to do a preseason game in Winnipeg. That was cool, even if they had to shorten the field because of some divots or whatever. That's perfect because here's a country with it's own American Football league and it was a smaller city where it's a actually a big deal to host a game and not the 27th-most interesting thing one could do on a Sunday in like London or whatever.
It's kind of a cool idea, actually, to spread some exhibition games around to non-NFL cities. It could be fun to do especially in places that aren't likely to get their own team ever. Not every team every year, but have a couple of these novelty preseason matchups in places like Boise or Omaha or Birmingham or Louisville. It would be particular interesting to do with teams out west that have geographically large fan bases like the Seahawks and Cowboys and Chiefs. Hell, you could have the 'boys tour the Lone Star State over the course of several preseasons holding games in places like El Paso, San Antonio and Lubbock. Seems to be a lot of Cowboy fans in New Mexico; host a preseason game in Albuquerque.
There's plenty of college stadiums around the country that would perfectly capable of hosting an NFL preseason game.
That's my pitch; more domestic preseason games in novel locations. Because Seahawks vs. Chargers in Anchorage in August sounds dope!
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 28, 2022, 12:44:35 PM
In other NFL news, the host teams of the 2022 International Games have been announced:
3 London games - Packers, Saints, Jaguars
1 Mexico City game - Cardinals
1 Munich game - Buccaneers
Very surprising that the Packers are giving up a home game. The others, not so much. Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater. Jags always play in London. Cardinals are near Mexico. Bucs are going to see a major dip in revenue and fan support next year, so it makes sense that they're attempting to stay relevant by being the first team to host a game in Germany.
I'm gonna guess that the Packers will play the Jets in London, the Jags will play the Giants, the Saints will play the Ravens, and the Cardinals will play the Chargers. It's been confirmed that the Bucs will play the Chiefs.
If it wasn't for the 9th extra home game don't think the Packers would have been as friendly to this. Many Green Bay area businesses need the eight home games plus two preseason game and the family night(plus hopefully postseason games) to turn a profit. The Jersey Store and a few others around Lambeau went under last couple years due to not having, or having reduced, game day attendance.
Another factor was that the Packers were the last team not to play in the International Series.
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Can't wait for an offseason of ... made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
The Murray drama went to a whole new level yesterday with a long statement from Murray's agent that basically said he wants to be paid
now. This whole thing seems very unnecessary and isn't a great look for anyone involved. I could definitely see public sentiment starting to turn against Murray if this continues.
Quote from: webny99 on March 01, 2022, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Can't wait for an offseason of ... made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
The Murray drama went to a whole new level yesterday with a long statement from Murray's agent that basically said he wants to be paid now. This whole thing seems very unnecessary and isn't a great look for anyone involved. I could definitely see public sentiment starting to turn against Murray if this continues.
He needs to fire his agent immediately. That memo might as well have been written in Comic Sans.
Quote from: webny99 on March 01, 2022, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Can't wait for an offseason of ... made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
The Murray drama went to a whole new level yesterday with a long statement from Murray's agent that basically said he wants to be paid now. This whole thing seems very unnecessary and isn't a great look for anyone involved. I could definitely see public sentiment starting to turn against Murray if this continues.
Murray is being a Deshaun Watson by going public with this, as the negotiating should be done behind the scenes. But the Cardinals don't have much of a choice. If they don't pay him, they're going straight back to the gutter of the league. He knows that, I don't blame him for trying to get the bag as early as possible, but it would be better not to go public I think.
Quote from: thspfc on March 01, 2022, 12:20:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 01, 2022, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Can't wait for an offseason of ... made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
The Murray drama went to a whole new level yesterday with a long statement from Murray's agent that basically said he wants to be paid now. This whole thing seems very unnecessary and isn't a great look for anyone involved. I could definitely see public sentiment starting to turn against Murray if this continues.
Murray is being a Deshaun Watson by going public with this, as the negotiating should be done behind the scenes. But the Cardinals don't have much of a choice. If they don't pay him, they're going straight back to the gutter of the league. He knows that, I don't blame him for trying to get the bag as early as possible, but it would be better not to go public I think.
Murray needs to have a great season if he thinks this power play will work. He has progressed, but at this point he is a good qb, not a great one. I'd call his bluff as I wouldn't be giving anything near Rodgers/Mahomes level deals when nobody confuses him for either of them.
As a Packers fan I do thank Murray for that game ending INT during the 2021-22 season
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2022, 03:40:42 PM
It's kind of a cool idea, actually, to spread some exhibition games around to non-NFL cities. It could be fun to do especially in places that aren't likely to get their own team ever. Not every team every year, but have a couple of these novelty preseason matchups in places like Boise or Omaha or Birmingham or Louisville. It would be particular interesting to do with teams out west that have geographically large fan bases like the Seahawks and Cowboys and Chiefs. Hell, you could have the 'boys tour the Lone Star State over the course of several preseasons holding games in places like El Paso, San Antonio and Lubbock. Seems to be a lot of Cowboy fans in New Mexico; host a preseason game in Albuquerque.
There's plenty of college stadiums around the country that would perfectly capable of hosting an NFL preseason game.
That's my pitch; more domestic preseason games in novel locations. Because Seahawks vs. Chargers in Anchorage in August sounds dope!
Cleveland vs Cincinnati at Ohio State and Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia at Penn State would, I think, be very popular games.
Quote from: frankenroad on March 01, 2022, 02:39:09 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2022, 03:40:42 PM
It's kind of a cool idea, actually, to spread some exhibition games around to non-NFL cities. It could be fun to do especially in places that aren't likely to get their own team ever. Not every team every year, but have a couple of these novelty preseason matchups in places like Boise or Omaha or Birmingham or Louisville. It would be particular interesting to do with teams out west that have geographically large fan bases like the Seahawks and Cowboys and Chiefs. Hell, you could have the 'boys tour the Lone Star State over the course of several preseasons holding games in places like El Paso, San Antonio and Lubbock. Seems to be a lot of Cowboy fans in New Mexico; host a preseason game in Albuquerque.
There's plenty of college stadiums around the country that would perfectly capable of hosting an NFL preseason game.
That's my pitch; more domestic preseason games in novel locations. Because Seahawks vs. Chargers in Anchorage in August sounds dope!
Cleveland vs Cincinnati at Ohio State and Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia at Penn State would, I think, be very popular games.
As would Chicago vs Indy at Notre Dame or Purdue.
Quote from: frankenroad on March 01, 2022, 02:39:09 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2022, 03:40:42 PM
It's kind of a cool idea, actually, to spread some exhibition games around to non-NFL cities. It could be fun to do especially in places that aren't likely to get their own team ever. Not every team every year, but have a couple of these novelty preseason matchups in places like Boise or Omaha or Birmingham or Louisville. It would be particular interesting to do with teams out west that have geographically large fan bases like the Seahawks and Cowboys and Chiefs. Hell, you could have the 'boys tour the Lone Star State over the course of several preseasons holding games in places like El Paso, San Antonio and Lubbock. Seems to be a lot of Cowboy fans in New Mexico; host a preseason game in Albuquerque.
There's plenty of college stadiums around the country that would perfectly capable of hosting an NFL preseason game.
That's my pitch; more domestic preseason games in novel locations. Because Seahawks vs. Chargers in Anchorage in August sounds dope!
Cleveland vs Cincinnati at Ohio State and Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia at Penn State would, I think, be very popular games.
It seems like they used to do some of this. I remember when the Cowboys played the Oilers in Mexico City and when they played in London long before playing games in London was a thing. When the Cowboys held training camp here in Austin, they scrimmaged the Oilers here in Austin. not quite the same but pretty cool. That was before they tried to Jedi mind trick everyone in to believing a preseason game was just like a regular season game so they could justify almost charging the same price per ticket. You know, back before sports took themselves so seriously.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on March 01, 2022, 01:13:52 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 01, 2022, 12:20:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 01, 2022, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
Can't wait for an offseason of ... made-up drama about Kyler Murray.
The Murray drama went to a whole new level yesterday with a long statement from Murray's agent that basically said he wants to be paid now. This whole thing seems very unnecessary and isn't a great look for anyone involved. I could definitely see public sentiment starting to turn against Murray if this continues.
Murray is being a Deshaun Watson by going public with this, as the negotiating should be done behind the scenes. But the Cardinals don't have much of a choice. If they don't pay him, they're going straight back to the gutter of the league. He knows that, I don't blame him for trying to get the bag as early as possible, but it would be better not to go public I think.
Murray needs to have a great season if he thinks this power play will work. He has progressed, but at this point he is a good qb, not a great one. I'd call his bluff as I wouldn't be giving anything near Rodgers/Mahomes level deals when nobody confuses him for either of them.
As a Packers fan I do thank Murray for that game ending INT during the 2021-22 season
Top 12 quarterbacks signing new contracts demand top dollar. Teams' choices are pay them like they're top 3, or plunge into irrelevancy. Is Dak Prescott overpaid? Yes. Was there a better option? No.
I don't know why nobody understands this.
It's why the Vikings are over a barrel with Cousins. Are we gonna do better? Not likely. Could we do way worse? Absolutely.
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 28, 2022, 12:44:35 PM
In other NFL news, the host teams of the 2022 International Games have been announced:
3 London games - Packers, Saints, Jaguars
1 Mexico City game - Cardinals
1 Munich game - Buccaneers
Very surprising that the Packers are giving up a home game. The others, not so much. Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater. Jags always play in London. Cardinals are near Mexico. Bucs are going to see a major dip in revenue and fan support next year, so it makes sense that they're attempting to stay relevant by being the first team to host a game in Germany.
I'm gonna guess that the Packers will play the Jets in London, the Jags will play the Giants, the Saints will play the Ravens, and the Cardinals will play the Chargers. It's been confirmed that the Bucs will play the Chiefs.
No road team wants to give up the 'gate' revenue from hosting a Packer game. The Packers were otherwise going to host another home game and the fans are used to the 5:3 season ticketing split between northeastern Wisconsinites and the Milwaukeeans ('Green' package and 'gold' package season tickets for eight total regular season home games). My family has had a season ticket subscription for two seats that are now on the 'Green' package since 1962.
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater.
You really, really hate the city of New Orleans, don't you?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 10:38:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater.
You really, really hate the city of New Orleans, don't you?
I feel like New Orleans (including suburbs) is going to go the way of Galveston.
Quote from: mgk920 on March 02, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
???
I didn't know San Antonio had an NFL team.
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:39:21 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 02, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
???
I didn't know San Antonio had an NFL team.
They play at the home of Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur, known as Spurs.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 11:40:52 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:39:21 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 02, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
???
I didn't know San Antonio had an NFL team.
They play at the home of Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur, known as Spurs.
I know, that was purely in jest :bigass:
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:56:10 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 11:40:52 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:39:21 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 02, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
???
I didn't know San Antonio had an NFL team.
They play at the home of Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur, known as Spurs.
I know, that was purely in jest.
Sorry, no sarcasm smiley on here. I'm sure there are plenty of folks who are unaware.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 10:38:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater.
You really, really hate the city of New Orleans, don't you?
Yes.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:56:10 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 11:40:52 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 02, 2022, 11:39:21 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 02, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
The Spurs should sell out that game VERY QUICKLY, The Packers are one of the most popular NFL teams in the UK and Ireland.
Mike
???
I didn't know San Antonio had an NFL team.
They play at the home of Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur, known as Spurs.
I know, that was purely in jest.
Sorry, no sarcasm smiley on here. I'm sure there are plenty of folks who are unaware.
Check my new modified post above...
Quote from: thspfc on March 02, 2022, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 10:38:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater.
You really, really hate the city of New Orleans, don't you?
Yes.
Out of curiosity, how many times have you been there?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 03, 2022, 12:11:12 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 02, 2022, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 02, 2022, 10:38:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 28, 2022, 01:04:46 PM
Saints don't play as many homes games anyways because their city is frequently underwater.
You really, really hate the city of New Orleans, don't you?
Yes.
Out of curiosity, how many times have you been there?
None.
I hate North Korea too. Never been there.
NOLA obviously isn't near as bad as North Korea. But the point is, you can believe that a place is bad without going there.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2022, 03:40:42 PM
Ugh, still with these foreign games, eh? This just in: Europe doesn't give a shit about American Football. If they did, they'd have their own leagues and shit. Give it up, Goddell.
I agree with not going to Europe, it is way too much travel for any team; heck, a single roundtrip cross country flight from coast to coast is very tiring. And with the passport/visa and Covid situation, it just makes the Europe travel even worse. I have no problem with international, but just keep it within North America. Texans at Cowboys this fall would certainly be a big draw in Mexico.
Cowboys are likely to release Amari Cooper. Good move IMO. They've got too many large contracts to keep paying big money to their #2 WR. Plus, they'll have to pay CeeDee, Parsons, and Diggs in a couple years.
We saw them score 33 points against the Raiders, a playoff team, without both CeeDee and Amari. Dak was 32/47 for 375 yds and 2 TDs in that game. And the team melted down by committing 14 penalties, including a few huge PIs, and still only lost in overtime.
Bills training camp to return to St. John Fisher in Pittsford after two years staying at home. Makes sense too given their large fanbase presence in this area:
https://www.buffalobills.com/news/bills-agree-to-terms-with-st-john-fisher-college-to-host-training-camp-in-roches
I love hypocrisy:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33446869/nfl-suspends-atlanta-falcons-wr-calvin-ridley-least-2022-season-betting-games (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33446869/nfl-suspends-atlanta-falcons-wr-calvin-ridley-least-2022-season-betting-games)
Every other commercial and billboard surrounding an NFL game is for some sort of degenerate sports betting thing, yet if a player does it, "OH NOES!!"
This is rank hypocrisy from an entity that thrives because of gambling. So which is it, NFL? You gonna keep taking money from these people and keep having a double standard or clean house and punish yourselves the way you have Mr. Ridley?
And don't give me none of that "Oh the NFL doesn't get money directly from gambling" bullcrap. They have their own TV station that sells ads to gambling companies. They sell the rights to broadcast their games to other networks who in turn sell advertising to gambling companies effectively making them money launderers for the NFL to profit further from gambling.
Am I wrong in remembering that even NFL players are doing ads for gambling companies? I swear I've seen that. How is that kosher?
I don't see the problem with a player betting on themselves or on something where they're not involved, but betting on anything where they could influence the outcome by not playing optimally should remain prohibited.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2022, 04:06:56 PM
I love hypocrisy:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33446869/nfl-suspends-atlanta-falcons-wr-calvin-ridley-least-2022-season-betting-games (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33446869/nfl-suspends-atlanta-falcons-wr-calvin-ridley-least-2022-season-betting-games)
Every other commercial and billboard surrounding an NFL game is for some sort of degenerate sports betting thing, yet if a player does it, "OH NOES!!"
This is rank hypocrisy from an entity that thrives because of gambling. So which is it, NFL? You gonna keep taking money from these people and keep having a double standard or clean house and punish yourselves the way you have Mr. Ridley?
And don't give me none of that "Oh the NFL doesn't get money directly from gambling" bullcrap. They have their own TV station that sells ads to gambling companies. They sell the rights to broadcast their games to other networks who in turn sell advertising to gambling companies effectively making them money launderers for the NFL to profit further from gambling.
Am I wrong in remembering that even NFL players are doing ads for gambling companies? I swear I've seen that. How is that kosher?
1. Calvin Ridley puts $100k on Calvin Ridley having fewer than 82.5 receiving yards against the Giants.
2. Calvin Ridley intentionally drops passes.
3. Calvin Ridley finishes the game with 53 receiving yards.
4. Calvin Ridley makes a ton of money.
Quote from: 1 on March 07, 2022, 04:09:22 PM
I don't see the problem with a player betting on themselves or on something where they're not involved, but betting on anything where they could influence the outcome by not playing optimally should remain prohibited.
...which would be betting on themselves.
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 07, 2022, 05:43:23 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 07, 2022, 04:09:22 PM
I don't see the problem with a player betting on themselves or on something where they're not involved, but betting on anything where they could influence the outcome by not playing optimally should remain prohibited.
...which would be betting on themselves.
I meant for themselves or their team to win, where there is no advantage to be gained for playing differently from usual.
Quote from: 1 on March 07, 2022, 04:09:22 PM
I don't see the problem with a player betting on themselves or on something where they're not involved, but betting on anything where they could influence the outcome by not playing optimally should remain prohibited.
The other issue, even if the player isn't in the game, is whether the player can take unfair advantage of inside information, that lets the player make a more intelligent bet than non-insiders. That risk might be overstated in this instance, but the mere perception of such unfairness often comes up in securities fraud cases.
Aaron Rodgers signs a 4-year $200 million contract with the Packers.
Quote from: Big John on March 08, 2022, 11:46:41 AM
Aaron Rodgers signs a 4-year $200 million contract with the Packers.
The highest paid player in the league, so now they won't have any money to sign good skill players and he'll be grumpy. But "it's not about the money."
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 08, 2022, 12:02:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 08, 2022, 11:46:41 AM
Aaron Rodgers signs a 4-year $200 million contract with the Packers.
The highest paid player in the league, so now they won't have any money to sign good skill players and he'll be grumpy. But "it's not about the money."
The contract has a $153M signing bonus so they can delay the salary-cap hit and free up some cap room this year.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 08, 2022, 12:02:32 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 08, 2022, 11:46:41 AM
Aaron Rodgers signs a 4-year $200 million contract with the Packers.
The highest paid player in the league, so now they won't have any money to sign good skill players and he'll be grumpy. But "it's not about the money."
Chiefs should up Mahomes' contract to $50.1m per year just to give a big middle finger to Rodgers.
There are rumors that the Seahawks are trading Russ to the Broncos.
The Seahawks traded Russell Wilson to the Broncos in exchange for two 1sts, two 2nds, Drew Lock, and a couple of unidentified players. Head-scratcher for the Seahawks IMO. Even more so when you consider that they gave up two 1sts and a 3rd for Jamal Adams. Seattle got only a little more for Russell Wilson than they gave up for a safety. Yikes.
So, to the bottom of the West goes Seattle. I guess they were there already anyways.
The other West, meanwhile is loaded with two likely HOF quarterbacks, one that has a chance at the HOF, and one that'll be in the Hall of Pretty Good.
Denver won the trade.
Quote from: thspfc on March 08, 2022, 02:08:39 PM
The Seahawks traded Russell Wilson to the Broncos in exchange for two 1sts, two 2nds, Drew Lock, and a couple of unidentified players. Head-scratcher for the Seahawks IMO. Even more so when you consider that they gave up two 1sts and a 3rd for Jamal Adams. Seattle got only a little more for Russell Wilson than they gave up for a safety. Yikes.
So, to the bottom of the West goes Seattle. I guess they were there already anyways.
The other West, meanwhile is loaded with two likely HOF quarterbacks, one that has a chance at the HOF, and one that'll be in the Hall of Pretty Good.
Denver won the trade.
Apparently Seattle got Noah Fant, which is nice, but still doesn't make up for losing Wilson.
Now Russ can miss Sutton, Jeudy, and Patrick deep instead of Metcalf and Lockett. ;-)
Broncos pick up a franchise quarterback with great character. Much better than dealing with AR and his anal cleanses. :D :D :D
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 08, 2022, 02:33:15 PM
Broncos pick up a franchise quarterback with great character. Much better than dealing with AR and his anal cleanses. :D :D :D
Apparently the anal cleanses are an actual thing with him:
https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20220301/aaron-rodgers-panchakarma-cleanse
Quote from: Big John on March 08, 2022, 11:46:41 AM
Aaron Rodgers signs a 4-year $200 million contract with the Packers.
Apparently not so fast says Mr. Rodgers. He didn't sign the contract; he immunized it.
Quote from: jlam on March 08, 2022, 02:03:23 PM
There are rumors that the Seahawks are trading Russ to the Broncos.
Quote from: thspfc on March 08, 2022, 02:08:39 PM
The Seahawks traded Russell Wilson to the Broncos in exchange for two 1sts, two 2nds, Drew Lock, and a couple of unidentified players.
Wow!!! That came out of the blue - I really thought Russ was going to stay, and it wouldn't have shocked me if he stayed and they won the NFC West next year given the questions around the 49ers and Cardinals.
It's actually kind of an ironic trade... After months of Aaron Rodgers speculation, it ends up being his polar opposite that goes to the Broncos. Meanwhile Russ goes from the second toughest division to the only division that might be tougher, the Seahawks replace the Broncos as the only West team with major QB questions, and of course the Super Bowl that the Seahawks won with Russ was a 43-8 beatdown of none other than... the Denver Broncos.
This obviously makes the Broncos an immediate contender while the Seahawks likely shrink into the background. As for Wilson, Denver is obviously a good situation roster-wise, but I'm not sure you really gain that much by going from a conference that looks historically weak to the most loaded division in a loaded conference. There's going to be months of AFC West hype, but it will be mostly justified IMO, because there has never been a more stacked division at the QB position and it's not even close.
Quote from: webny99 on March 08, 2022, 03:31:47 PM
Quote from: jlam on March 08, 2022, 02:03:23 PM
There are rumors that the Seahawks are trading Russ to the Broncos.
Quote from: thspfc on March 08, 2022, 02:08:39 PM
The Seahawks traded Russell Wilson to the Broncos in exchange for two 1sts, two 2nds, Drew Lock, and a couple of unidentified players.
Wow!!! That came out of the blue - I really thought Russ was going to stay, and it wouldn't have shocked me if he stayed and they won the NFC West next year given the questions around the 49ers and Cardinals.
It's actually kind of an ironic trade... After months of Aaron Rodgers speculation, it ends up being his polar opposite that goes to the Broncos. Meanwhile Russ goes from the second toughest division to the only division that might be tougher, the Seahawks replace the Broncos as the only West team with major QB questions, and of course the Super Bowl that the Seahawks won with Russ was a 43-8 beatdown of none other than... the Denver Broncos.
This obviously makes the Broncos an immediate contender while the Seahawks likely shrink into the background. As for Wilson, Denver is obviously a good situation roster-wise, but I'm not sure you really gain that much by going from a conference that looks historically weak to the most loaded division in a loaded conference. There's going to be months of AFC West hype, but it will be mostly justified IMO, because there has never been a more stacked division at the QB position and it's not even close.
Indeed, the Broncos are now 12:1 to win the SB and the Seahawks are 60:1 or worse.
With all teams having quality QBs, quality o-line and receivers will come to the fore. Denver retains a large cap space budget to go after free agents and pick up linemen where they are often picked up: later rounds of the draft.
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 08, 2022, 05:00:54 PM
Indeed, the Broncos are now 12:1 to win the SB and the Seahawks are 60:1 or worse.
With all teams having quality QBs, quality o-line and receivers will come to the fore. Denver retains a large cap space budget to go after free agents and pick up linemen where they are often picked up: later rounds of the draft.
I'll happily lay 12:1 to anyone who would like to bet.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 08, 2022, 02:35:59 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 08, 2022, 02:33:15 PM
Broncos pick up a franchise quarterback with great character. Much better than dealing with AR and his anal cleanses. :D :D :D
Apparently the anal cleanses are an actual thing with him:
https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20220301/aaron-rodgers-panchakarma-cleanse
No more Shailene Woodley probably means no more of this stupidity. She bragged about eating clay, something most people figure out is a bad idea in kindergarten. Now that's he staying in a place she clearly gives zero "anal cleanses" about, he starts to go back to normal.
The Wilson trade makes sense in the world of Jody Allen. She's managed to damage almost all of Paul Allen's community assets (Seahawks, Blazers, Cinerama, Living Computers Museum) since taking over the estate.
That Wilson trade is one that nobody saw coming! Perhaps the Broncos are hoping that lightning will strike twice?The reason I'm saying this is because the last time they acquired a big-name QB (Peyton Manning), they won their third Super Bowl (but ironically lost their fifth to the man they just got). Tom Brady's winning his seventh overall Super Bowl in his first season with the Buccaneers may also serve as inspiration for the trade.
Quote from: Henry on March 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
That Wilson trade is one that nobody saw coming! Perhaps the Broncos are hoping that lightning will strike twice?The reason I'm saying this is because the last time they acquired a big-name QB (Peyton Manning), they won their third Super Bowl (but ironically lost their fifth to the man they just got). Tom Brady's winning his seventh overall Super Bowl in his first season with the Buccaneers may also serve as inspiration for the trade.
Nobody saw coming? I think the general consensus was that the Broncos were going to go after Wilson if they didn't get Rodgers. The only mystery was whether or not Seattle would part with him.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 10:22:49 AM
Nobody saw coming? I think the general consensus was that the Broncos were going to go after Wilson if they didn't get Rodgers. The only mystery was whether or not Seattle would part with him.
... and Pete Carroll said at the combine that they had "no intention of making a move" at the QB position. :pan:
In the big picture, it's not that much of a shocker. But the fact that it happened on March 8th, 2022, after a month where everyone was talking about Aaron Rodgers while the general consensus was that Wilson would stay put, was a bit of of shocker.
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 10:35:46 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 10:22:49 AM
Nobody saw coming? I think the general consensus was that the Broncos were going to go after Wilson if they didn't get Rodgers. The only mystery was whether or not Seattle would part with him.
... and Pete Carroll said at the combine that they had "no intention of making a move" at the QB position. :pan:
In the big picture, it's not that much of a shocker. But the fact that it happened on March 8th, 2022, after a month where everyone was talking about Aaron Rodgers while the general consensus was that Wilson would stay put, was a bit of of shocker.
I wouldn't call it the consensus that he was staying put at all. Everything I had read was that it was more up in the air than any other QB other than Rodgers. Now we still, in theory, have Watson, Wentz, Carr, Cousins, Tua, Trubisky, and Hurts that could go somewhere.
The Wilson trade looks like a good deal for Seattle. This QB has 2 seasons worth of playtime left. The Seahawks are not in the mix for a Super Bowl berth so they need to rebuild. Wilson's contact is a high cost. Getting a slew of draft choices for the 2022 draft and some more good spots in 2023's draft due to finishing below .500 sets them up for a bright future. The more chances one has to swing the bat, the greater the chance to get a hit.
Al Davis would trade players off just before they ran out of steam to get draft choices. It worked for the Raiders. How well Seattle does in draft choices and injuries to them will determine the value realized from this trade.
Rick
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 10:45:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 10:35:46 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 10:22:49 AM
Nobody saw coming? I think the general consensus was that the Broncos were going to go after Wilson if they didn't get Rodgers. The only mystery was whether or not Seattle would part with him.
... and Pete Carroll said at the combine that they had "no intention of making a move" at the QB position.
In the big picture, it's not that much of a shocker. But the fact that it happened on March 8th, 2022, after a month where everyone was talking about Aaron Rodgers while the general consensus was that Wilson would stay put, was a bit of of shocker.
I wouldn't call it the consensus that he was staying put at all. Everything I had read was that it was more up in the air than any other QB other than Rodgers. Now we still, in theory, have Watson, Carr, Cousins, Tua, Trubisky, and Hurts that could go somewhere.
The high note their season ended on, with 89 points in 2 games, seemed to have calmed things down, although that obviously wasn't the case behind the scenes. Wilson hadn't really been talked about much at all in the past 2-3 weeks, unless you know of some sources that I don't. That kind of speaks for itself - if people thought he would be moving, it would have been talked about way more. I think basically any media member you might have asked in that time frame would have pegged it higher than 50% (but obviously not 100%) that he returned to Seattle.
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 10:59:24 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 10:45:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 10:35:46 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 10:22:49 AM
Nobody saw coming? I think the general consensus was that the Broncos were going to go after Wilson if they didn't get Rodgers. The only mystery was whether or not Seattle would part with him.
... and Pete Carroll said at the combine that they had "no intention of making a move" at the QB position.
In the big picture, it's not that much of a shocker. But the fact that it happened on March 8th, 2022, after a month where everyone was talking about Aaron Rodgers while the general consensus was that Wilson would stay put, was a bit of of shocker.
I wouldn't call it the consensus that he was staying put at all. Everything I had read was that it was more up in the air than any other QB other than Rodgers. Now we still, in theory, have Watson, Carr, Cousins, Tua, Trubisky, and Hurts that could go somewhere.
The high note their season ended on, with 89 points in 2 games, seemed to have calmed things down, although that obviously wasn't the case behind the scenes. Wilson hadn't really been talked about much at all in the past 2-3 weeks, unless you know of some sources that I don't. That kind of speaks for itself - if people thought he would be moving, it would have been talked about way more. I think basically any media member you might have asked in that time frame would have pegged it higher than 50% (but obviously not 100%) that he returned to Seattle.
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Quote from: nexus73 on March 09, 2022, 10:55:21 AM
This QB has 2 seasons worth of playtime left.
I'm not sure about that. Wilson's playing style doesn't necessarily lend itself to a career well into his 40's like Tom Brady, but he's only 33! It would be pretty surprising if he was playing too poorly to be a starter and/or retired at age 35.
Quote from: nexus73 on March 09, 2022, 10:55:21 AM
Getting a slew of draft choices for the 2022 draft and some more good spots in 2023's draft due to finishing below .500 sets them up for a bright future. The more chances one has to swing the bat, the greater the chance to get a hit.
That's probably true, but I wouldn't just assume they'll finish below .500, and I'm not sure it really matters if they do or not. I don't like the idea of any team just throwing away a season for "the future" which may or may not pan out. They have an OK roster and I think they should at least be competitive this year, maybe even in the division.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
Just scrolled across my TV screen: Colts trading Carson Wentz to the Commanders. No indication of the return to the Colts.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 01:56:01 PM
Just scrolled across my TV screen: Colts trading Carson Wentz to the Commanders. No indication of the return to the Colts.
Carson Wentz bringing back the L in NFC Least... :-D
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 09, 2022, 01:56:01 PM
Just scrolled across my TV screen: Colts trading Carson Wentz to the Commanders. No indication of the return to the Colts.
Two 3rds wherethe 2023 3rd could become a 2nd.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Just one condition I'd like to add: the bet is off if Wilson misses 5 or more games due to injury.
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 06:01:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Just one condition I'd like to add: the bet is off if Wilson misses 5 or more games due to injury.
If it were money I'd say no. Words on "paper"? Sure.
Oh, no. Amari Cooper. Gotta feel bad for the guy, getting traded to a team whose barely-above-replacement-level quarterback has found a way to significantly lower the productivity of every decent receiver he's ever played with.
Quote from: thspfc on March 12, 2022, 06:58:19 PM
Oh, no. Amari Cooper. Gotta feel bad for the guy, getting traded to a team whose barely-above-replacement-level quarterback has found a way to significantly lower the productivity of every decent receiver he's ever played with.
"Every" meaning just one (OBJ)?
Quote from: webny99 on March 12, 2022, 09:32:56 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 12, 2022, 06:58:19 PM
Oh, no. Amari Cooper. Gotta feel bad for the guy, getting traded to a team whose barely-above-replacement-level quarterback has found a way to significantly lower the productivity of every decent receiver he's ever played with.
"Every" meaning just one (OBJ)?
Landry wants out.
Quote from: thspfc on March 12, 2022, 10:42:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 12, 2022, 09:32:56 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 12, 2022, 06:58:19 PM
Oh, no. Amari Cooper. Gotta feel bad for the guy, getting traded to a team whose barely-above-replacement-level quarterback has found a way to significantly lower the productivity of every decent receiver he's ever played with.
"Every" meaning just one (OBJ)?
Landry wants out.
Because he can make more elsewhere, not because Baker significantly lowered his production.
Tom Brady unretired.
https://twitter.com/TomBrady/status/1503147141795045378
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 13, 2022, 07:25:03 PM
Tom Brady unretired.
https://twitter.com/TomBrady/status/1503147141795045378
DANG IT!!! THE GOAT IS BACK! :pan:
THIS IS THE WORST NEWS SINCE SYRACUSE NOT COMING IN THE TOURNEY!
*flushes toilet*
BEDTIME FOR ME! :colorful: :colorful: :colorful:
Just when you think Tom Brady couldn't possibly be more egotistical...
I guess that I missed the part where the Bucs have a better roster than last year?
Brady's extended contract with Tampa is up after this season. If Tampa is either really good or really disappointing this season (wins it all or misses the playoffs), I would not at all be shocked to see Brady end up on a third team in 2023.
For now, just happy he's back :D
I'm not sure "happy" is the word I'd use. It always seemed kind of strange that Brady was retiring even though it was clear he hadn't declined to a point where physically he couldn't play anymore, so I'm not shocked, but the NFL would have still been plenty exciting without Brady. It's obviously exciting for Bucs fans but probably more of a collective groan from the other 31 fanbases.
The NFC South also took a hard turn this weekend from looking like potentially historically bad division to looking OK-ish with the Brady un-retirement and the Saints and Panthers being leading contenders for Deshaun Watson.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 13, 2022, 07:25:03 PM
Tom Brady unretired.
https://twitter.com/TomBrady/status/1503147141795045378
Brady is just trying to keep up with Favre in un-retirements.
It's amazing how TB12 upended the NCAA's Men and Women's Tournament Selection Sunday, the return of baseball from the lockout, and a pretty good day of NBA and NHL games while reminding everyone why football is the only sport that the country cannot live without. (Sorry to any other sport I forgot to mention). Not to mention it's a gift to the sports media-industrial complex.
As for the announcement itself, I'm not surprised (and neither is anyone else in the aforementioned etc sports media complex here, who will be talking about this for days). His retirement seemed kind of sloppy and forced, with suspicious timing; he can still play at an elite level; he's not yet 45 (his stated age to retire, tho that will change, too); and Tampa Bay didn't make any high-profile moves to bring in a new starting QB, suggesting they knew this might happen. For his sake, he had better play at the same level he did since coming ago Tampa if he wants to avoid the inevitable Favre comparisons.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 13, 2022, 07:25:03 PM
Tom Brady unretired.
https://twitter.com/TomBrady/status/1503147141795045378
The ultimate troll on the guy that paid over $500,000 for Brady's "last" touchdown pass football. :rofl:
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 14, 2022, 05:39:16 AM
It's amazing how TB12 upended the NCAA's Men and Women's Tournament Selection Sunday, the return of baseball from the lockout, and a pretty good day of NBA and NHL games while reminding everyone why football is the only sport that the country cannot live without. (Sorry to any other sport I forgot to mention). Not to mention it's a gift to the sports media-industrial complex.
Yep (https://tinyurl.com/ywevvu89)! :D
Quote from: tchafe1978 on March 13, 2022, 10:30:08 PM
Brady is just trying to keep up with Favre in un-retirements.
You might even say Brady favres playing football over retiring.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on March 13, 2022, 10:30:08 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 13, 2022, 07:25:03 PM
Tom Brady unretired.
https://twitter.com/TomBrady/status/1503147141795045378
Brady is just trying to keep up with Favre in un-retirements.
IIRC, Brady once said that he wanted to play until he was 50. Well, he's five years away from that one...but yeah, his un-retirement is a major development in the sports world. No matter how much you love or hate the guy, he'll always be the center of attention, which is what the latest news just proved.
Reports are in stating that Mitch Trubisky is the replacement for Big Ben.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 14, 2022, 05:18:53 PM
Reports are in stating that Mitch Trubisky is the replacement for Big Ben.
I don't like it for Pittsburgh. Should've gone after Jimmy G.
Quote from: thspfc on March 14, 2022, 05:24:25 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 14, 2022, 05:18:53 PM
Reports are in stating that Mitch Trubisky is the replacement for Big Ben.
I don't like it for Pittsburgh. Should've gone after Jimmy G.
I feel the same for Washington and Wentz. He isn't the answer for them.
They should apply the 22nd Amendment to quarterbacks.
Refreshing to see so many other teams lamenting their QB choices.
Denver's got Russ. We're ecstatic. :D :D :D
Quote from: thspfc on March 14, 2022, 05:24:25 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 14, 2022, 05:18:53 PM
Reports are in stating that Mitch Trubisky is the replacement for Big Ben.
I don't like it for Pittsburgh. Should've gone after Jimmy G.
Hoping for him his time in Buffalo helped him get back on course to be a decent NFL QB. Thankful as a Packers fan his time as a Bear he didn't do much, but Mitch has more upside than Jimmy G if he had the right system IMHO. Will depend how badly the Bears and their coaches could have ruined him.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on March 14, 2022, 06:40:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 14, 2022, 05:24:25 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 14, 2022, 05:18:53 PM
Reports are in stating that Mitch Trubisky is the replacement for Big Ben.
I don't like it for Pittsburgh. Should've gone after Jimmy G.
Hoping for him his time in Buffalo helped him get back on course to be a decent NFL QB. Thankful as a Packers fan his time as a Bear he didn't do much, but Mitch has more upside than Jimmy G if he had the right system IMHO. Will depend how badly the Bears and their coaches could have ruined him.
Jimmy G's upside was a trip to the Super Bowl (even though he did very little on that Super Bowl run). Yet somehow I agree that Trubisky's upside is higher, while also having very little faith that he will lead the Steelers on any deep playoff runs.
The Bears have been through QB after QB, believing that they've kept picking the wrong QB when the reality is they've consistently had one of the worst offensive lines in the league and no QB can thrive with such a bad OL.
Jim McMahon wasn't some hall of fame, super QB. He was a decent QB who had an elite offensive line and the best RB of all time.
The truth is we don't know what Trubisky can do on a team with a good OL. I don't follow the Steelers so I don't know how good their OL is.
Quote from: webny99 on March 15, 2022, 08:09:39 AM
Yet somehow I agree that Trubisky's upside is higher, while also having very little faith that he will lead the Steelers on any deep playoff runs.
I will point out that Trubisky had the Bears in position to advance to the Divisional round in 2018-19...then the Double Doink happened.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 15, 2022, 08:15:50 AM
The Bears have been through QB after QB, believing that they've kept picking the wrong QB when the reality is they've consistently had one of the worst offensive lines in the league and no QB can thrive with such a bad OL.
Jim McMahon wasn't some hall of fame, super QB. He was a decent QB who had an elite offensive line and the best RB of all time.
The truth is we don't know what Trubisky can do on a team with a good OL. I don't follow the Steelers so I don't know how good their OL is.
The Steelers don't have a good O-line at this time. But what is to their best benefit is consistency as they aren't firing their HC and coordinators almost every other year. And they tend to draft well so he'll get a much fairer shot than he did as a Bear.
I'm watching the Deshaun Watson sweepstakes with interest. Here's what I think about what each team in the running.
- Saints: NOLA does have a somewhat good roster that nearly got them into playoff contention last year despite quarterback troubles. They're probably the team best suited to deal with any potential suspension, as Winston and Hill are both decent backups who can fill in if necessary. If they were to make a trade, I would like to see Kamara join the Texans.
- Browns: Okay, this one I do not like. No offense to Baker Mayfield, but if the Browns were to trade him I think he would cause more drama than he's worth for the Texans. I want to see the Texans rebuild under Davis Mills. Adding a similar quarterback who may be exiting his prime does not appeal to me. Maybe as part of a three-way deal this could work (Side note, if this trade were to take place who would be considered the 5th best quarterback in the NFC? Kirk Cousins?)
- Panthers: This one makes sense on all sides. Panthers need a quarterback, Deshaun Watson played college near there, Panthers can load off CMC, who I think would be a great fit for the Texans.
^ Even though the Browns are reportedly interested in Watson, I'm not sure he would agree to play in Cleveland given his no trade clause.
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 15, 2022, 03:23:24 PM
I'm watching the Deshaun Watson sweepstakes with interest. Here's what I think about what each team in the running.
- Saints: NOLA does have a somewhat good roster that nearly got them into playoff contention last year despite quarterback troubles. They're probably the team best suited to deal with any potential suspension, as Winston and Hill are both decent backups who can fill in if necessary. If they were to make a trade, I would like to see Kamara join the Texans.
- Browns: Okay, this one I do not like. No offense to Baker Mayfield, but if the Browns were to trade him I think he would cause more drama than he's worth for the Texans. I want to see the Texans rebuild under Davis Mills. Adding a similar quarterback who may be exiting his prime does not appeal to me. Maybe as part of a three-way deal this could work (Side note, if this trade were to take place who would be considered the 5th best quarterback in the NFC? Kirk Cousins?)
- Panthers: This one makes sense on all sides. Panthers need a quarterback, Deshaun Watson played college near there, Panthers can load off CMC, who I think would be a great fit for the Texans.
You missed that Atlanta is also apparently in the mix. Would also make sense since Matt Ryan could start this year if Watson gets suspended.
So basically the entire NFC South except the team that just got the GOAT back, LOL! :sombrero:
Everyone is leaving Cleveland, and I for one am here for it.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2022, 11:02:49 PM
Everyone is leaving Cleveland, and I for one am here for it.
Amari Cooper?
The Giants signed QB Tyrod Taylor.
Quote from: plain on March 16, 2022, 07:14:00 PM
The Giants signed QB Tyrod Taylor.
Now watch Daniel Jones become the next Tom Brady.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2022, 11:02:49 PM
Everyone is leaving Cleveland, and I for one am here for it.
The whole thing with the Browns and Mayfield has such strange energy. It seems basically impossible for Browns fans to feel good about any of this. You obviously don't like it if you're a Mayfield fan, but even if you're not, it's hard to see a clear plan forward, certainly it seems unlikely that Mayfield will return in 2022 and with Watson being the main upgrade option, that's still a pretty murky situation as well. Whatever ends up happening, I think the organization is overreacting to last year and has badly mishandled this whole situation.
Hard pivot: Von Miller to the Bills!
https://www.nfl.com/news/pass-rusher-von-miller-signing-with-bills-on-six-year-120m-deal
Quote from: jlam on March 16, 2022, 08:48:56 PM
Quote from: plain on March 16, 2022, 07:14:00 PM
The Giants signed QB Tyrod Taylor.
Now watch Daniel Jones become the next Tom Brady.
If we get back to the winning side of things because of it then I'm good :-D
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Hard pivot: Von Miller to the Bills!
https://www.nfl.com/news/pass-rusher-von-miller-signing-with-bills-on-six-year-120m-deal
This is a big commitment to a 33-year old linebacker, regardless of his resume. Bills fans had better hope it works out.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 17, 2022, 02:25:37 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Hard pivot: Von Miller to the Bills!
https://www.nfl.com/news/pass-rusher-von-miller-signing-with-bills-on-six-year-120m-deal
This is a big commitment to a 33-year old linebacker, regardless of his resume. Bills fans had better hope it works out.
It is, but the Bills' window to win is right now, and from what I understand most of the guaranteed money is in the first years so they can get out of it if his play declines. The general vibe here is more just excitement that free agents actually want to come to Buffalo, which is a big shift from the past 2 decades of mediocrity.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Hard pivot: Von Miller to the Bills!
https://www.nfl.com/news/pass-rusher-von-miller-signing-with-bills-on-six-year-120m-deal
Very happy for Von getting paid. Very sad that Denver couldn't work something out.
Also, the Bills and Cole Beasley are parting ways. Being a Cowboys fan and seeing the team lose 2 wide receivers this week, it would be nice to get him back.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on March 17, 2022, 03:03:06 PM
Also, the Bills and Cole Beasley are parting ways. Being a Cowboys fan and seeing the team lose 2 wide receivers this week, it would be nice to get him back.
You can have him, frankly :biggrin: He was good for the Bills for 3 seasons, but I think Isaiah McKenzie has higher upside and I have no problem with them moving on.
Rams sign Allen Robinson. I'm almost never against loading up at the skill positions, but I don't like this move. Their #1 receiver is the best player in the league. Their #2 and #3 receivers on their own would be one of the best 1-2 punches in the NFL. Their #4 receiver could be a #2 on many teams. How many WRs do you need? The Rams use 3 wide receiver sets about as frequently as anyone in the league. This ensures that on almost every down, TWO of Kupp, Woods, OBJ, Robinson, and Jefferson will be on the sideline. What is the point of that? They just lost an excellent pass blocking left tackle, and they're splurging on adding a 5th starting-caliber WR after basically Kupp and OBJ alone got them the production needed to win the SB.
The only way this move ends up being justified is if Robinson goes for like 1500 yds and 15 TDs, or if the Rams get 2+ major injuries to WRs.
Quote from: thspfc on March 17, 2022, 04:30:52 PM
The only way this move ends up being justified is if Robinson goes for like 1500 yds and 15 TDs, or if the Rams get 2+ major injuries to WRs.
... or if OBJ doesn't come back to the Rams next season.
Brady should have to play for the Jets as penance for changing his mind about retirement. :-D
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 04:41:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 17, 2022, 04:30:52 PM
The only way this move ends up being justified is if Robinson goes for like 1500 yds and 15 TDs, or if the Rams get 2+ major injuries to WRs.
... or if OBJ doesn't come back to the Rams next season.
Even then it's still not necessary.
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
Quote from: Big John on March 17, 2022, 08:19:34 PM
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
The arms race in the AFC Wild West continues! I'll set the over/under for combined wins by the AFC West at 40.5.
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 10:27:21 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 17, 2022, 08:19:34 PM
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
The arms race in the AFC Wild West continues! I'll set the over/under for combined wins by the AFC West at 40.5.
However, now that I think about it, I think the bigger story is the fact that Adams is going to a much tougher division in a much tougher conference, to a team with a worse (though still good) QB and probably a worse roster. I know everything is about the money, but there are reports that the Packers made an offer the same as the Raiders and Adams chose to move on anyways.
It seems pretty clear that this trade significantly lowers the odds of a Super Bowl title for 1) the Packers franchise, 2) Aaron Rodgers, and 3) Davante Adams. And I would imagine Rodgers isn't too thrilled given that Adams was by far his top WR. What am I missing here? :confused:
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 17, 2022, 07:18:53 PM
Brady should have to play for the Jets as penance for changing his mind about retirement. :-D
Belichick storms into Brady's room, carrying a deflated football. "This yours? Your mother said she found it in your closet!"
Brady: "Look, Dad, it's-"
Belichick: "Where did you get it? Answer me! Who taught you how to do this stuff?"
Brady "You, all right? I learned it by watching you!"
Quote from: tchafe1978 on March 18, 2022, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 18, 2022, 08:16:25 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 10:27:21 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 17, 2022, 08:19:34 PM
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
The arms race in the AFC Wild West continues! I'll set the over/under for combined wins by the AFC West at 40.5.
However, now that I think about it, I think the bigger story is the fact that Adams is going to a much tougher division in a much tougher conference, to a team with a worse (though still good) QB and probably a worse roster. I know everything is about the money, but there are reports that the Packers made an offer the same as the Raiders and Adams chose to move on anyways.
It seems pretty clear that this trade significantly lowers the odds of a Super Bowl title for 1) the Packers franchise, 2) Aaron Rodgers, and 3) Davante Adams. And I would imagine Rodgers isn't too thrilled given that Adams was by far his top WR. What am I missing here? :confused:
Rodgers aparrently knew the Adams trade was in the works when he was renegotiating his own contract, so he was plenty aware of what was going on. Now the Packers can use cap space they would've used on Adams towards signing or trading for another #1 reciever and now they also have two more draft picks to potentially use on a receiver. Also, this brings the "Last dance" posts from last summer by Adams and Rodgers full circle, as it was really their last dance together. Though it wasn't Rodgers leaving like everyone was predicting, but Adams instead.
I guess that makes sense (now that I fixed your quote for you :-P).
Wow.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-deshaun-watson-traded-to-cleveland-browns-194855151.html
Watson is reportedly going to the Browns. Texans get 3 first-rounders and 2 second-rounders.
Quote from: webny99 on March 18, 2022, 03:01:32 PM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on March 18, 2022, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 18, 2022, 08:16:25 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 10:27:21 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 17, 2022, 08:19:34 PM
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
The arms race in the AFC Wild West continues! I'll set the over/under for combined wins by the AFC West at 40.5.
However, now that I think about it, I think the bigger story is the fact that Adams is going to a much tougher division in a much tougher conference, to a team with a worse (though still good) QB and probably a worse roster. I know everything is about the money, but there are reports that the Packers made an offer the same as the Raiders and Adams chose to move on anyways.
It seems pretty clear that this trade significantly lowers the odds of a Super Bowl title for 1) the Packers franchise, 2) Aaron Rodgers, and 3) Davante Adams. And I would imagine Rodgers isn't too thrilled given that Adams was by far his top WR. What am I missing here? :confused:
Rodgers aparrently knew the Adams trade was in the works when he was renegotiating his own contract, so he was plenty aware of what was going on. Now the Packers can use cap space they would've used on Adams towards signing or trading for another #1 reciever and now they also have two more draft picks to potentially use on a receiver. Also, this brings the "Last dance" posts from last summer by Adams and Rodgers full circle, as it was really their last dance together. Though it wasn't Rodgers leaving like everyone was predicting, but Adams instead.
I guess that makes sense (now that I fixed your quote for you :-P).
Two other factors. 1) Packers are 6-0 with Rodgers but without Adams over the last couple years when Adams has missed games. 2) Adams and Carr are very close friends. They were roommates at Fresno State and have continued to be close friends over the years. Adams actually wants to play football again with Carr.
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 18, 2022, 04:04:28 PM
Wow.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-deshaun-watson-traded-to-cleveland-browns-194855151.html
Watson is reportedly going to the Browns. Texans get 3 first-rounders and 2 second-rounders.
Wow is right. I'm stunned. No idea what to think other than let's see what happens.
Quote from: skluth on March 18, 2022, 04:14:32 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 18, 2022, 04:04:28 PM
Wow.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-deshaun-watson-traded-to-cleveland-browns-194855151.html
Watson is reportedly going to the Browns. Texans get 3 first-rounders and 2 second-rounders.
Wow is right. I'm stunned. No idea what to think other than let's see what happens.
Make that three WOW's. I don't think this happens if the Browns are in the NFC. AFC teams are getting desperate knowing they have zero chance without a great QB, and now it gets even more stacked presuming Watson actually plays.
If Watson had gone to the Falcons, I was going to predict Matt Ryan to the Colts. But with Baker now likely to be traded, I'll predict Baker to the Seahawks. I think his personality and attitude are a good fit for the next era in Seattle.
The only thing I'm not surprised by is this dropping late on a Friday afternoon, because you know both sides want to get this trade done with as little media attention as possible and there's probably plenty of Browns fans who aren't going to be happy about this. It's rare to feel bad for a fanbase when they just traded for a supposedly superstar QB but I kind of do feel bad for Browns fans... not just because of Watson's off field issues, but because they give up 3 first rounders and I'm not sure it makes them significantly better than about 10 other AFC teams.
It just would not be that surprising if they never exceed their best season with Baker (11 wins) or get any further in the playoffs with Watson.
Quote from: webny99 on March 18, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 18, 2022, 04:14:32 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 18, 2022, 04:04:28 PM
Wow.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-deshaun-watson-traded-to-cleveland-browns-194855151.html
Watson is reportedly going to the Browns. Texans get 3 first-rounders and 2 second-rounders.
Wow is right. I'm stunned. No idea what to think other than let's see what happens.
Make that three WOW's. I don't think this happens if the Browns are in the NFC. AFC teams are getting desperate knowing they have zero chance without a great QB, and now it gets even more stacked presuming Watson actually plays.
If Watson had gone to the Falcons, I was going to predict Matt Ryan to the Colts. But with Baker now likely to be traded, I'll predict Baker to the Seahawks. I think his personality and attitude are a good fit for the next era in Seattle.
My God, the Browns better win a Super Bowl in the next 2-3 years (not gonna happen) because they're about to be in for another generation of stink.
Browns fans were obsessed with Baker and hopefully aren't happy with him being replaced with a serial sexual abuser. (had they replaced Baker with someone like Jimmy G, I'd have approved of that move) Anyways, 3 firsts and 2 seconds is way too much to give up for a guy that a) sexually assaulted at least a dozen women, and b) attempted to force his way out of the last team he was on because he was mad that he only got to play QB and not be the GM or team owner.
I hope this backfires massively for both Watson and the Browns, and if there was ever anything that could get me to root for Baker, it's this.
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 10:27:21 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 17, 2022, 08:19:34 PM
Packers trade WR Adams to the Raiders.
The arms race in the AFC Wild West continues! I'll set the over/under for combined wins by the AFC West at 40.5.
Add the Chiefs signing Juju Smith-Schuster.
My Texans are back to that all-too-familiar place of rebuilding. This Fall will be their 20-year anniversary since their first game in franchise history, and already our fourth rebuilding bid, which might already surpass the number of rebuild bids of other NFL team that have been around longer. All thanks to Bill 0'Brien's destruction of the team, and the ungrateful Deshaun Watson's trade demands. Kind of bittersweet that he's no longer with us, he was the franchise QB the Texans have been waiting for, but now I guess he's the Browns' problem now. I really don't know what to think right now except it's going to be another long road to recovery.
The Colts have picked up QB Matt Ryan from the Falcons.
Quote from: plain on March 21, 2022, 02:03:24 PM
The Colts have picked up QB Matt Ryan from the Falcons.
Nice!! I was sort of hoping that would happen. It makes a lot of sense for both sides, kind of like the Phillip Rivers signing a few years ago.
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 03:00:37 PM
Quote from: plain on March 21, 2022, 02:03:24 PM
The Colts have picked up QB Matt Ryan from the Falcons.
Nice!! I was sort of hoping that would happen. It makes a lot of sense for both sides, kind of like the Phillip Rivers signing a few years ago.
Atlanta only got a 3rd round pick though. Cements that the Falcons are not going to be any good this year.
Also the Saints are re-signing Jameis. Can't wait to watch this disaster.
Quote from: thspfc on March 21, 2022, 03:26:37 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 03:00:37 PM
Quote from: plain on March 21, 2022, 02:03:24 PM
The Colts have picked up QB Matt Ryan from the Falcons.
Nice!! I was sort of hoping that would happen. It makes a lot of sense for both sides, kind of like the Phillip Rivers signing a few years ago.
Atlanta only got a 3rd round pick though. Cements that the Falcons are not going to be any good this year.
I agree they could have gotten more in return, but they probably weren't going to be good anyways. They were pretty lucky to be 7-10 last year with one of the worst rosters in the league.
https://twitter.com/MoveTheSticks/status/1505210239947137024
...and now suddenly the Pittsburgh Steelers, bastion of organizational stability, have the biggest QB question mark in the entire AFC, easily. All of the other 15 teams have their QB or are going to find out if they do this season.
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 07:10:44 PM
https://twitter.com/MoveTheSticks/status/1505210239947137024
...and now suddenly the Pittsburgh Steelers, bastion of organizational stability, have the biggest QB question mark in the entire AFC, easily. All of the other 15 teams have their QB or are going to find out if they do this season.
Are the Steelers not going to find out if they have their guy? I don't think they have their guy, but we're going to find out for sure.
Quote from: thspfc on March 21, 2022, 07:26:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 07:10:44 PM
...and now suddenly the Pittsburgh Steelers, bastion of organizational stability, have the biggest QB question mark in the entire AFC, easily. All of the other 15 teams have their QB or are going to find out if they do this season.
Are the Steelers not going to find out if they have their guy? I don't think they have their guy, but we're going to find out for sure.
Maybe, if they draft a QB. But even then, they would be the only AFC team with a rookie. Trubisky might give them OK QB play for a couple years, but there's no way they expect him or Mason Rudolph to be their long term starter.
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 07:37:07 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 21, 2022, 07:26:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 21, 2022, 07:10:44 PM
...and now suddenly the Pittsburgh Steelers, bastion of organizational stability, have the biggest QB question mark in the entire AFC, easily. All of the other 15 teams have their QB or are going to find out if they do this season.
Are the Steelers not going to find out if they have their guy? I don't think they have their guy, but we're going to find out for sure.
Maybe, if they draft a QB. But even then, they would be the only AFC team with a rookie. Trubisky might give them OK QB play for a couple years, but there's no way they expect him or Mason Rudolph to be their long term starter.
I think Trubisky is a placeholder and they plan to draft a QB in 2023 which has several decent QB prospects. This year's class has been called the worst QB class since 2013 (https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-draft-ranking-every-quarterback-class-since-2000) (at least by a couple ESPN talking heads).
Quote from: Alps on March 18, 2022, 04:36:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 18, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 18, 2022, 04:14:32 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 18, 2022, 04:04:28 PM
Wow.
https://sports.yahoo.com/report-deshaun-watson-traded-to-cleveland-browns-194855151.html
Watson is reportedly going to the Browns. Texans get 3 first-rounders and 2 second-rounders.
Wow is right. I'm stunned. No idea what to think other than let's see what happens.
Make that three WOW's. I don't think this happens if the Browns are in the NFC. AFC teams are getting desperate knowing they have zero chance without a great QB, and now it gets even more stacked presuming Watson actually plays.
If Watson had gone to the Falcons, I was going to predict Matt Ryan to the Colts. But with Baker now likely to be traded, I'll predict Baker to the Seahawks. I think his personality and attitude are a good fit for the next era in Seattle.
My God, the Browns better win a Super Bowl in the next 2-3 years (not gonna happen) because they're about to be in for another generation of stink.
Quote from: thspfc on March 18, 2022, 05:08:36 PM
Browns fans were obsessed with Baker and hopefully aren't happy with him being replaced with a serial sexual abuser. (had they replaced Baker with someone like Jimmy G, I'd have approved of that move) Anyways, 3 firsts and 2 seconds is way too much to give up for a guy that a) sexually assaulted at least a dozen women, and b) attempted to force his way out of the last team he was on because he was mad that he only got to play QB and not be the GM or team owner.
I hope this backfires massively for both Watson and the Browns, and if there was ever anything that could get me to root for Baker, it's this.
Funny how a couple of years ago we said the exact same thing about the Bengals when they drafted Joe Burrow, and now they're coming off a miraculous season that unfortunately ended in a Super Bowl loss. As for the guy I'm thankfully not related to, the Browns are screwing it up big time when they traded for him. In any case, Burrow has become everything that Baker wasn't, which is a nice surprise of sorts. Don't be surprised if Cincinnati continues to have the superior team in OH for several more years, at least until inevitably the Bungles thing comes back to bite them in the ass.
(But even if it does happen, Cleveland will still be the bigger mess based on the latest development going on.)
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-post-2022-nfl-free-agency
Not that I couldn't find a few quibbles with these rankings, but it is noteworthy that 11 of the top 16 teams are in the AFC (meaning 11 of the bottom 16 teams are in the NFC). The only AFC teams in the bottom half are the Steelers, Dolphins, Jets, Texans, and Jaguars.
Quote from: webny99 on March 22, 2022, 12:15:50 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-post-2022-nfl-free-agency
Not that I couldn't find a few quibbles with these rankings, but it is noteworthy that 11 of the top 16 teams are in the AFC (meaning 11 of the bottom 16 teams are in the NFC). The only AFC teams in the bottom half are the Steelers, Dolphins, Jets, Texans, and Jaguars.
Ok, here's my way-too-early rankings for this year:
Tier 1: Super Bowl contenders1. Rams
2. Buccaneers
3. Bills
4. Chiefs
5. Broncos
6. Bengals
Tier 2: Will most likely make the playoffs7. Colts
8. Packers
9. Cowboys
10. Browns
11. Patriots
12. Cardinals
13. Titans
Tier 3: Playoff bubble14. Chargers
15. 49ers
16. Ravens
17. Vikings
18. Raiders
19. Steelers
20. Eagles
21. Dolphins
Tier 4: Not good but not completely awful22. Washington
23. Saints
24. Jets
25. Bears
26. Seahawks
Tier 5: Roll out the tanks27. Giants
28. Jaguars
29. Texans
30. Falcons
31. Lions
32. Panthers
OK, I've now realized that I have 8 AFC teams in the top two categories, which speaks to how deep the AFC is in terms of playoff teams.
I'll take my shot. Difference between me and thspfc shown in parentheses.
Super Bowl Contenders
1. Buccaneers (+1)
2. Bills (+1)
3. Chargers (+11)
4. Rams (-3)
5. Chiefs (-1)
Will Most Likely Make the Playoffs
6. Cowboys (+3)
7. Colts (-)
8. Titans (+5)
9. Bengals (-3)
10. Patriots (+1)
11. Packers (-3)
Playoff Bubble
12. Browns (-2)
13. Ravens (+3)
14. Broncos (-9)
15. 49ers (-)
16. Vikings (+1)
17. Raiders (+1)
18. Cardinals (-6)
19. Eagles (+1)
Not Horrible
20. Dolphins (+1)
21. Jaguars (+7)
22. Steelers (-3)
23. Bears (+2)
24. Saints (-1)
Roll Out the Tanks
25. Commanders (-3)
26. Jets (-2)
27. Falcons (+3)
28. Texans (+1)
29. Giants (-2)
30. Lions (+1)
31. Seahawks (-5)
32. Panthers (-)
Wow, so low on the Giants. I think they'll be at least tier 4, maybe tier 3. Tyrod Taylor is a lot better than their backups last year, which will keep them from falling to embarrassing new lows if something happens to Daniel Jones. And if he stays healthy, I think they could be a .500 team.
I would also move up whoever gets Baker Mayfield (probably Seahawks or Panthers?)
Quote from: webny99 on March 22, 2022, 03:06:02 PM
Wow, so low on the Giants. I think they'll be at least tier 4, maybe tier 3. Tyrod Taylor is a lot better than their backups last year, which will keep them from falling to embarrassing new lows if something happens to Daniel Jones. And if he stays healthy, I think they could be a .500 team.
I would also move up whoever gets Baker Mayfield (probably Seahawks or Panthers?)
Who did they add that will improve them from their 4-13 record? (Other than a new coach who might be worth a game)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 22, 2022, 03:45:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 22, 2022, 03:06:02 PM
Wow, so low on the Giants. I think they'll be at least tier 4, maybe tier 3. Tyrod Taylor is a lot better than their backups last year, which will keep them from falling to embarrassing new lows if something happens to Daniel Jones. And if he stays healthy, I think they could be a .500 team.
I would also move up whoever gets Baker Mayfield (probably Seahawks or Panthers?)
Who did they add that will improve them from their 4-13 record? (Other than a new coach who might be worth a game)
The Giants are such a disaster from the Judge/Gettleman 2.0 era that they'll need a few years to recover.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 22, 2022, 03:55:20 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 22, 2022, 03:45:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 22, 2022, 03:06:02 PM
Wow, so low on the Giants. I think they'll be at least tier 4, maybe tier 3. Tyrod Taylor is a lot better than their backups last year, which will keep them from falling to embarrassing new lows if something happens to Daniel Jones. And if he stays healthy, I think they could be a .500 team.
I would also move up whoever gets Baker Mayfield (probably Seahawks or Panthers?)
Who did they add that will improve them from their 4-13 record? (Other than a new coach who might be worth a game)
The Giants are such a disaster from the Judge/Gettleman 2.0 era that they'll need a few years to recover.
I agree that they aren't going to be a great team for at least a few years, but it's impossible to be worse than they were last year. I think the new coaching staff plus a solid veteran backup raises their floor to 5-6 wins and their ceiling to a fringe playoff team.
As for players, they haven't added anyone too flashy but that's not surprising for a non-Super Bowl contending team. Three solid O-line starters, Matt Brieda who had flashes with the Bills, and of course Tyrod. All signings that will make them competitive while they rebuild, similar to Buffalo in 2017-18. Of course I want to see it work because the coach and GM came from Buffalo, but still, it's not crazy to imagine the Jones-Daboll pairing works out, Jones has a bounceback season, and they're in the playoff mix in December.
Tyreek to the Dolphins. Bizarre trade for the Chiefs, unless they package it for a defensive player. For now, dropping down a bit in the ranks above.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 01:15:31 PM
Tyreek to the Dolphins. Bizarre trade for the Chiefs, unless they package it for a defensive player. For now, dropping down a bit in the ranks above.
Wow. Of course this makes them worse in the immediate term, but I guess it's not
that surprising - it probably had to happen eventually and they got a pretty good return IMO.
From a Bills angle, would rather have Tyreek Hill in the division than on the Chiefs, which is saying quite a bit. I saw someone point out that the Bills were already playing him twice a year (at least in 2020-21), so him being in the division makes no difference - and might even be an advantage with a worse QB throwing to him :sombrero:
And more wow:
https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1506322285589897217
Patriots got Malcolm Butler back!
Only real thing that we've done this free agency except lose players
My interest in the NFL started exactly couple of decades ago (Texans 20th anniversary in case you're wondering why), but it seems to me that this might be the wildest most active offseason that I know of. Many high-profile names either traded or signed. It really is turning out to be the most expensive game of poker in NFL history to see which club has the best hand dealt to them. On paper now compared to on the field this fall will be two very different things. The obvious differences between them -- health, legal issues, and do the players fit in with the right team system -- will be the three largest factors that will determine who played their hand the best. For example, it is still TBD if Deshaun will fit in with the Browns system, or if Russell will fit in with the Broncos system.
Quote from: jgb191 on March 24, 2022, 02:06:19 PM
My interest in the NFL started exactly couple of decades ago (Texans 20th anniversary in case you're wondering why), but it seems to me that this might be the wildest most active offseason that I know of. Many high-profile names either traded or signed. It really is turning out to be the most expensive game of poker in NFL history to see which club has the best hand dealt to them. On paper now compared to on the field this fall will be two very different things. The obvious differences between them -- health, legal issues, and do the players fit in with the right team system -- will be the three largest factors that will determine who played their hand the best. For example, it is still TBD if Deshaun will fit in with the Browns system, or if Russell will fit in with the Broncos system.
"Fitting into the system" is not the question. When you get a quarterback as talented as Russ or Deshaun, you have to make the system fit them. Prime example is John Harbaugh completely overhauling the Ravens offense in 2018 when Lamar took over for Flacco. If Russ and Deshaun fail due to the offensive systems, it will be because the coaching staff didn't adjust well enough to the quarterback, not because the quarterback didn't adjust well enough to the coaching staff.
^ If only we could live in that dream world where we all could pick and choose our bosses, co-workers, pay, and job descriptions at work; no one would ever quit. But in the real world, we are stuck with the cast of employees and employers that we are dealt with. Besides, it would be a scary world to live in if a player or worker gets to have that much power over an organization. The Browns are probably going to regret handing Deshaun nearly a quarter-billion dollars; all that money could have been used to upgrade or retool the team.
Bills new stadium deal announced, keeping the team in Buffalo. I wish that the billionaires paid for their own stadium but that's just the way things work I guess.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-buffalo-bills-nfl-business-sports-b16413591ee74ffb5a5bd2431d914910
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2022, 11:45:47 AM
Bills new stadium deal announced, keeping the team in Buffalo. I wish that the billionaires paid for their own stadium but that's just the way things work I guess.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-buffalo-bills-nfl-business-sports-b16413591ee74ffb5a5bd2431d914910
I understand that Buffalo takes pride in playing outdoors in the cold, but an enclosed stadium is a better option financially. You get stuff like NCAA tournament games, college football games, and maybe even a Super Bowl.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 28, 2022, 01:26:22 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2022, 11:45:47 AM
Bills new stadium deal announced, keeping the team in Buffalo. I wish that the billionaires paid for their own stadium but that's just the way things work I guess.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-buffalo-bills-nfl-business-sports-b16413591ee74ffb5a5bd2431d914910
I understand that Buffalo takes pride in playing outdoors in the cold, but an enclosed stadium is a better option financially. You get stuff like NCAA tournament games, college football games, and maybe even a Super Bowl.
Not that I put too much stock into the rumblings that the Bills would actually leave, but it's good to see this finally happening.
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
Super Bowl hosting tiers:
Gold:
Miami (though declining stadium has kept them out of the rotation for a while)
Phoenix
Houston
New Orleans
Tampa
Los Angeles
presumably Las Vegas
Silver (maybe one every blue moon, or new stadium, or outsized importance)
Dallas (because of fuckups with SB XLV both of their own doing and not, they're not higher)
Atlanta
Detroit
Minneapolis
San Francisco
New York City
Indianapolis
Jacksonville
MAYBE the new DC stadium gets one if Snyder sells the team
Never, due to hotel capacity issues and/or conflict with NFL's Super Bowl weather rule:
Chicago
Green Bay
Buffalo
Seattle
Nashville
Charlotte
Foxboro
Kansas City
Denver
Philly
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 28, 2022, 02:51:22 PM
Super Bowl hosting tiers:
Gold:
Miami (though declining stadium has kept them out of the rotation for a while)
Phoenix
Houston
New Orleans
Tampa
Los Angeles
presumably Las Vegas
Silver (maybe one every blue moon, or new stadium, or outsized importance)
Dallas (because of fuckups with SB XLV both of their own doing and not, they're not higher)
Atlanta
Detroit
Minneapolis
San Francisco
New York City
Indianapolis
Jacksonville
MAYBE the new DC stadium gets one if Snyder sells the team
Never, due to hotel capacity issues and/or conflict with NFL's Super Bowl weather rule:
Chicago
Green Bay
Buffalo
Seattle
Nashville
Charlotte
Foxboro
Kansas City
Denver
Philly
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Cincinnati
I think the NFL has already chosen Vegas to host this one, no?
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 28, 2022, 01:26:22 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2022, 11:45:47 AM
Bills new stadium deal announced, keeping the team in Buffalo. I wish that the billionaires paid for their own stadium but that's just the way things work I guess.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-buffalo-bills-nfl-business-sports-b16413591ee74ffb5a5bd2431d914910
I understand that Buffalo takes pride in playing outdoors in the cold, but an enclosed stadium is a better option financially. You get stuff like NCAA tournament games, college football games, and maybe even a Super Bowl.
Not that I put too much stock into the rumblings that the Bills would actually leave, but it's good to see this finally happening.
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
In this manner, Buffalo and Green Bay are really of a kind in the NFL. Possibly including Kansas City.
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
Between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, both sides of the border, really not enough hotel capacity? I haven't been up that way in a long time, but usually "tourist trap" areas tend to have hotel space
Quote from: jlam on March 28, 2022, 04:30:23 PM
I think the NFL has already chosen Vegas to host this one, no?
Yes, but my comment referred to if they return to Vegas in relatively short order after 2023, which is likely.
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 28, 2022, 07:22:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
Between Buffalo and Niagra Falls, both sides of the border, really not enough hotel capacity? I haven't been up that way in a long time, but usually "tourist trap" areas tend to have hotel space
The Buffalo area is really only about 1/4-1/3 the size of most Super Bowl host cities. Many of the fans that fill the stadium come from southern Ontario, Batavia, Rochester, and further.
If you included all of the Niagara hotels on both sides, then
maybe... but some of those would be close to an hour away factoring in the border, which is probably a bridge too far (no pun intended :D)
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 09:20:11 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 28, 2022, 07:22:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
Between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, both sides of the border, really not enough hotel capacity? I haven't been up that way in a long time, but usually "tourist trap" areas tend to have hotel space
The Buffalo area is really only about 1/4-1/3 the size of most Super Bowl host cities. Many of the fans that fill the stadium come from southern Ontario, Batavia, Rochester, and further.
If you included all of the Niagara hotels on both sides, then maybe... but some of those would be close to an hour away factoring in the border, which is probably a bridge too far (no pun intended :D)
Ever been out to LA? I feel like Downtown to the Airport (near where SoFi stadium is) is about an hour!
I don't think the NFL would consider hotel space within an hour of the venue as "too far away."
It is all academic, anyway. Bills are staying outdoors
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 28, 2022, 09:51:07 PM
Ever been out to LA? I feel like Downtown to the Airport (near where SoFi stadium is) is about an hour!
I don't think the NFL would consider hotel space within an hour of the venue as "too far away."
It is all academic, anyway. Bills are staying outdoors
In LA, short distances can take forever due to the traffic, whereas the mileages would be much greater in WNY.
But yes, it's not going to happen either way because it's outdoors and there's also a minimum seat requirement which the new stadium likely won't meet as it's proposed to be one of the smallest stadiums capacity-wise in the NFL.
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 28, 2022, 07:22:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
Between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, both sides of the border, really not enough hotel capacity? I haven't been up that way in a long time, but usually "tourist trap" areas tend to have hotel space
MOTEL space? Sure. Actual five-star HOTEL space? Not hardly. Example: The NFL, for the Super Bowl in LA this year, headquartered at the Intercontinental Los Angeles Downtown - brand new, 73 stories, super swank. That's the standard for lodging they look for in a venue. In Buffalo, the Hyatt Regency is probably top of the line, and it's not even 400 rooms. (They don't really care where the actual paying visitors stay - but the few thousand NFL staff, press, NFLPA staff, players, etc. - those folks are not going to settle for the Courtyard Downtown Buffalo.)
Downtown Buffalo, at least parts of it, are actually on the upswing. But not enough of an upswing to host the Super Bowl.
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 08:47:39 AM
Downtown Buffalo, at least parts of it, are actually on the upswing. But not enough of an upswing to host the Super Bowl.
Just imagine how big the upswing will be if and when the Bills and the Sabres will win their first Super Bowl and Stanley Cup championships.
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 08:47:39 AM
Downtown Buffalo, at least parts of it, are actually on the upswing. But not enough of an upswing to host the Super Bowl.
And it's not just adequate top quality hotel space; they've made the decision to build an open-air stadium, so there is zero chance they'll ever get a Super Bowl.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 28, 2022, 02:51:22 PM
Super Bowl hosting tiers:
Gold:
Miami (though declining stadium has kept them out of the rotation for a while)
Phoenix
Houston
New Orleans
Tampa
Los Angeles
presumably Las Vegas
Silver (maybe one every blue moon, or new stadium, or outsized importance)
Dallas (because of fuckups with SB XLV both of their own doing and not, they're not higher)
Atlanta
Detroit
Minneapolis
San Francisco
New York City
Indianapolis
Jacksonville
MAYBE the new DC stadium gets one if Snyder sells the team
Never, due to hotel capacity issues and/or conflict with NFL's Super Bowl weather rule:
Chicago
Green Bay
Buffalo
Seattle
Nashville
Charlotte
Foxboro
Kansas City
Denver
Philly
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Cincinnati
You forgot Baltimore, and they're probably going into the bottom tier anyway.
Chicago may move up if they elect to build an enclosed stadium, but I'll admit even that is still a long shot.
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 28, 2022, 04:49:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2022, 01:55:39 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 28, 2022, 01:26:22 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2022, 11:45:47 AM
Bills new stadium deal announced, keeping the team in Buffalo. I wish that the billionaires paid for their own stadium but that's just the way things work I guess.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-buffalo-bills-nfl-business-sports-b16413591ee74ffb5a5bd2431d914910
I understand that Buffalo takes pride in playing outdoors in the cold, but an enclosed stadium is a better option financially. You get stuff like NCAA tournament games, college football games, and maybe even a Super Bowl.
Not that I put too much stock into the rumblings that the Bills would actually leave, but it's good to see this finally happening.
Sure, an enclosed stadium would be ideal, but it's more expensive, college football isn't a big thing around here, and Buffalo is probably never going to host the Super Bowl regardless. It's just not big enough to have the hotel capacity, among other constraints.
In this manner, Buffalo and Green Bay are really of a kind in the NFL. Possibly including Kansas City.
Yay, good for Buffalo! The Bills really need their new stadium, and this is the best news they can get on that front. The NFL building new stadiums at a record pace is a reminder of how much MLB sucks in this regard, as Oakland and Tampa Bay are still struggling to get new ballparks.
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 04:05:28 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
And now the analytics say that it's better for you to lose the coin toss!
Because it's always better to know what you need first. If you lose the toss and the other team gets 7, you know you have to go for it on 4th every time. If you win the toss, you could go for it on 4th sometimes, but you're flying blind.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 04:45:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 04:05:28 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
And now the analytics say that it's better for you to lose the coin toss!
Because it's always better to know what you need first. If you lose the toss and the other team gets 7, you know you have to go for it on 4th every time. If you win the toss, you could go for it on 4th sometimes, but you're flying blind.
Doesn't the winner of the toss get to choose whether they go first or second?
Quote from: 1 on March 29, 2022, 05:05:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 04:45:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 04:05:28 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
And now the analytics say that it's better for you to lose the coin toss!
Because it's always better to know what you need first. If you lose the toss and the other team gets 7, you know you have to go for it on 4th every time. If you win the toss, you could go for it on 4th sometimes, but you're flying blind.
Doesn't the winner of the toss get to choose whether they go first or second?
I suppose you're right. Not sure what I read earlier that made me think otherwise. My apologies. Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 29, 2022, 05:05:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 04:45:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 04:05:28 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
And now the analytics say that it's better for you to lose the coin toss!
Because it's always better to know what you need first. If you lose the toss and the other team gets 7, you know you have to go for it on 4th every time. If you win the toss, you could go for it on 4th sometimes, but you're flying blind.
Doesn't the winner of the toss get to choose whether they go first or second?
I suppose you're right. Not sure what I read earlier that made me think otherwise. My apologies. Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Not necessarily. If neither team scores or it's tied after each team has one possession, first score still wins.
Quote from: skluth on March 29, 2022, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 29, 2022, 05:05:10 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 04:45:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 04:05:28 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-approve-modified-overtime-rule-ensuring-possession-for-both-teams-in- :cheers:
There's starting to be a pretty clear case that we will look back at the Bills-Chiefs divisional round game as changing the landscape of the NFL between this overtime rule change and the way it changed teams' pursuit of top-tier quarterbacks.
And now the analytics say that it's better for you to lose the coin toss!
Because it's always better to know what you need first. If you lose the toss and the other team gets 7, you know you have to go for it on 4th every time. If you win the toss, you could go for it on 4th sometimes, but you're flying blind.
Doesn't the winner of the toss get to choose whether they go first or second?
I suppose you're right. Not sure what I read earlier that made me think otherwise. My apologies. Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Not necessarily. If neither team scores or it's tied after each team has one possession, first score still wins.
I don't see why that would ever make me choose to go first.
I'm glad to see this change, but I don't think it's going to have much if any visible effect as it only applies to the postseason. Since 1965, there have only been 32 NFL postseason games that have gone to overtime, and only 13 of them involved a team not getting a possession - compared to 574 games in the regular season since they started playing regular-season overtime in 1974. That means as things stand now, only 2.15% of historical overtimes would be played differently today.
I see no reason why it shouldn't be extended to regular-season games.
Quote from: US 89 on March 29, 2022, 05:40:39 PM
I see no reason why it shouldn't be extended to regular-season games.
It probably will be eventually. Change is always more palatable in small bites.
Although to be fair, the 2% of OT games that will be affected are by far the most consequential 2% considering they're always elimination games. It's rare to have an overtime elimination game in the regular season, although ironically we did have one this season (the SNF Chargers-Raiders finale) that was the subject of much drama because of the stakes and the tie scenario, but didn't see the OT rules come under fire since both teams possessed the ball (and scored!)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:28:52 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 29, 2022, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Not necessarily. If neither team scores or it's tied after each team has one possession, first score still wins.
I don't see why that would ever make me choose to go first.
I'm not sure it's so clear-cut. Like many aspects of the game, there's a strategic element, so the best decision could vary from team to team and game to game. For one thing, if you were on defense last in regulation, you might want to give your defense a breather. For another, if you're playing another good offense you might want to set yourself up with the first sudden-death possession, which would mean getting the ball first (and then third).
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:28:52 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 29, 2022, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Not necessarily. If neither team scores or it's tied after each team has one possession, first score still wins.
I don't see why that would ever make me choose to go first.
I'm not sure it's so clear-cut. Like many aspects of the game, there's a strategic element, so the best decision could vary from team to team and game to game. For one thing, if you were on defense last in regulation, you might want to give your defense a breather. For another, if you're playing another good offense you might want to set yourself up with the first sudden-death possession, which would mean getting the ball first (and then third).
In your second scenario, why wouldn't you just go for two after seeing them score and go for an extra point? Just like college OT, teams who won the toss will always go second.
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 07:38:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 29, 2022, 05:40:39 PM
I see no reason why it shouldn't be extended to regular-season games.
It probably will be eventually. Change is always more palatable in small bites.
Yep, there is precedent for changing the playoffs first and then extending it to the regular season later.
The current rule was for the playoffs only in 2010 and 2011 and was then extended to the regular season in 2012.
The concept of sudden death overtime itself was first implemented for playoff games in the 1940's but did not apply to regular season games until 1974.
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:28:52 PM
I don't see why that would ever make me choose to go first.
I'm not sure it's so clear-cut. Like many aspects of the game, there's a strategic element, so the best decision could vary from team to team and game to game. For one thing, if you were on defense last in regulation, you might want to give your defense a breather. For another, if you're playing another good offense you might want to set yourself up with the first sudden-death possession, which would mean getting the ball first (and then third).
Another thing to mention is this frees up a team to chose field direction as their choice after winning the toss during an adverse weather game if they feel that is a bigger advantage than getting the ball first or second.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 30, 2022, 08:29:23 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:28:52 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 29, 2022, 05:21:24 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 29, 2022, 05:07:22 PM
Either way, everyone is going to choose to go second.
Not necessarily. If neither team scores or it's tied after each team has one possession, first score still wins.
I don't see why that would ever make me choose to go first.
I'm not sure it's so clear-cut. Like many aspects of the game, there's a strategic element, so the best decision could vary from team to team and game to game. For one thing, if you were on defense last in regulation, you might want to give your defense a breather. For another, if you're playing another good offense you might want to set yourself up with the first sudden-death possession, which would mean getting the ball first (and then third).
In your second scenario, why wouldn't you just go for two after seeing them score and go for an extra point? Just like college OT, teams who won the toss will always go second.
For the same reason many teams don't go for two when scoring a TD at the end of regulation. It brings the whole game down to that one play and if you miss it, you lose.
Quote from: webny99 on March 30, 2022, 10:18:30 AM
For the same reason many teams don't go for two when scoring a TD at the end of regulation. It brings the whole game down to that one play and if you miss it, you lose.
But I guess in your scenario you're so worried about the other team's offense that you'd take a non-optimal position to hope at best for the sudden death, why wouldn't you take the higher variance play which is better for you?
Quote from: webny99 on March 29, 2022, 07:38:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 29, 2022, 05:40:39 PM
I see no reason why it shouldn't be extended to regular-season games.
It probably will be eventually. Change is always more palatable in small bites.
Although to be fair, the 2% of OT games that will be affected are by far the most consequential 2% considering they're always elimination games. It's rare to have an overtime elimination game in the regular season, although ironically we did have one this season (the SNF Chargers-Raiders finale) that was the subject of much drama because of the stakes and the tie scenario, but didn't see the OT rules come under fire since both teams possessed the ball (and scored!)
Breaking OT ties is fine for the playoffs, but I kind of like the regular-season rule where if no team scores at the end of the extra period, then the game ends in a tie. It's akin to what the NHL did until a few years ago; now OT losses award one point for the team that lost the game, as opposed to two for a win (no matter how long it took), and zero for a regulation loss.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 30, 2022, 10:25:12 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 30, 2022, 10:18:30 AM
For the same reason many teams don't go for two when scoring a TD at the end of regulation. It brings the whole game down to that one play and if you miss it, you lose.
But I guess in your scenario you're so worried about the other team's offense that you'd take a non-optimal position to hope at best for the sudden death, why wouldn't you take the higher variance play which is better for you?
I'm just not convinced going first is always non-optimal. If you go first and score, you're in a very favorable position. If you score and get a stop, you win. If you score and don't get a stop, you
could lose on a 2 pt conversion, but they likely kick the XP to tie and then all you need is a FG.
(https://i.postimg.cc/hjsShbpV/Screenshot-2022-03-30-102856.png)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 30, 2022, 12:29:27 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/hjsShbpV/Screenshot-2022-03-30-102856.png)
That's fine, but that's college. The NFL is not even close to being the same as college, even with the changed rules.
I think it's way more important in the pros. The knowledge of whether or not you need to go for it on fourth down is much more important with a full field.
I would think going first in OT opens up a lot more possibilities and strategies. Whether or not they score, and whether it be 3, 6, 7 or 8 points, the defense will use that to their advantage on the opposing team's possession to determine how to attack the offense. If the opposing team ties after their possession, now it's back to sudden death with the 1st team having the ball.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 30, 2022, 01:05:29 PM
I would think going first in OT opens up a lot more possibilities and strategies. Whether or not they score, and whether it be 3, 6, 7 or 8 points, the defense will use that to their advantage on the opposing team's possession to determine how to attack the offense. If the opposing team ties after their possession, now it's back to sudden death with the 1st team having the ball.
True that both sides have more information on the second possession, not just the offense.
I know that it is just a game and can its own quirky rules, but wouldn't it make sense for the NFL to just have a 15 minute overtime period in the playoffs, with more added on if needed?
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 30, 2022, 01:36:41 PM
I know that it is just a game and can its own quirky rules, but wouldn't it make sense for the NFL to just have a 15 minute overtime period in the playoffs, with more added on if needed?
I suppose, but the objective is to get the game over with quickly.
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Wow Bruce Arians surprise retirement.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 31, 2022, 01:33:51 AM
Wow Bruce Arians surprise retirement.
Wonder if it had anything to do with Tom Brady's un-retirement.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 31, 2022, 05:06:04 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 31, 2022, 01:33:51 AM
Wow Bruce Arians surprise retirement.
Wonder if it had anything to do with Tom Brady's un-retirement.
With a Super Bowl ring in hand, there's not a lot left to prove, so it's a massive commitment if you're not that invested. If he's retiring
with Brady, I can't imagine he would have stayed
without Brady (he will also be in a front office position apparently, so still with the organization).
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Usually not until May.
Quote from: Buck87 on March 31, 2022, 09:16:31 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Usually not until May.
Yes, the NFL has spaced out their events so they hit every month of the offseason. March = combine, April = draft, May = schedule release. June = minicamps. July = training camps start. August = preseason games.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 31, 2022, 09:21:08 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on March 31, 2022, 09:16:31 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Usually not until May.
Yes, the NFL has spaced out their events so they hit every month of the offseason. March = combine, April = draft, May = schedule release. June = minicamps. July = training camps start. August = preseason games.
Just as the sun never set on the British Empire, the NFL really doesn't have an offseason. I think they have it planned masterfully so they are always relevant.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on April 01, 2022, 01:26:36 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 31, 2022, 09:21:08 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on March 31, 2022, 09:16:31 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Usually not until May.
Yes, the NFL has spaced out their events so they hit every month of the offseason. March = combine, April = draft, May = schedule release. June = minicamps. July = training camps start. August = preseason games.
Just as the sun never set on the British Empire, the NFL really doesn't have an offseason. I think they have it planned masterfully so they are always relevant.
For all of its controversies, the NFL has indeed mastered the sports universe.
Quote from: webny99 on March 31, 2022, 07:52:32 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 31, 2022, 05:06:04 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 31, 2022, 01:33:51 AM
Wow Bruce Arians surprise retirement.
Wonder if it had anything to do with Tom Brady's un-retirement.
With a Super Bowl ring in hand, there's not a lot left to prove, so it's a massive commitment if you're not that invested. If he's retiring with Brady, I can't imagine he would have stayed without Brady (he will also be in a front office position apparently, so still with the organization).
Probably true, but that won't stop the sports media industry from having a field day.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 01, 2022, 01:34:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 31, 2022, 07:52:32 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 31, 2022, 05:06:04 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 31, 2022, 01:33:51 AM
Wow Bruce Arians surprise retirement.
Wonder if it had anything to do with Tom Brady's un-retirement.
With a Super Bowl ring in hand, there's not a lot left to prove, so it's a massive commitment if you're not that invested. If he's retiring with Brady, I can't imagine he would have stayed without Brady (he will also be in a front office position apparently, so still with the organization).
Probably true, but that won't stop the sports media industry from having a field day.
I do agree that the timing is very odd. Brady definitely knew in advance given his well-prepared statement that came out almost immediately.
It think the OT rule change for the playoffs is better than nothing. And if it turns out to work well, they just might even expand it to the full season. And also my opinion, but any week 17 game which was anything like the Steelers/Ravens and Chargers/Raiders, where winner clinches wild card seed and loser goes home I consider those playoff games as well because literally the season is on the line in those types of situation....the matchup where it is a survival or elimination game situation.
Still crazy that in the first Week 18 ever, three games with massive playoff implications went to overtime. Ironically though, none of those three ended with a TD on the first possession.
Unrelated, but all of Western NY might have a new favorite MLB player. Spoken like a true Buffalonian from Buffalo native Jesse Winker:
https://twitter.com/BuffaloBills/status/1508815416898031626
According to his agent, former Redskins QB Dwayne Haskins is dead at age 25 24 after being hit by a car in Florida this morning.
(Edited because I misread the story–he would have been 25 on May 3.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 09, 2022, 11:04:35 AM
According to his agent, former Redskins QB Dwayne Haskins is dead at age 25 24 after being hit by a car in Florida this morning.
(Edited because I misread the story–he would have been 25 on May 3.)
RIP. Horrible news.
Wow too young
Oh no. :-( That is terrible. He was apparently on foot on Interstate 595.
Semi-unrelated: "not a (team) fan BUT" has to be the most stupid phrase on the Internet. Twitter comments on Haskins' death are full of people proudly announcing how empathetic and moral they are because they feel bad for Haskins' family !despite not being a Steelers fan! . . . obsessive sports fandom is an epidemic.
Quote from: webny99 on April 09, 2022, 03:02:15 PM
Oh no. :-( That is terrible. He was apparently on foot on Interstate 595.
Yikes. Not a smart move walking on an interstate. Stay safe when on busy roads guys.
Quote from: thspfc on April 09, 2022, 04:17:33 PM
Semi-unrelated: "not a (team) fan BUT" has to be the most stupid phrase on the Internet. Twitter comments on Haskins' death are full of people proudly announcing how empathetic and moral they are because they feel bad for Haskins' family !despite not being a Steelers fan! . . . obsessive sports fandom is an epidemic.
An unnecessary qualifier, but nowhere near as bad as Schefter's tone-deaf tweet about Haskins "struggling" in the NFL. Honestly I just don't get how anyone could possibly feel the need to comment about his NFL career in the context of his life being lost.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 09, 2022, 04:20:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 09, 2022, 03:02:15 PM
Oh no. :-( That is terrible. He was apparently on foot on Interstate 595.
Yikes. Not a smart move walking on an interstate. Stay safe when on busy roads guys.
I'd heard that his car broke down, possibly ran out of gas and that's why he was on foot. He wasn't just randomly walking on an interstate.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 09, 2022, 07:33:34 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 09, 2022, 04:20:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 09, 2022, 03:02:15 PM
Oh no. :-( That is terrible. He was apparently on foot on Interstate 595.
Yikes. Not a smart move walking on an interstate. Stay safe when on busy roads guys.
I'd heard that his car broke down, possibly ran out of gas and that's why he was on foot. He wasn't just randomly walking on an interstate.
That doesn't explain why he tried to
cross the highway. If you run out of gas on a freeway, the first logical thing to do would be call for help. If he didn't have a cell phone on him and had no other options but to walk, walking along the shoulder would be much more sensible than trying to cross 6+ lanes of 70 MPH traffic.
I would be shocked if alcohol and/or drugs weren't involved there. Tragic event; very avoidable.
Quote from: webny99 on April 09, 2022, 06:43:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 09, 2022, 04:17:33 PM
Semi-unrelated: "not a (team) fan BUT" has to be the most stupid phrase on the Internet. Twitter comments on Haskins' death are full of people proudly announcing how empathetic and moral they are because they feel bad for Haskins' family !despite not being a Steelers fan! . . . obsessive sports fandom is an epidemic.
An unnecessary qualifier, but nowhere near as bad as Schefter's tone-deaf tweet about Haskins "struggling" in the NFL. Honestly I just don't get how anyone could possibly feel the need to comment about his NFL career in the context of his life being lost.
Schefter is becoming arguably the most tone deaf public personality in sports.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Who plays who where is decided by a formula. What's to be announced is when.
Apparently, the Bears are serious about leaving Soldier Field because they hired Manica Architecture to design their new Arlington Heights stadium (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/sports/chicago-football/bears-hire-manica-architecture-to-help-design-arlington-heights-stadium/2785271/).
Manica is a Kansas City-based firm that was behind the designs of new stadiums and arenas like the Chase Center in San Francisco, Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas and some failed projects like the Chargers' new stadium in Downtown San Diego. I can't wait to see what they come up with on the Chicago project.
Quote from: Henry on April 12, 2022, 10:15:25 AM
Apparently, the Bears are serious about leaving Soldier Field because they hired Manica Architecture to design their new Arlington Heights stadium (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/sports/chicago-football/bears-hire-manica-architecture-to-help-design-arlington-heights-stadium/2785271/).
Manica is a Kansas City-based firm that was behind the designs of new stadiums and arenas like the Chase Center in San Francisco, Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas and some failed projects like the Chargers' new stadium in Downtown San Diego. I can't wait to see what they come up with on the Chicago project.
I wonder if there's a possibility of still playing one game per year at Soldier Field, like the Packers used to do at Milwaukee.
Quote from: elsmere241 on April 12, 2022, 10:06:57 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Who plays who where is decided by a formula. What's to be announced is when.
Exactly. The next year's schedule is complete once the last regular season games take place. Everyone knows what place everyone finished in their division by then.
The formula is actually quite simple once you break it down this way:
You are Team A in Division Z in the NFC and you finished 2021 in 1st place. There are 4 teams in each division, you being one. You play everyone in your division twice (once at home and once on the road).
So you play Team B twice, Team C twice and Team D twice: that's 6 games. So what about the remaining 11?
The formula goes on a rotating basis. The NFC has Division W, X, Y and Z and the AFC also has W, X, Y and Z. The formula has each division playing another division within it's conference and one outside of it's conference purely on a rotating basis. So for 2022, your division (Division Z) is slated to play the NFC Division Y and AFC Division X. You play everyone in those divisions, two at home and two on the road. That's 8 games added to the previous 6, so now we are up to 14 games. The old remaining two were filled by teams in your Conference that finished the previous season in the same place you did from the other two divisions (since you are in Division Z, finished 1st place and you are playing everyone in Division Y already, the other two division are W and X), so you play the 1st place team of Division W and the 1st place team of Division X. SO that's the old 16 game schedule. Now, that 17th game is played against a team from another division of the opposite conference that you aren't already playing. So you would play the 1st place team of AFC Division W, Y or Z. For simplistic reasons we will pretend the formula said Division Z. So there is your 17 game schedule. The formula is understood years in advance, like you would already know you are playing all of the NFC W and all of the AFC Y and the one game against the AFC W in 2023. The only thing you need to wait on is to see who places where at the end of the season. Then wait a few months for them to determine is what dat you will be playing those games. Heck, even which games are home games and which are road games is already determined. As a Cowboys fan married to a Packer fan, I already know the Cowboys are making the trip to Lambeau this year. I just don't know when yet.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on April 12, 2022, 10:30:15 AM
Quote from: elsmere241 on April 12, 2022, 10:06:57 AM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 31, 2022, 12:24:25 AM
When will the regular season schedule for 2022 be out? I'm eager to look it over as soon as I can do so.
Who plays who where is decided by a formula. What's to be announced is when.
Exactly. The next year's schedule is complete once the last regular season games take place. Everyone knows what place everyone finished in their division by then.
The formula is actually quite simple once you break it down this way:
You are Team A in Division Z in the NFC and you finished 2021 in 1st place. There are 4 teams in each division, you being one. You play everyone in your division twice (once at home and once on the road).
So you play Team B twice, Team C twice and Team D twice: that's 6 games. So what about the remaining 11?
The formula goes on a rotating basis. The NFC has Division W, X, Y and Z and the AFC also has W, X, Y and Z. The formula has each division playing another division within it's conference and one outside of it's conference purely on a rotating basis. So for 2022, your division (Division Z) is slated to play the NFC Division Y and AFC Division X. You play everyone in those divisions, two at home and two on the road. That's 8 games added to the previous 6, so now we are up to 14 games. The old remaining two were filled by teams in your Conference that finished the previous season in the same place you did from the other two divisions (since you are in Division Z, finished 1st place and you are playing everyone in Division Y already, the other two division are W and X), so you play the 1st place team of Division W and the 1st place team of Division X. SO that's the old 16 game schedule. Now, that 17th game is played against a team from another division of the opposite conference that you aren't already playing. So you would play the 1st place team of AFC Division W, Y or Z. For simplistic reasons we will pretend the formula said Division Z. So there is your 17 game schedule. The formula is understood years in advance, like you would already know you are playing all of the NFC W and all of the AFC Y and the one game against the AFC W in 2023. The only thing you need to wait on is to see who places where at the end of the season. Then wait a few months for them to determine is what dat you will be playing those games. Heck, even which games are home games and which are road games is already determined. As a Cowboys fan married to a Packer fan, I already know the Cowboys are making the trip to Lambeau this year. I just don't know when yet.
Let me try to simplify this a bit.
Every team, regardless of where the finished in the division, play the following:
1) All three division opponents twice [6 games]
2) All four teams from one of the other divisions from the same conference, with those divisions rotating on a 3-year cycle [4 games]
3) All four teams from one of the divisions from the opposite conference, with those divisions rotating on a 4-year cycle [4 games]
[note: 2) & 3) above produce the exact same set of 8 opponents once every 12 years]
Based on a team's finish in their division (1st/2nd/3rd/4th), they play:
4) Each of the two teams from the same place from the other divisions from the same conference not already on the schedule via 2) above [2 games]
5) The team from the same place from the division from the other conference that you played two years ago via 3) above [1 game]
[note: 5) was the 17th opponent added beginning in 2021]
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 12, 2022, 10:28:16 AM
Quote from: Henry on April 12, 2022, 10:15:25 AM
Apparently, the Bears are serious about leaving Soldier Field because they hired Manica Architecture to design their new Arlington Heights stadium (https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/sports/chicago-football/bears-hire-manica-architecture-to-help-design-arlington-heights-stadium/2785271/).
Manica is a Kansas City-based firm that was behind the designs of new stadiums and arenas like the Chase Center in San Francisco, Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas and some failed projects like the Chargers' new stadium in Downtown San Diego. I can't wait to see what they come up with on the Chicago project.
I wonder if there's a possibility of still playing one game per year at Soldier Field, like the Packers used to do at Milwaukee.
The Packers stopped scheduling games it old Milwaukee County Stadium because at the time (early 990s) it was costing them at least $1M/game in lost revenues v. playing all of their home games in Green Bay.
Mike
Baker is on another tirade. This time he was "disrespected" by the Browns. If you want the respect of a franchise quarterback, maybe you should play like a franchise quarterback.
"He wears his emotions on his sleeve, I do too, I was an emotional player. But the difference between Baker and I - I led the league in something besides crying." -Steve Smith
At least Baker is only the second most dislikable quarterback on his team.
Quote from: thspfc on April 13, 2022, 09:45:46 PM
Baker is on another tirade. This time he was "disrespected" by the Browns. If you want the respect of a franchise quarterback, maybe you should play like a franchise quarterback.
I mean, it's unquestionably true that he was disrespected, but going on this kind of tirade
right now is kind of cringe-worthy and just not a good look.
I continue to think that his injuries played an underrated role in his struggles last season, but... the past is the past. Both he and the Browns know that he has to move on now, and I kind of get him wanting to go off on the Browns, but he should have waited until he's found a new team and things settle down.
Quote from: thspfc on April 13, 2022, 09:45:46 PM
Baker is on another tirade. This time he was "disrespected" by the Browns. If you want the respect of a franchise quarterback, maybe you should play like a franchise quarterback.
"He wears his emotions on his sleeve, I do too, I was an emotional player. But the difference between Baker and I - I led the league in something besides crying." -Steve Smith
At least Baker is only the second most dislikable quarterback on his team.
He was disrespected by the Browns. He was injured. His present team is only slightly less of a dumpster fire than perennial dregs Washington, Jacksonville, and (pick one) New York.of course, he can't be surprised at Al, of this, because high draft picks tend to end up on lousy teams. It's clearly time to move on. But he's not helping himself with his hissy-fit.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 14, 2022, 01:47:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 13, 2022, 09:45:46 PM
Baker is on another tirade. This time he was "disrespected" by the Browns. If you want the respect of a franchise quarterback, maybe you should play like a franchise quarterback.
"He wears his emotions on his sleeve, I do too, I was an emotional player. But the difference between Baker and I - I led the league in something besides crying." -Steve Smith
At least Baker is only the second most dislikable quarterback on his team.
He was disrespected by the Browns. He was injured. His present team is only slightly less of a dumpster fire than perennial dregs Washington, Jacksonville, and (pick one) New York.of course, he can't be surprised at Al, of this, because high draft picks tend to end up on lousy teams. It's clearly time to move on. But he's not helping himself with his hissy-fit.
Nothing adds up when it comes to Baker's injury. Was his performace negatively impacted by the injury? Probably, but not by much.
Cleveland had what most would agree to be one of the smallest gaps between starter and backup QB (Baker and Keenum) in the league. Even their 3rd stringer, Nick Mullens, could be a quality backup IMO. So if Baker was really so hurt that he shouldn't have been playing, why did Stefanski wait so long to pull him?
In addition, Baker's worst statistical games of the season came towards the end, as in further away from the injury that he sustained in week 2. Week 10 against the Patriots, week 11 against the Lions, week 16 against the Packers, week 17 against the Steelers.
Kyler is either going to get the deal he wants or end up playing on his rookie deal for one more year.
That being said, it would be hilarious to watch the Cardinals' inevitable implosion if he actually were to hold out and sit. Maybe people would realize that a good QB on a massive contract is a heck of a lot better than a barely-above-replacement-level QB on a tiny contract. Maybe Cowboys and Vikings fans would stop begging for their teams to tank and try to win the lottery in the draft.
But Arizona, even for being the team that gave JJ Watt $1 million per tackle and $15 million per sack, is too smart for that.
Kyler was by far the best QB to come out of his draft class.
Arizona completely whiffed on a quarterback in the first round the year before. The only other franchise QBs they've had in recent memory (Warner and Palmer) came from other teams. Kyler is just about the best QB they've ever drafted.
If you have a top 12 QB, you pay him. End of story. You don't cheap out at quarterback and hope that a good run game and solid defense can get you to a Super Bowl, because in almost all cases, those two things alone can't.
Vegas just paid Carr. Is Carr overpaid? Yes. Did Vegas make the right decision? Yes.
I thought you were a Dak guy? Didn't you give me shit last year for saying the Cowboys weren't that good?
^^ Not all Cowboy fans are in love with Dak.
Sure, and I might be misremembering, but I thought he was one of the reasons I was wrong when I didn't have them included in my Superbowl possibilities according to thspfc.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 14, 2022, 10:09:42 PM
I thought you were a Dak guy? Didn't you give me shit last year for saying the Cowboys weren't that good?
I am a Dak guy. "Maybe Cowboys and Vikings fans would stop begging for their teams to tank and try to win the lottery in the draft" means "Maybe Cowboys and Vikings fans would realize they have a good quarterback already and can't lose that guy."
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 14, 2022, 10:26:25 PM
Sure, and I might be misremembering, but I thought he was one of the reasons I was wrong when I didn't have them included in my Superbowl possibilities according to thspfc.
Don't throw stones from the glass house of having the Colts as title contenders right up until the 4th quarter of the game at Jacksonville. Lol
Quote from: thspfc on April 15, 2022, 08:06:34 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 14, 2022, 10:26:25 PM
Sure, and I might be misremembering, but I thought he was one of the reasons I was wrong when I didn't have them included in my Superbowl possibilities according to thspfc.
Don't throw stones from the glass house of having the Colts as title contenders right up until the 4th quarter of the game at Jacksonville. Lol
Not throwing stones. :) I just thought you were PARTICULARLY a Dak guy which is why I thought it odd for you to include him in your "good but not great" quarterback example. I realize now you were talking about fans not appreciating him.
I knew Wentz sucked. I just thought JT and the defense were enough to drag them there.
Dak is the classic case of a QB who isn't good enough to win you 12 games, but not bad enough to lose you 12 games where you can draft someone better.
Quote from: cabiness42 on April 15, 2022, 11:22:22 AM
Dak is the classic case of a QB who isn't good enough to win you 12 games, but not bad enough to lose you 12 games where you can draft someone better.
Dallas literally just won 12 games.
Chances are you won't draft someone better. The QBs drafted in the last 10 years that are for sure better than Dak IMO are:
2012 - Wilson
2017 - Mahomes
2018 - Allen
2020 - Burrow
2020 - Herbert
Arguably better than Dak:
2012 - Cousins
2014 - Carr
2017 - Watson (other circumstances here mean that I would take Dak 100/100 times)
2018 - Lamar
Also there's Andrew Luck but he's not relevant anymore.
So if you think 2/4 from the "arguably" tier are better, then that's 7 QBs drafted in the last 10 years that are better than Dak. Less than 1 per year. In a 32 team league.
The odds of the Cowboys drafting someone better than Dak Prescott are slim to none. Dak Prescott isn't the problem just like Tony Romo wasn't the problem. A good QB is essential, but you still need a pretty complete team to compete for Super Bowls. The Cowboys have for the longest time fielded teams good enough to make the playoffs but not do anything in them.
I see the Packers scooped up Sammy Watkins for next season.
Interesting if he can stay healthy. Still need more help at that position, but it's a start. There's no replacing Davante Adams, but at least Watkins is a veteran who can maybe mentor whatever rookie receiver(s) I'm sure they'll end up drafting.
Also I see they amicably settled regarding what's-his-face's "last" touchdown ball. See I think that guy backed out too soon. A lot could happen between now and August. What if he destroys his ACL on the first play from scrimmage this season? Then you would've had the half-million dollar football, but gave it up for nothing!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 15, 2022, 05:05:44 PM
I see the Packers scooped up Sammy Watkins for next season.
Interesting if he can stay healthy. Still need more help at that position, but it's a start. There's no replacing Davante Adams, but at least Watkins is a veteran who can maybe mentor whatever rookie receiver(s) I'm sure they'll end up drafting.
Don't they already have that in Cobb?
Quote from: Big John on April 15, 2022, 06:21:26 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 15, 2022, 05:05:44 PM
I see the Packers scooped up Sammy Watkins for next season.
Interesting if he can stay healthy. Still need more help at that position, but it's a start. There's no replacing Davante Adams, but at least Watkins is a veteran who can maybe mentor whatever rookie receiver(s) I'm sure they'll end up drafting.
Don't they already have that in Cobb?
Watkins still has better upside than Cobb at his age.....mostly being a couple years younger. More or less it changes Packers from being desperate to sign/draft a WR, to still needing a WR but but not desperate. Helps in some respect come the draft when teams try to leverage a teams desperation into squeezing another draft pick or two out of them.
Deebo Samuel wants out of San Francisco, per reports.
He was easily their best player last year, so not sure if he wants a new start or if it's purely money-related (or most likely, some of both). I'd be cautious if I was another team looking for a Deebo-type player, as he clearly wants to be paid big money, and deservedly so, but at the same time, it seems very unlikely that he will have another season as good as his 2021 season.
From most reports, he doesn't want to be a hybrid RB/WR. If he's just a WR, that will probably increase his longevity.
Quote from: webny99 on April 21, 2022, 12:09:51 PM
Deebo Samuel wants out of San Francisco, per reports.
He was easily their best player last year, so not sure if he wants a new start or if it's purely money-related (or most likely, some of both). I'd be cautious if I was another team looking for a Deebo-type player, as he clearly wants to be paid big money, and deservedly so, but at the same time, it seems very unlikely that he will have another season as good as his 2021 season.
Maybe this is true for all NFL players, but IMO Deebo is not worth as much money as he thinks he is. Christian Kirk's contract is being cited as the reason for the sudden movement of elite wide receivers. Sooner or later, execs are going to realize that Kirk's contract was the exception, not the rule, and the money paid to top receivers will stop growing so rapidly.
There will be three games on Christmas this year. Excellent choice by the NFL in an attempt to squash the NBA's singular relevant day between mid-June and early April.
Quote from: thspfc on April 22, 2022, 05:18:11 PM
There will be three games on Christmas this year. Excellent choice by the NFL in an attempt to squash the NBA's singular relevant day between mid-June and early April.
Or maybe the NBA has had zero relevant days this entire time.
Quote from: webny99 on April 21, 2022, 12:09:51 PM
Deebo Samuel wants out of San Francisco, per reports.
He was easily their best player last year, so not sure if he wants a new start or if it's purely money-related (or most likely, some of both). I'd be cautious if I was another team looking for a Deebo-type player, as he clearly wants to be paid big money, and deservedly so, but at the same time, it seems very unlikely that he will have another season as good as his 2021 season.
ESPN has the Lions, Packers, and Jets as three more interested teams for Samuel.
Packers could use Samuel and have the draft picks to make it work. But I don't see them wanting to sign Samuel to the contract he wants and add in the 49ers wouldn't want to be trading in conference to a fellow conference team in the superbowl mix. And while the Lions and Jets have the draft picks to make it work and Samuel would become weapon #1, why would he want to go to a cellar dweller at this time. If he gets traded, as I think 49ers won't let him go all things considered, it's either to an AFC team or a bad NFC team or bust
Quote from: gr8daynegb on April 22, 2022, 07:23:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 21, 2022, 12:09:51 PM
Deebo Samuel wants out of San Francisco, per reports.
He was easily their best player last year, so not sure if he wants a new start or if it's purely money-related (or most likely, some of both). I'd be cautious if I was another team looking for a Deebo-type player, as he clearly wants to be paid big money, and deservedly so, but at the same time, it seems very unlikely that he will have another season as good as his 2021 season.
ESPN has the Lions, Packers, and Jets as three more interested teams for Samuel.
Packers could use Samuel and have the draft picks to make it work. But I don't see them wanting to sign Samuel to the contract he wants and add in the 49ers wouldn't want to be trading in conference to a fellow conference team in the superbowl mix. And while the Lions and Jets have the draft picks to make it work and Samuel would become weapon #1, why would he want to go to a cellar dweller at this time. If he gets traded, as I think 49ers won't let him go all things considered, it's either to an AFC team or a bad NFC team or bust
would love the Jets to have an actual good player
Samuel's issue isn't money; he doesn't like the way the 49ers are using him as a hybrid WR/RB and only wants to play a traditional WR position. I'm not sure why this is so hard to fix, unless the 49ers are that adamant about wanting to use him out of the backfield.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 23, 2022, 12:20:37 AM
Samuel's issue isn't money; he doesn't like the way the 49ers are using him as a hybrid WR/RB and only wants to play a traditional WR position. I'm not sure why this is so hard to fix, unless the 49ers are that adamant about wanting to use him out of the backfield.
I think it's at least some of both, or he wouldn't have asked for a trade. But now that seemingly half the league is running some variation of Kyle Shanahan's offense... I'm not sure other teams will want to pay him huge money to be solely a WR, either.
The Jets make some sense given the Saleh/LaFleur connections, but I think the 49ers do whatever they can to keep him if they want any hope of contending next year.
Any predictions for the draft tomorrow?
This year seems to have a ton of unknowns, unlike last year when you could have gotten the top 5 right in your sleep, this year I'm certain I would go 0/32 if I attempted a mock draft.
My only prediction is that if the Jags don't take Aidan Hutchinson, the Lions will (bold, I know!)
Barring any late trades, the Packers don't pick until #s 21 and 28 tonight. I hope my food and beverage last that long...
:spin:
Mike
Eh, I'll read about it tomorrow during my morning "business meeting".
Not one of those people who watches the draft. Far too tedious.
Quote from: mgk920 on April 28, 2022, 12:53:17 PM
Barring any late trades, the Packers don't pick until #s 21 and 28 tonight. I hope my food and beverage last that long...
:spin:
Mike
Barring a trade, you have to wait a little longer, for #22 and #28.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 28, 2022, 02:54:04 PM
Eh, I'll read about it tomorrow during my morning "business meeting".
Not one of those people who watches the draft. Far too tedious.
I remember the first time I watched the draft, with zero idea of what I was getting into. Vikings picked #16 and it took three freaking hours just to get that far. I was annoyed.
Thought just about every team has made good decisions so far, until Green Bay drafted a 2nd-round talent who plays a declining position - a position they already have solid starters at - while ignoring huge needs at WR, OG, and DE.
Don't hate the Cowboys selection but I would rather have them pick a cornerback.
Giants definitely getting what we needed in the first round (OT, DE).
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2022, 10:35:48 PM
Thought just about every team has made good decisions so far, until Green Bay drafted a 2nd-round talent who plays a declining position - a position they already have solid starters at - while ignoring huge needs at WR, OG, and DE.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Wow, a crazy first round in the books. A ton of trades, including Hollywood Brown to the Cardinals and AJ Brown to the Eagles, a Strange pick by the Patriots, and only one QB drafted, Kenny Pickett to the Steelers. I think the Jets and Lions are the biggest winners tonight.
Overall, only 14 teams picked in their original spot. After the first 6 picks, 18 of the next 26 picks (69%) involved a trade. And 10 teams did not pick in the first round which has to be an all-time high. The NFC East was the only division where all 4 teams made a pick!
Teams that picked three times: Jets
Teams that picked twice: Jaguars, Lions, Texans, Giants, Saints, Ravens, Chiefs, Packers
Teams that picked once: Panthers, Falcons, Seahawks, Eagles, Commanders, Chargers, Titans, Steelers, Bills, Cowboys, Patriots, Bengals, Vikings
Teams that did not pick:
-Dolphins (Tyreek Hill trade)
-Raiders (Davante Adams trade)
-Broncos (Russell Wilson trade)
-Browns (Deshaun Watson trade)
-Colts (Carson Wentz trade)
-Cardinals (Hollywood Brown trade)
-Rams (Matt Stafford trade)
-Buccaneers (traded #27 to Jacksonville)
-Bears (trade up for Justin Fields)
-49ers (trade up for Trey Lance)
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2022, 10:46:41 PM
Don't hate the Cowboys selection but I would rather have them pick a cornerback.
The Bills must have thought the same thing, because they jumped the Cowboys to get CB Kaiir Elam (never heard of him until tonight, but he seems like a good fit).
Just five words sums up how I feel about my Texans: "I still trust Nick Caserio!"
Not sure why a lot of griping/complaining within our fanbase, but if there is any GM or executive out there that know how to rebuild a team, Nick certainly is it.
This draft reminds me of someone at TJ Maxx picking through a disaster pile of clothes looking for a 3-piack of underwear.
Quote from: Big John on April 28, 2022, 11:29:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2022, 10:35:48 PM
Thought just about every team has made good decisions so far, until Green Bay drafted a 2nd-round talent who plays a declining position - a position they already have solid starters at - while ignoring huge needs at WR, OG, and DE.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
https://twitter.com/gmfb/status/1520040220539822080
Saw this on an Ohio State fan page....
"as of last night's draft, TTUN has finally produced the same number of defensive players picked in the Top 5 as Cheryl Bosa"
Not even mad that my Bengals drafted a player from TTUN.
Quote from: frankenroad on April 29, 2022, 02:24:08 PM
Saw this on an Ohio State fan page....
"as of last night's draft, TTUN has finally produced the same number of defensive players picked in the Top 5 as Cheryl Bosa"
Not even mad that my Bengals drafted a player from TTUN.
For those who don't believe that refusing to say the name of a rival team makes them worse, TTUN is Michigan.
I can somewhat believe it, but I can't believe only one QB went in the first round.
Quote from: thspfc on April 29, 2022, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: frankenroad on April 29, 2022, 02:24:08 PM
Saw this on an Ohio State fan page....
"as of last night's draft, TTUN has finally produced the same number of defensive players picked in the Top 5 as Cheryl Bosa"
Not even mad that my Bengals drafted a player from TTUN.
For those who don't believe that refusing to say the name of a rival team makes them worse, TTUN is Michigan.
TTDS is stupid
Quote from: golden eagle on April 29, 2022, 03:14:50 PM
I can somewhat believe it, but I can't believe only one QB went in the first round.
I can and I'm glad that talent is recognized. There were years when QBs were picked well ahead of where deserved simply cause most bad teams lack a good QB.
Quote from: Alps on April 29, 2022, 04:30:01 PM
Quote from: golden eagle on April 29, 2022, 03:14:50 PM
I can somewhat believe it, but I can't believe only one QB went in the first round.
I can and I'm glad that talent is recognized. There were years when QBs were picked well ahead of where deserved simply cause most bad teams lack a good QB.
And it's officially extended through round 2: still just 1 QB off the board.
There's probably going to be a run of QB's at some point, but the question is: for which teams? 16/16 AFC teams now have a guaranteed starter or close to it, so it will be NFC teams. Maybe Lions, Falcons, Panthers, Seahawks, Commanders... ?
The Bills draft James Cook (Dalvin Cook's brother) at pick #63 after trading down twice.
LOL, Wikipedia:
(https://imgur.com/PFQh8xQ.jpg)
... speaking of pick 74, Desmond Ridder to the Falcons!
Malik Willis to the Titans at 86
Matt Corral to the Panthers at 94
Great value by all three teams IMO.
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2022, 09:32:00 PM
The Bills draft James Cook (Dalvin Cook's brother) at pick #63 after trading down twice.
LOL, Wikipedia:
(https://imgur.com/PFQh8xQ.jpg)
What's the good Captain's 40 time?
:-D
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 01, 2022, 03:11:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 29, 2022, 09:32:00 PM
LOL, Wikipedia:
(https://imgur.com/PFQh8xQ.jpg)
What's the good Captain's 40 time?
:-D
40 months to go 'round the world. :-P
Here are my totally infallible NFL team rankings after the draft.
(Actually, I really struggled with some of these, especially the bottom of the rankings. Draft season is hope season, so it seems unfair to put anyone at the bottom. You could probably make a case for about 10 different teams to be #1 and 10 different teams to be #32. I wanted to put the Bills at #1, but I daren't jinx them.)
| AFC | NFC |
| Buccaneers |
| Chiefs | |
| Bills | |
| Rams |
| Chargers | |
| Bengals | |
| Packers |
| Broncos | |
| Colts | |
| Ravens | |
| Cardinals |
| Cowboys |
| Raiders | |
| Titans | |
| Browns | |
| 49ers |
| Dolphins | |
| Patriots | |
| Eagles |
| Steelers | |
| Saints |
| Vikings |
| Jets | |
| Seahawks |
| Commanders |
| Giants |
| Jaguars | |
| Lions |
| Bears |
| Falcons |
| Panthers |
| Texans | |
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
But the Texans organization is such a train wreck. No matter the talent on the field, they will find a way to be awful!
Should be fun watching the Jags play the Broncos in London this year. 8-)
And it sure helps having a strong ABC affiliate in town (not just here, but in Denver too).
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
But the Texans organization is such a train wreck. No matter the talent on the field, they will find a way to be awful!
Fortunately we don't have to worry about that anymore. Bill 0'Brien has been long gone, so the wreck has been cleared by his successor Nick Caserio who is rebuilding a new team. Last fall, the Texans did better than the Lions and Jaguars, and tied the same record as both the New York teams.
Quote from: jgb191 on May 05, 2022, 04:16:46 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
But the Texans organization is such a train wreck. No matter the talent on the field, they will find a way to be awful!
Fortunately we don't have to worry about that anymore. Bill 0'Brien has been long gone, so the wreck has been cleared by his successor Nick Caserio who is rebuilding a new team. Last fall, the Texans did better than the Lions and Jaguars, and tied the same record as both the New York teams.
The company you keep. It's like when my brother was in elementary school and I asked him how things were going and and he was super proud of himself that he was reading faster than the girl in the class that couldn't speak English.
I am legitimately impressed with how the Texans have rebuilt over the past two years. Going from an absolutely wrecked organization to a team that will likely become a contender again within a couple of years is no easy feat, but I think the Texans are going to pull it off. The source of the biggest problem they had last year, the absolutely putrid offensive play-calling, is gone, and in it's place is a coach (Pep Hamilton) who better understands his quarterback and offense. All of the 2021 Texans draftees had positive impacts as rookies, and this year's will probably be similar. The Texans, IMO, are better than the Falcons, Panthers, Bears, Giants, Jets, and Jaguars right now, and in 2024 or so, I can see them winning the AFC South again (Colts are treading water, Titans seem to be aging and will probably fall off a cliff in a couple years, Jags look as hopeless as ever). Plus now they have DeShaun off their hands and got a great deal for him.
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 05, 2022, 07:49:15 PM
I am legitimately impressed with how the Texans have rebuilt over the past two years. Going from an absolutely wrecked organization to a team that will likely become a contender again within a couple of years is no easy feat, but I think the Texans are going to pull it off. The source of the biggest problem they had last year, the absolutely putrid offensive play-calling, is gone, and in it's place is a coach (Pep Hamilton) who better understands his quarterback and offense. All of the 2021 Texans draftees had positive impacts as rookies, and this year's will probably be similar. The Texans, IMO, are better than the Falcons, Panthers, Bears, Giants, Jets, and Jaguars right now, and in 2024 or so, I can see them winning the AFC South again (Colts are treading water, Titans seem to be aging and will probably fall off a cliff in a couple years, Jags look as hopeless as ever). Plus now they have DeShaun off their hands and got a great deal for him.
Oh please. It seems that they're ahead of schedule, but it's still way to early for this kind of praise
This is hilarious: https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1522401817874903040
Read the questionable Twitter comments at your own risk.
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
| Jets | |
| Seahawks |
| Commanders |
| Giants |
| Jaguars | |
| Lions |
| Bears |
| Falcons |
| Panthers |
| Texans | |
I'm under no illusions that the Bears will be good this year, but the Lions are perpetually the lowest ranked team in the division until they prove they can finish higher.
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
| Jets | |
| Seahawks |
| Commanders |
| Giants |
| Jaguars | |
| Lions |
| Bears |
| Falcons |
| Panthers |
| Texans | |
Can't argue with the Panthers' ranking. They at least avoided the stupid move of drafting a QB early in round 1, having failed to trade down to get more picks. Let Sam Darnold keep getting pummeled, while the Panthers fix their O-line.
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
I'm agreeing with this. Houston didn't play THAT bad at the end of last year. Carolina stunk up the place.
Hmmmm, The Packers will be playing the Giants in London (Tottenham Hotpur) this coming October 9.
:-|
Interesting.
:popcorn:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on May 07, 2022, 01:20:59 PM
Hmmmm, The Packers will be playing the Giants in London (Tottenham Hotpur) this coming October 9.
:-|
Interesting.
:popcorn:
Mike
The Packers were the last team to have not played in one of the overseas games. With this being the first season they would've had a 9th home game, the Packers finally jumped at the opportunity since they wouldn't be losing much by having that 9th home game played in London. Plus the Packers are having a friendly soccer match this summer at Lambeau which will help make up for the lost revenue.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on May 08, 2022, 11:50:15 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 07, 2022, 01:20:59 PM
Hmmmm, The Packers will be playing the Giants in London (Tottenham Hotpur) this coming October 9.
:-|
Interesting.
:popcorn:
Mike
The Packers were the last team to have not played in one of the overseas games. With this being the first season they would've had a 9th home game, the Packers finally jumped at the opportunity since they wouldn't be losing much by having that 9th home game played in London. Plus the Packers are having a friendly soccer match this summer at Lambeau which will help make up for the lost revenue.
Notre Dame is playing there in 2026, rescheduled from 2020. Maybe the Packers will play overseas again that year, which would also be a 9 home game year.
According to this (https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/tom-brady-to-join-fox-sports-after-playing-career), Tom Brady is going to be a color analyst for Fox when he hangs it up for good. Someone tell Troy Aikman to watch his back because soon there'll be a new No. 1 at the network. (which, BTW, is still reeling from the loss of Joe Buck)
Quote from: Henry on May 10, 2022, 01:57:43 PM
According to this (https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/tom-brady-to-join-fox-sports-after-playing-career), Tom Brady is going to be a color analyst for Fox when he hangs it up for good. Someone tell Troy Aikman to watch his back because soon there'll be a new No. 1 at the network. (which, BTW, is still reeling from the loss of Joe Buck)
Troy Aikman moved with Joe Buck to MNF.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 10, 2022, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 10, 2022, 01:57:43 PM
According to this (https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/tom-brady-to-join-fox-sports-after-playing-career), Tom Brady is going to be a color analyst for Fox when he hangs it up for good. Someone tell Troy Aikman to watch his back because soon there'll be a new No. 1 at the network. (which, BTW, is still reeling from the loss of Joe Buck)
Troy Aikman moved with Joe Buck to MNF.
Indeed, so this screws over not Troy but whomever ends up joining Kevin Burkhardt on the #1 Fox crew this season (likely Greg Olsen), since now they'll go in knowing they're just keeping the seat warm for Brady.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 10, 2022, 02:46:35 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 10, 2022, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 10, 2022, 01:57:43 PM
According to this (https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/tom-brady-to-join-fox-sports-after-playing-career), Tom Brady is going to be a color analyst for Fox when he hangs it up for good. Someone tell Troy Aikman to watch his back because soon there'll be a new No. 1 at the network. (which, BTW, is still reeling from the loss of Joe Buck)
Troy Aikman moved with Joe Buck to MNF.
Indeed, so this screws over not Troy but whomever ends up joining Kevin Burkhardt on the #1 Fox crew this season (likely Greg Olsen), since now they'll go in knowing they're just keeping the seat warm for Brady.
Side note: ESPN traded the rights to the 2022 Notre Dame @ Ohio State game to FOX in exchange for FOX letting Buck out of his contract so he could sign with ESPN.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 10, 2022, 02:53:30 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 10, 2022, 02:46:35 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 10, 2022, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 10, 2022, 01:57:43 PM
According to this (https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/tom-brady-to-join-fox-sports-after-playing-career), Tom Brady is going to be a color analyst for Fox when he hangs it up for good. Someone tell Troy Aikman to watch his back because soon there'll be a new No. 1 at the network. (which, BTW, is still reeling from the loss of Joe Buck)
Troy Aikman moved with Joe Buck to MNF.
Indeed, so this screws over not Troy but whomever ends up joining Kevin Burkhardt on the #1 Fox crew this season (likely Greg Olsen), since now they'll go in knowing they're just keeping the seat warm for Brady.
Side note: ESPN traded the rights to the 2022 Notre Dame @ Ohio State game to FOX in exchange for FOX letting Buck out of his contract so he could sign with ESPN.
A sign I'm getting old: I momentarily forgot that Aikman and Buck will still be announcing together, but just on a new network.
Awesome; I only "have" to listen to Troy Buck and Joe Aikman once next year. Maybe never, if I just listen to GB's monday night game on the radio like this past season.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 11, 2022, 04:23:23 PM
Awesome; I only "have" to listen to Troy Buck and Joe Aikman once next year. Maybe never, if I just listen to GB's monday night game on the radio like this past season.
Or you could mute the TV?
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2022, 05:30:54 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 11, 2022, 04:23:23 PM
Awesome; I only "have" to listen to Troy Buck and Joe Aikman once next year. Maybe never, if I just listen to GB's monday night game on the radio like this past season.
Or you could mute the TV?
I believe that was implied when he said listen to the radio broadcast.
As long as NBC keeps Carrie Underwoods in their Sunday Night intro musical, I'm good!
Full 2022 schedule is released tonight. The Bears have an annual contest where you try to guess the full 18 game schedule, including bye week (opponents and locations are already known). The entry that gets the most right (or one randomly drawn entry from those tied with the most right) wins a pair of tickets to every 2022 game, home and away, with airfare, hotel, and $500 cash for each away game.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 12, 2022, 07:22:29 AM
Full 2022 schedule is released tonight. The Bears have an annual contest where you try to guess the full 18 game schedule, including bye week (opponents and locations are already known). The entry that gets the most right (or one randomly drawn entry from those tied with the most right) wins a pair of tickets to every 2022 game, home and away, with airfare, hotel, and $500 cash for each away game.
Doesn't sound like a prize to me. It sounds like torture seeing how you will be watching the Bears.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 12, 2022, 09:50:43 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 12, 2022, 07:22:29 AM
Full 2022 schedule is released tonight. The Bears have an annual contest where you try to guess the full 18 game schedule, including bye week (opponents and locations are already known). The entry that gets the most right (or one randomly drawn entry from those tied with the most right) wins a pair of tickets to every 2022 game, home and away, with airfare, hotel, and $500 cash for each away game.
Doesn't sound like a prize to me. It sounds like torture seeing how you will be watching the Bears.
At the very least, it's free weekend trips to Atlanta, Dallas, Detroit, Green Bay, Minneapolis, New England, and New York x2
Ah yes, my favorite day of the offseason. I'm tuning out all sources of information until the entire schedule is released this evening.
Detroit Free Press columnist Carlos Monarrez let loose on the Detroit Lions today.
QuoteNow that the 2022 NFL schedule has been released, the league's other teams know exactly on which days they will lose to the Detroit Lions, who have promised us they're planning to win the Super Bowl this season.
I'll pause here while you facepalm yourself so hard that NFL rules require you to enter concussion protocol.
OK, all good? Great. Where was I? Oh, yes, the Lions ... are going to win ... the Super Bowl. My computer's auto-correct program required me to type that three times before it allowed me to override the assumed error.
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2022/05/13/detroit-lions-2022-picks-predictions/9753815002/
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 12, 2022, 10:10:37 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 12, 2022, 09:50:43 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 12, 2022, 07:22:29 AM
Full 2022 schedule is released tonight. The Bears have an annual contest where you try to guess the full 18 game schedule, including bye week (opponents and locations are already known). The entry that gets the most right (or one randomly drawn entry from those tied with the most right) wins a pair of tickets to every 2022 game, home and away, with airfare, hotel, and $500 cash for each away game.
Doesn't sound like a prize to me. It sounds like torture seeing how you will be watching the Bears.
At the very least, it's free weekend trips to Atlanta, Dallas, Detroit, Green Bay, Minneapolis, New England, and New York x2
Alas, I only got one right out of 18. I correctly guessed the week of the game at Dallas. There are 6.4 quadrillion unique ways to arrange 18 items. Of course, restrictions such as byes only being certain weeks, playing division opponents in week 18, and never playing more than 3 in a row at home or away, make the number of realistic arrangements much less.
My Vikings' schedule is weird. We play all of our division rivals at home within the first five weeks and play all of them on the road the last five weeks.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 13, 2022, 04:21:08 PM
My Vikings' schedule is weird. We play all of our division rivals at home within the first five weeks and play all of them on the road the last five weeks.
Bears play 4 home games in December/January. NFL trying to get fans on board with the new indoor stadium.
So I've had time to look at the entire schedule, and I love it. The group of reigning division winners that play each other a lot (Cowboys, Packers, Bucs, Rams, Bills, Bengals, Titans, Chiefs) are giving us great matchups just about every week.
Kansas City has literally the most difficult football schedule of all time, at least as of now. Of course at least one of the 27 good teams in the AFC will disappoint.
Can't wait for Bucs/Cowboys in week 1, Rodgers/Brady V in week 3, Mahomes/Brady VI in week 4, Bills/Chiefs rematch in week 7, Rams/Bucs rematch in week 9, Cowboys visit to Lambeau in week 10, Chiefs/Rams rematch in week 12, Chiefs/Bengals rematch in week 13, others.
Dallas has quite a similar schedule to last year: tough first two games, then an easier stretch, then a more difficult stretch, then an easier stretch to close out the season. If they can split the first two I see them 6-2 at midseason, 10-4 at Christmastime. After that it gets difficult to predict, when some teams have their season on the line, some have clinched a playoff spot, some have fired their coaches and unraveled, etc. The ways the season could go south for the Cowboys are if a) Dak gets hurt or b) they start 2-4 or something, the media piles on, tempers flare, McCarthy loses the locker room.
Quote from: thspfc on May 13, 2022, 06:08:44 PM
some have fired their coaches and unraveled
Don't forget firing their coach and getting better because freedom!
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 13, 2022, 04:21:08 PM
My Vikings' schedule is weird. We play all of our division rivals at home within the first five weeks and play all of them on the road the last five weeks.
The Packers have three warm weather/dome teams at home in mid-December and later. (The Vikings on New Years Day!). Should be fun!
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on May 14, 2022, 10:34:05 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 13, 2022, 04:21:08 PM
My Vikings' schedule is weird. We play all of our division rivals at home within the first five weeks and play all of them on the road the last five weeks.
The Packers have three warm weather/dome teams at home in mid-December and later. (The Vikings on New Years Day!). Should be fun!
Mike
Sorry to ruin your fun but that doesn't matter at all.
Two pieces of good news for Lions fans: 1) they've been crowned the undisputed champions of the draft after intense analysis of the 0 combined NFL snaps their draftees have played, and 2) they play the Packers the first Sunday of November. Green Bay has been shockingly bad that weekend (typically week 9). Haven't won since 2012, which for a franchise that has only missed the playoffs twice in that span, is pretty shocking.
Might as well make my NFL predictions now (and I went through the games individually so the win-loss counts should be at least feasible):
AFC East:
Bills 13-4
Dolphins 9-7-1
Patriots 9-8
Jets 5-12
AFC North:
Bengals 12-5
Ravens 11-6
Browns 10-7
Steelers 8-9
AFC South:
Colts 11-6
Titans 9-8
Texans 6-11
Jaguars 2-15
AFC West:
Broncos 11-6
Chargers 11-6
Chiefs 10-7
Raiders 7-10
AFC Playoffs:
Bills (1)
Bengals (2)
Broncos (3)
Colts (4)
Ravens (5)
Chargers (6)
Chiefs (7)
Wild Card Round:
Bengals over Chiefs
Broncos over Chargers
Ravens over Colts
Divisional Round:
Ravens over Bills
Bengals over Broncos
AFC Championship:
Ravens over Bengals
NFC East:
Eagles 11-6
Cowboys 10-7
Commanders 7-10
Giants 2-15
NFC North:
Vikings 10-7
Packers 10-7
Lions 7-10
Bears 3-13-1
NFC South:
Buccaneers 13-4
Saints 9-8
Falcons 5-12
Panthers 3-14
NFC West:
Rams 13-4
Cardinals 10-7
Seahawks 8-9
49ers 6-11
NFC Playoffs:
Rams (1)
Buccaneers (2)
Eagles (3)
Vikings (4)
Cardinals (5)
Cowboys (6)
Packers (7)
Wild Card Round:
Buccaneers over Packers
Cowboys over Eagles
Cardinals over Vikings
Divisional Round:
Rams over Cowboys
Buccaneers over Cardinals
NFC Championship:
Rams over Buccaneers
Super Bowl:
Ravens over Rams
Hot Takes:
- I'm predicting that the Chiefs and Titans both catch the injury bug this year (similar to how the Ravens and Saints were last year)
- Giants get 2023 first pick. Their team just has nothing good about it.
- I'm predicting that the Lions and Texans have positive seasons compared to the last couple years for them.
Quote from: thspfc on May 14, 2022, 09:00:47 PM
Two pieces of good news for Lions fans: 1) they've been crowned the undisputed champions of the draft after intense analysis of the 0 combined NFL snaps their draftees have played, and 2) they play the Packers the first Sunday of November. Green Bay has been shockingly bad that weekend (typically week 9). Haven't won since 2012, which for a franchise that has only missed the playoffs twice in that span, is pretty shocking.
Disagree with 1) - the Jets are named winners by many sources
Deshaun Watson's new team the Browns will visit my Texans this fall....whether Deshaun actually plays (or serves his suspension) in NRG Stadium remains to be seen.
Quote from: Alps on May 14, 2022, 11:32:48 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 14, 2022, 09:00:47 PM
Two pieces of good news for Lions fans: 1) they've been crowned the undisputed champions of the draft after intense analysis of the 0 combined NFL snaps their draftees have played, and 2) they play the Packers the first Sunday of November. Green Bay has been shockingly bad that weekend (typically week 9). Haven't won since 2012, which for a franchise that has only missed the playoffs twice in that span, is pretty shocking.
Disagree with 1) - the Jets are named winners by many sources
I hadn't heard any pundit say anybody but the Jets. Some of that is the NY bias, especially on ESPN. But when you get four probable starters because you have four picks in the top 36 including 2 in the top 10 it's not hard to "win" the draft.
Just be grateful Matt Millen is no longer doing the Lions drafts. Millen was so bad even Packers fans like me were feeling sorry for Lions fans.
Quote from: thspfc on May 14, 2022, 09:00:47 PM
Two pieces of good news for Lions fans: 1) they've been crowned the undisputed champions of the draft after intense analysis of the 0 combined NFL snaps their draftees have played, and 2) they play the Packers the first Sunday of November. Green Bay has been shockingly bad that weekend (typically week 9). Haven't won since 2012, which for a franchise that has only missed the playoffs twice in that span, is pretty shocking.
Packers:
2013- Loss, Rodgers Hurt vs Bears
2014- Won on 11/9 vs Bears, had bye week the week 11/2 Sunday
2015- Loss vs Peyton Manning's Broncos
2016- Loss vs Andrew Luck Colts
2017- Loss vs Lions, Brett Hundley playing for injured Rodgers
2018- Loss at Patriots
2019- Loss at Chargers
2020- Loss vs Vikings
2021- Loss at Chiefs, Love playing for Rodgers(Covid)
Well three of the first Sundays in November Rodgers was out.....if Matt Flynn wasn't starting those weeks Packers lost. 2014 they had a bye week on the first November weekend. Good luck vs Brady, Mahomes, and Manning any year of their careers. Say what you want about the Charger and Vikings losses as those teams were below .500 for the year(but in division games in the NFC North are hard regardless of teams records).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 06, 2022, 12:58:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on May 04, 2022, 11:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 02, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
:-D. Sure you didn't mean to have several spaces between Panthers and Texans?
Texans are much better than Carolina IMO. Carolina's QB situation is so bad that it drags a merely below-average rest of their roster to the bottom of the league.
I'm agreeing with this. Houston didn't play THAT bad at the end of last year. Carolina stunk up the place.
To clarify a bit more as to my thoughts on this ... I think the Texans have a better QB situation than the Panthers
right now, while the Panthers have a better roster. However, I strongly believe the Panthers will do something at QB before the start of the season, which is why I still have them narrowly ahead of the Texans.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 06, 2022, 08:47:57 AM
I'm under no illusions that the Bears will be good this year, but the Lions are perpetually the lowest ranked team in the division until they prove they can finish higher.
I don't know, I'd actually be pretty surprised if the Lions don't finish with a better record than the Bears this season. They've got a competent QB and they definitely improved this offseason, while the Bears have an unproven QB and definitely got worse this offseason.
I kind of think the Bears are going to take the same "be competitive while rebuilding" approach that the Lions have been taking, but the Bears are a year behind and it's likely to get worse before it gets better. I honestly feel bad for Justin Fields because they basically wasted a year with the old coach/GM and now with the clear rebuild, he's not going to have much of a chance to succeed on his rookie contract.
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 14, 2022, 09:55:43 PM
Might as well make my NFL predictions now (and I went through the games individually so the win-loss counts should be at least feasible):
All fairly reasonable, but I think you're too low on the 49ers, Giants, Jaguars, and Raiders.
49ers better hope they're better than 6-11 even if Lance starts and struggles. That would be a disaster given their roster and how close they obviously think they are given the Lance trade. And I think very differently about the Giants - I could totally see 7-10 or 8-9. And there's just no way the Jaguars are that bad again.
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 14, 2022, 09:55:43 PM
Hot Takes:
- I'm predicting that the Chiefs and Titans both catch the injury bug this year (similar to how the Ravens and Saints were last year)
If that's the case, shouldn't it be the Chiefs at 7-10 instead of the Raiders? The Chiefs schedule is
so brutal, I don't usually read into the schedule too much but there's literally maybe two or three likely wins and every other game is against a Super Bowl contender. 6 division games, Bills, Bengals, Colts, Titans, Bucs, the entire NFC West...? I could see 7-10 even without significant injuries.
Similarly I'm kind of down on the Titans after the AJ Brown trade so I think 9-8 is pretty optimistic if they have a ton of injuries (keeping in mind how historic the Ravens and Saints were last year - the Titans were also fairly injured last year).
Quote from: webny99 on May 20, 2022, 12:15:08 AM
If that's the case, shouldn't it be the Chiefs at 7-10 instead of the Raiders? The Chiefs schedule is so brutal, I don't usually read into the schedule too much but there's literally maybe two or three likely wins and every other game is against a Super Bowl contender. 6 division games, Bills, Bengals, Colts, Titans, Bucs, the entire NFC West...? I could see 7-10 even without significant injuries.
You would consider the Raiders, Cardinals, Titans, and Colts to be Super Bowl contenders?
I wouldn't say the Niners are contenders either but they at least were a game away last year.
The obvious wins for the Chiefs are the Jags, Texans, and Seahawks. Of the 14 remaining games I think they'll roughly split them - no way they do worse than .500. During the offseason a lot of fans have a tendency to remember like 2 things about a team and base their entire predictions on those two things. For the Chiefs it's the second half of the AFC championship and losing Tyreek. No thought is given to the rest of last season or the players they still have. And they've been excellent against divisional opponents for several years running.
I have the Raiders at the bottom of the AFCW. Somebody is going to have to lose the division games, and the Raiders are just the weakest roster IMO, especially defensively.
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
You would consider the Raiders, Cardinals, Titans, and Colts to be Super Bowl contenders?
I wouldn't say the Niners are contenders either but they at least were a game away last year.
They might not be in the very top tier of Super Bowl contenders, but I think all of them expect to make the playoffs and would consider the season extremely disappointing if they don't.
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
The obvious wins for the Chiefs are the Jags, Texans, and Seahawks. Of the 14 remaining games I think they'll roughly split them - no way they do worse than .500.
That's a very fine line. If they win those three and split the rest, that's 10-7. That's
probably enough for a playoff spot, but maybe not - and likely not enough to win the division. And if they slip up somewhere and go 9-8, that's almost certainly out of the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
During the offseason a lot of fans have a tendency to remember like 2 things about a team and base their entire predictions on those two things. For the Chiefs it's the second half of the AFC championship and losing Tyreek. No thought is given to the rest of last season or the players they still have.
The rest of last season - you mean like when they scored 3 points against the Titans, got blown out by the Bills, struggled mightily against the Joe Judge Giants and Rodgers-less Packers, lost to the Bengals, and needed a defensive score to beat Drew Lock?
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
And they've been excellent against divisional opponents for several years running.
Undoubtedly true, but other than the Brady-era Patriots it's unprecedented to maintain that year after year. They were extremely closely matched with the Chargers in both games last year, and the other two teams added a top-10 QB and WR respectively plus got better on defense.
Quote from: webny99 on May 20, 2022, 09:25:31 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
You would consider the Raiders, Cardinals, Titans, and Colts to be Super Bowl contenders?
I wouldn't say the Niners are contenders either but they at least were a game away last year.
They might not be in the very top tier of Super Bowl contenders, but I think all of them expect to make the playoffs and would consider the season extremely disappointing if they don't.
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
The obvious wins for the Chiefs are the Jags, Texans, and Seahawks. Of the 14 remaining games I think they'll roughly split them - no way they do worse than .500.
That's a very fine line. If they win those three and split the rest, that's 10-7. That's probably enough for a playoff spot, but maybe not - and likely not enough to win the division. And if they slip up somewhere and go 9-8, that's almost certainly out of the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
During the offseason a lot of fans have a tendency to remember like 2 things about a team and base their entire predictions on those two things. For the Chiefs it's the second half of the AFC championship and losing Tyreek. No thought is given to the rest of last season or the players they still have.
The rest of last season - you mean like when they scored 3 points against the Titans, got blown out by the Bills, struggled mightily against the Joe Judge Giants and Rodgers-less Packers, lost to the Bengals, and needed a defensive score to beat Drew Lock?
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 08:11:16 AM
And they've been excellent against divisional opponents for several years running.
Undoubtedly true, but other than the Brady-era Patriots it's unprecedented to maintain that year after year. They were extremely closely matched with the Chargers in both games last year, and the other two teams added a top-10 QB and WR respectively plus got better on defense.
You can't just pick their 5 worst games lol. You understand how that doesn't encompass their season right?
Eh, you're a Bills fan. Of course you're salty when it comes to the Chiefs, so what do I think I'm going to accomplish?
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 10:12:24 AM
You can't just pick their 5 worst games lol. You understand how that doesn't encompass their season right?
Eh, you're a Bills fan. Of course you're salty when it comes to the Chiefs, so what do I think I'm going to accomplish?
Those games were actually spread out throughout the season. (But yeah, I was half-expecting to hear about the Bills' wind game loss and loss to the Jags etc.. so if you're going to spare me that, I'll take it. :D)
Quote from: webny99 on May 20, 2022, 10:24:52 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 10:12:24 AM
You can't just pick their 5 worst games lol. You understand how that doesn't encompass their season right?
Eh, you're a Bills fan. Of course you're salty when it comes to the Chiefs, so what do I think I'm going to accomplish?
Those games were actually spread out throughout the season. (But yeah, I was half-expecting to hear about the Bills' wind game loss and loss to the Jags etc.. so if you're going to spare me that, I'll take it. :D)
You still can't just pick their 5 worst games
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 10:58:25 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 20, 2022, 10:24:52 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 20, 2022, 10:12:24 AM
You can't just pick their 5 worst games lol. You understand how that doesn't encompass their season right?
Eh, you're a Bills fan. Of course you're salty when it comes to the Chiefs, so what do I think I'm going to accomplish?
Those games were actually spread out throughout the season. (But yeah, I was half-expecting to hear about the Bills' wind game loss and loss to the Jags etc.. so if you're going to spare me that, I'll take it. :D)
You still can't just pick their 5 worst games
To be fair, I was responding to cherry picking with more cherry picking... but mine was much more encompassing of their season than just "they blew the AFC title game and lost Tyreek". The point being, the Chiefs (and really every other team too...) were far from perfect in 2021-22 even considering much more than just the ~two main headlines.
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
While what he did was stupid, I don't think he was trying to kill himself; he was just wasted. By saying 'else', you infer that he killed someone which he did not. Call him what you want, but he's not a murderer/killer.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 08:19:38 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
While what he did was stupid, I don't think he was trying to kill himself; he was just wasted. By saying 'else', you infer that he killed someone which he did not. Call him what you want, but he's not a murderer/killer.
I really dislike the practice of classifying the severity of driving drunk by whether or not someone else was badly injured or died. Once you choose to drive drunk, it's largely a matter of luck whether or not you hit another person or car. Obviously not applicable in this specific case, but I think every drunk driver should be punished as harshly as those who kill someone while doing it.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 08:19:38 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
While what he did was stupid, I don't think he was trying to kill himself; he was just wasted. By saying 'else', you infer that he killed someone which he did not. Call him what you want, but he's not a murderer/killer.
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 08:19:38 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
While what he did was stupid, I don't think he was trying to kill himself; he was just wasted. By saying 'else', you infer that he killed someone which he did not. Call him what you want, but he's not a murderer/killer.
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 08:19:38 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 23, 2022, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
Haskins had a BAC of .24, three times the legal limit, at the time of the crash . . . color me shocked. Good thing he didn't kill anyone else.
Kill anyone else? Did he kill someone? Yeah, he was likely driving before he got out of the car, but he got hit while walking.
He killed himself, pretty much? Walking across a south Florida Interstate (or any Interstate for that matter) is unlikely to end well . . .
He was driving drunk, by 3x the legal limit.
Had he not run out of gas he very well could have killed someone else.
While what he did was stupid, I don't think he was trying to kill himself; he was just wasted. By saying 'else', you infer that he killed someone which he did not. Call him what you want, but he's not a murderer/killer.
Not just "wasted." He also had ketamine in his system. He was a drugged-up mess. It's pretty lucky no one else was injured or killed as a result of him driving a car on the road that night. Tragic, in the classic sense of the word, that he ended up being the only fatality.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:42:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
I, also, don't disagree with this at all. That's why I objected to the insinuation that he was a killer. The maniac that killed 10-year-olds yesterday? Yeah, he can rot in the worst kind of hell, but just being drunk, high, and getting hit by a truck doesn't make us need to vilify him.
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:42:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
Good thing I'm not talking to Haskins' family then.
If we don't talk about the poor decisions that were made leading up to tragedies, we will never properly learn from them. If I die because of an idiotic decision I would at least want people to learn from it.
Quote from: thspfc on May 25, 2022, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:42:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
Good thing I'm not talking to Haskins' family then.
If we don't talk about the poor decisions that were made leading up to tragedies, we will never properly learn from them. If I die because of an idiotic decision I would at least want people to learn from it.
I don't take issue with talking about the poor decisions, it's more the framing of a tragedy (particularly one in which no weapons were involved, with no apparent malicious intent) being someone's own fault. Of course he should not have been driving or walking on a highway while drunk and on drugs, but the reasons for what happened are always much more complicated than that. The way to learn from it is to understand that drugs, alcohol, and especially addiction can be dangerous and try to help anyone that struggles with it, and not just assume that anyone that does is a bad person.
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 06:38:17 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 25, 2022, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:42:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
Good thing I'm not talking to Haskins' family then.
If we don't talk about the poor decisions that were made leading up to tragedies, we will never properly learn from them. If I die because of an idiotic decision I would at least want people to learn from it.
I don't take issue with talking about the poor decisions, it's more the framing of a tragedy (particularly one in which no weapons were involved, with no apparent malicious intent) being someone's own fault. Of course he should not have been driving or walking on a highway while drunk and on drugs, but the reasons for what happened are always much more complicated than that. The way to learn from it is to understand that drugs, alcohol, and especially addiction can be dangerous and try to help anyone that struggles with it, and not just assume that anyone that does is a bad person.
I never said he was a bad person. I didn't know him, I'm not the one to make those judgements.
Much more complicated? As in like, why did he drive drunk on a freeway? Your guess is as good as mine, but you'd be very hard pressed to find a good reason to drive at all with a BAC that high, nevermind on a freeway.
It's not hard to figure out why he attempted to walk for gas: he knew that if he called for help, he would get busted for drunk driving. But had he not driven drunk, he wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place. (there's also the completely free no-questions-asked Uber-like service the NFL has for its players, which could have been used before he got in the car drunk or after he ran out of gas)
Framing means attempting to make someone look responsible for something they weren't responsible for. I don't understand how I'm "framing" this as being Haskins' fault.
It was a tragic accident that could have been avoided in so many simple ways. It's important to recognize those ways so that if any of us are ever in a place where we need to make similar decisions, we make the correct ones. Playing it off as not Haskins' fault does nothing.
Quote from: thspfc on May 25, 2022, 09:47:45 PM
It was a tragic accident that could have been avoided in so many simple ways. It's important to recognize those ways so that if any of us are ever in a place where we need to make similar decisions, we make the correct ones. Playing it off as not Haskins' fault does nothing.
It might be a mental health issue too. Whatever happened before that point, it's unlikely that Haskins was in a right state of mind to be making different decisions or really any decisions at all, and the same would likely apply to anyone else in that situation. I obviously agree he never should have been on the road under the influence of drugs/alcohol, but other than that, we don't have enough information to make any definitive statements. And while I'm not trying to absolve Haskins, I just don't think it's necessary or helpful to try to assign blame - especially since he was on foot when he got hit by a car not vice versa which makes it very different than many other drugs/alcohol related incidents.
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:38:17 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 25, 2022, 09:47:45 PM
It was a tragic accident that could have been avoided in so many simple ways. It's important to recognize those ways so that if any of us are ever in a place where we need to make similar decisions, we make the correct ones. Playing it off as not Haskins' fault does nothing.
It might be a mental health issue too. Whatever happened before that point, it's unlikely that Haskins was in a right state of mind to be making different decisions or really any decisions at all, and the same would likely apply to anyone else in that situation. I obviously agree he never should have been on the road under the influence of drugs/alcohol, but other than that, we don't have enough information to make any definitive statements. And while I'm not trying to absolve Haskins, I just don't think it's necessary or helpful to try to assign blame - especially since he was on foot when he got hit by a car not vice versa which makes it very different than many other drugs/alcohol related incidents.
This isn't "got hit by a car" in the traditional sense. Us in the roadgeek community should know better than anyone not to cross a south Florida Interstate on foot.
Well, usually those two things are on opposite ends of the spectrum - the drunk driver is the offender and the person that got hit by a car is the victim. But in this case, Haskins was both, which is why it doesn't do much good to assign blame for what happened.
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 06:38:17 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 25, 2022, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 10:42:03 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 24, 2022, 09:46:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 24, 2022, 08:51:56 AM
I suppose. I guess what I'm getting at is he has no one to blame but himself.
I don't disagree with this at all.
But even if it was avoidable (which it obviously was), I don't appreciate the undertone. I think it's distasteful and unhelpful to play the "blame game" with anyone that has just died, regardless of the circumstances. Imagine saying to Haskins' family, "well, too bad, but it was his own fault!"
Good thing I'm not talking to Haskins' family then.
If we don't talk about the poor decisions that were made leading up to tragedies, we will never properly learn from them. If I die because of an idiotic decision I would at least want people to learn from it.
I don't take issue with talking about the poor decisions, it's more the framing of a tragedy (particularly one in which no weapons were involved, with no apparent malicious intent) being someone's own fault.
The very definition of tragedy is: A drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow,
especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, moral weakness, or inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances.That is exactly what happened in this case. Tragedy occurs specifically because of someone's own fault.
Quote from: webny99 on May 25, 2022, 11:17:42 PM
Well, usually those two things are on opposite ends of the spectrum - the drunk driver is the offender and the person that got hit by a car is the victim. But in this case, Haskins was both, which is why it doesn't do much good to assign blame for what happened.
You really trying to say that the person driving a dump truck on a freeway who was found in investigations to have done nothing wrong, is at fault for hitting a guy trying cross the freeway on foot?
If a guy jumps out in front of the dump truck you're driving at 60 MPH, your options are to brake, which you don't have enough time to fully do (keep in mind this was in relatively low light early in the morning), or swerve and risk injuring yourself and/or another innocent driver. The driver likely had no time to react. Who knows, maybe he did purposefully blow straight through, but I find that extremely unlikely as the death has already been officially ruled an accident and the driver isn't even going to face a trial.
Random offseason question: How many teams should/should not expect to contend for a playoff spot this season?
In the AFC, I think basically the entire conference views themselves as a playoff contender. The four biggest exceptions IMO:
-Steelers. I know they're always in the mix but I think this could be the year they aren't. Trubisky isn't going to be great and even if Pickett is OK, they're not going to get as lucky as they did last year. Big Ben was not good last year, but he made key plays to win a bunch of close games and that was largely attributable to his years of experience. You can't expect the same from Trubisky or a rookie.
-Jets. I think they have the roster and potential upside of a playoff team, but really the only thing that matters is Wilson's development. If his play improves significantly, 8-9 wins is still a success.
-Jaguars. Likely not a playoff team, but could certainly win 7-8 games. I'm not buying the Titans, and the Jaguars seem to have the Colts' number lately, so it wouldn't be shocking to find them in the mix for the division in December.
-Texans. Not too much explanation needed here. They're considerably worse roster-wise than all of the other teams in their division and would be the only truly shocking playoff team in the entire AFC.
In the NFC, it gets more interesting as to whether certain teams are contending or rebuilding.
I think the entire NFC West expects to have a shot at the playoffs. The Seahawks could definitely make it with competent QB play - which is obviously a giant question mark. Cardinals are obviously expecting to contend but I could see them finishing with a losing record.
Vikings are a definite yes to contend for a playoff spot. Lions are also yes IMO - I could see 8-9 wins with competent play from Goff given the improved roster. And I think the entire NFC East is a yes - Commanders and especially Giants might be a stretch, but it wouldn't be crazy if either of them made the wild card. And the NFC South, Saints are obviously expecting to make the playoffs, Panthers are not in the playoff mix with their current QB situation but the roster isn't terrible, so yes if they get Baker Mayfield or Jimmy G.
That leaves the Falcons and Bears as the only true non-contending teams in the NFC, plus the Texans in the AFC. So 29 of 32 teams could make the playoffs and it wouldn't be totally shocking - that seems like more than any other year I can remember.
Agree except for the Lions. They're still devoid of talent. We don't know yet if they drafted well or not. We don't know if their quarterback is capable, we don't know if their coach is capable. I'd say 5-6 wins at most.
Quote from: thspfc on June 07, 2022, 02:29:38 PM
Agree except for the Lions. They're still devoid of talent. We don't know yet if they drafted well or not. We don't know if their quarterback is capable, we don't know if their coach is capable. I'd say 5-6 wins at most.
I think you absolutely know what you're getting from Jared Goff, and that's probably half the reason they traded for him: so they could have competence at QB and be somewhat competitive while rebuilding.
Yes, the coach(es) and draft class(es) are unproven, but in the small sample we have, they were pretty unlucky to have only 3 wins last year. It could have easily been more given how many close games they were in.
Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 03:51:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 07, 2022, 02:29:38 PM
Agree except for the Lions. They're still devoid of talent. We don't know yet if they drafted well or not. We don't know if their quarterback is capable, we don't know if their coach is capable. I'd say 5-6 wins at most.
I think you absolutely know what you're getting from Jared Goff, and that's probably half the reason they traded for him: so they could have competence at QB and be somewhat competitive while rebuilding.
Yes, the coach(es) and draft class(es) are unproven, but in the small sample we have, they were pretty unlucky to have only 3 wins last year. It could have easily been more given how many close games they were in.
I think your coach is a nutjob. He seems to say a bunch of things loudly to help mask the fact he is in over his head. I really hope I am wrong; I am not someone who takes pleasure in the Lions being bad because it has gone on for so long now. It's more like an old hat or something you can count on. If the Lions became good, it would throw the world off kilter.
I'mma say the Jets themselves expect to CONTEND - not to actually get a spot but to at least still be in the mix for most of the season, within a game or two of .500 for the most part. I think a lot of prognosticators are undervaluing them, and it really depends on both Wilson and the newest set of draft picks, how quickly they acclimate and grow together. They could finish 9-8 and back into spot #7, they could finish 5-12 and disappoint.
Tom Brady is going to be without one of his favorite targets this upcoming season, as Rob Gronkowski has decided to call it a career for the second time: https://www.nfl.com/news/four-time-super-bowl-champion-rob-gronkowski-announces-retirement-after-11-seaso. I wonder if this means we will see Gronkowski return to Fox Sports, like he did during his first retirement?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 21, 2022, 06:21:36 PM
Tom Brady is going to be without one of his favorite targets this upcoming season, as Rob Gronkowski has decided to call it a career for the second time: https://www.nfl.com/news/four-time-super-bowl-champion-rob-gronkowski-announces-retirement-after-11-seaso. I wonder if this means we will see Gronkowski return to Fox Sports, like he did during his first retirement?
Or WWE as he seemed to have some interest there too in the past
Thoughts on Baker Mayfield to the Panthers?
I wanted to see Jimmy G to the Panthers and Baker Mayfield to the Seahawks, that just seemed to make the most sense for all teams involved. I think Jimmy G is better than Baker and the Panthers could use someone with as much experience as possible, plus the Darnold/Mayfield thing is kind of awkward.
And from a Seahawks POV, Baker is still a big upgrade over Drew Lock. But there's no way Jimmy G goes to Seattle so he may end up a backup somewhere.
Quote from: webny99 on July 06, 2022, 08:24:36 PM
Thoughts on Baker Mayfield to the Panthers?
I wanted to see Jimmy G to the Panthers and Baker Mayfield to the Seahawks, that just seemed to make the most sense for all teams involved. I think Jimmy G is better than Baker and the Panthers could use someone with as much experience as possible, plus the Darnold/Mayfield thing is kind of awkward.
And from a Seahawks POV, Baker is still a big upgrade over Drew Lock. But there's no way Jimmy G goes to Seattle so he may end up a backup somewhere.
It's laughable.
Browns at Panthers September 11...my, my.
The Athletic Football Show podcast has a 6-episode series about Andrew Luck that came out this week... interesting insight for anyone that followed Luck's career/early retirement: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-athletic-football-show-a-show-about-the-nfl
Luck's retirement was one of the few NFL moments I don't think I'll ever forget. Truly and unbelievably stunning the way it unfolded.
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2022, 03:22:02 PM
The Athletic Football Show podcast has a 6-episode series about Andrew Luck that came out this week... interesting insight for anyone that followed Luck's career/early retirement: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-athletic-football-show-a-show-about-the-nfl
Luck's retirement was one of the few NFL moments I don't think I'll ever forget. Truly and unbelievably stunning the way it unfolded.
Luck himself has been mostly quiet since his retirement. Were he to write a tell-all, it could be a best-seller.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 12, 2022, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2022, 03:22:02 PM
The Athletic Football Show podcast has a 6-episode series about Andrew Luck that came out this week... interesting insight for anyone that followed Luck's career/early retirement: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-athletic-football-show-a-show-about-the-nfl
Luck's retirement was one of the few NFL moments I don't think I'll ever forget. Truly and unbelievably stunning the way it unfolded.
Luck himself has been mostly quiet since his retirement. Were he to write a tell-all, it could be a best-seller.
This series might be as close as we ever get. Made it to the final episode today and it's very well done. It's a back-and-forth between narration by Colts beat reporter Zach Keefer and commentary from various Colts and NFL figures. I'm not usually a huge fan of that style and prefer a conversational style, but it worked well here. Lots of background on the decision to move on from Peyton, Luck's early career, injuries, comeback campaign in 2018, etc.
Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2022, 06:04:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 12, 2022, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2022, 03:22:02 PM
The Athletic Football Show podcast has a 6-episode series about Andrew Luck that came out this week... interesting insight for anyone that followed Luck's career/early retirement: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-athletic-football-show-a-show-about-the-nfl
Luck's retirement was one of the few NFL moments I don't think I'll ever forget. Truly and unbelievably stunning the way it unfolded.
Luck himself has been mostly quiet since his retirement. Were he to write a tell-all, it could be a best-seller.
This series might be as close as we ever get. Made it to the final episode today and it's very well done. It's a back-and-forth between narration by Colts beat reporter Zach Keefer and commentary from various Colts and NFL figures. I'm not usually a huge fan of that style and prefer a conversational style, but it worked well here. Lots of background on the decision to move on from Peyton, Luck's early career, injuries, comeback campaign in 2018, etc.
Stinks with the injuries he had to deal with causing early retirement. Would like to think he'd have been a HOF QB, or well on HOF path, if he was still playing.
Very out-of-the-blue post, but I remember last year a couple of us "forked" teams once we were confident they weren't going to make the playoffs, and accumulated a list of such teams over time until the end of the regular season. I think that's a fun idea, what if we had an organized "forking" competition for this season?
For example:
Fork before season starts: 20 points
Fork weeks 1 through 7: 15 points
Fork weeks 8 through 11: 11 points
Fork weeks 12 through 14: 8 points
Fork weeks 15 and 16: 6 points
The deadline to make final forks would be Thursday 12/29, the start of week 17. After week 17, it's just picking week 18 games which isn't really the spirit.
Of course, there would be a penalty for an incorrect fork. Maybe -30 points? It would have to be steep in order to encourage smart and timely picks.
Forking a team after they have been eliminated from playoff contention would obviously net you 0 points.
So, who is interested? Any disputes on the points system?
Quote from: thspfc on July 16, 2022, 09:31:39 PM
Very out-of-the-blue post, but I remember last year a couple of us "forked" teams once we were confident they weren't going to make the playoffs, and accumulated a list of such teams over time until the end of the regular season. I think that's a fun idea, what if we had an organized "forking" competition for this season?
For example:
Fork before season starts: 20 points
Fork weeks 1 through 7: 15 points
Fork weeks 8 through 11: 11 points
Fork weeks 12 through 14: 8 points
Fork weeks 15 and 16: 6 points
The deadline to make final forks would be Thursday 12/29, the start of week 17. After week 17, it's just picking week 18 games which isn't really the spirit.
Of course, there would be a penalty for an incorrect fork. Maybe -30 points? It would have to be steep in order to encourage smart and timely picks.
Forking a team after they have been eliminated from playoff contention would obviously net you 0 points.
So, who is interested? Any disputes on the points system?
I'm down.
Oh, I am obviously down for this as well. I think it was me that started it last year, remembering that it was an old Around the NFL podcast segment that I enjoyed.
My only suggestion would be to make it 4 tiers with 5-point increments for simplicity's sake. Keeping preseason at 20 pts, maybe something like 15 for weeks 1-8, 10 for weeks 9-12, and 5 for weeks 13-16? And I'm good with -30 points for an incorrect fork.
I'm in. Put me down for Detroit today.
Quote from: webny99 on July 19, 2022, 04:00:57 PM
Oh, I am obviously down for this as well. I think it was me that started it last year, remembering that it was an old Around the NFL podcast segment that I enjoyed.
My only suggestion would be to make it 4 tiers with 5-point increments for simplicity's sake. Keeping preseason at 20 pts, maybe something like 15 for weeks 1-8, 10 for weeks 9-12, and 5 for weeks 13-16? And I'm good with -30 points for an incorrect fork.
How about we meet in the middle:
Preseason: 20 points
Weeks 1-8: 15 points
Weeks 9-13: 10 points
Weeks 14-16: 5 points
Quote from: thspfc on July 20, 2022, 11:33:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 19, 2022, 04:00:57 PM
My only suggestion would be to make it 4 tiers with 5-point increments for simplicity's sake. ...
How about we meet in the middle:
Preseason: 20 points
Weeks 1-8: 15 points
Weeks 9-13: 10 points
Weeks 14-16: 5 points
:thumbsup:
Deal. Put me in for Atlanta, Houston, both NY teams, and Chicago. And Detroit if we can do repeats of other forum members' selections.
Quote from: jlam on July 21, 2022, 10:43:33 AM
Deal. Put me in for Atlanta, Houston, both NY teams, and Chicago. And Detroit if we can do repeats of other forum members' selections.
Yes, repeats are allowed.
And one final thing I forgot to add: if you haven't forked 18 teams by the start of week 17, you will be docked 30 points for every missing team (i.e. if you only do 16 you'll lose 60 points).
I think that's necessary because otherwise people can just fork the teams that are obviously going to miss out and leave the close ones untouched so as to guarantee no wrong forks. And that's boring.
Now that we've got several people in this, I'll make a table to keep track, which I'll update at the end of every points period. Anyone else reading this, feel free to join whenever.
Green = has been eliminated
Red = has clinched a playoff berth
Black = TBD
NWI_Irish96
Lions (+20)
Jets (+20)
Browns (+20)
Texans (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Patriots (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Raiders (+15)
Commanders (+15)
Panthers (+15)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13)
Saints (+13)
Colts (+10)
Rams (+10)
Cardinals (+10)
Bears (+10)
Current total: 274
jlam
Falcons (+20)
Texans (+20)
Jets (+20)
Giants (+20)
Bears (+20)
Lions (+20)
Raiders (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Seahawks (+15)
Panthers (+13)
Commanders (+13)
Saints (+13)
Cardinals (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13)
Colts (+13)
Patriots (+13)
Chargers (+13)
Current total: 282
thspfc
Texans (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Giants (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Bears (+20)
Lions (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Patriots (+15)
Jets (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Panthers (+15)
Raiders (+13)
Saints (+13)
Cardinals (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Browns (+13)
Rams (+10)
Colts (+10)
Current total: 285
jayhawkco
Giants (+20)
Panthers (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Jets (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Browns (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Lions (+20)
Bears (+20)
Commanders (+20)
Cardinals (+15)
Cowboys (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Raiders (+15)
Patriots (+15)
Broncos (+13)
Texans (+13)
Saints (+13)
Current total: 314
webny99
Steelers (+20)
Browns (+20)
Jets (+20)
Patriots (+20)
Texans (+20)
Titans (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Giants (+20)
Commanders (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Lions (+20)
Bears (+20)
Panthers (+15)
Packers (+13)
Buccaneers (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13)
Raiders (+13)
Current total: 320
CoreySamson
Falcons (+20)
Bears (+20)
Giants (+20)
Panthers (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Current total: 100
hobsini2
Jets (+20)
Texans (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Steelers (+20)
Broncos (+20)
Commanders (+20)
Giants (+20)
Panthers (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Saints (+20)
Lions (+20)
Current total: 220
Henry
Bears (+10)
Broncos (+10)
Browns (+10)
Jaguars (+10)
Lions (+10)
Panthers (+10)
Raiders (+10)
Rams (+10)
Saints (+10)
Steelers (+10)
Texans (+10)
Bengals (+10)
Cardinals (+10)
Chargers (+10)
Colts (+10)
Commanders (+10)
Falcons (+10)
Panthers (+10)
Current total: 180
Quote from: thspfc on July 21, 2022, 12:18:21 PM
Quote from: jlam on July 21, 2022, 10:43:33 AM
Deal. Put me in for Atlanta, Houston, both NY teams, and Chicago. And Detroit if we can do repeats of other forum members' selections.
Yes, repeats are allowed.
And one final thing I forgot to add: if you haven't forked 18 teams by the start of week 17, you will be docked 30 points for every missing team (i.e. if you only do 16 you'll lose 60 points).
I think that's necessary because otherwise people can just fork the teams that are obviously going to miss out and leave the close ones untouched so as to guarantee no wrong forks. And that's boring.
Concur with that. The spirit of the game is to go out on a limb and make some tough choices.
We might need a table or some way to keep track, unless everyone just keeps track of their own.
Quote from: thspfc on July 21, 2022, 12:27:32 PM
Now that we've got several people in this, I'll make a table to keep track, which I'll update at the end of every points period...
Edit: Wow, that was good timing. Sounds good!
Put me down for the Falcons, Bears, Giants, Browns, Panthers, and Jaguars.
Quote from: CoreySamson on July 21, 2022, 12:38:36 PM
Put me down for the Falcons, Bears, Giants, Browns, Panthers, and Jaguars.
Edited you into the table.
So....the Arizona Cardinals gave a guaranteed $160m to Kyler Murray, but included a proviso that he spend four hours per week on film study. A very odd situation.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 27, 2022, 04:45:39 AM
So....the Arizona Cardinals gave a guaranteed $160m to Kyler Murray, but included a proviso that he spend four hours per week on film study. A very odd situation.
Yikes. Not good really for either side that that got leaked, but especially Kyler. This is going to stick to him for a long time unless he wins a Super Bowl (and the Cardinals' roster is not that great, so that's probably not going to happen in the next few years...)
Training camp has begun for the 2022 season.
And now Arizona removed the homework clause lol. Honestly, removing it after causing a media stir is even worse than including it in the first place.
Talk about making a bad situation worse I'd love to be a fly on the wall in that locker room
Watson suspended a whole 6 games.
Calvin Ridley got 16 games for betting on games he wasn't even involved in. And I'm not saying that Ridley shouldn't have been suspended; betting is a serious offense for a player and it can't happen. But I don't understand how Watson doesn't get a longer suspension than Ridley.
Perhaps most egregious is that Zeke got 6 games for ONE ACCUSATION that wasn't even true.
For an AFC team, Cleveland's schedule is stupidly easy to start the year. Even with Brissett or whoever else starting the first 6, they shouldn't be worse than 3-3.
No comment on the suspension length other than I'm not shocked as I figured it would be less than a year. But I must say, the back loading of Cleveland's schedule was probably intentional. Not exactly a gauntlet to get through before Watson returns.
Quote from: thspfc on July 21, 2022, 12:27:32 PM
Now that we've got several people in this, I'll make a table to keep track, which I'll update at the end of every points period. Anyone else reading this, feel free to join whenever.
jayhawkco
Give me:
Giants
Panthers
Seahawks
Jets
Falcons
Browns
Jaguars
Lions
Bears
Commanders
I've also started my list of preseason forks and I've got some spicy ones in the AFC, but I'm finding the NFC weirdly hard to pick teams knowing there will be some bad teams in the mix because of the overall weakness of the conference.
Trying for at least 5 per conference since the preseason forks have the highest point value.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 01, 2022, 11:19:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on July 21, 2022, 12:27:32 PM
Now that we've got several people in this, I'll make a table to keep track, which I'll update at the end of every points period. Anyone else reading this, feel free to join whenever.
jayhawkco
Give me:
Giants
Panthers
Seahawks
Jets
Falcons
Browns
Jaguars
Lions
Bears
Commanders
Updated.
Now that we have the Watson news, I'll be making my record and playoff predictions soon.
Watson should've been suspended for at least 10 games, if not the whole season, IMO. I'll probably unfork the Browns for now as I expected him to get a longer suspension.
Quote from: CoreySamson on August 01, 2022, 05:15:52 PM
Watson should've been suspended for at least 10 games, if not the whole season, IMO. I'll probably unfork the Browns for now as I expected him to get a longer suspension.
I happily forked them even with only 6 games, which, I agree, is a travesty.
Quote from: webny99 on August 01, 2022, 12:12:42 PM
I've also started my list of preseason forks and I've got some spicy ones in the AFC, but I'm finding the NFC weirdly hard to pick teams knowing there will be some bad teams in the mix because of the overall weakness of the conference.
Trying for at least 5 per conference since the preseason forks have the highest point value.
Alright, I settled on 12 teams. That leaves only 6 more to fork, but I'd much rather get the full 20 points if I'm right :biggrin:
Here goes:
Steelers
Browns
Jets
Patriots
Texans
Titans
Falcons
Giants
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Bears
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 01, 2022, 12:12:42 PM
I've also started my list of preseason forks and I've got some spicy ones in the AFC, but I'm finding the NFC weirdly hard to pick teams knowing there will be some bad teams in the mix because of the overall weakness of the conference.
Trying for at least 5 per conference since the preseason forks have the highest point value.
Alright, I settled on 12 teams. That leaves only 6 more to fork, but I'd much rather get the full 20 points if I'm right :biggrin:
Here goes:
Steelers
Browns
Jets
Patriots
Texans
Titans
Falcons
Giants
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Bears
Got it. Seeing everyone else's picks, I should probably add a few teams to my list.
So if I am reading this right for the Forking Game, pick as many teams that will not make the playoffs. Right? Here's my preseason list of who will not make the playoffs with the predicted record:
NY Jets 4-13
Houston 3-14
Jacksonville 7-10
Pittsburgh 8-9
Denver 9-8
Washington 6-11
NY Giants 6-11
Carolina 2-15
Atlanta 5-12
New Orleans 8-9
Detroit 7-10
Chicago 6-11
Seattle 3-14
My NFL Predictions for 2022 (* Playoff team):
AFC East
Buffalo 13-4*
Miami 11-6*
New England 10-7
NY Jets 4-13
South
Indianapolis 12-5*
Tennessee 9-8
Jacksonville 7-10
Houston 3-14
North
Cincinnati 11-6*
Baltimore 11-6
Cleveland 9-8
Pittsburgh 8-9
West
Las Vegas 13-4*
Kansas City 12-5*
LA Chargers 12-5*
Denver 9-8
NFC East
Dallas 10-7*
Philadelphia 10-7
Washington 6-11
NY Giants 6-11
South
Tampa Bay 12-5*
New Orleans 8-9
Atlanta 5-12
Carolina 2-15
North
Green Bay 13-4*
Minnesota 11-6*
Detroit 7-10
Chicago 6-11
West
San Francisco 12-5*
LA Rams 11-6*
Arizona 11-6*
Seattle 3-14
AFC Playoffs
1 Buffalo
2 Las Vegas
3 Indianapolis
4 Cincinnati
5 Kansas City
6 LA Chargers
7 Miami
2 Las Vegas over 7 Miami
3 Indianapolis over 6 LA Chargers
5 Kansas City over 4 Cincinnati
1 Buffalo over 5 Kansas City
3 Indianapolis over 2 Las Vegas
Buffalo over Indianapolis
NFC Playoffs
1 Green Bay
2 San Francisco
3 Tampa Bay
4 Dallas
5 LA Rams
6 Minnesota
7 Arizona
2 San Francisco over 7 Arizona
3 Tampa Bay over 6 Minnesota
5 LA Rams over 4 Dallas
1 Green Bay over 5 LA Rams
3 Tampa Bay over 2 San Francisco
Green Bay over Tampa Bay
Super Bowl
Buffalo over Green Bay 26-23
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 03, 2022, 11:47:55 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 03, 2022, 11:46:00 AM
Denver 9-8
Another on my anti-Russ team! Welcome!
I like Russell Wilson but that is too tough a division and the Broncos don't have the weapons on offense to keep up.
Well it's not like Watson did something serious like gambling. :crazy: :crazy:
This league is so screwed up in its priorities.
This is one area where I part ways from the NFLPA. Usually I'm on their side about most issues, but when it comes to suspensions for off-field issues, they are too protective of their people. Especially in cases of domestic violence and sexual assault.
Alright, time for my picks.
AFC East
Buffalo 14-3*
New England 9-8*
Miami 8-9
NY Jets 4-13
AFC South
Indianapolis 11-6*
Houston 10-7*
Tennessee 9-8
Jacksonville 6-11
AFC North
Baltimore 12-5*
Cincinnati 9-8
Pittsburgh 8-9
Cleveland 6-11
AFC West
LA Chargers 12-5*
Kansas City 11-6*
Las Vegas 8-9
Denver 8-9
NFC East
Philadelphia 11-6*
Dallas 11-6*
Washington 7-10
NY Giants 4-13
NFC South
Tampa Bay 13-4*
New Orleans 8-9
Atlanta 4-13
Carolina 3-14
NFC North
Minnesota 12-5*
Green Bay 11-6*
Detroit 6-11
Chicago 4-13
NFC West
LA Rams 12-5*
San Francisco 10-7*
Arizona 7-10
Seattle 3-14
AFC Playoffs
1. Buffalo
2. LA Chargers
3. Baltimore
4. Indianapolis
5. Kansas City
6. Houston
7. New England
2. Chargers over 7. Patriots
3. Ravens over 6. Texans
5. Chiefs over 4. Colts
1. Bills over 5. Chiefs
2. Chargers over 3. Ravens
2. Chargers over 1. Bills
NFL Playoffs
1. Tampa Bay
2. LA Rams
3. Minnesota
4. Philadelphia
5. Green Bay
6. Dallas
7. San Francisco
2. Rams over 7. 49ers
3. Vikings over 6. Cowboys
5. Packers over 4. Eagles
1. Bucs over 5. Packers
2. Rams over 3. Vikings
1. Bucs over 2. Rams
Super Bowl
Chargers over Bucs 31-28
Starting with the AFC.
AFC East
1. Bills (13-4): a streaky team last year that I think is slightly overrated entering this season. They're #1 in just about every power rankings list I've read, which I think is aggressive considering they didn't make the AFC title game and their most notable offseason addition was an aging linebacker on a huge contract. Allen was hot and cold last year - more hot than cold, no doubt, but when he was cold, Buffalo really struggled.
The stretch of games that is most influencing Buffalo's sky-high expectations is the second half at Tampa through the divisional loss to the Chiefs. 1), I don't think it's smart to zone in on 6.5 games out of 19, and 2), both of their best games were against the Patriots. While destroying Belichick twice is very impressive, there are plenty of other good coaches and plenty of better teams.
All that said, when they're on their game, they're near unstoppable on offense and excellent on defense. There are also many teams in the conference capable of clearing out achilles heel Mahomes this year.
2. Dolphins (11-6): it's now or never for Tua. They're built to his strengths at WR with Waddle and Hill - both excellent volume receivers who can pick up big yardage after the catch. Cedrick Wilson is a criminally underrated WR3 who was overshadowed by Cooper, Lamb, and Gallup in Dallas. The offensive line is much improved. Chase Edmonds and Raheem Mostert, health permitting, is a more than serviceable RB duo.
For the second straight year I'm convincing myself to believe in this team. They really do have the right pieces.
3. Patriots (9-8): one of the only AFC teams that didn't get much, or any, better this offseason. Last year they were lucky to catch the Titans when they were destroyed by injuries and the Bills when weather killed their offense and their defense couldn't stop a run up the middle when they knew for certain it was coming. Jones should take a second-year jump, perhaps to the fringe of the top 10, but I don't have utmost confidence in their defense, especially against a more difficult schedule than what they faced last year.
4. Jets (6-11): at some point drafting well has to result in winning games, or else you're not actually drafting well. Expectations aren't too high this season in the loaded AFC. Rising out of the bottom feeder group would make this season a success.
AFC North
1. Ravens (11-6): with how battered they were from the beginning, it's remarkable that they were 8-3 at one point last year. Turned out Lamar was the duct tape holding the team together. A brutal schedule to end the year didn't help. But minus those last six games, they're a ridiculous 39-10 in the regular season since Lamar took over in 2018. The roster is not what it was in 2019, but provided the injury bug doesn't bite again, they're still good enough to be in the thick of things.
2. Bengals (9-8): I don't entirely know why, but I'm just not sold. They were an unconvincing and inconsistent 8-6 at Christmas last year. Then, a field day on the decimated Ravens secondary, an upset of the Chiefs who had been on a tear, and all of a sudden they're title contenders. They narrowly beat an average Raiders team, narrowly beat a fraudulent 1 seed Titans team whose best player wasn't at full strength. Credit where credit is due for beating the Chiefs and holding it close against the Rams.
The patchwork defense was solid down the stretch, but that feels like a one-hit wonder. The offensive line was bolstered in the offseason, but Burrow still isn't totally safe, especially with one ACL tear already. We don't know if Zac Taylor is the right coach.
3. Browns (9-8): I hate almost everything about this team. I hope this disgusting group goes 0-17 and pushes away all the fans they still somehow have. But, sadly, they're good at football. That defensive front can shut teams down and bash them with helmets. Offensively, they've got some offenders. 3-3 when Watson gets back, then they hit the ground running.
4. Steelers (7-10): this HAS to be the year the Tomlin .500 or better streak ends. They're the only team in the division that doesn't have it figured out at quarterback. The conference is passing them by. The defense benefitted last year by facing the Seahawks without Wilson, injured Baker twice, Ravens twice late in the season when they were most depleted, and Titans when they were most depleted. Against better offenses they weren't all that good. TJ Watt and Najee Harris are units, but they're not enough.
AFC South
1. Colts (12-5): the 2021 Colts missing the playoffs is one of the disasters of the modern era. Matt Ryan should provide some stability at QB, and that's really all this team needs. He's not an MVP-caliber player anymore, but he doesn't need to be. Four free wins (right? RIGHT?) against the Texans and Jags will help.
2. Titans (8-9): first-place schedules are brutal this year, and especially so for the Titans, because to me they were the worst first-place team in 2021. It is seriously a mystery how they stumbled into a #1 seed while the Rams were a #4. Without AJ Brown and Julio, they're deficient at WR - a lot is resting on rookie Treylon Burks. They swept Indy last year, that's not happening again.
3. Jaguars (6-11): with a real NFL coach and some more experience, they should be better than last year. They're solid at WR, though they broke the market in the process. Defense is still a problem at every position.
4. Texans (4-13): to a lot of teams Houston will be a relief game from the AFC gauntlet. Might well be underdogs in all 17 games. But they are still professionals, getting paid to play football. They'll steal a few wins here and there. We'll find out about Davis Mills.
AFC West
1. Chargers (11-6): there's no reason why that defense should have been as bad as it was last year. Fixing that - which Khalil Mack will help with - will go a long way in ensuring the Chargers don't randomly lay an egg once every three weeks like they did last season. Their receiving corps are kind of lacking for a team with an elite quarterback.
It might be surprising that I have 11-6 winning the best division in the league. My logic is that the four teams are going to beat up on each other, with nobody finishing better than 4-2 or worse than 2-4 against divisional opponents.
2. Broncos (11-6): having finished 4th in the AFCW in 2021, Denver has the easiest schedule in the division, an advantage that shouldn't be underestimated in such a tight race. Their skill group might be the best Wilson has had in his career. Patrick Surtain and Justin Simmons will be a dominant pair in the secondary, crucial in slowing down the AFCW's prolific passing offenses.
3. Chiefs (10-7): in my week-by-week picks I had them winning all 20 games they played last year. I still think they were the best team in the AFC, and just melted down in the second half against Cincy. But they lost so many guys in free agency. Hill, Austin Blythe, Darrell Williams, Byron Pringle, DeMarcus Robinson, Tyrann Mathieu, Charvarius Ward, Melvin Ingram, Jarran Reed, Mike Hughes, Daniel Sorensen. They were able to backfill some of those holes on offense - and of course they still have Mahomes and Kelce - but the defense is what concerns me. KC's defense was swiss cheese for the first 7 games and last 5 games of 2021, wrapped around a dominant stretch through November and December. Having lost so many pieces, it could be rough, especially early on. The schedule is brutal. Ultimately this team will live and die with Mahomes, even more so than the past couple seasons.
4. Raiders (7-10): somebody has to come last in the division of death. It's not so simple as "10-7 plus Adams" . They were 4-0 in overtime games last year, including three of the most bizarre games any of us have ever seen (against the Ravens, Cowboys, and Chargers). That won't happen again. Offensively they're talented, but not any more so than the other teams in the AFCW. Defensively they don't stack up with many of the offenses they're going to have to stop.
AFC Playoffs
1. Bills
2. Colts
3. Chargers
4. Ravens
5. Broncos
6. Dolphins
7. Chiefs
Wild Card
2) Colts defeat 7) Chiefs
3) Chargers defeat 6) Dolphins
4) Ravens defeat 5) Broncos
Divisional
1) Bills defeat 4) Ravens
2) Colts defeat 3) Chargers
AFC Championship
2) Colts defeat 1) Bills
Quote from: thspfc on August 03, 2022, 09:41:54 PM
Starting with the AFC.
way too formulaic at the end, you have all the top seeds winning until the very end
Quote from: Alps on August 03, 2022, 11:57:15 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 03, 2022, 09:41:54 PM
Starting with the AFC.
way too formulaic at the end, you have all the top seeds winning until the very end
Well, I also have 5 of the 7 playoff teams being different from last year . . .
Quote from: thspfc on August 04, 2022, 07:58:10 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 03, 2022, 11:57:15 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 03, 2022, 09:41:54 PM
Starting with the AFC.
way too formulaic at the end, you have all the top seeds winning until the very end
Well, I also have 5 of the 7 playoff teams being different from last year . . .
You're right. I didn't go that drastic originally (and still didn't), but I changed my AFC up to be a little more volatile. I'm probably the only one that sees a path for the Texans to make the playoffs, but I might as well take a shot.
I slightly edited my AFC predictions to get everything where I want it to be (and at a total record of 272-272). If Watson's suspension is lengthened then I'll make further changes.
Now for the NFC.
NFC East
1. Cowboys (11-6): the NFC Least will have a repeat champion for the first time in nearly two decades. Losing Amari Cooper and Cedrick Wilson hurts, but I often think back to Thanksgiving last year against the Raiders. Dallas was missing Cooper, missing Lamb, and having an absolute meltdown on defense, yet Dak kept the team in the game throwing to Gallup, Wilson, Noah Brown, and Dalton Schultz the whole time. If overtime went differently that game would be viewed as the defining moment of Dak's career to this point.
Lost in Zeke's massive contract is the fact that he was 7th in rushing yards last year. Overpaid? Yes. Useless? No. And with Pollard also in the backfield, Zeke might not even be the best RB on the team. With even an average offensive line, there's no reason why Dallas shouldn't be top 5-10 in rushing this year.
Defensively they still lack depth and were ripped apart by speedy teams last year, but Parsons and Diggs is an excellent 1-2 punch.
2. Eagles (10-7): I don't think this team is anything special but they should be able to feast on a fairly weak schedule. AJ Brown and Devonta Smith could be one of the best receiving duos in the league, and their skillsets complement each other's. Jalen Hurts is an interesting situation but to me it looks unlikely that he's not Philly's starter through at least 2023.
3. Football Redskin Commanders (10-7): I feel Wentz will have a better season than people think, especially if Jahan Dotson plays up to expectations. Dotson should provide an actual receiving threat besides McLaurin, something that offense severely lacked last year. Health permitting, that defensive front is dominant.
4. Giants (4-13): Kadarius Toney could be really, really good. After the catch he's unlike just about anyone I've ever seen. Other than that this team is a trainwreck.
NFC North
1. Packers (12-5): by now we all know how this goes. It's been basically the same thing with this team for 8 of the last 11 years. Adams is a big loss, albeit not quite as big as the one they're going to take in the postseason again.
2. Vikings (8-9): feels like the exact same team as last year and the year before. Defense still needs improvement, especially when it comes to getting stops on big drives. Offense is solid but not good enough to make up for highly unreliable defense and special teams.
3. Bears (5-12): I can't even pretend to care about this team. There's the funny kind of bad (Urban's Jaguars), the entertaining kind of bad (Campbell's Lions), and then there's just bad. Fields has a LONG way to go.
4. Lions (5-12): after rigorous analysis of literally 0 NFL snaps, I hereby announce that the Detroit Lions have won the 2022 NFL Draft.
I don't doubt that the players love Campbell. But last year there were no expectations at all. This year, rightfully so or not, people are expecting the Lions to be competitive. The team is still bad. Biting kneecaps is all fun and games until the team is 3-9 and everyone is getting sick of your bizarre press conferences.
NFC South
1. Buccaneers (13-4): similar to last year, they're just loaded everywhere. Injuries and the AB circus contributed heavily to their divisional round exit last season. It's also really hard to repeat as Super Bowl champions. But this offseason feels like a reset and return to what the team was during the championship season. A very weak division might help Brady avoid the wild card round for the first time since 2018.
2. Saints (7-10): there's a lot of question marks with this Saints offense. Their top three WRs have played a combined 9 games for the team in the last two seasons. Their starting quarterback has only played 8. Their top RB joined the long list of running backs with major off-field issues.
Jameis was not as good last year as people give him credit for. Look past 14 TDs/3 INTs and you'll see that the rest of his stats were highly questionable. With a new head coach and a lot of new pieces on the field, I think this will be the Saints' first losing season since 2016.
3. Panthers (4-13): Rhule isn't the right coach, McCaffrey can't stay healthy, and Baker isn't good enough to drag a below average squad to the playoffs. Simple as that.
4. Falcons (3-14): deficient everywhere. Except tight end, and tight ends don't carry teams. Falcons players can confidently bet under 4.5 wins.
NFC West
1. Rams (13-4): with all the retirement rumors after the Super Bowl (and Andrew Whitworth actually retiring), it feels like this team isn't as motivated. And it's only natural to be less motivated to achieve more after reaching a goal you've worked towards your entire career. They're still really good. But unlike how I was last year with Tampa, I'm not at all confident that this Rams team will repeat as NFC or SB champions. Though maybe this year people won't prematurely abandon them if they lose a couple games in November. Don't think I forgot :-D.
2. Cardinals (9-8): the offseason in Arizona did not lack for drama, and I wonder how a young team with an unproven coach will respond. Hopkins' suspension hurts. My critical reaction to the JJ Watt signing is aging like wine - Arizona paid him $1 million per tackle last year, and $15 million per sack. They're also a dismal 7-16 from week 11 onwards during the Kingsbury/Kyler era.
3. 49ers (8-9): Garoppolo played better than people gave him credit for last year, and it's not at all a given that Lance is an upgrade. Their playoff victories were just as much or more about opposing teams imploding than they were about the Niners playing well. Schedule is tough, especially later on in the season.
4. Seahawks (6-11): they're actually quite good at the skill positions and not too bad on defense. I don't believe that any Pete Carroll team is going to be totally awful. They have big problems at quarterback which will hold them back from the playoffs, but I think this team will be better than most expect.
NFC Playoffs
1. Buccaneers
2. Rams
3. Packers
4. Cowboys
5. Eagles
6. Commanders
7. Cardinals
Wild Card
2) Rams defeat 7) Cardinals
3) Packers defeat 6) Commanders
4) Cowboys defeat 5) Eagles
Divisional
4) Cowboys defeat 1) Buccaneers
2) Rams defeat 3) Packers
NFC Championship
4) Cowboys defeat 2) Rams
And finally:
Super Bowl
Colts defeat Cowboys 27-20
MVP
Josh Allen
OPOY
Travis Kelce
DPOY
TJ Watt
OROY
Garrett Wilson
DROY
Travon Walker
Biggest upset
Panthers over Rams, week 6
Biggest blowout
Cowboys over Giants, week 3
Game most likely to end in a tie
Jets at Steelers, week 4
Fired coaches
Dan Campbell (DET)
Lovie Smith (HOU)
Matt Rhule (CAR)
Arthur Smith (ATL)
Kliff Kingsbury (AZ)
Bill Belichick (NE)
I don't have too much to complain about your picks, but I find it funny that your Super Bowl teams are the ones that you and I disagreed the most about last season. :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 11, 2022, 04:20:21 PM
I don't have too much to complain about your picks, but I find it funny that your Super Bowl teams are the ones that you and I disagreed the most about last season. :)
True, haha.
I disagree pretty strongly with hobsini and jayhawkco about the Seahawks (both had them at 3-14 as I recall). I'm more in line with thspfc on that, and might even go higher than 6-11 record-wise. A scrappy, run heavy, 9-8 wild card team led by Drew Lock seems like a Pete Carroll dream come true and I can kind of see it.
But I disagree with thspfc about basically the entire NFC South. I don't see the Bucs as quite the same juggernaut as the last few years (especially given recent O-line injuries) and think the Saints could easily win the division. I also think the Panthers could be a lot better than they were last year and could see them going 8-9 or 9-8 if things go well. However, I can see the Falcons going 3-14, as they easily could have last year.
I would also be surprised if the Commanders go 10-7. It just seems like Indy was Wentz's last chance to save his career and we all know how terribly that turned out. He was serviceable at times but they seemed to always play around him and he was not a true difference maker, so there's no reason to think he will be in Washington.
Quote from: webny99 on August 11, 2022, 11:57:20 PM
I disagree pretty strongly with hobsini and jayhawkco about the Seahawks (both had them at 3-14 as I recall). I'm more in line with thspfc on that, and might even go higher than 6-11 record-wise. A scrappy, run heavy, 9-8 wild card team led by Drew Lock seems like a Pete Carroll dream come true and I can kind of see it.
But I disagree with thspfc about basically the entire NFC South. I don't see the Bucs as quite the same juggernaut as the last few years (especially given recent O-line injuries) and think the Saints could easily win the division. I also think the Panthers could be a lot better than they were last year and could see them going 8-9 or 9-8 if things go well. However, I can see the Falcons going 3-14, as they easily could have last year.
I would also be surprised if the Commanders go 10-7. It just seems like Indy was Wentz's last chance to save his career and we all know how terribly that turned out. He was serviceable at times but they seemed to always play around him and he was not a true difference maker, so there's no reason to think he will be in Washington.
At best, Seattle is going be 2-4 at best in the division. Vs the NFC South, maybe 2-2 at best. I don't see them beating anyone in the AFC West (0-4). That leaves @ Detroit, vs NYJ and vs NYG. They could win 2 of those. So the ceiling in my mind for Seattle is 6-11.
It looks like my outliers compared to the conventional wisdom are Cleveland (I think much worse than others, especially with no Watson), Minnesota (I think they win the division), Denver (I don't think Russ adds as much as people think), and Houston (Mills isn't half bad and their D played well at the end of last season).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 12, 2022, 11:09:14 AM
It looks like my outliers compared to the conventional wisdom are Cleveland (I think much worse than others, especially with no Watson), Minnesota (I think they win the division), Denver (I don't think Russ adds as much as people think), and Houston (Mills isn't half bad and their D played well at the end of last season).
I think a lot of people are selling Houston short this year. I would be surprised, but not shocked, if they make the playoffs as you predict. The real problem the Texans had last year was the absolutely putrid offensive play calling behind an offensive line that couldn't work with it. Possessions usually went something like this:
2 yard run inside
-3 yard run outside
2 yard check down pass
Punt
The guy who called those plays is gone, and Pep Hamilton (the former QB coach who helped Mills play as well as he did when he was unhampered by the play calling) is now the OC. Mills to me plays a lot like Tom Brady. He likes throwing (and completing) short high percentage passes and doesn't scramble very much, especially in this era of quarterbacks (not suggesting here that he is on Brady's level. They are not even close). The Texans will probably score more than you'd think. The defense, though, is kinda suspect. They played great for their talent level last year, but they lost Justin Reid and they can't generate a pass rush. They have a great future, however.
I feel like my biggest hot take would be that I expect the Chiefs to miss or barely make the playoffs. If Mahomes gets hurt for a long period of time I can't see the rest of the team picking up the slack. Especially now that the defense is average and the division is extremely difficult.
Man, I think you guys are drinking the kool-aid.
Houston was 32nd in total offense and 31st in total defense last year. I don't feel like going through a bunch of stats from past seasons, but I'm guessing a team being bottom 2 on both sides of the ball hardly ever happens. There isn't anything about Lovie Smith that makes me think he's going to make any radical improvements. Two of their four wins were against the Jags, who, to me, have the better roster by quite a bit entering this season and were ravaged by their own head coach last year.
I like Mills but there's a lot more to it than that.
The Texans also beat the Chargers last year and looked pretty good while doing so. Does that mean they're going to be a good team this year? Absolutely not. But they've also kind of sold out to not be completely terrible, by signing a lot of serviceable veterans etc.. Sort of like Seattle, it seems like they're trying to be a 6-8 win team that's not the laughingstock of the league, and could absolutely be successful doing so.
Watson ends up with an 11 game suspension. Still less than I think it should be, but it's enough to put a major dent into the Browns season. The 5 games that he'll now be missing are:
@ Ravens
Bengals
@ Dolphins
@ Bills
Buccaneers
Ouch. I'm changing my predictions a little bit, subtracting two wins for the Browns and adding one each for the Ravens and Bills.
I've said this before: My Texans exceeded all expectations in 2021 by matching the same number of wins as the 2020 season. For 2021, I remember the unanimous agreement among all sports fan's prediction that the Texans were going to be winless (0-17). The four wins should have been more than enough to keep David Culley's job safe -- indeed consideration for Coach of the Year; the players loved playing for him, and a lot of fans (myself included) began to believe in him. I'm confident Davis Mills will keep improving under our new OC, and the Texans will exceed last year's win total. Houston can win at least two division games plus two games vs the NFC "Least", plus an additional two games apart from those, bringing the anticipated 2022 record to six wins and 11 losses. Not low enough to have the top pick next year, but not high enough to challenge for a playoff spot. And yes I do have high hopes that one of those Texans win can be against Cleveland in Deshaun's Browns debut.
Quote from: thspfc on August 18, 2022, 08:08:38 PM
Watson ends up with an 11 game suspension. Still less than I think it should be, but it's enough to put a major dent into the Browns season. The 5 games that he'll now be missing are:
@ Ravens
Bengals
@ Dolphins
@ Bills
Buccaneers
Ouch. I'm changing my predictions a little bit, subtracting two wins for the Browns and adding one each for the Ravens and Bills.
I know we disagree on the Browns, but I'm quite surprised you thought they could win at Buffalo. Ravens maybe I could have seen, but not against arguably the most complete team in the league.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 18, 2022, 10:45:24 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 18, 2022, 08:08:38 PM
Watson ends up with an 11 game suspension. Still less than I think it should be, but it's enough to put a major dent into the Browns season. The 5 games that he'll now be missing are:
@ Ravens
Bengals
@ Dolphins
@ Bills
Buccaneers
Ouch. I'm changing my predictions a little bit, subtracting two wins for the Browns and adding one each for the Ravens and Bills.
I know we disagree on the Browns, but I'm quite surprised you thought they could win at Buffalo. Ravens maybe I could have seen, but not against arguably the most complete team in the league.
I wasn't necessarily picking the games individually. Trying to pick November games in August is useless. Just had to add two wins to other teams, and it was logical to add them to teams that play the Browns during that stretch.
Quote from: jgb191 on August 18, 2022, 09:16:32 PM
For 2021, I remember the unanimous agreement among all sports fan's prediction that the Texans were going to be winless (0-17).
Absolutely not true, and anyone who seriously predicts that an NFL team is going 0-17 is, uh, not very smart.
Quote
The four wins should have been more than enough to keep David Culley's job safe -- indeed consideration for Coach of the Year;
Lol
Quote
two games vs the NFC "Least"
The East will not be the worst NFC division this year. Last year it was better than the North and barely behind the South (and the east had two playoff teams to the south's one).
Quote from: thspfc on August 19, 2022, 12:09:17 PM
The East will not be the worst NFC division this year. Last year it was better than the North and barely behind the South (and the east had two playoff teams to the south's one).
The South should easily be the worst NFC division this year if you ask me.
The Panthers have increased their chances of winning their first weekend when they elected Baker Mayfield to start against his former "home" the Cleveland Browns. Baker will definitely have a chip on his shoulder.
Note: The word 'home' was in quotes in the above statement in reference to the home he used to take care of in his commercials. I wish At Home would follow him to Charlotte.
Speaking of the Cleveland Browns: My gut feeling tells me that Deshaun's suspension was chosen by the league to be 11 games due to the Deshaun's debut as a Browns against his former team; good time for my Texans to show Deshaun what he's been missing out on since he quit on the team.
Meanwhile I found it very odd that Watson will return against the Texans. It will make for an awkward return and I would have thought the league would want to avoid that.
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2022, 08:26:18 AM
Meanwhile I found it very odd that Watson will return against the Texans. It will make for an awkward return and I would have thought the league would want to avoid that.
An multi-year NFL contract requires being rostered for 6 games in order to move to the next year, so that's why Watson agreed to an 11 game suspension but would fight anything longer. That Houston is the 12th game is coincidental to the financial reality.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 08:34:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2022, 08:26:18 AM
Meanwhile I found it very odd that Watson will return against the Texans. It will make for an awkward return and I would have thought the league would want to avoid that.
An multi-year NFL contract requires being rostered for 6 games in order to move to the next year, so that's why Watson agreed to an 11 game suspension but would fight anything longer. That Houston is the 12th game is coincidental to the financial reality.
The real question will be how rusty Watson will be, having played his last game nearly 24 months ago.
Speaking of Deshaun's debut with the Browns and return to the NRG/Reliant Stadium, it there any way the league could flex that game into a prime time slot? Either move them to the second time slot (labeling it "America's Game of the Week") or the evening time slot on SNF or MNF? Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
thspfc and I agree on something! :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 23, 2022, 01:11:26 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
thspfc and I agree on something! :)
One thing no one can object to about the Cowboys is that no matter how good or bad they are, they will get huge ratings. And there's invariably a Colts hype train every year, this year more than ever because of Matty Ice.
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Quote from: SectorZ on August 23, 2022, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Yeah but, I don't think it's coincidence his suspension is up for the Browns/Texans game. I think when the sides were negotiating the length of the extended suspension, that game was chose on purpose. I don't put it past the NFL to make money/gain ratings from this mess.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 23, 2022, 06:17:09 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 23, 2022, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Yeah but, I don't think it's coincidence his suspension is up for the Browns/Texans game. I think when the sides were negotiating the length of the extended suspension, that game was chose on purpose. I don't put it past the NFL to make money/gain ratings from this mess.
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 06:21:38 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 23, 2022, 06:17:09 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 23, 2022, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Yeah but, I don't think it's coincidence his suspension is up for the Browns/Texans game. I think when the sides were negotiating the length of the extended suspension, that game was chose on purpose. I don't put it past the NFL to make money/gain ratings from this mess.
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
I still don't think it's 100 % all that and just a coincidence the Texans are playing.
I think that back in the Spring, the league figured there was a reasonable change it would be 11 games and scheduled that game that way on purpose.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 06:21:38 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 23, 2022, 06:17:09 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 23, 2022, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Yeah but, I don't think it's coincidence his suspension is up for the Browns/Texans game. I think when the sides were negotiating the length of the extended suspension, that game was chose on purpose. I don't put it past the NFL to make money/gain ratings from this mess.
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
Learn something new every day I guess. That would actually make sense, I'm just surprised it wasn't mentioned in any of the reporting that I saw anywhere.
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2022, 07:35:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 06:21:38 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 23, 2022, 06:17:09 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 23, 2022, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 23, 2022, 01:08:24 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 23, 2022, 11:54:43 AM
Replace the Colts/Cowboys game with Browns/Texans on Sunday Night would be great for ratings I would like to believe.
Uh, no. Watson's return or not, Colts/Cowboys would beat Browns/Texans in ratings. Two decent teams, one of which has the largest following in the league, as opposed to one decent team and one awful team, neither of which have huge fanbases.
I don't think the NFL wants to showcase Watson in his week 1 either. That would come across as incredibly tone deaf.
Yeah but, I don't think it's coincidence his suspension is up for the Browns/Texans game. I think when the sides were negotiating the length of the extended suspension, that game was chose on purpose. I don't put it past the NFL to make money/gain ratings from this mess.
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
Learn something new every day I guess. That would actually make sense, I'm just surprised it wasn't mentioned in any of the reporting that I saw anywhere.
Does anyone still trust the media? Or think the media reports the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Because they don't. Sports or otherwise.
Quote from: thspfc on August 24, 2022, 11:59:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2022, 07:35:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 06:21:38 PM
...
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
Learn something new every day I guess. That would actually make sense, I'm just surprised it wasn't mentioned in any of the reporting that I saw anywhere.
Does anyone still trust the media? Or think the media reports the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Because they don't. Sports or otherwise.
Of course not, but "the media" is a huge entity, and that's a really important thing to mention. Not only that, it's cynical, just like most/all of the Watson coverage, so it's something that you'd expect to be in the coverage. (I'm also broadly including the various podcasts I've listened to in the past ~2 months, some of which I would definitely expect to explain this, or at least mention it.)
I mean... now I'm googling it to verify and coming up empty. Maybe NWI_Irish96 has a citation.
Quote from: webny99 on August 24, 2022, 01:26:50 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 24, 2022, 11:59:42 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 23, 2022, 07:35:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 23, 2022, 06:21:38 PM
...
As I noted upthread, it was chosen on purpose but nothing to do with the Texans. Watson needs to be on the roster for 6 games for his salary increase for the next season to kick in, so 11 games was the longest suspension that he wouldn't fight.
Learn something new every day I guess. That would actually make sense, I'm just surprised it wasn't mentioned in any of the reporting that I saw anywhere.
Does anyone still trust the media? Or think the media reports the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Because they don't. Sports or otherwise.
Of course not, but "the media" is a huge entity, and that's a really important thing to mention. Not only that, it's cynical, just like most/all of the Watson coverage, so it's something that you'd expect to be in the coverage. (I'm also broadly including the various podcasts I've listened to in the past ~2 months, some of which I would definitely expect to explain this, or at least mention it.)
I mean... now I'm googling it to verify and coming up empty. Maybe NWI_Irish96 has a citation.
https://twitter.com/bradfordfini/status/1560301740301471745
OK, so what I originally read wasn't 100% accurate. He needs 6 games for the year to count as a year of service time, not to advance his contract to the next year, which is less important given Watson's contract but still possibly why that number was agreed to
"Brad Fini" has 23 followers and is not verified. Wouldn't trust him either.
R.I.P Len Dawson.
https://www.pennlive.com/sports/2022/08/hall-of-fame-quarterback-broadcaster-len-dawson-dies-at-87.html
QuoteKANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) – Hall of Fame quarterback Len Dawson, whose unmistakable swagger in helping the Kansas City Chiefs to their first Super Bowl title earned him the nickname "Lenny the Cool," died Wednesday. He was 87.
Dawson's family announced his death in a statement through KMBC, the Kansas City-based television station where he starred in his second career as a broadcaster. No cause was given, though Dawson had been in declining health for years.
"With wife Linda at his side, it is with much sadness that we inform you of the passing of our beloved Len Dawson," the family's statement read. "He was a wonderful husband, father, brother and friend. Len was always grateful and many times overwhelmed by the countless bonds he made during his football and broadcast careers."
The MVP of the Chiefs' victory over the Vikings in January 1970, Dawson had entered hospice care on Aug. 12.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1vLhHO6uFg
OK, my 2022 standings and playoff predictions:
AFC East - BUF 13-4, NE 9-8, MIA 8-9, NYJ 4-13
AFC North - CIN 11-6, BAL 9-8, PIT 8-9, CLE 6-11
AFC South - IND 11-6, *TEN 10-7, JAX 6-11, HOU 5-12
AFC West - KC 12-5, *LAC 11-6, *LV 10-7, DEN 8-9
NFC East - PHI 10-7, *DAL 9-8, WAS 7-10, NYG 6-11
NFC North - GB 13-4, *CHI 8-9, MIN 8-9, DET 5-12
NFC South - TB 12-5, NO 7-10, CAR 6-11, ATL 4-13
NFC West - LAR 12-5, *SF 11-6, ARI 8-9, SEA 5-12
AFC Wild Card: (2) KC over (7) LV, (3) IND over (6) TEN, (5) LAC over (4) CIN
NFC Wild Card: (2) TB over (7) CHI, (3) LAR over (6) DAL, (5) SF over (4) PHI
AFC Divisional: (1) BUF over (5) LAC, (3) IND over (2) KC
NFC Divisional: (1) GB over (5) SF, (3) LAR over (2) TB
Championships: (1) BUF over (3) IND, (3) LAR over (1) GB
Super Bowl: Buffalo over LA Rams
Jets went 3-0 in the preseason so I'm predicting 0-17 in the regular season. Prove me wrong.
Quote from: Alps on August 28, 2022, 08:51:00 PM
Jets went 3-0 in the preseason so I'm predicting 0-17 in the regular season. Prove me wrong.
They might win one game idk though
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 01, 2022, 03:08:24 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 28, 2022, 08:51:00 PM
Jets went 3-0 in the preseason so I'm predicting 0-17 in the regular season. Prove me wrong.
They might win one game idk though
As much as I enjoyed watching the Lions and Browns go winless in a season, I am no longer routing for a team to lose all of its games, unless that team is the Dolphins. Nothing would please me more than the same team that is arrogantly proud of their undefeated season also having a winless season!
Marcus Maye charged with aggravated assault with a firearm. How about those Saints, really living up to their name with two starters charged with assault this offseason alone.
With the recent heatwave on the West Coast, SoFi Stadium will have everyone sweating inside during the Bills-Rams game because it doesn't have air conditioning. And that could possibly be a fatal mistake, with the power grid being in danger of overloading. I wouldn't be surprised if that game got a repeat of Super Bowl XLVII's infamous blackout.
That time again . . .
Rams 30, Bills 27
Eagles 38, Lions 24
49ers 23, Bears 22
Bengals 24, Steelers 20
Dolphins 27, Patriots 17
Browns 21, Panthers 20
Colts 33, Texans 17
Saints 30, Falcons 13
Ravens 35, Jets 10
Commanders 28, Jaguars 17
Vikings 29, Packers 14
Titans 30, Giants 22
Chargers 37, Raiders 30
Chiefs 31, Cardinals 21
Cowboys 26, Buccaneers 19
Broncos 23, Seahawks 13
Quote from: Henry on September 07, 2022, 10:38:44 AM
With the recent heatwave on the West Coast, SoFi Stadium will have everyone sweating inside during the Bills-Rams game because it doesn't have air conditioning. And that could possibly be a fatal mistake, with the power grid being in danger of overloading. I wouldn't be surprised if that game got a repeat of Super Bowl XLVII's infamous blackout.
You can bet the NFL is scrambling to have contingencies in place to avoid another CF like that. At least this time, they know circumstances are iffy for the power grid and it's not some hidden flaw in the stadium itself.
I like to imagine that Super Bowl blackout was part of some elaborate heist going on in New Orleans. Kind of like Oceans 11; everyone distracted by the big sports thing, then they cause a blackout to do whatever to the security gizmo. Boom, baby!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 07, 2022, 11:43:43 AM
Quote from: Henry on September 07, 2022, 10:38:44 AM
With the recent heatwave on the West Coast, SoFi Stadium will have everyone sweating inside during the Bills-Rams game because it doesn't have air conditioning. And that could possibly be a fatal mistake, with the power grid being in danger of overloading. I wouldn't be surprised if that game got a repeat of Super Bowl XLVII's infamous blackout.
You can bet the NFL is scrambling to have contingencies in place to avoid another CF like that. At least this time, they know circumstances are iffy for the power grid and it's not some hidden flaw in the stadium itself.
They can go to Home Depot and buy a million window units to solve the heat issue! :-D
With regards to the "forking" competition upthread, tomorrow is the deadline to fork teams to get the full 20 points. After kickoff, forks through week 8 will be worth 15 points. I took a long, hard look at my list and I'm sticking with it:
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Alright, I settled on 12 teams. [...] Here goes:
Steelers
Browns
Jets
Patriots
Texans
Titans
Falcons
Giants
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Bears
I'm not going to be quite as aggressive, I'll fork these teams:
Jets
Browns
Texans
Lions
Falcons
Seahawks
We'll see if my aggression pays off. I'm planning on doing my remaining forks after week 8 (not to give away my strategy :-D)
In other NFL forecasting news, FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions came out today: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/
Quote from: webny99 on September 07, 2022, 09:45:57 PM
We'll see if my aggression pays off. I'm planning on doing my remaining forks after week 8 (not to give away my strategy :-D)
In other NFL forecasting news, FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions came out today: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/
One thing he's not good at. Way too close in wins/losses for the 32 teams. Some are gonna shine and he should be doing a better job with that.
Quote from: Alps on September 07, 2022, 10:34:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 07, 2022, 09:45:57 PM
...
In other NFL forecasting news, FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions came out today: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/
One thing he's not good at. Way too close in wins/losses for the 32 teams. Some are gonna shine and he should be doing a better job with that.
Yeah, I don't pay much attention to the forecasted win totals because they're always clustered close to .500. I mostly use it is a reference for playoff/division odds and individual games.
One this day two decades ago, I finally became an NFL football fan....my Houston Texans played their first game in franchise history.
Before the Texans, I didn't have much of an interest in the NFL because having lived in my Lone Star State my whole life I never had a team to cheer for. I was obviously way too young to remember the Oilers, and by the time I realized Houston had the Oilers, Bud Adams soon after announced his intention to relocate the franchise to Tennessee, so there was no point for me to even cheer for them their last couple seasons.
Bob McNair jolted the area's NFL interest when his team brought the Texans to my state. Even so Houston still remained the most divided NFL fanbase in the country which was divided even deeper after Hurricane Katrina, with the influx of N.O. Saints fans into the city. The Saints are solidly the largest fanbase of an outsider team followed by the Cowboys.
My suspicions may become reality, as the Bears' proposed home in Arlington Heights will be either a domed or retractable-roof stadium. And to me, that makes a lot more sense than the Mayor's crazy proposal to build a dome over Soldier Field, which I do not like. Perhaps this will open the door for the Chicago area to host some big-ticket events in the future, like the Super Bowl and NCAA Men's Final Four.
Meanwhile, there have been rumors going around that a second team may be established in Chicago after the Bears leave, but I'm sort of skeptical about it because no team is looking to relocate that I'm aware of, and it's lagging far behind New York and Los Angeles (both two-team towns) in about every aspect. My father was 13 when the Cardinals left, but that mattered very little since he was always a Bears and Cubs fan at that time. If there ever were to be a second team, it would have to be an AFC team, and probably be a small-market team like the Jaguars, who are committed to Jacksonville for now anyway. I remember when the Raiders were seeking to leave Oakland for the second time and thinking how I'd love to have the Windy City host them, but I'm glad they're in Las Vegas now, and enjoying it there.
Quote from: Henry on September 08, 2022, 02:01:34 PM
My father was 13 when the Cardinals left, but that mattered very little since he was always a Bears and Cubs fan at that time.
I've heard stories from some old (some now passed) Chicagoans about the two NFL team era in Chicago. There were pretty clear divisions. Northsiders were Bears and Cubs fans. Southsiders were Cardinals and Sox fans. The rivalries were bitter. Despite the fact that Soldier Field was by far a nicer stadium and better suited for football than either Wrigley or Comiskey, neither NFL team dared move there and be perceived as moving in on the others' territory. A full decade after the Cardinals left, the Bears finally made the move downtown.
When the Cardinals left, most of their fans refused to adopt the Bears and switched their allegiances to the Bears' other main rival, the Packers, and that's why there are so many Packers fans scattered throughout the south side.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 08, 2022, 02:07:23 PM
When the Cardinals left, most of their fans refused to adopt the Bears and switched their allegiances to the Bears' other main rival, the Packers, and that's why there are so many Packers fans scattered throughout the south side.
Now
that's holding a grudge!
I hope Chicago doesn't waste money on a retractable roof. Those are a waste of money for an NFL venue. There are not enough games in a year to make it worthwhile. Just dome it.
Look around the country at the retractable roof stadiums in the NFL; they're nearly always closed. So what was the point of spending tens of millions more (often taxpayer) dollars on something you almost never use?
Phoenix, Houston, Indy, The Death Star; always closed.
Quote from: Henry on September 08, 2022, 02:01:34 PM
My suspicions may become reality, as the Bears' proposed home in Arlington Heights will be either a domed or retractable-roof stadium. And to me, that makes a lot more sense than the Mayor's crazy proposal to build a dome over Soldier Field, which I do not like. Perhaps this will open the door for the Chicago area to host some big-ticket events in the future, like the Super Bowl and NCAA Men's Final Four.
Meanwhile, there have been rumors going around that a second team may be established in Chicago after the Bears leave, but I'm sort of skeptical about it because no team is looking to relocate that I'm aware of, and it's lagging far behind New York and Los Angeles (both two-team towns) in about every aspect. My father was 13 when the Cardinals left, but that mattered very little since he was always a Bears and Cubs fan at that time. If there ever were to be a second team, it would have to be an AFC team, and probably be a small-market team like the Jaguars, who are committed to Jacksonville for now anyway. I remember when the Raiders were seeking to leave Oakland for the second time and thinking how I'd love to have the Windy City host them, but I'm glad they're in Las Vegas now, and enjoying it there.
Why would Chicago get another team to "replace" the Bears? The Bears are not actually leaving. It's similar to the 49ers in Santa Clara (which it's become an open secret that was a huge mistake, but I digress)
Quote from: jgb191 on September 08, 2022, 01:23:25 AM
The Saints are solidly the largest fanbase of an outsider team followed by the Cowboys.
I completely disagree. I'd say Cowboys fans outnumber Saints fans in the Houston area 10 to 1 from what I've seen.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 08, 2022, 07:17:33 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on September 08, 2022, 01:23:25 AM
The Saints are solidly the largest fanbase of an outsider team followed by the Cowboys.
I completely disagree. I'd say Cowboys fans outnumber Saints fans in the Houston area 10 to 1 from what I've seen.
If it was follow
ing the Cowboys, that I could see. But I would be very surprised if the Saints are #1 anywhere in Texas.
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it, but as for the Rams, here is a shocking stat: Sean McVay is now under .500 for the first time in his head coaching career.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it, but as for the Rams, here is a shocking stat: Sean McVay is now under .500 for the first time in his head coaching career.
You mean the team he coaches is now sub .500 for the season, and not his overall coaching career record?
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on September 09, 2022, 10:30:45 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it, but as for the Rams, here is a shocking stat: Sean McVay is now under .500 for the first time in his head coaching career.
You mean the team he coaches is now sub .500 for the season, and not his overall coaching career record?
Yes correct, the Rams under McVay have won every season opener until last night and have never been under .500 at any point during a season. They missed the playoffs in 2019, but still went 9-7.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it
You say February like it's a forgone conclusion.
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2022, 11:07:39 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it
You say February like it's a forgone conclusion.
Nothing to do with what's on the NFL calendar in February or anything, just holding my commentary until then regardless of what happens. ;-)
Of course, no one knows how the season will turn out, but the Rams have this to deal with:
https://www.turfshowtimes.com/2022/5/16/23075066/rams-super-bowl-repeat-history
Absolutely unhinged early slate of games.
Honestly, I think the only team that goes home feeling like they played well is Miami. They outclassed the Pats on both sides of the ball for pretty much the entire game.
Other than that, it was just chaos. Steelers/Bengals was maybe the second weirdest game I've ever seen.
Colts/Texans was about as dumbfounding as you would expect a tie to be. But Indy, without a doubt in my mind, loses that game last year with Wentz. Ties suck, but they're better than losses, and who knows how valuable that half game will be in the crowded AFC playoff race.
Speaking of Wentz, he did play pretty well against the Jags.
Browns win in week 1 for the first time since 2004. Baker doesn't get his revenge. His play left some to be desired, but unlike many Browns games last year, he wasn't the main reason they lost.
Watching today's games makes you wonder what actually happened at training camp this year.
Quote from: thspfc on September 11, 2022, 05:09:41 PM
Ties suck
Ties don't suck when they're worth half a win rather than a third as in some other sports (soccer being the one I'm familiar with, but I believe there are others). And as we saw in Week 18 last year...
More information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_points_for_a_win
It's not limited to physical sports, either; you see a lot more games/matches where players agree to a draw in chess (1/2 win) than Magic: the Gathering (1/3 win). (Both games allow agreeing to a draw at any time.)
Not a good performance from the Patriots today.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on September 11, 2022, 07:50:45 PM
Not a good performance from the Patriots today.
Neither did the Jags nor Jets.
Lots of Texans fans are infuriated by Lovie Smith's decision to punt on 4th and 3 with 24 seconds left in OT to go for the tie instead of the win. However, I think it was the right call. The Colts had the offensive momentum for all of overtime and the 4th quarter. It was only the Colts shooting themselves in the foot that kept Houston in the game. And honestly, neither team really deserved to win.
My mind harkens back to Week 4 of the 2018 season where the Texans and Colts were in a similar situation. The Colts faced a short 4th down near midfield (in a strange reversal of what happened today) in the last minute of overtime. Rather than punt for the tie, they went for it and failed. The Texans ended up using the short field to win on a field goal. Perhaps that game was in the back of the Texans's mind when they made their decision to punt.
Quote from: thspfc on September 11, 2022, 05:09:41 PM
Absolutely unhinged early slate of games.
Honestly, I think the only team that goes home feeling like they played well is Miami. They outclassed the Pats on both sides of the ball for pretty much the entire game.
Other than that, it was just chaos. Steelers/Bengals was maybe the second weirdest game I've ever seen.
7 of 9 early games went down to the wire. Saints-Falcons was chaotic as always. Eagles-Lions was a points fest. Two overtimes. And one tie. Other than Ravens-Jets, it was everything you could have asked for from Week 1.
Quote from: thspfc on September 11, 2022, 05:09:41 PM
Colts/Texans was about as dumbfounding as you would expect a tie to be. But Indy, without a doubt in my mind, loses that game last year with Wentz. Ties suck, but they're better than losses, and who knows how valuable that half game will be in the crowded AFC playoff race.
I'm not sure about that.. the Carson Wentz Colts swept the Texans last year by a combined score of 62-3 and neither game was remotely competitive. Obviously, this is an improved Texans team and Mills has more experience, plus the Colts always start slow and improve throughout the season (today was their first non-loss in Week 1 under Frank Reich!), but still, it's not crazy to think they win that game with Wentz. The tie is absolutely still valuable though; remember, the Steelers' tie last year was the reason they made the playoffs ahead of the Colts.
Packers didn't look too competitive against my Vikes today.
My favorite moment from the early games was easily the Bears offense doing a slip-&-slide on the waterlogged Soldier Field grass immediately after taking the final kneeldown:
https://twitter.com/NFL/status/1569054566062387200?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 11, 2022, 10:37:07 PM
My favorite moment from the early games was easily the Bears offense doing a slip-&-slide on the waterlogged Soldier Field grass immediately after taking the final kneeldown:
[tweet]1569054566062387200[/tweet]?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Haha I recall the messy forecast for Soldier Field...and of course Da Bears somehow delivered!
If the Bengals had an emergency snapper who could properly snap (on placekicks)!!!
Anyway, it was amazing that the Bengals even tied the game at 20 with the five turnovers (4 INT, 1 lost fumble by Joe Burrow) they had. If only a good snap... :thumbdown: :-( :angry: :banghead:
The Ghost of Peyton Manning's past always rattles my Texans when they play the Colts. Even though Peyton left the Colts over a decade ago, his spirit seems to imprinted onto the Colts team and energize them (kind of as if he was playing with them still) when they play my Texans and it happened in the 4th Q.
Quote from: amroad17 on September 12, 2022, 12:42:10 AM
If the Bengals had an emergency snapper who could properly snap (on placekicks)!!!
Anyway, it was amazing that the Bengals even tied the game at 20 with the five turnovers (4 INT, 1 lost fumble by Joe Burrow) they had. If only a good snap... :thumbdown: :( :angry: :banghead:
Chance the Snapper? ;)
Seriously though, I concur.
Dak out 6-8 weeks with hand surgery.
Last night on SNF, Cris Collinsworth (who was just tired but sounded like a decades long pack-a-day smoker) had an interesting theory that may explain why the play was so bad in so many games - the reduced number of pre-season games (and padded practices?) led to players not being as ready as they were in the past, less time for players to develop rapport with each other, not as much time to iron out the obvious wrinkles, etc. It seems plausible.
Remains to be seen whether the Bears are any good at football, but they are very good at mud wrestling.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 11, 2022, 10:37:07 PM
My favorite moment from the early games was easily the Bears offense doing a slip-&-slide on the waterlogged Soldier Field grass immediately after taking the final kneeldown:
https://twitter.com/NFL/status/1569054566062387200?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
I don't believe how much it rained here yesterday. From the moment I woke up to the moment I went to sleep. Just steady unrelenting rain. Temperature didn't break 60 degrees. It's still raining as I type this.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 12, 2022, 06:54:53 AM
Dak out 6-8 weeks with hand surgery.
Yeah, that's a problem. Dallas struggled more than enough when they had Dak last night. Worst game I've seen them play offensively since when Dak was out in 2020.
Always a great weekend when the Bears win and the Packers lose.
As for the Arlington Heights stadium, it will definitely be a dome. Hopefully some windows will be included to let the daylight in, a la Minneapolis or L.A., as that is the trend nowadays (and the newest retractable-roof MLB parks have them too).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 11, 2022, 10:28:28 PM
Packers didn't look too competitive against my Vikes today.
Vikings dodged a bullet on the first play when Christian Watson dropped what should have been an immediate game-tying TD on Green Bay's first play. It set the tone for their day on offense.
Quote from: Henry on September 12, 2022, 10:25:09 AM
Always a great weekend when the Bears lose and the Packers win.
FTFY :(
Disagree with the Broncos' decision to attempt a 64-yarder rather than go for it on 4th and 5, in a game where the offense moved the ball quite well until they got near the red zone.
Russ played fine. 29/42 for 340 yards and no turnovers. Let's not start with the "he lost to Geno Smith" talk; Smith played probably the best game of his career.
I enjoyed Buck and Aikman on MNF.
Well, I guess Baker Mayfield's "revenge game" doesn't look quite so bad after Russell Wilson's. At least Mayfield completed a comeback, even if they still lost. That was some atrocious end game management by the Broncos. A 64-yard field goal? That's just a few yards short of the NFL record, no way that has a higher probability than converting 4th and 5. The loss wasn't really on Russ but there are MAJOR questions about this coaching staff.
The Broncos paid a lot for Wilson, and have no faith on him to convert 4th and 5?
I wonder how much money was lost this past weekend. It's only week 1, but still.
Chiefs 34, Chargers 31
Steelers 21, Patriots 13
Panthers 31, Giants 10
Browns 23, Jets 20
Colts 31, Jaguars 20
Ravens 20, Dolphins 16
Buccaneers 28, Saints 24
Lions 27, Commanders 26
49ers 17, Seahawks 16
Rams 38, Falcons 23
Raiders 30, Cardinals 17
Broncos 42, Texans 21
Bengals 27, Cowboys 17
Packers 24, Bears 20
Bills 45, Titans 24
Eagles 34, Vikings 32
Fork the Cardinals and the Cowboys.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 14, 2022, 09:16:09 PM
Fork the Cardinals and the Cowboys.
Fork the Packers
GREEN BAY SUCKS!!!!!
BEAR DOWN!!!!
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2022, 08:36:49 PM
Chiefs 34, Chargers 31
Steelers 21, Patriots 13
Panthers 31, Giants 10
Browns 23, Jets 20
Colts 31, Jaguars 20
Ravens 20, Dolphins 16
Buccaneers 28, Saints 24
Lions 27, Commanders 26
49ers 17, Seahawks 16
Rams 38, Falcons 23
Raiders 30, Cardinals 17
Broncos 42, Texans 21
Bengals 27, Cowboys 17
Packers 24, Bears 20
Bills 45, Titans 24
Eagles 34, Vikings 32
Playing those results on a 16 Team Parlay? Would win some pretty serious bank were it to hit... Even better if 32-Way parlay with Spreads AND Totals for each game
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 10:21:45 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2022, 08:36:49 PM
Chiefs 34, Chargers 31
Steelers 21, Patriots 13
Panthers 31, Giants 10
Browns 23, Jets 20
Colts 31, Jaguars 20
Ravens 20, Dolphins 16
Buccaneers 28, Saints 24
Lions 27, Commanders 26
49ers 17, Seahawks 16
Rams 38, Falcons 23
Raiders 30, Cardinals 17
Broncos 42, Texans 21
Bengals 27, Cowboys 17
Packers 24, Bears 20
Bills 45, Titans 24
Eagles 34, Vikings 32
Playing those results on a 16 Team Parlay?
Absolutely not. Though if I bet $50 on all of those scores hitting exactly and they all did, I would be set for life. Problem is, that's, like, really unlikely.
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 10:20:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 14, 2022, 09:16:09 PM
Fork the Cardinals and the Cowboys.
Fork the Packers
GREEN BAY SUCKS!!!!!
BEAR DOWN!!!!
Want to join the competition? Fork the teams you think are going to miss the playoffs . . . Packers are quite a bold pick at this point.
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2022, 10:57:25 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 10:20:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 14, 2022, 09:16:09 PM
Fork the Cardinals and the Cowboys.
Fork the Packers
GREEN BAY SUCKS!!!!!
BEAR DOWN!!!!
Want to join the competition? Fork the teams you think are going to miss the playoffs . . . Packers are quite a bold pick at this point.
Did I miss something? I figured the "fork" usage was a substitute for another 4-letter word that starts with "f" and ends in "k" ...
Guess I need to go back a few pages and read what this forking competition is
*Browns 13, Jets 3.
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 11:28:54 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2022, 10:57:25 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 10:20:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 14, 2022, 09:16:09 PM
Fork the Cardinals and the Cowboys.
Fork the Packers
GREEN BAY SUCKS!!!!!
BEAR DOWN!!!!
Want to join the competition? Fork the teams you think are going to miss the playoffs . . . Packers are quite a bold pick at this point.
Did I miss something? I figured the "fork" usage was a substitute for another 4-letter word that starts with "f" and ends in "k" ...
Guess I need to go back a few pages and read what this forking competition is
You "fork" a team (shortened from "stick a fork in") by declaring that they have no chance to make the playoffs. You get more points for being right the earlier you fork them, but you get negative points if a team you fork makes the playoffs.
All this time, I thought "fork" was a euphemism, even in the context of the forking competition.
Quote from: 1 on September 15, 2022, 07:37:20 AM
All this time, I thought "fork" was a euphemism, even in the context of the forking competition.
I suppose you could call it a euphemism for "dead" and/or "cooked"...
see here (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/stick_a_fork_in_something#:~:text=(idiomatic%2C%20informal)%20Used%20to,I'm%20out%20of%20lives.). (But not for the curse word, if that's what you meant).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 15, 2022, 07:33:41 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on September 14, 2022, 11:28:54 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 14, 2022, 10:57:25 PM
Want to join the competition? Fork the teams you think are going to miss the playoffs . . . Packers are quite a bold pick at this point.
Did I miss something? I figured the "fork" usage was a substitute for another 4-letter word that starts with "f" and ends in "k" ...
Guess I need to go back a few pages and read what this forking competition is
You "fork" a team (shortened from "stick a fork in") by declaring that they have no chance to make the playoffs. You get more points for being right the earlier you fork them, but you get negative points if a team you fork makes the playoffs.
Yep. The original discussion started
here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2755388#msg2755388).
When a team is forked, they are definitely fucked, so I can see the confusion. :P
I somehow assumed fork(team) meant spawning a copy of it
Quote from: kurumi on September 15, 2022, 01:13:17 PM
I somehow assumed fork(team) meant spawning a copy of it
Who do you have in the Jets vs. Jets game?
Speaking of forked team names, the following are all former NFL teams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_National_Football_League_franchises):
* Cincinnati Reds
* Cleveland Indians
* Dallas Texans
* Detroit Tigers
* Hartford Blues
* LA Buccaneers
* New York Yankees
* Washington Senators
(all pre-merger though)
Quote from: kurumi on September 16, 2022, 12:12:39 PM
Speaking of forked team names, the following are all former NFL teams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_National_Football_League_franchises):
* Cincinnati Reds
* Cleveland Indians
* Dallas Texans
* Detroit Tigers
* Hartford Blues
* LA Buccaneers
* New York Yankees
* Washington Senators
(all pre-merger though)
New York Yanks
Brooklyn Dodgers
Quote from: 1 on September 15, 2022, 07:37:20 AM
All this time, I thought "fork" was a euphemism, even in the context of the forking competition.
The Good Place popularized this, because Kristen Bell's character said it all the time.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on September 16, 2022, 01:36:15 PM
Quote from: kurumi on September 16, 2022, 12:12:39 PM
Speaking of forked team names, the following are all former NFL teams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_National_Football_League_franchises):
* Cincinnati Reds
* Cleveland Indians
* Dallas Texans
* Detroit Tigers
* Hartford Blues
* LA Buccaneers
* New York Yankees
* Washington Senators
(all pre-merger though)
Brooklyn Yanks
Brooklyn Dodgers
Boston Braves
Miami Seahawks
Pittsburgh Pirates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_National_Football_League_franchises
No love for the Dayton Triangles :(
Quote from: Alps on September 16, 2022, 06:58:36 PM
No love for the Dayton Triangles :(
Or the first New England team to win an NFL Championship: the Providence Steamrollers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Steamrollers_(NFL)).
Quote from: kurumi on September 17, 2022, 04:13:38 PM
Quote from: Alps on September 16, 2022, 06:58:36 PM
No love for the Dayton Triangles :(
Or the first New England team to win an NFL Championship: the Providence Steamrollers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Steamrollers_(NFL)).
Yes, they did steamroll the competition ;)
Cowboys defense comes up huge in holding Cincy to 17 points, including only one touchdown, with a massive 3-and-out stop late in the 4th. The best part? They didn't force a turnover. Why is that good? No turnover dependency, unlike last year. Through two games Dallas has held two of last year's best offenses to 19 and 17 points, forcing only one turnover between those two games. Holding to field goals on long drives has also been big.
The offense still has problems, but Noah Brown leading the team in receiving yards in each of the first two games is a good sign. Lamb is solid, but he's not going to be highly effective if the entire defense can focus on him.
Zeke is averaging over 4 yards a carry so far. He hasn't been explosive, and 2nd & 6 every series isn't going to cut it if the passing game continues to be inconsistent. Hopefully Pollard continues to bring that speed from the backfield like he did today.
Overall, I'm just happy that everyone is going to shut up for a week.
Speaking of shutting up, those Tua non-believers are doing a lot of that this afternoon. Best quarterback performance since at least the legendary Bills/Chiefs game. Though it can be noted that the Ravens secondary had two embarrassingly botched coverages on the long touchdowns to Hill. Miami's crazy victory overshadows what was Lamar's second or third best game ever, after 2019 vs. also the Dolphins and 2021 vs. the Colts.
Both Wentz and Goff were solid. McLaurin/Samuel/Dotson is going to be a legitimate 1-2-3 punch at WR for the Commanders. Amon-Ra St. Brown is the real deal.
:-D Baker Mayfield :-D . . . don't freak out on the Giants. They're not good.
Not sure what was worse: the Browns late collapse or their midfield logo.
We saw the grit that we didn't think the Cardinals had in them. And turns out, overtime games are weird and largely come down to luck. Vegas was an insanely lucky 4-0 in overtime last year. Not happening this year.
Quote from: thspfc on September 18, 2022, 08:39:32 PM
Tua non-believers
Interestingly, the meaning of this phrase depends on where you put the dash. "
Tua-non believers" would mean exactly the exactly the opposite of what you intended here.
That was an amazing 4th quarter by Tua.. not sure about the entire 60 minutes considering they did fall down 28-7 (that's not
all on the defense) but it is certainly safe to say this offense could be something special and Tyreek Hill is going to be just fine without Mahomes. (And yes, that was some sweet revenge for Miami for the 59-10 embarrassment in Lamar's MVP season.)
Today was the day of crazy comebacks...
-Dolphins were down 28-7 and won, 42-38
-Jets were down 30-17 with 2 minutes left and won, 31-30
-Cardinals were shut out in the first half and down 20-0 and won, 29-23 in OT
And of course... the Falcons were down 28-3 and nearly ended the curse, but still lost, 31-27 in what was somehow the most bizarre ending of them all!
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
Quote from: webny99 on September 18, 2022, 10:00:21 PM
Today was the day of crazy comebacks...
-Dolphins were down 28-7 and won, 42-38
-Jets were down 30-17 with 2 minutes left and won, 31-30
-Cardinals were shut out in the first half and down 20-0 and won, 29-23 in OT
And of course... the Falcons were down 28-3 and nearly ended the curse, but still lost, 31-27 in what was somehow the most bizarre ending of them all!
Amazed the Jets would win something like that. "Giants, Jets, Mets, Yankees all win on same day for first time since 2009"
Texans squander another opportunity to win against another talented team with a superstar QB....second week in a row we had a 4th Q lead and did not win.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
He's got to have uninjured wide receivers to throw to. And a coach who knows the basics of the game.
Quote from: thspfc on September 19, 2022, 06:53:32 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
It's week 2
Sure, but getting booed off your home field is an inauspicious start.
Quote from: thspfc on September 19, 2022, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 19, 2022, 10:30:57 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 19, 2022, 06:53:32 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
It's week 2
Sure, but getting booed off your home field is an inauspicious start.
Still has a better record than the Raiders.
Fortunately, I also very much dislike the Raiders.
In other news, my fantasy team had both Stefon Diggs and Amon-Ra St. Brown, who accounted for nearly two-thirds of my team's points. Diggs in particular helped me erase a 20 point deficit and win. Undefeated so far. We'll see if that lasts in week 3.
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 19, 2022, 11:56:30 PM
In other news, my fantasy team had both Stefon Diggs and Amon-Ra St. Brown, who accounted for nearly two-thirds of my team's points. Diggs in particular helped me erase a 20 point deficit and win. Undefeated so far. We'll see if that lasts in week 3.
Typical for me, in my main league, I'm the highest scorer yet 0-2. Gotta love it.
After week 2, there's only six remaining undefeated teams, the AFC and NFC East are atop the league with 6-2 records, and the entire NFC North and NFC West have 1-1 records.
Even the predictably bad AFC South is shaping up to worse than anyone could have predicted, with the 1-win Jaguars all alone in first place and a combined division record of 1-5-2 and 0-4 if you take out the games against each other.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 20, 2022, 10:58:15 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 19, 2022, 11:56:30 PM
In other news, my fantasy team had both Stefon Diggs and Amon-Ra St. Brown, who accounted for nearly two-thirds of my team's points. Diggs in particular helped me erase a 20 point deficit and win. Undefeated so far. We'll see if that lasts in week 3.
Typical for me, in my main league, I'm the highest scorer yet 0-2. Gotta love it.
I'm 1-1 with both matchups coming down to Monday night. Jerry Jeudy clutched it in week 1, Dalvin Cook sold it in week 2.
Quote from: thspfc on September 20, 2022, 05:04:04 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 20, 2022, 10:58:15 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on September 19, 2022, 11:56:30 PM
In other news, my fantasy team had both Stefon Diggs and Amon-Ra St. Brown, who accounted for nearly two-thirds of my team's points. Diggs in particular helped me erase a 20 point deficit and win. Undefeated so far. We'll see if that lasts in week 3.
Typical for me, in my main league, I'm the highest scorer yet 0-2. Gotta love it.
I'm 1-1 with both matchups coming down to Monday night. Jerry Jeudy clutched it in week 1, Dalvin Cook sold it in week 2.
I was up 45 and went up against Diggs and Henry. Henry had a shit game but still got a TD. Yay.
Browns 20, Steelers 14
Bills 29, Dolphins 16
Bengals 28, Jets 27
Raiders 25, Titans 17
Saints 20, Panthers 10
Patriots 22, Ravens 17
Lions 33, Vikings 30
Eagles 31, Commanders 13
Chiefs 30, Colts 20
Texans 19, Bears 16
Chargers 41, Jaguars 25
Rams 34, Cardinals 17
Buccaneers 27, Packers 13
Falcons 20, Seahawks 19
49ers 28, Broncos 21
Giants 23, Cowboys 16
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2022, 11:38:31 AM
Browns 20, Steelers 14
Bills 29, Dolphins 16
Bengals 28, Jets 27
Raiders 25, Titans 17
Saints 20, Panthers 10
Patriots 22, Ravens 17
Lions 33, Vikings 30
Eagles 31, Commanders 13
Chiefs 30, Colts 20
Texans 19, Bears 16
Chargers 41, Jaguars 25
Rams 34, Cardinals 17
Buccaneers 27, Packers 13
Falcons 20, Seahawks 19
49ers 28, Broncos 21
Giants 23, Cowboys 16
Give me the Steelers, Ravens, Vikings, otherwise I agree.
Raiders-Titans is a classic "cornered animal" game. Both teams have underwhelmed so far with 0-2 records and will be desperate for a win. 0-3 would be dangerously close to game over for the Raiders, while the Titans might still have a path to the playoffs in that terrible division. The Raiders are the more talented team, but I trust the Titans a little more. Should be a good one!
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 21, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2022, 11:38:31 AM
Patriots 22, Ravens 17
...
Give me the Steelers, Ravens, Vikings, otherwise I agree.
The Ravens have shown they can put up points, and Lamar's greatness was overshadowed by a historic defensive collapse last week. So I'm with you that they should win, but I think it will be higher-scoring if the Pats pull of the upset.
Beats me how Tampa got a delay of game on the penultimate 2-pt conversion in their home stadium with Tom Brady as their quarterback.
Brady did manage to feed Russell Gage, Tampa's #4 WR coming into the season, 12 receptions on 13 targets. The dude could probably make me look like a starting NFL WR. Green Bay's defense fell asleep on the last drive, and their offense has been asleep since the second quarter. I don't think much can be taken from that game for either side, other than that both defenses are really good, which we knew already.
Jacksonville is good. Best team in the league for sure over the last two weeks. Didn't expect it, but I support it. I've still got the Colts in that division though.
I don't know what they're doing on offense in Chicago, but it's not going to work. Fields has 23 completions in 3 games. He's on pace for less than 1700 yards if he starts every game this season. 8 successful passes and 40 runs might beat the 49ers in a monsoon and the bad Texans, but it's not going to get them anywhere over the course of the season.
Vegas is done. I'm not officially forking anyone until the end of the 15 points period, but it looks like they're going to be on the list.
Fork the Steelers and Raiders.
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2022, 07:51:19 PM
Green Bay's defense fell asleep on the last drive, and their offense has been asleep since the second quarter. I don't think much can be taken from that game for either side, other than that both defenses are really good, which we knew already.
My takeaway is that the Eagles are the best team in the NFC. I would have said so anyways, but the TB loss means they're alone atop the conference standings.
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2022, 07:51:19 PM
Vegas is done. I'm not officially forking anyone until the end of the 15 points period, but it looks like they're going to be on the list.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 25, 2022, 09:07:59 PM
Fork the Steelers and Raiders.
Just realized the Raiders are the ONLY 0-3 team. Texans are 0-2-1, and all other teams have a win. I'm also not doing another round of forks yet, but they will be forked barring a major turnaround.
After (almost) three weeks of action, I will update my forked list (new additions in bold). Red teams I am regretting adding.
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Giants
Bears
Lions
Raiders
Steelers
Seahawks
Additionally I completely forgot to post my predictions. From here on out I will try to post every Wednesday night. For this week give me Giants 17, Cowboys 14.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 07, 2022, 09:09:32 PM
I'm not going to be quite as aggressive, I'll fork these teams:
Jets 1-2
Browns2-1
Texans0-2-1
Lions 1-2
Falcons 1-2
Seahawks 1-2
Looks like the only bad one so far is Cleveland. Didn't think they'd be this good without Watson.
Likely adding Washington and Vegas but no reason to do so before the next cutoff date.
Quote from: thspfc on July 20, 2022, 11:33:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 19, 2022, 04:00:57 PM
Oh, I am obviously down for this as well. I think it was me that started it last year, remembering that it was an old Around the NFL podcast segment that I enjoyed.
My only suggestion would be to make it 4 tiers with 5-point increments for simplicity's sake. Keeping preseason at 20 pts, maybe something like 15 for weeks 1-8, 10 for weeks 9-12, and 5 for weeks 13-16? And I'm good with -30 points for an incorrect fork.
How about we meet in the middle:
Preseason: 20 points
Weeks 1-8: 15 points
Weeks 9-13: 10 points
Weeks 14-16: 5 points
I'm just bumping this up in case you've like me and forgot when the next cutoff is.
In hindsight, we probably should have added another cutoff after week 4, but I'm not advocating changing the rules once the game has started.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 26, 2022, 07:53:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on July 20, 2022, 11:33:58 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 19, 2022, 04:00:57 PM
Oh, I am obviously down for this as well. I think it was me that started it last year, remembering that it was an old Around the NFL podcast segment that I enjoyed.
My only suggestion would be to make it 4 tiers with 5-point increments for simplicity's sake. Keeping preseason at 20 pts, maybe something like 15 for weeks 1-8, 10 for weeks 9-12, and 5 for weeks 13-16? And I'm good with -30 points for an incorrect fork.
How about we meet in the middle:
Preseason: 20 points
Weeks 1-8: 15 points
Weeks 9-13: 10 points
Weeks 14-16: 5 points
I'm just bumping this up in case you've like me and forgot when the next cutoff is.
In hindsight, we probably should have added another cutoff after week 4, but I'm not advocating changing the rules once the game has started.
I think week 8 is a little late also. We could have it drop to 13 between week 5 and week 8. Only if everyone agrees though.
Ironically I think we should have been more patient to start the competition. :-D Then we could've done 20 points through Week 4 and 15 through Week 8.
Too late now... I am OK with dropping to 13 points after Week 5. Or 12 if that makes the math easier?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
Mmmhmmmmmmmm.......
Say goodbye to the Pro Bowl (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34669351/nfl-replaces-pro-bowl-pro-bowl-games-featuring-weeklong-skills-competitions-flag-football-game).
They're gonna basically just do football's version of a home run derby/slam dunk contest instead.
I guess that's better than flag football? :-/
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2022, 03:59:50 PM
Say goodbye to the Pro Bowl (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34669351/nfl-replaces-pro-bowl-pro-bowl-games-featuring-weeklong-skills-competitions-flag-football-game).
They're gonna basically just do football's version of a home run derby/slam dunk contest instead.
I guess that's better than flag football? :-/
About time. MLB is the only one that should have an all-star "game".
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 26, 2022, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
Mmmhmmmmmmmm.......
Through week 3 Russ has not played up to expectations at all, but they have plenty of other problems on offense, most of which I think stem from it being Russ's first time in a drastically new offense since he was drafted. There have been a lot of miscommunications before and after the snap. Hackett has been lost. It's going to get better as the season goes on.
As for that team as a whole . . . if their wins were, say, 34-27 and 31-30 rather than 16-9 and 11-10, they would be perceived much differently. Same with Tampa - imagine the discussion if Tampa's schedule looked like this:
@ Cowboys - W 37-21
@ Saints - W 34-24
Packers - L 30-28
Wouldn't be nearly as negative as it is IRL. In an increasingly offensive league, we're forgetting that defense exists.
It also says something that everyone is dumping on the
2-1 Broncos. If they're really underperforming that badly . . . where will they be once the offense figures it out?
Quote from: thspfc on September 26, 2022, 04:03:17 PM
It also says something that everyone is dumping on the 2-1 Broncos. If they're really underperforming that badly . . . where will they be once the offense figures it out?
I mean, they lost to Seattle who isn't very good. Beat Houston who isn't very good. Beat San Francisco who is playing their backup QB. I get Jimmy G isn't that bad, but still not exactly murderer's row. We shall see of course how it all ends up.
The Broncos are intriguing. They're simultaneously one play away from 3-0, and very lucky not to be 0-3. Combine a defense that's played well enough to be 3-0 and an offense that's played poorly enough to be 0-3, and you'd expect 1.5 wins. Considering that a safety provided the winning margin last night, that's pretty much spot on.
Despite this being a new offense for Russ, the last two games have been remarkably Seahawks-esque... close, low scoring games that they have no business winning when you look at how the offense played, but somehow escape with a win. The offense has moved the ball well outside the red zone, but only putting up 14 points a game is not a sustainable. Unfortunately for the Chargers, I do think the Broncos are going to be the biggest threat to the Chiefs in that division, and their ability to stack some wins while figuring things out is a big reason why.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2022, 03:59:50 PM
Say goodbye to the Pro Bowl (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34669351/nfl-replaces-pro-bowl-pro-bowl-games-featuring-weeklong-skills-competitions-flag-football-game).
They're gonna basically just do football's version of a home run derby/slam dunk contest instead.
I guess that's better than flag football? :-/
The Pro Bowl had basically turned into a flag football game anyways the last few years with the players understandably not wanting to risk injury, so why not make it official?
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2022, 11:38:31 AM
Giants 23, Cowboys 16
I had the right score but wrong teams :-D. Thought this was going to be the game Rush's luck ran out, but it wasn't. Another solid outing for him. Pollard and Zeke's combined 178 yards were big. Lamb with an excellent one-handed TD catch. Giants have still only beaten the Cowboys once since 2016.
This week was one of those moments where you knew a particular moment would wind up on "C'Mon Man!" as soon as it happened–the "Butt Punt," of course.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2022, 07:39:21 AM
This week was one of those moments where you knew a particular moment would wind up on "C'Mon Man!" as soon as it happened–the "Butt Punt," of course.
I would think Jimmy G pulling a Dan Orlovsky qualifies here as well.
Starting to look like they'll have to relocate or postpone this weekend's game in Tampa with that hurricane bearing down on them. No word yet, but with Ian expected to be a strong cat 3 or even a cat 4 at a landfall in the metro Wednesday night, I doubt they're going to be ready to play by Sunday. With all the logistics of an NFL game, I don't think they can wait until the storm actually hits to see how bad it is before making that decision.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 27, 2022, 10:26:20 AM
Starting to look like they'll have to relocate or postpone this weekend's game in Tampa with that hurricane bearing down on them. No word yet, but with Ian expected to be a strong cat 3 or even a cat 4 at a landfall in the metro Wednesday night, I doubt they're going to be ready to play by Sunday. With all the logistics of an NFL game, I don't think they can wait until the storm actually hits to see how bad it is before making that decision.
I was looking at possible locations. Outside of the other two Florida stadiums, the closest options (Atlanta, New Orleans, Carolina) are all in use Sunday. The Bucs are practicing in Miami right now, so they might just play the game there. Being an NBC primetime game, there will be a huge push to get the game played somewhere.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 27, 2022, 10:26:20 AM
Starting to look like they'll have to relocate or postpone this weekend's game in Tampa with that hurricane bearing down on them. No word yet, but with Ian expected to be a strong cat 3 or even a cat 4 at a landfall in the metro Wednesday night, I doubt they're going to be ready to play by Sunday. With all the logistics of an NFL game, I don't think they can wait until the storm actually hits to see how bad it is before making that decision.
The Buccaneers are already using the Dolphins' practice facility so as to get out ahead of the storm, but word is the NFL would be unlikely to move the game to Miami for the very legitimate reason that it would be inappropriate to be using law enforcement and other state resources for a football game if the hurricane is bad enough to require the game to be moved.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 27, 2022, 10:36:02 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 27, 2022, 10:26:20 AM
Starting to look like they'll have to relocate or postpone this weekend's game in Tampa with that hurricane bearing down on them. No word yet, but with Ian expected to be a strong cat 3 or even a cat 4 at a landfall in the metro Wednesday night, I doubt they're going to be ready to play by Sunday. With all the logistics of an NFL game, I don't think they can wait until the storm actually hits to see how bad it is before making that decision.
The Buccaneers are already using the Dolphins' practice facility so as to get out ahead of the storm, but word is the NFL would be unlikely to move the game to Miami for the very legitimate reason that it would be inappropriate to be using law enforcement and other state resources for a football game if the hurricane is bad enough to require the game to be moved.
So I didn't think about the resource drain that an NFL game is. If Florida is out entirely, and the next three closest options unavailable as I noted above (depending on the track and speed, Carolina's game Sunday could be a mess), where do they go then?
Nashville might be right in the middle of the storm Sunday. Dallas and Houston both unavailable. Do they end up in Chicago?
It is odd that the entire NFC South happened to be playing at "home" this week, although the Saints are actually in London, so New Orleans might still be an option.
The Titans are heading to Indy this week, and the storm is currently projected to track east of Nashville, so that might be an option.
An ESPN article suggests Minneapolis since the Vikings will be in London. Perhaps that's just to get as far away from the storm track as possible?
Regarding other games, South Carolina moved its game in Columbia from Saturday to Thursday night. Duke has oddly shifted its home game against UVA from noon to 7:30, but still on Saturday. Got to think that one will be a huge mess.
Quote from: webny99 on September 27, 2022, 10:51:11 AM
It is odd that the entire NFC South happened to be playing at "home" this week, although the Saints are actually in London, so New Orleans might still be an option. The Texans and Cowboys are also playing at home.
The Titans are heading to Indy this week, and the storm is currently project to track east of Nashville, so that might be an option.
I forgot about the London game. New Orleans makes the most sense then. I think that's where they'll end up.
Dolphins 13, Bengals 26
Vikings 20, Saints 24
Browns 13, Falcons 14
Commanders 21, Cowboys 30
Seahawks 17, Lions 20
Titans 14, Colts 24
Bears 12, Giants 16
Jaguars 17, Eagles 35
Jets 24, Steelers 13
Bills 17, Ravens 24
Chargers 23, Texans 17
Cardinals 24, Panthers 17
Patriots 10, Packers 17
Broncos 21, Raiders 3
Chiefs 23, Buccaneers 15
Rams 9, 49ers 28
Bengals 23, Dolphins 17
Vikings 27, Saints 24
Lions 30, Seahawks 17
Steelers 20, Jets 15
Bears 24, Giants 19
Colts 28, Titans 10
Chargers 31, Texans 20
Browns 24, Falcons 9
Cowboys 34, Commanders 20
Jaguars 30, Eagles 28
Ravens 29, Bills 26
Panthers 23, Cardinals 13
Raiders 16, Broncos 14
Packers 28, Patriots 7
Chiefs 20, Buccaneers 19
49ers 24, Rams 20
Hopefully I do better than 5-11 this week.
There hasn't been any negative feedback about lowering the fork points to 13 starting next week. So for 15 points, the deadline is now a week from tomorrow.
Dolphins over Bengals
Vikings over Saints
Lions over Seahawks
Steelers over Jets
Giants over Bears
Titans over Colts
Chargers over Texans
Falcons over Browns
Commanders over Cowboys
Eagles over Jaguars
Bills over Ravens
Cardinals over Panthers
Broncos over Raiders
Packers over Patriots
Buccaneers over Chiefs
Rams over 49ers
I'm pretty contrary to you guys this week.
Bengals
Vikings
Browns
Bills
Cowboys
Seahawks
Chargers
Colts
Bears
Eagles
Steelers
Cardinals
Packers
Raiders
Chiefs
Rams
Everyone really picking the Bengals who haven't looked good at all against arguably the team that's looked best this season? OK.....
ESPN reports Minneapolis will host if the Buccaneers game Sunday has to be relocated.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 28, 2022, 11:37:56 AM
Everyone really picking the Bengals who haven't looked good at all against arguably the team that's looked best this season? OK.....
Tua's status is still somewhat in question, and Miami hasn't been truly dominant except for Q4 against the Ravens. Plus the Bengals are at home (and debuting their white helmets, I might add). I think it's a coin flip.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 28, 2022, 02:46:21 PM
ESPN reports Minneapolis will host if the Buccaneers game Sunday has to be relocated.
Was hoping they'd pick Chicago. I was going to try to go to the game if they did.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 28, 2022, 11:37:56 AM
Everyone really picking the Bengals who haven't looked good at all against arguably the team that's looked best this season? OK.....
Vegas has Cincy -3.5. Miami is not winning another game like the one against the Bills - they were more than doubled in total yards, first downs, and time of possession. Though oddly they did win one against the Rams in 2020 which might have been even more bizarre: https://www.espn.com/nfl/game/_/gameId/401220127
Quote from: webny99 on September 28, 2022, 02:58:44 PM
Tua's status is still somewhat in question, and Miami hasn't been truly dominant except for Q4 against the Ravens. Plus the Bengals are at home (and debuting their white helmets, I might add). I think it's a coin flip.
How was Tua allowed back in that game? He couldn't even stand straight. Bad look for the league.
Texans gave us the most wonderful Christmas present when they routed the Chargers last Christmas! I believe in deja vu this Sunday!
Quote from: jgb191 on September 28, 2022, 11:59:57 PM
Texans gave us the most wonderful Christmas present when they routed the Chargers last Christmas! I believe in deja vu this Sunday!
Same with the Cowboys dropping 56 on the ol' Washington Football Team. I call that one the Nightmare After Christmas.
Bill Belichick's new catchphrase: day-by-day.
ESPN reports the Buccaneers game will be played in Tampa as scheduled.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 29, 2022, 12:39:33 PM
Bill Belichick's new catchphrase: day-by-day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWAqW5D5kZo
Absolutely horrendous uniforms on display tonight.
Tua head trauma injury.
Quote from: thspfc on September 28, 2022, 08:27:04 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 28, 2022, 02:58:44 PM
Tua's status is still somewhat in question, and Miami hasn't been truly dominant except for Q4 against the Ravens. Plus the Bengals are at home (and debuting their white helmets, I might add). I think it's a coin flip.
How was Tua allowed back in that game? He couldn't even stand straight. Bad look for the league.
And it became a thousand times worse tonight with Tua taken to the hospital. Hope he's okay first & foremost, but wonder if Miami could be in some serious trouble now for how the whole situation has been handled. Regardless of what the injury on Sunday really was, it's a terrible look for everyone involved.
(And as a side note, announcers really need to stop with the "I'm not gonna speculate..." coupled with replaying the injury over & over.)
Edited to add: I found it odd that the halftime show didn't make any mention of the Sunday injury, but now Al & Kirk discussed it briefly coming out of a commercial break. Either way, Amazon is clearly treading lightly on the subject.
Scary situation with Tua and hope he's OK...
I know concussion protocols in the NFL are better than they used to be, but it still seems really odd that he came back in last week and was cleared to play tonight. And now this happening is the worst-case scenario.
It's possible that he didn't have a concussion last time but he does this time. He cleared all the tests last time. Therefore despite the grave hit, it wasn't a concussion.
Shame on the Dolphins for letting Tua play. They could've kept him out of the game as a precaution. The way the Bengals' defense pounded him severely just shows how wrong it was to allow him to continue playing, even if he didn't get a concussion in the last game.
Not really related to the current season. But former NFL and San Diego State TE Gavin Escobar died in a rock climbing accident in Idyllwild (https://sports.yahoo.com/former-cowboys-te-gavin-escobar-among-2-rock-climbers-killed-in-southern-california-012942557.html). I've hiked on the mountains between Palm Springs and Idyllwild multiple times and it's fairly common to see rock climbers on many of the San Jacinto Mountains steeper faces. Injuries beyond scrapes and the occasional twisted ankle or wrist are rare (most bring along giant cushions (https://www.climbing.com/gear/everything-you-need-to-know-about-crashpads-plus-our-top-11-crashpad-picks/)), so to hear of two deaths is pretty shocking. Escobar had recently started a post-football career as a firefighter in Long Beach. Very sad to hear.
Quote from: skluth on September 30, 2022, 06:11:47 PM
Not really related to the current season. But former NFL and San Diego State TE Gavin Escobar died in a rock climbing accident in Idyllwild (https://sports.yahoo.com/former-cowboys-te-gavin-escobar-among-2-rock-climbers-killed-in-southern-california-012942557.html). I've hiked on the mountains between Palm Springs and Idyllwild multiple times and it's fairly common to see rock climbers on many of the San Jacinto Mountains steeper faces. Injuries beyond scrapes and the occasional twisted ankle or wrist are rare (most bring along giant cushions (https://www.climbing.com/gear/everything-you-need-to-know-about-crashpads-plus-our-top-11-crashpad-picks/)), so to hear of two deaths is pretty shocking. Escobar had recently started a post-football career as a firefighter in Long Beach. Very sad to hear.
I wonder how that can happen if you're wearing a harness. Did it break?
Quote from: Henry on September 30, 2022, 01:01:39 PM
Shame on the Dolphins for letting Tua play. They could've kept him out of the game as a precaution. The way the Bengals' defense pounded him severely just shows how wrong it was to allow him to continue playing, even if he didn't get a concussion in the last game.
Head injuries are football's Achilles heel.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2022, 11:43:51 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 30, 2022, 06:11:47 PM
Not really related to the current season. But former NFL and San Diego State TE Gavin Escobar died in a rock climbing accident in Idyllwild (https://sports.yahoo.com/former-cowboys-te-gavin-escobar-among-2-rock-climbers-killed-in-southern-california-012942557.html). I've hiked on the mountains between Palm Springs and Idyllwild multiple times and it's fairly common to see rock climbers on many of the San Jacinto Mountains steeper faces. Injuries beyond scrapes and the occasional twisted ankle or wrist are rare (most bring along giant cushions (https://www.climbing.com/gear/everything-you-need-to-know-about-crashpads-plus-our-top-11-crashpad-picks/)), so to hear of two deaths is pretty shocking. Escobar had recently started a post-football career as a firefighter in Long Beach. Very sad to hear.
I wonder how that can happen if you're wearing a harness. Did it break?
No idea. They've only released what I linked to.
I've given up on predictions for this year after having only five correct predictions for week 3.
Quote from: epzik8 on October 01, 2022, 04:55:29 PM
I've given up on predictions for this year after having only five correct predictions for week 3.
Also 5 here. Week 3 was especially weird, even as far as September goes.
Washington at Dallas looks more like Pittsburgh at Dallas.
Cowboys are 3-1. Giants are also 3-1 but a very unimpressive 3-1. Bears are awful.
That's it from me until my predictions get better :-D
Career Patriots backup QB Brian Hoyer leaves with a head injury...and the ball goes to rookie Bailey Zappe.
Most of my Baltimore and DC brethren want to fire our head coaches. Amazing time.
Sadly we won't get to fantasize about somebody going 0-17 this year. The only team without a W is Houston who has a tie. And they've been competitive in all their games so I don't foresee them being winless for much longer.
Raiders looked good today so I'm going to hold off on forking them this round. My 15 point forks are:
- Patriots
- Jets
- Steelers
- Panthers
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
...
Steelers
Browns
Jets
Patriots
Texans
Titans
Falcons
Giants
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Bears
I'm reasonably satisfied with my preseason forks so far, especially in the AFC. NFC is a bit more meh, but it feels like almost everyone has a chance there, so who knows. And I'm definitely glad I forked the Steelers early (and the Pats, although they almost beat the Packers with Bailey Zappe which would have been incredible). I'll wait till the Thurs deadline to decide if I'm going to add any more.
Add the Patriots to my fork list.
Add this to the list of reasons why I don't like ties: if not for the Colts-Texans tie, we would have...
(1) 4-0 team (Eagles)
(7) 3-1 teams
(16) 2-2 teams (incl. Colts)
(7) 1-3 teams
(1) 0-4 team (Texans)
The tie ruins the perfect symmetry, but still pretty impressive how many 2-2 teams there are.
Those numbers are supposed to be 2, 8, 12, 8, and 2, according to the bell curve. If teams were required to play teams with the same record, this would be guaranteed.
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2022, 07:23:46 PM
Add this to the list of reasons why I don't like ties: if not for the Colts-Texans tie, we would have...
(1) 4-0 team (Eagles)
(7) 3-1 teams
(16) 2-2 teams (incl. Colts)
(7) 1-3 teams
(1) 0-4 team (Texans)
The tie ruins the perfect symmetry, but still pretty impressive how many 2-2 teams there are.
If it wasn't a tie the Texans would have been one of those 1-3 teams.
I went 9-7 last week. Pretty pathetic.
Broncos over Colts
Vikings over Bears
Jaguars over Texans
Packers over Giants
Bills over Steelers
Chargers over Browns
Lions over Patriots
Saints over Seahawks
Dolphins over Jets
Bucs over Falcons
Titans over Commanders
49ers over Panthers
Rams over Cowboys
Eagles over Cardinals
Bengals over Ravens
Chiefs over Raiders
Quote from: jgb191 on October 05, 2022, 12:26:13 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2022, 07:23:46 PM
Add this to the list of reasons why I don't like ties: if not for the Colts-Texans tie, we would have...
(1) 4-0 team (Eagles)
(7) 3-1 teams
(16) 2-2 teams (incl. Colts)
(7) 1-3 teams
(1) 0-4 team (Texans)
The tie ruins the perfect symmetry, but still pretty impressive how many 2-2 teams there are.
If it wasn't a tie the Texans would have been one of those 1-3 teams.
Lovie could have gone for the W in OT; he coached it to be content with the sister-kisser
I wasn't much better, 10-6
Broncos
Packers
Bills
Chargers
Jaguars
Vikings
Patriots
Saints
Jets
Bucs
Titans
49ers
Eagles
Cowboys
Bengals
Chiefs
I did pretty well last week. 11-5 but I almost got Baltimore as well.
Colts 20, Broncos 23
Giants 17, Packers 27
Steelers 16, Bills 30
Chargers 31, Browns 20
Bears 13, Vikings 27
Lions 38, Patriots 26
Saints 24, Seahawks 33
Dolphins 26, Jets 23
Falcons 17, Buccaneers 29
Titans 20, Commanders 16
Texans 13, Jaguars 28
49ers 27, Panthers 10
Cowboys 26, Rams 20
Eagles 28, Cardinals 16
Bengals 21, Ravens 24
Raiders 28, Chiefs 30
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 05, 2022, 11:52:35 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on October 05, 2022, 12:26:13 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2022, 07:23:46 PM
Add this to the list of reasons why I don't like ties: if not for the Colts-Texans tie, we would have...
...
The tie ruins the perfect symmetry, but still pretty impressive how many 2-2 teams there are.
If it wasn't a tie the Texans would have been one of those 1-3 teams.
Lovie could have gone for the W in OT; he coached it to be content with the sister-kisser
Yes, it could have gone either way. I assigned the W to the Colts and the L to the Texans to make things symmetrical, but it could have been the reverse, which would have put both teams at 1-3.
Broncos 20, Colts 17
Packers 31, Giants 13
Lions 27, Patriots 16
Chargers 29, Browns 14
Jaguars 38, Texans 21
Buccaneers 26, Falcons 24
Bills 38, Steelers 14
Dolphins 23, Jets 16
Vikings 28, Bears 13
Commanders 25, Titans 20
Saints 23, Seahawks 20
49ers 31, Panthers 10
Eagles 42, Cardinals 20
Rams 20, Cowboys 17
Ravens 27, Bengals 24
Chiefs 35, Raiders 21
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
...
Steelers
Browns
Jets
Patriots
Texans
Titans
Falcons
Giants
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Bears
I'm going to cut my losses and fork the Panthers.
That's it for now - there's a few other teams on my radar, but none that aren't worth giving up the two points for a few more weeks' worth of data points.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 07, 2022, 09:09:32 PM
I'm not going to be quite as aggressive, I'll fork these teams:
Jets
Browns
Texans
Lions
Falcons
Seahawks
Adding:
Patriots
Steelers
Raiders
Commanders
Panthers
I think this explains the season so far:
https://www.nfl.com/news/tom-brady-2-2-teams-in-nfl-there-s-a-lot-of-bad-football
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 06, 2022, 10:01:01 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 26, 2022, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2022, 11:35:19 PM
Russ looking great with the Broncos...
Mmmhmmmmmmmm.......
Mmmmmmhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm...
3rd & 4 at IND 13
(2:13 - 4th) (Shotgun) R.Wilson pass deep middle intended for T.Cleveland INTERCEPTED by S.Gilmore at IND -5. Touchback
4th & 1 at IND 5
(2:38 - OT) (Shotgun) R.Wilson pass incomplete short middle to C.Sutton
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Fork the Broncos. Should have had my conviction to do so in the preseason. Russ is cooked just like I said. Add in a terrible coach and this is what you get.
Breaking my forum sabbatical to note that tonight may have been the worst NFL game I have ever seen.
I'm not sure it tops the 6-6 tie (https://www.nfl.com/news/cardinals-seahawks-settle-for-historic-tie-after-wild-ot-0ap3000000727002) between the Cardinals and Seahawks (ironically also involving Russell Wilson), but it was close. Definitely in "so bad it's good" territory. I can't believe that final 4th down play.
Not only have the Broncos been playing extremely ugly games and very lucky to have 2 wins, they've been in prime time three times already, with another one coming up next Monday against the Chargers.
2007 MNF MIA at PIT on the disaster of a field?
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200711260pit.htm
2006 MIN at GB
2013 MIN at NYG
Quote from: cl94 on October 06, 2022, 11:48:44 PM
Breaking my forum sabbatical to note that tonight may have been the worst NFL game I have ever seen.
It's the worst game I've ever seen that wasn't impacted by weather.
Quote from: JayhawkCO
1. Mahomes
2. Rodgers
3. Allen
4. Herbert
5. Burrow
6. Prescott
7. Watson (I don't know if he'll ever play again, but he is obviously talented, if not a scumbag)
8. Lamar
9. Stafford
10. Murray
11. Carr
12. Wilson
13. Cousins
14. Tannehill
15. Ryan
16. Mayfield
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 20, 2022, 11:27:28 AM
Re: Stafford and his ranking. I just don't feel like he makes throws that ever make me say "wow". Yeah, he won the Super Bowl, but that was way more due to Aaron Donald than it was to Matthew Stafford.
Re: Kyler. He does things that I think are special. His ability to run obviously limits how defenses can control him.
Re: Russell. The last two years that offense hasn't done nearly as much as it should with Metcalf and Lockett. He takes a lot of sacks that I don't feel he needs to. His deep ball in particular this past year (and yes, I know he was injured) looked terrible. I just tend to think he's on the downside of his career.
Revisiting this now. I feel like my opinion on Stafford has been somewhat validated. That offense is a mess right now. Obviously I've discussed Russell Wilson ad nauseum and my perception of his decline. Kyler has been fine, but certainly not great. My biggest misses are obviously Hurts and Tua being left off of the list, and Allen probably needs to be above Rodgers now. But otherwise, I think this isn't too bad.
Didn't see the game last night. Probably for the best. I have no doubts that Denver looked horrible on offense, but still, a few things:
1. If they lost 33-30 in overtime the discussion would be a lot different. In that case we'd also be talking about the Colts like they're contenders, having beat the Chiefs and the Broncos, rather than having beat the Chiefs and played that awful game against the Broncos. Defense exists. Denver's is really good. Indy's isn't bad either.
2. For as bad as it was, the two plays that essentially lost them the game (late 4th quarter pick and missed Hamler wide open in overtime) are very fixable and uncharacteristic of any starting NFL QB, much less one as accomplished as Russ. It might not get a lot better immediately, but I'm confident that this is absolute rock bottom for Denver and things will only go up from here.
3. People are framing KJ Hamler's visible frustration at the end of the game as being directed at Russ specifically, like it's a sign Russ has lost the team. If you've played any team sport competitively, you know that's not the case. That was frustration with a 2-3 record and five weeks' worth of offensive struggles, not with any one teammate.
New York (NJ) football teams are 7-3. Nobody would have guessed that.
I'm done with Ron Rivera
Quote from: thspfc on September 18, 2022, 08:39:32 PM
Overall, I'm just happy that everyone is going to shut up for a week.
Where is everyone? I haven't heard anything in nearly a month now. Find me a list of teams who beat both defending conference champions with a backup quarterback.
That might have been the best game I've ever seen the Cowboys play. (Wasn't around for the 90s :-D) Perfect example of how both Zeke and Pollard have major roles and compliment each other. 10 first downs, 239 total yards, whatever, I don't care. The defense looks like one of the best in the league, up with San Fran and Buffalo. Totally dominated the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball.
And I think there's still plenty of room for improvement in the passing game. Rush has made the necessary throws and hasn't singlehandedly lost a game, which is what you ask for from a backup. But once Dak is back, if he can replicate his production last year? This team would be right there with the Bills for the best in the league.
Elsewhere . . . add Campbell to the list of coaches who could be fired before Halloween. Head-scratcher for the Jags. Wentz sells it on the goal line and ruins what would have been a nearly perfect prediction. Starting to think Buffalo might be good. Baker stinks.
Panthers just fired Matt Rhule.
https://www.panthers.com/news/panthers-part-ways-with-head-coach-matt-rhule (https://www.panthers.com/news/panthers-part-ways-with-head-coach-matt-rhule)
After 5 weeks, here is my updated fork list:
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Giants
Bears
Lions
Raiders
Steelers
Seahawks
Panthers
Commanders
Saints
Not losing faith in the Broncos. Yet.
Wow, 12-4 week.
Week 6:
Bears (this could be as bad as last Thursday's game)
Niners
Patriots
Packers
Colts
Vikings
Bengals
Giants
Bucs
Rams
Seahawks
Bills
Eagles
Chargers
It's often discussed that the NFC West has the equivalent of rock-paper-scissors going on between the teams in their division, with each team (and particularly each coach among Shanahan, McVay and Kingsbury) owning another. But the rock-paper-scissors seems to be even stronger in the AFC South, even more transcendent, and even more defiant of all logic and reason:
Texans OWN Jaguars
Jaguars OWN Colts
Colts OWN Texans
And the Titans have somehow stayed out of it, they've been good against the Colts the past few seasons, but usually play close, unpredictable games with all three division opponents.
Quote from: thspfc on October 09, 2022, 07:48:08 PM
Where is everyone? I haven't heard anything in nearly a month now. Find me a list of teams who beat both defending conference champions with a backup quarterback.
Sure, the Cowboys have been surprisingly good as a defense-first team under Cooper Rush. Beating the conference champs is not the best argument though, considering both were only #4 seeds last year and both have losing records. Neither have been a top-10 team this season, and the Rams haven't even been close.
Cowboys-Eagles next week is definitely the most exciting and meaningful NFC East game in a long time. It might not be the NFC "Least" for the first time in years (and no, the Giants are not a great 4-1 team, but they're undeniably well-coached and getting the most out of what they have, and stacking these wins means they're going to be in the playoff mix for a while.)
Quote from: thspfc on October 09, 2022, 07:48:08 PM
Elsewhere . . . add Campbell to the list of coaches who could be fired before Halloween.
That I disagree with. It was so obvious that this was a long term rebuild that I think he's safe through at least the end of the season, probably longer. Yesterday's result was mostly just Belichick doing Belichick things (remember the Super Bowl?). I don't expect the Lions offense to look that bad again, and grudgingly give Belichick a lot of credit for completely OWNING an unprepared team out of the blue at least once a season. (2020 it was 45-0 against the Chargers. 2021 it was 50-10 against the Jags. etc.)
Quote from: thspfc on October 09, 2022, 07:48:08 PM
Head-scratcher for the Jags.
Yes, but also very predictable. [see post above]
Great win for my Chiefs - came back from down 17-0 to win despite a bad roughing the passer call on what should have been a fumble recovery.
Quote from: thspfc on September 30, 2022, 11:43:51 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 30, 2022, 06:11:47 PM
Not really related to the current season. But former NFL and San Diego State TE Gavin Escobar died in a rock climbing accident in Idyllwild (https://sports.yahoo.com/former-cowboys-te-gavin-escobar-among-2-rock-climbers-killed-in-southern-california-012942557.html). I've hiked on the mountains between Palm Springs and Idyllwild multiple times and it's fairly common to see rock climbers on many of the San Jacinto Mountains steeper faces. Injuries beyond scrapes and the occasional twisted ankle or wrist are rare (most bring along giant cushions (https://www.climbing.com/gear/everything-you-need-to-know-about-crashpads-plus-our-top-11-crashpad-picks/)), so to hear of two deaths is pretty shocking. Escobar had recently started a post-football career as a firefighter in Long Beach. Very sad to hear.
I wonder how that can happen if you're wearing a harness. Did it break?
Finally have info on what happened. Apparently, the weather turned ugly and they had an equipment failure. Story here (https://laist.com/news/report-on-2-rock-climbers-killed-at-tahquitz-rock-fell-victim-to-weather-and-equipment).
I eked out a 10-6 record last week.
Commanders 14, Bears 24
49ers 28, Falcons 21
Patriots 27, Browns 13
Jets 9, Packers 19
Jaguars 34, Colts 28
Vikings 27, Dolphins 20
Bengals 24, Saints 23
Ravens 16, Giants 23
Buccaneers 31, Steelers 17
Panthers 19, Rams 21
Cardinals 26, Seahawks 41
Bills 23, Chiefs 16
Cowboys 24, Eagles 27
Broncos 17, Chargers 26
Quote from: KCRoadFan on October 11, 2022, 02:37:27 PM
Great win for my Chiefs - came back from down 17-0 to win despite a bad roughing the passer call on what should have been a fumble recovery.
I was very impressed by how synced up the 70,000+ fans were screaming "BS" immediately after said call. The "Refs you suck" chant before Wright's 59-yarder wasn't synced nearly as well.
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2022, 01:38:14 PM
But the rock-paper-scissors seems to be even stronger in the AFC South, even more transcendent, and even more defiant of all logic and reason:
Texans OWN Jaguars
Jaguars OWN Colts
Colts OWN Texans
This reminded me of my high school senior year our district football division; it was a head-scratcher for sure
Team A crushed Team B: 39-0
Team B crushed Team C: 44-3
Team C crushed Team A: 51-7
All were road victories for the visiting team. There was a mystifying aura about having the homefield
dis-advantage.
Quote from: webny99 on October 11, 2022, 02:00:29 PM
Cowboys-Eagles next week is definitely the most exciting and meaningful NFC East game in a long time. It might not be the NFC "Least" for the first time in years (and no, the Giants are not a great 4-1 team, but they're undeniably well-coached and getting the most out of what they have, and stacking these wins means they're going to be in the playoff mix for a while.)
Another interesting note: entering Week 6 there's a 71% chance that an NFC East team gets the first-round playoff bye, per FiveThirtyEight.
That's a massive swing from 2020, when all four NFC East teams were below 1% chance at a bye and had a COMBINED 3% chance at earning a wild-card berth at this point in the season. 2021 wasn't much better, with only a 10% chance for the Cowboys and less than 1% for the other three teams.
Commanders 20, Bears 13
Ravens 31, Giants 23
Browns 24, Patriots 19
Bengals 34, Saints 20
Buccaneers 21, Steelers 17
49ers 27, Falcons 13
Packers 23, Jets 17
Rams 35, Panthers 10
Cardinals 28, Seahawks 21
Bills 33, Chiefs 27
Cowboys 24, Eagles 14
Chargers 26, Broncos 20
Not even picking Jags/Colts. I'm a combined 4-11-1 picking games involving an AFC South team this year. Haven't been correct yet on a Colts game. Wrong on every Jags game besides week 1.
Waiting to see who will play QB for the Dolphins.
9-7 last week has me one game over .500 on the season. Yikes.
My fantasy team has notched its third come from behind victory so far this year en route to a 4-1 record and 3rd place out of 16 teams. Out of curiosity, I would be interested to see the teams of those who have teams. Here's mine:
Aaron Rodgers
Dameon Pierce
Tyler Allgeier
Stefon Diggs
Amon-Ra St. Brown
Travis Kelce
Saints D
Justin Tucker
Romeo Doubs
Bench:
Chase Claypool
Jimmy Garoppolo
Davis Mills
Mark Ingram
Nelson Agholor
Josh Reynolds
Will Dissly
IR:
Elijah Mitchell
Josh Allen
Nick Chubb
Rachad White
Stefon Diggs
Tyler Lockett
Jaylen Waddle
Allen Lazard
Hayden Hurst
Bears Defense
Bench
Geno Smith
Derrick Henry (on bye this week)
Jakobi Myers
DJ Moore
Robert Woods
Devante Parker
Rondale Moore
TJ Hockenson (on bye this week)
IR
Rashad Penney
My league eliminated kickers this year because they are too random with scoring and have little effect on the outcome of games. I'm currently in 1st place at 4-1 and lead the scoring by 110 points over the next highest team.
"Teacher, he pushed me!"
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove)
That's so stupid. Watch the video of that "assault" and tell me Adams should be charged with a crime. Give me a break.
Yes it was a shitty thing to do in a moment of frustration and the guy deserves a personal apology, maybe some cash, but getting the cops involved? Really? Way to have perspective, everyone.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 13, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
"Teacher, he pushed me!"
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove)
That's so stupid. Watch the video of that "assault" and tell me Adams should be charged with a crime. Give me a break.
Yes it was a shitty thing to do in a moment of frustration and the guy deserves a personal apology, maybe some cash, but getting the cops involved? Really? Way to have perspective, everyone.
The NFL needs to review procedures for media personnel and players leaving the field. There's no way the camera person should have been right in Adams' path. Obviously, it was wrong for Adams to shove him over, but he shouldn't have been crossing right there as players exited into the tunnel. He basically walked right into him, and something like that can set a player off, especially after such a bad loss (maybe the most painful loss of any team all season, on a shortlist that includes several Raiders losses - there's a decent case that they own 3 of the top 5!)
Quote from: webny99 on October 13, 2022, 02:30:43 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 13, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
"Teacher, he pushed me!"
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove)
That's so stupid. Watch the video of that "assault" and tell me Adams should be charged with a crime. Give me a break.
Yes it was a shitty thing to do in a moment of frustration and the guy deserves a personal apology, maybe some cash, but getting the cops involved? Really? Way to have perspective, everyone.
The NFL needs to review procedures for media personnel and players leaving the field. There's no way the camera person should have been right in Adams' path. Obviously, it was wrong for Adams to shove him over, but he shouldn't have been crossing right there as players exited into the tunnel. He basically walked right into him, and something like that can set a player off, especially after such a bad loss (maybe the most painful loss of any team all season, on a shortlist that includes several Raiders losses - there's a decent case that they own 3 of the top 5!)
That's it! All we need is a procedure in writing and this won't ever happen again!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 13, 2022, 11:12:14 AM
"Teacher, he pushed me!"
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34782109/davante-adams-charged-misdemeanor-assault-mnf-shove)
That's so stupid. Watch the video of that "assault" and tell me Adams should be charged with a crime. Give me a break.
Yes it was a shitty thing to do in a moment of frustration and the guy deserves a personal apology, maybe some cash, but getting the cops involved? Really? Way to have perspective, everyone.
On one hand I get it, but also try deliberately shoving some random passerby down to the pavement on the street when you're having a bad day and I'm guessing no one will have the sympathy they seem to have for Adams.
For many years now I've been calling for the NFL to issue the same yellow and red cards that are used by the fútbol refs to its on-the-field officiating crews, complete with all of their AWESOME powers. ALL personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls would rate at least a 'yellow card'. I can imagine that the looming spectre of having to play the rest of a big game with only ten (and maybe even FEWER) men on the field would be a HUGE incentive for those guys to behave.
:poke:
mike
That was a win of all-time for my squad
Quote from: mgk920 on October 14, 2022, 12:25:38 AM
For many years now I've been calling for the NFL to issue the same yellow and red cards that are used by the fútbol refs to its on-the-field officiating crews, complete with all of their AWESOME powers. ALL personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls would rate at least a 'yellow card'. I can imagine that the looming spectre of having to play the rest of a big game with only ten (and maybe even FEWER) men on the field would be a HUGE incentive for those guys to behave.
:poke:
mike
So they sort of do this, without the colored cards. A second unsportsmanlike penalty in a game is an automatic ejection.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 14, 2022, 07:58:44 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on October 14, 2022, 12:25:38 AM
For many years now I've been calling for the NFL to issue the same yellow and red cards that are used by the fútbol refs to its on-the-field officiating crews, complete with all of their AWESOME powers. ALL personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls would rate at least a 'yellow card'. I can imagine that the looming spectre of having to play the rest of a big game with only ten (and maybe even FEWER) men on the field would be a HUGE incentive for those guys to behave.
:poke:
mike
So they sort of do this, without the colored cards. A second unsportsmanlike penalty in a game is an automatic ejection.
Without the loss of a player, though.
Well for a full contact game where you need a hat on a hat, as they say, that would be a fundamental change to the game that I don't think would work at all. This isn't like soccer or hockey where one team can kind of dick around passing the ball/puck around stalling for time without trying to advance. Those sports don't have a play clock or shot clock, so they're capable of absorbing the temporary loss of a player during the game.
Forgot to do my picks before yesterday. I would have probably picked the Bears, so lucky me.
Jaguars over Colts
Vikings over Dolphins
49ers over Falcons
Patriots over Browns
Packers over Jets
Bengals over Saints
Ravens over Giants
Bucs over Steelers
Rams over Panthers
Seahawks over Cardinals
Chiefs over Bills
Eagles over Cowboys
Chargers over Broncos
I can't remember an early window I've enjoyed as much as this one.
Five upset wins, the Giants are 5-1, the Vikings are a real threat to win the NFC North, the Packers might not coast to a top seed with a fraudulent record for the first time in four years, and the Jets are 4-2. AFC North looks like a slugfest as always, and the NFC West is up for grabs. And the Falcons might be good! The only bad thing is a leftover bad taste from the Grady Jarret call against the Bucs last week. If not for that, the Falcons and Saints would be right there in the division and I would be happily getting ready to FORK the Bucs.
And the clear top four (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions) teams play each other later today.
Ravens lost to their old defensive coordinator, the guy whose firing delighted most of their fans.
NFL needs to move the Bills or Chiefs to the NFC because we need a few Bills-Chiefs Super Bowls over the next ten years.
2021 Vikings had 5 one-score games in their first 6 games. They were 2-3 in those.
2022 Vikings have had 4 one-score games in their first 6. 4-0.`
Everyone who picks the Giants to lose, please continue to do so. Almost guarantees us the opposite :bigass:
2 games is a small sample, but Bailey Zappe is 2-0 so far, and his team outscoring opponents (Detroit and Cleveland) 67-15.
I'm also picking the Giants and Jets to run the table for the rest of the season. Go Giants and Jets!
jayhawkco
Giants (+20)
Panthers (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Jets (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Browns (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Lions (+20)
Bears (+20)
Commanders (+20)
Cardinals (+15)
Cowboys (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Raiders (+15)
Patriots (+15)
Broncos (+13)
Fork the Texans and the Saints.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2022, 10:38:42 AM
jayhawkco
Giants (+20)
Panthers (+20)
Seahawks (+20)
Jets (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Browns (+20)
Jaguars (+20)
Lions (+20)
Bears (+20)
Commanders (+20)
Cardinals (+15)
Cowboys (+15)
Steelers (+15)
Raiders (+15)
Patriots (+15)
Broncos (+13)
Fork the Texans and the Saints.
And that's 18. You've got 314 points. We'll see if the aggressive strategy pays off.
I'm going for 5 forks this round and 2 the round after that, which will bring me to 18 with 285 points.
Starting with the next points period I'll update the table weekly showing who is in playoff position and how that affects everyone's totals.
And I still might have to do more if the Giants keep this up.
Wait a second... shouldn't the number of teams you can fork be capped at 18?
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2022, 02:43:35 PM
Wait a second... shouldn't the number of teams you can fork be capped at 18?
I mean, I'm eating the punishment for being wrong, right?
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2022, 02:43:35 PM
Wait a second... shouldn't the number of teams you can fork be capped at 18?
If one of your forks ends up looking likely to make the playoffs, I suppose you could do more.
I think most, if not all of us, forked the Jets and they're looking good right now.
Hmm . . . I was planning on not being able to go over 18, and I thought that went without saying. But it might be kinda interesting.
If we decide we're okay with more than 18, I think there should be a rule that the number of extra teams on your list has to be the same as or larger than the number of teams on your list that have clinched a playoff berth at all times. That is to say, if you're going to fork a 19th team, you have to do it before any of your forked teams clinch a playoff berth. If you're going to fork a 20th, you have to do it when at most one team on your list has clinched.
What does everyone think?
Also, I doubt anyone would be petty enough to do this, but you can't fork a team while they're playing. So if (when) the Bears need to win to stay in contention and they're down by 30 in the 4th and you haven't forked them yet, you can't steal the points by waiting for the game to be decided.
Russ looks terrible. Even on his 47 yard connection to Hamler, he underthrew it by about 7 yards. It was an easy TD if he actually got it out there.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 17, 2022, 02:48:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2022, 02:43:35 PM
Wait a second... shouldn't the number of teams you can fork be capped at 18?
If one of your forks ends up looking likely to make the playoffs, I suppose you could do more.
I think most, if not all of us, forked the Jets and they're looking good right now.
That just means most of us were wrong about the Jets. Anyone who kept them alive looks like they may have made a smart play.
Similarly anyone who forked the Panthers and Texans looks very justified; meanwhile I waited to fork the Panthers and (probably) lost easy points by doing so.
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2022, 04:23:44 PM
Hmm . . . I was planning on not being able to go over 18, and I thought that went without saying. But it might be kinda interesting.
If we decide we're okay with more than 18, I think there should be a rule that the number of extra teams on your list has to be the same as or larger than the number of teams on your list that have clinched a playoff berth at all times. That is to say, if you're going to fork a 19th team, you have to do it before any of your forked teams clinch a playoff berth. If you're going to fork a 20th, you have to do it when at most one team on your list has clinched.
What does everyone think?
I thought so too, otherwise you could fork all 32 and guarantee 18 correct, which kind of defeats the purpose. Being
right is just as important a component of the game as being aggressive, so allowing extras would be sort of like a reward for being wrong. In other words, the only reason you would need to fork more than 18 would be if you were wrong about some of your forks. But
everyone is going to be wrong about some, that's just inevitable. That's why it's part of the strategy of the game to be aggressive, but not
too aggressive (IMO).
There's also the 30-point penalty for an incorrect fork, so there would at least be an incentive to get any new forks in ASAP to make up those losses.
(I agree that, if we do allow extras, the # of extra teams must be ≥ # of clinched playoff teams.)
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2022, 08:32:43 AM
There's also the 15-point penalty for an incorrect fork, so there would at least be an incentive to get any new forks in ASAP to make up those losses.
I thought it was a 30-
yard point penalty.
I'd say let's just keep it at 18. Looks like I'm done. :)
Quote from: 1 on October 18, 2022, 08:34:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2022, 08:32:43 AM
There's also the 15-point penalty for an incorrect fork, so there would at least be an incentive to get any new forks in ASAP to make up those losses.
I thought it was a 30-yard point penalty.
Whoops, you're right. 30 points it is.
I was very pleased to see the Philadelphia Eagles get the victory Sunday Night; great for them! I would like to think that the Eagles can it to another Super Bowl this February. Also, my Texans finally remove a devastating three-year-long cancer (in the form of a former executive VP) yesterday to help bolster the rebuilding process.
A third of the way through the season, here's how I would rank the teams 1-32:
Tier 1: Super Bowl contenders as of today
1. Bills
2. Eagles
3. Chiefs
Tier 2: could be Super Bowl contenders if things go right
4. Chargers
5. Vikings
6. Cowboys
7. Ravens
8. Rams
9. Colts
10. Buccaneers
Tier 3: decent chance to make the playoffs
11. Bengals
12. 49ers
13. Dolphins
14. Jets
15. Giants
16. Packers
Tier 4: outside chance to make the playoffs
17. Patriots
18. Titans
19. Broncos
20. Cardinals
21. Raiders
22. Jaguars
23. Saints
24. Falcons
25. Browns
26. Seahawks
27. Commanders
Tier 5: nope
28. Steelers
29. Lions
30. Texans
31. Bears
32. Panthers
Chargers at 4 feels wrong, but they at least have a winning record. Same cannot be said of a lot of similarly talented teams. The gap between #4 and #16 is very little.
I'm not as sold on the Giants and Jets as most. Two of the Giants' wins (Panthers and Bears) should just be thrown out the window. They lost to the Cowboys, scraped by a mediocre Titans team, and capitalized on a Ravens meltdown. Green Bay was their only impressive win IMO. The Jets had an ugly September, needed four interceptions to beat the Steelers, and beat the Dolphins who were on their third string QB. Again, the only game that impressed me was Green Bay.
With that, week 7 predictions:
Cardinals 26, Saints 20
Ravens 31, Browns 17
Buccaneers 21, Panthers 6
Bengals 31, Falcons 24
Cowboys 27, Lions 23
Jaguars 20, Giants 17
Packers 17, Commanders 13
Colts 30, Titans 20 (this one is going to be wrong)
Raiders 34, Texans 17
Broncos 23, Jets 16
Chiefs 24, 49ers 21
Chargers 28, Seahawks 20
Dolphins 24, Steelers 20
Patriots 27, Bears 10
I think this week will begin a stretch of relative normalcy after the chaos of the first third of this season. Between now and the end of November we'll find out who is good and who is not. Right now, beyond the first few teams and last few teams, we have no idea. 75% of the league is a mystery.
Hopefully my predictions stabilize as well . . . 45-46-1 is very bad. I think the Broncos pick up a big win off Zach Wilson turnovers.
10-4 last week.
Cardinals
Ravens
Bucs
Bengals
Cowboys
Giants
Titans
Packers
Jets
Raiders
Chargers
Chiefs
Dolphins
Patriots
Quote from: thspfc on October 19, 2022, 03:44:45 PM
A third of the way through the season, here's how I would rank the teams 1-32:
Hard to argue with anything here since it's so murky outside a clear top three and bottom three (or maybe four or five). I'd have the Titans higher (sadly, since I forked them), and the Colts lower (even though they looked good last week, but who knows what a win against the Jaguars means). For comparison, here's FiveThirtyEight's rankings:
(https://imgur.com/pD6Mmmw.jpg)
And here's the "official" NFL power rankings: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-7-2022-nfl-season
As proof of the murkiness beyond 1-3, everyone seems to have a different team at #4... I
think I'd actually go with the Cowboys if Dak returns and returns to form? but I can see the argument for Vikings or Chargers. Bucs wouldn't be crazy either, but they're 3-3 and the vibes aren't great. I'd have them much lower personally.
Quote from: thspfc on October 19, 2022, 03:44:45 PM
I'm not as sold on the Giants and Jets as most. Two of the Giants' wins (Panthers and Bears) should just be thrown out the window. They lost to the Cowboys, scraped by a mediocre Titans team, and capitalized on a Ravens meltdown. Green Bay was their only impressive win IMO. The Jets had an ugly September, needed four interceptions to beat the Steelers, and beat the Dolphins who were on their third string QB. Again, the only game that impressed me was Green Bay.
At a certain point, maybe that says more about the Packers than their opponent? I'm interested to see what happens this week against the Commanders coming off the first losing streak of the Matt LaFleur era. Looking at their schedule, I see a bunch of really tough games coming up too. It's hard to see them going on a long winning streak to take the division, or even get above .500.
9-5 last week.
Saints 14, Cardinals 24
Falcons 20, Bengals 27
Lions 12, Cowboys 27
Colts 28, Titans 24
Commanders 23, Packers 31
Buccaneers 22, Panthers 17
Giants 16, Jaguars 17
Browns 13, Ravens 29
Jets 14, Broncos 17
Texans 16, Raiders 21
Seahawks 23, Chargers 26
Chiefs 29, 49ers 30
Steelers 15, Dolphins 20
Bears 10, Patriots 24
I'll fork the Broncos and Cardinals. They simply don't look like playoff teams.
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Giants
Bears
Lions
Raiders
Steelers
Seahawks
Panthers
Commanders
Saints
Cardinals
Broncos
14 on the year.
Cardinals over Saints
Giants over Jags
Dolphins over Steelers
Bengals over Falcons
Lions over Cowboys
Titans over Colts
Commies over Packers
Bucs over Panthers
Ravens over Browns
Jets over Broncos
Raiders over Texans
Chargers over Seahawks
Chiefs over Niners
Patriots over Bears
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
My Texans have only lost one game (out of six) at Oakland all-time, and their only loss was during the Bush Administration. Now that the scene has shifted cities, let's see if the favorable record continues in Las Vegas on Sunday.
The Colts have been 0-0-1, 1-1-1, 2-2-1 and are now 3-3-1.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 21, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
In other Russel Wilson news the Dangerwich was dropped by Subway:
https://news.yahoo.com/subway-cuts-russell-wilsons-widely-204557254.html
Quote from: thspfc on October 19, 2022, 03:44:45 PM
Colts 30, Titans 20 (this one is going to be wrong)
Count it.
I'm so done with the AFC South. Joke division. The only team I think is worth anything has gone 1-3-1 against their division opponents. Tennessee is fake.
Not super impressed with the Cowboys today, but it's only Dak's first game back. Lions turned it over 5 times. Bad teams find a way to lose games, and sometimes all you have to do is not lose it back.
Very not convinced by the Giants. Their schedule is softer than a pillow for the next few weeks, but it gets tougher down the stretch. Cowboys, Eagles twice, Commanders twice, Vikings, Colts. I'll give them no better than 2-5 over those 7 games, which might still get them in the playoffs, but they won't go anywhere.
Wilson is part of the problem but clearly not the whole problem, or even the majority of it. Gotta feel bad for that Broncos defense. They've been lights out all season, only let one team hit 20 points, and yet they're 2-5.
Like a broken record, I still think things will get better in Denver. But if next week is another L, I'll have little choice but to cut my losses and give them the fork.
I'm not losing belief in Tampa just yet. Remember, one year ago tomorrow, the Chiefs lost 27-3 to the Titans and dropped to 3-4. They proceeded to win 8 straight and 11 of their last 13.
Josh Jacobs has been HUGE for me in fantasy. Averaging nearly 35 points/game since week 4. One of the best three game stretches ever by a running back.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 21, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
In other Russel Wilson news the Dangerwich was dropped by Subway:
https://news.yahoo.com/subway-cuts-russell-wilsons-widely-204557254.html
Fine by me, and I don't even know the backstory. Any company or ad agency that thinks I'm going to spend my money there because of who appears in its TV commercials is sadly mistaken.
I'm getting pretty good at predicting upsets, but not sharing the prediction anywhere. So, no credit for this, but I did believe the Panthers would beat the Bucs. :-D
Quote from: thspfc on October 23, 2022, 04:47:17 PM
I'm so done with the AFC South. Joke division. The only team I think is worth anything has gone 1-3-1 against their division opponents. Tennessee is fake.
The NFC South is not much better, maybe even worse. I still think there's three teams that could win either division, with the Texans and Panthers being the exceptions.
Quote from: thspfc on October 23, 2022, 04:47:17 PM
Very not convinced by the Giants. Their schedule is softer than a pillow for the next few weeks, but it gets tougher down the stretch. Cowboys, Eagles twice, Commanders twice, Vikings, Colts. I'll give them no better than 2-5 over those 7 games, which might still get them in the playoffs, but they won't go anywhere.
I think they could easily sweep the Commanders. I'll say 3-4 in that stretch. Of course they're not a legit contender, but in the increasingly messy stew that is the middle of the NFL, there's more close games, and that means coaching matters more. The Giants have been really impressive in the fourth quarter and have shown for weeks now that they can come back and close games. They were "due" for a close loss as much as the Jags were "due" for a close win today, but there's a factor you can't really measure when it comes to closing out games, and the Giants clearly have it while the Jaguars clearly don't. I think the Jags are a more talented team (they still have a positive point differential on the season!!!) but the inability to close out games is the difference between 2-5 and 6-1, and a big part of that is on coaching.
Fun semi-road-related Super Bowl Trivia:
(all distances are driving distance via fastest route as provided by Google Maps)
Closest distance between home stadiums of Super Bowl participants: 181 miles, Super Bowl XLI, Colts-Bears
Closest possible distance between home stadiums of Super Bowl participants: 0 miles, Giants-Jets or Rams-Chargers
Closest possible nonzero distance between home stadiums of Super Bowl participants: 33 miles, Commanders-Ravens
Longest distance between home stadiums of Super Bowl participants: 3040 miles, Super Bowl XIX, 49ers-Dolphins
Longest possible distance between home stadiums of Super Bowl participants: 3285 miles, Seahawks-Dolphins
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 23, 2022, 10:19:29 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 21, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
In other Russel Wilson news the Dangerwich was dropped by Subway:
https://news.yahoo.com/subway-cuts-russell-wilsons-widely-204557254.html
Fine by me, and I don't even know the backstory. Any company or ad agency that thinks I'm going to spend my money there because of who appears in its TV commercials is sadly mistaken.
Maybe not personally you, but companies use celebs because it works in bringing in customers.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 23, 2022, 10:49:22 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 23, 2022, 10:19:29 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 21, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
In other Russel Wilson news the Dangerwich was dropped by Subway:
https://news.yahoo.com/subway-cuts-russell-wilsons-widely-204557254.html
Fine by me, and I don't even know the backstory. Any company or ad agency that thinks I'm going to spend my money there because of who appears in its TV commercials is sadly mistaken.
Maybe not personally you, but companies use celebs because it works in bringing in customers.
Somehow I think the "Dangerwich" just wasn't working as an advertisement vehicle.
My understanding is that the Dangerwich contained the following ingredients:
- pepperoni
- salami
- black forest ham
- provolone cheese
- bacon
- Italian Herbs
- Cheese bread
- lettuce
- green peppers
- tomatoes
- banana peppers
- yellow mustard
- mayo
I fail to see where the "danger" comes into the equation, maybe someone had a food allergy? A sandwich of danger should IMO at least have one actual exotic ingredient.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 11:28:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 23, 2022, 10:49:22 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on October 23, 2022, 10:19:29 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 21, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 20, 2022, 03:42:34 PM
Jets over Broncos
I just read that Russ is a game time decision. If he doesn't play, I might change my mind to the Broncos. ;-)
In other Russel Wilson news the Dangerwich was dropped by Subway:
https://news.yahoo.com/subway-cuts-russell-wilsons-widely-204557254.html
Fine by me, and I don't even know the backstory. Any company or ad agency that thinks I'm going to spend my money there because of who appears in its TV commercials is sadly mistaken.
Maybe not personally you, but companies use celebs because it works in bringing in customers.
Somehow I think the "Dangerwich" just wasn't working as an advertisement vehicle.
My understanding is that the Dangerwich contained the following ingredients:
- pepperoni
- salami
- black forest ham
- provolone cheese
- bacon
- Italian Herbs
- Cheese bread
- lettuce
- green peppers
- tomatoes
- banana peppers
- yellow mustard
- mayo
I fail to see where the "danger" comes into the equation, maybe someone had a food allergy? A sandwich of danger should IMO at least have one actual exotic ingredient.
Apparently the sandwich they had for the Jaguars was dropped also.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 11:28:22 PM
I fail to see where the "danger" comes into the equation, maybe someone had a food allergy? A sandwich of danger should IMO at least have one actual exotic ingredient.
I agree, it is oddly named :-D No surprise here, but it was more about using Wilson himself as a promotion than the actual sandwich.
On the other hand, with such a long list of ingredients, there's bound to be
something on there that someone doesn't like. For me, it's mustard, and to a lesser extent salami and pepperoni. With that many ingredients, most people are going to either avoid it or customize it. That doesn't sound like a great promotion, so I'm not at all surprised it's being dropped.
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2022, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2022, 04:23:44 PM
Hmm . . . I was planning on not being able to go over 18, and I thought that went without saying. But it might be kinda interesting.
If we decide we're okay with more than 18, I think there should be a rule that the number of extra teams on your list has to be the same as or larger than the number of teams on your list that have clinched a playoff berth at all times. That is to say, if you're going to fork a 19th team, you have to do it before any of your forked teams clinch a playoff berth. If you're going to fork a 20th, you have to do it when at most one team on your list has clinched.
What does everyone think?
I thought so too, otherwise you could fork all 32 and guarantee 18 correct, which kind of defeats the purpose. Being right is just as important a component of the game as being aggressive, so allowing extras would be sort of like a reward for being wrong. In other words, the only reason you would need to fork more than 18 would be if you were wrong about some of your forks. But everyone is going to be wrong about some, that's just inevitable. That's why it's part of the strategy of the game to be aggressive, but not too aggressive (IMO).
Now I'm starting to question the strong stand that I took here :-D
Mostly kidding about that, but in all seriousness, I am going to complete my NFC forks by forking the
Bucs and
Packers. That means my NFC playoff field is officially SET and it will be (in rough order of what I think the seeds will be) Eagles, Vikings, 49ers, Saints (oof), Cowboys, Rams, and Cardinals (yeah, I shouldn't have forked the Giants, but too late now).
AFC incoming... is the deadline for 13 points this Thursday, or next? I'd like to wait until after Broncos-Jaguars even though I'm probably going to end up forking both.
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2022, 08:36:36 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2022, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2022, 04:23:44 PM
Hmm . . . I was planning on not being able to go over 18, and I thought that went without saying. But it might be kinda interesting.
If we decide we're okay with more than 18, I think there should be a rule that the number of extra teams on your list has to be the same as or larger than the number of teams on your list that have clinched a playoff berth at all times. That is to say, if you're going to fork a 19th team, you have to do it before any of your forked teams clinch a playoff berth. If you're going to fork a 20th, you have to do it when at most one team on your list has clinched.
What does everyone think?
I thought so too, otherwise you could fork all 32 and guarantee 18 correct, which kind of defeats the purpose. Being right is just as important a component of the game as being aggressive, so allowing extras would be sort of like a reward for being wrong. In other words, the only reason you would need to fork more than 18 would be if you were wrong about some of your forks. But everyone is going to be wrong about some, that's just inevitable. That's why it's part of the strategy of the game to be aggressive, but not too aggressive (IMO).
Now I'm starting to question the strong stand that I took here :-D
Mostly kidding about that, but in all seriousness, I am going to complete my NFC forks by forking the Bucs and Packers. That means my NFC playoff field is officially SET and it will be (in rough order of what I think the seeds will be) Eagles, Vikings, 49ers, Saints (oof), Cowboys, Rams, and Cardinals (yeah, I shouldn't have forked the Giants, but too late now).
AFC incoming... is the deadline for 13 points this Thursday, or next? I'd like to wait until after Broncos-Jaguars even though I'm probably going to end up forking both.
Next Thursday is the deadline.
Packers and Bucs, but not Saints? Bold strategy, Cotton.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2022, 08:47:30 AM
Next Thursday is the deadline.
Packers and Bucs, but not Saints? Bold strategy, Cotton.
Got it.
Probably should have forked the Saints and kept the Falcons, but I'm out on the Bucs either way so I have to take what's left. :D
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2022, 08:06:50 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 23, 2022, 11:28:22 PM
I fail to see where the "danger" comes into the equation, maybe someone had a food allergy? A sandwich of danger should IMO at least have one actual exotic ingredient.
I agree, it is oddly named :-D No surprise here, but it was more about using Wilson himself as a promotion than the actual sandwich.
On the other hand, with such a long list of ingredients, there's bound to be something on there that someone doesn't like. For me, it's mustard, and to a lesser extent salami and pepperoni. With that many ingredients, most people are going to either avoid it or customize it. That doesn't sound like a great promotion, so I'm not at all surprised it's being dropped.
I thought about what would add "danger" to the Dangerwich. Pour three servings of Jalepenos into the base sandwich, problem solved and danger added.
Updated fork list:
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Giants
Bears
Lions
Raiders
Steelers
Seahawks
Panthers
Commanders
Saints
Cardinals
Broncos
Jaguars
Just the Jags for now as an addition. Three more by the end of the season.
Apparently the Colts are benching Matt Ryan, which seems like a glaring mistake.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2022, 03:34:21 PM
Apparently the Colts are benching Matt Ryan, which seems like a glaring mistake.
Their offensive line is bad right now and Ehlinger is at least more mobile, so it makes sense.
Who was that wearing the Bears uniforms tonight?
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 24, 2022, 11:15:38 PM
Who was that wearing the Bears uniforms tonight?
Whoever it was, their season high in points is higher than the Giants, and they get a big thanks from me for providing one of my favorite results of the season!
Quote from: webny99 on October 25, 2022, 09:08:28 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 24, 2022, 11:15:38 PM
Who was that wearing the Bears uniforms tonight?
Whoever it was, their season high in points is higher than the Giants, and they get a big thanks from me for providing one of my favorite results of the season!
For once, it was actually fun watching the Bears. I haven't said it that much since the last time they made the Super Bowl and lost to Peyton Manning.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 06, 2022, 11:47:57 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 07, 2022, 09:09:32 PM
I'm not going to be quite as aggressive, I'll fork these teams:
Jets
Browns
Texans
Lions
Falcons
Seahawks
Adding:
Patriots
Steelers
Raiders
Commanders
Panthers
Looks like I'm gonna take a hit on the Jets.
I'm going to add
Broncos
Jaguars
Saints
10-4 again on the week despite all the wild upsets.
Bucs
Broncos
Panthers
Cowboys
Dolphins
Vikings
Saints
Jets
Eagles
Titans
Colts
Rams
Giants
Bills
Bengals
Bucs 23, Ravens 20
Broncos/Jags: heck if I know
Dolphins 30, Lions 23
Panthers 21, Falcons 20
Vikings 34, Cardinals 24
Cowboys 28, Bears 20
Raiders 27, Saints 19
Eagles 33, Steelers 17
Jets 23, Patriots 16
Texans 24, Titans 23
Seahawks 29, Giants 17
Colts 16, Commanders 13
Rams 26, 49ers 20
Bills 31, Packers 24
Bengals 24, Browns 21
I called the 1-8 Texans beating the 8-2 Titans last year so might as well try again. Plus the Titans are annoying.
I fully expect to not improve upon my horrendous 5-13-1 record picking games that involve an AFC South team. And four of the five correct ones (three Texans losses and Bills over Titans) were pretty much gimmes.
7-7 last week. Might as well have flipped a coin.
Ravens 41, Buccaneers 37
Broncos 13, Jaguars 17
Panthers 23, Falcons 19
Bears 23, Cowboys 30
Dolphins 20, Lions 21
Cardinals 23, Vikings 26
Raiders 27, Saints 21
Patriots 28, Jets 24
Steelers 28, Eagles 33
Titans 21, Texans 19
Commanders 16, Colts 20
49ers 30, Rams 28
Giants 23, Seahawks 21
Packers 13, Bills 27
Bengals 29, Browns 16
10-4 last week. Not too bad.
Bucs over Ravens
Jags over Broncos
Dolphins over Lions
Vikings over Cardinals
Panthers over Falcons
Bears over Cowboys
Raiders over Saints
Jets over Patriots
Eagles over Steelers
Texans over Titans
Commies over Colts
49ers over Rams
Seahawks over Giants
Bills over Packers
Bengals over Browns
Until last night, no Tom Brady-led team had started the season 3-5. If this keeps up, I think that the Bucs will also be the first team with him as the QB to have a losing record. Even the Patriots missed the playoffs when he was with them, so it's rather a foreign thing to him. But at least they were 8-8.
I suspect that Brady's impending divorce from Gisele Bundchen may have something to do with it...could she have been right to talk him out of a comeback?
Quote from: Henry on October 28, 2022, 11:00:40 AM
Until last night, no Tom Brady-led team had started the season 3-5. If this keeps up, I think that the Bucs will also be the first team with him as the QB to have a losing record. Even the Patriots missed the playoffs when he was with them, so it's rather a foreign thing to him. But at least they were 8-8.
I suspect that Brady's impending divorce from Gisele Bundchen may have something to do with it...could she have been right to talk him out of a comeback?
I don't know if you've seen pics of him lately, but in his most recent press conference (before the game), he looked like Skeletor - sunken cheeks, kind of frail almost. I think Mr. Brady finally hit the wall. I picked the Bucs in the game last night just because I couldn't see him losing 3 in a row, but now my perception is definitely different.
He posted on Instagram a few hours ago that the divorce is final.
People are looking at Tampa's record and Brady's age and assuming that he's their biggest issue. Not even close. Brady isn't actually playing badly. He leads the league in passing yards (having played 8 games, of course, but his per game average of 283.4 yards would still put him near the top even if he hadn't played an extra game). Only 9 touchdowns, but also only one pick, which is remarkable considering he also leads the league in pass attempts and completions.
Tampa is on pace to be one of the worst rushing teams of all time, which has forced Brady to throw an average of 46.5 passes/game over their last 6 games. At 45 it's a miracle his arm hasn't fallen off. With no run game and Evans being pretty much their only downfield threat at this point, Tampa needs near-perfect drives to score. In their last three games they've reached their opponent's 30-yard line 12 times, and scored 3 touchdowns. Against the Steelers they had four drives of 11+ plays, three of which ended in short field goals. Against the Cowboys they kicked field goals on all five of their first half drives. Their offense is toothless. They need to start running the ball better and throwing it downfield. Bad line play isn't helping.
The good news? Their division stinks. 8-9 could win it, 9-8 most definitely will.
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2022, 08:36:36 AM
Mostly kidding about that, but in all seriousness, I am going to complete my NFC forks by forking the Bucs and Packers. That means my NFC playoff field is officially SET and it will be (in rough order of what I think the seeds will be) Eagles, Vikings, 49ers, Saints (oof), Cowboys, Rams, and Cardinals (yeah, I shouldn't have forked the Giants, but too late now).
AFC incoming...
I decided I'm going to fork both of this week's London teams regardless of result, so there's no point in waiting to complete my AFC forks. I'm forking the
Broncos,
Jaguars, and
Raiders. That means my forks are complete and AFC playoff field is officially SET and it will be (in rough order of what I think the seeds will be) Bills, Chiefs, Ravens, Colts (oof), Bengals, Dolphins, and Chargers.
In summary...
12 teams x 20 pts = 240
1 team x 15 pts = 15
5 teams x 13 pts = 65
TOTAL pts if all 18 are correct (spoiler alert: they won't be) = 320
I'm expecting to be wrong about 4 of my preseason forks, which would cost me 120 pts for a net of 200.
Well, Denver wins. They scored touchdowns instead of field goals, that was the difference between today and the rest of their games. Still unlikely that they make the playoffs. But I'm already this far in, why would I back out after a W? So I'm not forking them yet.
Fork the Raiders. More to come.
Another W for my Cowboys, this one much different from the first five. Defense was pushed around all day, but it was refreshing to see 49 points. Dak is back. Pollard is really good.
Chicago was trailing from the go, usually by double digits, and still ran the ball 43 times. On one hand, I respect it because it was working. On the other, they simply ate too much clock, especially in the second half, to give themselves a chance. Fields did play maybe the best game of his career.
Campbell needs to be fired.
Falcons win against their will in a game that summarizes the 2022 NFC South.
My prediction for the Cardinals/Vikings game was only two points off. Probably one of the only intelligent predictions I've made.
The four division pairs in both conference kind of resemble each other. To be a little clearer, I'll just write it out:
AFC East is combined 9 games above .500 (+9); NFC East is +15. No teams are below .500 here.
AFC and NFC North are -4 and -4.
AFC and NFC South are -6 and -8.
AFC and NFC West are -1 and -1.
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2022, 04:56:08 PM
Fork the Raiders. More to come.
Another W for my Cowboys, this one much different from the first five. Defense was pushed around all day, but it was refreshing to see 49 points. Dak is back. Pollard is really good.
Chicago was trailing from the go, usually by double digits, and still ran the ball 43 times. On one hand, I respect it because it was working. On the other, they simply ate too much clock, especially in the second half, to give themselves a chance. Fields did play maybe the best game of his career.
Campbell needs to be fired.
Falcons win against their will in a game that summarizes the 2022 NFC South.
My prediction for the Cardinals/Vikings game was only two points off. Probably one of the only intelligent predictions I've made.
Fields has no receivers and no pass blocking. Running the ball 43 times a game keeps him upright until the offseason when they can get him some help. At this point that's more important than winning.
Quote from: kurumi on October 31, 2022, 01:11:11 AM
The four division pairs in both conference kind of resemble each other. To be a little clearer, I'll just write it out:
AFC East is combined 9 games above .500 (+9); NFC East is +15. No teams are below .500 here.
AFC and NFC North are -4 and -4.
AFC and NFC South are -6 and -8.
AFC and NFC West are -1 and -1.
Yep. It is very notable that all 8 teams in the East divisions are .500 or better. When's the last time that happened through 8 games? Sometime the 1990's? Maybe never?
Meanwhile, the South divisions are a mess, all below .500 except the Titans who might cruise to a division title (unfortunately for my forks list).
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2022, 11:26:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2022, 08:47:30 AM
Packers and Bucs, but not Saints? Bold strategy, Cotton.
...
Probably should have forked the Saints and kept the Falcons, but I'm out on the Bucs either way so I have to take what's left. :D
Quote from: webny99 on October 29, 2022, 10:06:23 PM
I'm forking the Broncos, Jaguars, and Raiders. That means my forks are complete and AFC playoff field is officially SET
I guess Raiders-Saints was my Super Bowl :-D
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 31, 2022, 07:27:50 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2022, 04:56:08 PM
Fork the Raiders. More to come.
Another W for my Cowboys, this one much different from the first five. Defense was pushed around all day, but it was refreshing to see 49 points. Dak is back. Pollard is really good.
Chicago was trailing from the go, usually by double digits, and still ran the ball 43 times. On one hand, I respect it because it was working. On the other, they simply ate too much clock, especially in the second half, to give themselves a chance. Fields did play maybe the best game of his career.
Campbell needs to be fired.
Falcons win against their will in a game that summarizes the 2022 NFC South.
My prediction for the Cardinals/Vikings game was only two points off. Probably one of the only intelligent predictions I've made.
Fields has no receivers and no pass blocking. Running the ball 43 times a game keeps him upright until the offseason when they can get him some help. At this point that's more important than winning.
This, people are conveniently forgetting that this was going to be a lost year for the Bears from the start. While I don't like seeing Fields getting beaten to death because the o-line sucks, it is very impressive to see his play over the last two weeks. Yesterday was a nice building block game for him.
Adding the Saints and Cardinals to my list. Browns likely to follow, but might as well wait for tonight's game.
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2022, 12:39:39 PM
Well, Denver wins. They scored touchdowns instead of field goals, that was the difference between today and the rest of their games. Still unlikely that they make the playoffs. But I'm already this far in, why would I back out after a W? So I'm not forking them yet.
I've been going back and forth on this. I think both the Broncos and Commies have a shot, but strategically I have to fork one of them.
With how the Chargers have looked lately I wouldn't be totally shocked if Denver came 2nd in the West. The South won't have a wild card. The North won't have more than one. The East is the best AFC division as was mentioned, but everyone besides the Bills has looked shaky at times. So if things fall a certain way, Denver could quite possibly be the 7 seed. (Provided they pick it up on offense, of course.)
If the Commies catch the Giants for 3rd in the NFCE, they're likely in. I think the NFC wild cards will be two East teams and one West team, though I'm not totally counting out Green Bay. Plus, my pre-season predictions had the Cowboys, Eagles, and Commies all making the playoffs, so that would be pretty insane if it works out.
I think I have to go with the Commies as the more likely team to make it, meaning the Broncos get the fork after all. (sigh)
Fork the Colts, Patriots, and Chargers.
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Giants
Bears
Lions
Raiders
Steelers
Seahawks
Panthers
Commanders
Saints
Cardinals
Broncos
Jaguars
That concludes my forks (unless a team screws me over this week)
Quote from: webny99 on October 31, 2022, 12:10:35 PM
Quote from: kurumi on October 31, 2022, 01:11:11 AM
The four division pairs in both conference kind of resemble each other. To be a little clearer, I'll just write it out:
AFC East is combined 9 games above .500 (+9); NFC East is +15. No teams are below .500 here.
...
Yep. It is very notable that all 8 teams in the East divisions are .500 or better. When's the last time that happened through 8 games? Sometime the 1990's? Maybe never?
Re: the NFC East:
https://twitter.com/FieldYates/status/1587053187751677953
Quote from: thspfc on October 31, 2022, 05:13:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2022, 12:39:39 PM
Well, Denver wins. They scored touchdowns instead of field goals, that was the difference between today and the rest of their games. Still unlikely that they make the playoffs. But I'm already this far in, why would I back out after a W? So I'm not forking them yet.
I've been going back and forth on this. I think both the Broncos and Commies have a shot, but strategically I have to fork one of them.
With how the Chargers have looked lately I wouldn't be totally shocked if Denver came 2nd in the West. The South won't have a wild card. The North won't have more than one. The East is the best AFC division as was mentioned, but everyone besides the Bills has looked shaky at times. So if things fall a certain way, Denver could quite possibly be the 7 seed. (Provided they pick it up on offense, of course.)
If the Commies catch the Giants for 3rd in the NFCE, they're likely in. I think the NFC wild cards will be two East teams and one West team, though I'm not totally counting out Green Bay. Plus, my pre-season predictions had the Cowboys, Eagles, and Commies all making the playoffs, so that would be pretty insane if it works out.
I think I have to go with the Commies as the more likely team to make it, meaning the Broncos get the fork after all. (sigh)
Yeah, the AFC wild card race is much tougher than the NFC. The Broncos would almost certainly need to get to 10-7 (which would mean going 7-2 the rest of the way) against a very tough schedule. They're probably going to be underdogs in 7 or 8 of their remaining games. FiveThirtyEight agrees with your decision, giving the Commanders 18% playoff odds and the Broncos only 10%.
It would be hilarious if the entire NFC East makes the playoffs, and it's not completely out of question. With how the Rams have looked, if the 49ers win the west, the Seahawks are probably the biggest threat to that happening.
Today is November 1 so I think it's a good time to remember that the last two Super Bowl champions were terrible in November, and each of the last four had a losing streak of 2+ games at some point in the season.
Whoever ends up winning it all is more than likely going to lose multiple games over the next few months, possibly in a row, after which everyone is going to leave them for dead. At this point in the year the Super Bowl favorites in the eyes of fans are just the teams that won most recently.
I'm gonna fork the Browns anyways despite the impressive win last night.
Eagles 35, Texans 14
Chargers 34, Falcons 16
Bills 30, Jets 14
Patriots 26, Colts 13
Lions 31, Packers 26
Vikings 27, Commanders 20
Bengals 23, Panthers 17
Jaguars 28, Raiders 13
Dolphins 28, Bears 21
Cardinals 20, Seahawks 19
Buccaneers 17, Rams 12
Chiefs 38, Titans 13
Ravens 20, Saints 10
Excited for another .500 week!
8-7 last week. Was too high on the NJ teams I guess.
Eagles
Chargers
Dolphins
Bengals
Packers
Jaguars
Colts
Bills
Vikings
Seahawks
Rams
Chiefs
Ravens
A gross 7-8 last week.
Eagles over Texans
Vikings over Commies
Raiders over Jaguars
Falcons over Chargers
Bears over Dolphins
Bengals over Panthers
Lions over Packers
Patriots over Colts
Bills over Jets
Seahawks over Cardinals
Rams over Bucs
Chiefs over Titans
Saints over Ravens
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Bears over Dolphins
Bears traded away their 2 best defensive players, and while Fields has improved a lot I don't think he can win a shootout.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 03, 2022, 11:45:21 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Bears over Dolphins
Bears traded away their 2 best defensive players, and while Fields has improved a lot I don't think he can win a shootout.
Dolphins defense has sucked recently. Gotta pick a random upset in there that no one sees coming. I think mine this week are the Bears and the Saints.
8-7 last week.
Eagles 31, Texans 17
Chargers 27, Falcons 24
Dolphins 23, Bears 19
Panthers 20, Bengals 26
Packers 28, Lions 26
Colts 17, Patriots 23
Bills 29, Jets 20
Vikings 22, Commanders 20
Raiders 28, Jaguars 27
Seahawks 28, Cardinals 31
Rams 17, Buccaneers 20
Titans 16, Chiefs 28
Ravens 21, Saints 24
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 03, 2022, 11:45:21 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Bears over Dolphins
Bears traded away their 2 best defensive players, and while Fields has improved a lot I don't think he can win a shootout.
Dare I say something positive about the Bears, I think it's smart to commit to a rebuild on defense while also adding a weapon for Fields. Give him and the offense a real chance to develop and be competitive instead of constantly relying on the defense.
Quote from: thspfc on November 03, 2022, 11:24:18 AM
Eagles 35, Texans 14
Chargers 34, Falcons 16
Bills 30, Jets 14
Patriots 26, Colts 13
Lions 31, Packers 26
Vikings 27, Commanders 20
Bengals 23, Panthers 17
Jaguars 28, Raiders 13
Dolphins 28, Bears 21
Cardinals 20, Seahawks 19
Buccaneers 17, Rams 12
Chiefs 38, Titans 13
Ravens 20, Saints 10
Excited for another .500 week!
*Bills 30, Jets -3
Eagles offense was incredibly impressive at Reliant/NRG Stadium tonight putting up four TDs against a stellar and inspired Texans defense, I vote Jalen Hurts for offensive player of the year for sure. My Texans as usual had a chance to win (as they had most games this year) in the second half, but too many self-inflicted turnovers on offense denied the Texans from handing the Eagles their first loss of the season.
Longtime Redskins stalwart Dave Butz has died at 72. I remember how the cameras always zoomed in on his severely scratched helmet. Knowing what we know now, I sure hope he wasn't suffering from CTE or similar. RIP.
Quote from: thspfc on November 03, 2022, 11:24:18 AM
Eagles 35, Texans 14
Chargers 20, Falcons 16
Bills 30, Jets 14
Patriots 26, Colts 13
Lions 31, Packers 26
Vikings 27, Commanders 20
Bengals 23, Panthers 17
Jaguars 28, Raiders 13
Dolphins 28, Bears 21
Cardinals 20, Seahawks 19
Buccaneers 17, Rams 12
Chiefs 38, Titans 13
Ravens 20, Saints 10
Excited for another .500 week!
Edited the Chargers/Falcons a little bit because the Chargers have basically nobody playing WR.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 04, 2022, 02:33:45 PM
Longtime Redskins stalwart Dave Butz has died at 72. I remember how the cameras always zoomed in on his severely scratched helmet. Knowing what we know now, I sure hope he wasn't suffering from CTE or similar. RIP.
Dave Butz was a gentle giant--except for opponents and opposing QB's. He was also good with quips, such as, "I missed a touchdown by inches. At least Walter Payton didn't catch me, but the opposing center did." and when trying to recover a fumble that he didn't retrieve, "I barely touched it. I thought footballs weighed more than that."
Also, one of the greatest punters of all-time, Ray Guy, also passed away at the age of 72 from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. He was the first punter to be drafted in the first round with Oakland taking him with the 23rd pick of the 1973 draft. He is in both the College and Pro Football Hall of Fames and was named the punter on both the 75th and 100th NFL anniversary teams. He is the punter in which the term "hang time" was associated with. He also has an award named after him, the Ray Guy Award which is awarded to the nation's best collegiate punter.
RIP to both Dave Butz (#65) and Ray Guy (#8)--two players I enjoyed watching in my younger days.
Quote from: thspfc on November 04, 2022, 10:08:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 03, 2022, 11:24:18 AM
Eagles 35, Texans 14
Chargers 20, Falcons 16
Bills 30, Jets 14
Patriots 26, Colts 13
Lions 31, Packers 26
Vikings 27, Commanders 20
Bengals 23, Panthers 17
Jaguars 28, Raiders 13
Dolphins 28, Bears 21
Cardinals 20, Seahawks 19
Buccaneers 17, Rams 12
Chiefs 38, Titans 13
Ravens 20, Saints 10
Excited for another .500 week!
Edited the Chargers/Falcons a little bit because the Chargers have basically nobody playing WR.
Apparently I'm smart this week. 8-1 so far with the 1 being a pretty tough one to predict.
If Aaron Rodgers is benched tomorrow I wouldn't say it's totally unjustified. If they don't turn it around starting next week, might as well see what Love has to offer.
Big one in Tampa this afternoon. I'd say it's the most important game of the season thus far. I think the winner will make the playoffs and the loser probably won't.
That 4th quarter was one of the great Brady moments ever IMO. That team was lost on offense. Couldn't run for anything. Receivers looked like they put $50 on the Rams moneyline. And Brady leads them on three long 4th quarter drives, including the game winning TD.
If it was Rodgers who threw that dropped pass to Miller on the second to last drive? Ball game, and Miller wouldn't get another target for a month. But Brady went back to him twice on the last drive, and it paid off.
Tampa now leads the division at 4-5. If they go on a run, that will be the moment that started it.
One of the great Brady moments? :rofl: The last Brady moment, maybe. There's zero reason to think the Bucs are going to go on a run here. That was much more of a gag by the Rams (coaching staff included) than anything that changes how I view the Bucs.
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 08:16:18 PM
One of the great Brady moments? :rofl: The last Brady moment, maybe. There's zero reason to think the Bucs are going to go on a run here. That was much more of a gag by the Rams (coaching staff included) than anything that changes how I view the Bucs.
IIRC, this was more or less your exact response to the Chiefs' blowout win over the Raiders that kickstarted their big run last year (which included knocking the Bills out of the playoffs). The Bills part probably won't happen, but you get my point.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
Weighing in on the NFC North...
This Packers season has serious late career Favre vibes. I wouldn't be surprised if we do see Jordan Love this season. But more importantly, the Vikings are basically a lock to win the division. With a 4-1/2 game lead, their division games are the only remaining games that matter (at least in the division race - obviously not for seeding). Sweeping the division would get them to 10 wins and give each opponent their 7th loss. With the tiebreakers, they'd clinch the division no matter what else happens - even if they lost all their non-division games and one of the other teams managed to win out.
Per FiveThirtyEight (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo), they're now the heaviest division favorite in the league with a 98.4% chance to win it. Not sure what the record is for earliest point in the season that a division could be clinched, but the Vikings may be in contention to break the record. If they somehow found a way to blow it, it would be worse than 28-3. Barring that, there will be a playoff game in Minneapolis for the first time since Minneapolis Miracle.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 08:26:54 PM
IIRC, this was more or less your exact response to the Chiefs' blowout win over the Raiders that kickstarted their big run last year (which included knocking the Bills out of the playoffs). The Bills part probably won't happen, but you get my point.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
1. This is why I'm trying to refrain from in-season commentary this season. It's too tempting to overreact, and/or try and will things into existence only to be let down 95% of the time. That was not a great take in terms of framing it as "the Chiefs aren't back", but still accurate as pertains to the Raiders.
2. I have no idea how that relates to my post about the Bucs. So... here I go with more commentary... :D
The 2021 Chiefs had 26-year old Patrick Mahomes with a great roster and a top-5 coach of all time. Sure, they had to figure things out last season, but at no point were they in serious danger of missing the playoffs, and at no point did I believe they were not a Super Bowl contender.
The 2022 Bucs have the 45-year old ghost of Tom Brady who's afraid of taking hits due to his age and a bad O-line; an aging roster; a first-year coach (after questionably ousting the coach they won the SB with); their season high in points is 22 outside of a blowout loss and they've averaged 18 points per game; they haven't looked like a good team since Week 1 and could easily be 2-7 right now; they're a coin-flip to make the playoffs and may make it with a losing record in a terrible division; they're at
best the 5th-best team in the NFC right now, and look nothing like a true Super Bowl contender. That sounds nothing at all like last years Chiefs.
So... I recognize that the ghost of Tom Brady had another comeback win, but a single game-winning touchdown drive after being a field goal offense for half a season means almost nothing in the context of Brady's career. Not only that, the game was only close because they were playing another inept offense, they only scored 16 points and it was a dreadful offensive performance overall that did not inspire any confidence they can return to scoring 30+ points per game. The win is highly unlikely to change the trajectory of their season.
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 08:26:54 PM
IIRC, this was more or less your exact response to the Chiefs' blowout win over the Raiders that kickstarted their big run last year (which included knocking the Bills out of the playoffs). The Bills part probably won't happen, but you get my point.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative. That game said way more about the Raiders' incompetence on defense than it did about the Chiefs. The Raiders basically looked at everything that teams have done to stop the Chiefs this season and said "no thanks" and of course got steamrolled. Unbelievable.
1. This is why I'm trying to refrain from in-season commentary this season. It's too tempting to overreact, and/or try and will things into existence only to be let down 95% of the time. That was not a great take in terms of framing it as "the Chiefs aren't back", but still accurate as pertains to the Raiders.
I actually agreed (and still do) that the Raiders played the Chiefs the wrong way defensively. What I took issue with was 1) using that to throw out the success of the Chiefs defense in both that game and their second meeting, and 2) acting like those were the only two games to that point that the Chiefs were successful offensively - they had games of 33, 35, 42, and 31 points earlier in the season. As well as 34, 36, 31, 28, 42, and 42 afterwards, which is neither here nor there but it certainly goes to show that they were successful against teams other than the Raiders.
Quote
2. I have no idea how that relates to my post about the Bucs. So... here I go with more commentary... :D
Focusing overwhelmingly on the mistakes made by the opposing team rather than the plays made by the winning team. It was both.
QuoteThe 2021 Chiefs had 26-year old Patrick Mahomes with a great roster and a top-5 coach of all time. Sure, they had to figure things out last season, but at no point were they in serious danger of missing the playoffs, and at no point did I believe they were not a Super Bowl contender.
Based on that post I have a hard time believing that.
QuoteThe 2022 Bucs have the 45-year old ghost of Tom Brady
You mean the one who leads the league in completions, attempts, and yards, has thrown ONE pick, and is on pace for the fewest INTs per pass attempt in a single season in NFL history?
Quotewho's afraid of taking hits due to his age and a bad O-line;
This is true and it shows in his play. He's also lost some of his pocket mobility, which is leading to more sacks and throwaways. To say that Brady has not declined at all would be ridiculous; it's been slow but sure since at least 2018. He's still good though.
Quotecould easily be 2-7 right now;
Non-argument and you know it because they could just as easily be 7-2.
Quotethey're a coin-flip to make the playoffs
538 has them at 61%. And that doesn't account for any emotional boost today's win provided, which I think will matter.
Quotethey're at best the 5th-best team in the NFC right now
I might even put them lower than that as of today, but "who are the best teams today" and "who has the best chances to make a run late in the season" are two different questions.
Quoteand look nothing like a true Super Bowl contender
Neither did the Chiefs until week 10.
Quotea field goal offense for half a season
That means they're getting inside the 30. Obviously they have to do better from there but that's an easier problem to fix than rarely getting that far.
Quoteanother inept offense
That's like half the league this year.
QuoteThe win is highly unlikely to change the trajectory of their season.
One game by itself never changes the trajectory of any team's season. What I said was if they start winning more games, this will be looked back upon as the starting point.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 04:29:01 PM
Apparently I'm smart this week. 8-1 so far with the 1 being a pretty tough one to predict.
Ahem. :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Lions over Packers
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 06, 2022, 11:35:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 04:29:01 PM
Apparently I'm smart this week. 8-1 so far with the 1 being a pretty tough one to predict.
Ahem. :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Lions over Packers
The one I missed was Bills/Jets. And Seahawks/Cardinals after that.
Quote from: thspfc on November 07, 2022, 05:50:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 06, 2022, 11:35:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 04:29:01 PM
Apparently I'm smart this week. 8-1 so far with the 1 being a pretty tough one to predict.
Ahem. :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 03, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
Lions over Packers
The one I missed was Bills/Jets. And Seahawks/Cardinals after that.
Ha. You're right. I was looking at jlam's. My apologies.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PMWhat I took issue with was 1) using that to throw out the success of the Chiefs defense in both that game and their second meeting, and 2) acting like those were the only two games to that point that the Chiefs were successful offensively...
OK, we don't really need to rehash this, but that comment was 100% about the Chiefs offense (which had been struggling in the weeks prior) vs. the Raiders defense. Yes, the defense looked better, and was in favorable position all game with a large lead and unstoppable offense, but the comment had nothing to do with the defense. It wasn't the only game when the Chiefs were successful offensively but it had been over a month since they had. All I was saying is the Raiders could have tried some of the defensive strategy that other teams had success with and maybe the Chiefs don't go off for 40+ points, and then nobody would be saying "the Chiefs are back!"
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PM
2. I have no idea how that relates to my post about the Bucs. So... here I go with more commentary... :D
Focusing overwhelmingly on the mistakes made by the opposing team rather than the plays made by the winning team. It was both.
In both cases, the mistakes related more to coaching than strictly the performance of the players, and those mistakes set up the winning team to make plays. If the Rams play for a first down and get it, the Bucs do not have another chance for a touchdown drive. It is just terrible coaching to get conservative and play to give them that chance.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PM
The 2021 Chiefs had 26-year old Patrick Mahomes with a great roster and a top-5 coach of all time. Sure, they had to figure things out last season, but at no point were they in serious danger of missing the playoffs, and at no point did I believe they were not a Super Bowl contender.
Based on that post I have a hard time believing that.
You have a hard time believing... that I thought the Chiefs were a SB contender? :confused: Of course they were a SB contender, but scoring 40 points against the Raiders simply didn't change what I thought about them.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PMThe 2022 Bucs have the 45-year old ghost of Tom Brady
You mean the one who leads the league in completions, attempts, and yards ...?
Of course he does because they have no running game. They're on pace to have the worst running game in NFL history.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PMcould easily be 2-7 right now;
Non-argument and you know it because they could just as easily be 7-2.
What!? I don't buy that at all. I can tell you exactly how they'd be 2-7: a terrible call on Grady Jarrett that cost the Falcons a chance to win, and terrible end game management by Sean McVay.
I have no idea how they could be 7-2, even if you can somehow make the case they could have won every game except for Chiefs and Panthers, the Panthers are in the mix for the #1 overall pick and beat them by three scores, the Chiefs put up 41 points on a defense that's supposed to be their strength, and they were badly outplayed by the Ravens too even though the score ended up close.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PM
The win is highly unlikely to change the trajectory of their season.
One game by itself never changes the trajectory of any team's season. What I said was if they start winning more games, this will be looked back upon as the starting point.
I actually disagree that one game can't change the trajectory. It absolutely can, I just don't think this is it for the Bucs.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2022, 10:56:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2022, 10:23:29 PMcould easily be 2-7 right now;
Non-argument and you know it because they could just as easily be 7-2.
What!? I don't buy that at all. I can tell you exactly how they'd be 2-7: a terrible call on Grady Jarrett that cost the Falcons a chance to win, and terrible end game management by Sean McVay.
I have no idea how they could be 7-2, even if you can somehow make the case they could have won every game except for Chiefs and Panthers, the Panthers are in the mix for the #1 overall pick and beat them by three scores, the Chiefs put up 41 points on a defense that's supposed to be their strength, and they were badly outplayed by the Ravens too even though the score ended up close.
Alright fine.
- They don't take a delay of game on the 2pt conversion against the Packers, they convert it, they win in OT.
- They replace even one of their 3 short field goals against the Steelers with a touchdown. Heck, if Kenny Pickett doesn't get hurt, they probably win that game.
- They replace even one of their 3 short field goals against the Ravens with a touchdown.
Absolutely
none of that matters one inch - which is precisely why this point that they "could be 2-7" is irrelevant. They're 4-5. Period. Talking about what would have happened if things were different is a slippery slope.
Side note - Atlanta still would have had to go the length of the field in a couple minutes and score a TD to win that game if the correct non-call was made. With Marcus Mariota at QB.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative.
By saying this you quite clearly implied that you did not believe the Chiefs were back. Back to what? I have to assume Super Bowl contention. I mean, what else would it be? Back to putting ketchup on steak? Back to making state farm commercials?
I noticed that yesterday, four games (including the win by my Chiefs) all ended with the same final score of 20-17. Do any of you know what the record might be for the most games in one day with the same final score? Yesterday has to at least be close to it, in my opinion.
Quote from: thspfc on November 07, 2022, 10:00:01 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2021, 10:50:35 AM
-Preemptive eye roll at the "Chiefs are back!" narrative.
By saying this you quite clearly implied that you did not believe the Chiefs were back. Back to what? I have to assume Super Bowl contention. I mean, what else would it be? Back to putting ketchup on steak? Back to making state farm commercials?
It just didn't change what I thought about them, period. I thought they were a team figuring things out that hadn't looked great to that point, but still had potential to be a Super Bowl contender. That was the case before that game, and was still the case after it.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on November 07, 2022, 10:13:09 AM
I noticed that yesterday, four games (including the win by my Chiefs) all ended with the same final score of 20-17. Do any of you know what the record might be for the most games in one day with the same final score? Yesterday has to at least be close to it, in my opinion.
I would not be surprised if four games is the record, or at least ties the record. 20-17 is also the most common score in the NFL, so it was fitting.
Calling it right now: No QB will ever throw for 100,000 yards again, at least not in our lifetimes. Tom Brady stands alone on this one.
Quote from: Henry on November 07, 2022, 01:54:39 PM
Calling it right now: No QB will ever throw for 100,000 yards again, at least not in our lifetimes. Tom Brady stands alone on this one.
Don't think Mahomes has a shot?
Whoa.. the Colts have fired coach Frank Reich and named former center Jeff Saturday as interim coach. One of very few instances of a team naming a head coach with zero coaching experience, although he did play in the NFL for 14 years. I saw someone suggest that Saturday is being brought in primarily as a talent evaluator.. and that actually made sense to me, so depending on how this unfolds, GM Chris Ballard could be gone as well.
Reich had a 40-33-1 record in Indy (better than Kyle Shanahan, FWIW), and was regarded as a top-10 coach entering the season. I think he's a near lock to get another head coaching job, which is not something you usually say about a coach fired midseason. Wild times in Indy!
I'm going to make my picks early this week since I'm out of town Wednesday onward. Obviously if anyone from tonight's game gets hurt, I'll probably adjust.
Falcons over Panthers
Bills over Vikings
Bears over Lions
Seahawks over Bucs
Chiefs over Jaguars
Titans over Broncos
Dolphins over Browns
Giants over Texans
Saints over Steelers
Raiders over Colts
Cowboys over Packers
Cardinals over Rams
49ers over Chargers
Eagles over Commies
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2022, 10:38:42 AM
jayhawkco
....
Fork the Texans and the Saints.
While reading back through the thread and trying not to mope about my fork list, I noticed you have 10 NFC teams and only 8 AFC teams. Not sure if that was intentional.
Quote from: webny99 on November 08, 2022, 11:55:29 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2022, 10:38:42 AM
jayhawkco
....
Fork the Texans and the Saints.
While reading back through the thread and trying not to mope about my fork list, I noticed you have 10 NFC teams and only 8 AFC teams. Not sure if that was intentional.
Yeah. I know I'm going to get some wrong from the outset in the NFC and the AFC has a lot more variability. I didn't pay attention to who I had already forked necessarily as I was just kind of winging it. We'll see if my strategy pays off.
9-4 week. Not too bad.
Falcons
Seahawks
Bills
Bears
Chiefs
Dolphins
Giants
Steelers
Titans
Colts
Cowboys
Rams
Chargers
Eagles
I went 9-4 last week.
Falcons 27, Panthers 24
Seahawks 26, Buccaneers 28
Vikings 20, Bills 30
Lions 27, Bears 29
Broncos 21, Titans 20
Jaguars 21, Chiefs 33
Browns 26, Dolphins 31
Texans 23, Giants 24
Saints 23, Steelers 21
Colts 17, Raiders 24
Cowboys 28, Packers 24
Cardinals 23, Rams 28
Chargers 22, 49ers 27
Commanders 21, Eagles 31
My best week of the season at 11-2 has me finally back over .500. 69-63-1.
Falcons 27, Panthers 9
Buccaneers 23, Seahawks 21
Bears 31, Lions 30
Dolphins 26, Browns 23
Bills 33, Vikings 17
Giants 23, Texans 20
Chiefs 42, Jaguars 24
Saints 27, Steelers 10
Raiders 28, Colts 23
Rams 22, Cardinals 14
Cowboys 24, Packers 20
49ers 19, Chargers 16
Eagles 30, Commanders 21
Waiting to see who plays QB for the Titans. It might not matter that much since I don't think either team is going to be successful throwing the ball in this game. But if Tannehill plays, the Titans will at least have hope of completing a pass once in a while, same can't be said of Willis at this point.
Edit: Titans 19, Broncos 13
Quote from: webny99 on November 08, 2022, 11:55:29 AM
While reading back through the thread and trying not to mope about my fork list ...
Speaking of forks...
https://www.stitcher.com/show/nfl-around-the-league-podcast/episode/colts-drama-stick-a-fork-in-em-with-zak-keefer-and-bridget-condon-208351670
Tampa outrushes Seattle 161-39 👀
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2022, 06:38:37 PM
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
Chargers/Raiders week 18 last year. That 4th quarter + overtime was the most captivating hour (actually it might have been two hours) of sports I've ever seen, and I don't think it will be topped.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2022, 06:38:37 PM
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
Game of the year at any rate.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2022, 06:38:37 PM
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
Chiefs-Rams 2018...
Josh McDaniels and the Raiders lost 25-20 to completely inexperienced and yet oddly compelling storyline known as Jeff Saturday. A bit of revenge for the Colts (being left at the altar in 2018) and another chop to the Belichick coaching tree.
17 point leads are not what they used to be. The Raiders have blown 3 this season, and the Bills did today and it's not even a top-5 storyline coming out of the game.
With that said... I wouldn't vote for Vikings-Bills as the best regular season game ever. It was such a choke job by the Bills that it would be like ranking the 28-3 Super Bowl as the best ever. You can make the case for it, but it's not what I'd pick personally. Also, Raiders-Chargers from last season >>>.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 13, 2022, 07:27:47 PM
Josh McDaniels and the Raiders lost 25-20 to completely inexperienced and yet oddly compelling storyline known as Jeff Saturday. A bit of revenge for the Colts (being left at the altar in 2018) and another chop to the Belichick coaching tree.
That is brutal for the Raiders and especially for McDaniels. To fall to 2-7 against a team that's in total chaos with an interim coach off the street - the same team that you passed up a few years ago - is about as bad as it gets. Their playoff odds are down to 1% per FiveThirtyEight, and that might be generous.
Brutal loss for the Cowboys, mostly at the fault of the defense. Way too many big plays. Run defense has not existed the last couple weeks. People are gonna rip on the choice to go for it on 4th and 3 at the 35 in overtime. The feeling I got was that anything short of a touchdown on that drive meant a loss, or tie at best if the 53 yarder was made (on a horrible playing surface), because of how useless the Dallas defense was.
Flashbacks to the Raiders game last year. They won four in a row following that one. Giants on Thanksgiving is shaping up to be a huge game, as is @ Minnesota next week. 6-5 with three straight losses would make things real complicated. 7-4 would be comfortably in playoff position, especially if the win is against the Giants.
Speaking of the Raiders? 😬
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2022, 06:38:37 PM
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
No, though probably game of the year
Quote from: thspfc on November 13, 2022, 08:28:05 PM
Brutal loss for the Cowboys, mostly at the fault of the defensethe referees bailing Aaron Rodgers out like they always do by not calling defensive PI in overtime.
Fixed.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 14, 2022, 07:57:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2022, 07:52:06 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 14, 2022, 07:47:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 13, 2022, 08:28:05 PM
the referees bailing Aaron Rodgers out like they always do
Fixed.
Why are they 4-6 then?
There's a limit to how much the refs can help.
I don't know why any human would ever take the job of being a ref. It's the absolute most thankless job in the world.
I forked the Packers, so I'm not exactly thrilled about the result either, but Aaron Rodgers just seems to own the Cowboys. I could feel it coming last week. In fact, I could feel a lot of unenjoyable results coming in Week 10, and sure enough, I was basically 6-1 (the one being the Colts) predicting a terrible week for my rooting interests. (So I guess that's really more like 1-6...? Either way, not a great week.)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 14, 2022, 07:47:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 13, 2022, 08:28:05 PM
Brutal loss for the Cowboys, mostly at the fault of the defensethe referees bailing Aaron Rodgers out like they always do by not calling defensive PI in overtime.
Fixed.
They waited until overtime to call the game a certain way so the Packers can win? That seems kinda risky. Why not do it, say, during regulation?
Also, there's this:
Fans throughout the game: They call too many penalties. Let them play!
Fans when the call goes against their team: Why did or didn't they call a penalty? The game is fixed!
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2022, 06:38:37 PM
Vikings vs. Bills = Best regular season game of all time?
Great game. Both the Vikings and Bills have had their share of heartbreak in big games. Sad to see either one lose
I was actually disappointed when FOX cut away from Bills/Vikes to start the Packer game. I needed closure, dammit!
How you gonna fumble the exchange on your own goal line, Buffalo? C'mon, man!
Minnesota has a giant horseshoe up their butt this season.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 14, 2022, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 14, 2022, 07:47:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 13, 2022, 08:28:05 PM
Brutal loss for the Cowboys, mostly at the fault of the defensethe referees bailing Aaron Rodgers out like they always do by not calling defensive PI in overtime.
Fixed.
They waited until overtime to call the game a certain way so the Packers can win? That seems kinda risky. Why not do it, say, during regulation?
Also, there's this:
Fans throughout the game: They call too many penalties. Let them play!
Fans when the call goes against their team: Why did or didn't they call a penalty? The game is fixed!
Packers would have more than 2 superbowls from 1992-today if the refs were always trying to favor the Packers. Been 20+ years of hearing that accusation lol
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 14, 2022, 02:19:26 PM
Packers would have more than 2 superbowls from 1992-today if the refs were always trying to favor the Packers. Been 20+ years of hearing that accusation lol
Exactly.
As far as game fixing conspiracy theories go: the refs having agendas, while still highly unlikely, is actually pretty believable compared to the theory that every, or ANY game, has a predetermined outcome from the start (like WWE). I would say that's an Alex Jones-level conspiracy theory, but that would be disrespectful to Alex Jones.
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2022, 04:01:26 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 14, 2022, 02:19:26 PM
Packers would have more than 2 superbowls from 1992-today if the refs were always trying to favor the Packers. Been 20+ years of hearing that accusation lol
Exactly.
As far as game fixing conspiracy theories go: the refs having agendas, while still highly unlikely, is actually pretty believable compared to the theory that every, or ANY game, has a predetermined outcome from the start (like WWE). I would say that's an Alex Jones-level conspiracy theory, but that would be disrespectful to Alex Jones.
As a Bears fan, I find it amusing that the refs will do anything to help the Packers win. But then, we've heard about them doing the same thing with the Patriots and Buccaneers during the Tom Brady era.
I've never believed that an NFL outcome was predetermined/fixed. But there are a handful of division rivalries where one side dominates so repeatedly that it's almost hard to believe. Bears-Packers, Broncos-Chiefs, Rams-49ers, and Jets-Patriots (and Bills-Patriots before Josh Allen) come to mind.
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2022, 08:07:22 PM
I've never believed that an NFL outcome was predetermined/fixed. But there are a handful of division rivalries where one side dominates so repeatedly that it's almost hard to believe. Bears-Packers, Broncos-Chiefs, Rams-49ers, and Jets-Patriots (and Bills-Patriots before Josh Allen) come to mind.
The only one that's hard to believe there is 49ers/Rams, since the Rams have typically been the better team during the McVay/Shanahan era. And even in that one, the Rams won what has been by far the biggest game.
In all the others, one team dominates because they're a lot better than the other team. Throw Steelers/Browns in there too, until the last couple years.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Just seeing when we wanted to bring this bet to consummation. :) I can't see the Broncos going 7-1 the rest of the way to give you a push.
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2022, 08:19:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2022, 08:07:22 PM
I've never believed that an NFL outcome was predetermined/fixed. But there are a handful of division rivalries where one side dominates so repeatedly that it's almost hard to believe. Bears-Packers, Broncos-Chiefs, Rams-49ers, and Jets-Patriots (and Bills-Patriots before Josh Allen) come to mind.
The only one that's hard to believe there is 49ers/Rams, since the Rams have typically been the better team during the McVay/Shanahan era. And even in that one, the Rams won what has been by far the biggest game.
In all the others, one team dominates because they're a lot better than the other team. Throw Steelers/Browns in there too, until the last couple years.
They are better, but not enough for one team to win so consistently given how random results tend to occur in the NFL. Like last year, when the Broncos, losers of 13 straight against the Chiefs, were in great position to beat them, and then the Chiefs got a defensive score of all things to seal the win. It almost seemed scripted, like it simply wasn't possible for the Broncos to win. I had similar feelings during Jets-Patriots a few weeks ago and Bills-Patriots in 2019.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2022, 08:29:05 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Just seeing when we wanted to bring this bet to consummation. :) I can't see the Broncos going 7-1 the rest of the way to give you a push.
The 8th loss. Barring a miracle, you've cancelled out your bet on the Colts to advance further than the Rams and Cowboys in last year's postseason, while I've failed miserably on this Broncos prediction :-D I'll start thinking about that essay.
I guess the Eagles got tired of being undefeated, which I don't understand that logic. Why would they not want to remain undefeated any more? Why would they want to lose a game???
Quote from: jgb191 on November 15, 2022, 12:25:28 AM
I guess the Eagles got tired of being undefeated, which I don't understand that logic. Why would they not want to remain undefeated any more? Why would they want to lose a game???
The 2007 Patriots probably felt the same way......
Quote from: jgb191 on November 15, 2022, 12:25:28 AM
I guess the Eagles got tired of being undefeated, which I don't understand that logic. Why would they not want to remain undefeated any more? Why would they want to lose a game???
I would doubt they were trying to lose the game, although it certainly seemed that way.
A huge bad miss on what should've been a facemask penalty didn't help either.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 15, 2022, 12:25:28 AM
I guess the Eagles got tired of being undefeated, which I don't understand that logic. Why would they not want to remain undefeated any more? Why would they want to lose a game???
They needed me to have bragging rights.
So now it's been 50 years since the last time a team went through an entire season and playoffs undefeated...
Quote from: Henry on November 15, 2022, 10:31:04 AM
So now it's been 50 years since the last time a team went through an entire season and playoffs undefeated...
And yet, every season, people are still gonna look at the last undefeated team's remaining schedule and be like "they'll be favored in every game here on out! This is the year!" And the reverse with the last winless team.
Cooper Kupp is going on IR with a high ankle sprain that requires surgery, basically ending the Rams season if it wasn't over already. I think Rams are gonna be one of the more interesting teams to watch this offseason. Of the core group that won the Super Bowl: Von Miller, Whitworth, and OBJ are already gone, and Donald, Stafford, and Ramsey have somewhat uncertain futures. Kupp and Floyd are under contract for a while yet but that seems to matter less and less each offseason.
There are rumors that McVay doesn't want to go through a rebuild. He could "retire" , go into broadcasting, then come back whenever there's an opening he likes. If that happens, the Rams, having traded away a ton of draft picks, could be in for a very rough next few seasons. Obviously worth it for the championship though.
To add to that . . . I think there's a solid chance the Chargers job opens up this offseason, which would be a very attractive one as far as head coach openings go. McVay wouldn't have to move an inch. :hmmm:
Quote from: thspfc on November 15, 2022, 11:10:28 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 15, 2022, 10:31:04 AM
So now it's been 50 years since the last time a team went through an entire season and playoffs undefeated...
And yet, every season, people are still gonna look at the last undefeated team's remaining schedule and be like "they'll be favored in every game here on out! This is the year!" And the reverse with the last winless team.
I was
thiiiis close to posting "the Eagles will lose before Thanksgiving" before their TNF game last week. I didn't do it, so I can't take any credit, but I'm not at all surprised. They already had over a month as the lone undefeated team; given the increased parity and the individual game results seeming to become more unpredictable every year, the chances of going 0-17 or 17-0 are extremely slim.
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-11-2022-nfl-season
I generally don't take major issue with team rankings, but I do this week. Eagles still at #1 is crazy, the Chiefs should probably be #1, the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime; starting the paragraph about the Vikings with "No matter how this season turns out..." proves that point. In short, I disagree with all of the top five for maybe the first time ever.
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-11-2022-nfl-season
I generally don't take major issue with team rankings, but I do this week. Eagles still at #1 is crazy, the Chiefs should probably be #1, the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime; starting the paragraph about the Vikings with "No matter how this season turns out..." proves that point. In short, I disagree with all of the top five for maybe the first time ever.
I disagree with your assessment about the Vikings/Bills game. Admittedly biased as a Vikings fan, but a lot of the fluky stuff goes away if the Cousins QB sneak goes one inch farther. I don't think it's unreasonable to have the one loss Vikings over the third place in the AFC East Bills.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 12:31:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-11-2022-nfl-season
I generally don't take major issue with team rankings, but I do this week. Eagles still at #1 is crazy, the Chiefs should probably be #1, the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime; starting the paragraph about the Vikings with "No matter how this season turns out..." proves that point. In short, I disagree with all of the top five for maybe the first time ever.
I disagree with your assessment about the Vikings/Bills game. Admittedly biased as a Vikings fan, but a lot of the fluky stuff goes away if the Cousins QB sneak goes one inch farther. I don't think it's unreasonable to have the one loss Vikings over the third place in the AFC East Bills.
But in the (repeated) words of Hanzus himself, this isn't about record. Seven one-score wins by Week 10 is unprecedented in NFL history. It was the rare game where the result that levels each team's record with its season-long performance did not occur. The Vikings were arguably worse than their record while the Bills were arguably better than their record
before this game, and now the disparity is even greater. All three of the Bills' losses have been fluky bordering on bizarre -- a lot of the fluky stuff in this game goes away if they take an easy field goal instead of getting overagressive -- there's also
this insane stat (https://tinyurl.com/3a34z69f) adding to the flukiness, and the only reason they're third in the division is because of the two division losses, which will have rematches next month.
How many wins have the Vikings had that similarly could have gone either way? I would argue almost all of them. And look at their other games: could the Vikings have beat the Chiefs in Arrowhead, or beat the Titans and Steelers by 35 points each? All 9 Vikings games
combined have been decided by a total of 80 points, including 47 points combined (avg 6.7 per game) on this 7 game win streak, while the Bills have a +99 point differential
despite those three losses. And the Vikings haven't looked vastly superior to anyone all season, so you can't say yes with a straight face.
All that makes it pretty hard to argue that the Vikings are the better
team -- again, not the team with the better record -- than the Bills.
FiveThirtyEight agrees (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo), and for what it's worth, the Bills are also well ahead of the Eagles in season-long ELO rating, 1657 to 1611, and Eagles' loss was much worse; in other words, you could have made a much better argument to move the Eagles down the rankings and leave the Bills where they were than vice-versa.
(I really wanted to avoid talking about the Bills, but you got me there...)
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 02:01:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 12:31:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-11-2022-nfl-season
I generally don't take major issue with team rankings, but I do this week. Eagles still at #1 is crazy, the Chiefs should probably be #1, the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime; starting the paragraph about the Vikings with "No matter how this season turns out..." proves that point. In short, I disagree with all of the top five for maybe the first time ever.
I disagree with your assessment about the Vikings/Bills game. Admittedly biased as a Vikings fan, but a lot of the fluky stuff goes away if the Cousins QB sneak goes one inch farther. I don't think it's unreasonable to have the one loss Vikings over the third place in the AFC East Bills.
But in the (repeated) words of Hanzus himself, this isn't about record. Seven one-score wins by Week 10 is unprecedented in NFL history. It was the rare game where the result that levels each team's record with its season-long performance did not occur. The Vikings were arguably worse than their record while the Bills were arguably better than their record before this game, and now the disparity is even greater. All three of the Bills' losses have been fluky bordering on bizarre -- a lot of the fluky stuff in this game goes away if they take an easy field goal instead of getting overagressive -- there's also this insane stat (https://tinyurl.com/3a34z69f) adding to the flukiness, and the only reason they're third in the division is because of the two division losses, which will have rematches next month.
How many wins have the Vikings had that similarly could have gone either way? I would argue almost all of them. And look at their other games: could the Vikings have beat the Chiefs in Arrowhead, or beat the Titans and Steelers by 35 points each? All 9 Vikings games combined have been decided by a total of 80 points, including 47 points combined (avg 6.7 per game) on this 7 game win streak, while the Bills have a +99 point differential despite those three losses. And the Vikings haven't looked vastly superior to anyone all season, so you can't say yes with a straight face.
All that makes it pretty hard to argue that the Vikings are the better team -- again, not the team with the better record -- than the Bills. FiveThirtyEight agrees (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-nfl-predictions/?ex_cid=rrpromo), and for what it's worth, the Bills are also well ahead of the Eagles in season-long ELO rating, 1657 to 1611, and Eagles' loss was much worse; in other words, you could have made a much better argument to move the Eagles down the rankings and leave the Bills where they were than vice-versa.
(I really wanted to avoid talking about the Bills, but you got me there...)
For the record, I don't recognize the usefulness of Elo when it comes to pro sports because it is based on teams from previous years which have different players, coaches, etc., so the 538 rankings mean pretty little to me. The Bills are going to be higher than the Eagles or Vikings due to a large part their record from last year if nothing else.
As to if the Vikings could beat the Chiefs at Arrowhead? Sure. Why not? They just beat the Bills at Highmark. The Chiefs have lost to the Colts, who are demonstrably worse than the Vikings. They only beat the Raiders by 1 at Arrowhead, a team also demonstrably worse than the Vikings.
For the record, my opinion on the Vikings is not that they're the Culpepper/Moss/Carter Vikings of the past, or even the Favre-led Vikes that should have made the Super Bowl. But cherry picking particular stats just to ignore win loss record and head to head isn't going to convince me. Would the Bills beat the Vikings if they played again tomorrow? Maybe? But all sports, football especially, are conglomerations of talent and skill mixed with some randomness. Adapting to that randomness is the sign of a good team to me.
Tom Brady is considered by many to be the GOAT because he came up big in big moments. The Vikings have come up big in big moments this year, as is evident by your NGS link posted about JJ. Having close games doesn't mitigate the skill it takes to rise to the occasion.
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime
If things were different then they would be different.
My top 10 right now would be:
1) Chiefs
2) Eagles
3) Vikings
4) Bills
5) Ravens
6) Cowboys
7) Dolphins
8) 49ers
9) Bengals
10) Jets
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 02:01:56 PM
this insane stat (https://tinyurl.com/3a34z69f) adding to the flukiness
News flash: great players make great plays. They didn't flip a coin or something to determine whether he caught it.
I disagree with the heavy usage of the word "fluke", because in this context it's a logical fallacy - you're assuming from the go that the Bills are better than all these teams at doing all these things and therefore every time the Bills mess up it must be a "fluke", not even a
potentially legitimate representation of the Bills level relative to other teams.
Here's what I will give you: the Bills/Dolphins game was extremely bizarre and is not an accurate representation of those two teams. For Buffalo to gain nearly 500 yards of offense to Miami's 212, gain 30 first downs, have the ball for more than two thirds of the game, turn it over just once, never trail by multiple possessions, only trail period for about 10 minutes, and still lose?
All in all there's still no standout team or few teams to me. The top 4 are interchangeable. Philly beat Minnesota, Minnesota beat Buffalo, Buffalo beat KC, but KC has looked without a doubt the best of the four outside of that loss to Buffalo.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime
If things were different then they would be different.
My top 10 right now would be:
1) Chiefs
2) Eagles
3) Vikings
4) Bills
5) Ravens
6) Cowboys
7) Dolphins
8) 49ers
9) Bengals
10) Jets
I'm pretty close to that exact list, maybe with the Cowboys slotted down a few to #8.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 03:19:17 PM
For the record, I don't recognize the usefulness of Elo when it comes to pro sports because it is based on teams from previous years which have different players, coaches, etc., so the 538 rankings mean pretty little to me. The Bills are going to be higher than the Eagles or Vikings due to a large part their record from last year if nothing else.
The
preaseason Elo is based on the previous season, but it does factor in changes to the team in the offseason, and also updates after every game result. The Bills have played 9 games, so it's updated 9 times since the beginning of the season. Where they started at the beginning of the season means literally nothing at this point in the season. And the Bills' record last year was only 11-6 - not all that spectacular.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 03:19:17 PM
As to if the Vikings could beat the Chiefs at Arrowhead? Sure. Why not? They just beat the Bills at Highmark. The Chiefs have lost to the Colts, who are demonstrably worse than the Vikings. They only beat the Raiders by 1 at Arrowhead, a team also demonstrably worse than the Vikings.
Chiefs-Colts was also one of the most bizarre results of the season. And we did expect the Raiders to be able to hang with the Chiefs: what's happened since has been a major careening off the rails, but their roster and talent preseason suggested they could do it (and they should have won that game). I guess the question is not so much "could the Vikings win?" (of course they
could) but "are they a better team?". Nothing I've seen at any point suggests to me that the Vikings are a better team than the Chiefs
or Bills... or Eagles, for that matter. And that's not an anti-Vikings take, I just don't think they're better roster-wise or QB-wise.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 03:19:17 PM
Adapting to that randomness is the sign of a good team to me. ... Having close games doesn't mitigate the skill it takes to rise to the occasion.
It's a good sign - and of course Jefferson is great and they have other great players - but it's also not necessarily sustainable. Like I said, 7-0 in one score games, especially at this point in the season, is unprecedented.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime
If things were different then they would be different.
But it also doesn't mean anything in the context of team rankings. The Falcons lost by 10 to the Panthers, and are ranked well above them. The Saints lost by 10 to the Steelers, and are ranked several spots above them. When an upset occurs and it's a close, one-score game - and sometimes even when it's not, like Bucs-Panthers - it's almost always an overreaction to say that the underdog is now the better team.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 02:01:56 PM
this insane stat (https://tinyurl.com/3a34z69f) adding to the flukiness
News flash: great players make great plays. They didn't flip a coin or something to determine whether he caught it.
For anyone that doesn't know, it's a metric that computes the expected probability of a completion based on several factors. Like any metric, it's not perfect, and obviously, there are non-tangible factors too, including the fact that Jefferson is just a great player. But to have 9 in a single game when the previous record was 6? That is insane. You need everything to go your way, and that includes getting lucky as well as just making great plays.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
I disagree with the heavy usage of the word "fluke", because in this context it's a logical fallacy - you're assuming from the go that the Bills are better than all these teams at doing all these things and therefore every time the Bills mess up it must be a "fluke", not even a potentially legitimate representation of the Bills level relative to other teams.
No, I don't think everything is always a "fluke". I would not call the Jets loss a fluke, even though I don't think it means the Jets are a better team. I think the Bills
are better than all three of the teams they've lost to, and it's largely their own mistakes and lack of adjustments that have led to the losses. In the Vikings and Dolphins games, it was all that
and some flukiness - the final Vikings touchdown, for example, and the final play against the Dolphins where they ran out of time to get a potential game-winning field goal off. If they lost by multiple scores and looked inferior for long stretches, I would obviously rethink whether they were the better team.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
All in all there's still no standout team or few teams to me. The top 4 are interchangeable. Philly beat Minnesota, Minnesota beat Buffalo, Buffalo beat KC, but KC has looked without a doubt the best of the four outside of that loss to Buffalo.
See, I don't think the Vikings have to be in the top four just because they beat the Bills. The Jets did too, and no one is saying they're in the top four. I'd probably have the Cowboys ahead of the Vikings even despite the loss, and possibly the Dophins too given that they hung with the Vikings without Tua and are much better when he's on the field.
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 06:37:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime
If things were different then they would be different.
But it also doesn't mean anything in the context of team rankings. The Falcons lost by 10 to the Panthers, and are ranked well above them. The Saints lost by 10 to the Steelers, and are ranked several spots above them. When an upset occurs and it's a close, one-score game - and sometimes even when it's not, like Bucs-Panthers - it's almost always an overreaction to say that the underdog is now the better team.
But you're grouping a 7-1 underdog beating a 6-2 favorite in the same category of "upset" as, say, a 1-7 underdog beating a 6-2 favorite. Would it almost always be an overreaction to rank the now 2-7 team over the 6-3 team? Yes.
QuoteFor anyone that doesn't know, it's a metric that computes the expected probability of a completion based on several factors. Like any metric, it's not perfect, and obviously, there are non-tangible factors too, including the fact that Jefferson is just a great player. But to have 9 in a single game when the previous record was 6? That is insane. You need everything to go your way, and that includes getting lucky as well as just making great plays.
As long as we're on the topic of luck: https://billswire.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/buffalo-bills-penalty-overtime-vikings-12-men/
QuoteSee, I don't think the Vikings have to be in the top four just because they beat the Bills. The Jets did too, and no one is saying they're in the top four. I'd probably have the Cowboys ahead of the Vikings even despite the loss, and possibly the Dolphins too given that they hung with the Vikings without Tua and are much better when he's on the field.
Dallas has serious issues on defense and if given the choice between Cousins and Dak today, I would take Cousins. Very close, but still. I might pick the Cowboys to beat them this week since I think it's a somewhat favorable matchup for Dallas, but in the long run this season I'd have my money on the Vikings.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 08:26:08 PM
As long as we're on the topic of luck: https://billswire.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/buffalo-bills-penalty-overtime-vikings-12-men/
Not to mention the Gabriel Davis "catch" that hit the ground and didn't get reviewed within the last two minutes.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 08:26:08 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 06:37:55 PM
But it also doesn't mean anything in the context of team rankings. The Falcons lost by 10 to the Panthers, and are ranked well above them. The Saints lost by 10 to the Steelers, and are ranked several spots above them. When an upset occurs and it's a close, one-score game - and sometimes even when it's not, like Bucs-Panthers - it's almost always an overreaction to say that the underdog is now the better team.
But you're grouping a 7-1 underdog beating a 6-2 favorite in the same category of "upset" as, say, a 1-7 underdog beating a 6-2 favorite. Would it almost always be an overreaction to rank the now 2-7 team over the 6-3 team? Yes.
The size of the upset is determined by the pregame point spread and how much they won by, not the teams' records. Texans-Giants vs. Jaguars-Chiefs last week is a great example. The Chiefs and Giants had the same record, and the Texans had a worse record than the Jaguars, yet the Texans were much smaller underdogs, since the Chiefs were correctly seen as much better than the Giants.
Interestingly, the last time the Bills and Vikings played, in 2018, is another great case study. The Bills were 17-point underdogs and won by 21. That's probably among the biggest pregame spread to final result differentials (+38) in NFL history. (For context, Titans-Ravens in the 2019 divisional playoffs, which felt like an all-time stunner, had a spread-to-result differential of +25). That type of upset
is one that might be reason to rethink things, but a small spread and close final result usually isn't.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 08:57:40 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 08:26:08 PM
As long as we're on the topic of luck: https://billswire.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/buffalo-bills-penalty-overtime-vikings-12-men/
Not to mention the Gabriel Davis "catch" that hit the ground and didn't get reviewed within the last two minutes.
Forgot about that one.
Needless to say, I'll fork these teams just to put them out of their misery:
Bears, Broncos, Browns, Jaguars, Lions, Panthers, Raiders, Rams, Saints, Steelers, Texans
Titans over Packers
Vikings over Cowboys
Bears over Falcons
Bills over Browns
Eagles over Colts
Patriots over Jets
Saints over Rams
Lions over Giants
Ravens over Panthers
Commies over Texans
Raiders over Broncos
Bengals over Steelers
Chiefs over Chargers
49ers over Cardinals
Bills home game vs Cleveland has been moved to Detroit due to expected mass quantities of snow.
As for my picks, I was a season worst 6-8
Packers
Bears
Ravens
Bills
Commanders
Eagles
Jets
Rams
Giants
Broncos
Vikings
Bengals
Chiefs
Niners
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 25, 2022, 10:49:51 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 06, 2022, 11:47:57 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 07, 2022, 09:09:32 PM
I'm not going to be quite as aggressive, I'll fork these teams:
Jets
Browns
Texans
Lions
Falcons
Seahawks
Adding:
Patriots
Steelers
Raiders
Commanders
Panthers
Looks like I'm gonna take a hit on the Jets.
I'm going to add
Broncos
Jaguars
Saints
Adding:
Colts
Rams
Cardinals
I went a brutal 5-9 last week.
Titans 21, Packers 17
Browns 19, Bills 24
Eagles 24, Colts 15
Lions 21, Giants 27
Jets 26, Patriots 21
Panthers 20, Ravens 34
Bears 34, Falcons 28
Commanders 23, Texans 17
Rams 20, Saints 17
Raiders 20, Broncos 23
Cowboys 31, Vikings 29
Bengals 27, Steelers 21
Chiefs 34, Chargers 26
49ers 28, Chargers 21
I'm late with my predictions, promise I haven't seen the score of tonight's game yet :-D.
Titans 19, Packers 17
Falcons 27, Bears 17
Eagles 26, Colts 14
Jets 20, Patriots 13
Commanders 31, Texans 19
Saints 24, Rams 14
Bills 31, Browns 20
Ravens 28, Panthers 10
Lions 29, Giants 13
Broncos 22, Raiders 16
Cowboys 28, Vikings 24
Bengals 28, Steelers 14
Chiefs 35, Chargers 21
49ers 26, Cardinals 20
Here's a look at where everyone's at in our competition. Obviously this is really oversimplified, and incomplete because some of us have a few forks left to do. Playoff odds are from 538, with the top 7 in each conference counted as incorrect forks as of today.
Green = not in playoff position
Red = in playoff position
NWI_Irish96
Lions (+20, 4%)
Jets (+20, 59%)
Browns (+20, 8%)
Texans (+20, .1%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Seahawks (+20, 76%)
Patriots (+15, 40%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Raiders (+15, 1%)
Commanders (+15, 37%)
Panthers (+15, 6%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Jaguars (+13, 3%)
Saints (+13, 5%)
Colts (+10, 28%)
Rams (+10, 6%)
Cardinals (+10, 10%)
Current total: 264
-60 for Jets and Seahawks = 204
Forks left: 1
Average playoff % = 17.7
jlam
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Texans (+20, .1%)
Jets (+20, 59%)
Giants (+20, 75%)
Bears (+20, 1%)
Lions (+20, 4%)
Raiders (+15, 1%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Seahawks (+15, 76%)
Panthers (+13, 6%)
Commanders (+13, 37%)
Saints (+13, 5%)
Cardinals (+13, 10%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Jaguars (+13, 3%)
Colts (+13, 28%)
Patriots (+13, 40%)
Chargers (+13, 40%)
Current total: 282
-90 for Jets, Giants, and Seahawks = 192
Forks left: 0
Average playoff % = 22.4
thspfc
Texans (+20, .1%)
Jaguars (+20, 3%)
Giants (+20, 75%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Bears (+20, 1%)
Lions (+20, 4%)
Seahawks (+20, 76%)
Patriots (+15, 40%)
Jets (+15, 59%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Panthers (+15, 6%)
Raiders (+13, 1%)
Saints (+13, 5%)
Cardinals (+13, 10%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Browns (+13, 8%)
Current total: 265
-90 for Jets, Giants, and Seahawks = 175
Forks left: 2
Average playoff % = 19.1
jayhawkco
Giants (+20, 75%)
Panthers (+20, 6%)
Seahawks (+20, 76%)
Jets (+20, 59%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Browns (+20, 8%)
Jaguars (+20, 3%)
Lions (+20, 4%)
Bears (+20, 1%)
Commanders (+20, 37%)
Cardinals (+15, 10%)
Cowboys (+15, 93%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Raiders (+15, 1%)
Patriots (+15, 40%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Texans (+13, .1%)
Saints (+13, 5%)
Current total: 314
-120 for Jets, Giants, Seahawks, and Cowboys = 194
Forks left: 0
Average playoff % = 24.2
webny99
Steelers (+20, 3%)
Browns (+20, 8%)
Jets (+20, 59%)
Patriots (+20, 40%)
Texans (+20, .1%)
Titans (+20, 93%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Giants (+20, 75%)
Commanders (+20, 37%)
Seahawks (+20, 76%)
Lions (+20, 4%)
Bears (+20, 1%)
Panthers (+15, 6%)
Packers (+13, 12%)
Buccaneers (+13, 83%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Jaguars (+13, 3%)
Raiders (+13, 1%)
Current total: 320
-150 for Jets, Giants, Seahawks, Titans, and Buccaneers = 170
Forks left: 0
Average playoff % = 28.7
CoreySamson
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Bears (+20, 1%)
Giants (+20, 75%)
Panthers (+20, 6%)
Jaguars (+20, 3%)
Current total: 100
-30 for Giants = 70
Forks left: 13? :-D
Average playoff % = 19.6
hobsini2
Jets (+20, 59%)
Texans (+20, .1%)
Jaguars (+20, 3%)
Steelers (+20, 3%)
Broncos (+20, 3%)
Commanders (+20, 37%)
Giants (+20, 75%)
Panthers (+20, 6%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Saints (+20, 5%)
Lions (+20, 4%)
Current total: 220
-60 for Jets and Giants = 160
Forks left: 7
Average playoff % = 18.9
Henry
Bears (+10, 1%)
Broncos (+10, 3%)
Browns (+10, 8%)
Jaguars (+10, 3%)
Lions (+10, 4%)
Panthers (+10, 6%)
Raiders (+10, 1%)
Rams (+10, 6%)
Saints (+10, 5%)
Steelers (+10, 3%)
Texans (+10, .1%)
Current total: 110
-0 for nobody (sure hope so :-D) = 110
Average playoff % = 3.6
Based off all that I think NWI_Irish_96 is the most likely winner right now. Assuming he doesn't blunder his last fork, I think I'm the only one that can realistically beat him, and I would need the Commanders to make the playoffs. Hobsini2 would have a shot, if he returns to this thread.
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2022, 09:24:08 PM
Here's a look at where everyone's at in our competition. Obviously this is really oversimplified, and incomplete because some of us have a few forks left to do. Playoff odds are from 538, with the top 7 in each conference counted as incorrect forks as of today.
...
Based off all that I think NWI_Irish_96 is the most likely winner right now. Assuming he doesn't blunder his last fork, I think I'm the only one that can realistically beat him, and I would need the Commanders to make the playoffs. Hobsini2 would have a shot, if he returns to this thread.
The Patriots are currently in the #7 seed in the AFC, but thanks for not counting them as -30. :D
I agree NWI_Irish_96 will probably have the fewest incorrect forks, but that doesn't necessarily mean win the competition when you factor in the varying point totals based on when they were forked.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 17, 2022, 05:10:36 PM
Bills home game vs Cleveland has been moved to Detroit due to expected mass quantities of snow.
The current band of snow coming off of Lake Erie seems to be parked almost directly over Orchard Park, with totals of at least 3 feet expected by the end of the day tomorrow, so moving the game was probably the right decision. (Meanwhile, 80 miles away, there's hardly a dusting.) The Bills also play the Lions on Thanksgiving, so they'll have two games in five days at Ford Field.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 16, 2022, 12:31:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-week-11-2022-nfl-season
I generally don't take major issue with team rankings, but I do this week. Eagles still at #1 is crazy, the Chiefs should probably be #1, the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime; starting the paragraph about the Vikings with "No matter how this season turns out..." proves that point. In short, I disagree with all of the top five for maybe the first time ever.
I disagree with your assessment about the Vikings/Bills game. Admittedly biased as a Vikings fan, but a lot of the fluky stuff goes away if the Cousins QB sneak goes one inch farther. I don't think it's unreasonable to have the one loss Vikings over the third place in the AFC East Bills.
If Cousins sneaks it in and the rest of the game plays out the same after that, it just proves the Vikings made the play in OT and the Bills did not.
Quote from: webny99 on November 18, 2022, 08:59:13 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 17, 2022, 05:10:36 PM
Bills home game vs Cleveland has been moved to Detroit due to expected mass quantities of snow.
The current band of snow coming off of Lake Erie seems to be parked almost directly over Orchard Park, with totals of at least 3 feet expected by the end of the day tomorrow, so moving the game was probably the right decision. (Meanwhile, 80 miles away, there's hardly a dusting.) The Bills also play the Lions on Thanksgiving, so they'll have two games in five days at Ford Field.
But don't take it from me:
https://twitter.com/BuffaloBills/status/1593650649329278976
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
I remember another Browns Bills game in Cleveland with similar conditions they played in. I think it was a 6-3 final.
Quote from: Henry on November 17, 2022, 10:41:57 AM
Needless to say, I'll fork these teams just to put them out of their misery:
Bears, Broncos, Browns, Jaguars, Lions, Panthers, Raiders, Rams, Saints, Steelers, Texans
Time to start living dangerously. I have four more teams from the NFC and three more from the AFC to fork, so let's add these teams to the mix:
Bengals, Cardinals, Chargers, Colts, Commanders, Falcons, Packers
Quote from: hobsini2 on November 18, 2022, 06:12:10 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
I remember another Browns Bills game in Cleveland with similar conditions they played in. I think it was a 6-3 final.
It would have been crazy if it was played today. There's more snow in the forecast for tomorrow, but it's supposed to be clearing up by game time. The issue isn't that they couldn't use the stadium, but that the fans, players, etc. would be trying to dig out and travel to the game before the roads are clear and while resources normally used for the game are still needed elsewhere.
Well, that's pretty much what I thought would happen with the Giants today. They can only win games one way. In all seven of their wins, they scored between 19 and 27 points, and gave up between 12 and 22. In five of the seven they scored between 19 and 24 and gave up between 16 and 20. Basically, they need to run the ball well, get big stops on defense, and not make major mistakes such as Daniel Jones picks. Today, 413 yards of offense - including Jones' 341 pass yards which is by far his season high - was not even close to enough to make up for 3 turnovers and a struggling defense.
Look at their remaining schedule. Dallas, Washington twice, Philly twice, Minnesota, Indy. I wouldn't be surprised if they go 2-5 the rest of the way. That would put them at 9-8, very much in jeopardy of missing the playoffs.
What's the future for Baker? He doesn't even look like a competent backup.
Cowboys look good so far, and hopefully they can keep control of the game so that I don't lose my mind over the late afternoon game for the 3rd week in a row.
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2022, 04:45:18 PM
Look at their remaining schedule. Dallas, Washington twice, Philly twice, Minnesota, Indy. I wouldn't be surprised if they go 2-5 the rest of the way. That would put them at 9-8, very much in jeopardy of missing the playoffs.
They're now a coin-flip, per FiveThirtyEight... and so are the Commanders, so the possibility of the entire NFC East making it is very much alive. Basically, there are no major Wild Card contenders in the NFC North or South (unless you count the Packers, but they'd probably have to win out), so it could happen if the Seahawks stumble. The success of the two East divisions is becoming a major storyline of this season, as all 8 teams are now above .500. The AFC East is a slugfest, with the Jets having a chance to move into 1st place with a win today, but instead falling to 4th place with a loss.
And, in other news, Dan Campbell has now tied Brian Daboll with 7 career wins as head coach!
Sheesh. That was for sure the best game any team has played this season. Total domination in all three phases, against a team that was tied for the best record in the league entering today.
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2022, 08:27:52 PM
Broncos 22, Raiders 16
Third time this season that I've predicted the correct score, but with the teams flipped.
Still a pretty good week overall at 10-2 so far.
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2022, 07:39:55 PM
Sheesh. That was for sure the best game any team has played this season. Total domination in all three phases, against a team that was tied for the best record in the league entering today.
The Cowboys really slammed the door and hammered the nails on last week's Vikings-Bills debate, as the Vikings now have a -2 point differential on the season.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2022, 08:22:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2022, 07:39:55 PM
Sheesh. That was for sure the best game any team has played this season. Total domination in all three phases, against a team that was tied for the best record in the league entering today.
The Cowboys really slammed the door and hammered the nails on last week's Vikings-Bills debate, as the Vikings now have a -2 point differential on the season.
Nah, I'll pull a reverse on this one and say that that game was more about the Cowboys than the Vikings :poke:
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
The Packers would send out a call for snow shovelers, several thousand would show up and have the stadium cleaned out in no time.
:nod:
Mike
Did the Vikings forget that they were supposed to play today? They were never seen on the field today.
Quote from: mgk920 on November 21, 2022, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
The Packers would send out a call for snow shovelers, several thousand would show up and have the stadium cleaned out in no time.
:nod:
Mike
There's a huge difference between the 6-18 inches of snow that might fall in Green Bay right before a game and the 5+ feet that Orchard Park got.
Patriots outlast the Jets 10-3 on a final-minute return by Marcus Jones. A great game for the defense, but horrible for the t offense on both teams.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 21, 2022, 07:19:45 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 21, 2022, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
The Packers would send out a call for snow shovelers, several thousand would show up and have the stadium cleaned out in no time.
:nod:
Mike
There's a huge difference between the 6-18 inches of snow that might fall in Green Bay right before a game and the 5+ feet that Orchard Park got.
+1. None of us in WI have ever seen that much snow at once.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 21, 2022, 07:22:13 AM
Patriots outlast the Jets 10-3 on a final-minute return by Marcus Jones. A great game for the defense, but horrible for the t offense on both teams.
Same can be said for Panthers-Ravens.
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2022, 07:48:41 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 21, 2022, 07:19:45 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 21, 2022, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
That would amazing to see a football game played in that! :-D
Can you wear snowshoes? There's probably no rule against it. ;)
The Packers would send out a call for snow shovelers, several thousand would show up and have the stadium cleaned out in no time.
:nod:
Mike
There's a huge difference between the 6-18 inches of snow that might fall in Green Bay right before a game and the 5+ feet that Orchard Park got.
+1. None of us in WI have ever seen that much snow at once.
Yep, lake effect is a different beast. The game never would have been moved for 1-2 feet. Just so happens that Orchard Park is right in the zone where early-season snow bands coming off Lake Erie tend to be at their worst (before the lake freezes over), and this time was no exception. I'm 80 miles away and didn't see so much as a snowflake all weekend, but that's life downwind of the Great Lakes in November.
I think it's safe to say that the Jets have a major quarterback problem. After throwing for 77 yards and doing nothing in the second half, Zach Wilson blew the easiest softball question ever when he was asked if he felt like he let the defense down and said no. You have to take accountability there, especially when your defense had such an incredible performance.
I disagree with the Jets being over-committed to Wilson and not giving Mike White a shot to win that game. Wilson can still be the starter the rest of the season even if you bench him there. It's just unfair to the rest of the team and the game is too important not to make a change when it's clearly not working.
We should do a takes-fest at the end of the season because I've been thumbing back through the thread from the Super Bowl on and there are some great ones...
Quote from: thspfc on May 14, 2022, 09:00:47 PM
... good news for Lions fans: ... they play the Packers the first Sunday of November. Green Bay has been shockingly bad that weekend (typically week 9). Haven't won since 2012, which for a franchise that has only missed the playoffs twice in that span, is pretty shocking.
This was an eerily accurate prediction, as the Lions did beat the Packers that weekend, setting off a 3-game win streak, and it was a low point of the Packers' season even though they're not as good as we expected.
Rodgers clearly hates the time change too.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 21, 2022, 02:41:23 AM
Did the Vikings forget that they were supposed to play today? They were never seen on the field today.
I'm glad that I was on a road trip up in thspfc's neck of the woods and didn't have to watch that atrocity.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 17, 2022, 10:52:31 AM
Titans over Packers
Vikings over Cowboys
Bears over Falcons
Bills over Browns
Eagles over Colts
Patriots over Jets
Saints over Rams
Lions over Giants
Ravens over Panthers
Commies over Texans
Raiders over Broncos
Bengals over Steelers
Chiefs over Chargers
49ers over Cardinals
12-2 this week. Not too shabby. My Vikings pick was probably more homer than reason and then I missed the Bears/Falcons as I don't understand how Fields can be so good but the Bears so bad. (I suppose when you trade away all your stud defenders, that helps.)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 22, 2022, 09:43:42 AM
I missed the Bears/Falcons as I don't understand how Fields can be so good but the Bears so bad. (I suppose when you trade away all your stud defenders, that helps.)
However, it is arguably the best thing possible for the Bears organization to be losing games while Fields develops, and he has shown a lot in the last month plus. The Bears have become the anti-Broncos, with a good offense that isn't quite good enough to carry a really bad defense. Meanwhile I saw (and confirmed) an insane stat that the Broncos would be 9-1 if they had scored 19 points in regulation in every game. 9-1 with 19 PPG! Both parts of that stat are un-be-lieve-able. The fact that they are actually only 3-7 has to be one of the biggest underachievements in NFL history.
Quote from: webny99 on November 22, 2022, 10:11:47 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 22, 2022, 09:43:42 AM
I missed the Bears/Falcons as I don't understand how Fields can be so good but the Bears so bad. (I suppose when you trade away all your stud defenders, that helps.)
However, it is arguably the best thing possible for the Bears organization to be losing games while Fields develops, and he has shown a lot in the last month plus. The Bears have become the anti-Broncos, with a good offense that isn't quite good enough to carry a really bad defense. Meanwhile I saw (and confirmed) an insane stat that the Broncos would be 9-1 if they had scored 19 points in regulation in every game. 9-1 with 19 PPG! Both parts of that stat are un-be-lieve-able. The fact that they are actually only 3-7 has to be one of the biggest underachievements in NFL history.
The offensive line is terrible and the receivers are mediocre at best. Fields isn't running for 100+ yards per game by design. He's doing it because they can't protect him long enough for these receivers to get open. They're going to have a ton of cap space and great draft position but even that may not be enough to fill all the holes this team has.
Plus, as you noted, they traded away their two best defensive players.
It may not be enough right away, but it doesn't have to be immediate. As long as Fields is the guy and you've got the right people making the decisions and draft picks, it's OK if it's a few years before they're true contenders, much like the 2017-2019 Bills.
On the draft note, I will add that there are four teams with top-10 draft position that no longer hold their own pick.
5. Broncos > Seahawks
6. Rams > Lions
7. Browns > Texans
10. Saints > Eagles
Of those four recipients, it's likely that only the Texans' own pick will be higher than the pick they received in the trade. Brutal for the Broncos, Rams, and Saints, who are not only bad this season, but barring any more trades are going to watch better teams pick in their spot next April.
I've seen enough to say the Broncos lost their trade.
Rams obviously "won" the Stafford trade because they won the Super Bowl, but it was decent for the Lions, and the Rams' terrible season certainly helps.
The Saints trade for Olave is a shrug emoji. He's great, possibly the best receiver in the class, but they haven't been a good team, and it's pretty rough to trade a first-round pick to a Super Bowl contender.
12-2 in week 11 brings me to 29-12 (71%) over the last three weeks, compared to 18-22 (45%) over the previous three before that.
Bills 37, Lions 27
Cowboys 34, Giants 21
Vikings 20, Patriots 16
Dolphins 31, Texans 20
Titans 26, Bengals 14
Broncos 20, Panthers 10
Jets 27, Bears 20
Commanders 24, Falcons 17
Buccaneers 28, Browns 14
Ravens 30, Jaguars 13
Raiders 23, Seahawks 17
Chargers 25, Cardinals 23
49ers 28, Saints 20
Chiefs 23, Rams 13
Eagles 30, Packers 17
Colts 17, Steelers 16
It'll be interesting to see how the Bills handle the four-day turnaround as they'll be playing in Detroit for the second game in a row. Has it ever happened before, where one team plays consecutive games in the same stadium as both the home and visiting sides? (New York and L.A. don't count.)
Quote from: Henry on November 23, 2022, 10:11:33 AM
It'll be interesting to see how the Bills handle the four-day turnaround as they'll be playing in Detroit for the second game in a row. Has it ever happened before, where one team plays consecutive games in the same stadium as both the home and visiting sides? (New York and L.A. don't count.)
Not sure about the NFL, but last year Oklahoma played "at" Tulane then home against some FCS cupcake, with both those games being at Oklahoma due to Hurricane Whichever-one-it-was-that-year.
The Bills actually used the visitors sideline and locker room against the Browns even though they were the "home" team.
There was some goodwill between the two teams on Twitter (https://tinyurl.com/ycy5p9sa) as the Bills sent a $20k donation to the Lions foundation as a thank you, but I'm sure that will end at 12:30 tomorrow. :D
Did the Bills even fly back to Buffalo or did they just stay in Detroit?
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 23, 2022, 10:49:16 AM
Did the Bills even fly back to Buffalo or did they just stay in Detroit?
They did fly back, probably because it's such a short flight, only about 40 minutes.
Vikings over Patriots
Bills over Lions
Cowboys over Giants
Ravens over Jaguars
Bucs over Browns
Titans over Bengals
Dolphins over Texans
Jets over Bears
Falcons over Commies
Broncos over Panthers
Chargers over Cardinals
Seahawks over Raiders
Chiefs over Rams
49ers over Saints
Packers over Eagles
Colts over Steelers
I went 10-4 last week. As I started late, I won't post my record
Bills 29, Lions 24
Giants 21, Cowboys 31
Patriots 21, Vikings 28
Bears 13, Jets 21
Bengals 23, Titans 27
Falcons 24, Commanders 27
Broncos 16, Panthers 13
Texans 19, Dolphins 35
Buccaneers 30, Browns 23
Ravens 26, Jaguars 21
Raiders 22, Seahawks 26
Chargers 28, Cardinals 20
Rams 14, Chiefs 33
Saints 17, 49ers 26
Packers 24, Eagles 26
Steelers 19, Colts 21
Only 7-7 last week.
Bills
Cowboys
Vikings
Broncos
Bucs
Ravens
Dolphins
Jets
Bengals
Commanders
Chargers
Seahawks
Chiefs
Niners
Eagles
Colts
Can't say the first half wasn't frustrating, but the quality difference between the teams really showed in the second. Dallas winning despite 11 penalties and being -2 in turnovers kind of encapsulates the two teams: the Cowboys are far more talented but more mistake prone, while the Giants are less talented but more disciplined.
If 538 is to be believed, the Cowboys are now just a hair behind the Chiefs in "elo" and Super Bowl chances, while the Giants have dropped below 50/50 to make the playoffs.
One thing I really didn't like was the Cowboys decision to go for it on 4th and 2 at their own 40 on their first drive of the game. I don't care about analytics on that one: don't give an inferior team a golden chance to take the lead with a short field. Especially when all you stand to gain is a first down in minus territory in the first quarter.
I was waiting for the Bills to blow another one, but they got the penalties and clock mismanagement they needed.
Just glad the Vikings got a win to flush that horrific performance on Sunday. 10 days of quiet now.
I haven't caught up yet on the end of Pats-Vikings but was pleasantly surprised with the result.
There's an interesting round-robin going on between Thanksgiving teams, as the Giants/Lions and Cowboys/Vikings each played last week, while the Bills and Pats play next Thursday.
The Raiders' 576 yards of offense today is the most in a game since the Buccaneers' 588 against the Lions in 2020. I correctly predicted the upset, but who knew it would be that high-scoring. My Chargers/Cardinals prediction was only a point off.
On the other hand, there's the Broncos, who flat stink. There's 0 reason that Hackett should not be fired tomorrow. I'll start thinking about that paragraph :-/
I've been following 538's page each week just to get a sense of the playoff picture. They have the Browns at an elo of 1540, 11th-highest in the league, above the Patriots, Commanders, Seahawks, Chargers, Jets, and Giants. That, uh, raises some questions. It's probably accounting for how Watson is now their starting QB, but still.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 08:16:16 PM
On the other hand, there's the Broncos, who flat stink. There's 0 reason that Hackett should not be fired tomorrow. I'll start thinking about that paragraph :-/
Brutal. Losing by 13 to the Panthers who have been a get-right opponent for literally everyone outside their division is a new low. Their average of 14 points per game is on pace to be the lowest by any team this century.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 08:16:16 PM
I've been following 538's page each week just to get a sense of the playoff picture. They have the Browns at an elo of 1540, 11th-highest in the league, above the Patriots, Commanders, Seahawks, Chargers, Jets, and Giants. That, uh, raises some questions. It's probably accounting for how Watson is now their starting QB, but still.
It may be accounting for Watson now, but it wasn't while Brissett was the starter. In desktop view, there's a column called "Current QB Adj" where you can see how many points are being adjusted for an injured or temporary starter. Right now, the Commanders, Rams, and Bears are the only 3 teams with an adjustment, so my guess is it's already been updated for Watson's return.
The Browns have been competitive in all but two games this season and have some brutal close losses. We don't need to go down the path of "they could have won games X, Y, and Z", but suffice to say that they are better than their record, especially on offense (although the defense has been brutal at times), and Brissett has been good enough that I'm not assuming Watson will be an immediate massive upgrade. Even so, with 7 losses they'd have to win out to make the playoffs.
... speaking of the playoff picture, here's the 5 teams with odds of 1% or less right now:
-Cardinals
-Broncos
-Steelers
-Bears
-Texans
A somewhat surprising list, with the defending champs not far behind at 3% and the Jaguars at 4%, and the remaining 25 teams are all above 5%.
As for locks, I'd put five teams in each conference: the current division leaders (of which the Bucs are the most tenuous), plus the Bills and Cowboys. For the remaining two AFC wild cards, the Bengals are in decent position, but they will likely have to win 3 of 6 against a brutal schedule. The Chargers, Jets, and Patriots are the main contenders for the final spot, and 2 of those 3 could make it if the Bengals or someone else stumbles. For the remaining two NFC wild cards, the entire NFC East is now in playoff position with the Giants and Commanders holding those spots right now, and the Seahawks are right there if one of those teams slips.
That leaves the Colts (who could benefit from a tie scenario like the one that cost them last year), Raiders, and Browns as long shots in the AFC, and the Lions and Packers as long shots in the NFC, plus the rest of the NFC South as a long shot to win the division.
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
the entire NFC East is now in playoff position
What hurts the chances of the entire division making it is that the Giants and Commies, the bottom two, still have to play each other twice. If one team sweeps those games it pretty much guarantees that the loser will miss out.
It's been interesting to watch the Commies slowly catch up to the Giants over the last month or so. I think their matchups next week and three weeks from now will have massive long-term consequences in terms of how those teams approach the draft and free agency. 11-6 and in the playoffs compared to 9-8 and out of them is a huge difference to players, coaches, GMs, fans, and owners.
Next week's slate of games looks awesome. Bills/Patriots, Jets/Vikings, Titans/Eagles, Commanders/Giants, Dolphins/49ers, Chargers/Raiders, Chiefs/Bengals, and Saints/Buccaneers.
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
... speaking of the playoff picture, here's the 5 teams with odds of 1% or less right now:
-Cardinals
-Broncos
-Steelers
-Bears
-Texans
I believe my Texans have already been mathematically eliminated from the playoff picture; they can still win another game or two but we have the highest chance of getting the top pick for the first time in eight years. Lovie Smith was a bad hire for a head coach; he was better off as a DC. David Culley had the ship steered in a better direction last year.
Broncos, Texans, Rams and Packers are done. Bengals, Browns and Commanders suddenly have reason for hope. And Buccaneers, Ravens and Titans fans are losing faith in their teams again.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
I think every team still has a shot to make the playoffs. If everything plays out perfectly, of course.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
the entire NFC East is now in playoff position
What hurts the chances of the entire division making it is that the Giants and Commies, the bottom two, still have to play each other twice. If one team sweeps those games it pretty much guarantees that the loser will miss out.
....
The scheduling is interesting in that respect. Washington's next two games are both against the Giants (road game this coming Sunday, home game two weeks later, with the bye week in between), while the Giants have already had their bye week and have a home game against Philadelphia sandwiched in between. The Giants' schedule makes the prospect of a Washington sweep that much more interesting in terms of playoff ramifications.
That schedule prompts me to wonder, BTW, how often in the modern era (let's say since 1960) an NFL team has played the same opponent two games in a row in the regular season, even recognizing that the bye week arguably distinguishes it slightly.
Playoff hopes are gone for the Packers. Why not start Love, even if Rodgers is healthy enough? They already need to decide whether to pick up his 5th year option this offseason. He needs to play, continuing to sit offers little benefit.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2022, 10:19:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
the entire NFC East is now in playoff position
What hurts the chances of the entire division making it is that the Giants and Commies, the bottom two, still have to play each other twice. If one team sweeps those games it pretty much guarantees that the loser will miss out.
....
The scheduling is interesting in that respect. Washington's next two games are both against the Giants (road game this coming Sunday, home game two weeks later, with the bye week in between), while the Giants have already had their bye week and have a home game against Philadelphia sandwiched in between. The Giants' schedule makes the prospect of a Washington sweep that much more interesting in terms of playoff ramifications.
That schedule prompts me to wonder, BTW, how often in the modern era (let's say since 1960) an NFL team has played the same opponent two games in a row in the regular season, even recognizing that the bye week arguably distinguishes it slightly.
Ravens and Browns last year. FWIW, they split those games one each.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2022, 10:22:32 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2022, 10:19:36 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
the entire NFC East is now in playoff position
What hurts the chances of the entire division making it is that the Giants and Commies, the bottom two, still have to play each other twice. If one team sweeps those games it pretty much guarantees that the loser will miss out.
....
The scheduling is interesting in that respect. Washington's next two games are both against the Giants (road game this coming Sunday, home game two weeks later, with the bye week in between), while the Giants have already had their bye week and have a home game against Philadelphia sandwiched in between. The Giants' schedule makes the prospect of a Washington sweep that much more interesting in terms of playoff ramifications.
That schedule prompts me to wonder, BTW, how often in the modern era (let's say since 1960) an NFL team has played the same opponent two games in a row in the regular season, even recognizing that the bye week arguably distinguishes it slightly.
Ravens and Browns last year. FWIW, they split those games one each.
I see the 1991 Chargers and Seahawks also had two games in a row against each other with both terms' bye week in between (recall Seattle was in the AFC West then).
Edited to add: CBS reports the Jets and Dolphins were scheduled to do the same in 2020 (again with the bye week intervening) until COVID-related issues forced in-season schedule changes.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2022, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
It would be a catastrophic cap hit if Rodgers was released next year.
Quote from: Big John on November 28, 2022, 10:44:21 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2022, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
It would be a catastrophic cap hit if Rodgers was released next year.
What's the alternative? Grasp at straws with an aging Rodgers while Love sits for a 4th year? That would almost certainly mean cutting Love in either 2024 or 2025, as they wouldn't give him a large QB second contract unless they take his 5th year and he terrorizes the league in 2024.
They have to see what Love's got. The longer they wait the worse the situation will become and the longer it will be before they can rebuild. If that means trading or cutting Rodgers then so be it.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2022, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2022, 09:46:45 PM
the entire NFC East is now in playoff position
What hurts the chances of the entire division making it is that the Giants and Commies, the bottom two, still have to play each other twice. If one team sweeps those games it pretty much guarantees that the loser will miss out.
It's been interesting to watch the Commies slowly catch up to the Giants over the last month or so. I think their matchups next week and three weeks from now will have massive long-term consequences in terms of how those teams approach the draft and free agency. 11-6 and in the playoffs compared to 9-8 and out of them is a huge difference to players, coaches, GMs, fans, and owners.
FWIW, I like the Commanders' chances a lot better as long as they at least split with the Giants. Having already played both games against the Eagles helps, but it's not just the schedule. I think they're a much better team with higher upside. The Giants are more consistent, but they're still rebuilding and very limited on offense especially when Barkley doesn't get going. Their season high in points is 27, while the Commanders were just the second team all season to put up 30 on the now 10-1 Eagles. So, I think a split would be a win for the Giants.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2022, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
If Rodgers retires, gets traded, or cut (teams would still trade decent draft pick or two so why cut AR?) the Packers take a huge cap hit in 2023. Packers have to hope Rodgers to create cap space is willing to renegotiate his deal. Otherwise trading Love might be a path the Packers need to look at. As for 2022 it's best Rodgers sits and gets healthy, he'll likely play vs Bears if medically cleared and as Packers mathematically could make the playoffs. But after that should be playing Love to gain leverage for trading Love to get a better pick, or to obtain any sort of leverage back at Rodgers if he goes the Favre offseason path. But the head coach and GM need to make their decision and stick with it, they run the team and need to act like it.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 03:22:32 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2022, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
If Rodgers retires, gets traded, or cut (teams would still trade decent draft pick or two so why cut AR?) the Packers take a huge cap hit in 2023. Packers have to hope Rodgers to create cap space is willing to renegotiate his deal. Otherwise trading Love might be a path the Packers need to look at. As for 2022 it's best Rodgers sits and gets healthy, he'll likely play vs Bears if medically cleared and as Packers mathematically could make the playoffs. But after that should be playing Love to gain leverage for trading Love to get a better pick, or to obtain any sort of leverage back at Rodgers if he goes the Favre offseason path. But the head coach and GM need to make their decision and stick with it, they run the team and need to act like it.
To trade Love, someone has to want him.
Given that they invested a first rounder on Jordan Love, I think it makes sense to see what you have with him for the rest of the season, and if you like it, then trade Rodgers.
Heh. The Commanders might decide Rodgers should be next up in the "find a veteran to try to supersede Heinicke" sweepstakes.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 28, 2022, 03:43:10 PM
To trade Love, someone has to want him.
Is this supposed to mean something outside the context of the NFL?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 28, 2022, 03:43:10 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 03:22:32 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2022, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 28, 2022, 12:10:03 AM
Aaron Rodgers could be done in the NFL after injury?
Rodgers believes he can play in next game. Will say Love by having a couple decent series vs Eagles has made the discussion for should they be sitting Rodgers, to get him healthy, a lot more interesting now. With the ribs injury added on it makes in almost certain IMHO when Packers are mathematically eliminated that Love win be starting rest of games for the season.
Rodgers has a contract through 2026. I'm not a salary cap expert, so I don't know if him retiring saves them more cap space compared to releasing him.
If retirement saves more cap space, then maybe throw him out there the rest of the season with backup offensive linemen to perhaps encourage him to choose retirement.
If Rodgers retires, gets traded, or cut (teams would still trade decent draft pick or two so why cut AR?) the Packers take a huge cap hit in 2023. Packers have to hope Rodgers to create cap space is willing to renegotiate his deal. Otherwise trading Love might be a path the Packers need to look at. As for 2022 it's best Rodgers sits and gets healthy, he'll likely play vs Bears if medically cleared and as Packers mathematically could make the playoffs. But after that should be playing Love to gain leverage for trading Love to get a better pick, or to obtain any sort of leverage back at Rodgers if he goes the Favre offseason path. But the head coach and GM need to make their decision and stick with it, they run the team and need to act like it.
To trade Love, someone has to want him.
There were teams willing to trade up to a 2nd round pick last offseason, up to you if you believe those stories and sources. But you'll have teams like the Colts and others that'll have interest I'm guessing. If Love had a good December, he could nab a decent pick in return. There are two top level QB's this upcoming draft, but teams will take chances on guys on players they see the potential in. If Love has a good December many would rather take a chance with him than a draft pick as that'll do well to erase concerns had about Love that the Chiefs game and other times Love entered games in 2021 caused.
Not saying Love goes to these teams. But these teams appear to have, or could have, uncertain QB situations going into 2023.
Pats, Texans, Commanders, Lions, Bucs, Falcons, Saints, Panthers Seahawks, Jets, Raiders, 49ers, and Broncos
Some like the Jets, Pats I listed because current young qb causing doubt. Teams like them will kick the tires even if they stay with what they have. Broncos (buyer's remorse on Wilson) or Raiders(sticking with Carr as long as they have) might try and find move on from them. The NFC South outside of Brady who is defying father time has mediocre starting qb's, and when Brady does retire or father time catches makes it the whole division have lackluster QBs.
Teams like the 49ers might feel the QB is the only thing holding them back. 49ers tried to move on from Jimmy G, and with Trey Lances injury will they stay committed to him?
We can debate the actual return the Packers trading Love or Rodgers could get them, but there will be interest in whichever QB they'd try and trade
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 04:12:37 PM
Teams like the 49ers might feel the QB is the only thing holding them back. 49ers tried to move on from Jimmy G, and with Trey Lances injury will they stay committed to him?
First off, Garoppolo is not holding the 49ers back. He's playing well. If anything, their issue is the awkward situation associated with his replacement.
What even makes you think Love is an attractive target for QB-needy teams? He's played 1 real game, and didn't look too good. Even if he starts the rest of this season and plays well, I doubt anyone would give up more than a 3rd round pick for him. Everyone except maybe Carolina and Houston would take their current QB over Love without question.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2022, 05:08:44 PM
What even makes you think Love is an attractive target for QB-needy teams? He's played 1 real game, and didn't look too good. Even if he starts the rest of this season and plays well, I doubt anyone would give up more than a 3rd round pick for him. Everyone except maybe Carolina and Houston would take their current QB over Love without question.
That's why I posted above that someone would have to want him. I could easily see him getting released and clearing waivers. The game he started, he basically looked as good at QB as Kendall Hinton.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2022, 05:08:44 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 28, 2022, 04:12:37 PM
Teams like the 49ers might feel the QB is the only thing holding them back. 49ers tried to move on from Jimmy G, and with Trey Lances injury will they stay committed to him?
First off, Garoppolo is not holding the 49ers back. He's playing well. If anything, their issue is the awkward situation associated with his replacement.
What even makes you think Love is an attractive target for QB-needy teams? He's played 1 real game, and didn't look too good. Even if he starts the rest of this season and plays well, I doubt anyone would give up more than a 3rd round pick for him. Everyone except maybe Carolina and Houston would take their current QB over Love without question.
Like I said "Teams like the 49ers might feel", they obviously weren't thinking Jimmy G was the guy to get them there as they were giving the job to Lance only to have to give it back to Jimmy G because of injury. My own opinion is Jimmy is a very capable NFL QB in the line of of guys like Alex Smith.....meaning he's plenty good enough to leading solid teams but when it comes to leading teams to a Superbowl then maybe not.
Love is 24 years old. He's athletic and has a good NFL arm and has had the opportunity to sit and learn behind a 1st ballot HOF qb. Listening on WDUZ and WNFL and their national shows in Green Bay teams like the Browns were offering up to a 2nd or 3rd round pick for Love before they traded for Watson last offseason (your choice again if you believe these rumors or if this was all internet gossip). Last year vs KC he looked like crap, not going to argue that, but also consider what offseason training time he has as well due to leagues Covid restrictions. This year the Packers and Aaron Rodgers have been raving about the leaps Love took from last season to this year. And when Love has gotten into games this year he looks like a capable NFL QB this time around. If the Packers were to sit Rodgers after the Bears game or when Packers are mathematically eliminated if Love was in those 3 or 4 games to appear and strengthen the belief he can be a good to great starter then is vary plausible a team could come to the Packers trying to trade for him, or the Packers if they could make things work with the cap they could trade Rodgers and get good value for him as well.
And when I listed possible teams with QB issues.....yes it's very possible many of them may stick with what they have but name me a team that I listed that is perfectly happy with who they have long term. The Falcons would like to do better than Mariota, the Saints had two retreads as their starters, whoever the Panthers play this season at QB seems to always be the wrong choice. Doesn't mean they'd be interested in Love, but as stated means they are likely to be looking and that creates leverage. If Love was to start and have success to finish this year then scouting departments get to debate when it's best to go with 21 and 22 year old college qb's vs a 24 year old QB that has NFL footage. IF Love was to repeat 2021 again, then you win the argument......but if Love plays well the potential he has get some teams at least making calls to 1265 to gauge interest.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on November 30, 2022, 10:56:25 AM
My own opinion is Jimmy is a very capable NFL QB in the line of of guys like Alex Smith.....meaning he's plenty good enough to leading solid teams but when it comes to leading teams to a Superbowl then maybe not.
It's hard not to mention that Garoppolo
has led his team to a Super Bowl, as well as a close loss in the NFC title game. Now, the team was heavily reliant on the rushing game and defense for both of those playoff runs. But still.
QuoteLove is 24 years old. He's athletic and has a good NFL arm and has had the opportunity to sit and learn behind a 1st ballot HOF qb.
Whatever happened in college, whatever the scouts saw, has no importance anymore. NFL is a different game. It's been 3 years and he's played one game. We know nothing.
QuoteFalcons would like to do better than Mariota, the Saints had two retreads as their starters, whoever the Panthers play this season at QB seems to always be the wrong choice. Doesn't mean they'd be interested in Love, but as stated means they are likely to be looking and that creates leverage.
:confused: If they're not interested then they're not going to pursue him.
QuoteIf Love was to start and have success to finish this year then scouting departments get to debate when it's best to go with 21 and 22 year old college qb's vs a 24 year old QB that has NFL footage. IF Love was to repeat 2021 again, then you win the argument......but if Love plays well the potential he has get some teams at least making calls to 1265 to gauge interest.
Why not just keep him then? Rodgers is not Rodgers anymore. He's further from his peak than Brady is from his.
8-8 last week. Gross.
Bills over Patriots
Jaguars over Lions
Vikings over Jets
Falcons over Steelers
Packers over Bears
Commies over Giants
Titans over Eagles
Ravens over Broncos
Browns over Texans
Seahawks over Rams
Niners over Dolphins
Chiefs over Bengals
Raiders over Chargers
Bucs over Saints
Another decent week at 11-5 despite many upsets. Somehow I've correctly predicted the amount of points the Chargers scored in 3 of the last 4 weeks.
Patriots 20, Bills 19
Bears 27, Packers 17
Falcons 22, Steelers 19
Vikings 31, Jets 24
Jaguars 30, Lions 27
Eagles 26, Titans 17
Texans 28, Browns 21
Commanders 29, Giants 10
Ravens 20, Broncos 14
49ers 28, Dolphins 17
Seahawks 23, Rams 16
Chargers 24, Raiders 21
Chiefs 28, Bengals 13
Cowboys 28, Colts 10
Buccaneers 23, Saints 13
Another 11-5 week
Bills
Steelers
Ravens
Packers
Lions
Browns
Vikings
Giants
Eagles
Seahawks
Dolphins
Bengals
Chargers
Cowboys
Bucs
Quote from: thspfc on November 17, 2022, 09:24:08 PM
Here's a look at where everyone's at in our competition. Obviously this is really oversimplified, and incomplete because some of us have a few forks left to do. Playoff odds are from 538, with the top 7 in each conference counted as incorrect forks as of today.
Green = not in playoff position
Red = in playoff position
NWI_Irish96
Lions (+20, 4%)
Jets (+20, 59%)
Browns (+20, 8%)
Texans (+20, .1%)
Falcons (+20, 13%)
Seahawks (+20, 76%)
Patriots (+15, 40%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Raiders (+15, 1%)
Commanders (+15, 37%)
Panthers (+15, 6%)
Broncos (+13, 3%)
Jaguars (+13, 3%)
Saints (+13, 5%)
Colts (+10, 28%)
Rams (+10, 6%)
Cardinals (+10, 10%)
Current total: 264
-60 for Jets and Seahawks = 204
Forks left: 1
Average playoff % = 17.7
Based off all that I think NWI_Irish_96 is the most likely winner right now. Assuming he doesn't blunder his last fork, I think I'm the only one that can realistically beat him, and I would need the Commanders to make the playoffs. Hobsini2 would have a shot, if he returns to this thread.
Didn't realize I hadn't forked the Bears yet, so that's my last one. If I had one more, I'd fork the Packers also.
Once again another 11-5 week.
Bills 24, Patriots 14
Steelers 23, Falcons 18
Broncos 16, Ravens 23
Packers 28, Bears 27
Jaguars 28, Lions 30
Browns 27, Texans 20
Jets 19, Vikings 24
Commanders 26, Giants 21
Titans 22, Eagles 27
Seahawks 29, Rams 17
Dolphins 26, 49ers 24
Chiefs 31, Bengals 28
Chargers 23, Raiders 26
Colts 20, Cowboys 30
Saints 21, Buccaneers 23
Not feeling very confident about tonight, hope I'm wrong.
I was right. We suck.
The torch has been passed....in the AFC East, from the Patriots to the Bills.
Fire Matt Patrica
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 02, 2022, 02:06:46 PM
Fire Matt Patrica
Or at least get an actual offensive coordinator in that role. As much as I love BB, it makes no sense why he is set on employing old hands and relatives in such key roles, especially with mediocre (for them) results.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 02, 2022, 02:14:05 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 02, 2022, 02:06:46 PM
Fire Matt Patrica
Or at least get an actual offensive coordinator in that role. As much as I love BB, it makes no sense why he is set on employing old hands and relatives in such key roles, especially with mediocre (for them) results.
Honestly his son's defense has been pretty good. Not perfect, but good. The offense though...
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 02, 2022, 02:06:46 PM
Fire Matt Patrica
" Hire wide receivers" is more like it. Belichick is intent on continuing his strategy of picking up outcasted free agent pass catchers for pennies on the dollar, which worked with Brady at QB, but not anymore.
The popular theory is he's just waiting for McDaniels to be inevitably fired and bring him back as the OC.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 02, 2022, 04:51:11 PM
The popular theory is he's just waiting for McDaniels to be inevitably fired and bring him back as the OC.
I can see that being his strategy.
Not like any coaches off the Bill Belichick coaching tree have done anything at all.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on December 02, 2022, 05:15:14 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 02, 2022, 04:51:11 PM
The popular theory is he's just waiting for McDaniels to be inevitably fired and bring him back as the OC.
I can see that being his strategy.
Not like any coaches off the Bill Belichick coaching tree have done anything at all.
That's not entirely true. They've been hired by desperate, snakebit teams, try to use the Patriot Way that doesn't translate to other teams, get fired, and then come back to the mother ship, where they prbiably should have stayed
Mike Vrabel is a big exception to that.
And I think McDaniels is safe for at least another year with the Raiders. They've had a chance to win all but one game even though it was a disastrous start record-wise.
Quote from: webny99 on December 02, 2022, 06:44:13 PM
And I think McDaniels is safe for at least another year with the Raiders. They've had a chance to win all but one game even though it was a disastrous start record-wise.
I expect he'll be around another year, but the Raiders are headed for a major rebuild and the question is if McDaniels is the guy you want to lead them through that. It doesn't help that their two 2020 first rounders are already off the roster due to being morons.
Quote from: webny99 on December 02, 2022, 06:44:13 PM
Mike Vrabel is a big exception to that.
Vrabel is doing very well, but he technically wasn't a coach under Belichick (although undoubtedly benefiting from him as a coach).
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 03, 2022, 07:04:37 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 02, 2022, 06:44:13 PM
Mike Vrabel is a big exception to that.
Vrabel is doing very well, but he technically wasn't a coach under Belichick (although undoubtedly benefiting from him as a coach).
You're right, I guess I was thinking of him as being from the Belichick "tree" because of his time in Houston under Bill O'Brien.
With their win today at the Bears, the Packers now have to most franchise wins in the NFL (787).
:wow:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on December 04, 2022, 05:58:16 PM
With their win today at the Bears, the Packers now have to most franchise wins in the NFL (787).
:wow:
Mike
A record the Bers held for over a century.
Jimmy Garoppolo out for the season with a broken foot
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 04, 2022, 08:16:42 PM
Jimmy Garoppolo out for the season with a broken foot
Another year, another injury. :no:
On a more positive note, the Bengals have made it three straight wins over the Chiefs, winning 27-24. Joe Burrow 3-0 over Patrick Mahomes II. :clap:
I wonder if the tie game between the Giants and Commanders could possibly help
both teams?
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Quote from: amroad17 on December 04, 2022, 08:32:09 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 04, 2022, 08:16:42 PM
Jimmy Garoppolo out for the season with a broken foot
Another year, another injury. :no:
Further complicating the Garoppolo/Lance situation. San Fran looked great today, forcing 4 turnovers and more than doubling the Dolphins in time of possession en route to ending Miami's 5 game win streak. They should still win the division, but it's hard to figure them going deep in the playoffs with their 3rd string QB.
Quote
I wonder if the tie game between the Giants and Commanders could possibly help both teams?
All it really does is push the chips down the road to week 15. Giants play Philly next week and the Commies are on bye, so it's likely both teams will be 7-5-1.
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Quote
I wonder if the tie game between the Giants and Commanders could possibly help both teams?
All it really does is push the chips down the road to week 15. Giants play Philly next week and the Commies are on bye, so it's likely both teams will be 7-5-1.
Generally, it's a 50/50 shot if it helps or hurts. If both teams are in the running for the 7th seed, they will need to look at the other matchup between both teams, in 2 weeks, to determine who has the head to head advantage.
Since the Conference generally sucks from seeds 9 on down, the tie may not be overly damaging if they can win a few more games each.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Quote
I wonder if the tie game between the Giants and Commanders could possibly help both teams?
All it really does is push the chips down the road to week 15. Giants play Philly next week and the Commies are on bye, so it's likely both teams will be 7-5-1.
Generally, it's a 50/50 shot if it helps or hurts. If both teams are in the running for the 7th seed, they will need to look at the other matchup between both teams, in 2 weeks, to determine who has the head to head advantage.
Since the Conference generally sucks from seeds 9 on down, the tie may not be overly damaging if they can win a few more games each.
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup,
but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 04, 2022, 08:32:09 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 04, 2022, 08:16:42 PM
Jimmy Garoppolo out for the season with a broken foot
Another year, another injury. :no:
Further complicating the Garoppolo/Lance situation. San Fran looked great today, forcing 4 turnovers and more than doubling the Dolphins in time of possession en route to ending Miami's 5 game win streak. They should still win the division, but it's hard to figure them going deep in the playoffs with their 3rd string QB.
Brutal. Purdy actually played OK, but their season becomes a lot more unpredictable now.
As long as the 49ers can still win the West, the NFC playoff picture is really starting to take shape. It's very likely the Eagles are the #1 seed and the Vikings are the #2 seed. Eagles will have to keep winning to hold off the Cowboys, but the Vikings are unlikely to fall from #2 and even less so with the Jimmy G injury. 49ers are the likely #3 seed, and the Bucs (or whoever wins the South) will be the #4 seed. Cowboys will likely be the #5 seed and the final wild cards will be Seahawks, Giants, and/or Commanders (2 of those 3) unless the Lions somehow get into the mix. So, it's early, but not too early to look at potential playoff matchups and they should be favorable for the Vikings, 49ers, and Cowboys (especially if the Bucs don't win the South).
Meanwhile, the AFC is much more in flux. The Raiders are going to be last year's Dolphins, where they're probably in too big a hole to make it, but they're going to keep winning and make those of us who forked them sweat until the last week or so.
The Texans and Bears were officially eliminated today, so that's money in the bank for those of us who forked them.
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Quote
I wonder if the tie game between the Giants and Commanders could possibly help both teams?
All it really does is push the chips down the road to week 15. Giants play Philly next week and the Commies are on bye, so it's likely both teams will be 7-5-1.
Generally, it's a 50/50 shot if it helps or hurts. If both teams are in the running for the 7th seed, they will need to look at the other matchup between both teams, in 2 weeks, to determine who has the head to head advantage.
Since the Conference generally sucks from seeds 9 on down, the tie may not be overly damaging if they can win a few more games each.
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
Season's first fifty burger in Dallas.
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 11:29:25 PM
Season's first fifty burger in Dallas.
Also a Scorigami, is 54-19
Vikings can't put a team away when they have them on the ropes, nor can anyone else put them away when they're on the ropes.
But the Vikings finish the clean sweep of the AFC East with the win over the Jets today.
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 04, 2022, 11:39:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 11:29:25 PM
Season's first fifty burger in Dallas.
Also a Scorigami, is 54-19
What the hell happened in that 4th quarter? Indianapolis misses a 2-point conversion to tie it at 21 with 3:49 left in the 3rd, and then it was like they fell apart as Dallas scores 33 in the 4th?!?
With the 2-point conversion and the extra point kicked from the 23, it seems there have been many more "Scorigami's" in the last five years.
Quote from: amroad17 on December 05, 2022, 12:58:37 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 04, 2022, 11:39:18 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 11:29:25 PM
Season's first fifty burger in Dallas.
Also a Scorigami, is 54-19
What the hell happened in that 4th quarter? Indianapolis misses a 2-point conversion to tie it at 21 with 3:49 left in the 3rd, and then it was like they fell apart as Dallas scores 33 in the 4th?!?
With the 2-point conversion and the extra point kicked from the 23, it seems there have been many more "Scorigami's" in the last five years.
Also, 33 points in a single quarter is wild. Tough to find info on what the record is for points scored in a single quarter, but it might be 34 (Lions vs. the Bears in 2007).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 05, 2022, 09:16:28 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
The rule change only applies to the playoffs, at least for this season.
There's been 4 full seasons since the shortening of overtime: 2018 had two ties, and 2019, 20, and 21 each had one tie.
Wait, what? The ref expressly explained yesterday that if the team that possessed the ball first (turned out to be the Giants) scored a field goal on the first possession, the game would not end and the other team would get to possess the ball. The game ends on the first possession only if the offense scores a touchdown, there is a turnover leading to a defensive score, or there is a safety. That applies both to the regular season and the playoffs. Are you talking about some other rule change?
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
Wait, what? The ref expressly explained yesterday that if the team that possessed the ball first (turned out to be the Giants) scored a field goal on the first possession, the game would not end and the other team would get to possess the ball. The game ends on the first possession only if the offense scores a touchdown, there is a turnover leading to a defensive score, or there is a safety.
Yes, that part is all correct for a regular season game...
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
That applies both to the regular season and the playoffs. Are you talking about some other rule change?
The rule change that applies only to the playoffs is that a touchdown on the first possession no longer ends the game. Both teams are now guaranteed an offensive possession.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 05, 2022, 09:16:28 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
I'd agree. Being that many teams will try and have an extended drive if they win the toss and in turn milking the clock I'm surprised there hasn't been 3+ ties in a season. With scoring rules never quite got the NFL shortening the OT period
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 05, 2022, 10:40:26 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 05, 2022, 09:16:28 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
I'd agree. Being that many teams will try and have an extended drive if they win the toss and in turn milking the clock I'm surprised there hasn't been 3+ ties in a season. With scoring rules never quite got the NFL shortening the OT period
Player safety to not endure another 15 minute period. How many injuries occurred in the final 5 minutes may be debatable, but they shortened the OT to reduce that risk.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 10:31:12 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
Wait, what? The ref expressly explained yesterday that if the team that possessed the ball first (turned out to be the Giants) scored a field goal on the first possession, the game would not end and the other team would get to possess the ball. The game ends on the first possession only if the offense scores a touchdown, there is a turnover leading to a defensive score, or there is a safety.
Yes, that part is all correct for a regular season game...
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
That applies both to the regular season and the playoffs. Are you talking about some other rule change?
The rule change that applies only to the playoffs is that a touchdown on the first possession no longer ends the game. Both teams are now guaranteed an offensive possession.
OK, thanks. NWI_Irish96 didn't mention that rule in the post I was quoting and that's why I got confused as to what you meant:
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 05, 2022, 09:16:28 AM
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 10:44:54 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 05, 2022, 10:40:26 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 05, 2022, 09:16:28 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 09:13:38 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 08:23:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 04, 2022, 10:46:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2022, 10:14:41 PM
They're definitely both in the running for the 7th seed. In fact, they were 6th and 7th before the Seahawks won this afternoon to bump the Commanders down to 8th. So, this did very little to change the playoff odds. It will just put even more weight on the Week 15 matchup, but the tie could help both teams get in if the Seahawks fall back a game.
If WAS lost today, their seeding would be the same. WAS & SEA don't play each other this year, so it would come down, most likely, to their records within the conference or against common opponents. At least currently, in my view the tie hurts WAS more than helps.
I see it as a built-in tiebreaker for Washington. Now, it won't come down to other tiebreakers with Seattle because the tie will ensure they don't finish with the same record, and they only have to finish a half-game ahead instead of a full game.
There's still 5 weeks left in the season. Seattle can still play to a tie in any of those upcoming games.
OK, so it's not a guarantee they won't finish with the same record, but it's highly unlikely. There's never been 3 ties in a season in the sudden-death overtime era.
Yes, but the recent rule changes that make it not sudden death if a FG is scored on the first drive and the shortening to 10 minutes make comparisons to seasons before then less relevant. I think we'll see a 3+ tie season before too long if not this year.
I'd agree. Being that many teams will try and have an extended drive if they win the toss and in turn milking the clock I'm surprised there hasn't been 3+ ties in a season. With scoring rules never quite got the NFL shortening the OT period
Player safety to not endure another 15 minute period. How many injuries occurred in the final 5 minutes may be debatable, but they shortened the OT to reduce that risk.
Which if both teams got a possession (assuming a game ending score didn't happen) doesn't make the most sense as thing two teams running normal offense in a 15 minute OT better for player safety than some of the weirdness we see in these 10 minute overtimes where desperation attempts expose players to potentially worse hits. Could argue forever about player safety about what works and doesn't for all the rule changes in game and how teams are/aren't allowed to practice. I'm more curious how players that are talking about having all fields be natural grass think that'll be realistic for teams in northern climates. Are they going to partner on the cost to have an under-field system like in Lambeau in northern climates or make stadium conversions in other mostly norther stadiums that will allow grass to grow in domed fields. It's not impossible, but the players asking for it make it sound like that's a simple fix when there will be a lot that goes into doing that in reality.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 05, 2022, 12:04:13 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 05, 2022, 10:44:54 AM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 05, 2022, 10:40:26 AM
I'd agree. Being that many teams will try and have an extended drive if they win the toss and in turn milking the clock I'm surprised there hasn't been 3+ ties in a season. With scoring rules never quite got the NFL shortening the OT period
Player safety to not endure another 15 minute period. How many injuries occurred in the final 5 minutes may be debatable, but they shortened the OT to reduce that risk.
Which if both teams got a possession (assuming a game ending score didn't happen) doesn't make the most sense as thing two teams running normal offense in a 15 minute OT better for player safety than some of the weirdness we see in these 10 minute overtimes where desperation attempts expose players to potentially worse hits. Could argue forever about player safety about what works and doesn't for all the rule changes in game and how teams are/aren't allowed to practice. I'm more curious how players that are talking about having all fields be natural grass think that'll be realistic for teams in northern climates. Are they going to partner on the cost to have an under-field system like in Lambeau in northern climates or make stadium conversions in other mostly norther stadiums that will allow grass to grow in domed fields. It's not impossible, but the players asking for it make it sound like that's a simple fix when there will be a lot that goes into doing that in reality.
If the OT was still a 15 minute period: A desperation playcall is optional; playing a tie game until 15 minutes is up is mandatory.
I'm not sure how much the NFL chips in to the teams now for mandatory improvements, if any. It's probably a part of the shared money each team gets. Things like security, for example, requires teams to upgrade their monitoring equipment fairly often, and sometimes in mid-season if something requires an immediate change. Changing a grass field in a current grass turf stadium occurs every several years anyway. Ripping out artificial turf for grass is a little more involved, and pricey, but compared to what the teams pay certain players, it's just another improvement to the stadium. There's other ways to keep grass growing in the wintertime in northern climates - many football stadiums use enormous tarps to cover the field, with heaters blowing heat underneath to keep that grass and sod warm.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 08:35:28 AM
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
I don't think NBC would appreciate a second tie, now that the 2nd game in W15 got flexed to SNF by the NFL today
https://nflcommunications.com/Pages/Week-15-Flex-Scheduling---Giants-Commanders-Moves-to-Sunday-Night-Football.aspx
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
Wait, what? The ref expressly explained yesterday that if the team that possessed the ball first (turned out to be the Giants) scored a field goal on the first possession, the game would not end and the other team would get to possess the ball. The game ends on the first possession only if the offense scores a touchdown, there is a turnover leading to a defensive score, or there is a safety. That applies both to the regular season and the playoffs. Are you talking about some other rule change?
In the regular season, if the team with the ball first scores a TD or the team on defense first scores a safety or a defensive TD, the game is over. If the team with the ball first scores a FG, the ether team gets a chance with the ball on offense. If the score is still tied after those two possessions, it is sudden death until ten minutes have elapsed, after which the game is recorded as a draw (1/2 win, 1/2 loss).
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on December 05, 2022, 02:20:57 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 10:17:23 AM
Wait, what? The ref expressly explained yesterday that if the team that possessed the ball first (turned out to be the Giants) scored a field goal on the first possession, the game would not end and the other team would get to possess the ball. The game ends on the first possession only if the offense scores a touchdown, there is a turnover leading to a defensive score, or there is a safety. That applies both to the regular season and the playoffs. Are you talking about some other rule change?
In the regular season, if the team with the ball first scores a TD or the team on defense first scores a safety or a defensive TD, the game is over. If the team with the ball first scores a FG, the ether team gets a chance with the ball on offense. If the score is still tied after those two possessions, it is sudden death until ten minutes have elapsed, after which the game is recorded as a draw (1/2 win, 1/2 loss).
Mike
Yes, I know. That's what I said. If you look back up the thread, you'll see it turns out webny99 was referring to a different rule that was not the one mentioned in the post to which I was responding.
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 08:35:28 AM
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
I don't think NBC would appreciate a second tie, now that the 2nd game in W15 got flexed to SNF by the NFL today
https://nflcommunications.com/Pages/Week-15-Flex-Scheduling---Giants-Commanders-Moves-to-Sunday-Night-Football.aspx
As part of this, Pats-Raiders has been flexed back to 4:05 ET. That's somewhat surprising, since Pats-Raiders is a pretty important game too.
The preceding Saturday tripleheader has also been announced: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-announces-week-15-saturday-triple-header-on-nfl-network
Then Week 16 will have the majority of games played on Saturday and a tripleheader on Christmas Day, so there will be plenty of island games to go around before the new year.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 03:11:59 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 08:35:28 AM
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
I don't think NBC would appreciate a second tie, now that the 2nd game in W15 got flexed to SNF by the NFL today
https://nflcommunications.com/Pages/Week-15-Flex-Scheduling---Giants-Commanders-Moves-to-Sunday-Night-Football.aspx
As part of this, Pats-Raiders has been flexed back to 4:05 ET. That's somewhat surprising, since Pats-Raiders is a pretty important game too.
The preceding Saturday tripleheader has also been announced: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-announces-week-15-saturday-triple-header-on-nfl-network
Then Week 16 will have the majority of games played on Saturday and a tripleheader on Christmas Day, so there will be plenty of island games to go around before the new year.
Patriots-Raiders, once selected to be flexed out of of SNF for an NFC East clash with the #1 Media market involved, had to go somewhere
It couldn't be one of the 3 Saturday games because 1) It was not previously identified as one of the 5 games that could be put on Saturday 17 Dec And 2) Allegiant Stadium hosts the Las Vegas Bowl on Saturday Dec 17th
That leaves Sunday. Since Las Vegas is in the Pacific TZ, home games cannot be played in the "Early" 1 PM ET window. So that leaves either Singleheader Late @4:05 on FOX or Doubleheader Late @4:25 on CBS. CBS wants to send Bengals/Bucs to most of the country as the Doubleheader Lead game featuring Nantz, Romo, and Wolfson, and already has an Undercard game in Titans/Chargers. FOX only had Cards/Broncos originally at 4:05, and now has a better game for markets that need a Late game (typically markets that the "home" team plays in the 1 PM Early window on the Doubleheader network so likely Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Kansas City, Houston, Detroit, and NYC, in addition to markets of interest for that particular game). Hence why Pats/Raiders ended up at 4:05
Panthers cutting Baker. It's gonna be interesting to see if/when/where he's picked up as a backup. What a falloff, and it's a unique one in that it's entirely due to poor play on the field, and not age-related. Most of the time when someone goes from solid starter to irrelevance in two years, it's because of age or bad decisions off the field.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 03:40:57 PM
Panthers cutting Baker. It's gonna be interesting to see if/when/where he's picked up as a backup. What a falloff, and it's a unique one in that it's entirely due to poor play on the field, and not age-related. Most of the time when someone goes from solid starter to irrelevance in two years, it's because of age or bad decisions off the field.
If he can't even beat out Sam Darnold he should never get a starting job in the NFL again.
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 03:33:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 03:11:59 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 08:35:28 AM
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
I don't think NBC would appreciate a second tie, now that the 2nd game in W15 got flexed to SNF by the NFL today
https://nflcommunications.com/Pages/Week-15-Flex-Scheduling---Giants-Commanders-Moves-to-Sunday-Night-Football.aspx
As part of this, Pats-Raiders has been flexed back to 4:05 ET. That's somewhat surprising, since Pats-Raiders is a pretty important game too.
The preceding Saturday tripleheader has also been announced: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-announces-week-15-saturday-triple-header-on-nfl-network
Then Week 16 will have the majority of games played on Saturday and a tripleheader on Christmas Day, so there will be plenty of island games to go around before the new year.
Patriots-Raiders, once selected to be flexed out of of SNF for an NFC East clash with the #1 Media market involved, had to go somewhere
It couldn't be one of the 3 Saturday games because 1) It was not previously identified as one of the 5 games that could be put on Saturday 17 Dec And 2) Allegiant Stadium hosts the Las Vegas Bowl on Saturday Dec 17th
That leaves Sunday. Since Las Vegas is in the Pacific TZ, home games cannot be played in the "Early" 1 PM ET window. So that leaves either Singleheader Late @4:05 on FOX or Doubleheader Late @4:25 on CBS. [...]
Yes, totally understood on all of that. I wasn't surprised that it was flexed to the 4:05 timeslot (that's the only logical spot, as you outlined). I was mostly just surprised that it got flexed out of SNF, period. Giants-Commanders is worthy of a prime time slot too, but it was one of the better Saturday options so they could have put it at 4:30 or 8:15 on Saturday and left Ravens-Browns or Colts-Vikings on Sunday since those games aren't as important, with the Browns and Colts likely on the fringes or out of the race entirely by then.
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2022, 03:11:59 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 01:47:39 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 05, 2022, 08:35:28 AM
What would be funny is if Washington and New York play to another tie two weeks from now. (As an aside, I'm pretty sure no team has ever had two ties in one season since the 1974 adoption of regular-season overtime, although a couple of teams have come close.)
I don't think NBC would appreciate a second tie, now that the 2nd game in W15 got flexed to SNF by the NFL today
https://nflcommunications.com/Pages/Week-15-Flex-Scheduling---Giants-Commanders-Moves-to-Sunday-Night-Football.aspx
As part of this, Pats-Raiders has been flexed back to 4:05 ET. That's somewhat surprising, since Pats-Raiders is a pretty important game too.
It's not really that surprising. Despite their mirage of a late season push the Raiders stink and they still have a major uphill battle ahead with only 5 games left and being behind three teams they need to leap over for the #7 seed with the Jets and Patriots both holding the conference record tiebreakers over the Raiders as of today.
Yes, to be clear I am by no means disputing that Giants-Commanders is a better and more important game, but I do think Pats-Raiders is better than 2 of the 3 Saturday games.
It took 100 years, but da Bears just fell from the top of the all-time wins list. And that it happened against their most hated rival hurt a lot too.
I'm a Packers fan and the all-time wins was always something that irked me because the Bears rarely sucked under Halas while the Pack sucked for most of the time after WWII until Favre and Holmgren though the decade under Lombardi made up for a lot of that. The Bears had a huge lead in the rivalry at the end of the 1980s. Still, it's something that's going to be a Packers or Bears thing for a while because only the Cards, Giants, and Lions are also about that old they've all had significantly more lean times than the Pack and Bears.
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
TB12 needs to just be his own OC on the field. Byron Leftwich can help consult on the sidelines and keep personnel ready, but let TB12 run the show
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 11:32:05 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
TB12 needs to just be his own OC on the field. Byron Leftwich can help consult on the sidelines and keep personnel ready, but let TB12 run the show
I feel like that would get exhausting for a QB, even Brady. It works when he's dialed in his Brady mode late in the 4th, but if he had to call the whole game himself, that would be a real challenge.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:38:19 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 11:32:05 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
TB12 needs to just be his own OC on the field. Byron Leftwich can help consult on the sidelines and keep personnel ready, but let TB12 run the show
I feel like that would get exhausting for a QB, even Brady. It works when he's dialed in his Brady mode late in the 4th, but if he had to call the whole game himself, that would be a real challenge.
Speaking of TB12, he pulled another victory from the jaws of defeat with 3 seconds left.
Almost forgot, I'll finish my forks with the Rams and Colts.
Wow, what a brutal choke by the Saints, but the bigger story is that Tom Brady really took it personally that I forked the Bucs.
-Crazy last second comeback against the unforked Rams (who were leading with 1 minute to play) to END their season
-Even crazier comeback against the unforked Saints (who were leading with 10 seconds left and could've won the division if they won) to END their season
-Zero doubt: there will be a third last second, three-score comeback by Brady against the Cardinals (on the final play) to CLINCH the NFC South and ELIMINATE the unforked Cardinals from the playoffs, just to stick it to me extra hard one last time :poke:
And at that point, I'll be officially buried in the locks competition. But no really, thanks Tom for unretiring.
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
Never should have happened. Dennis Allen should have been fired on the field for that clock mismanagement. I can't believe in this day and age with a billion dollar business getting these decisions so, so wrong.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 06, 2022, 09:44:15 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
Never should have happened. Dennis Allen should have been fired on the field for that clock mismanagement. I can't believe in this day and age with a billion dollar business getting these decisions so, so wrong.
There was coaching malpractice on both sides. Both head coaches have been a significant downgrade. It's just that one team had Tom Brady, and one didn't. But even so, the Saints had
so many chances to put it away, like
this (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ftw/2022/12/06/mark-ingram-apologized-for-his-awful-decision-in-loss-to-bucs/51049365/), the Taysom drop, the two field goals on 4th & short... they just blew it spectacularly at every chance. And there was ZERO reason to think the Bucs had a chance through 55 minutes. Maybe the worst loss of the season, in a year with some pretty bad ones.
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
That's spicy. Definitely not a coincidence that it happens 2 days after they got torched by AJ Brown. My guess is Vrabel was in favor of paying AJ while Robinson wasn't. That leaves Robinson responsible for their lack of wide receiver talent, which has cost them big time against top opponents. Mike Vrabel is reigning COTY and has a proven track record of success even with a limited roster (which Robinson is responsible for), so I think they made the right decision even though it's surprising that it happened now.
Meanwhile, the Colts fired their coach and kept the GM, which I think was the wrong decision. They'd be better off with Reich and a new GM. They might end up with both, but now they'll have to waste resources finding a new coach when they already had a good one that wasn't even close to being their biggest problem.
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
That's spicy. Definitely not a coincidence that it happens 2 days after they got torched by AJ Brown. My guess is Vrabel was in favor of paying AJ while Robinson wasn't. That leaves Robinson responsible for their lack of wide receiver talent, which has cost them big time against top opponents. Mike Vrabel is reigning COTY and has a proven track record of success even with a limited roster (which Robinson is responsible for), so I think they made the right decision even though it's surprising that it happened now.
Meanwhile, the Colts fired their coach and kept the GM, which I think was the wrong decision. They'd be better off with Reich and a new GM. They might end up with both, but now they'll have to waste resources finding a new coach when they already had a good one that wasn't even close to being their biggest problem.
Too bad for the Colts fans they couldn't replace their owner. Irsay can thank Tony Dungy and Peyton Manning for making him look like a half decent owner for the time both were in Indy
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 02:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Meanwhile, the Colts fired their coach and kept the GM, which I think was the wrong decision. They'd be better off with Reich and a new GM. They might end up with both, but now they'll have to waste resources finding a new coach when they already had a good one that wasn't even close to being their biggest problem.
Too bad for the Colts fans they couldn't replace their owner. Irsay can thank Tony Dungy and Peyton Manning for making him look like a half decent owner for the time both were in Indy
But the Colts are in the "
top quartile of the upper quartile (https://tinyurl.com/374dkzbv)" of all NFL teams! ;-)
(I think he was going for top
half of the upper quartile, which would be top-4, but it made for a good soundbite anyways.)
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:38:19 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 05, 2022, 11:32:05 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 05, 2022, 11:13:53 PM
That's now twice this year that Brady has totally switched on a dead team in the last five minutes. Two of the most impressive drives I've ever seen.
TB12 needs to just be his own OC on the field. Byron Leftwich can help consult on the sidelines and keep personnel ready, but let TB12 run the show
I feel like that would get exhausting for a QB, even Brady. It works when he's dialed in his Brady mode late in the 4th, but if he had to call the whole game himself, that would be a real challenge.
P Manning was essentially his own OC for much of his career. Didn't seem to bother him. But he may be the last QB to ever do so. It used to be the norm. Unitas and Starr called almost all their own plays.
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:43:54 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 02:35:19 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Meanwhile, the Colts fired their coach and kept the GM, which I think was the wrong decision. They'd be better off with Reich and a new GM. They might end up with both, but now they'll have to waste resources finding a new coach when they already had a good one that wasn't even close to being their biggest problem.
Too bad for the Colts fans they couldn't replace their owner. Irsay can thank Tony Dungy and Peyton Manning for making him look like a half decent owner for the time both were in Indy
But the Colts are in the "top quartile of the upper quartile (https://tinyurl.com/374dkzbv)" of all NFL teams! ;-)
(I think he was going for top half of the upper quartile, which would be top-4, but it made for a good soundbite anyways.)
What about when he talked about making sausage?
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 04:16:49 PM
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
One of the oddest stories to be coming for the 2023 NFL draft will be the Eagles' early position. At 11-1, they currently hold the 5th pick in the draft. On Draft Night 2022, they made a trade with the Saints which included the Eagles getting the Saints' 1st round pick in 2023. The Saints suck this year. The Eagles are in 1st overall. This is looking to be one of the better trades made overall during the 2022 draft.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 06, 2022, 07:28:03 PM
One of the oddest stories to be coming for the 2023 NFL draft will be the Eagles' early position. At 11-1, they currently hold the 5th pick in the draft. On Draft Night 2022, they made a trade with the Saints which included the Eagles getting the Saints' 1st round pick in 2023. The Saints suck this year. The Eagles are in 1st overall. This is looking to be one of the better trades made overall during the 2022 draft.
Indeed. I'll re-up my
post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26378.msg2789904#msg2789904) from a few weeks ago regarding the top of next year's draft. Eagles, Seahawks, and Lions all made trades that are looking pretty good right now.
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 04:16:49 PM
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
ESPN does NOT have Thursday Night Football. ESPN has Monday Night Football, and Saturday Football the last week of the regular season, Week 18
Amazon Prime Video has Thursday Night Football most weeks, except Week 1 and Thanksgiving Night, which are both on NBC. Amazon has Raiders/Rams on Thursday night
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 08:30:57 PM
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 04:16:49 PM
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
ESPN does NOT have Thursday Night Football. ESPN has Monday Night Football, and Saturday Football the last week of the regular season, Week 18
Amazon Prime Video has Thursday Night Football most weeks, except Week 1 and Thanksgiving Night, which are both on NBC. Amazon has Raiders/Rams on Thursday night
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think he meant that the
Rams have a Thursday night game, not that ESPN will be broadcasting it.
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 08:43:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 08:30:57 PM
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 04:16:49 PM
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
ESPN does NOT have Thursday Night Football. ESPN has Monday Night Football, and Saturday Football the last week of the regular season, Week 18
Amazon Prime Video has Thursday Night Football most weeks, except Week 1 and Thanksgiving Night, which are both on NBC. Amazon has Raiders/Rams on Thursday night
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think he meant that the Rams have a Thursday night game, not that ESPN will be broadcasting it.
Wow, I didn't even consider that interpretation of that statement. After reading your post, I kinda feel bad now...
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 09:21:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 08:43:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 08:30:57 PM
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 06, 2022, 04:16:49 PM
Rams claimed Baker Mayfield......interesting
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
ESPN does NOT have Thursday Night Football. ESPN has Monday Night Football, and Saturday Football the last week of the regular season, Week 18
Amazon Prime Video has Thursday Night Football most weeks, except Week 1 and Thanksgiving Night, which are both on NBC. Amazon has Raiders/Rams on Thursday night
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think he meant that the Rams have a Thursday night game, not that ESPN will be broadcasting it.
Wow, I didn't even consider that interpretation of that statement. After reading your post, I kinda feel bad now...
My bad. I should have been clearer. But yes, I meant that ESPN is reporting Mayfield may be starting for the Rams Thursday. Thanks to webny99 for fixing my unclear statement.
Quote from: skluth on December 07, 2022, 11:52:00 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 09:21:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 08:43:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 06, 2022, 08:30:57 PM
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
ESPN is also reporting he may start for them this week - and they have the Thursday night game. I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
ESPN does NOT have Thursday Night Football. ESPN has Monday Night Football, and Saturday Football the last week of the regular season, Week 18
Amazon Prime Video has Thursday Night Football most weeks, except Week 1 and Thanksgiving Night, which are both on NBC. Amazon has Raiders/Rams on Thursday night
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think he meant that the Rams have a Thursday night game, not that ESPN will be broadcasting it.
Wow, I didn't even consider that interpretation of that statement. After reading your post, I kinda feel bad now...
My bad. I should have been clearer. But yes, I meant that ESPN is reporting Mayfield may be starting for the Rams Thursday. Thanks to webny99 for fixing my unclear statement.
Anytime! :) I was actually amused that neither of us had thought of the other's interpretation of the statement. Language is weird like that sometimes.
Raiders over Rams
Titans over Jaguars
Bills over Jets
Bengals over Browns
Cowboys over Texans
Giants over Eagles
Steelers over Ravens
Chiefs over Broncos
Niners over Bucs
Panthers over Seahawks
Dolphins over Chargers
Vikings over Lions
Patriots over Cardinals
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 03:12:44 PM
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
I think it's more just based on everyone (including me to a degree) thinking the Vikings aren't nearly as good as their record, so everyone is betting against them every week. That'll skew the line farther away from them just to balance the cash.
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
That's spicy. Definitely not a coincidence that it happens 2 days after they got torched by AJ Brown. My guess is Vrabel was in favor of paying AJ while Robinson wasn't. That leaves Robinson responsible for their lack of wide receiver talent, which has cost them big time against top opponents. Mike Vrabel is reigning COTY and has a proven track record of success even with a limited roster (which Robinson is responsible for), so I think they made the right decision even though it's surprising that it happened now.
An interesting read about the Titans' decision to move on from Robinson: https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2022/12/7/23497581/tennessee-titans-fire-gm-jon-robinson-whats-next
Hard not to think there's more to the story about the AJ Brown trade.
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 10:25:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
That's spicy. Definitely not a coincidence that it happens 2 days after they got torched by AJ Brown. My guess is Vrabel was in favor of paying AJ while Robinson wasn't. That leaves Robinson responsible for their lack of wide receiver talent, which has cost them big time against top opponents. Mike Vrabel is reigning COTY and has a proven track record of success even with a limited roster (which Robinson is responsible for), so I think they made the right decision even though it's surprising that it happened now.
An interesting read about the Titans' decision to move on from Robinson: https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2022/12/7/23497581/tennessee-titans-fire-gm-jon-robinson-whats-next
Hard not to think there's more to the story about the AJ Brown trade.
I've wondered how sustainable the Titans approach of relying on Ryan Tannehill/Derrick Henry for most of their offense was, especially knowing how running backs seem to have such short shelf lives. Meanwhile, getting torched by a former player and responding by firing the GM afterwards reeks of desperation and disorganization. There must be some logic behind it.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 08, 2022, 06:31:40 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 10:25:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 06, 2022, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
That's spicy. Definitely not a coincidence that it happens 2 days after they got torched by AJ Brown. My guess is Vrabel was in favor of paying AJ while Robinson wasn't. That leaves Robinson responsible for their lack of wide receiver talent, which has cost them big time against top opponents. Mike Vrabel is reigning COTY and has a proven track record of success even with a limited roster (which Robinson is responsible for), so I think they made the right decision even though it's surprising that it happened now.
An interesting read about the Titans' decision to move on from Robinson: https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2022/12/7/23497581/tennessee-titans-fire-gm-jon-robinson-whats-next
Hard not to think there's more to the story about the AJ Brown trade.
I've wondered how sustainable the Titans approach of relying on Ryan Tannehill/Derrick Henry for most of their offense was, especially knowing how running backs seem to have such short shelf lives. Meanwhile, getting torched by a former player and responding by firing the GM afterwards reeks of desperation and disorganization. There must be some logic behind it.
The logic was that Robinson clearly had no plan to build the team into a Super Bowl contender. Ryan Tannehill on a big contract, Treylon Burks, and Robert Woods don't cut it in the passing game. On Sunday, Titans ownership saw a quite similar team across the line of scrimmage that had one thing the Titans didn't: a competent passing game. AJ Brown torching them must have hurt to watch as well.
I'd even go so far as to say Robinson's plan was to be competitive while rebuilding over the next 2-3 years instead of going all-in to win a Super Bowl. But having AJ Brown on their team right now would've made them a true contender over that span instead.
Also, the two first round draft misses can't be ignored. Isaiah Wilson is among the biggest first round busts of all time.
12-2-1 last week, my best of the year.
Raiders 28, Rams 16
Jets 22, Bills 31
Browns 23, Bengals 26
Texans 21, Cowboys 38
Vikings 29, Lions 26
Eagles 28, Giants 23
Ravens 22, Steelers 21
Jaguars 19, Titans 24
Chiefs 30, Broncos 14
Buccaneers 23, 49ers 17
Panthers 20, Seahawks 27
Dolphins 33, Chargers
Patriots 26, Chargers 18
The 3-9 Rams are on pace to have the worst championship defense season in all of sports, as they're doing even worse than the 1999 Broncos, who went 6-10. That's the biggest symptom of going all-in to win. The 1982 49ers went 3-6, but that was a strike year. The 1998-99 Bulls (13-37 in a lockout season), 1998 Marlins (54-108) and 1994-95 Rangers (22-23-3, also in a lockout season) own the worst title defenses in their respective sport. However, the first two have a fire sale to blame, which is also a terrible way to break up a winning team.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 07, 2022, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 03:12:44 PM
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
I think it's more just based on everyone (including me to a degree) thinking the Vikings aren't nearly as good as their record, so everyone is betting against them every week. That'll skew the line farther away from them just to balance the cash.
I smell shenanigans. Some degenerate gambling industry people are trying to do something, methinks.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 08, 2022, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 07, 2022, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 03:12:44 PM
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
I think it's more just based on everyone (including me to a degree) thinking the Vikings aren't nearly as good as their record, so everyone is betting against them every week. That'll skew the line farther away from them just to balance the cash.
I smell shenanigans. Some degenerate gambling industry people are trying to do something, methinks.
Like what?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 08, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 08, 2022, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 07, 2022, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 03:12:44 PM
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
I think it's more just based on everyone (including me to a degree) thinking the Vikings aren't nearly as good as their record, so everyone is betting against them every week. That'll skew the line farther away from them just to balance the cash.
I smell shenanigans. Some degenerate gambling industry people are trying to do something, methinks.
Like what?
Don't even try. Lost cause.
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 06:03:07 PM
I guess we'll find out just how good a QB coach McVay really is.
Well, that was interesting. Yet another gag by the Raiders (
this is insane (https://tinyurl.com/6atybys5)), but I guess a point in McVay's favor here? And certainly a nice moment for Baker after a really rough two years.
Here we go again 🙄 Baker still isn't good. One drive does not change an entire career. Awful loss for the Raiders, basically knocking them out of contention.
Edit: yeah okay. I didn't see it live, but my suspicions were confirmed after watching the drive. He made one impressive throw (the touchdown to Jefferson). Skowronek made an incredible catch on a prayer into double coverage that would have been picked if the corner turned around. The PI on the interception early in the drive was the correct call, but that pass was so bad it would have been picked anyway. And, the bailout by an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Again, it was the right call, but it's not like Baker earned it.
Would have picked the Raiders like everyone else.
Vikings 30, Lions 24
Steelers 23, Ravens 17
Bengals 31, Browns 19
Bills 34, Jets 17
Cowboys 41, Texans 21
Eagles 28, Giants 10
Titans 24, Jaguars 16
Chiefs 23, Broncos 10
Seahawks 35, Panthers 13
49ers 24, Buccaneers 17
Dolphins 20, Chargers 13
Patriots 19, Cardinals 17
Quote from: thspfc on December 09, 2022, 07:32:02 AM
Here we go again 🙄 Baker still isn't good. One drive does not change an entire career.
Just in case this was meant for me, this isn't a counter what I said about Baker. Of course he can have a nice moment that isn't career altering.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 07, 2022, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 07, 2022, 03:12:44 PM
The 5-7 Lions are actually favored over the 10-2 Vikings. Bizarre at first glance, but they just put up a 40-burger and have arguably been the better team over the last month. They've also put up 30 points 6 times this season vs. just 3 times for the Vikings. And it's a more important game for the Lions as they must win to stay in the playoff race, while the Vikings are going to playoffs regardless. I'm not saying I agree with them being favored, but it is certainly interesting.
I think it's more just based on everyone (including me to a degree) thinking the Vikings aren't nearly as good as their record, so everyone is betting against them every week. That'll skew the line farther away from them just to balance the cash.
This year's Vikings remind me of the 2011 Packers who had a great offense but a defense that could surrender points as much as cause turnovers (at least after Nick Collins injury) though the Vikings offense isn't quite as potent. It's a recipe for disaster though it usually causes a team to self-destruct in the playoffs more than lose an in-season game.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 08, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Like what?
Probably tweaking the line so they can dupe more rubes into getting addicted to gambling. First hit is free; next one's gonna cost ya.
Quote from: webny99 on December 09, 2022, 12:26:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 09, 2022, 07:32:02 AM
Here we go again 🙄 Baker still isn't good. One drive does not change an entire career.
Just in case this was meant for me, this isn't a counter what I said about Baker. Of course he can have a nice moment that isn't career altering.
It wasn't, sorry for not making it clear.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 09, 2022, 02:28:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 08, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Like what?
Probably tweaking the line so they can dupe more rubes into getting addicted to gambling. First hit is free; next one's gonna cost ya.
I know thspfc told me not to bother... but you literally think the house is willing to take a loss, not only to first timers, but also to sharks, just to get $20 from the soon-to-be second-timers?
I'm all but convinced the AFC North will come down to the Bengals and Ravens' week 18 matchup.
It would have been nice for Dallas to wake up before the last five minutes of the 4th quarter, but a characteristic of a good team is being able to win a close game even on a day when they didn't play their best. The recent alternation of excellent performances (Bears, Vikings, Colts) and shaky ones (Lions, Packers, Giants, Texans) makes me question the team's leadership, specifically McCarthy. Great coaches have their team ready to go from the kickoff every week, and that has not been the case. Dak has thrown 7 picks in his last 5 games. All that has to be fixed come the playoffs.
Giants 💀
The three teams that positively surprised everyone the most earlier this season (Jets, Giants, Seahawks) are 2-8-1 since week 11. Wins over the 3-10 Bears and 4-9 Rams. Seattle's next two games are the 49ers and Chiefs. Ouch. Then the Jets which could go either way, then the Rams who they had a lot of trouble with last week. The Giants schedule is similarly tough, and I don't 100% trust the Commies either. It almost inclines one to believe in the Lions to make the playoffs, but . . . they're still the Lions.
Lots of commentary about the 49ers current QB being this year's "Mr. Irrelevant" (last player chosen in the draft). But I heard no mentions that the Bucs' kicker was 2009's "Mr. Irrelevant", making today's game kind of a "battle of the Irrelevants". While I think Ryan Succop is so far the most successful "Mr. Irrelevant" to date, he wasn't terribly relevant today, contributing only 1 point after TD, and missing his only (long 55-yard) FG attempt.
Eagles are in the playoffs. Because of Dallas, they haven't cliched the Division yet.
Trying to look ahead, I don't know if they Eagles can clinch the Division or the Conference Bye next week even if they win and Cowboys lose. They play the Cowboys in Week 16 so that's *the* key game.
If Eagles win both their next 2 games, they win the Division and Conference.
Next week's game for the Eagles is almost inconsequential to the playoff race, and the scheduling Gods will assist with this. If Eagles beat Dallas the following week, they win the Division, and the conference if the Vikings don't win their final 4 games. Vikings play this coming Saturday; Eagles Sunday. If the Vikings lose Saturday, that sets up a showdown between the Eagles & Cowboys for the top seed. The Eagles will play to win, because if they lose against Dallas they have a little more work to do, but Week 15 is setting up to be fairly unimportant for the Eagles. 49ers could also win the Conference if they win out and Eagles, Vikings and Cowboys both suck over the next few weeks.
We're also back to the "if the season ended today" scenario in which the entire NFC East would be in.
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2022, 07:47:28 PM
It almost inclines one to believe in the Lions to make the playoffs, but . . . they're still the Lions.
They will likely catch the Jets at a good time next week as QB Mike White suffered broken ribs in today's loss at Buffalo, which likely sets up either Joe Flacco or throwing the keys back to Wilson out of lack of options. Then they go on the road to Carolina, who may still have something to play for and puts together wildly inconsistent performances from week to week, so will depend on which Panthers team they get before closing out against the Bears and Packers. If they can get through the next two weeks 2-0, they might be in decent shape.
Lions have beaten both the Giants and Commanders, so that helps them.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 11, 2022, 09:07:21 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2022, 07:47:28 PM
It almost inclines one to believe in the Lions to make the playoffs, but . . . they're still the Lions.
They will likely catch the Jets at a good time next week as QB Mike White suffered broken ribs in today's loss at Buffalo, which likely sets up either Joe Flacco or throwing the keys back to Wilson out of lack of options. Then they go on the road to Carolina, who may still have something to play for and puts together wildly inconsistent performances from week to week, so will depend on which Panthers team they get before closing out against the Bears and Packers. If they can get through the next two weeks 2-0, they might be in decent shape.
Lions have beaten both the Giants and Commanders, so that helps them.
Unless the Lions play to a Tie in one of their remaining games, the H2H tie-breaker will NOT be in play against the Giants nor the WFT
The Geno renaissance has been a great story, but Seattle is still an average team -- with what looks like a great rookie draft class -- that's playing with house money because of the Russ trade. Next week's Commanders-Giants rematch is probably the single most important remaining game in the NFC wild card picture. The winner is a near-lock for the playoffs, and the loser will be battling for the final spot along with the Lions and Seahawks.
Very tough pill to swallow.... :(
Today makes the sixth (6th) time this season the Texans blew a fourth quarter lead that has to be the NFL record most blown leads in a single season. I'm suspecting something very fishy going on here....I wonder if the NFL is paying Lovie to sabotage my team like that. Just painful heartbreaking to watch another choke-job in that final minute.
With the Chargers win tonight, it is very important that beat that we beat the Cardinals tomorrow to stay alive in the playoff race.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 12, 2022, 01:53:02 AM
With the Chargers win tonight, it is very important that beat that we beat the Cardinals tomorrow to stay alive in the playoff race.
I think the Pats can beat the Cardinals tonight. They'll have to. Their remaining schedule (Raiders, Bengals, Dolphins, and Bills) is brutal (at least the last three are).
Quote from: jgb191 on December 12, 2022, 01:09:47 AM
Very tough pill to swallow.... :(
Today makes the sixth (6th) time this season the Texans blew a fourth quarter lead that has to be the NFL record most blown leads in a single season. I'm suspecting something very fishy going on here....I wonder if the NFL is paying Lovie to sabotage my team like that. Just painful heartbreaking to watch another choke-job in that final minute.
I was really hoping that the Texans would win a couple games down the stretch and move that #1 draft pick up north.
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2022, 04:39:44 PM
It would have been nice for Dallas to wake up before the last five minutes of the 4th quarter, but a characteristic of a good team is being able to win a close game even on a day when they didn't play their best. The recent alternation of excellent performances (Bears, Vikings, Colts) and shaky ones (Lions, Packers, Giants, Texans) makes me question the team's leadership, specifically McCarthy. Great coaches have their team ready to go from the kickoff every week, and that has not been the case. Dak has thrown 7 picks in his last 5 games. All that has to be fixed come the playoffs.
Giants 💀
McCarthy isn't blameless, but I'm looking more at the player leadership......mostly Dak. This issue with the Cowboys predates his McCarthy's hiring where they play down to teams and the Cowboys have had the same core of start players in both McCarthy and Garretts tenure. As a Packers fans watching our former coach it appears that McCarthy this season appears to finally be making adjustments that he never made in GB(feels weird seeing a run pass balance). But watching Dak for games like yesterday it felt he was going through the motions. If the Texans didn't self-implode (especially on 4th down in the 4th quarter) they would have for all purposes eliminated themselves from competing for the division. Will make for an interesting playoffs with them as Superbowl or bust are both very possible.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 12, 2022, 01:09:47 AM
Very tough pill to swallow.... :(
Today makes the sixth (6th) time this season the Texans blew a fourth quarter lead that has to be the NFL record most blown leads in a single season. I'm suspecting something very fishy going on here....I wonder if the NFL is paying Lovie to sabotage my team like that. Just painful heartbreaking to watch another choke-job in that final minute.
I actually do give some credit to the Cowboys because previous Cowboys teams (think 2019) probably would've blown that game. Yes, the Texans did self-implode somewhat, but as a Texans fan I think I would feel way worse about the Browns loss. Could've had that one if not for allowing a brutal 21 of Cleveland's 27 points on defense and special teams, plus that was a home game and would have been a really cool moment to get off the schneid against Watson and end the Browns playoff hopes. I was rooting for it, but it didn't happen so at this point you might as well just coast to the #1 overall pick.
I'll say this: my Texans were indeed figuratively playing with house money and the weight of tons of bricks were on the home team (and the house nearly crumbled), which just shows that the Cowboys can't live up to their cult-followers' egos. Even so, this was a winnable game that the Texans choked away. If David Culley were still our coach, Texans would have taken the game. But just seems like Lovie is trying to do his best to keep the air out of our team.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 09, 2022, 05:19:00 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 09, 2022, 02:28:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 08, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Like what?
Probably tweaking the line so they can dupe more rubes into getting addicted to gambling. First hit is free; next one's gonna cost ya.
I know thspfc told me not to bother... but you literally think the house is willing to take a loss, not only to first timers, but also to sharks, just to get $20 from the soon-to-be second-timers?
Eh looks like it was all me talking out my ass. The entire premise that the Lions suck and were going to get steamrolled by a first place team was flawed, as shown on Sunday. So whoops. Guess I'll have my crow with a nice glass of STFU. :P
Quote from: jgb191 on December 12, 2022, 11:48:46 AM
which just shows that the Cowboys can't live up to their cult-followers' egos.
If your favorite sports team being good feeds your personal ego, you have a problem.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 12, 2022, 08:36:16 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2022, 04:39:44 PM
It would have been nice for Dallas to wake up before the last five minutes of the 4th quarter, but a characteristic of a good team is being able to win a close game even on a day when they didn't play their best. The recent alternation of excellent performances (Bears, Vikings, Colts) and shaky ones (Lions, Packers, Giants, Texans) makes me question the team's leadership, specifically McCarthy. Great coaches have their team ready to go from the kickoff every week, and that has not been the case. Dak has thrown 7 picks in his last 5 games. All that has to be fixed come the playoffs.
Giants 💀
McCarthy isn't blameless, but I'm looking more at the player leadership......mostly Dak. This issue with the Cowboys predates his McCarthy's hiring where they play down to teams and the Cowboys have had the same core of start players in both McCarthy and Garretts tenure. As a Packers fans watching our former coach it appears that McCarthy this season appears to finally be making adjustments that he never made in GB(feels weird seeing a run pass balance). But watching Dak for games like yesterday it felt he was going through the motions. If the Texans didn't self-implode (especially on 4th down in the 4th quarter) they would have for all purposes eliminated themselves from competing for the division. Will make for an interesting playoffs with them as Superbowl or bust are both very possible.
McCarthy's other problem is his teams are penalty prone. This was a problem with the Packers, especially on special teams; the Packers ST and penalty issues have continued under MLF. I don't follow the Cowboys enough to know if penalties were a problem before but McCarthy's Cowboys have continued that tradition of stupid penalties and are currently #2 in penalties behind the Broncos.
Quote from: thspfc on December 12, 2022, 04:07:43 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 12, 2022, 11:48:46 AM
which just shows that the Cowboys can't live up to their cult-followers' egos.
If your favorite sports team being good feeds your personal ego, you have a problem.
Exactly, and that's only half the story. Then they (along with 90 percent of other NFL followers) downplay every other team's win over the Texans. It seems like all the opponents that beat us get downplayed as if our team doesn't exist, but when we lost to the Cowboys, their fans completely rubbed it in us after the game.
Case in point: When the Eagles beat my Texans by "only" twelve points last month, all the Cowboys fans around here were laughing at the Eagles; but yesterday after the 27-23 nailbiter those same Cowboys fans insisted on getting credit.
Something else I'd like to add: before Sunday's game everybody kept telling me,
"Any high school team could easily crush your Texans". After the game they all said:
"Well, the Cowboys found a way to win!"The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 01:09:34 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 12, 2022, 04:07:43 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 12, 2022, 11:48:46 AM
which just shows that the Cowboys can't live up to their cult-followers' egos.
If your favorite sports team being good feeds your personal ego, you have a problem.
Exactly, and that's only half the story. Then they (along with 90 percent of other NFL followers) downplay every other team's win over the Texans. It seems like all the opponents that beat us get downplayed as if our team doesn't exist, but when we lost to the Cowboys, their fans completely rubbed it in us after the game.
Case in point: When the Eagles beat my Texans by "only" twelve points last month, all the Cowboys fans around here were laughing at the Eagles; but yesterday after the 27-23 nailbiter those same Cowboys fans insisted on getting credit.
My mileage varies.
QuoteSomething else I'd like to add: before Sunday's game everybody kept telling me,
"Any high school team could easily crush your Texans".
There's your issue, you're probably listening to people who spout nonsense whether they're talking about football or not. Every fanbase has those people.
Quote
The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Browns fans?
Quote from: skluth on December 12, 2022, 05:54:26 PM
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 12, 2022, 08:36:16 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2022, 04:39:44 PM
It would have been nice for Dallas to wake up before the last five minutes of the 4th quarter, but a characteristic of a good team is being able to win a close game even on a day when they didn't play their best. The recent alternation of excellent performances (Bears, Vikings, Colts) and shaky ones (Lions, Packers, Giants, Texans) makes me question the team's leadership, specifically McCarthy. Great coaches have their team ready to go from the kickoff every week, and that has not been the case. Dak has thrown 7 picks in his last 5 games. All that has to be fixed come the playoffs.
Giants 💀
McCarthy isn't blameless, but I'm looking more at the player leadership......mostly Dak. This issue with the Cowboys predates his McCarthy's hiring where they play down to teams and the Cowboys have had the same core of start players in both McCarthy and Garretts tenure. As a Packers fans watching our former coach it appears that McCarthy this season appears to finally be making adjustments that he never made in GB(feels weird seeing a run pass balance). But watching Dak for games like yesterday it felt he was going through the motions. If the Texans didn't self-implode (especially on 4th down in the 4th quarter) they would have for all purposes eliminated themselves from competing for the division. Will make for an interesting playoffs with them as Superbowl or bust are both very possible.
McCarthy's other problem is his teams are penalty prone. This was a problem with the Packers, especially on special teams; the Packers ST and penalty issues have continued under MLF. I don't follow the Cowboys enough to know if penalties were a problem before but McCarthy's Cowboys have continued that tradition of stupid penalties and are currently #2 in penalties behind the Broncos.
Packers had bad special teams play more often than not during his term here. Penalties for most of his teams here wasn't a problem. McCarthy's main issue in Green Bay was his in-game adjustments stunk to were non-existent, to the point his relationship with Rodgers(despite the hug for Packers vs Cowboys game this season) was getting toxic.
Quote from: thspfc on December 13, 2022, 07:53:18 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 01:09:34 AM
The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Browns fans?
I've never heard of a Browns fan proclaim their team as "America's Team" (there is no such thing by the way). I've also never heard any of them still celebrating 1996 like they do every year.
Cowboys fans hound me every year:
"We're the five-time Super Bowl Champions! You're team has none!". I've been hoping that after a quarter-century since their last Super Bowl title that they would have settled down a bit but no.
Nice to get a Monday Night win, although it was ugly.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 11:54:11 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 13, 2022, 07:53:18 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 01:09:34 AM
The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Browns fans?
I've never heard of a Browns fan proclaim their team as "America's Team" (there is no such thing by the way). I've also never heard any of them still celebrating 1996 like they do every year.
Cowboys fans hound me every year: "We're the five-time Super Bowl Champions! You're team has none!". I've been hoping that after a quarter-century since their last Super Bowl title that they would have settled down a bit but no.
When I hear that I start think Packers(13), Bears(9), Giants(8), Patriots(6), and Steelers(6) fans are like "How cute, here are all our championships"
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 11:54:11 PM
I've never heard of a Browns fan proclaim their team as "America's Team" (there is no such thing by the way). I've also never heard any of them still celebrating 1996 like they do every year.
Cowboys fans hound me every year: "We're the five-time Super Bowl Champions! You're team has none!". I've been hoping that after a quarter-century since their last Super Bowl title that they would have settled down a bit but no.
Thanks to Modell, there were no 1996 Browns.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 14, 2022, 08:26:23 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 11:54:11 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 13, 2022, 07:53:18 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 01:09:34 AM
The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Browns fans?
I've never heard of a Browns fan proclaim their team as "America's Team" (there is no such thing by the way). I've also never heard any of them still celebrating 1996 like they do every year.
Cowboys fans hound me every year: "We're the five-time Super Bowl Champions! You're team has none!". I've been hoping that after a quarter-century since their last Super Bowl title that they would have settled down a bit but no.
When I hear that I start think Packers(13), Bears(9), Giants(8), Patriots(6), and Steelers(6) fans are like "How cute, here are all our championships"
According to Cowboy and Steeler fans, te pre-merger days (pre-1970) don't count.
Quote from: Big John on December 14, 2022, 08:56:14 AM
According to Cowboy and Steeler fans, te pre-merger days (pre-1970) don't count.
They can be wrong if they want to. :P
Championships aren't as prestigious when there were fewer teams in existence, and I say this as a Red Sox fan where quite a lot of their wins were 1918 or earlier. That's not to say their value is zero, though.
Quote from: 1 on December 14, 2022, 09:17:59 AM
Championships aren't as prestigious when there were fewer teams in existence, and I say this as a Red Sox fan where quite a lot of their wins were 1918 or earlier. That's not to say their value is zero, though.
Would be a fun exercise to assign point values to championships equal to the number of other teams in the league that season. Current championships worth 32, decreasing back to the older championships being worth 11.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 14, 2022, 09:58:04 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 14, 2022, 09:17:59 AM
Championships aren't as prestigious when there were fewer teams in existence, and I say this as a Red Sox fan where quite a lot of their wins were 1918 or earlier. That's not to say their value is zero, though.
Would be a fun exercise to assign point values to championships equal to the number of other teams in the league that season. Current championships worth 32, decreasing back to the older championships being worth 11.
Curious how other sports would react if we used like let's say for baseball anything pre-Jackie Robinson didn't count.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 11:54:11 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 13, 2022, 07:53:18 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 13, 2022, 01:09:34 AM
The one glaring downside of living in Texas is hearing it from them every single NFL season. Whatever fits their narrative I guess. The most obnoxious and fickle fans ever.
Browns fans?
I've never heard of a Browns fan proclaim their team as "America's Team" (there is no such thing by the way). I've also never heard any of them still celebrating 1996 like they do every year.
Cowboys fans hound me every year: "We're the five-time Super Bowl Champions! You're team has none!". I've been hoping that after a quarter-century since their last Super Bowl title that they would have settled down a bit but no.
My mileage varies.
The offensive player of the week award has officially descended to meme status with Baker, who did next to nothing all night aside from one nice touchdown throw, winning it over Justin Jefferson (11 catches/223 yards) and Goof (27/39, 330 yards, 3 TDs no picks)
FiveThirtyEight on the prospect of the entire NFC East making the playoffs being very much alive entering Week 15: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-entire-nfc-east-can-make-the-playoffs/
Quote from: webny99 on December 15, 2022, 11:08:39 AM
FiveThirtyEight on the prospect of the entire NFC East making the playoffs being very much alive entering Week 15: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-entire-nfc-east-can-make-the-playoffs/
If it does happen, I better not hear people complaining about the amount of nationally televised NFCE games until another division does it.
Quote from: thspfc on December 15, 2022, 01:25:05 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 15, 2022, 11:08:39 AM
FiveThirtyEight on the prospect of the entire NFC East making the playoffs being very much alive entering Week 15: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-entire-nfc-east-can-make-the-playoffs/
If it does happen, I better not hear people complaining about the amount of nationally televised NFCE games until another division does it.
Not only that, there are a lot of easier targets if you want to complain about the prime time schedule... Broncos, Colts, Raiders, Cardinals, Patriots to name a few. Meanwhile the Jets have 0 prime time games and haven't been on SNF in something like a decade. That should change next season if they end their playoff drought.
Also, we may end up getting a snow game in Buffalo after all. It's looking likely that there will be significant snowfall on Saturday night when the Bills play the Dolphins.
.500 again last week, 7-7. At 112-92-2 on the season, I need to go 52-12 the rest of the way in order to beat my 2021 self. (So you're saying there's a chance.)
49ers 20, Seahawks 13
Vikings 31, Colts 16
Browns 25, Ravens 14
Bills 28, Dolphins 15
Eagles 30, Bears 27
Jets 22, Lions 14
Steelers 18, Panthers 16
Chiefs 34, Texans 17
Saints 31, Falcons 6
Cowboys 28, Jaguars 20
Broncos 19, Cardinals 13
Raiders 33, Patriots 17
Chargers 24, Titans 21
Buccaneers 21, Bengals 16
Commanders 23, Giants 12
Packers 26, Rams 14
A Dolphins loss, Jets win, and Chargers win would I believe push the Dolphins out of playoff position. The races for the last two wild card spots in both conferences will be fun to watch. Albeit not nearly as chaotic as last year's AFC, which had the 1 and 11 seeds separated by just 2 games at this time, and 8 teams within one game of each other around .500.
7-6 last week
49ers 23, Seahawks 17
Colts 19, Vikings 31
Ravens 19, Browns 21
Dolphins 26, Bills 33
Falcons 23, Saints 28
Steelers 20, Panthers 18
Eagles 34, Bears 24
Chiefs 38, Texans 17
Cowboys 29, Jaguars 23
Lions 31, Jets 28
Cardinals 23, Broncos 21
Patriots 28, Raiders 26
Titans 24, Chargers 22
Bengals 29, Buccaneers 21
Giants 23, Commanders 27
Rams 21, Packers 27
Quote from: webny99 on December 15, 2022, 11:08:39 AM
FiveThirtyEight on the prospect of the entire NFC East making the playoffs being very much alive entering Week 15: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-entire-nfc-east-can-make-the-playoffs/
I'm scared to death about this possibility.
I sort of want to see a WAS—NYG tie.
Quote from: webny99 on December 15, 2022, 01:29:20 PM
Meanwhile the Jets have 0 prime time games
That changes a week from tonight when they host Jacksonville on Thursday Night (yes I still consider Thursday Night as "Prime" time). Please note that all 32 teams are required to play at least one night game each season (Thursday/Sunday/Monday).
Meanwhile my Texans path just gets lots tougher now....KC Chiefs do what they do all the time (even when they're not at their best), grind my Texans team to a pulp. KC's largest win this season
was by 21 points at Phoenix; until Sunday when that game will look like a nailbiter compared to what they're going to do in Reliant/NRG Stadium. I really wish I could be wrong but I say KC obliterates Houston 44-7 in our house. When the best team in the league goes up against the worst team, you can't expect anything less than a wipeout.
It might be kind of funny to watch Seahawks fans slowly descend back to frustration with the team. They want to act like this season doesn't matter, they weren't supposed to be good, the high draft from Denver pick will fix everything, whatever. In reality, if you miss the playoffs after a 6-3 start (and from a position where you had four straight games lined up against losing teams after that 6-3 start), that's a missed opportunity to not only, you know, compete for a Super Bowl, but also to attract free agents and build confidence within the team. And you don't know how many chances you're going to get before the team falls apart - Carroll is 71, Geno is 32, and injuries can strike anyone at any time. Some teams have more to lose than others, but nobody is truly "playing with house money" .
The NFL announced that there will be no game in Mexico City next season due to renovations at Estadio Azteca. Reportedly they may play a second game in Germany instead.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2022, 07:34:37 AM
It might be kind of funny to watch Seahawks fans slowly descend back to frustration with the team. They want to act like this season doesn't matter, they weren't supposed to be good, the high draft from Denver pick will fix everything, whatever. In reality, if you miss the playoffs after a 6-3 start (and from a position where you had four straight games lined up against losing teams after that 6-3 start), that's a missed opportunity to not only, you know, compete for a Super Bowl, but also to attract free agents and build confidence within the team. And you don't know how many chances you're going to get before the team falls apart - Carroll is 71, Geno is 32, and injuries can strike anyone at any time. Some teams have more to lose than others, but nobody is truly "playing with house money" .
It would be disappointing if they missed the playoffs, but I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that
really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office. Players are a different story, but they're still .500 with a great chance to finish with a winning record - better than half the league and far from the tankfest many expected.
And there's also the fact that preseason expectations, as they often do, became untethered from reality. They were never going to be a terrible team, nor was Denver going to be a top tier SB contender in that division and conference. Imagine predicting in the preseason that the Denver pick and Seattle's own pick would be in the same range;
that would have been called crazy. Then imagine predicting that the two picks wouldn't be in the same range because
Denver's would be top-5 and
Seattle would be in the thick of the playoff race in December? That would have been laughed off the face of the earth, but here we are.
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2022, 07:34:37 AM
It might be kind of funny to watch Seahawks fans slowly descend back to frustration with the team. They want to act like this season doesn't matter, they weren't supposed to be good, the high draft from Denver pick will fix everything, whatever. In reality, if you miss the playoffs after a 6-3 start (and from a position where you had four straight games lined up against losing teams after that 6-3 start), that's a missed opportunity to not only, you know, compete for a Super Bowl, but also to attract free agents and build confidence within the team. And you don't know how many chances you're going to get before the team falls apart - Carroll is 71, Geno is 32, and injuries can strike anyone at any time. Some teams have more to lose than others, but nobody is truly "playing with house money" .
It would be disappointing if they missed the playoffs, but I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office. Players are a different story, but they're still .500 with a great chance to finish with a winning record - better than half the league and far from the tankfest many expected.
And there's also the fact that preseason expectations, as they often do, became untethered from reality. They were never going to be a terrible team, nor was Denver going to be a top tier SB contender in that division and conference. Imagine predicting in the preseason that the Denver pick and Seattle's own pick would be in the same range; that would have been called crazy. Then imagine predicting that the two picks wouldn't be in the same range because Denver's would be top-5 and Seattle would be in the thick of the playoff race in December? That would have been laughed off the face of the earth, but here we are.
Now for the Seahawks going into 2023 will be interesting how they deal with the QB spot. Geno Smith has had a good/great season to right now but they will have to decide if they found their guy going forward or if this was a one year fluke with Geno and he reverts to what most everyone thought of Geno before this season. If I'm Geno though I stay with the Seahawks
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office.
And this perfectly sets up my point: every team's ultimate goal is to win a Super Bowl. Different teams are at different points along that journey, but when you're on top of your division by a game and a half in mid-November, missing the playoffs is squandering an excellent opportunity. Regardless of how bright you predict the future is, that's a loss of a year that you could have accomplished the ultimate goal, and that absolutely does matter. Does Seattle end this season feeling more optimistic than when they began it? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the end result doesn't matter.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2022, 03:45:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office.
And this perfectly sets up my point: every team's ultimate goal is to win a Super Bowl. Different teams are at different points along that journey, but when you're on top of your division by a game and a half in mid-November, missing the playoffs is squandering an excellent opportunity. Regardless of how bright you predict the future is, that's a loss of a year that you could have accomplished the ultimate goal, and that absolutely does matter. Does Seattle end this season feeling more optimistic than when they began it? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the end result doesn't matter.
I would argue that not every team's ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl. I would say not ever team in professional sports' ultimate goal is to win their respective championship. I would say every team's ultimate goal is definitely to make money.
There are some owners/ownership groups who flat out don't want to win, but instead would be fine making a profit every year even if the team stinks. Winning the Super Bowl takes a lot of work and you have to spend a lot of money on players and staff which hurts your bottom line. Some owners don't want to do that and would rather make $X being mediocre or horrible rather than make $Y being competitive or being the champion, so long as $X>$Y (or the potential Y could be. Small market teams differ from large market teams).
Case in point is clearly the Detroit Lions. The Twins are another one I think fits the mold. Maybe they haven't publicly came out and said it, but how they conduct their business is a dead giveaway.
I don't think they want to fail; I just think if being successful gets in the way of the maximum profit they can make in a year, they have no incentive to improve their competitiveness. They would rather float along with the players they have and if one day, they just happen to be good, then it's a win/win, but if they aren't, then whatever.
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2022, 03:45:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office.
And this perfectly sets up my point: every team's ultimate goal is to win a Super Bowl. Different teams are at different points along that journey, but when you're on top of your division by a game and a half in mid-November, missing the playoffs is squandering an excellent opportunity. Regardless of how bright you predict the future is, that's a loss of a year that you could have accomplished the ultimate goal, and that absolutely does matter. Does Seattle end this season feeling more optimistic than when they began it? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the end result doesn't matter.
I agree that it's disappointing to miss the playoffs because of the stakes and you never know what can happen once you're in, but at no point have the Seahawks looked like a true contender, nor should anyone have been expecting them to be a true contender this season.
Their Super Bowl odds will be extremely slim even if they make the playoffs - probably even if they win a playoff game! They'd have to win four straight as heavy underdogs, and I'm not saying that's impossible, but it would be one of the most surprising sports stories of all time, easily topping the Geno renaissance. In short: they're not going to win it all anyways, so it's more about the future.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on December 16, 2022, 03:58:55 PM
I would argue that not every team's ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl. I would say not ever team in professional sports' ultimate goal is to win their respective championship. I would say every team's ultimate goal is definitely to make money.
...
Case in point is clearly the Detroit Lions. The Twins are another one I think fits the mold. Maybe they haven't publicly came out and said it, but how they conduct their business is a dead giveaway.
It is worth distinguishing between ownership, who often cares more about profits, and the coaching staffs, who are almost always trying to get the most out of what they have and win a championship.
Another example would be the Titans, at least with their now-fired GM who was quite possibly fired
because he was looking more towards the future didn't try to go all-in on a Super Bowl.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on December 16, 2022, 03:58:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 16, 2022, 03:45:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
I think the Russ trade looking like a massive win, plus a great rookie draft class and Geno looking like a legit starter is all that really matters to Pete Carroll and their front office.
And this perfectly sets up my point: every team's ultimate goal is to win a Super Bowl. Different teams are at different points along that journey, but when you're on top of your division by a game and a half in mid-November, missing the playoffs is squandering an excellent opportunity. Regardless of how bright you predict the future is, that's a loss of a year that you could have accomplished the ultimate goal, and that absolutely does matter. Does Seattle end this season feeling more optimistic than when they began it? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the end result doesn't matter.
I would argue that not every team's ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl. I would say not ever team in professional sports' ultimate goal is to win their respective championship. I would say every team's ultimate goal is definitely to make money.
There are some owners/ownership groups who flat out don't want to win, but instead would be fine making a profit every year even if the team stinks. Winning the Super Bowl takes a lot of work and you have to spend a lot of money on players and staff which hurts your bottom line. Some owners don't want to do that and would rather make $X being mediocre or horrible rather than make $Y being competitive or being the champion, so long as $X>$Y (or the potential Y could be. Small market teams differ from large market teams).
Case in point is clearly the Detroit Lions. The Twins are another one I think fits the mold. Maybe they haven't publicly came out and said it, but how they conduct their business is a dead giveaway.
I don't think they want to fail; I just think if being successful gets in the way of the maximum profit they can make in a year, they have no incentive to improve their competitiveness. They would rather float along with the players they have and if one day, they just happen to be good, then it's a win/win, but if they aren't, then whatever.
I agree that some owners likely have ulterior motives, but for the players, coaches, GM, etc., a Super Bowl is the goal.
Quote from: webny99 on December 16, 2022, 04:40:09 PM
I agree that it's disappointing to miss the playoffs because of the stakes and you never know what can happen once you're in, but at no point have the Seahawks looked like a true contender, nor should anyone have been expecting them to be a true contender this season.
Their Super Bowl odds will be extremely slim even if they make the playoffs - probably even if they win a playoff game! They'd have to win four straight as heavy underdogs, and I'm not saying that's impossible, but it would be one of the most surprising sports stories of all time, easily topping the Geno renaissance. In short: they're not going to win it all anyways, so it's more about the future.
Let's go back in time. 2021, the Rams are 7-4, having lost three straight. 2021, the Bengals are 7-6, having lost two straight and four of their last six. 2020, the Bucs are 7-5, having lost two straight and three of their last four. 2019, the Chiefs are 6-4, having lost four of their last six. 2017, the Eagles just lost their MVP-caliber quarterback for the season. 2016, the Falcons are 7-5, having lost four of their last seven. 2014, the Seahawks are 6-4, looking like a shell of the team that won it all the previous year.
How many people had any of those teams making the Super Bowl, or winning it, at those moments? I would guess that none of them were in the top 5 per betting odds. Sure, Seattle would be a longer shot than most if not all of those, but not by a whole lot, especially if Geno is as legit as people think he is.
I live well out of market for my team, the Packers. I had Sunday Ticket for years but it eventually got too expensive and DirecTV's service went to crap after ATT bought it so I've lived with going to bars and now NFL RedZone (my favorite way to spend fall Sundays). Apple has now dropped out of the competition for the Sunday NFL package (https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/12/16/report-apple-bows-out-of-sunday-ticket-talks-leaving-amazon-and-google-as-the-finalists/) leaving the evil empires of Google (YouTube) and Amazon to battle for the rights. I'm guessing both will charge a premium for it but at least I won't have to have an ugly dish on my home if I get it.
Jeff Saturday sure is thankful for Urban Meyer right now. Saturday is probably a worse NFL coach, but Meyer's off-field chaos means that his will be the more widely remembered disaster.
Only 885 pass yards in the last two games for Cousins. Really makes you wonder why they pay him so much. Big contract for a top 10 QB? How will they ever survive?
That was awful refereeing, though nobody will remember it because the Vikings won anyway. There's literally no reason to not let it play out when the ball is on the ground. Who knows what prompted them to blow the whistle because Jackson wasn't even close to being down.
And the funniest part of that game? Turnovers didn't even play a role in the Colts collapse. The only one was the fumble the refs messed up, which the Vikings didn't score off anyways. Indy just got completely ran over, like an FCS team playing Alabama, for the entire second half.
Also: "garbage time" . It's garbage time until it isn't, huh?
Garbage time is not a legitimate argument for anything unless it's like a 3-4 possession deficit in the last few minutes of the 4th and backups are in. Professional athletes don't stop going hard, whether they're on the winning side or the losing side.
What an epic fail by the Colts, which saved an epic fail by the Vikings. It's hard to tell how good Minnesota is, having fallen 33-0 only to cap off the biggest comeback in NFL history. It's very easy to see how bad the Colts are, having blown another big lead. What must Jim Irsay be thinking right now?
I was pretty critical of the Vikings after they beat the Bills, but after they snatched away the "Largest Comeback" title this afternoon, I'm really more just wowed by what an insane season they're having than annoyed by their record. So, time to give them their flowers for (1) the largest comeback, obviously, (2) tying the NFL record for one score wins, and (3) clinching the division a week before Christmas. To do all three in one game is truly next level.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2022, 05:57:27 PM
Also: "garbage time" . It's garbage time until it isn't, huh?
Garbage time is not a legitimate argument for anything unless it's like a 3-4 possession deficit in the last few minutes of the 4th and backups are in. Professional athletes don't stop going hard, whether they're on the winning side or the losing side.
I certainly agree that there is no such thing as garbage time in the first half, probably even in the first three quarters. With that said... not all big leads are created equal. This Vikings game today and the game they played a few weeks ago against the Cowboys is a great example of the contrast. The Cowboys were truly dominant to go up 40-3 and really didn't feel like the Vikings had any chance at all. They just didn't have it that day and it was beyond reconciling before their offense could get going. Today was a lot more... weird. The Colts were up 33-0 with only one offensive touchdown. It was a disaster on the scoreboard for the Vikings, but it felt completely different since it was clear the Colts really weren't 33 points better than the Vikings, they just had a defensive and special teams TD to build up the lead and then kept settling for FG's.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2022, 05:33:23 PM
Jeff Saturday sure is thankful for Urban Meyer right now. Saturday is probably a worse NFL coach, but Meyer's off-field chaos means that his will be the more widely remembered disaster.
Expectations aren't the same for interim coaches. I don't think the Saturday hire is anywhere close to the disaster level of Urban Meyer (and firing Reich was a much worse move than hiring Saturday), but that subject can wait for the offseason.
I first saw the score to the Colts game and loved it when it was 33-0. Then I saw the score later in the 4th quarter and I started thinking "surely the Vikings won't complete the comeback will they?" I checked the score after overtime and started laughing when they did. Time to clean house over at 56th Street.
Quote from: skluth on December 17, 2022, 11:17:44 AM
I live well out of market for my team, the Packers. I had Sunday Ticket for years but it eventually got too expensive and DirecTV's service went to crap after ATT bought it so I've lived with going to bars and now NFL RedZone (my favorite way to spend fall Sundays). Apple has now dropped out of the competition for the Sunday NFL package (https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/12/16/report-apple-bows-out-of-sunday-ticket-talks-leaving-amazon-and-google-as-the-finalists/) leaving the evil empires of Google (YouTube) and Amazon to battle for the rights. I'm guessing both will charge a premium for it but at least I won't have to have an ugly dish on my home if I get it.
Until then, a VPN and some internet googling can be your friend. :D :D :D
Is Browns-Ravens the only game without referee interference today
Cowboys :-D
Hi, as you can tell by my username, I am a big Jets fan, and I was just wondering if you think they can still make a push for the playoffs. Sitting at 7-7 and 4th in the AFC. If the Patriots and Chargers lose, then we will still be tied, but both teams have tiebreakers against us. Just wondering if y'all think they can still get into the playoffs.
That 3rd quarter by the Bucs was giving me nightmare flashbacks to yesterday's Vikings 1st half.
-3 turnovers
-failed fake punt
-17 points allowed
-4th down defensive stop negated by penalty
-dropped pick
-kick returner error resulted in starting a drive inside their 10
Quote from: TMETSJETSYT on December 18, 2022, 05:58:30 PM
Hi, as you can tell by my username, I am a big Jets fan, and I was just wondering if you think they can still make a push for the playoffs. Sitting at 7-7 and 4th in the AFC. If the Patriots and Chargers lose, then we will still be tied, but both teams have tiebreakers against us. Just wondering if y'all think they can still get into the playoffs.
They still have a 21% chance, according to FiveThirtyEight. The Ravens and Chargers both have easy remaining schedules and are very likely in, so it will be the 3 AFC East teams battling for the final spot. Jets will probably have to win out and will certainly need to beat the Dolphins in Week 18 to have any chance of getting in.
"What the hell, it's the final play of regulation, we might as well try some laterals." The New England Patriots demonstrated rather clearly why that's not necessarily a very good idea.
Quote from: gonealookin on December 18, 2022, 07:46:01 PM
"What the hell, it's the final play of regulation, we might as well try some laterals." The New England Patriots demonstrated rather clearly why that's not necessarily a very good idea.
Basically, you should never do this when you're tied/leading.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Patriots-Raiders. W.T.F.?
All they had to do was run out the clock and head into overtime. Instead.......an inexplicable loss. For a supposedly disciplined team, it was the worst time to break down and practice lateral passing. Now it's on to Cincinnati...a phrase that actually has meaning now.
Prior to that debacle was another hilariously bad call on the incomplete pass to Keenan Cole that was ruled a touchdown. I hardly ever complain about referees; it's one thing to make an unpopular but subjective call (PI, roughing the passer), it's another to be blatantly definitively wrong on a massive game-changing play - after reviewing it. Questionable pass interference calls are more excusable because they happen so fast and (for some reason) are not reviewable, but with a simple binary rule like both feet inbounds and the opportunity to review the play, it's embarrassing that they got that wrong.
2 of the 3 worst calls/non-calls I've ever seen have taken place in the last two days (other being in the 2018 NFC title game). The league needs to take some legitimate action here so that this doesn't continue into the playoffs.
Bad loss for Dallas after leading 27-10 at one point in the 3rd quarter. Jags TD, Dak pick, Jags TD, three and out, Jags TD. Plus another three and out in the last two minutes of the 4th, which allowed Jacksonville to send it to overtime, and of course the pick six to end it. Giving the ball back to the other offense so quickly will kill you in today's NFL.
The good news is that it hopefully won't matter. The division is a loss anyway. One more win will likely secure the 5 seed, which means facing the NFC South champion in the wild card. I like Dallas' chances against whoever that is. After that, just gotta hope for the best against Philly and/or San Fran. Minnesota would be the ideal divisional round matchup, but I really don't see the Niners losing in the wild card, meaning the Cowboys would go to either Philly or San Fran for the divisional.
There have been some great weeks of games this season, but it's hard to argue this wasn't THE best week.
-Colts-Vikings largest comeback in history; Dolphins-Bills winter classic
-All 6 early games within one score including Cowboys-Jaguars and Chiefs-Texans(!?) going to OT and Lions-Jets coming down to the wire
-Brady implosion in Bengals-Bucs, Titans-Chargers down to the wire, and whatever that insane Pats-Raiders finish was
SNF is still a question mark, but so far, Browns-Ravens was the only dud all weekend.
Quote from: webny99 on December 18, 2022, 09:36:22 PM
There have been some great weeks of games this season, but it's hard to argue this wasn't THE best week.
-Colts-Vikings largest comeback in history; Dolphins-Bills winter classic
-All 6 early games within one score including Cowboys-Jaguars and Chiefs-Texans(!?) going to OT and Lions-Jets coming down to the wire
-Brady implosion in Bengals-Bucs, Titans-Chargers down to the wire, and whatever that insane Pats-Raiders finish was
SNF is still a question mark, but so far, Browns-Ravens was the only dud all weekend.
I was watching NFL Red Zone and told my son he needed to come out and watch because two of the late games were going to overtime, and then somehow neither of them did.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 18, 2022, 10:02:14 PM
I was watching NFL Red Zone and told my son he needed to come out and watch because two of the late games were going to overtime, and then somehow neither of them did.
With 50 seconds left, I figured the Chargers had a decent chance of winning in regulation, but it took one of the most bizarre plays ever to keep Pats/Raiders from going to OT.
It is also interesting that both Brady and the Patriots had their worst meltdown since they separated at pretty much the same time.
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Prior to that debacle was another hilariously bad call on the incomplete pass to Keenan Cole that was ruled a touchdown. I hardly ever complain about referees; it's one thing to make an unpopular but subjective call (PI, roughing the passer), it's another to be blatantly definitively wrong on a massive game-changing play - after reviewing it. Questionable pass interference calls are more excusable because they happen so fast and (for some reason) are not reviewable, but with a simple binary rule like both feet inbounds and the opportunity to review the play, it's embarrassing that they got that wrong.
2 of the 3 worst calls/non-calls I've ever seen have taken place in the last two days (other being in the 2018 NFC title game). The league needs to take some legitimate action here so that this doesn't continue into the playoffs.
There was no camera angle that showed a direct down-the-sideline view on that. The angle that appeared to show the toe out of bounds was from behind the goal posts, and that offset creates a bit of a distorted view. I was inclined to stick with "play stands as called" by the official on the field who probably
was looking directly down the sideline.
As to "fixing it for the playoffs"...well that will happen because playoff games are covered by many more cameras, I'm sure some of which would be down-the-line views including pylon cams. Today's game was one of five Fox had today and glancing at The 506 maps it was probably #3 in distribution, so it wouldn't have had any extra cameras beyond what is network standard for an adequate production.
Quote from: gonealookin on December 18, 2022, 10:06:51 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2022, 08:53:03 PM
Prior to that debacle was another hilariously bad call on the incomplete pass to Keenan Cole that was ruled a touchdown. I hardly ever complain about referees; it's one thing to make an unpopular but subjective call (PI, roughing the passer), it's another to be blatantly definitively wrong on a massive game-changing play - after reviewing it. Questionable pass interference calls are more excusable because they happen so fast and (for some reason) are not reviewable, but with a simple binary rule like both feet inbounds and the opportunity to review the play, it's embarrassing that they got that wrong.
2 of the 3 worst calls/non-calls I've ever seen have taken place in the last two days (other being in the 2018 NFC title game). The league needs to take some legitimate action here so that this doesn't continue into the playoffs.
There was no camera angle that showed a direct down-the-sideline view on that. The angle that appeared to show the toe out of bounds was from behind the goal posts, and that offset creates a bit of a distorted view. I was inclined to stick with "play stands as called" by the official on the field who probably was looking directly down the sideline.
As to "fixing it for the playoffs"...well that will happen because playoff games are covered by many more cameras, I'm sure some of which would be down-the-line views including pylon cams. Today's game was one of five Fox had today and glancing at The 506 maps it was probably #3 in distribution, so it wouldn't have had any extra cameras beyond what is network standard for an adequate production.
Not to mention in today's age, we are so dependent on wanting every angle possible on ultra-clear screens, that while people think today's refs are worse than previous eras, it's really because in previous eras there weren't as many camera angles available, and there was nothing we could see to counter the ref's ruling. Even instant replays were quite primitive.
As recently as the 80's and early 90's, many games had only 4 cameras: At the 50 yard line, both 20 yard lines, and 1 end zone (not even both). Today's games have about double that for just basic cameras; "Games of the Week" probably have more than a dozen.
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
Quote from: TMETSJETSYT on December 18, 2022, 05:58:30 PM
Hi, as you can tell by my username, I am a big Jets fan, and I was just wondering if you think they can still make a push for the playoffs. Sitting at 7-7 and 4th in the AFC. If the Patriots and Chargers lose, then we will still be tied, but both teams have tiebreakers against us. Just wondering if y'all think they can still get into the playoffs.
No. At 7-3 I said the Jets wouldn't win another game. I stand by this as a Jets fan.
The ending of the Patriots-Raiders game today is reminiscent of the original 'Miracle in the Meadowlands'. In that game, all the Giants had to do was take a knee and the game would have been over. For some reason, the Giants ran a play, fumbled the ball, and the Eagles were able to score a late game-winning touchdown.
https://youtu.be/hfOiY5MhqHA
In today's game, Patriots could have easily just taken a knee and gone into overtime. They decided to try for a low-chance touchdown. Once the ball was fumbled and recovered by the Patriots, they should have went down or out of bounds to go into OT. The lateral was probably one of the dumbest moves ever made during a tied game as time elapsed in which another opportunity was highly probable, and the result was a defensive recovery by the Raiders and touchdown for the win.
https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1604672340301946880?t=yVDrTnNwv5A6xGZjWOSVKA&s=19
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 11:43:34 PM
The ending of the Patriots-Raiders game today is reminiscent of the original 'Miracle in the Meadowlands'. In that game, all the Giants had to do was take a knee and the game would have been over. For some reason, the Giants ran a play, fumbled the ball, and the Eagles were able to score a late game-winning touchdown.
https://youtu.be/hfOiY5MhqHA
In today's game, Patriots could have easily just taken a knee and gone into overtime. They decided to try for a low-chance touchdown. Once the ball was fumbled and recovered by the Patriots, they should have went down or out of bounds to go into OT. The lateral was probably one of the dumbest moves ever made during a tied game as time elapsed in which another opportunity was highly probable, and the result was a defensive recovery by the Raiders and touchdown for the win.
https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1604672340301946880?t=yVDrTnNwv5A6xGZjWOSVKA&s=19
As far the "The Miracle in the Meadowlands", the "Victory Formation" was not thought of then. In fact, it wasn't until 1987 that the rule allowing QBs to simply kneel was allowed. Sure, Giants QB Joe Pisarcik could have backed up, held the ball, and then fallen down when a defensive person came near him,
which he did on the prior play, instead of running the fateful play. However, the MLB for the Eagles, Bill Bergey, knocked the center for the Giants into Pisarcik trying to cause a fumble. The offensive coordinator for the Giants, Bob Gibson, did not want to risk an injury to Pisarcik, and, in the prevailing attitude of the time that simply "falling on the ball" was not sporting, called the running play to Larry Csonka. The players in the huddle were like WTF? and Csonka said to not hand the ball to him. Well, because the Giants were late leaving the huddle because of the play call, the play clock was winding down. The center snapped the ball early, so Pisarcik never had a strong grip of the ball. He turned, the ball went off of Csonka's hip, and into the hands of Herman "We play to win the game" Edwards for the TD and history.
In fact, earlier that 1978 season, Washington played Dallas on Monday Night Football on October 2. Washington was leading 9-3 and were inside their own 20 as time was running out. Washington QB Joe Theismann took the snap and backed up and kept backing up toward his own end zone as the game clock was getting closer to 0:00. He finally reached the end zone, fell down, and was touched (shoved) by Randy White of Dallas as time expired, having the final score of 9-5, Washington. Just another example of the prevailing attitude of the time.
The Patriots play was one of the stupidest in NFL history. If Tom Brady was there, this would never had happened. He would have just taken a knee and played for OT. This was just an example of players trying to do too much (and maybe looking for a highlight on ESPN, which they did get :wow:) and, unfortunately, taking defeat right out of the mouth of a possible victory or tie. It is a wonder that
Roadgeekteen hasn't demanded that Jakobi Meyers be immediately waived.
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
Another poor ref call on SNF.
The roster-depleted Texans are losing players as much as they are losing fourth-quarter leads; they lost SEVEN (7) leads in the fourth quarter and lost just as many starters in the process. They need something -- anything -- to boost their spirits/morale, but how are they going to find it in Tennessee on Christmas Day?
Also why didn't Bill Belichick just opt to play overtime? Wait that couldn't have possibly been him; he would NEVER make senseless decisions like that. So who was that imposter on the sideline calling plays for the Patriots?
Quote from: 1 on December 14, 2022, 09:17:59 AM
Championships aren't as prestigious when there were fewer teams in existence....
In the mid-1990s there were only about twenty-something teams in the league -- a lot less competition than there are now (32 teams). The Texans didn't exist until 2002 (the year I started watching the game; I had no interest before my Texans debut); also Baltimore, Tennessee, Jacksonville, Carolina, and St. Louis didn't have teams back then either.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 18, 2022, 08:17:33 PM
Patriots-Raiders. W.T.F.?
All they had to do was run out the clock and head into overtime. Instead.......an inexplicable loss. For a supposedly disciplined team, it was the worst time to break down and practice lateral passing. Now it's on to Cincinnati...a phrase that actually has meaning now.
Yes, the 10-4 first place Bengals (10-2 after an 0-2 start) are visiting Gillette next week. This after spotting Tom Brady a 17-point lead and then erasing it rather quickly. Also, this is the first loss on home turf that Tom Brady experienced when he had a lead of 17 or more points (89-1). Even though Brady isn't having a bad season passing statistically, it surely is not anywhere close to his standards. He is averaging 6.3 yds/attempt and
only 9.5 yds/completion. 66% completion percentage. TD/Int ratio: 20/7, passer rating: 89.1. Team record: 6-8, and have scored 247 pts, second lowest in the NFC (Rams: 218 in 13 games). Divorce seems to be a bitch, doesn't it.
We will have to see if the Patriots can recover from this debacle.
In other NFL observations, how can a team be 11-3 (Minnesota Vikings) and outscore your opponents by two points (351-349)? Crazy, when it seems as if every game you win is by one possession, aided by a 33 points down comeback, and the games you lose are blowouts. Of course, there have been many teams with winning records that have had a negative point differential (one glaring example: 1978 Houston Oilers, 10-6 283 PF 298 PA and a playoff appearance, reaching the AFC Championship Game losing 34-5 to Pittsburgh). Heck, in 1971 the Cincinnati Bengals were 4-10 and
outscored the opposition 286-265.
There is a chance that both conferences South division could have first place teams with losing records. If Tampa Bay loses one more game, then the NFC South will be a definite as the other three teams are currently 5-9. Tennessee currently is leading the AFC South at 7-7 with Jacksonville (!?!) behind them at 6-8.
Even though the Cowboys are 10-4, I do not believe they could be trusted in the playoffs. They could easily be bounced out by a lesser team as well as possibly winning a playoff game or two. I guess it depends on how well Coach McCarthy is thinking that day.
The Philadelphia Eagles appear to be the best team in the NFL at the moment (13-1, best record in the league, duh), with Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Kansas City right behind them. I can see the Eagles be the NFC representative at Super Bowl LVII with a dogfight between the other three teams mentioned above as the AFC representative. If I had to pick right now, I would go with Cincinnati.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 19, 2022, 01:32:40 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 14, 2022, 09:17:59 AM
Championships aren't as prestigious when there were fewer teams in existence....
In the mid-1990s there were only about twenty-something teams in the league -- a lot less competition than there are now (32 teams). The Texans didn't exist until 2002 (the year I started watching the game; I had no interest before my Texans debut); also Baltimore, Tennessee, Jacksonville, Carolina, and St. Louis didn't have teams back then either.
The NFL had 26 teams from 1970-75, 28 teams from 1976-1994, 30 teams from 1995-1998, 31 teams from 1999-2001, and 32 teams from 2002-present. Basically, a Super Bowl victory in 1971 (Super Bowl V) should be as prestigious as one from 2021 as there are only six more teams now than there were in 1970. Now, whether the NFL Champion or the AFL Champion before 1966, or the first four Super Bowl winners is considered "prestigious" is up for debate as the NFL had 14 teams in 1965, 15 teams in 1966, and 16 teams in 1967-69; the AFL had 8 teams in 1965, 9 teams in 1966-67, and 10 teams in 1968-69.
There was also a prevailing attitude that the fewer the teams means that only the "most talented" players ever played in that league and that any expansion would dilute that said talent. For example, with a 40-man roster limit in the NFL in the early- to mid-1960's, that meant that 560 of the "most talented" players were playing in the NFL. With an expansion in Atlanta in 1966 and New Orleans in 1967, that meant that the talent pool was now diluted with a total of 640 players, with the thought that these 80 extra players would not have been in the NFL in 1965. Of course, that thought is bull. There were fringe players on every team then. Not everyone was good enough to play in the NFL, even if they were on one then.
Now things are different, especially with today's game. Players train better, eat better, and generally devote themselves to playing in the NFL. The main reason is that players now are paid much, much, much better than those who played before 1982. The players then (especially in the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's) worked off-season jobs for the extra income they needed and were not able to continually stay in shape during the off-season. They would use the six week preseason to get back in "football playing shape" for the regular season. Today, players have only three weeks to prove themselves or be ready for the season, thus the off-season training programs developed for them.
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 01:50:42 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 18, 2022, 08:17:33 PM
Patriots-Raiders. W.T.F.?
All they had to do was run out the clock and head into overtime. Instead.......an inexplicable loss. For a supposedly disciplined team, it was the worst time to break down and practice lateral passing. Now it's on to Cincinnati...a phrase that actually has meaning now.
Yes, the 10-4 first place Bengals (10-2 after an 0-2 start) are visiting Gillette next week. This after spotting Tom Brady a 17-point lead and then erasing it rather quickly. Also, this is the first loss on home turf that Tom Brady experienced when he had a lead of 17 or more points (89-1). Even though Brady isn't having a bad season passing statistically, it surely is not anywhere close to his standards. He is averaging 6.3 yds/attempt and only 9.5 yds/completion. 66% completion percentage. TD/Int ratio: 20/7, passer rating: 89.1. Team record: 6-8, and have scored 247 pts, second lowest in the NFC (Rams: 218 in 13 games). Divorce seems to be a bitch, doesn't it.
We will have to see if the Patriots can recover from this debacle.
In other NFL observations, how can a team be 11-3 (Minnesota Vikings) and outscore your opponents by two points (351-349)? Crazy, when it seems as if every game you win is by one possession, aided by a 33 points down comeback, and the games you lose are blowouts. Of course, there have been many teams with winning records that have had a negative point differential (one glaring example: 1978 Houston Oilers, 10-6 283 PF 298 PA and a playoff appearance, reaching the AFC Championship Game losing 34-5 to Pittsburgh). Heck, in 1971 the Cincinnati Bengals were 4-10 and outscored the opposition 286-265.
There is a chance that both conferences South division could have first place teams with losing records. If Tampa Bay loses one more game, then the NFC South will be a definite as the other three teams are currently 5-9. Tennessee currently is leading the AFC South at 7-7 with Jacksonville (!?!) behind them at 6-8.
Even though the Cowboys are 10-4, I do not believe they could be trusted in the playoffs. They could easily be bounced out by a lesser team as well as possibly winning a playoff game or two. I guess it depends on how well Coach McCarthy is thinking that day.
The Philadelphia Eagles appear to be the best team in the NFL at the moment (13-1, best record in the league, duh), with Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Kansas City right behind them. I can see the Eagles be the NFC representative at Super Bowl LVII with a dogfight between the other three teams mentioned above as the AFC representative. If I had to pick right now, I would go with Cincinnati.
It's hard to trust anyone in the NFC come start of the playoffs. The Vikings had two teams implode on them the last month and are nowhere as good as their record. Cowboys would be 8-6 right now if the Colts and Texans weren't on the schedule the last few weeks. Eagles seem to be the class of the NFC but have had too many close calls against weak teams of late. Washington and New York are overachieving for the season but really aren't all that good. The NFC South is fortunate they have to send one team to the playoffs. The 49ers look the most consistent but to trust their 3rd string qb? The Seahawks are hitting a wall. Lions are playing great, but we expect them to mess it up, because they are the Lions. And Packers if they were lucky enough to claw back and nab the last playoff spot is still not a good team.
Eagles will be my favorites to win the NFC but will pick whoever wins the AFC to win the Superbowl
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 12:50:02 AM
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
That's what I read later on. Although at the time, at real speed, it looked like the ball had slipped up and out, with an intentional lateral afterwards (that was intercepted).
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2022, 07:54:24 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
I'm on the fence on this one. A lot of people complaint that the refs need to let the teams play and stop calling so many penalties, yet those same people want to make penalties reviewable when one was missed. If they start reviewing them, then people will ultra-slow mo the replays to find a ticky-tack touch that is an "obvious" interference. Sure, if the guy is mowed down it's obvious. But do fans start getting to the point where they cry foul because a thread of a uniform was touched?
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 19, 2022, 08:40:12 AM
Eagles seem to be the class of the NFC but have had too many close calls against weak teams of late.
I'd argue they've played this way all season. Not every game is going to be a 56-7 blowout. They're still winning the games with room to spare. 8 of their 13 wins have been by 9+ points (2 possession games).
Their point differential is a huge +143. Dallas isn't that far off in that department because they ran up the scoreboard a few times, but 3 additional losses tells the real story. Giants are 8-5-1 yet are -25 in point differential.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 12:50:02 AM
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
That's what I read later on. Although at the time, at real speed, it looked like the ball had slipped up and out, with an intentional lateral afterwards (that was intercepted).
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2022, 07:54:24 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
I'm on the fence on this one. A lot of people complaint that the refs need to let the teams play and stop calling so many penalties, yet those same people want to make penalties reviewable when one was missed. If they start reviewing them, then people will ultra-slow mo the replays to find a ticky-tack touch that is an "obvious" interference. Sure, if the guy is mowed down it's obvious. But do fans start getting to the point where they cry foul because a thread of a uniform was touched?
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 19, 2022, 08:40:12 AM
Eagles seem to be the class of the NFC but have had too many close calls against weak teams of late.
I'd argue they've played this way all season. Not every game is going to be a 56-7 blowout. They're still winning the games with room to spare. 8 of their 13 wins have been by 9+ points (2 possession games).
Their point differential is a huge +143. Dallas isn't that far off in that department because they ran up the scoreboard a few times, but 3 additional losses tells the real story. Giants are 8-5-1 yet are -25 in point differential.
Guess depends what version shows up them. Those games vs the Colts, Bears, Packers, and Commanders to me says they are very beatable. Eagles will still be the favorite, but the eye test says they are vulnerable. They cowboys are the great mystery. On paper they should be right there with the Eagles, but that team mentally you never get a read on. For me as a Packers fan has me looking at guys like Elliot, Dak, and other long-term Cowboys as to what presence they are in the locker room. Not saying McCarthy is blameless, but the Cowboys before McCarthy with this core have patterns of playing down to the competition like they have the last 3 weeks. I'm looking more in that direction first then their coach.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 19, 2022, 08:40:12 AM
Cowboys would be 8-6 right now if the Colts and Texans weren't on the schedule the last few weeks.
Are we taking out everyone's wins against low-quality teams then?
QuoteEagles seem to be the class of the NFC but have had too many close calls against weak teams of late.
The Chiefs have struggled to beat the Broncos and Texans the last two weeks, are we applying the same logic there?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 12:50:02 AM
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
That's what I read later on. Although at the time, at real speed, it looked like the ball had slipped up and out, with an intentional lateral afterwards (that was intercepted).
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
I'm on the fence on this one. A lot of people complaint that the refs need to let the teams play and stop calling so many penalties, yet those same people want to make penalties reviewable when one was missed. If they start reviewing them, then people will ultra-slow mo the replays to find a ticky-tack touch that is an "obvious" interference. Sure, if the guy is mowed down it's obvious. But do fans start getting to the point where they cry foul because a thread of a uniform was touched?
Many fans will go nuts regardless. As I said, I personally would be satisfied with the blatantly obvious calls being made correctly. Officiating isn't perfect and that's part of the game, but some of the stuff that happened this week is inexcusable.
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2022, 10:59:05 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 12:50:02 AM
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
That's what I read later on. Although at the time, at real speed, it looked like the ball had slipped up and out, with an intentional lateral afterwards (that was intercepted).
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
I'm on the fence on this one. A lot of people complaint that the refs need to let the teams play and stop calling so many penalties, yet those same people want to make penalties reviewable when one was missed. If they start reviewing them, then people will ultra-slow mo the replays to find a ticky-tack touch that is an "obvious" interference. Sure, if the guy is mowed down it's obvious. But do fans start getting to the point where they cry foul because a thread of a uniform was touched?
Many fans will go nuts regardless. As I said, I personally would be satisfied with the blatantly obvious calls being made correctly. Officiating isn't perfect and that's part of the game, but some of the stuff that happened this week is inexcusable.
We had it for at least one season (maybe two?). I'd be in favor of it if the review official could only watch it at full speed. When you go to slow mo, everything looks like a penalty.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 19, 2022, 01:34:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 19, 2022, 10:59:05 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 19, 2022, 12:50:02 AM
BTW, Stevenson didn't fumble--he actually lateraled to Meyers on the play.
That's what I read later on. Although at the time, at real speed, it looked like the ball had slipped up and out, with an intentional lateral afterwards (that was intercepted).
Quote from: epzik8 on December 19, 2022, 07:34:00 AM
Refs wanted to get back at us for Philly I suppose. What can you do.
Reviewable pass interference please . . .
I'm on the fence on this one. A lot of people complaint that the refs need to let the teams play and stop calling so many penalties, yet those same people want to make penalties reviewable when one was missed. If they start reviewing them, then people will ultra-slow mo the replays to find a ticky-tack touch that is an "obvious" interference. Sure, if the guy is mowed down it's obvious. But do fans start getting to the point where they cry foul because a thread of a uniform was touched?
Many fans will go nuts regardless. As I said, I personally would be satisfied with the blatantly obvious calls being made correctly. Officiating isn't perfect and that's part of the game, but some of the stuff that happened this week is inexcusable.
We had it for at least one season (maybe two?). I'd be in favor of it if the review official could only watch it at full speed. When you go to slow mo, everything looks like a penalty.
Was only one season that pass interference was reviewable. I believe like one the Vikings had one called/overturned against them vs the Packers.........otherwise nothing was ever called or overturned that season to the best of my memory. And fans and teams were like what's the point then for pass interference being reviewable.
The problem with PI is that the rule is clear that it doesn't take just contact, it takes contact that substantially hinders a player's ability to catch a pass. It's the most subjective rule there is.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 10:19:21 PM
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
As long as I remember, it was 1 foot in college football and 2 feet in the NFL.
Quote from: Big John on December 19, 2022, 05:36:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 10:19:21 PM
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
As long as I remember, it was 1 foot in college football and 2 feet in the NFL.
I always recall it being the same way you describe. I don't ever remember one foot being sufficient in the NFL. The main rules change I remember as to a completed pass was the elimination of the "force-out" rule whereby when a receiver catches and controls the ball inbounds in the air but is unable to put both feet down because a defender pushes him out of bounds before he can touch his feet to the ground, even though it is clear he otherwise would have done so, is no longer a completed pass. I'm certain I recall that in the past that sort of thing could be considered a completion.
Edited to add: It looks like the NFL eliminated the "force-out" rule prior to the 2008 season. The following is the old rule:
QuoteA forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 19, 2022, 05:10:36 PM
The problem with PI is that the rule is clear that it doesn't take just contact, it takes contact that substantially hinders a player's ability to catch a pass. It's the most subjective rule there is.
Another element of its subjective nature: DPI cannot, by rule, apply when a thrown ball is deemed uncatchable (very subjective) or if tipped (this is actually such an objective element of the rule, it can be reviewed/challenged)
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 19, 2022, 05:43:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on December 19, 2022, 05:36:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 10:19:21 PM
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
As long as I remember, it was 1 foot in college football and 2 feet in the NFL.
I always recall it being the same way you describe. I don't ever remember one foot being sufficient in the NFL. The main rules change I remember as to a completed pass was the elimination of the "force-out" rule whereby when a receiver catches and controls the ball inbounds in the air but is unable to put both feet down because a defender pushes him out of bounds before he can touch his feet to the ground, even though it is clear he otherwise would have done so, is no longer a completed pass. I'm certain I recall that in the past that sort of thing could be considered a completion.
Edited to add: It looks like the NFL eliminated the "force-out" rule prior to the 2008 season. The following is the old rule:
QuoteA forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. For some reason, to me, it seems the 2 feet thing has taken on more importance more recently.
https://twitter.com/NFL_Memes/status/1604586266242256897
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 19, 2022, 05:43:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on December 19, 2022, 05:36:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 10:19:21 PM
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
As long as I remember, it was 1 foot in college football and 2 feet in the NFL.
I always recall it being the same way you describe. I don't ever remember one foot being sufficient in the NFL. The main rules change I remember as to a completed pass was the elimination of the "force-out" rule whereby when a receiver catches and controls the ball inbounds in the air but is unable to put both feet down because a defender pushes him out of bounds before he can touch his feet to the ground, even though it is clear he otherwise would have done so, is no longer a completed pass. I'm certain I recall that in the past that sort of thing could be considered a completion.
Edited to add: It looks like the NFL eliminated the "force-out" rule prior to the 2008 season. The following is the old rule:
QuoteA forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. For some reason, to me, it seems the 2 feet thing has taken on more importance more recently.
I think you're right in general and that the league has made the process of a catch more stringent. Recall a few years back when they amended the rule to say that a receiver must maintain control of the ball throughout the entire process of making the catch. Then that proved confusing, so they changed it again to require the player "secure control of the ball," have two feet or another body part down inbounds, and "perform an act common to the game" (such as a third step or stretching the ball towards the goal line or the line to gain) or have the ability to perform such an act (meaning, basically, a player could have run with the ball if he hadn't been tackled as he made the catch). Essentially all this is trying to clarify that if the ball pops out when the player hits the ground, it's an incomplete pass. (One might reasonably ask why the ground can cause an incomplete pass but can't cause a fumble.)
A look at the most likely games to be chosen for the regular season finale on SNF...
1. Ravens at Bengals for AFC North title
It's highly likely that both teams will go to the playoffs and the division title will come down to this game. The Bengals have to win just one of their next two to guarantee a chance for the division title. The Ravens can't fall back another game, so if the Bengals win both, they would also have to win both (at home vs. Falcons and Steelers) for a chance to clinch the tiebreaker - and the division - in Week 18. Fortunately for them, the Bengals have two tough games against the Patriots and Bills, so they may be able to afford a slip-up.
2. Titans at Jaguars for AFC South title
Almost identical situation to the AFC North, except the loser will likely miss out on the playoffs. Titans have to win one of their next two, Jaguars would have to win both only if the Titans also win both.
3. Jets at Dolphins for AFC Wild Card
This hinges on how things play out with the other wild card contenders, namely Chargers and Patriots. As of right now, either team could clinch a playoff berth here if they win out. The Chargers winning their next two and the Patriots losing at least one of two would make this a win and in for the final wild card spot.
4. Lions at Packers for NFC Wild Card
This will be an important game for the Lions, but the Packers being alive here depends on winning their next two games first, and it's probably irrelevant for them if they don't. It would also depend on how things play out with the other wild card contenders, namely the Commanders and Seahawks.
5. Falcons at Bucs or Panthers at Saints for NFC South title
In the battle for the NFL's worst division, I'm lumping these 2 matchups together because they're highly interconnected. Bucs can clinch with a win over Arizona this week and a win over the Panthers in Week 17. If they lose to the Panthers, things get very interesting. The Panthers could then clinch with a win over the Saints here, but if the Saints could have a chance too if they win their next two. The most likely outcome is that both games will matter and need to be played at the same time.
I'll bet the experts are now eating their caps who predicted that the Seahawks would completely fall apart and the Broncos would compete for a playoff spot with Russell Wilson at QB. It's funny how it's going to end up being the other way around...
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 20, 2022, 08:23:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2022, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 19, 2022, 05:43:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on December 19, 2022, 05:36:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2022, 10:19:21 PM
Rules are different too. It wasn't that long ago only 1 foot had to be in bounds. Mandating 2 feet be in bounds is where a lot of the arguments have occurred, since that second foot is often a critical inch in or out.
As long as I remember, it was 1 foot in college football and 2 feet in the NFL.
I always recall it being the same way you describe. I don't ever remember one foot being sufficient in the NFL. The main rules change I remember as to a completed pass was the elimination of the "force-out" rule whereby when a receiver catches and controls the ball inbounds in the air but is unable to put both feet down because a defender pushes him out of bounds before he can touch his feet to the ground, even though it is clear he otherwise would have done so, is no longer a completed pass. I'm certain I recall that in the past that sort of thing could be considered a completion.
Edited to add: It looks like the NFL eliminated the "force-out" rule prior to the 2008 season. The following is the old rule:
QuoteA forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. For some reason, to me, it seems the 2 feet thing has taken on more importance more recently.
I think you're right in general and that the league has made the process of a catch more stringent. Recall a few years back when they amended the rule to say that a receiver must maintain control of the ball throughout the entire process of making the catch. Then that proved confusing, so they changed it again to require the player "secure control of the ball," have two feet or another body part down inbounds, and "perform an act common to the game" (such as a third step or stretching the ball towards the goal line or the line to gain) or have the ability to perform such an act (meaning, basically, a player could have run with the ball if he hadn't been tackled as he made the catch). Essentially all this is trying to clarify that if the ball pops out when the player hits the ground, it's an incomplete pass. (One might reasonably ask why the ground can cause an incomplete pass but can't cause a fumble.)
So, I guess the Mel Gray touchdown catch for the St. Louis Cardinals against the Washington Redskins in 1975 to send the game into OT (Cardinals won 20-17) would not have been a catch under today's rules. ;-) https://youtu.be/2VKcuT6TBjg
^^ And the commentary would get the announcer fired today "like wild-eyed Indians"
RIP Franco Harris.
At least the weather cooperated for the Packers on Monday Night.
Mike
Can't expect the same down in Miami on Xmas day. ;)
Jaguars 21, Jets 20
Ravens 19, Falcons 17
Lions 30, Panthers 27
Chiefs 34, Seahawks 27
Browns 20, Saints 7
Titans 28, Texans 22
Bengals 27, Patriots 14
Vikings 28, Giants 24
Bills 44, Bears 17
49ers 25, Commanders 13
Cowboys 31, Eagles 23
Raiders 24, Steelers 17
Dolphins 35, Packers 14
Broncos 17, Rams 10
Buccaneers 20, Cardinals 17
Chargers 16, Colts 7
Quote from: Alps on December 18, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
No. At 7-3 I said the Jets wouldn't win another game. I stand by this as a Jets fan.
Oh no. You might be right about this, but the silver lining is that at least you know you have to move on from Zach Wilson.
The Jags are now tied with the Jets with a 7-8 record, but their division puts them in great position. All they have to do is beat the Texans to guarantee a win-and-in in Week 18. That's easier said than done though... they're on a 9-game losing streak against the Texans and haven't beat them since 2017.
Quote from: Alps on December 18, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
No. At 7-3 I said the Jets wouldn't win another game. I stand by this as a Jets fan.
Their last win, over the Bears, brought them to 7-4. That was the game Mike White played flawlessly in his first start of the season. Quite impressive if this isn't revisionist history.
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2022, 07:24:06 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 18, 2022, 10:26:51 PM
No. At 7-3 I said the Jets wouldn't win another game. I stand by this as a Jets fan.
Their last win, over the Bears, brought them to 7-4. That was the game Mike White played flawlessly in his first start of the season. Quite impressive if this isn't revisionist history.
Yeah. 6-3, 6-4, 7-4, pff.
Quote from: Big John on December 21, 2022, 09:33:12 AM
^^ And the commentary would get the announcer fired today "like wild-eyed Indians"
Yes, much has changed since the 1970's. Although, if he was around today, Pat Summerall more than likely would not be saying that in commentary.
Horrible day for special teams/kicking today (CIN-NE kickers are 1 for 4 in extra points).
Sigh....Pats season is essentially over. They could have pulled out a win, but too many mistakes did them in.
I don't want to hear a word about Hurts' absence from Eagles fans who went nuts over beating a Cooper Rush-led team in week 6. But in any case, that was an excellent game. Dak bounced back in a big way after the early pick six. Defense has to tighten up, can't be relying on 4 turnovers and 40 points from the offense to beat anyone.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 24, 2022, 05:18:05 PM
Sigh....Pats season is essentially over. They could have pulled out a win, but too many mistakes did them in.
Tough to win a game when you let the opposing QB complete 28 passes for 284 yards and 3 TDs in the first half.
Speaking of, also tough to win a game when you give up 320 rushing yards. The Lions is the Lions. Carolina is 5-4 in games started by anyone but Baker.
The Vikings just keep pulling it off, huh. Kirk has been the most clutch QB in the league this year.
As the playoff picture starts to crystalize, a reminder that this Thursday before Cowboys-Titans kicks off is the final deadline for any "forks" if anyone still has more to add.
8 teams have clinched playoff spots, including 6 division winners:
AFC: Bengals, Bills, Chiefs, Ravens
NFC: 49ers, Cowboys Eagles, Vikings
8 teams are eliminated:
AFC: Broncos, Browns, Colts, Texans
NFC: Bears, Cardinals, Falcons, Rams
16 teams competing for the final 6 spots which I'd classify as follows (
bold=division race;
italics=wild card race):
In good shape:
Chargers,
Dolphins,
Jaguars //
Bucs,
GiantsUphill climb:
Jets,
Patriots,
Titans //
Commanders,
Lions,
Packers,
Panthers,
SeahawksOn life support:
Raiders,
Steelers //
SaintsQuote from: webny99 on December 20, 2022, 09:26:04 AM
A look at the most likely games to be chosen for the regular season finale on SNF...
ALL of these are looking pretty good right now. We're already guaranteed an AFC South title game, and all the rest except for Bucs-Falcons are still in play but will depend on next week's results.
Remember Disney aka ABC/ESPN also has 2 National Broadcast games on Week 18 Saturday (I like to call them Games 257&258, respectively), and the Mouse House would love to also get 2 stand-alone, "Win and In" type games, in addition to the Game 272 SNF finale for NBC/Comcast
The more Division Title Games, the Better for the NFL and its TV partners
This marks the fourth (4th) consecutive season that both the Texans and Titans split road wins in both division games. The last home team to win was four years ago in December 2018 when the Texans won the Monday Night meeting in Reliant/NRG Stadium, since then the visiting team has won every meeting.
On a related note: my #2 favorite NFL team, Jaguars, has overtaken my #3 favorite NFL team, Titans, by virtue of the latter losing to my #1 team the Texans. And next week is the battle of my #1 and #2 teams. Just because my Texans won in Jacksonville earlier this season doesn't make our home game against them any easier, in fact Jacksonville is still rightfully favored to win the game; the revitalized Jaguars are surging and Trevor Lawrence is playing like a superstar QB.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 26, 2022, 02:09:49 AM
This marks the fourth (4th) consecutive season that both the Texans and Titans split road wins in both division games. The last home team to win was four years ago in December 2018 when the Texans won the Monday Night meeting in Reliant/NRG Stadium, since then the visiting team has won every meeting.
On a related note: my #2 favorite NFL team, Jaguars, has overtaken my #3 favorite NFL team, Titans, by virtue of the latter losing to my #1 team the Texans. And next week is the battle of my #1 and #2 teams. Just because my Texans won in Jacksonville earlier this season doesn't make our home game against them any easier, in fact Jacksonville is still rightfully favored to win the game; the revitalized Jaguars are surging and Trevor Lawrence is playing like a superstar QB.
It's weird that your three favorite teams are in the same division. Most people do not like the other teams in the same division as their favorite team.
Nathaniel Hackett fired! Probably a month and a half too late, but at least they didn't drag it out for too long.
Who would want to be Denver's coach? A declining quarterback for whom the team raided all of its assets, no high draft picks, and a brutal division.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 26, 2022, 05:49:50 PM
Who would want to be Denver's coach? A declining quarterback for whom the team raided all of its assets, no high draft picks, and a brutal division.
With Russ's contract and game, might as well go with a Defensive HC and rebuild that side. Dumb the offense down to Run & Play Action
A plan can be developed. But if you are going Defense in THAT division, it must be iron-clad. Hard to do with the current NFL rules
Denver has quietly put together a dominant season defensively (minus yesterday, where the team quit). That's how insanely bad their offense has been.
And that's why yesterday was so brutal for the Broncos... their defense had been their one constant all season. To give up 51 points and get blown out by the worst defending champion of all time (whose offense hadn't been much better than Denver's) was truly a "wheels falling off" moment, and I believe it cost Hackett his job. I think he would've lasted the rest of the season and had a slim chance to stay beyond that if they were even competitive against the 4-10 Rams.
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2022, 10:46:20 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2022, 08:29:05 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 05:58:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 09, 2022, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2022, 11:18:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 09, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
We must read different people. All the guys I follow on Twitter thought there was at least a sporting chance that he was moved. Either way, the Broncos will be massively overrated and the Seahawks underrated.
Well dang, I wasn't thinking that you're literally in the Denver area. Like I said, not a total shocker in the big picture, there just didn't seem to be a lot of talk of it in the past few weeks before it happened.
But I agree on your other point, I could totally see the Broncos underachieving. I think they'll at least end their 13-game losing streak to the Chiefs (still can't believe they didn't end it in Week 18 last year), but I'm not assuming they'll go on a Super Bowl run.
I live in Denver, but I'm a Vikings fan (born in Minnesota, so loyal to the team I cheered for as a kid, and I moved here during the Elway heyday and he was just on the news so much it was sickening if you weren't a Broncos fan).
I'll go 9-8, maaaaybe 10-7 for the Broncos next year unless they make some other moves.
Alright. Denver over 10 wins, I win. Denver under 10 wins, you win.
Sure. Assuming 10 is a push. What's the wager? (Right to nullify the wager if a major move happens before the season, i.e. they turn around and trade someone major).
If I win, you write a paragraph about how good Russell Wilson is. If you win, I write a paragraph about how bad he is.
Done and done. ::virtual shake::
Just seeing when we wanted to bring this bet to consummation. :) I can't see the Broncos going 7-1 the rest of the way to give you a push.
The 8th loss. Barring a miracle, you've cancelled out your bet on the Colts to advance further than the Rams and Cowboys in last year's postseason, while I've failed miserably on this Broncos prediction :-D I'll start thinking about that essay.
Now that he's gotten his coach fired, ready to rock? :sombrero:
GM Patton made some serious blunders (Vonn Miller trade, Russell Wilson trade); he obviously can't fire himself so instead takes it out on his coach. That's like a supervisor getting canned for a mistake made by the manager. Let's see if Nathaniel can land another Head Coach job for another team. Also can't fire players with contracts. Just wished the Broncos could have waited until season was over. If you're going to fire a coach, a couple of things: make sure the fired coach doesn't have many more years left to pay him, and best know who your replacement will be (be it the interim coach or a newly signed Head Coach). Also I can't blame Nathaniel for taking the HC job; I don't know of very many people in any career field who would turn down a promotional upgrade at any workplace. If it doesn't work out, you just return to your previous position so practically no risk there.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 26, 2022, 08:57:39 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on December 26, 2022, 02:09:49 AM
This marks the fourth (4th) consecutive season that both the Texans and Titans split road wins in both division games. The last home team to win was four years ago in December 2018 when the Texans won the Monday Night meeting in Reliant/NRG Stadium, since then the visiting team has won every meeting.
On a related note: my #2 favorite NFL team, Jaguars, has overtaken my #3 favorite NFL team, Titans, by virtue of the latter losing to my #1 team the Texans. And next week is the battle of my #1 and #2 teams. Just because my Texans won in Jacksonville earlier this season doesn't make our home game against them any easier, in fact Jacksonville is still rightfully favored to win the game; the revitalized Jaguars are surging and Trevor Lawrence is playing like a superstar QB.
It's weird that your three favorite teams are in the same division. Most people do not like the other teams in the same division as their favorite team.
AFC South represent! :)
Unlike other divisions, AFC South fans don't seem to hate each other's teams all that much. In fact I wish for my AFC South to be as strong of a division as potentially possible; I am tired of ours being labeled the weakest division.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 27, 2022, 02:51:17 AM
make sure the fired coach doesn't have many more years left to pay him
Biggest fallacy in sports. You're going to pay him a lot whether he's still your coach or not. Keeping the wrong coach so that you feel like your money is better spent is a good way to waste years where you could be rebuilding towards success. If your coach stinks, you fire him.
I didn't have much confidence in the Chargers but they got it done last night to clinch an AFC Wild Card berth! Jags-Titans will decide the AFC South and that leaves just one AFC Wild Card remaining to be fought out between 3 AFC East teams (plus technically the Raiders and Steelers who are both on life support at this point).
Quote from: jgb191 on December 27, 2022, 02:51:17 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 26, 2022, 08:57:39 AM
It's weird that your three favorite teams are in the same division. Most people do not like the other teams in the same division as their favorite team.
AFC South represent! :)
Unlike other divisions, AFC South fans don't seem to hate each other's teams all that much. In fact I wish for my AFC South to be as strong of a division as potentially possible; I am tired of ours being labeled the weakest division.
I don't know about that... there certainly seems to be some bad blood between the Titans and Colts (who were not on your list).
Speaking from an AFC East perspective, there's certainly no love lost between any of the four teams. There's perhaps a bit of comradery between the Bills, Jets, and Dolphins because of the ~20 years of shared suffering in the Brady/Belichick era but that doesn't mean the other two are anywhere near the favorites list, and there would certainly never be a rooting conflict when they play each other.
In fact if I was going to rank my "favorite" teams, I'd probably make an effort to pick one from each division before doubling up... and the rest of the AFC East would probably be 30, 31, and 32, possibly throwing in some other AFC rivals beneath the Jets.
Tom Brady is the luckiest sonofabitch in the history of sports. With his career waning on an extremely mediocre team, he still is probably going to get a playoff game by once again playing in a division where the rest of the teams are total shit. First he spends two decades playing against Buffalo, Miami and the Jets when all three sucked pretty hard. Then as soon as one of those teams starts to get good, he bails to the new shittiest division in the league.
Since he's so goddamn popular, the Bucs have been on national TV a lot, despite their overwhelming mediocrity, so I've seen quite a few of their games. Man, that team does not deserve to be in the playoffs. I would support a change to playoff rules so that if no team in a division is over .500, the #4 seed goes to the first wild card team in that conference. A winning record should be mandatory to host a playoff game.
On that note, I'm going to indulge in "if things were different, they would have been different™": the Bucs have three terrible wins against three of the worst teams in the league (Rams, Saints, and Cardinals) in which they played terribly for three quarters and should have lost all three games. They should be 4-11 right now but are somehow 7-8. The Panthers and Saints have both looked more inspired than the Bucs over the last few weeks and I would rather see either of them in the playoffs over the Bucs. Sam Darnold in a home playoff game would be a great twist to this NFL season.
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2022, 12:36:09 PM
should be 4-11
Apparently we've moved on from "could" to "should" ? I can at least understand the "could" , but explain to me where the "should" comes from.
JJ Watt -- the greatest defensive force I've ever seen in my life! And in my opinion the second greatest athlete in Houston sports history (only after Hakeem). Thanks for all that you have done.
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2022, 07:05:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2022, 12:36:09 PM
should be 4-11
Apparently we've moved on from "could" to "should" ? I can at least understand the "could" , but explain to me where the "should" comes from.
This whole post was tongue-in-cheek, so it's mostly a distinction without a difference, but I guess if games were 58 minutes instead of 60 then they "should" be 4-11. I don't even have a logical reason to dispute those three outcomes other than just disbelief that the Bucs can be terrible for the entire game and then start moving the ball at the end of the 4th quarter.
Derrick Carr benched. So much for Adams playing with his college buddy.
Cowboys 24, Titans 9
Cardinals 16, Falcons 14
Patriots 21, Dolphins 19
Eagles 45, Saints 14
Giants 23, Colts 20
Buccaneers 16, Panthers 10
Chiefs 30, Broncos 22
Bears 28, Lions 27
Browns 27, Commanders 13
Jaguars 41, Texans 17
49ers 25, Raiders 19
Jets 24, Seahawks 20
Packers 20, Vikings 19
Chargers 25, Rams 10
Ravens 21, Steelers 10
Bills 34, Bengals 24
Quote from: Big John on December 28, 2022, 05:33:02 PM
Derrick Carr benched. So much for Adams playing with his college buddy.
Wonder if much regret or not on Adams part in requesting the trade or not. Got to play by his family and got the big payday he wanted.....but now playing for a garbage fire of a team and he had attitude issues this season that I don't recall him having any of them in Green Bay.
Packers for 2022 didn't win, but the players drafted with the picks Packers received for Adams appear to be the real deal and a big part of the future
Quote from: gr8daynegb on December 30, 2022, 10:52:13 AM
Quote from: Big John on December 28, 2022, 05:33:02 PM
Derrick Carr benched. So much for Adams playing with his college buddy.
Wonder if much regret or not on Adams part in requesting the trade or not. Got to play by his family and got the big payday he wanted.....but now playing for a garbage fire of a team and he had attitude issues this season that I don't recall him having any of them in Green Bay.
Packers for 2022 didn't win, but the players drafted with the picks Packers received for Adams appear to be the real deal and a big part of the future
Chances are those draft picks aren't turning into anyone like Davante Adams. Green Bay would be comfortably in the playoffs right now if they still had him.
Should be an interesting Week 17, as 15 of 16 games (including the one already played) have playoff or seeding implications. Falcons vs. Cardinals is the only one that doesn't.
Saw a crazy fun fact going around today... The entire NFC West has had at least *3* different starting QB's this season, with one exception: the Seattle Seahawks. Just imagine being told that in the preseason. I would have guessed any of the other three teams miles ahead of Seattle.
With week 17 underway, our forking competition is locked up, so here's where everyone stands. Playoff odds according to 538.
NWI_Irish96
Lions (+20, 24%)
Jets (+20, 15%)
Browns (+20)
Texans (+20)
Falcons (+20)
Seahawks (+20, 27%)
Patriots (+15, 20%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Raiders (+15, .5%)
Commanders (+15, 28%)
Panthers (+15, 29%)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13, 75%)
Saints (+13, 3%)
Colts (+10)
Rams (+10)
Cardinals (+10)
Bears (+10)
Current total: 274
0/18 have clinched playoff berth
8/18 have been eliminated
10/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 22.5%, and one (Jaguars) over 50%
jlam
Falcons (+20)
Texans (+20)
Jets (+20, 15%)
Giants (+20, 92%)
Bears (+20)
Lions (+20, 24%)
Raiders (+15, .5%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Seahawks (+15, 27%)
Panthers (+13, 29%)
Commanders (+13, 28%)
Saints (+13, 3%)
Cardinals (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13, 75%)
Colts (+13)
Patriots (+13, 20%)
Chargers (+13)
Current total: 282
1/18 has clinched playoff berth (282-30 = 252)
6/18 have been eliminated
11/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 28.8%, and two (Giants, Jaguars) over 50%
thspfc
Texans (+20)
Jaguars (+20, 75%)
Giants (+20, 92%)
Falcons (+20)
Bears (+20)
Lions (+20, 24%)
Seahawks (+20, 27%)
Patriots (+15, 20%)
Jets (+15, 15%)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Panthers (+15, 29%)
Raiders (+13, .5%)
Saints (+13, 3%)
Cardinals (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Browns (+13)
Rams (+10)
Colts (+10)
Current total: 285
0/18 have clinched playoff berth
8/18 have been eliminated
10/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 28.9%, and two (Giants, Jaguars) over 50%
jayhawkco
Giants (+20, 92%)
Panthers (+20, 29%)
Seahawks (+20, 27%)
Jets (+20, 15%)
Falcons (+20)
Browns (+20)
Jaguars (+20, 75%)
Lions (+20, 24%)
Bears (+20)
Commanders (+20, 28%)
Cardinals (+15)
Cowboys (+15)
Steelers (+15, 3%)
Raiders (+15, .5%)
Patriots (+15, 20%)
Broncos (+13)
Texans (+13)
Saints (+13, 3%)
Current total: 314
1/18 has clinched playoff berth (314-30 = 284)
6/18 have been eliminated
11/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 28.8%, and two (Giants, Jaguars) over 50%
webny99
Steelers (+20, 3%)
Browns (+20)
Jets (+20, 15%)
Patriots (+20, 20%)
Texans (+20)
Titans (+20, 27%)
Falcons (+20)
Giants (+20, 92%)
Commanders (+20, 28%)
Seahawks (+20, 27%)
Lions (+20, 24%)
Bears (+20)
Panthers (+15, 29%)
Packers (+13, 27%)
Buccaneers (+13, 70%)
Broncos (+13)
Jaguars (+13, 75%)
Raiders (+13, .5%)
Current total: 320
0/18 have clinched playoff berth
5/18 have been eliminated
13/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 33.7%, and three (Giants, Jaguars, Bucs) over 50%
CoreySamson
Falcons (+20)
Bears (+20)
Giants (+20, 92%)
Panthers (+20, 29%)
Jaguars (+20, 75%)
Current total: 100
0/5 have clinched playoff berth
2/5 have been eliminated
3/5 are still alive, with an average chance of 65.3%, and two (Giants, Jaguars) over 50%
hobsini2
Jets (+20, 15%)
Texans (+20)
Jaguars (+20, 75%)
Steelers (+20, 3%)
Broncos (+20)
Commanders (+20, 28%)
Giants (+20, 92%)
Panthers (+20, 29%)
Falcons (+20)
Saints (+20, 3%)
Lions (+20, 24%)
Current total: 220
0/11 have clinched playoff berth
3/11 have been eliminated
8/11 are still alive, with an average chance of 33.6%, and two (Giants, Jaguars) over 50%
Henry
Bears (+10)
Broncos (+10)
Browns (+10)
Jaguars (+10, 75%)
Lions (+10, 24%)
Panthers (+10, 29%)
Raiders (+10, .5%)
Rams (+10)
Saints (+10, 3%)
Steelers (+10, 3%)
Texans (+10)
Bengals (+10)
Cardinals (+10)
Chargers (+10)
Colts (+10)
Commanders (+10, 28%)
Falcons (+10)
Panthers (+10, 29%)
Current total: 180
2/18 have clinched playoff berth (180-60 = 120)
8/18 have been eliminated
8/18 are still alive, with an average chance of 23.9%, one (Jaguars) over 50%
Three of us - NWI_Irish96, webny99, and me - are able to win the competition. It's essentially going to come down to five teams: the Giants, Commanders, Buccaneers, Packers, and Titans.
In a nutshell, Irish wins in any scenario where the Giants make the playoffs and the Commanders do not, except for if the Giants are the only team of the five to make it, in which case webny99 would win. Irish also wins if only the Bucs, only the Packers, or only the Titans make it. All that gives Irish a roughly 59% chance to win.
I win in any scenario where a) the Commanders make it or the Giants don't, and b) at least 2/4 of the Bucs, Commanders, Packers, and Titans make it. That gives me roughly a 25% chance to win.
Webny99 wins in any scenario where the Bucs, Packers, and Titans all miss the playoffs. There's about a 16% chance of that happening.
(I'm in a bit of a statistics and probability nerd phase after taking up low-stakes poker recently. I probably won't become a gambling addict.)
WAS started Carson Wentz because Heinicke threw too many INTs last week. Wentz has two INTs (so far) very early in the second quarter and the boos were raining down as they went to commercial.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 01:44:54 PM
WAS started Carson Wentz because Heinicke threw too many INTs last week. Wentz has two INTs (so far) very early in the second quarter and the boos were raining down as they went to commercial.
Wentz also has no upside. At least Heinicke has games where he plays well.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 01, 2023, 02:40:26 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 01:44:54 PM
WAS started Carson Wentz because Heinicke threw too many INTs last week. Wentz has two INTs (so far) very early in the second quarter and the boos were raining down as they went to commercial.
Wentz also has no upside. At least Heinicke has games where he plays well.
We went out for a walk at halftime with the Commies leading 7—3. Got home and turned it back on right as Cleveland scored to make it 17—7. :banghead:
Top AFC seed between Chiefs and Bills now?
The "ghost of Tom Brady" goes 34/45 for 432, 4 total TDs, no picks 😬
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 03:04:08 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 01, 2023, 02:40:26 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 01:44:54 PM
WAS started Carson Wentz because Heinicke threw too many INTs last week. Wentz has two INTs (so far) very early in the second quarter and the boos were raining down as they went to commercial.
Wentz also has no upside. At least Heinicke has games where he plays well.
We went out for a walk at halftime with the Commies leading 7—3. Got home and turned it back on right as Cleveland scored to make it 17—7. :banghead:
Packers fans everywhere thank the Commies for starting Carson Wentz instead of Taylor Heinicke.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2023, 04:25:02 PM
The "ghost of Tom Brady" goes 34/45 for 432, 4 total TDs, no picks 😬
Brady with a chance to eliminate me from our forks competition? I'm surprised his stats weren't even better. :paranoid:
Quote from: skluth on January 01, 2023, 07:45:21 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 03:04:08 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 01, 2023, 02:40:26 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 01, 2023, 01:44:54 PM
WAS started Carson Wentz because Heinicke threw too many INTs last week. Wentz has two INTs (so far) very early in the second quarter and the boos were raining down as they went to commercial.
Wentz also has no upside. At least Heinicke has games where he plays well.
We went out for a walk at halftime with the Commies leading 7—3. Got home and turned it back on right as Cleveland scored to make it 17—7. :banghead:
Packers fans everywhere thank the Commies for starting Carson Wentz instead of Taylor Heinicke.
I agree, they should have stuck with Heinicke. It's not like he's even that much better, but he just has something of an "it" factor that I don't think Wentz has. And the importance of that game can't be overstated - with the built in half-game because of the tie and the Cowboys quite likely resting starters next week, the Commanders would be in great position if they'd won.
Last week Patrick Starr almost took care of my punishment for losing the Broncos bet for me. In case anyone somehow hasn't seen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl4f0yNcWrI
Indeed, 4 wins and one of the worst offenses in NFL history are not what Russ wanted to cook. Mr. Unlimited was actually quite limited. With a crucial touchdown pass today in Denver's 12th loss of the season, Russ' 2022 TD pass total finally equaled the number of bathrooms in his house.
Perhaps the most embarrassing part of the flop that was the Broncos offense was how they wasted one of the best defenses we've seen in recent years. They allowed 20+ points in only 6 of 16 games, with the 6 including an overtime game and two games against the Chiefs. This is especially impressive because the Broncos offense ranked dead last in 3rd down percentage and #1 in 3-and-outs, so the defense was on the field a lot.
I pretty much drank the kool-aid for the entire season up until the second Raiders game. Turns out everyone else was right to be dumping on the Broncos after that forsaken Thursday night game. If I can still offer
one piece of defense, it's that I don't think Denver is bad enough to deserve the 31st/32nd rankings they're getting in most power rankings lists. Their defense kept almost all their games close, even against good teams. To me the Texans, Bears, and Cardinals are undoubtedly worse, and you could argue my preseason Super Bowl pick - the Colts - are worse as well.
So Broncos Country has a bumpy ride ahead if they're going to make it back to relevancy. Cutting Mr. Limited Cap Space is not an option because with no first round pick and a massive dead cap hit, there's no alternative. Unless they want to go back to Kendall Hinton at QB. They would probably be in a better position right now if they never traded for Russ and started Hinton the whole year.
Quote from: webny99 on January 01, 2023, 07:56:16 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2023, 04:25:02 PM
The "ghost of Tom Brady" goes 34/45 for 432, 4 total TDs, no picks 😬
Brady with a chance to eliminate me from our forks competition? I'm surprised his stats weren't even better. :paranoid:
As expected, NWI_Irish96 is the official winner of the competition.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2023, 08:33:41 PM
As expected, NWI_Irish96 is the official winner of the competition.
Congratulations, NWI_Irish96!
I want to do a more thorough analysis after Week 18, but for now, it looks like your conservative strategy paid off. My aggression had some upside: I'm reasonably happy with my preseason forks, including some gutsy ones in the AFC, but it's all too fitting that forking Tom Brady is what cost me in the end. If only I'd had the sense to pair the
Rams with the Packers when forking so called NFC contenders... or just given up on the moribund Cardinals.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2023, 08:33:41 PM
If I can still offer one piece of defense, it's that I don't think Denver is bad enough to deserve the 31st/32nd rankings they're getting in most power rankings lists. Their defense kept almost all their games close, even against good teams. To me the Texans, Bears, and Cardinals are undoubtedly worse, and you could argue my preseason Super Bowl pick - the Colts - are worse as well.
Add "the Broncos will beat the Chiefs this season" to my list of predictions that came frustratingly close to happening, even
despite the terrible season.
As for the Broncos being at the bottom of team rankings, I disagreed for most of the season, but their vaunted defense giving up a 50-burger to the Rams did it for me. I would probably have them 28th or 29th, in the mix with the Bears, Falcons, and Colts, and definitely ahead of the Cardinals and Texans. I think I'd have the Cardinals at 32 right now. They've been uncompetitive most of the season, just lost to the Falcons, their best player is retiring, and they have an aging roster with big questions about their coaching staff and front office. All that adds up to a future that's more uncertain than almost any team in the league.
Evidently, someone who works for the Commanders must be familiar with the quotation in my autosignature. The following is a screenshot from an article on their website about the Hogs.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230102/7d83d728d03cd422cb6a6f3f917f2ea3.jpg)
^ ????? Errr, alright. :hmmm: :-/ :no:
Anyway, continuing on the idiocy that is the Washington Commanders, in my perusing of news about the team it seemed that no one in the organization knew that they would be eliminated from playoff contention if they lost and the Packers won today. Coach Rivera was sure surprised when asked about it ("We can be eliminated? If it happens, it'll be disappointing.") :rolleyes: Really? Guess what? Let the disappointment start! However, what would anyone expect when you start a QB with a track record of, in George Steinbrenner's words, "spitting the bit".
BTW, that quote from Olaf Kolzig is one of the most profound answers to a reporter's question in history. Kolzig was not wrong.
Here is a big if...
Because of the Steelers victory over the Ravens, if the Bengals defeat the Bills on Monday Night Football, the Bengals win the AFC North. If the Bengals and the Bills end with the same record at the end of the season (with a possible Bengals victory over Buffalo) the Bengals would be the 2 seed. Even more far-fetched, if the Chiefs, Bills, and Bengals end up with the same record (say, 13-4), the Bengals would be the 1 seed. Burrow and Company just need to first take care of business later tonight.
_______________________________________
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers have come back from the dead and have positioned themselves in the driver's seat for the 7 seed in the NFC. A win and they are in.
Any proof that Jalen Hurts should be the NFL MVP this season? The Eagles are in danger of losing the 1 seed. They need to beat the New York Football Giants next week to secure the spot. Otherwise, it could be the 49ers as the 1 seed.
Also, be very wary of the 49ers. They are giving up a league best 16.5 ppg. Buffalo, New England, Baltimore, and Dallas are the only other teams that are giving up less than 20 ppg.
I don't know if this has ever happened before and if it hasn't then my Texans are the first non-winless team to go winless at home this season....both wins this season were on the road at Jacksonville and at Tennessee. Also if the NFL games was only 45 minutes, the Texans record would have been even at eight wins and losses, but those dreaded fourth quarters saw many of those leads slip away. Factor in the fourth quarter and we get their current 2-13-1 record.
I'm happy to see that we have Steve Kornacki of NBC is available to help understand the fascinating playoff scenarios.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 02, 2023, 03:52:13 AM
I don't know if this has ever happened before and if it hasn't then my Texans are the first non-winless team to go winless at home this season....both wins this season were on the road at Jacksonville and at Tennessee. Also if the NFL games was only 45 minutes, the Texans record would have been even at eight wins and losses, but those dreaded fourth quarters saw many of those leads slip away. Factor in the fourth quarter and we get their current 2-13-1 record.
I hope the Texans get one more win.
Quote from: amroad17 on January 02, 2023, 12:51:10 AM
Because of the Steelers victory over the Ravens, if the Bengals defeat the Bills on Monday Night Football, the Bengals win the AFC North. If the Bengals and the Bills end with the same record at the end of the season (with a possible Bengals victory over Buffalo) the Bengals would be the 2 seed. Even more far-fetched, if the Chiefs, Bills, and Bengals end up with the same record (say, 13-4), the Bengals would be the 1 seed. Burrow and Company just need to first take care of business later tonight.
_______________________________________
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers have come back from the dead and have positioned themselves in the driver's seat for the 7 seed in the NFC. A win and they are in.
First off, I'm now regretting my bungled fork (pun intended) of Cincinnati; they look to be in even better shape for the playoffs than they were last season.
And second, I'll be rooting for the Vikings to beat the Packers in the season finale, in a rare instance of me cheering on another NFC North team. May as well do so, since the Bears are dead last...again.
Quote from: Henry on January 02, 2023, 10:10:36 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 02, 2023, 12:51:10 AM
Because of the Steelers victory over the Ravens, if the Bengals defeat the Bills on Monday Night Football, the Bengals win the AFC North. If the Bengals and the Bills end with the same record at the end of the season (with a possible Bengals victory over Buffalo) the Bengals would be the 2 seed. Even more far-fetched, if the Chiefs, Bills, and Bengals end up with the same record (say, 13-4), the Bengals would be the 1 seed. Burrow and Company just need to first take care of business later tonight.
_______________________________________
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers have come back from the dead and have positioned themselves in the driver's seat for the 7 seed in the NFC. A win and they are in.
First off, I'm now regretting my bungled fork (pun intended) of Cincinnati; they look to be in even better shape for the playoffs than they were last season.
And second, I'll be rooting for the Vikings to beat the Packers in the season finale, in a rare instance of me cheering on another NFC North team. May as well do so, since the Bears are dead last...again.
The Vikings already played, well, kind of, the Packers yesterday. Are you cheering for them in a potential playoff matchup?
Next week the Lions need the Seahawks to lose but the Seahawks need the Lions to win.
DET/GB got flexed to Sunday night, but would be meaningless for Detroit if Seattle wins.
Quote from: Big John on January 02, 2023, 05:07:54 PM
DET/GB got flexed to Sunday night, but would be meaningless for Detroit if Seattle wins.
If it was any other division, Titans/Jags would have been flexed. But the AFCS is never good for ratings.
Imagine hearing after the first time the two teams met, when the 2-6 Lions beat the 3-6 Packers 15-9, that Lions/Packers would be the week 18 Sunday night game.
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
Cincinnati/Baltimore would have been a good candidate for SNF if the Bengals lose tonight, but I presume the NFL couldn't wait any longer to finalize next week's schedule and didn't want to risk the Bengals having the AFC North clinched already should they win tonight. I wonder if it would have been the SNF game had the Ravens won last night.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
They'll Flex more next season, as Late Season MNF also has Flex capabilities, in addition to Sunday Afternoons and SNF, beginning next season
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
They've always had the option, especially for the Sunday night game. For the last week of the season this year, I think they purposely didn't schedule any game times since they wind up moving so many around.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 02, 2023, 06:34:48 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
They'll Flex more next season, as Late Season MNF also has Flex capabilities, in addition to Sunday Afternoons and SNF, beginning next season
Where do we stand on the cross-flexing between Fox and CBS for the afternoon games; is it to the point that the visiting team Fox/NFC and CBS/AFC relationships won't really exist going forward? There has certainly been more cross-flexing this year, e.g. Vikings @ Packers as the featured Nantz/Romo game yesterday.
Bills DB Damar Hamlin collapsed on the field after a play. CPR was administered for several minutes. Game is suspended temporarily at least. No official word but it doesn't sound like they got him back.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 02, 2023, 09:28:27 PM
Bills DB Damar Hamlin collapsed on the field after a play. CPR was administered for several minutes. Game is suspended temporarily at least. No official word but it doesn't sound like they got him back.
Just a terrible situation. Please, send everybody home now, and when there's more certainty tomorrow they can figure out how to proceed.
Thankfully, they're suspending this game. People are exiting.
Per Joe and Troy before they signed off: Hamlin is in critical condition at the University of Cincinnati hospital. He's alive and that's all that matters right now.
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
This is just a sickening situation. I've never seen anything like it, or such an outpouring on social media and elsewhere, including from all 31 other teams. Praying for Damar and hope he's OK above all else.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
Same with the person(s) at Disney and/or the Commissioner's Office that allowed ESPN to burn through an entire game's worth of banal ads in about an hour. Given the circumstances, that was totally inappropriate. All advertising should have been canceled and the clients' money refunded. :angry:
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
I believe that the 5 minutes is standard NFL procedure following a stoppage of play. It didn't necessarily come from the league office or the officials. Obviously that policy failed to account for this type of situation, and the game was rightfully postponed.
We know how awful this situation is for Hamlin and his family, and additionally my thoughts are with all other players from all 32 teams. These guys have spent their entire lives working for this opportunity, and one can imagine that this is a heavy reality check for them. Putting the pads back on, in any timeframe, after seeing this must be so difficult.
Nobody cares about who your favorite team is right now (or ever actually). "(insert team that is not the Bills) fan here, I'm praying for Damar Hamlin" is a statement I have already seen way too much of. This is much deeper than that.
Quote from: webny99 on January 02, 2023, 10:39:15 PM
This is just a sickening situation. I've never seen anything like it...
One comparable situation I recall was when Larry Dierker was managing the Houston Astros. He collapsed in the dugout during a game (https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/june-13-1999-astros-manager-larry-dierker-suffers-seizure-in-the-dugout/), suffering a grand mal seizure. The game was suspended.
QuoteIn the eighth inning, with Houston still leading 4-1, San Diego reliever Trevor Hoffman had thrown one pitch to Jeff Bagwell when Houston manager Larry Dierker suffered a grand mal seizure in the dugout. Medical personnel treated Dierker for more than 20 minutes before he was taken to Methodist Hospital. The seizure was caused by a tangle of blood vessels in his brain that had ruptured. Dierker had brain surgery and missed the next 27 games.
Bagwell described what happened: "I was getting ready to step in, and the umpire said, "˜Hold on,' I looked around, and everybody was running to the dugout. Larry had collapsed. He couldn't talk. He was shaking violently. He was shaking the whole time. It was shocking. We're all stunned."
Astros owner Drayton McLane Jr. talked with San Diego owner John Moores about how to resolve the unfinished game. They agreed to suspend the game until San Diego's next trip to Houston. McLane said, "For the San Diego players as well as our players, their heart just wasn't into finishing this game, and the umpires felt the same way."
It became clear later that day than Dierker would survive, and the Astros played their home game the next day. One hopes that by tommorow morning we have some similar news.
As a practical issue I assume the Bills are staying in Cincinnati tonight, and if there's good news the game might be played tomorrow or Wednesday.**
The worse outcome was when Hank Gathers was playing basketball for Loyola Marymount, and collapsed on the court during a conference tournament game and died almost immediately (https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/30880702/the-tragedy-hank-gathers-triumph-loyola-marymount). LMU was awarded the conference championship and actually went on and played very well in the NCAA tournament in Hank's honor and memory.
**Edit since we have a different answer on the strikeout part. Obviously I understand whatever decision the team and the man's teammates individually come to.
https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1610145933936787457
What an amazing job here by Ryan Clark in a really tough situation.
https://twitter.com/TommySledge/status/1610115264216973312
https://youtube.com/watch?v=H-G9mziXL9w
This guy who is a credible doctor says that this is "almost certainly" something called commotio cordis, which is extremely rare. Obviously the rarity of the situation does nothing to make it less tragic.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
Next Sunday's Detroit @ Green Bay game was always shown as TBD for start time on the Packers' season schedule.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 02, 2023, 11:49:56 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
Next Sunday's Detroit @ Green Bay game was always shown as TBD for start time on the Packers' season schedule.
Mike
All games were shown like this. There was no schedule other than who was playing who and where.
I've largely avoided this thread as, being a Dolphins fan, I'm not really interested in melting down publicly.
But, under the circumstances, I gotta at least come out and say just how much I'm hoping for a full recovery for Hamlin. Injuries of all kinds are scary, but this simply another level. He's still young and has so much potential in his career. I've never seen anything like this; short of dying and spinal cord injuries, this is about as scary as it gets.
I have mad respect for NFL players, putting themselves out there every week, risking constant, potentially debilitating injury. It's scary as hell just thinking about, but another thing to actually witness, never mind experience. But realistically, I also hate how intrinsic injuries are to American Football. How impactful injuries can be (pun completely intended) almost ruins the entire sport for me.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 02, 2023, 11:01:50 PM
One hopes that by tommorow morning we have some similar news. As a practical issue I assume the Bills are staying in Cincinnati tonight, and if there's good news the game might be played tomorrow or Wednesday.**
Completely unimportant under the circumstances, but noting that teams almost always return home after a road game, even a night one. The Bills didn't have hotel rooms for Monday night, so they pretty much had to fly home. A few guys could get rooms on their own, but not the whole team.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 02, 2023, 11:01:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 02, 2023, 10:39:15 PM
This is just a sickening situation. I've never seen anything like it...
One comparable situation I recall was when Larry Dierker was managing the Houston Astros. He collapsed in the dugout during a game (https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/june-13-1999-astros-manager-larry-dierker-suffers-seizure-in-the-dugout/), suffering a grand mal seizure. The game was suspended.
...
The NHL has had three incidents since 2001 of players going into cardiac arrest on the bench during a game; in all three cases, the games were suspended. (The games in which Clint Malarchuk's and Richard Zednik's necks were sliced open by skate blades were not suspended.) I remember watching an NHL game on TV in which the Thrashers' goalie, Ondrej Pavelec, collapsed unconscious on the ice against the Capitals; that game likewise resumed after some delay waiting for a second ambulance to come replace the one in which he was taken away.
The closest thing I'd seen to last night was a college football game between UVA and UNC in Chapel Hill in 1997 during which ACC referee Jim Knight suffered a massive heart attack and collapsed on the field right as UNC was about to run a play. The UVA defense saw it happened and jumped out of their stances, initially prompting a couple of UNC players to want a flag thrown until they realized what had happened. I suppose Mr. Knight was mildly "lucky" (such as it was) in that the UNC hospital was a stone's throw from the stadium.
Being officially stated now as cardiac arrest:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35368372/damar-hamlin-collapses-field-bills-bengals-temporarily-suspended
Just a tragic event all around. Not only for Demar Hamlin and his family, my love and prayers going out to them, but think about the psychological trauma Tee Higgins may be going through as well knowing that his hit caused the cardiac arrest. My prayers go out to Tee as well. Given the circumstances, I thought the coaches, trainers and medical personal did a great job of handling the situation.
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 09:56:03 AM
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
So far, no new news, just a lot of speculation.
That's the worst as people do panic.
I'm sure they need to run thorough tests to be sure, as I'm sure it's a mystery to doctors as well.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 03, 2023, 09:57:51 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 09:56:03 AM
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
So far, no new news, just a lot of speculation.
I mean, this kind of thing can in fact happen to people who in shape and otherwise healthy. As an example I went into arterial fibrillation after a 13.5 mile run during 2015. I got back from the run, took my dog for a short walk and suddenly couldn't move. Never had anything like that happen before or since, I've been a distance runner for 22 years.
What happened here is incredibly out of nowhere, but it can happen even to even professional athletes.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 09:56:03 AM
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
Read about commotio cordis. Sudden cardiac arrest due to a severe blow to the chest at just the wrong time in the heart's electrical cycle. I seem to recall an MLB umpire going into cardiac arrest after being hit in the chest with a fastball several years ago.
It's most likely due to the hit to the chest he took while tackling Tee Higgins. Look up commodio cordis. Basically you get hit at just the right part of the chest at just the right time during the heart's electrical impulses and the hit disrupts those impulses causing cardiac arrest. It hasn't been officially released as that yet but based on other things I've heard and read that's what it likely is.
But one of the most disgusting things about this and many other times someone who is otherwise healthy has sudden like this happen is the ones who start coming out of the woodwork with the conspiracies, like trying to blame it on the COVID vaccine. It's like have some respect, people, not everything is a damn conspiracy, or reason for you to start saying "see! I told you the vaccine was dangerous!"
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 09:56:03 AM
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
ESPN and 670 The Score in Chicago this morning were both saying that it was commodio cordis. It is an interruption of the heart cycle by a blunt force trauma to the chest cavity over the heart. It is highly rare because the condition happens for a millisecond. In other words, wrong place at the wrong time can cause cardiac arrest.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on January 03, 2023, 10:31:25 AM
It's most likely due to the hit to the chest he took while tackling Tee Higgins. Look up commodio cordis. Basically you get hit at just the right part of the chest at just the right time during the heart's electrical impulses and the hit disrupts those impulses causing cardiac arrest. It hasn't been officially released as that yet but based on other things I've heard and read that's what it likely is.
But one of the most disgusting things about this and many other times someone who is otherwise healthy has sudden like this happen is the ones who start coming out of the woodwork with the conspiracies, like trying to blame it on the COVID vaccine. It's like have some respect, people, not everything is a damn conspiracy, or reason for you to start saying "see! I told you the vaccine was dangerous!"
Anything Covid is conspiracy whether anti or pro. The same with Bob Saget I’ve heard both speculations of it being the Covid itself to its vaccine until the ME ruled.
Let’s hope we keep politics out of this one as people come up wacky theories. So far it’s been concern for Hamlin and let’s keep it that way.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on January 03, 2023, 10:31:25 AM
But one of the most disgusting things about this and many other times someone who is otherwise healthy has sudden like this happen is the ones who start coming out of the woodwork with the conspiracies, like trying to blame it on the COVID vaccine. It's like have some respect, people, not everything is a damn conspiracy, or reason for you to start saying "see! I told you the vaccine was dangerous!"
I have lost all respect for, formerly one of my favorite basketball players, John Stockton, who pushes this crap.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 03, 2023, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
Considering that football isn’t like baseball that calls off games due to inclement weather, it’s nice that they postponed this match up. As the game can be played at any moment in time, Hamlin health only has now to be dealt with.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 11:14:09 AM
As the game can be played at any moment in time
Not really. The latest the game could be played without it causing major schedule conflicts would probably be Thursday. Any later than today (no way it's being played today), and they're probably going to have to push back Ravens/Bengals and Patriots/Bills to at least Monday. If they can't get the game in this week, things get really sticky. I can't imagine that cancellation is an option, and changing the date of the Super Bowl isn't either.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 03, 2023, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
Well official statements from the NFL indicate that 5 minute thing was never actually under consideration. That's just something people were assuming because that's standard procedure for the league after a really bad injury; like a 'normal' really bad injury, not something like this. Possibly chalk that 5 minute thing to speculation in a vacuum of information.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2023, 11:22:21 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 11:14:09 AM
As the game can be played at any moment in time
Not really. The latest the game could be played without it causing major schedule conflicts would probably be Thursday. Any later than today (no way it's being played today), and they're probably going to have to push back Ravens/Bengals and Patriots/Bills to at least Monday. If they can't get the game in this week, things get really sticky. I can't imagine that cancellation is an option, and changing the date of the Super Bowl isn't either.
I meant it figuratively. Of course they're facing a clock, but compared to a person's life it's playing at other moments verses doing it now to save a man's life.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2023, 11:22:21 AM
and changing the date of the Super Bowl isn't either.
They would first cancel the bye week between the championship game and the Super Bowl.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 03, 2023, 09:56:03 AM
Has anyone heard the latest? Did they find the cause?
24 year old people don't just go into cardiac arrest.
It was most likely commotio cordis (https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/902504-overview) caused by the impact he took to his chest before he collapsed. He would have had a couple of seconds of consciousness after he went into arrest before losing blood flow to his brain, which explains why he was able to get up.
A similar thing happened to former NHL player Chris Pronger, who went into cardiac arrest after taking a slap shot to the chest during a 1998 Stanley Cup playoff game. He survived and actually played in the very next game. He retired in 2011.
https://twitter.com/chrispronger/status/1610282040544432130
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 03, 2023, 11:23:29 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 03, 2023, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
Well official statements from the NFL indicate that 5 minute thing was never actually under consideration. That's just something people were assuming because that's standard procedure for the league after a really bad injury; like a 'normal' really bad injury, not something like this. Possibly chalk that 5 minute thing to speculation in a vacuum of information.
I did see that statement issued afterward, but where it still seems murky is that it wasn't just social-media speculation - Joe Buck said it on-air several times during McDermott & Taylor's initial discussion as well as while they were on phone calls after taking their teams back to the locker room. Regardless of one's opinion of Buck as an announcer, I don't think he'd say that out-of-turn.
Meanwhile, the latest from the NFL is that the game will not be resumed this week - no decisions yet regarding eventual makeup (if at all), and no adjustments to week 18 for the moment.
One W18 game still has yet to be assigned a Kickoff time: Ravens/Bengals
It was initially given Conditional KO times dependent on MNF's result
Before it can be fully assigned, a decision kinda needs to be made IF Bills/Bengals will be made up.
If "Yes" keep it at 4:25, as Ravens/Bengals still has AFCN implications
If "No" needs to be at 1, as the Bills and Bengals need to play at the same time, since they could finish with the same record and both in contention for the #2 seed (with no makeup game, Bengals already are AFCN Champs)
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2023, 03:47:01 PM
One W18 game still has yet to be assigned a Kickoff time: Ravens/Bengals
It was initially given Conditional KO times dependent on MNF's result
Before it can be fully assigned, a decision kinda needs to be made IF Bills/Bengals will be made up.
If "Yes" keep it at 4:25, as Ravens/Bengals still has AFCN implications
If "No" needs to be at 1, as the Bills and Bengals need to play at the same time, since they could finish with the same record and both in contention for the #2 seed (with no makeup game, Bengals already are AFCN Champs)
I wouldn't agree that "with no makeup game, Bengals are already AFCN Champs". The Ravens already beat the Bengals once this season. If the Ravens win Sunday's game, they would be 11-6 and Cincinnati would be 11-5. A half-game difference there and I would award Baltimore the division championship on the basis of the season sweep of Cincinnati.
If both Buffalo and Cincinnati win on Sunday, the Bills would be 13-3 and Cincinnati 12-4 and both division champs. If KC wins on Saturday the Chiefs clinch the #1 seed so Buffalo and Cincinnati would be #2/#3. Despite the one-game difference I would use some tiebreaker formula or maybe even a coin flip to decide which one is 2 and which is 3.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 03, 2023, 03:55:32 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2023, 03:47:01 PM
One W18 game still has yet to be assigned a Kickoff time: Ravens/Bengals
It was initially given Conditional KO times dependent on MNF's result
Before it can be fully assigned, a decision kinda needs to be made IF Bills/Bengals will be made up.
If "Yes" keep it at 4:25, as Ravens/Bengals still has AFCN implications
If "No" needs to be at 1, as the Bills and Bengals need to play at the same time, since they could finish with the same record and both in contention for the #2 seed (with no makeup game, Bengals already are AFCN Champs)
I wouldn't agree that "with no makeup game, Bengals are already AFCN Champs". The Ravens already beat the Bengals once this season. If the Ravens win Sunday's game, they would be 11-6 and Cincinnati would be 11-5. A half-game difference there and I would award Baltimore the division championship on the basis of the season sweep of Cincinnati.
If both Buffalo and Cincinnati win on Sunday, the Bills would be 13-3 and Cincinnati 12-4 and both division champs. If KC wins on Saturday the Chiefs clinch the #1 seed so Buffalo and Cincinnati would be #2/#3. Despite the one-game difference I would use some tiebreaker formula or maybe even a coin flip to decide which one is 2 and which is 3.
If Ravens were to beat the Bengals AND Bills/Ravens is not made up, Ravens finish 11-6 and Bengals finish 11-5. Bengals have a better Winning% and thus the AFCN crown. Same number of wins with less losses = better Win%. H2H is not of consequence then, as Win% is not equal
If Bengals beat the Ravens AND Patriots defeat the Bills AND the Chiefs beat the Raiders Saturday, and Bills/Bengals is not made up, both finish 12-4. H2H will obviously not apply. Strength of Victory tie breaker gives the Bengals the 2 seed.
Hence why both Bengals and Bills need to play at the same time with no makeup game
With a makeup, Bills and Bengals cannot tie and will have a H2H result, and the Ravens are still in play for the AFCN
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2023, 04:12:10 PM
If Ravens were to beat the Bengals AND Bills/Ravens is not made up, Ravens finish 11-6 and Bengals finish 11-5. Bengals have a better Winning% and thus the AFCN crown. Same number of wins with less losses = better Win%. H2H is not of consequence then, as Win% is not equal
I understand your point, and if winning percentage is used as the absolute determinant then yes, Cincinnati has clinched the division. My counter argument is that the Bengals playing one fewer game than the Ravens compromises the validity of winning percentage; basically they "missed an opportunity to lose a sixth game". If the Ravens win Sunday, I think it's more fair to Baltimore to say that with both teams having 11 wins, you call that a tie, and Baltimore having beaten Cincinnati in both of their H2H, then H2H should be the tiebreaker and Baltimore should be awarded the division championship notwithstanding their additional loss to somebody else.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 03, 2023, 04:37:59 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2023, 04:12:10 PM
If Ravens were to beat the Bengals AND Bills/Ravens is not made up, Ravens finish 11-6 and Bengals finish 11-5. Bengals have a better Winning% and thus the AFCN crown. Same number of wins with less losses = better Win%. H2H is not of consequence then, as Win% is not equal
I understand your point, and if winning percentage is used as the absolute determinant then yes, Cincinnati has clinched the division. My counter argument is that the Bengals playing one fewer game than the Ravens compromises the validity of winning percentage; basically they "missed an opportunity to lose a sixth game". If the Ravens win Sunday, I think it's more fair to Baltimore to say that with both teams having 11 wins, you call that a tie, and Baltimore having beaten Cincinnati in both of their H2H, then H2H should be the tiebreaker and Baltimore should be awarded the division championship notwithstanding their additional loss to somebody else.
The League"˜s primary concern is the Health and Safety of its Players, and right now that concern is rightfully centered on Bills Safety Damar Hamlin
That said, the League has to be making contingencies. What all they entail, who knows. All we know, for now, is W18 is to be played as currently scheduled
If the game is to be made up, the only (somewhat sensible) time to do it would be to push the Playoffs back a week, eliminate the week off between Championship Sunday and Super Sunday, and make Bills/Bengals a Saturday/14th or Sunday/15th "Week 19" makeup game as Game 272. I don't think the NFL wants to do that unless they feel the need to, be it by the Owners, Competitive Balance, Sponsors, or other
I think the NFL will wait until W18 plays out before announcing that decision
In light of the scary incident last night, it feels rather trivial to theorize about what might happen with making up the game, but it is worth noting that a forfeit or "tie" scenario would not only allow the Bengals to clinch the AFC North, it would also make the Chiefs heavy favorites to take the #1 seed and a first-round playoff bye, which would be unfortunate for the Bills since they had control of the #1 seed entering last night and probably need the bye more than anyone right now. In this scenario, they would need a win vs. the Patriots and a Chiefs loss to the Raiders to get the #1 seed.
There's also a remote possibility that the unfinished game gets assigned as a Win/Loss, although that's unlikely since only about 9 minutes of the game were played - much too early to put any real stock in the score, although the Bengals did have a 7-3 lead after the Bills settled for a FG on the drive before the injury... but again, that seems pretty meaningless now and all that really matters is Damar Hamlin's health and safety.
They've announced that the game will not be finished this week, meaning the next game these two teams play will be their week 18 matchups (unless those are impacted as well, which would be a whole new can of worms that I'm sure the league would refuse to open). The entirety of the playoffs being pushed back a week isn't that crazy of an undertaking in terms of logistics, as the playoff matchups are only known a week in advance anyway - in fact, for the playoff teams whose status will not be affected by the Bills/Bengals game (the entire NFC), it will be an extra week to prepare, both for the teams and for the logistics. But the Super Bowl can't be changed, so the Pro Bowl weekend would then come after the Super Bowl.
Imagine taking a break from technology for the last 24 hours, and then stumbling in on this discussion. Crazy stuff, but these are changes that need to be made considering the situation.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2023, 06:44:36 PM
They've announced that the game will not be finished this week, meaning the next game these two teams play will be their week 18 matchups (unless those are impacted as well, which would be a whole new can of worms that I'm sure the league would refuse to open). The entirety of the playoffs being pushed back a week isn't that crazy of an undertaking in terms of logistics, as the playoff matchups are only known a week in advance anyway - in fact, for the playoff teams whose status will not be affected by the Bills/Bengals game (the entire NFC), it will be an extra week to prepare, both for the teams and for the logistics. But the Super Bowl can't be changed, so the Pro Bowl weekend would then come after the Super Bowl.
Imagine taking a break from technology for the last 24 hours, and then stumbling in on this discussion. Crazy stuff, but these are changes that need to be made considering the situation.
They could get creative and go ahead with the NFC WC round as scheduled but play BUF/CIN on that weekend, pushing the AFC playoffs back a week. Give the NFC their extra week off between the divisional and champ. rounds so the Super Bowl participants are both on equal rest.
1/14-15: NFC WC, BUF/CIN
1/21-22: NFC Div, AFC WC
1/28-29: AFC Div
2/5: AFC & NFC Champ
2/12: Super Bowl
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 03, 2023, 06:59:48 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2023, 06:44:36 PM
They've announced that the game will not be finished this week, meaning the next game these two teams play will be their week 18 matchups (unless those are impacted as well, which would be a whole new can of worms that I'm sure the league would refuse to open). The entirety of the playoffs being pushed back a week isn't that crazy of an undertaking in terms of logistics, as the playoff matchups are only known a week in advance anyway - in fact, for the playoff teams whose status will not be affected by the Bills/Bengals game (the entire NFC), it will be an extra week to prepare, both for the teams and for the logistics. But the Super Bowl can't be changed, so the Pro Bowl weekend would then come after the Super Bowl.
Imagine taking a break from technology for the last 24 hours, and then stumbling in on this discussion. Crazy stuff, but these are changes that need to be made considering the situation.
They could get creative and go ahead with the NFC WC round as scheduled but play BUF/CIN on that weekend, pushing the AFC playoffs back a week. Give the NFC their extra week off between the divisional and champ. rounds so the Super Bowl participants are both on equal rest.
1/14-15: NFC WC, BUF/CIN
1/21-22: NFC Div, AFC WC
1/28-29: AFC Div
2/5: AFC & NFC Champ
2/12: Super Bowl
That actually does not sound unreasonable for how to make the game up.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:49:24 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 02, 2023, 10:10:36 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 02, 2023, 12:51:10 AM
Because of the Steelers victory over the Ravens, if the Bengals defeat the Bills on Monday Night Football, the Bengals win the AFC North. If the Bengals and the Bills end with the same record at the end of the season (with a possible Bengals victory over Buffalo) the Bengals would be the 2 seed. Even more far-fetched, if the Chiefs, Bills, and Bengals end up with the same record (say, 13-4), the Bengals would be the 1 seed. Burrow and Company just need to first take care of business later tonight.
_______________________________________
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers have come back from the dead and have positioned themselves in the driver's seat for the 7 seed in the NFC. A win and they are in.
First off, I'm now regretting my bungled fork (pun intended) of Cincinnati; they look to be in even better shape for the playoffs than they were last season.
And second, I'll be rooting for the Vikings to beat the Packers in the season finale, in a rare instance of me cheering on another NFC North team. May as well do so, since the Bears are dead last...again.
The Vikings already played, well, kind of, the Packers yesterday. Are you cheering for them in a potential playoff matchup?
I'm hoping that the Lions beat the Packers, since that game may determine who gets the last playoff spot in the NFC. However, that also depends on the results of the Seahawks-Rams game, as Seattle will clinch by winning that game and the Packers losing. As long as Green Bay is out, I could live with it.
As for the Bills-Bengals game, it truly was a miracle that Hamlin survived a near-death experience on the field. It just goes to show how dangerous football really is, so prayers and well wishes go out to him, his family and the Bills. If I was the commissioner, I'd pause the season until a definitive result occurs with Hamlin, and maybe even have the Bengals win by forfeit, since they were leading at the time of the incident. But it was a good call to not let the game continue this week.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 03, 2023, 07:06:59 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 03, 2023, 06:59:48 PM
They could get creative and go ahead with the NFC WC round as scheduled but play BUF/CIN on that weekend, pushing the AFC playoffs back a week. Give the NFC their extra week off between the divisional and champ. rounds so the Super Bowl participants are both on equal rest.
1/14-15: NFC WC, BUF/CIN
1/21-22: NFC Div, AFC WC
1/28-29: AFC Div
2/5: AFC & NFC Champ
2/12: Super Bowl
That actually does not sound unreasonable for how to make the game up.
I agree, this could work. And if the Chiefs lose + Bills and Bengals win this weekend, Bills and Bengals would still be playing for a first round bye.
Another possibility is a slightly modified version with only the three AFC Wild Card games on 1/21-22 and all four divisional games on 1/28-29 (this would give the NFC #1 seed a double bye, but would provide a minimum of three games each weekend).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 03, 2023, 12:31:37 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on January 02, 2023, 11:49:56 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 02, 2023, 05:34:05 PM
Is it me, or is the NFL flexing more games this year?
Next Sunday's Detroit @ Green Bay game was always shown as TBD for start time on the Packers' season schedule.
Mike
All games were shown like this. There was no schedule other than who was playing who and where.
The rest of the Packers' schedule had definite start times for all of the regular and pre season games.
Mike
Quote from: Henry on January 03, 2023, 07:35:43 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:49:24 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 02, 2023, 10:10:36 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 02, 2023, 12:51:10 AM
Because of the Steelers victory over the Ravens, if the Bengals defeat the Bills on Monday Night Football, the Bengals win the AFC North. If the Bengals and the Bills end with the same record at the end of the season (with a possible Bengals victory over Buffalo) the Bengals would be the 2 seed. Even more far-fetched, if the Chiefs, Bills, and Bengals end up with the same record (say, 13-4), the Bengals would be the 1 seed. Burrow and Company just need to first take care of business later tonight.
_______________________________________
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers have come back from the dead and have positioned themselves in the driver's seat for the 7 seed in the NFC. A win and they are in.
First off, I'm now regretting my bungled fork (pun intended) of Cincinnati; they look to be in even better shape for the playoffs than they were last season.
And second, I'll be rooting for the Vikings to beat the Packers in the season finale, in a rare instance of me cheering on another NFC North team. May as well do so, since the Bears are dead last...again.
The Vikings already played, well, kind of, the Packers yesterday. Are you cheering for them in a potential playoff matchup?
I'm hoping that the Lions beat the Packers, since that game may determine who gets the last playoff spot in the NFC. However, that also depends on the results of the Seahawks-Rams game, as Seattle will clinch by winning that game and the Packers losing. As long as Green Bay is out, I could live with it.
As for the Bills-Bengals game, it truly was a miracle that Hamlin survived a near-death experience on the field. It just goes to show how dangerous football really is, so prayers and well wishes go out to him, his family and the Bills. If I was the commissioner, I'd pause the season until a definitive result occurs with Hamlin, and maybe even have the Bengals win by forfeit, since they were leading at the time of the incident. But it was a good call to not let the game continue this week.
Disagree on the forfeit. You can't just finalize the game in the first quarter. If the game cannot be finished, it should be a no-contest (which would still favor Cincy much more than it would favor Buffalo, but not as much so as if it was a forfeit).
Quote from: webny99 on January 03, 2023, 07:40:54 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 03, 2023, 07:06:59 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 03, 2023, 06:59:48 PM
They could get creative and go ahead with the NFC WC round as scheduled but play BUF/CIN on that weekend, pushing the AFC playoffs back a week. Give the NFC their extra week off between the divisional and champ. rounds so the Super Bowl participants are both on equal rest.
1/14-15: NFC WC, BUF/CIN
1/21-22: NFC Div, AFC WC
1/28-29: AFC Div
2/5: AFC & NFC Champ
2/12: Super Bowl
That actually does not sound unreasonable for how to make the game up.
I agree, this could work. And if the Chiefs lose + Bills and Bengals win this weekend, Bills and Bengals would still be playing for a first round bye.
Another possibility is a slightly modified version with only the three AFC Wild Card games on 1/21-22 and all four divisional games on 1/28-29 (this would give the NFC #1 seed a double bye, but would provide a minimum of three games each weekend).
The television networks are pretty much committed to specific timeslots for the NFL's playoff games. Yes I know the TV schedule isn't etched in stone and had to be changed when the league had to make up a whole week of games due to 9/11, but to scramble everything to make up a single game, I doubt it. I think Buffalo and Cincinnati just wind up short one game each (there is ZERO chance the NFL would declare the Bengals the winner of last night's game based on the score after 9 minutes of play, or by forfeit) and there will be some reasonable agreement as to the AFC playoff seeding. Kansas City beating the lowly Raiders and claiming the #1 seed in the AFC would help. There really isn't that much difference between the #2 and #3 seeds in the conference, nor among the three wild cards that have to go on the road in the first week.
Quote from: thspfc on January 03, 2023, 10:36:25 PM
Disagree on the forfeit. You can't just finalize the game in the first quarter. If the game cannot be finished, it should be a no-contest (which would still favor Cincy much more than it would favor Buffalo, but not as much so as if it was a forfeit).
Just so I'm clear here... a no-contest would mean the game does not count in the standings (the mathematical equivalent of a tie), while a forfeit would count as a Bengals win / Bills loss?
Quote from: gonealookin on January 03, 2023, 11:35:02 PM
The television networks are pretty much committed to specific timeslots for the NFL's playoff games. Yes I know the TV schedule isn't etched in stone and had to be changed when the league had to make up a whole week of games due to 9/11, but to scramble everything to make up a single game, I doubt it.
Nothing would be scrambled except for what week the games are played. All the same games would still be played in the same time slots, just spread out over an extra week.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 03, 2023, 11:35:02 PM
Kansas City beating the lowly Raiders and claiming the #1 seed in the AFC would help. There really isn't that much difference between the #2 and #3 seeds in the conference, nor among the three wild cards that have to go on the road in the first week.
In the event that the Bills and Bengals end up a game short, Kansas City beating the Raiders would sure help the Chiefs, but it wouldn't help the Bills at all, who would be at a disadvantage needing a Chiefs loss after being in control of the #1 seed entering last night.
I also disagree that there's not much difference between the #2 seed and the #3 seed. When there's a clear top-3 teams in the conference (as there is this year IMO), the #3 seed is at a disadvantage because they'd have to play two road games against the #1 and #2 seeds to get to the Super Bowl, and the #2 seed would get to host the Conference Championship in the event that the #1 seed loses (we saw this play out last year when the #1 seed Titans lost, and the Chiefs beat the Bills at home in that classic Divisional Round shootout to earn home field for the Championship). And this year in particular, the #3 seed will have a tough Wild Card matchup vs. either the Ravens or Chargers while the #2 seed will have a much less fearsome matchup vs. whoever squeaks in as the #7 seed.
If they can't find a way to make up the game, I say Bills/Bengals Monday Night game goes down as a tie game in the standings. Bills would be 12-3-1, and Bengals would be 11-4-1. Who cares if the league loses just a little bit of money here; it's time we put people first over needless profits. Think about Damar and his family first....the NFL needs to step up and spend how much money it takes to keep Damar alive and well and take care of his parents who are in severe emotional pain. There are some things worth spending.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that Hamlin would want his teammates to go out there and play the game. It would be oddly selfish of him to want anything less.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 04, 2023, 01:46:20 AM
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that Hamlin would want his teammates to go out there and play the game. It would be oddly selfish of him to want anything less.
I mean, he can want that all he wants, but that doesn't mean that's what's best for the team. If I saw one of my coworkers almost die doing the exact same thing I do on the job, I would probably be freaked out enough I'd take more than a week off work.
On the other hand, teams have played after rough situations. Recall the 2007 Redskins played (against Buffalo) five days after Sean Taylor was murdered. I suppose it not being an on-field incident might be considered a difference.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 04, 2023, 07:37:16 AM
On the other hand, teams have played after rough situations. Recall the 2007 Redskins played (against Buffalo) five days after Sean Taylor was murdered. I suppose it not being an on-field incident might be considered a difference.
Both teams basically saw someone die on the field, so this is definitely a very different situation.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2023, 04:25:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 04, 2023, 01:46:20 AM
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that Hamlin would want his teammates to go out there and play the game. It would be oddly selfish of him to want anything less.
I mean, he can want that all he wants, but that doesn't mean that's what's best for the team. If I saw one of my coworkers almost die doing the exact same thing I do on the job, I would probably be freaked out enough I'd take more than a week off work.
No one is saying they need to replay the game immediately (and it shouldn't), but the show must go on
eventually. American football is a brutal, savage sport, with a long history of debilitating injury. But what happened to Hamlin isn't the norm, at all, and I highly doubt any NFL players are going to walk away from the sport because of it.
Just as a data point, in the 2020/21 Euros, Denmark continued their match against Finland after their star, Christian Eriksen, had a heart attack on the field. Not saying that it should have been done the other night (and would actually argue against it), but there is precedence.
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin. It could have been a football injury, it could have been related to causes other than anything that happened on the field ... who knows? Hank Gathers died from a previously undiagnosed heart condition.
The tackle he made did not appear to be anything out of the ordinary. But then again, Dale Earnhardt had survived worse-looking crashes prior to his fatal wreck.
There's been some controversy surrounding the incident here. For background, Google "Eric Deters." He's a retired lawyer from northern Kentucky -- he retired while suspended in both Ohio and Kentucky ahead of a likely disbarment -- who still owns a law firm, and an online media company called Bulldog Media. He's also a candidate for Kentucky governor. He came out with a claim Monday night that Hamlin had died, and not only refused to retract, but doubled down, even when members of Hamlin's family said he was still alive.
Deters is a wack job. He had no chance of winning the primary, but with his rush to scoop all other Cincinnati-area media, he's shot every toe off both feet and is now aiming as his own shins.
Dale Earnhardt also had his harness modified outside of spec. The harness bottom snapped and his face smashed into the steering wheel. A lot of the other drivers were doing similar things at the time, it was bound to go wrong eventually.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on January 04, 2023, 08:22:26 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 04, 2023, 07:37:16 AM
On the other hand, teams have played after rough situations. Recall the 2007 Redskins played (against Buffalo) five days after Sean Taylor was murdered. I suppose it not being an on-field incident might be considered a difference.
Both teams basically saw someone die on the field, so this is definitely a very different situation.
My dad worked in a paper mill until he died (in 1978). Everyone in the mill knew my dad as he was an electrician for the entire mill and did troubleshooting on all the machines. I worked there one summer and saw just how popular my dad was at work. My father died at work. He had just finished the 3-11 shift and was showering when he collapsed from a heart attack. They didn't close the paper mill for the night shift even though several people saw him die and watched him being taken away by ambulance.
While I'm relieved they didn't try to finish the game Monday night, I don't see why teams can't play this weekend. It's difficult for those involved but that's life. Damar Hamlin is in a hospital, in an ICU, not dead, and hopefully he will come out of this without much loss. This isn't to say it's not going to affect the players should they play this weekend. I'm sure some will have trouble focusing on the game, especially the prep during the week. But they are also professionals. I would expect them to uphold that standard.
IIRC, the NFL brought back the bye week before the Super Bowl because of what happened in 2001.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it's commotio cordis?
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it's commotio cordis?
The Columbia Cardiology Professor on ESPN yesterday was much more cautious trying to diagnose. Her main claim was that when Hamlin goes into cardiac arrest, immediate care with CPR and AEDs to get blood pumping to deliver oxygen to the body is of greatest importance to protect the other organs in the body, especially the brain, and then getting Hamlin to a Level 1 trauma center and let the Cardiologists and medical staff there treat the patient. Being an NFL game with team doctors and physical therapists/trainers onsite and an ambulance and EMTs onsite and UC Hospital only 2 miles away all were potentially life-saving Monday night
Even the UCLA Cardiology Professor on NFLN yesterday was pretty cautious about diagnosing a cause at this point
The how/why will (hopefully) be determined, but that is not the primary concern until Hamlin is stabilized
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 04, 2023, 04:52:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it's commotio cordis?
The Columbia Cardiology Professor on ESPN yesterday was much more cautious trying to diagnose. Her main claim was that when Hamlin goes into cardiac arrest, immediate care with CPR and AEDs to get blood pumping to deliver oxygen to the body is of greatest importance to protect the other organs in the body, especially the brain, and then getting Hamlin to a Level 1 trauma center and let the Cardiologists and medical staff there treat the patient. Being an NFL game with team doctors and physical therapists/trainers onsite and an ambulance and EMTs onsite and UC Hospital only 2 miles away all were potentially life-saving Monday night
Even the UCLA Cardiology Professor on NFLN yesterday was pretty cautious about diagnosing a cause at this point
The how/why will (hopefully) be determined, but that is not the primary concern until Hamlin is stabilized
This isn't mutually exclusive. Immediate care is the most important thing, and that's what Hamlin got. That doesn't mean certified and credible doctors can't give their opinions on the situation.
And keep in mind that in the media there is an, in my opinion, overly stifling filter when it comes to what is acceptable to talk about in the context of a tragedy. I wonder if those cardiologists have likely causes in mind, but are afraid to talk about it because people will ridicule them for "speculation" .
I see the media is confined to the parking lot. Well to be expected, as the hospital has other patients.
Anyway that was my first suggestion that doctors don't want to say anything not so much the press will take out of context, but social media will.
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 04, 2023, 04:52:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it's commotio cordis?
The Columbia Cardiology Professor on ESPN yesterday was much more cautious trying to diagnose. Her main claim was that when Hamlin goes into cardiac arrest, immediate care with CPR and AEDs to get blood pumping to deliver oxygen to the body is of greatest importance to protect the other organs in the body, especially the brain, and then getting Hamlin to a Level 1 trauma center and let the Cardiologists and medical staff there treat the patient. Being an NFL game with team doctors and physical therapists/trainers onsite and an ambulance and EMTs onsite and UC Hospital only 2 miles away all were potentially life-saving Monday night
Even the UCLA Cardiology Professor on NFLN yesterday was pretty cautious about diagnosing a cause at this point
The how/why will (hopefully) be determined, but that is not the primary concern until Hamlin is stabilized
This isn't mutually exclusive. Immediate care is the most important thing, and that's what Hamlin got. That doesn't mean certified and credible doctors can't give their opinions on the situation.
And keep in mind that in the media there is an, in my opinion, overly stifling filter when it comes to what is acceptable to talk about in the context of a tragedy. I wonder if those cardiologists have likely causes in mind, but are afraid to talk about it because people will ridicule them for "speculation" .
If getting someone to a level 1 trauma center is critical, then you're in good shape at 29 of 30 NFL stadia.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 04, 2023, 06:22:43 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 04, 2023, 04:52:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it’s commotio cordis?
The Columbia Cardiology Professor on ESPN yesterday was much more cautious trying to diagnose. Her main claim was that when Hamlin goes into cardiac arrest, immediate care with CPR and AEDs to get blood pumping to deliver oxygen to the body is of greatest importance to protect the other organs in the body, especially the brain, and then getting Hamlin to a Level 1 trauma center and let the Cardiologists and medical staff there treat the patient. Being an NFL game with team doctors and physical therapists/trainers onsite and an ambulance and EMTs onsite and UC Hospital only 2 miles away all were potentially life-saving Monday night
Even the UCLA Cardiology Professor on NFLN yesterday was pretty cautious about diagnosing a cause at this point
The how/why will (hopefully) be determined, but that is not the primary concern until Hamlin is stabilized
This isn’t mutually exclusive. Immediate care is the most important thing, and that’s what Hamlin got. That doesn’t mean certified and credible doctors can’t give their opinions on the situation.
And keep in mind that in the media there is an, in my opinion, overly stifling filter when it comes to what is acceptable to talk about in the context of a tragedy. I wonder if those cardiologists have likely causes in mind, but are afraid to talk about it because people will ridicule them for “speculation”.
If getting someone to a level 1 trauma center is critical, then you're in good shape at 29 of 30 NFL stadia.
Just curious. What is the one outlier? Is it Green Bay?
Nevermind. I looked it up. Green Bay has 2 Level 2 TCs. Madison and Milwaukee are the only Level 1 TCs in the state.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:47:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 04, 2023, 06:22:43 PM
If getting someone to a level 1 trauma center is critical, then you're in good shape at 29 of 30 NFL stadia.
Just curious. What is the one outlier? Is it Green Bay?
That would be the one that makes sense. Makes me wonder if a medivac chopper is on standby at Lambeau, if in fact Green Bay is the outlier
Quote from: thspfc on January 04, 2023, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
It's premature for anyone to be speculating on what happened to Hamlin.
Too early even for cardiologists, who have come to a pretty uniform conclusion that it's commotio cordis?
They haven't examined him.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 04, 2023, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:47:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 04, 2023, 06:22:43 PM
If getting someone to a level 1 trauma center is critical, then you're in good shape at 29 of 30 NFL stadia.
Just curious. What is the one outlier? Is it Green Bay?
That would be the one that makes sense. Makes me wonder if a medivac chopper is on standby at Lambeau, if in fact Green Bay is the outlier
The interesting thing is that of the 3 hospitals in Green Bay, St Vincent (Downtown) and Aurora Baycare (I-43 & E Mason) are the only Level 2. The one closest to the stadium (St Mary's on W Shawano Ave) is unlisted on the level.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:59:42 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 04, 2023, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:47:27 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 04, 2023, 06:22:43 PM
If getting someone to a level 1 trauma center is critical, then you're in good shape at 29 of 30 NFL stadia.
Just curious. What is the one outlier? Is it Green Bay?
That would be the one that makes sense. Makes me wonder if a medivac chopper is on standby at Lambeau, if in fact Green Bay is the outlier
The interesting thing is that of the 3 hospitals in Green Bay, St Vincent (Downtown) and Aurora Baycare (I-43 & E Mason) are the only Level 2. The one closest to the stadium (St Mary's on W Shawano Ave) is unlisted on the level.
It looks like there are only two Level I trauma centers in Wisconsin, in Milwaukee and Madison. The Athletic has an article stating that the NFL's Emergency Action Plan, which was invoked on Monday, provides for a plan of transportation to either a Level I or Level II trauma center, so I would guess "No" on the medevac helicopter question.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:59:42 PM
The interesting thing is that of the 3 hospitals in Green Bay, St Vincent (Downtown) and Aurora Baycare (I-43 & E Mason) are the only Level 2. The one closest to the stadium (St Mary's on W Shawano Ave) is unlisted on the level.
St. vincent and St. Mary's are "sister" hospitals. There are actually 4 hospitals in Green Bay, the other one, Bellin, is the one affiliated with the Packers.
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2023, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:59:42 PM
The interesting thing is that of the 3 hospitals in Green Bay, St Vincent (Downtown) and Aurora Baycare (I-43 & E Mason) are the only Level 2. The one closest to the stadium (St Mary's on W Shawano Ave) is unlisted on the level.
St. vincent and St. Mary's are "sister" hospitals. There are actually 4 hospitals in Green Bay, the other one, Bellin, is the one affiliated with the Packers.
Where is Bellin in Green Bay? I didn't see it on the Wisconsin Trauma Map I was looking at.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
...
Hank Gathers died from a previously undiagnosed heart condition.
...
For the record, Hank Gathers collapsed during an early-season game, missed some time, and was on medication at the time of his death (editing to clarify: which was during a conference tournament 3 months after his initial collapse). There was speculation that he was skipping days or wasn't taking his full dosage because of how he felt it made him feel during games.
I'm not seeing any level 1 trauma centers near Gillette Stadium. Boston is a full 20 miles away.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 07:44:45 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2023, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 04, 2023, 06:59:42 PM
The interesting thing is that of the 3 hospitals in Green Bay, St Vincent (Downtown) and Aurora Baycare (I-43 & E Mason) are the only Level 2. The one closest to the stadium (St Mary's on W Shawano Ave) is unlisted on the level.
St. vincent and St. Mary's are "sister" hospitals. There are actually 4 hospitals in Green Bay, the other one, Bellin, is the one affiliated with the Packers.
Where is Bellin in Green Bay? I didn't see it on the Wisconsin Trauma Map I was looking at.
Adjacent to St. Vincent.
Quote from: davewiecking on January 04, 2023, 08:20:45 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
...
Hank Gathers died from a previously undiagnosed heart condition.
...
For the record, Hank Gathers collapsed during an early-season game, missed some time, and was on medication at the time of his death. There was speculation that he was skipping days or wasn't taking his full dosage because of how he felt it made him feel during games.
Actually during the conference tournament, which was then cancelled.
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2023, 09:58:36 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on January 04, 2023, 08:20:45 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2023, 10:44:51 AM
...
Hank Gathers died from a previously undiagnosed heart condition.
...
For the record, Hank Gathers collapsed during an early-season game, missed some time, and was on medication at the time of his death (editing to clarify: which was during the conference tournament 3 months after his initial collapse). There was speculation that he was skipping days or wasn't taking his full dosage because of how he felt it made him feel during games.
Actually during the conference tournament, which was then cancelled.
Quote from: 1 on January 04, 2023, 09:29:49 PM
I'm not seeing any level 1 trauma centers near Gillette Stadium. Boston is a full 20 miles away.
Per mass.gov, the closest is Steward in Brockton, although there are more options in Boston.
Reports are that Damar is alert and holding his family's hands. Great news.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 05, 2023, 11:55:20 AM
Reports are that Damar is alert and holding his family's hands. Great news.
Thanks for the update. That's wonderful news.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 05, 2023, 11:55:20 AM
Reports are that Damar is alert and holding his family's hands. Great news.
Great news indeed.
I'm glad that Hamlin is going to be fine.
Looks like the final week of the season is going to be truncated, with no TNF or MNF games on tap. However, the fate of that Bills-Bengals matchup is still unknown, as is that if the playoffs, and I'm fearing that we may not know for several more days.
There is a small part of me that wonders if Hamlin is going to be slightly peeved knowing his hit was in vain.
Also: how many people are now going to remember Hamlin for this and little else? Dedicating your life to a game, but mostly being remembered for a cardiac arrest...that's gotta suck.
Glad he's healing up and improving every day.
Quote from: Henry on January 05, 2023, 07:09:03 PM
I'm glad that Hamlin is going to be fine.
Looks like the final week of the season is going to be truncated, with no TNF or MNF games on tap. However, the fate of that Bills-Bengals matchup is still unknown, as is that if the playoffs, and I'm fearing that we may not know for several more days.
I don't think there's ever any Monday Night games on the last week, or Thursday Night games but who cares about those? As for the fate of the Bills-Bengals game, I believe they just cancelled it. There will be no game, they will both play their Week 18 game and then we'll see what happens. I guess there's some ideas about using the winning percentage to determine seeding among the top three times now. Not sure if any of that's confirmed.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 03, 2023, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
My perspective on this has shifted a bit after hearing comments from both coaches and hearing a former player's perspective (Mitchell Schwartz on the Athletic Football Podcast). Yes, it was an unprecedented situation but all anyone had to go on at the time was that after a major injury, the SOP is for players to take 5 minutes and then the game will resume. But it doesn't sound like there was any official directive from the NFL that play must resume, and at no point was it not a very fluid situation. Per McDermott, the NFL was in contact with the coaches and officials the whole time and gave the teams permission to go to their locker rooms. Discussions continued and McDermott was in contact with his players who decided they were not comfortable resuming the game. The Bengals captains came over to let the Bills captains know they felt the same way, this was communicated to the NFL which ultimately led to the postponement and then suspension of the game.
Bills/Bengals has been officially cancelled.
Chiefs 31, Raiders 17
Jaguars 23, Titans 16
Steelers 19, Browns 13
Bengals 20, Ravens 14
Vikings 27, Bears 6
Patriots 24, Bills 20
Dolphins 18, Jets 12
Buccaneers 21, Falcons 20
Saints 34, Panthers 26
Texans 20, Colts 16
49ers 31, Cardinals 10
Cowboys 38, Commanders 10
Seahawks 30, Rams 23
Eagles 27, Giants 19
Chargers 20, Broncos 17
Packers 28, Lions 14
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2023, 09:23:26 PM
Bills/Bengals has been officially cancelled.
Chiefs 31, Raiders 17
Jaguars 23, Titans 16
Steelers 19, Browns 13
Bengals 20, Ravens 14
Vikings 27, Bears 23
Patriots 24, Bills 20
Dolphins 18, Jets 12
Buccaneers 21, Falcons 20
Saints 34, Panthers 26
Texans 20, Colts 16
49ers 31, Cardinals 10
Cowboys 38, Commanders 10
Seahawks 30, Rams 23
Eagles 27, Giants 19
Chargers 20, Broncos 17
Packers 28, Lions 14
Fields is out so there's no way the Bears score 23.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 05, 2023, 09:29:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2023, 09:23:26 PM
Bills/Bengals has been officially cancelled.
Chiefs 31, Raiders 17
Jaguars 23, Titans 16
Steelers 19, Browns 13
Bengals 20, Ravens 14
Vikings 27, Bears 23
Patriots 24, Bills 20
Dolphins 18, Jets 12
Buccaneers 21, Falcons 20
Saints 34, Panthers 26
Texans 20, Colts 16
49ers 31, Cardinals 10
Cowboys 38, Commanders 10
Seahawks 30, Rams 23
Eagles 27, Giants 19
Chargers 20, Broncos 17
Packers 28, Lions 14
Fields is out so there's no way the Bears score 23.
Didn't know that, thank you.
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2023, 08:14:53 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 03, 2023, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 02, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Whoever originally told the teams that they were going to restart the game in 5 minutes should be castrated with a broken beer bottle.
And hats off to Sean McDermott & Zac Taylor for taking matters into their own hands and, after briefly discussing, sending their teams back to the locker room and more-or-less deciding the postponement themselves. Great leadership by both to stand up to the league & advocate for their players, who they knew couldn't possibly be expected to continue playing as if nothing happened.
My perspective on this has shifted a bit after hearing comments from both coaches and hearing a former player's perspective (Mitchell Schwartz on the Athletic Football Podcast). Yes, it was an unprecedented situation but all anyone had to go on at the time was that after a major injury, the SOP is for players to take 5 minutes and then the game will resume. But it doesn't sound like there was any official directive from the NFL that play must resume, and at no point was it not a very fluid situation. Per McDermott, the NFL was in contact with the coaches and officials the whole time and gave the teams permission to go to their locker rooms. Discussions continued and McDermott was in contact with his players who decided they were not comfortable resuming the game. The Bengals captains came over to let the Bills captains know they felt the same way, this was communicated to the NFL which ultimately led to the postponement and then suspension of the game.
A lot of people like to shit on the NFL, and rumors went flying about the 5 minute thing. Even the press claimed they based their story on other press that are well regarded sources of info. It apparently was just a big circus where no one really had first hand info. The press has been given a huge pass here because of the focus on Hamlin, but they really were sources of gossip, not actual facts, at the beginning of the situation.
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2023, 09:23:26 PM
Bills/Bengals has been officially cancelled.
And that officially crowns the Bengals as 2022 AFC North champions - certainly the strangest division clinch in NFL history but warranted in these circumstances. The NFL proposes that if the Ravens win Sunday and face a rematch with the Bengals in the Wild Card, a coin flip would determine which team would host.
The NFL also proposes a neutral site for the AFC Championship if it's between two teams that could have earned the #1 seed. The specific matchups for which this could occur will be determined by this week's games: https://www.nfl.com/news/week-17-buffalo-cincinnati-game-will-not-be-resumed-neutral-afc-championship-gam
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2023, 10:44:18 PM
The NFL also proposes a neutral site for the AFC Championship if it's between two teams that could have earned the #1 seed. The specific matchups for which this could occur will be determined by this week's games: https://www.nfl.com/news/week-17-buffalo-cincinnati-game-will-not-be-resumed-neutral-afc-championship-gam
I think Cleveland Browns stadium would be an almost perfect location for the AFC Championship game as it looks to be about equally distant between Cincinnati and Buffalo....a perfect opportunity for fans of both teams to make that reasonable drive to Cleveland to see which team will advance to Super Bowl LVII. And an NFL championship hasn't been played in Cleveland perhaps in my lifetime.
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2023, 09:23:26 PM
Chiefs 31, Raiders 17
Jaguars 23, Titans 16
Steelers 19, Browns 13
Bengals 20, Ravens 14
Vikings 27, Bears 6
Patriots 24, Bills 20
Dolphins 18, Jets 12
Buccaneers 21, Falcons 20
Saints 34, Panthers 26
Texans 20, Colts 16
49ers 31, Cardinals 10
Cowboys 38, Commanders 10
Seahawks 30, Rams 23
Eagles 27, Giants 19
Chargers 20, Broncos 17
Packers 28, Lions 14
Hold on a sec....we have some Breaking News to share! Someone has actually picked my Texans to win a game??!!! That's never happened before!
Quote from: jgb191 on January 06, 2023, 01:11:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2023, 10:44:18 PM
The NFL also proposes a neutral site for the AFC Championship if it's between two teams that could have earned the #1 seed. The specific matchups for which this could occur will be determined by this week's games: https://www.nfl.com/news/week-17-buffalo-cincinnati-game-will-not-be-resumed-neutral-afc-championship-gam
I think Cleveland Browns stadium would be an almost perfect location for the AFC Championship game as it looks to be about equally distant between Cincinnati and Buffalo....a perfect opportunity for fans of both teams to make that reasonable drive to Cleveland to see which team will advance to Super Bowl LVII. And an NFL championship hasn't been played in Cleveland perhaps in my lifetime.
Considering Kansas City has to be a participant, I would think Indianapolis (if Indoors) or Nashville (if Outdoors) are probably better candidates.
I doubt any of the Outdoor Great Lakes stadiums will be considered (Green Bay, Chicago, Cleveland), due to weather being a bigger wild card along the lakeshores. Middle of the country. Nashville is about the only one that fits the billing. Cincy maybe for a Chiefs/Bills game, but that introduces other weird questions
Indoor stadiums, Indy or Minneapolis probably makes the most sense, since these scenarios all involve KC vs either Cincy or Buffalo. MSP only makes sense if the Vikings are already eliminated by Championship Sunday
A 12-4 Bengals/12-4 Bills AFC Title Game would be in Cincinnati, as both teams played the same number of games, and the tie-breaker goes to Cincy, all the way down to Strength of Victory in the tie-breakers
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 06, 2023, 01:11:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2023, 10:44:18 PM
The NFL also proposes a neutral site for the AFC Championship if it's between two teams that could have earned the #1 seed. The specific matchups for which this could occur will be determined by this week's games: https://www.nfl.com/news/week-17-buffalo-cincinnati-game-will-not-be-resumed-neutral-afc-championship-gam
I think Cleveland Browns stadium would be an almost perfect location for the AFC Championship game as it looks to be about equally distant between Cincinnati and Buffalo....a perfect opportunity for fans of both teams to make that reasonable drive to Cleveland to see which team will advance to Super Bowl LVII. And an NFL championship hasn't been played in Cleveland perhaps in my lifetime.
Considering Kansas City has to be a participant, I would think Indianapolis (if Indoors) or Nashville (if Outdoors) are probably better candidates.
I doubt any of the Outdoor Great Lakes stadiums will be considered (Green Bay, Chicago, Cleveland), due to weather being a bigger wild card along the lakeshores. Middle of the country. Nashville is about the only one that fits the billing. Cincy maybe for a Chiefs/Bills game, but that introduces other weird questions
Indoor stadiums, Indy or Minneapolis probably makes the most sense, since these scenarios all involve KC vs either Cincy or Buffalo. MSP only makes sense if the Vikings are already eliminated by Championship Sunday
Even with the potential participants all being outdoor teams, the NFL isn't going to pick an outdoor neutral site. My money is on Indy.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 02:16:07 PM
A 12-4 Bengals/12-4 Bills AFC Title Game would be in Cincinnati, as both teams played the same number of games, and the tie-breaker goes to Cincy, all the way down to Strength of Victory in the tie-breakers
However, a 13-3 Bills / 12-4 Bengals AFC Championship would be in Buffalo, even despite the fact that the Bengals could have been 13-4 with the head-to-head win. But the NFL is not considering a neutral site in that scenario since both teams played the same number of games.
Overall, it seems that the feedback on this resolution has been the most negative from Bengals fans (at least from what I've seen). They're now guaranteed the AFC North title, but eliminated from contention for the #1 seed, and face an unusual scenario of not being guaranteed a home game if they meet the Ravens as a #3 seed / #6 seed matchup... not ideal,
however, that overlooks the fact that they can eliminate that scenario by just beating the Ravens this week. If they do that, they could still have a rematch next week but the game would be in Cincinnati and the coin-flip scenario would not be in play.
(I also found
this tweet (https://tinyurl.com/yhb4v392) by the Ravens rather (amusingly?) odd. I get that they would love a home playoff game and that gives them incentive to win this week, but why would you be rooting for a Chargers win here, which would guarantee you a lower seed? Wouldn't you rather get the #5 seed and an easier matchup against the Jaguars? That seems to me like a significantly better situation than relying on the coin toss to get home field and facing a road rematch with the Bengals if you lose the toss.)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 06, 2023, 02:21:50 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 06, 2023, 01:11:04 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2023, 10:44:18 PM
The NFL also proposes a neutral site for the AFC Championship if it's between two teams that could have earned the #1 seed. The specific matchups for which this could occur will be determined by this week's games: https://www.nfl.com/news/week-17-buffalo-cincinnati-game-will-not-be-resumed-neutral-afc-championship-gam
I think Cleveland Browns stadium would be an almost perfect location for the AFC Championship game as it looks to be about equally distant between Cincinnati and Buffalo....a perfect opportunity for fans of both teams to make that reasonable drive to Cleveland to see which team will advance to Super Bowl LVII. And an NFL championship hasn't been played in Cleveland perhaps in my lifetime.
Considering Kansas City has to be a participant, I would think Indianapolis (if Indoors) or Nashville (if Outdoors) are probably better candidates.
I doubt any of the Outdoor Great Lakes stadiums will be considered (Green Bay, Chicago, Cleveland), due to weather being a bigger wild card along the lakeshores. Middle of the country. Nashville is about the only one that fits the billing. Cincy maybe for a Chiefs/Bills game, but that introduces other weird questions
Indoor stadiums, Indy or Minneapolis probably makes the most sense, since these scenarios all involve KC vs either Cincy or Buffalo. MSP only makes sense if the Vikings are already eliminated by Championship Sunday
Even with the potential participants all being outdoor teams, the NFL isn't going to pick an outdoor neutral site. My money is on Indy.
Also, it may consider Atlanta, Glendale (Arizona), Houston and New Orleans, since their own teams have already been eliminated.
Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2023, 04:53:45 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 02:16:07 PM
A 12-4 Bengals/12-4 Bills AFC Title Game would be in Cincinnati, as both teams played the same number of games, and the tie-breaker goes to Cincy, all the way down to Strength of Victory in the tie-breakers
However, a 13-3 Bills / 12-4 Bengals AFC Championship would be in Buffalo, even despite the fact that the Bengals could have been 13-4 with the head-to-head win. But the NFL is not considering a neutral site in that scenario since both teams played the same number of games.
Overall, it seems that the feedback on this resolution has been the most negative from Bengals fans (at least from what I've seen). They're now guaranteed the AFC North title, but eliminated from contention for the #1 seed, and face an unusual scenario of not being guaranteed a home game if they meet the Ravens as a #3 seed / #6 seed matchup... not ideal, however, that overlooks the fact that they can eliminate that scenario by just beating the Ravens this week. If they do that, they could still have a rematch next week but the game would be in Cincinnati and the coin-flip scenario would not be in play.
(I also found this tweet (https://tinyurl.com/yhb4v392) by the Ravens rather (amusingly?) odd. I get that they would love a home playoff game and that gives them incentive to win this week, but why would you be rooting for a Chargers win here, which would guarantee you a lower seed? Wouldn't you rather get the #5 seed and an easier matchup against the Jaguars? That seems to me like a significantly better situation than relying on the coin toss to get home field and facing a road rematch with the Bengals if you lose the toss.)
People put way too much stock in home field. I haven't looked, maybe home field advantage is coming back a little after it was basically nonexistent in 2020 and 2021. But it's not worth the price of paying the Bengals rather than the Jaguars or Titans.
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:37:58 PM
Also, it may consider Atlanta, Glendale (Arizona), Houston and New Orleans, since their own teams have already been eliminated.
No way Glendale would be used. That looks bad, playing a neutral AFC Titile Game at the same stadium as the SuperBowl
If you want fans from both teams to reasonably attend, the site needs to be, shall we say, between KC and Cincy/Buffalo
Indoors, MSP,
Indy, and Detroit fit. Vikings could be in, and potentially hosting, the NFC Title Game.
If Detroit squeaks in, it will be as the 7 seed, and they cannot host the NFC Title Game as the 7 seed. Buffalo already has played a "home" game at Ford Field this year. I do think Indy makes the most sense of the Indoor possibilitiesIndy is out: https://twitter.com/mickeyshuey/status/1611483991764357132
Detroit is out: https://www.si.com/nfl/lions/news/lions-move-up-field-turf-replacement
I think that would leave MSP for Indoors. ATL, NO, or Houston just seem like decent travel hurdles for the fan bases
Outdoors, Green Bay, Chicago, Nashville, Cincy (if KC/Buffalo), Cleveland, Pittsburgh are about the only realistic options. I think the NFL would immediately toss Green Bay, Chicago, and Cleveland just due to lake effects on weather this time of year. That leaves Nashville, possibly Cincy, and possibly Pittsburgh. Cincy could be weird to host a Bills game, and obviously is not neutral for KC/Cincy. Pittsburgh smells like a home away from home field for either Cincy or Buffalo. Nashville makes sense if Outdoors. And obviously, if the Title game involves 2 of KC, Buffalo, and Cincy, the Titans are already eliminated at that point
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 10:30:11 PM
Indy is out: https://twitter.com/mickeyshuey/status/1611483991764357132
That event must have gotten scheduled very recently. The Colts weren't eliminated from playoff contention until a few weeks ago.
There was basically a 0% chance the Colts would be in the AFC Championship Game, let alone host it, even at the beginning of the season. Even if there was, they would have found SOME way around it in that circumstance. Much better to have a guaranteed backup event.
There could also be a potential for a university to host the game, say Ohio State or Memphis. Or maybe a former NFL site in St Louis. The Dome is still there.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 07, 2023, 09:10:39 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 10:30:11 PM
Indy is out: https://twitter.com/mickeyshuey/status/1611483991764357132
That event must have gotten scheduled very recently. The Colts weren't eliminated from playoff contention until a few weeks ago.
There was a special carve-out, specifically, for the Colts playing a Home AFC Championship Game. From what I read, it specifies the Colts by name as the only exception
Detroit is also out as a potential neutral site. At this point, Nashville might be the favorite (then again, Titans could still make the playoffs, which would complicate things). But obviously there's only a small chance the neutral site happens to begin with, and a final decision can't be made until after the divisional round.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 07, 2023, 11:09:02 AM
There could also be a potential for a university to host the game, say Ohio State or Memphis. Or maybe a former NFL site in St Louis. The Dome is still there.
The turf in St Louis was as bad as the old Philly artificial turf. I don't know if they ever upgraded it after the Rams left, maintained it, or if it even still exists. I'd also doubt the NFL will put any games there given the city's lawsuit against the Rams (https://www.ky3.com/2022/11/23/nfl-settles-with-st-louis-city-county-millions/). Too much bad blood. I'd say Nashville, Atlanta, and Charlotte are the most likely neutral site possibilities. DC could also be in the mix but I can't see the NFL trying to work anything with Dan Snyder right now.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 07, 2023, 11:09:02 AM
There could also be a potential for a university to host the game, say Ohio State or Memphis. Or maybe a former NFL site in St Louis. The Dome is still there.
A couple decades ago, the NFL made only NFL stadiums eligible to host the superb owl, ensuring they have all the NFL facilities. I see this reasoning for hosting a playoff game at a neutral site.
Vegas is in the discussion for a neutral-site game, according to the Review-Journal: https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders/raiders-open-to-allegiant-stadium-hosting-afc-title-game-2707828/ (https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders/raiders-open-to-allegiant-stadium-hosting-afc-title-game-2707828/)
QuoteAllegiant Stadium is among the venues the NFL has contacted as a potential host. The game is scheduled to be played Jan. 29.
...
With the Pro Bowl being played at Allegiant Stadium the following week, and league personnel in town to oversee that event, the necessary infrastructure would be in place to accommodate both events.
Also, with the weeklong Pro Bowl festivities commencing after the conference championship games, the fans in town for the AFC championship game could potentially stay in town to participate.
This is all nonsense. If the league really cared about making this fair then Bills/Bengals would have been rescheduled, not cancelled.
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2023, 03:54:57 PM
This is all nonsense. If the league really cared about making this fair then Bills/Bengals would have been rescheduled, not cancelled.
Would there have been a way to do this without giving all the other playoff teams a bye week?
Quote from: Mapmikey on January 07, 2023, 04:12:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2023, 03:54:57 PM
This is all nonsense. If the league really cared about making this fair then Bills/Bengals would have been rescheduled, not cancelled.
Would there have been a way to do this without giving all the other playoff teams a bye week?
No, but that comes back to the point of how much they really care. Neutral site playoff games feel like an empty gesture when the game could have been made up without too much complication.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 07, 2023, 03:38:12 PM
Vegas is in the discussion for a neutral-site game, according to the Review-Journal: https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders/raiders-open-to-allegiant-stadium-hosting-afc-title-game-2707828/ (https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders/raiders-open-to-allegiant-stadium-hosting-afc-title-game-2707828/)
Quote
With the Pro Bowl being played at Allegiant Stadium the following week, and league personnel in town to oversee that event, the necessary infrastructure would be in place to accommodate both events.
Also, with the weeklong Pro Bowl festivities commencing after the conference championship games, the fans in town for the AFC championship game could potentially stay in town to participate.
This part seems to be a poorly opinionated opinion by the story's author.
Detroit sold out the Bills-Browns game when they only had 2 days to sell tickets. Numerous one-game playoffs occur with very little time to sell tickets, and most sell out as well.
No one is going to book tickets for a neutral site game, then decide to make it a week-long trip to enjoy the pro-bowl festivities...whatever they are. A few visitor websites claim "a week-long celebration of player skills", but offer no detail and no schedule of said celebration or activities. The game is expected to be so lowly attended that only the 100 and 200 levels will be open. The entire upper bowl - the 300 and 400 levels, will be closed. If you want tickets, you can still get original - not resale - tickets 3 rows off the field.
That said, Vegas does have a lot going for it - namely, a lot of flights, a lot of hotel rooms and a lot of dining options that can prepare for an event on short notice. And there's no large-scale events going on that weekend. Actually, one of Vegas's largest conferences, the CES Tech show, is currently happening this weekend.
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 01, 2022, 12:12:42 PM
I've also started my list of preseason forks and I've got some spicy ones in the AFC ...
Alright, I settled on 12 teams. ...
Here goes:
Steelers ❌
Browns ❌
Jets ❌
Patriots ❌
Texans ❌
Titans ❌
6/6 on my AFC preseason forks. Never a doubt!! 🔒
I was 6/7 on playoff teams overall. Jaguars were my only incorrect fork, but cashing in on the Titans when they had a 97% chance to win the division after Thanksgiving more than makes up for that.
Bills 35, Patriots 23. Bills will face Miami; Patriots season is over.
Can't really be surprised, given the emotional week for Buffalo especially, and they were the better team. The Pats showed some fight, but were otherwise predictably overmatched.
Texans convert two 4th and longs, one for a TD, then get the 2 pt conv to beat the Colts and hand the #1 pick to the Bears.
Bears not in the market for a QB, so likely trading the pick to the team that wants Bryce Young the most.
Without those 2 kick return TDs the game looks a lot different. Oh well.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 08, 2023, 04:44:00 PM
Texans convert two 4th and longs, one for a TD, then get the 2 pt conv to beat the Colts and hand the #1 pick to the Bears.
Bears not in the market for a QB, so likely trading the pick to the team that wants Bryce Young the most.
Draft drama! A great spot for the Bears to be in, and very fitting that it was former Bears coach Lovie Smith that helped make it happen by leading his team to a third win to close the season.
From my cousin, a Patriots fan: "the Pats died so the Dolphins could live".
Hoping that Tua returns for the post-season. Only chance us Dolphins fans have.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 06, 2023, 01:11:04 AM
I think Cleveland Browns stadium would be an almost perfect location for the AFC Championship game as it looks to be about equally distant between Cincinnati and Buffalo....a perfect opportunity for fans of both teams to make that reasonable drive to Cleveland to see which team will advance to Super Bowl LVII. And an NFL championship hasn't been played in Cleveland perhaps in my lifetime.
Plus, it would be consolation for their team having a fat chance to make it to the AFCCG anytime soon.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 10:30:11 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:37:58 PM
Also, it may consider Atlanta, Glendale (Arizona), Houston and New Orleans, since their own teams have already been eliminated.
No way Glendale would be used. That looks bad, playing a neutral AFC Titile Game at the same stadium as the SuperBowl
If you want fans from both teams to reasonably attend, the site needs to be, shall we say, between KC and Cincy/Buffalo
Indoors, MSP, Indy, and Detroit fit. Vikings could be in, and potentially hosting, the NFC Title Game. If Detroit squeaks in, it will be as the 7 seed, and they cannot host the NFC Title Game as the 7 seed. Buffalo already has played a "home" game at Ford Field this year. I do think Indy makes the most sense of the Indoor possibilities
Indy is out: https://twitter.com/mickeyshuey/status/1611483991764357132
Detroit is out: https://www.si.com/nfl/lions/news/lions-move-up-field-turf-replacement
I think that would leave MSP for Indoors. ATL, NO, or Houston just seem like decent travel hurdles for the fan bases
Outdoors, Green Bay, Chicago, Nashville, Cincy (if KC/Buffalo), Cleveland, Pittsburgh are about the only realistic options. I think the NFL would immediately toss Green Bay, Chicago, and Cleveland just due to lake effects on weather this time of year. That leaves Nashville, possibly Cincy, and possibly Pittsburgh. Cincy could be weird to host a Bills game, and obviously is not neutral for KC/Cincy. Pittsburgh smells like a home away from home field for either Cincy or Buffalo. Nashville makes sense if Outdoors. And obviously, if the Title game involves 2 of KC, Buffalo, and Cincy, the Titans are already eliminated at that point
As a Steelers fan, I can promise you that for Cincy, our city would be nothing like home away from home. The Cincinnati Bengals will never, ever be at home here. If we have our way the stadium would look like Arrowhead by the time it was said and done.
Quite the wacky finish in Indy to give the Bears the #1 pick (thanks, Lovie!!!) moments after they completed their tank. Personally I'm hopeful the Bears trade down for a ransom like NWI_Irish96 mentioned - and based on Ryan Poles's draft strategy in 2022, I could easily see that playing out.
Elsewhere, quite the interesting slate of wildcard matchups shaping up as the 4:25 games conclude. No coin flip necessary for Cincinnati/Baltimore, and the Seahawks stay alive with a game-winner in OT after doinking the try at the end of regulation. Curious how Detroit will play this evening now that they're officially eliminated - would they at least still have motivation to take their division rival down with them?
Just about the worst Cowboys performance I've ever seen. Starters should have been pulled to stop the bleeding with Philly up 16-0 at half. Dak's 14/37 for 128 yards is disgusting, and it's unnecessary that this game is going to be hanging over the players' heads entering the playoffs.
Philly didn't look too good either, but the wild card bye is usually a nice reset for teams that struggle down the stretch as compared to earlier in the season. The 2020 Chiefs, 2019 49ers, 2018 Patriots, 2018 Rams, 2017 Eagles, and 2015 Broncos come to mind.
Another impossible climb back to above .500 for Mike Tomlin's Steelers. He gets my vote for COTY. Every AFC North division series was a split, which is very AFC North.
As far as playoff teams go it doesn't get much worse than losing 5 straight and breaking the streak with a win against a slumping team on their 3rd string QB by a scoreline that could be a win/loss record in a 17 game season.
This Cowboys/Bucs wild card is a bit of a conflict of interest for me, with the Cowboys and Brady. I'm definitely rooting for the Cowboys, but no matter who wins, a lot of people will be proven right and a lot of people will be proven wrong.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 08, 2023, 07:37:55 PM
Curious how Detroit will play this evening now that they're officially eliminated - would they at least still have motivation to take their division rival down with them?
100% yes. Green Bay has beat up on them for so long. For the Lions it would be about as satisfying as they come in terms of regular season wins. Also, being eliminated relieves some pressure (and negates the usual Lions choking element). They'll be playing more relaxed which is good, but I still have the Packers winning.
What a bummer that the Rams couldn't finish off the Seahawks, ending a really promising Lions season amidst questionable officiating. :-/
Curious if anyone has any thoughts on whether it's a competitive disadvantage for Seattle to have to play in an earlier window than Detroit/Green Bay? That seems to be the prevailing thought in Seattle, and I tend to agree... it is an awkward situation to rely on a team that's just been rooting against you for three hours to then go out and win to send you to the playoffs knowing you just eliminated them, and now the Packers get to face an opponent that already knows their fate.
If we're to believe Campbell, the Lions are going to be fighting hard regardless, but it's got to be deflating to be eliminated an hour before kickoff. At least they still have a chance to finish with a winning record and eliminate a division rival, but it's still not nearly as exciting as a true elimination game. And if we're looking ahead to next weekend I'm almost tempted to root for the Packers because Packers/49ers would have so much more intrigue than a third Seahawks/49ers matchup.
SF OVER GB/SEA, NYG OVER MIN, TB OVER DAL
BUF OVER MIA, CIN OVER BAL, SD OVER JAX
PHI OVER NYG, SF OVER TB
KC OVER SD, BUF OVER CIN
SF OVER PHI, BUF OVER KC
SF OVER BUF
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2023, 08:59:33 PM
If we're to believe Campbell, the Lions are going to be fighting hard regardless, but it's got to be deflating to be eliminated an hour before kickoff. At least they still have a chance to finish with a winning record and eliminate a division rival, but it's still not nearly as exciting as a true elimination game. And if we're looking ahead to next weekend I'm almost tempted to root for the Packers because Packers/49ers would have so much more intrigue than a third Seahawks/49ers matchup.
I'm rooting for Rodgers/49ers Playoffs V because the meltdown from the losing fanbase would be hilarious no matter which one it is.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2023, 04:40:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Steelers ❌
Browns ❌
Jets ❌
Patriots ❌
Texans ❌
Titans ❌
6/6 on my AFC preseason forks. Never a doubt!! 🔒
I was 6/7 on playoff teams overall. Jaguars were my only incorrect fork, but cashing in on the Titans when they had a 97% chance to win the division after Thanksgiving more than makes up for that.
Now for the NFC...
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Falcons ❌
Giants ✔️
Commanders ❌
Seahawks ✔️
Lions ❌
Bears ❌
Just 4 of 6 correct in the NFC, 10 of 12 overall.
+200 points for 10 correct and -60 points for 2 incorrect = 140 points
Now add in the following teams forked in-season...
Panthers (+15)
Packers (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Raiders (+13)
---------------
Buccaneers (-30)
Jaguars (-30)
So a net -6 there for a final total of
134 points if my math is correct.
As a Lions fan I would have definitely taken 9-8 and knocking the Packers out of the playoffs at the beginning of the year. It is hard to be disappointed with the improvements this year, especially with the draft pick prospects coming up.
Woww... great end to the season for the Lions but it's too bad they won't be in the playoffs. Lions/49ers would have been a great Wild Card matchup. The Seahawks getting in is a great redemption story and probably clinches CPOTY for Geno.
Dear Nick Caserio,
Go find Demeco Ryans; he's out there somewhere, and get him (after he win Super Bowl LVII for the Niners). Bring back Demeco Ryans to Houston where he belongs! Offer him the Head Coach job, and pay him his asking price however much he desires. Thank you Nick!
Sincerely,
Signed: Texans fans all over the state of Texas
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2023, 11:39:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2023, 04:40:29 PM
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Steelers ❌
Browns ❌
Jets ❌
Patriots ❌
Texans ❌
Titans ❌
6/6 on my AFC preseason forks. Never a doubt!! 🔒
I was 6/7 on playoff teams overall. Jaguars were my only incorrect fork, but cashing in on the Titans when they had a 97% chance to win the division after Thanksgiving more than makes up for that.
Now for the NFC...
Quote from: webny99 on August 02, 2022, 02:03:39 PM
Falcons ❌
Giants ✔️
Commanders ❌
Seahawks ✔️
Lions ❌
Bears ❌
Just 4 of 6 correct in the NFC, 10 of 12 overall.
+200 points for 10 correct and -60 points for 2 incorrect = 140 points
Now add in the following teams forked in-season...
Panthers (+15)
Packers (+13)
Broncos (+13)
Raiders (+13)
---------------
Buccaneers (-30)
Jaguars (-30)
So a net -6 there for a final total of 134 points if my math is correct.
The way we've been doing it the whole time is that the 30s are subtracted after everything, including points for incorrect forks (i.e. your 13 points for the Bucs), is added up. So you'd have 320-120 = 200.
The final table is:
1. NWI_Irish96, 204 points
2. webny99, 200 points
3. thspfc, 195 points
4. jayhawkco, 194 points
5. jlam, 162 points
6. hobsini2, 160 points
7. Henry, 90 points
8. CoreySamson, 40 points
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
2) 49ers defeat 7) Seahawks
5) Chargers defeat 4) Jaguars
2) Bills defeat 7) Dolphins
3) Vikings defeat 6) Giants
3) Bengals defeat 6) Ravens
5) Cowboys defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) Chiefs defeat 5) Chargers
3) Bengals defeat 2) Bills
5) Cowboys defeat 1) Eagles
2) 49ers defeat 3) Vikings
1) Chiefs defeat 3) Bengals
2) 49ers defeat 5) Cowboys
1) Chiefs defeat 2) 49ers
It took 2 years, but we finally got a .500 team in a 17 game schedule, with the Commanders finishing 8-8-1.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 06:37:24 AM
The way we've been doing it the whole time is that the 30s are subtracted after everything, including points for incorrect forks (i.e. your 13 points for the Bucs), is added up. So you'd have 320-120 = 200.
OK, I wondered if I was off based on your previous table, but I hadn't thought of that. That's fine with me, although it may make me even more aggressive if we play again (i.e. I would have gained 7 free points by just forking one of my in-season forks in the preseason, which would have been enough to win. Obviously it's not quite that simple since I may not have picked one of those teams, but it does heavily favor locking up the maximum points value).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 09, 2023, 08:27:28 AM
It took 2 years, but we finally got a .500 team in a 17 game schedule, with the Commanders finishing 8-8-1.
How times have changed! Just two years ago, an 8-8 record would have been enough to win the NFC East with room to spare as Washington won it at 7-9. Now this year, 8-8-1 was good for 4th place with the entire division finishing at or above .500.
Meanwhile, an 8-8-1 record would have been enough to win the NFC South this year.
Quote from: thspfc on January 08, 2023, 09:16:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2023, 08:59:33 PM
If we're to believe Campbell, the Lions are going to be fighting hard regardless, but it's got to be deflating to be eliminated an hour before kickoff. At least they still have a chance to finish with a winning record and eliminate a division rival, but it's still not nearly as exciting as a true elimination game. And if we're looking ahead to next weekend I'm almost tempted to root for the Packers because Packers/49ers would have so much more intrigue than a third Seahawks/49ers matchup.
I'm rooting for Rodgers/49ers Playoffs V because the meltdown from the losing fanbase would be hilarious no matter which one it is.
The NFL agrees, showing no respect for the Seahawks by putting them in the early Saturday window. Makes sense, as they are clearly the worst playoff team (pending the status of Tua and Lamar).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 09, 2023, 08:27:28 AM
It took 2 years, but we finally got a .500 team in a 17 game schedule, with the Commanders finishing 8-8-1.
Surprised it happened this quick. 8 and 8 in a 16 game schedule didn't happen every year.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 09, 2023, 09:28:41 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 09, 2023, 08:27:28 AM
It took 2 years, but we finally got a .500 team in a 17 game schedule, with the Commanders finishing 8-8-1.
Surprised it happened this quick. 8 and 8 in a 16 game schedule didn't happen every year.
Pretty much every year. This got me curious so I just checked back to 2000 and every year but one had at least one 8-8 team and most years had multiple 8-8 teams.
The exception that proves the rule was the 2018 season, which had both an 8-7-1 team and a 7-8-1 team, four 7-9 teams, and two 9-7 teams.
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2023, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
That, and I suppose most Chiefs fans will be rooting for an upset.
That was a fun season finale, and congrats to the Lions for taking down the Packers and allowing the Seahawks to take the final playoff spot in the NFC. So all three NFC North fanbases outside of Minnesota will be watching at home this year.
It's going to be interesting to see what the Bears do with the Number 1 pick.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2023, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
Opponent aside, it's always good to see teams snap playoff droughts. The Dolphins were definitely due, after two straight years of missing out despite posting a winning record.
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2023, 08:58:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2023, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
Opponent aside, it's always good to see teams snap playoff droughts. The Dolphins were definitely due, after two straight years of missing out despite posting a winning record.
And of course they made it after losing 5 of 6 to end the season, and missed last year after winning 8 of 9. :confused: On top of that, 10-6 in 2020 was their best record of the three years.
The Chiefs, Bills, Steelers, and Dolphins are the only teams to have a winning record in each year of the decade so far. It feels like the latter two don't belong in that group, but there they are and you can't argue with it.
Relating to the above, the Steelers are 19-21-1 since they started 11-0 in 2020, but still managed a winning record in each individual season.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 10:03:52 PM
Relating to the above, the Steelers are 19-21-1 since they started 11-0 in 2020, but still managed a winning record in each individual season.
Tomlin IMO deserves coach of the year for getting 9-8. The Steelers are total trash and somehow he got the absolute most out of them.
Thank you Lions for knocking out GB
And thank you Lovie Smith for knowing your true allegiances and giving the Bears the #1 pick :-D :spin:
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 09:58:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2023, 08:58:18 PM
Opponent aside, it's always good to see teams snap playoff droughts. The Dolphins were definitely due, after two straight years of missing out despite posting a winning record.
And of course they made it after losing 5 of 6 to end the season, and missed last year after winning 8 of 9. :confused: On top of that, 10-6 in 2020 was their best record of the three years.
And yet, I don't think there's any question that this team is the best of the three by far if Tua is healthy (obviously a massive caveat). The highs are way higher, and they've been competitive even despite their QB issues.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 09:58:43 PM
The Chiefs, Bills, Steelers, and Dolphins are the only teams to have a winning record in each year of the decade so far. It feels like the latter two don't belong in that group, but there they are and you can't argue with it.
Interesting that there are no NFC teams in that group. Both the Bucs and Packers would have been on the list with a victory last week.
Another fun fact: 26 of 32 teams have made the playoffs in the past three seasons. The only teams with a playoff drought dating to the 2010's are the Jets, Broncos, Texans, Lions, Panthers, and Falcons. If you're looking at winning records, the list is the same except the Lions are off the list (9-8 this year) and the Bears and Commanders are on the list as they made the playoffs in 2020 without a winning record.
Jaguars over Chargers
Bengals over Ravens
Bills over Dolphins
Cowboys over Bucs
Vikings over Giants
49ers over Seahawks
Chiefs over Jaguars
Bills over Bengals
Eagles over Cowboys
49ers over Vikings
Chiefs over Bills
49ers over Eagles
Chiefs over 49ers
I hate agreeing with thspfc. :) Also, did I miss our essay on Russell Wilson?
I still find it to be a bit hard to believe that the Bears are now on the clock for their pick in the upcoming draft.
:wow:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 10, 2023, 12:10:26 PM
I still find it to be a bit hard to believe that the Bears are now on the clock for their pick in the upcoming draft.
:wow:
Mike
I fully expect them to trade it for a boatload of picks and they'd be stupid not to do so. Some GM will become enamored by Young, Levis, Stroud, or some other rocket-armed phenom after the combine. The Bears need a lot of help around Fields and turning that pick into a bunch of picks/prospects will do more than just one stud. The only reason not to trade it is the Bears think one of the other QBs available is an upgrade over Fields like the Murray over Rosen situation in Arizona a couple years ago. (I don't see that as I think Fields could become the best NFC North QB by the time Rodgers leaves.) The question is do the Bears want the best defensive player available who may become a superstar or would they prefer several prospects at needed positions like WR, OL, LB, etc.
Quote from: mgk920 on January 10, 2023, 12:10:26 PM
I still find it to be a bit hard to believe that the Bears are now on the clock for their pick in the upcoming draft.
:wow:
Mike
Pretty unlikely that they actually draft first.
Quote from: mgk920 on January 10, 2023, 12:10:26 PM
I still find it to be a bit hard to believe that the Bears are now on the clock for their pick in the upcoming draft.
:wow:
Mike
The last time the Bears had the first pick was in 1947 and that was by a lottery pick. The pick only lasted 1 season in the NFL.
https://americanfootballdatabase.fandom.com/wiki/1947_NFL_Draft
Quote from: skluth on January 10, 2023, 12:36:58 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on January 10, 2023, 12:10:26 PM
I still find it to be a bit hard to believe that the Bears are now on the clock for their pick in the upcoming draft.
:wow:
Mike
I fully expect them to trade it for a boatload of picks and they'd be stupid not to do so. Some GM will become enamored by Young, Levis, Stroud, or some other rocket-armed phenom after the combine. The Bears need a lot of help around Fields and turning that pick into a bunch of picks/prospects will do more than just one stud. The only reason not to trade it is the Bears think one of the other QBs available is an upgrade over Fields like the Murray over Rosen situation in Arizona a couple years ago. (I don't see that as I think Fields could become the best NFC North QB by the time Rodgers leaves.) The question is do the Bears want the best defensive player available who may become a superstar or would they prefer several prospects at needed positions like WR, OL, LB, etc.
I think patching all the holes can be done via FA, they have a lot of cap space opening up this offseason. My hope is they use the Draft to get the offense built up around Fields and reload the defense.
Quote from: ET21 on January 10, 2023, 09:15:26 AM
Thank you Lions for knocking out GB
And thank you Lovie Smith for knowing your true allegiances and giving the Bears the #1 pick :-D :spin:
Thank goodness for that. It will be so nice having a post season not having to worry about Rodgers. For once I am excited about this year's playoffs.
Quote from: dvferyance on January 10, 2023, 07:02:11 PM
Quote from: ET21 on January 10, 2023, 09:15:26 AM
Thank you Lions for knocking out GB
And thank you Lovie Smith for knowing your true allegiances and giving the Bears the #1 pick :-D :spin:
Thank goodness for that. It will be so nice having a post season not having to worry about Rodgers. For once I am excited about this year's playoffs.
Rodgers + Raiders feels like a Vegas wedding waiting to happen. Mark Davis doesn't seem like the type who would want to start a total rebuild with a rookie at this point, and Rodgers is about 6 years younger than Tom Brady which is another name that has been tossed around in Vegas.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 10, 2023, 07:08:46 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on January 10, 2023, 07:02:11 PM
Quote from: ET21 on January 10, 2023, 09:15:26 AM
Thank you Lions for knocking out GB
And thank you Lovie Smith for knowing your true allegiances and giving the Bears the #1 pick :-D :spin:
Thank goodness for that. It will be so nice having a post season not having to worry about Rodgers. For once I am excited about this year's playoffs.
Rodgers + Raiders feels like a Vegas wedding waiting to happen. Mark Davis doesn't seem like the type who would want to start a total rebuild with a rookie at this point, and Rodgers is about 6 years younger than Tom Brady which is another name that has been tossed around in Vegas.
I don't know if Rodgers would go for that. It wouldn't be a great look to follow Davante Adams to Vegas after an unsuccessful campaign without him in Green Bay.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 10, 2023, 09:57:18 AM
Jaguars over Chargers
Bengals over Ravens
Bills over Dolphins
Cowboys over Bucs
Vikings over Giants
49ers over Seahawks
Chiefs over Jaguars
Bills over Bengals
Eagles over Cowboys
49ers over Vikings
Chiefs over Bills
49ers over Eagles
Chiefs over 49ers
I hate agreeing with thspfc. :) Also, did I miss our essay on Russell Wilson?
Look back at week 17 ish.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2023, 11:14:38 AM
Look back at week 17 ish.
Well played. I had missed it. I'll look forward to another wager on something dumb between us at some point. :biggrin:
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2023, 08:58:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2023, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
Opponent aside, it's always good to see teams snap playoff droughts. The Dolphins were definitely due, after two straight years of missing out despite posting a winning record.
Second straight trip to the playoffs Dolphins will have to try to win with a backup QB. Matt Moore started their 2016 playoff loss at Pittsburgh after Ryan Tannehill was lost for the season in December.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 11, 2023, 10:33:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2023, 08:58:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2023, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 09, 2023, 06:55:55 AM
Good news: Dolphins made the playoffs!
Bad news: 99% of the country will be rooting against them...
Maybe, maybe not. Dolphins are the underdogs in the game, I suspect they will attract a fair amount of supporters on that basis alone, including other AFC East fans who don't like the Bills.
Opponent aside, it's always good to see teams snap playoff droughts. The Dolphins were definitely due, after two straight years of missing out despite posting a winning record.
Second straight trip to the playoffs Dolphins will have to try to win with a backup QB. Matt Moore started their 2016 playoff loss at Pittsburgh after Ryan Tannehill was lost for the season in December.
Life of a Dolphins' fan...occasional amazement followed by mind-numbing frustration.
Having a QB1 play the whole season would make my...life.
A year-end quarterback ranking from Marc "top-10 football analyst" Sessler that gave me a few good chuckles, as always:
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-qb-index-ranking-all-32-teams-primary-starting-quarterbacks-at-the-end-of-th
Quote from: webny99 on January 12, 2023, 04:06:36 PM
A year-end quarterback ranking from Marc "top-10 football analyst" Sessler that gave me a few good chuckles, as always:
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-qb-index-ranking-all-32-teams-primary-starting-quarterbacks-at-the-end-of-th
Kirk at 17 is disgusting. Seriously, how do you come to that conclusion? What a joke. Mac, Russ, and Watson (as much as I hate him) being 26/27/28 is a big overreaction, especially when there's guys like Mariota, Darnold, and Dalton ahead.
Reading the Rodgers part was kinda funny. "An air of finality" for the 3rd straight year after a crushing playoff (or playoff-like) loss at home. Can't wait for Packers fans to tell me more about how much warm weather and dome teams struggle at Lambeau.
Quote from: thspfc on January 12, 2023, 06:01:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 12, 2023, 04:06:36 PM
A year-end quarterback ranking from Marc "top-10 football analyst" Sessler that gave me a few good chuckles, as always:
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-qb-index-ranking-all-32-teams-primary-starting-quarterbacks-at-the-end-of-th
Kirk at 17 is disgusting. Seriously, how do you come to that conclusion? What a joke.
That was my initial thought, but after reading the blurb (which reminded me: he hasn't had a great statistical seasons despite being clutch all season), I scrolled back up to see who I would move him ahead of. Maybe Purdy, who's on a great team, and Kyler, who has more upside but a rough season? Probably even Rodgers based on this season alone. I would have him at #14, but it's in the right ballpark.
Quote from: thspfc on January 12, 2023, 06:01:51 PM
Reading the Rodgers part was kinda funny. "An air of finality" for the 3rd straight year after a crushing playoff (or playoff-like) loss at home. Can't wait for Packers fans to tell me more about how much warm weather and dome teams struggle at Lambeau.
It was the Matt Ryan blurb that had me most amused:
QuoteWhether it was Ryan, Sam Ehlinger or Nick Foles, COLTS QB stood out as one of America's least rewarding occupations in 2022. It weighed on the soul to watch Ryan crushed weekly behind a line doubling as an open barn door.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2023, 08:30:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 12, 2023, 06:01:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 12, 2023, 04:06:36 PM
A year-end quarterback ranking from Marc "top-10 football analyst" Sessler that gave me a few good chuckles, as always:
https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-qb-index-ranking-all-32-teams-primary-starting-quarterbacks-at-the-end-of-th
Kirk at 17 is disgusting. Seriously, how do you come to that conclusion? What a joke.
That was my initial thought, but after reading the blurb (which reminded me: he hasn't had a great statistical seasons despite being clutch all season), I scrolled back up to see who I would move him ahead of. Maybe Purdy, who's on a great team, and Kyler, who has more upside but a rough season? Probably even Rodgers based on this season alone. I would have him at #14, but it's in the right ballpark.
I'd put him above Purdy, Fields, Kyler, Rodgers, Dak, and Tua. So 11th.
My prediction of who plays in the Second (Divisional) Round:
Tampa at Philadelphia
Minnesota at San Francisco
Jacksonville at Kansas City
Cincinnati vs Buffalo (site TBD I guess)
Needless to say: This Texans fan is obviously pulling for Jacksonville Jaguars to win their first Super Bowl in history! I think they can at least get there; it will be tough, but the JAX Jags are quite capable of Super Bowl contention they way they've been playing the last month or so.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
My prediction of who plays in the Second (Divisional) Round:
...
Cincinnati vs Buffalo (site TBD I guess)
If this occurs, it would be in Buffalo. Tiebreakers don't come into play here because both teams played 16 games and the Bills have a better record.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Needless to say: This Texans fan is obviously pulling for Jacksonville Jaguars to win their first Super Bowl in history! I think they can at least get there; it will be tough, but the JAX Jags are quite capable of Super Bowl contention they way they've been playing the last month or so.
The Jaguars have had a great season, but they were lucky to get past the Titans last week. The were outplayed for the majority of the game, and if not for that fumble returned for a touchdown, we would most likely be seeing the Titans in the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2023, 11:42:17 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
My prediction of who plays in the Second (Divisional) Round:
...
Cincinnati vs Buffalo (site TBD I guess)
If this occurs, it would be in Buffalo. Tiebreakers don't come into play here because both teams played 16 games and the Bills have a better record.
Yes - only potential neutral-site game would be Buffalo-KC in the AFC Championship, and it was announced yesterday that should that matchup happen, it would be played in Atlanta.
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 10:30:11 PM
I think that would leave MSP for Indoors. ATL, NO, or Houston just seem like decent travel hurdles for the fan bases
Well, it looks like you'll have to eat your words, because Atlanta is hosting the AFC Championship Game if both the Chiefs and Bills get that far.
Quote from: Henry on January 13, 2023, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 06, 2023, 10:30:11 PM
I think that would leave MSP for Indoors. ATL, NO, or Houston just seem like decent travel hurdles for the fan bases
Well, it looks like you'll have to eat your words, because Atlanta is hosting the AFC Championship Game if both the Chiefs and Bills get that far.
Yup. League decided Atlanta will work, should we get Bills/Chiefs
I think the League got it wrong, but it is their show to run
Quote from: jgb191 on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
I think they can at least get there; it will be tough, but the JAX Jags are quite capable of Super Bowl contention they way they've been playing the last month or so.
Nah. They don't stack up with any of the top 3 in the conference. FWIW, 538 gives it a 95% chance that either the Chiefs, Bills, or Bengals represent the AFC in the Super Bowl.
I was reading a discussion today about the teams who have the brightest futures. The most common answers? Lions, Seahawks, Jets, Jaguars. :rolleyes: Seriously? Would anyone say that any of those teams are more likely to win a championship in the next 5 years than the Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, or Eagles? Maybe the question was being interpreted as "which teams have the most potential to improve?", but that's not how it was asked.
These teams that pop out of absolutely nowhere usually don't last. The Giants, Jets, and Seahawks were everyone's favorite surprise teams at midseason. Since week 11 they're a combined 6-16-1. Are the Lions and Jags here to stay? Maybe. The teams that do find sustained success are the ones who manage to find the right quarterback and the right coach, and it appears the Jaguars, and possibly the Lions, have done that.
^ Well Cincinnati surprised a lot of people a year ago when they made the Super Bowl; it was highly anticipated that either KC or Buffalo would represent the AFC. I would like to think Jacksonville has that kind of potential to pull off the same kind of surprise when fans and even teams are sleeping on them.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2023, 11:42:17 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Needless to say: This Texans fan is obviously pulling for Jacksonville Jaguars to win their first Super Bowl in history! I think they can at least get there; it will be tough, but the JAX Jags are quite capable of Super Bowl contention they way they've been playing the last month or so.
The Jaguars have had a great season, but they were lucky to get past the Titans last week. The were outplayed for the majority of the game, and if not for that fumble returned for a touchdown, we would most likely be seeing the Titans in the playoffs.
Their season wasn't great per say, they started alright winning two of their first three, then lost five games in a row but their finish the last several weeks were in a flourish winning seven of their final nine. I like to think of them as the dark horse, the sleeper team if you will. I really believe that a strong finish to the regular season (despite a lackluster start) ends up better than a strong start to the season and stumbling into the playoffs.
My 2022-23 playoff predictions:
AFC
WC Round
Buffalo 23 Miami 13
Cincinnati 24 Baltimore 10
LA Chargers 34 Jacksonville 23
Divisional
Kansas City 28 LA Chargers 20
Buffalo 23 Cincinnati 20 (OT)
Conference
Buffalo 26 Kansas City 24
NFC (a plague on all their houses)
WC Round
San Francisco 31 Seattle 13
Minnesota 34 NY Giants 27
Dallas 23 Tampa Bay 16 (Fuck Tom Brady)
Divisional
San Francisco 38 Minnesota 20
Philadelphia 26 Dallas 20 (OT)
Conference
San Francisco 26 Philadelphia 17
Super Bowl
Buffalo 20 San Francisco 16
Oh and an early draft prediction...Bears draft a bust with the number 1 pick.
What a comeback for the Jaguars to beat the Chargers 31-30 after trailing 27-0!
Brandon Staley has to be fired
In regular season game 7, the Niners were 3-4 and the Jags were 2-5. They're doing better now.
I don't want to jinx it by talking about them playing each other this postseason, so I won't bring it up :-)
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 14, 2023, 11:38:15 PM
What a comeback for the Jaguars to beat the Chargers 31-30 after trailing 27-0!
Bolts won the turnover battle +5, and still allowed the Jags to come back and beat them
Before tonight, no playoff team was +5 in Turnovers and lost the game. Good job, LA!
In Week Three, the Jaguars won at the Chargers 38-10. During halftime tonight, I thought the playoff game would repeat the same exact score with the two teams swapping sides of that score in Jacksonville (in other words the Chargers winning at the Jaguars 38-10). Tonight was just a reminder that regular season results mean nothing come playoff time.
I went to bed after halftime with the Chargers up 27-7. Good thing I'm not a Chargers fan.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 14, 2023, 11:55:13 PM
Brandon Staley has to be fired
I disagree, the Chargers have had two winning seasons under Staley and have been visibly improving. I'm not convinced Justin Herbert is a top ten quarterback in the NFL at this point. The guy can't seem to come up big when it matters like the best QBs in the league can. What we haven't talked yet is Trevor Lawrence throwing four interceptions only to flip the switch and come back with four touchdowns.
Well it looks like the Chargers showed up in the first half and Jacksonville showed up in the second half.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 15, 2023, 10:11:23 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 14, 2023, 11:55:13 PM
Brandon Staley has to be fired
I disagree, the Chargers have had two winning seasons under Staley and have been visibly improving. I'm not convinced Justin Herbert is a top ten quarterback in the NFL at this point. The guy can't seem to come up big when it matters like the best QBs in the league can.
I think Staley is done. Yes, they've improved marginally the past two season, but they are one of the most talented teams in the league and that was one of the most sickening meltdowns in NFL history. And it was Staley's decision to play starters last week that led to Mike Williams not being on the field, which could have easily been the difference in that game. And coaching absolutely cost them last night. Doug Pederson came up big in key moments and Staley did not, not relying on the run game enough with a huge lead and then getting conservative on 4th down leading to a missed field goal.
It was an entire team meltdown (yikes, Joey Bosa) but after last week's controversy and doing nothing on offense
or defense in the second half, you have to place a large share of the blame on coaching.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 15, 2023, 10:11:23 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 14, 2023, 11:55:13 PM
Brandon Staley has to be fired
I disagree, the Chargers have had two winning seasons under Staley and have been visibly improving. I'm not convinced Justin Herbert is a top ten quarterback in the NFL at this point. The guy can't seem to come up big when it matters like the best QBs in the league can. What we haven't talked yet is Trevor Lawrence throwing four interceptions only to flip the switch and come back with four touchdowns.
I would say he's top 10, but I agree that he doesn't have the "it factor" that Brady and Mahomes and Burrow and prime Rodgers have. When the camera pans to one of those guys jogging onto the field down by one possession with a couple minutes left in the 4th, you just get the feeling that they're going to win. I don't get that feeling with Herbert (or Allen, but that's unfair because the narrative would be totally different if the Bills defense didn't implode with 13 seconds left).
Also, a very underrated aspect of today's NFL is closing out games with the offense. Nobody is better at this than the Chiefs: sealing the victory with a clutch drive late while in the lead. It can be as much as a touchdown or as little as one first down depending on the time on the clock. If you're the Chargers you absolutely cannot go 3 and out in that situation, knowing that your defense can't stop the Jags and is exhausted from being on the field for the majority of the half. The Cowboys did the same thing against the Jags a few weeks ago.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on January 14, 2023, 11:38:15 PM
What a comeback for the Jaguars to beat the Chargers 31-30 after trailing 27-0!
Fucking Chargers blew my parlay with 6 minutes to go.
To the surprise of many, the Buffalo Bills beat the Miami Dolphins by a grand total of 3 points and with much agita.
Not even the refs could get Minny a playoff win.
Fraudkings
Final scores from today's games:
Bills 34, Dolphins 31
Giants 31, Vikings 24
Bengals 24, Ravens 17
Games on Saturday, 1/21
Jaguars vs. Cheifs
Giants vs. Eagles
Games on Sunday, 1/22
Bengals vs. Bills
Cowboys or Buccaneers vs. 49ers
Purdy, Thompson, Huntley...what a weekend for those backup QBs.
So the 7-seeds are now 0-6 since they were first introduced 2 years ago. Of those 6, maybe 2 were competitive? (The Colts 2 years ago and the Dolphins this year, both against the 2-seed Bills coincidentally.) Curious how long it will take for a 7-seed to register their first win.
Meanwhile what a swing in last night's game, with Sam Hubbard doing his best James Harrison impression.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 16, 2023, 09:59:18 AM
So the 7-seeds are now 0-6 since they were first introduced 2 years ago. Of those 6, maybe 2 were competitive? (The Colts 2 years ago and the Dolphins this year, both against the 2-seed Bills coincidentally.) Curious how long it will take for a 7-seed to register their first win.
To be fair, no 16-seed in the NCAA men's tournament had beaten a 1-seed until 2018, when UMBC did so against Virginia (who went on to win the national championship the very next year).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 15, 2023, 07:49:25 PM
Not even the refs could get Minny a playoff win.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 15, 2023, 07:58:00 PM
Fraudkings
I really was hoping for a Vikings-Bills Super Bowl, which would've guaranteed a Lombardi Trophy for one of those teams.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 16, 2023, 09:59:18 AM
Meanwhile what a swing in last night's game, with Sam Hubbard doing his best James Harrison impression.
Yes, that ending sure was exciting. Sort of like the gridiron equivalent of LeBron James blocking Andre Igoudala's layup in Game 7 of the 2016 NBA Finals.
Didn't both the Vikings and Giants have a negative points differential? When is the last time two teams with negative point differentials matched up in the playoffs?
Two Giants fans I know think the Ravens will trade Lamar during the offseason.
Quote from: webny99 on December 26, 2021, 09:58:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 11:02:54 AM
Reportedly, the Giants will continue to stumble (iykyk) with Daniel Jones and Joe Judge in 2022. So I'm forking their 2022 playoff chances before 2021 is over.
Alright, I'll bite. The Giants WILL make the playoffs in 2022.
Not that I really have that much confidence, but there's something sort of Cinderella-like about the Giants franchise that it wouldn't shock me at all if they have one or two playoff runs out of nowhere, maybe even Super Bowl runs, sometime in the next few years. That's the tradeoff for some really bad football in their down years, injuries obviously being a huge factor recently.
This was quite an incredible take, though it was kinda watered down by the forking of the Giants before this season started.
I never bought into the Giants this season, and I've obviously been proven wrong. I was feeling pretty confident about their downfall after three rough losses to the Lions, Cowboys, and Eagles, but the win at Washington saved their season, and they've ridden that momentum to the divisional round. As the playoff picture shaped up it seemed like the second Giants/Commies matchup would be one of the most consequential regular season games in years, and it clearly was: Daniel Jones might well have played himself into a contract extension yesterday, and if that week 15 game had gone the other way, he never would've gotten the chance. On the Commanders side, Rivera and Heinicke are both on the chopping block after a disappointing end to the season, which likely wouldn't be the case had they beaten the Giants.
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2022, 04:20:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 12:18:07 PM
the Bills should still be above the Vikings given the insane nature of what had to happen for the Vikings to beat them in overtime
If things were different then they would be different.
My top 10 right now would be:
1) Chiefs
2) Eagles
3) Vikings
4) Bills
5) Ravens
6) Cowboys
7) Dolphins
8) 49ers
9) Bengals
10) Jets
Quote from: webny99 on November 16, 2022, 02:01:56 PM
this insane stat (https://tinyurl.com/3a34z69f) adding to the flukiness
News flash: great players make great plays. They didn't flip a coin or something to determine whether he caught it.
I disagree with the heavy usage of the word "fluke", because in this context it's a logical fallacy - you're assuming from the go that the Bills are better than all these teams at doing all these things and therefore every time the Bills mess up it must be a "fluke", not even a potentially legitimate representation of the Bills level relative to other teams.
Here's what I will give you: the Bills/Dolphins game was extremely bizarre and is not an accurate representation of those two teams. For Buffalo to gain nearly 500 yards of offense to Miami's 212, gain 30 first downs, have the ball for more than two thirds of the game, turn it over just once, never trail by multiple possessions, only trail period for about 10 minutes, and still lose?
All in all there's still no standout team or few teams to me. The top 4 are interchangeable. Philly beat Minnesota, Minnesota beat Buffalo, Buffalo beat KC, but KC has looked without a doubt the best of the four outside of that loss to Buffalo.
I was also wrong here, though I still think it's dumb to call the Vikings/Bills game a "fluke". An upset, sure, but not all upsets are flukes. Bills/Dolphins in week 3 is a real example of a fluke. The truth has been exposed, Bills > Vikings.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2023, 02:32:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 26, 2021, 09:58:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 26, 2021, 11:02:54 AM
Reportedly, the Giants will continue to stumble (iykyk) with Daniel Jones and Joe Judge in 2022. So I'm forking their 2022 playoff chances before 2021 is over.
Alright, I'll bite. The Giants WILL make the playoffs in 2022.
Not that I really have that much confidence, but there's something sort of Cinderella-like about the Giants franchise that it wouldn't shock me at all if they have one or two playoff runs out of nowhere, maybe even Super Bowl runs, sometime in the next few years. That's the tradeoff for some really bad football in their down years, injuries obviously being a huge factor recently.
This was quite an incredible take, though it was kinda watered down by the forking of the Giants before this season started.
Well, thanks: I had forgotten about this take. This was before Daboll and Joe Schoen were hired, but knowing they were connected to the Giants was definitely a factor. Even so, I felt good about the fork: I figured they'd have an 8-9 or 7-10 season and show major improvement from the Joe Judge years, but fall short of the playoffs.
(You should know by now that there is no such thing as a home run webny99 take... I always blunder into some sort of unnecessary caveat or backtrack :D)
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2023, 02:32:16 PM
As the playoff picture shaped up it seemed like the second Giants/Commies matchup would be one of the most consequential regular season games in years, and it clearly was: Daniel Jones might well have played himself into a contract extension yesterday, and if that week 15 game had gone the other way, he never would've gotten the chance. On the Commanders side, Rivera and Heinicke are both on the chopping block after a disappointing end to the season, which likely wouldn't be the case had they beaten the Giants.
Agreed overall, but two things worth mentioning:
1) The Giants might have snuck into the playoffs with a Week 15 loss if they'd beat the Eagles in Week 18. That seems very possible considering their backups were competitive in a must-win game for the Eagles (we'll see what that means for next week, but I expect another competitive contest).
2) The Commanders might have snuck into the playoffs even despite that Week 15 loss if they'd just beaten the Browns in Week 16. In hindsight, I think either Heinicke or Howell could have done it and the switch back to Wentz was even more costly than losing to the Giants. Also, Rivera not knowing the playoff scenarios was a pretty big blunder: maybe he doesn't make the switch if he knows they could be eliminated with a loss?
I will repeat my call for the NFL to abolish conferences. Just have 8 divisions and seed the division winners 1-8 and the wild cards 9-14.
here's what this postseason would have looked like:
Byes: 1 Philadelphia, 2 Kansas City
3 Buffalo vs 14 Pittsburgh
4 San Francisco vs 13 Miami
5 Minnesota vs 12 NY Giants
6 Cincinnati vs 11 Baltimore
7 Jacksonville vs 10 LA Chargers
8 Tampa Bay vs 9 Dallas
Remarkably, 4 of the 6 Wild Card matchups stay the same, with Pittsburgh replacing Seattle as the last team in.
Assuming the same winners, the divisional round would have:
1 Philadelphia vs 12 NY Giants
2 Kansas City vs 8/9 TB/DAL
3 Buffalo vs 7 Jacksonville
4 San Francisco vs 6 Cincinnati
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 16, 2023, 09:59:18 AM
So the 7-seeds are now 0-6 since they were first introduced 2 years ago. Of those 6, maybe 2 were competitive? (The Colts 2 years ago and the Dolphins this year, both against the 2-seed Bills coincidentally.) Curious how long it will take for a 7-seed to register their first win.
Yes, I was also noticing that. The Bills have given us two close games against the #7 seed and the other four have all been blowouts.
2020 NFC: Saints 21, Bears 9 (Saints bizarre goal line turnover on downs, Bears TD on final play, should have been at least 28-3)
2021 AFC: Chiefs 42, Steelers 21 (Chiefs were up 35-7 at one point)
2021 NFC: Bucs 31, Eagles 15 (Bucs were up 31-0 at one point)
2022 NFC: 49ers 41, Seahawks 23 (no reminder needed)
And yet... I feel like the NFL has been very unlucky with these games. Not just their lopsided nature, but the fact that almost without exception, there's still a better team that got left out of the playoffs that would have been a more competitive matchup with the #2 seed. 2020 AFC is the exception, as the Colts were a very good #7 seed and proved it by taking the Bills down to the wire.
2020 NFC: Cardinals > Bears
2021 AFC: Chargers/Colts > Steelers
2021 NFC: Saints ≥ Eagles
2022 AFC: Steelers > Dolphins
2022 NFC: Lions/Packers > Seahawks
I'm certainly not advocating for further expansion: if anything, this is an argument for returning to the 12-team format. I'm just hoping the seeding and tiebreakers will work out a bit more favorably in future years because it's been a strange and disappointing run of the final wild card team not being a top 7 team in the conference.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 16, 2023, 03:34:19 PM
I will repeat my call for the NFL to abolish conferences. Just have 8 divisions and seed the division winners 1-8 and the wild cards 9-14.
here's what this postseason would have looked like:
...
Remarkably, 4 of the 6 Wild Card matchups stay the same, with Pittsburgh replacing Seattle as the last team in.
Pittsburgh over Seattle is a slight improvement, but this still leaves out Detroit and Green Bay who I think were better than both. There's going to be an element of luck no matter how the seeding works... and some tiebreakers are conference-based so that would have to be addressed as well.
It's probably not a coincidence the more competitive 2-7 games have generally involved division rivals who know each other well, but just don't have enough talent to pull off the upset. Seattle kept it close for nearly 3 quarters, but the strip-sack fumble that ended their drive at the 49ers' 25 yard line when it was 23-17 opened up an avalanche.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 16, 2023, 09:59:18 AM
So the 7-seeds are now 0-6 since they were first introduced 2 years ago. Of those 6, maybe 2 were competitive? (The Colts 2 years ago and the Dolphins this year, both against the 2-seed Bills coincidentally.) Curious how long it will take for a 7-seed to register their first win.
My guess is within the next two seasons. Sooner or later an upset will happen, or just a strong 7 seed beating a 2 seed with a ton of injuries or a deceiving record (like the Vikings, who had the same record as the 2 seed 49ers). But I think it is telling that the league put the 7/2 matchups in the least attractive time slots this weekend. There's no doubt that the playoff expansion has increased revenue, but maybe not as much as the league thought it would.
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 04:47:16 PM
2021 NFC: Saints ≥ Eagles
2022 AFC: Steelers > Dolphins
2022 NFC: Lions/Packers > Seahawks
I disagree on these three. The Eagles beat the Saints pretty handily in 2021, up 33-7 at the end of the 3rd quarter, and won 40-29 with the last Saints TD coming with under a minute left. It's tempting to look at the Saints sweeping the Bucs and the Eagles getting blown out by them, but 1) the Saints defense just owns Brady for no apparent reason, and 2) Philly had quite a few lopsided wins (including the one over the Saints) and a throwaway week 18 loss in their 9-8 record.
Full strength Dolphins > full strength Steelers, but I agree that the late-season Steelers were better than the depleted late-season Dolphins.
Packers > Seahawks seems like a load of recency bias to me.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2023, 06:05:40 PM
The Eagles beat the Saints pretty handily in 2021, up 33-7 at the end of the 3rd quarter, and won 40-29 with the last Saints TD coming with under a minute left. It's tempting to look at the Saints sweeping the Bucs and the Eagles getting blown out by them, but 1) the Saints defense just owns Brady for no apparent reason, and 2) Philly had quite a few lopsided wins (including the one over the Saints) and a throwaway week 18 loss in their 9-8 record.
You preempted me on this one. That's why I changed the symbol to ≥ at the last second. The Eagles making the playoffs actually came down to having that tiebreaker over the Saints, which they earned pretty handily as you mentioned. Even so, I just couldn't imagine a scenario where the Saints were down 31-0 in the playoffs against the Bucs. Based on their history, the opposite would've been more likely. So, I'd call it a wash at best, with the Eagles being a slightly better team but a much worse matchup with the Bucs.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2023, 06:05:40 PM
Packers > Seahawks seems like a load of recency bias to me.
If by recency bias you mean weighting the second half of the season more heavily, then sure. I was thinking of it as "which team is the better overall team right now/would the 49ers least like to play right now".
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2023, 06:05:40 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 16, 2023, 09:59:18 AM
So the 7-seeds are now 0-6 since they were first introduced 2 years ago. Of those 6, maybe 2 were competitive? (The Colts 2 years ago and the Dolphins this year, both against the 2-seed Bills coincidentally.) Curious how long it will take for a 7-seed to register their first win.
My guess is within the next two seasons. Sooner or later an upset will happen, or just a strong 7 seed beating a 2 seed with a ton of injuries or a deceiving record (like the Vikings, who had the same record as the 2 seed 49ers). But I think it is telling that the league put the 7/2 matchups in the least attractive time slots this weekend. There's no doubt that the playoff expansion has increased revenue, but maybe not as much as the league thought it would.
2 additional games. 2 sold out stadiums. 2 games always had to go into the least attractive timeslots. I'm not sure how else the league could pull in more revenue.
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
The Cowboys have a lot of work the rest of this week on points-after-touchdown, or 2-point conversions. Tonight they went 1 for 5 on PATs, and clearly didn't trust their kicker on field goals (the one FG opportunity they had, they instead went for it on 4th down). If they are to have any hope at all on Sunday, they can't afford to leave so many points on the table.
The 49ers face the Cowboys next weekend - a rematch of "The Catch" from the 1981-82 playoffs. I'm sure we'll be seeing a lot of coverage of that play throughout the week.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2023, 10:17:17 AM
Didn't both the Vikings and Giants have a negative points differential? When is the last time two teams with negative point differentials matched up in the playoffs?
After perusing Pro Football Reference, the last time was on January 8, 2005 when the St. Louis Rams (8-8; -73 PD) defeated the Seattle Seahawks (9-7; -2 PD) 27-20. Before that was on December 31, 1989 when the Pittsburgh Steelers (9-7; -61 PD) defeated the Houston Oilers (9-7; -47 PD) 26-23.
Not surprised the Cowboys beat the Bucs, but a little surprised that it was as dominant as it was.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 17, 2023, 08:50:34 AM
Not surprised the Cowboys beat the Bucs, but a little surprised that it was as dominant as it was.
Especially since their kicker missed four out of five extra points. Which is inexcusable, since those should be gimmes; missing field goals is bad, but missing extra points sucks even more. At least Brady didn't master another 28-3-style comeback, proving once again that lightning doesn't always strike twice.
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
It just occurred to me that 3 of the 4 NFC teams left are from the East (compared to the AFC, where it's the 4 division winners remaining) - wow, the NFC East sure has come a long way from the days of being referred to as the NFC Least!
Quote from: oscar on January 16, 2023, 11:56:56 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
The Cowboys have a lot of work the rest of this week on points-after-touchdown, or 2-point conversions. Tonight they went 1 for 5 on PATs, and clearly didn't trust their kicker on field goals (the one FG opportunity they had, they instead went for it on 4th down). If they are to have any hope at all on Sunday, they can't afford to leave so many points on the table.
Yeah, that's definitely a concern moving forward - it proved inconsequential last night with the Cowboys's domination (add me to the camp expecting it to be closer), but it might not be that way against the 49ers.
Reminds me of the '18 Bears - Cody Parkey hit the uprights 4 times (2 FG, 2 XP) in a November game against the Lions where the outcome was never really in doubt, so the tone afterward was more about the absurdity of it and less how it could have cost the Bears the game. Fast forward 2 months to the wild-card round against the Eagles, where we all know what happened... *shudders*
Quote from: epzik8 on January 17, 2023, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
Meh....It's not the NFC Championship game so it doesn't have the same gravitas.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 17, 2023, 10:15:26 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 17, 2023, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
Meh....It's not the NFC Championship game so it doesn't have the same gravitas.
And, I don't think it's going to be that close. Niners are going to win by 10+.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 17, 2023, 11:42:47 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 17, 2023, 10:15:26 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 17, 2023, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
Meh....It's not the NFC Championship game so it doesn't have the same gravitas.
And, I don't think it's going to be that close. Niners are going to win by 10+.
Especially since the Cowboys kicker can't seem to make extra points anymore.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 17, 2023, 10:15:26 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 17, 2023, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
Meh....It's not the NFC Championship game so it doesn't have the same gravitas.
Championships may have more gravitas because of the stakes, but overall, Divisional Weekend > Championship Weekend IMO.
And this one should be good because we have the clear top three teams + one really good "underdog" in each conference.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2023, 11:53:12 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 17, 2023, 10:15:26 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 17, 2023, 10:12:53 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 16, 2023, 11:36:41 PM
Cowboys beat the Bucs in dominant fashion, and the NFC Divisional Round will feature 3 of 4 NFC East teams. A 49ers-Cowboys rematch from last year should be great theater.
And from the 1990s.
Meh....It's not the NFC Championship game so it doesn't have the same gravitas.
Championships may have more gravitas because of the stakes, but overall, Divisional Weekend > Championship Weekend IMO.
And this one should be good because we have the clear top three teams + one really good "underdog" in each conference.
Maybe, but I remember back when the NFC Championship Game was the real Super Bowl, especially the ones the 49ers and Cowboys played in the 80s and 90s. Mentally am still in that version of the NFL.
Always a pleasure to see Tom Brady taken out to the woodshed.
Though I should be careful what I wish for; the last thing I want is for him to end up the broadcast booth and then I have to listen to that smarmy douche during games next year. Ugh. If that happens, there will be a lot of games on mute in my house.
My prediction as to who will play in the Conference Championship games:
NFC: San Francsico at Philadelphia
AFC: Buffalo vs Jacksonville (site TBD?)
My hope for an all-Florida AFC championship went down the drain due to the Dolphins lack of quality coaching (thanks Miami for self-destructing).
^^The neutral site game (Atlanta) is only for a KC/BUF game, JAC/BUF would be in Buffalo.
Quite a response by the Cowboys following the disastrous Commies game. Dak was sharp, mistakes were few and far between on both sides of the ball. Polar opposite from the first meeting of the two teams back in week 1, when Tampa managed to win a game they completely dominated by only 16 points, by way of 5 field goal attempts in the first half. The last Cowboys touchdown drive was beautiful, slamming the door shut on what looked like a conspiring Brady rally, with a MADE EXTRA POINT (!) to top it off.
I was wrong again predicting that Tampa would go on a run after that dramatic win over the Rams in week 9. I think they looked better after that game than before it (3-5 before week 9, 5-4 in meaningful games week 9 and later), so maybe I was a little bit right, but the offensive issues persisted all year. Four of their eight wins came straight out of the rubble in the 4th quarter against bad teams. Cleveland was a costly loss, San Fran simply a better team. Probably their best half of the year was the first half against Cincy, but then the epic 3rd quarter meltdown happened.
Brady's right arm is reportedly still attached to his body after throwing 66 passes, the second most all-time in a playoff game. Oddly that record is not his, as Big Ben threw 68 in the 2020 wild card, which I suppose will happen when you fall behind 28-0 in the first quarter and have absolutely no deep passing game. (Huh, sounds kinda like last night.)
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. It's evident that this year has taken a big toll on him, with a bad offensive line, incompetent offensive staff, and inconsistent receivers forcing him to play hero ball by throwing 50+ times a game so that they have a chance to win. Last night he was clearly playing on edge. At least half of his 31 incompletions were off target panic throws to avoid taking a hit, and he doesn't have the pocket mobility to escape those sacks and hits. At his age he can't put his body on the line with 50 dropbacks per game behind that offensive line. He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers. From that perspective San Fran seems like the perfect fit, but if Purdy keeps playing so well, there's no reason for SF to move off him. Vegas could work. But from the outside, it seems like the best choice for him is retirement. There's a new wave of really good teams that aren't going anywhere.
If this is indeed the end of the Tampa Tom era, I think it has to be considered a success for both parties. Super Bowls are really hard to win. They did it. Each of the last two Super Bowl champions are seemingly in bad shape for the future, but all of their players, coaches, owners, and fans would tell you it's worth it.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 08:00:40 AM
2) 49ers defeat 7) Seahawks
5) Chargers defeat 4) Jaguars
2) Bills defeat 7) Dolphins
3) Vikings defeat 6) Giants
3) Bengals defeat 6) Ravens
5) Cowboys defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) Chiefs defeat 5) Chargers
3) Bengals defeat 2) Bills
5) Cowboys defeat 1) Eagles
2) 49ers defeat 3) Vikings
1) Chiefs defeat 3) Bengals
2) 49ers defeat 5) Cowboys
1) Chiefs defeat 2) 49ers
4/6 so far. I'll reluctantly stick with my 49ers over Cowboys pick. Wish that could be the NFC Championship instead of the divisional, but I guess the moral of the story is win more games. I'll take Philly over the Giants, and my AFC bracket wasn't altered much.
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
There's a new wave of really good teams that aren't going anywhere.
Indeed: all 8 divisional round QB's are under age 30 for the first time in NFL history.
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
Quite a response by the Cowboys following the disastrous Commies game. Dak was sharp, mistakes were few and far between on both sides of the ball. Polar opposite from the first meeting of the two teams back in week 1, when Tampa managed to win a game they completely dominated by only 16 points, by way of 5 field goal attempts in the first half. The last Cowboys touchdown drive was beautiful, slamming the door shut on what looked like a conspiring Brady rally, with a MADE EXTRA POINT (!) to top it off.
I was wrong again predicting that Tampa would go on a run after that dramatic win over the Rams in week 9. I think they looked better after that game than before it (3-5 before week 9, 5-4 in meaningful games week 9 and later), so maybe I was a little bit right, but the offensive issues persisted all year. Four of their eight wins came straight out of the rubble in the 4th quarter against bad teams. Cleveland was a costly loss, San Fran simply a better team. Probably their best half of the year was the first half against Cincy, but then the epic 3rd quarter meltdown happened.
Brady's right arm is reportedly still attached to his body after throwing 66 passes, the second most all-time in a playoff game. Oddly that record is not his, as Big Ben threw 68 in the 2020 wild card, which I suppose will happen when you fall behind 28-0 in the first quarter and have absolutely no deep passing game. (Huh, sounds kinda like last night.)
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. It's evident that this year has taken a big toll on him, with a bad offensive line, incompetent offensive staff, and inconsistent receivers forcing him to play hero ball by throwing 50+ times a game so that they have a chance to win. Last night he was clearly playing on edge. At least half of his 31 incompletions were off target panic throws to avoid taking a hit, and he doesn't have the pocket mobility to escape those sacks and hits. At his age he can't put his body on the line with 50 dropbacks per game behind that offensive line. He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers. From that perspective San Fran seems like the perfect fit, but if Purdy keeps playing so well, there's no reason for SF to move off him. Vegas could work. But from the outside, it seems like the best choice for him is retirement. There's a new wave of really good teams that aren't going anywhere.
If this is indeed the end of the Tampa Tom era, I think it has to be considered a success for both parties. Super Bowls are really hard to win. They did it. Each of the last two Super Bowl champions are seemingly in bad shape for the future, but all of their players, coaches, owners, and fans would tell you it's worth it.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 08:00:40 AM
2) 49ers defeat 7) Seahawks
5) Chargers defeat 4) Jaguars
2) Bills defeat 7) Dolphins
3) Vikings defeat 6) Giants
3) Bengals defeat 6) Ravens
5) Cowboys defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) Chiefs defeat 5) Chargers
3) Bengals defeat 2) Bills
5) Cowboys defeat 1) Eagles
2) 49ers defeat 3) Vikings
1) Chiefs defeat 3) Bengals
2) 49ers defeat 5) Cowboys
1) Chiefs defeat 2) 49ers
4/6 so far. I'll reluctantly stick with my 49ers over Cowboys pick. Wish that could be the NFC Championship instead of the divisional, but I guess the moral of the story is win more games. I'll take Philly over the Giants, and my AFC bracket wasn't altered much.
This has been one of the more odd seasons in NFL history. A 33 point comeback along with a 27 point comeback in the playoffs (T-2nd most all time). Many teams not being able to hold a lead. A 13-4 team that actually
gave up more points than they scored (424-427). A game that ended up being cancelled due to the health and well being of a player. And a 45 year old QB that threw
731 passes (43.1/game) in the regular season and another 66 in a playoff game.
Why would an offensive coordinator, with the head coach hearing what is being called, allow his QB to throw it that many times in a game, much less a 45 year old who is, admittedly, the GOAT among QBs. I see they had the worst running game in the NFL, which is surprising since they have Leonard Fournette and Rachaad White in the backfield. Was the running game ever given a chance or was it just "We have Tom Brady. Let's air it out!" Was it Brady calling the passing plays himself, audiblizing on many plays? I mean the Buccaneers were second in net yards passing, however, they were 31st in yards per completion at 9.5. And with all those passing plays, they were 25th in scoring.
Incredibly, the Buccaneers allowed just 22 sacks, which was the fewest allowed in the NFL--unbelievable for a team that had an average of 45 pass plays per game. The overall numbers were not horrible (66.4% completion, 26 TD, 10 INT), it just blows my mind that either the Buccaneers or Brady himself would subject themselves to throwing that much in a season. Well, the GOAT's season is finished, however, Burrow and Company are still continuing.
Both the Bengals and the Bills have to play much better this coming Sunday if they want to advance. I believe both teams had both an emotional and a physical letdown due to the events that transpired here in Cincinnati on Monday January 2. From what I heard from some fans, the crowd at Paycor wasn't really into the playoff game with the Ravens. They said it was rather quiet through most of the game until the 98 yard fumble recovery TD by Sam Hubbard. Maybe it was because they were playing the Ravens for the second week in a row at Paycor or maybe the crowd was emotionally drained from the events of Jan 2. I don't know. However, I will be rooting for the Bengals this coming Sunday.
Quote from: amroad17 on January 18, 2023, 02:56:33 AM
From what I heard from some fans, the crowd at Paycor wasn't really into the playoff game with the Ravens. They said it was rather quiet through most of the game until the 98 yard fumble recovery TD by Sam Hubbard. Maybe it was because they were playing the Ravens for the second week in a row at Paycor or maybe the crowd was emotionally drained from the events of Jan 2.
I'm always disappointed when teams have to play each other two weeks in a row, and I would guess that teams and fans probably feel the same to some extent. There's less excitement and it feels highly predictable being a re-run of the previous week. In this case, it was a re-run the Bengals probably weren't thrilled about, given that the Ravens are a defense-first team and were successful in both games going on long drives and turning it into a defensive slugfest throughout (a far cry from the high-flying passing game the Bengals have gotten used to the past two seasons). There was probably a sense of dread as the Ravens got stops and kept it close, and in the end I'm sure they just felt relieved to get that big play and get out of there with a win more than anything else.
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. ... He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers.
And a weak-ass division to play against. No coincidence he bails on New England as soon as Buffalo starts getting good.
Moves down south where he was guaranteed to play shit teams at least 6 times a year.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 18, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. ... He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers.
And a weak-ass division to play against. No coincidence he bails on New England as soon as Buffalo starts getting good.
Moves down south where he was guaranteed to play shit teams at least 6 times a year.
(nobody tell him that the Saints were coming off back-to-back 13-3 seasons when Brady went to Tampa)
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2023, 05:04:01 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 18, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. ... He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers.
And a weak-ass division to play against. No coincidence he bails on New England as soon as Buffalo starts getting good.
Moves down south where he was guaranteed to play shit teams at least 6 times a year.
(nobody tell him that the Saints were coming off back-to-back 13-3 seasons when Brady went to Tampa)
And the Saints just had their HoF QB retire...
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 19, 2023, 09:14:19 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2023, 05:04:01 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 18, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. ... He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers.
And a weak-ass division to play against. No coincidence he bails on New England as soon as Buffalo starts getting good.
Moves down south where he was guaranteed to play shit teams at least 6 times a year.
(nobody tell him that the Saints were coming off back-to-back 13-3 seasons when Brady went to Tampa)
And the Saints just had their HoF QB retire...
Brady signed in the 2020 offseason, Brees retired in the 2021 offseason . . .
Quote from: thspfc on January 19, 2023, 10:19:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 19, 2023, 09:14:19 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 18, 2023, 05:04:01 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 18, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 17, 2023, 09:26:00 PM
If he does come back, I doubt it's with Tampa. ... He's going to want a strong o-line, solid run game, and reliable receivers.
And a weak-ass division to play against. No coincidence he bails on New England as soon as Buffalo starts getting good.
Moves down south where he was guaranteed to play shit teams at least 6 times a year.
(nobody tell him that the Saints were coming off back-to-back 13-3 seasons when Brady went to Tampa)
And the Saints just had their HoF QB retire...
Brady signed in the 2020 offseason, Brees retired in the 2021 offseason . . .
My bad. I misremembered when Brady joined TB.
Yeah but the writing was on the wall.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 19, 2023, 11:56:57 AM
Yeah but the writing was on the wall.
(nobody tell him that they went 12-4 in 2020 which included a regular season sweep of the Bucs)
The irony is that even though the Bucs got swept by the Saints that season, they beat them in the playoffs enroute to the Super Bowl anyways.
However, it was pretty obvious that Brees was at the end of his career, so it was a good bet the division would be bad beyond 2020. And sure enough: since then, the NFC South has gotten much worse even as the AFC East has gotten much better. It's certainly safe to say a bad division is the only reason Brady was in the playoffs this season.
Is this the first-ever instance of all three FL teams (Buccaneers, Dolphins, Jaguars) making the playoffs in the same season?
^ I do wish to see an all-Florida Super Bowl....something like Jacksonville vs Tampa played in Miami.
Quote from: Henry on January 19, 2023, 07:19:41 PM
Is this the first-ever instance of all three FL teams (Buccaneers, Dolphins, Jaguars) making the playoffs in the same season?
One of the pre-game shows mentioned that this was the first time all three Florida teams made the playoffs together since the late 1990s.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 20, 2023, 05:23:04 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 19, 2023, 07:19:41 PM
Is this the first-ever instance of all three FL teams (Buccaneers, Dolphins, Jaguars) making the playoffs in the same season?
One of the pre-game shows mentioned that this was the first time all three Florida teams made the playoffs together since the late 1990s.
1999 - and to boot, all three made it to at least the divisional round. Jacksonville deleted the Dolphins out of existence while Tampa Bay barely escaped as Washington botched a game-winning field goal try, but the next week both the Bucs and Jags lost their conference title games.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 20, 2023, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 20, 2023, 05:23:04 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 19, 2023, 07:19:41 PM
Is this the first-ever instance of all three FL teams (Buccaneers, Dolphins, Jaguars) making the playoffs in the same season?
One of the pre-game shows mentioned that this was the first time all three Florida teams made the playoffs together since the late 1990s.
1999 - and to boot, all three made it to at least the divisional round. Jacksonville deleted the Dolphins out of existence while Tampa Bay barely escaped as Washington botched a game-winning field goal try, but the next week both the Bucs and Jags lost their conference title games.
I just remembered, it also happened in 1997, so this season is actually the third example.
KC leads Jacksonville 17-10 at halftime, but the big story is Mahomes and the (potential) injury to his ankle.
The Chiefs beat the Jaguars by the score of 27-20...
The Eagles beat the Giants by the score of 38-7...
Tomorrow's games should be exciting!
I don't normally put stock in "playoff experience" but it is absolutely a factor in games like this one where one team has a lot more of it than the other. This will be the 5th straight title game appearance for the Chiefs. Interestingly enough, the Jags were in the AFC title game the last time the Chiefs weren't, where they lost to the Pats in controversial fashion (https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/22/jaguars-myles-jack-fumble-return-afc-championshipfumble%20return%20that%20wasn't).
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2023, 08:25:19 PM
I don't normally put stock in "playoff experience" but it is absolutely a factor in games like this one where one team has a lot more of it than the other. This will be the 5th straight title game appearance for the Chiefs. Interestingly enough, the Jags were in the AFC title game the last time the Chiefs weren't, where they lost to the Pats in controversial fashion (https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/22/jaguars-myles-jack-fumble-return-afc-championshipfumble%20return%20that%20wasn't).
As much as people pick on Andy Reid for his teams' playoff failures, he really is the only coach in the game today even remotely comparable to Belichick in terms of sustained success.
Bengals over Bills, 27-10, in the snow. Not surprised that Cincinnati won, but the margin is surprising.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 06:14:15 PM
Bengals over Bills, 27-10, in the snow. Not surprised that Cincinnati won, but the margin is surprising.
Next week, the Bengals will have to play the Chiefs for the AFC championship...
I am predicting that the 49ers will be winning against the Cowboys to play against the Eagles next week... (Yup, I was right about that)
Quote from: thspfc on January 10, 2022, 04:57:25 PM
(4) Bengals defeat (5) Raiders
(3) Bills defeat (6) Patriots
(2) Chiefs defeat (7) Steelers
(4) Bengals defeat (1) Titans
(2) Chiefs defeat (3) Bills
(2) Chiefs defeat (4) Bengals
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2023, 08:00:40 AM
5) Chargers defeat 4) Jaguars
2) Bills defeat 7) Dolphins
3) Bengals defeat 6) Ravens
1) Chiefs defeat 5) Chargers
3) Bengals defeat 2) Bills
1) Chiefs defeat 3) Bengals
Predicting a Chiefs/Bengals AFC title game is becoming a pretty solid strategy. We'll see if I get the outcome right this time.
Catastrophic loss for the Bills. That's now three straight years of ending the regular season on a big run, being one of the top two AFC favorites entering the playoffs, and faltering before reaching the Super Bowl. The first one, 2020, was whatever. Few predicted they would be that good, and that Chiefs team hadn't lost a meaningful game since early October. Last year, the late defensive meltdown was kind of lost in the offensive brilliance of that game (and the overtime rules). But that game was very winnable for the Bills, even with an unlucky coin toss and the Chiefs being the Chiefs. And now this year, no excuses and no consolation. You can't lose that game in your home stadium, in the snow, against a supposedly inferior team.
Abandoning the run as soon as the first possession, against a defense frequently showing light boxes and pass blitzes, gave Cincy their way. Allen played too much Superman when they fell behind, leading to wasted possessions. Cincy turned their possessions into long clock-eating drives and points on the board.
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it
Well, I had a meltdown after the Vikings game, but otherwise I intend to stick to my word here and save my commentary for, well, February.
Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
Maher misses another PAT. Touchdowns aren't even fun anymore. Let's just go for two every time and pray the game doesn't come down to a kicking situation.
The 49ers are up 9-6 at halftime... We'll see what happens during the second half...
So ironic that Dallas is losing to 3 field goals. Losing Pollard sucks. It's definitely not over, but it feels like San Fran is gaining momentum and Dallas is losing momentum.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 22, 2023, 08:09:19 PM
The 49ers are up 9-6 at halftime... We'll see what happens during the second half...
Final Score:
49ers- 19
Cowboys- 12
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
Have some Doritos!
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230123/00ae3021c725fd909960ef308d81e625.jpg)
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
As a Giants fan, the Cowboys did last longer than us. By 1 day :-D
Welcome to the couch.
Wow - With the conference championship matchups set, 3 of the 4 teams are returning from last year (with PHL "replacing" LAR compared to last year).
I was half-expecting DAL-SFO to come down to a Maher kick - after his only XP was blocked (and it looked like a low wobbler leaning left prior to the block on replay), he did make his 2 FG attempts.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
1) people hate them, and 2) it's the style of the game that gives people the illusion that it should have gone differently. If the final was 35-28 - also a 7 point margin - we'd be talking about how great the Niners are. There would still be the usual trolling of the Cowboys, but the overall narrative would be "hard fought and well-played game by both teams" . But at 19-12, it's "Dallas totally choked and San Fran didn't" .
The "points fallacy" is going to get bigger and bigger until people realize that this is the direction the league is going in. Every single winner this weekend won time of possession, first downs, and the turnover battle in their game. Only 2 of 17 touchdowns were from beyond 20 yards, and none were from beyond 40. Points per team per game has decreased two years in a row. Pass yards per game, per completion, and per attempt have all decreased two years in a row. Most rushing stats have increased this year, which correlates with more time-consuming drives, fewer possessions per game, fewer points. The increased success of QB sneaks has made 4th and 1 from inside the opponent's 40 a basically automatic decision to go for it, and more and more teams are trying their luck from further 4th downs as well. This extends drives when they convert, and often pins opponents deep in their own territory when they don't.
It was nice to see a Cowboys playoff win this year. Once again fans will call for the team to be blown up and rebuilt, which is simply a bad take. The team is too good for that. Ran into arguably the best team in the league, on an 11-game win streak, in the divisional. Tough. Dak didn't play well, but using "he got beat by a 7th rounder" as a reason for moving off him is braindead. Purdy is the most promising late round QB since Brady and he's with the most complete roster in the league. "Tanking for a chance at a Super Bowl" makes zero sense when they're already closer to a Super Bowl than 80% of the teams in the league, just by getting to the divisional and having a solid young roster. Need a WR in the draft.
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on January 22, 2023, 10:11:48 PM
Wow - With the conference championship matchups set, 3 of the 4 teams are returning from last year (with PHL "replacing" LAR compared to last year).
I was half-expecting DAL-SFO to come down to a Maher kick - after his only XP was blocked (and it looked like a low wobbler leaning left prior to the block on replay), he did make his 2 FG attempts.
The first FG felt like a touchdown. The second was nice but I felt they should have gone for it. Happy for Maher.
HOW BOUT DEM COWBOYS!
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 10:42:51 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
1) people hate them, and 2) it's the style of the game that gives people the illusion that it should have gone differently. If the final was 35-28 - also a 7 point margin - we'd be talking about how great the Niners are. There would still be the usual trolling of the Cowboys, but the overall narrative would be "hard fought and well-played game by both teams" . But at 19-12, it's "Dallas totally choked and San Fran didn't" .
The "points fallacy" is going to get bigger and bigger until people realize that this is the direction the league is going in. Every single winner this weekend won time of possession and the turnover battle in their game. Only 2 of 17 touchdowns were from beyond 20 yards, and none were from beyond 40. Points per team per game has decreased two years in a row. Pass yards per game, per completion, and per attempt have all decreased two years in a row. Most rushing stats have increased this year, which correlates with more time-consuming drives, fewer possessions per game, fewer points. The increased success of QB sneaks has made 4th and 1 from inside the opponent's 40 a basically automatic decision to go for it, and more and more teams are trying their luck from further 4th downs as well. This extends drives when they convert, and often pins opponents deep in their own territory when they don't.
It was nice to see a Cowboys playoff win this year. Once again fans will call for the team to be blown up and rebuilt, which is simply a bad take. The team is too good for that. Ran into arguably the best team in the league, on an 11-game win streak, in the divisional. Tough. Dak didn't play well, but using "he got beat by a 7th rounder" as a reason for moving off him is braindead. Purdy is the most promising late round QB since Brady and he's with the most complete roster in the league. "Tanking for a chance at a Super Bowl" makes zero sense when they're already closer to a Super Bowl than 80% of the teams in the league, just by getting to the divisional and having a solid young roster. Need a WR in the draft.
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
So, basically we are going to continue with the delusion that the Cowboys are something greater than a team that just regularly makes the playoffs? I don't recall saying Dallas choked, I said they were out played and out coached by a better team.
So, as a season ticket holder for the Eagles, we have the option to 'opt in' for playoff game charges (I imagine most season ticket holders take this option). The Eagles will charge the credit card only after it is known they'll play a game. For next week's NFC Championship game, my card was hit up this morning. One of the few charges I'm happy to see!
I sold off my Divisional Round game, and whoever bought them was treated to a great win yesterday. I will be going to Sunday's game. I'll be there early - probably between 6 & 7am, ready to tailgate until about 2pm, when we'll start heading to the stadium for the 3pm kickoff.
While I'll love to believe the Eagles will be the favorites to win, both teams are the best of the best in the NFL. Looking forward to the game, and hoping for a win to advance to the big game!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 10:50:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 10:42:51 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
1) people hate them, and 2) it's the style of the game that gives people the illusion that it should have gone differently. If the final was 35-28 - also a 7 point margin - we'd be talking about how great the Niners are. There would still be the usual trolling of the Cowboys, but the overall narrative would be "hard fought and well-played game by both teams" . But at 19-12, it's "Dallas totally choked and San Fran didn't" .
The "points fallacy" is going to get bigger and bigger until people realize that this is the direction the league is going in. Every single winner this weekend won time of possession and the turnover battle in their game. Only 2 of 17 touchdowns were from beyond 20 yards, and none were from beyond 40. Points per team per game has decreased two years in a row. Pass yards per game, per completion, and per attempt have all decreased two years in a row. Most rushing stats have increased this year, which correlates with more time-consuming drives, fewer possessions per game, fewer points. The increased success of QB sneaks has made 4th and 1 from inside the opponent's 40 a basically automatic decision to go for it, and more and more teams are trying their luck from further 4th downs as well. This extends drives when they convert, and often pins opponents deep in their own territory when they don't.
It was nice to see a Cowboys playoff win this year. Once again fans will call for the team to be blown up and rebuilt, which is simply a bad take. The team is too good for that. Ran into arguably the best team in the league, on an 11-game win streak, in the divisional. Tough. Dak didn't play well, but using "he got beat by a 7th rounder" as a reason for moving off him is braindead. Purdy is the most promising late round QB since Brady and he's with the most complete roster in the league. "Tanking for a chance at a Super Bowl" makes zero sense when they're already closer to a Super Bowl than 80% of the teams in the league, just by getting to the divisional and having a solid young roster. Need a WR in the draft.
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
So, basically we are going to continue with the delusion that the Cowboys are something greater than a team that just regularly makes the playoffs? I don't recall saying Dallas choked, I said they were out played and out coached by a better team.
Which is true. I will admit that I drank some kool-aid after the Cowboys/Vikings game, which was a mixture of overreacting to the game and overrating the team they beat. But yes, they were outplayed and outcoached by a better team. The trolling is because everyone hates them, not because they were supposed to win.
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 10:42:51 PM
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
What team was a fluke last year? The real fluke in the AFC was the Titans getting the 1 seed, which meant Bills-Chiefs was a divisional game. Rams weren't a fluke. Could maybe argue the 49ers.
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 11:11:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 10:42:51 PM
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
What team was a fluke last year? The real fluke in the AFC was the Titans getting the 1 seed, which meant Bills-Chiefs was a divisional game. Rams weren't a fluke. Could maybe argue the 49ers.
49ers for sure and I think the Bengals had a very unconvincing run to the AFC title game. They showed they deserved it by beating the Chiefs, but before that, they were very hot and cold during the regular season, 8-6 at Christmas, and they narrowly beat a mediocre Raiders team and a fraudulent Titans team.
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 11:17:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 11:11:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2023, 10:42:51 PM
Chiefs, Bengals, and Niners in the final four again, with the Eagles replacing the Rams. Unlike last year there's no flukes here. Obviously everyone will be rooting against the Chiefs since they're probably the least interesting storyline.
What team was a fluke last year? The real fluke in the AFC was the Titans getting the 1 seed, which meant Bills-Chiefs was a divisional game. Rams weren't a fluke. Could maybe argue the 49ers.
49ers for sure and I think the Bengals had a very unconvincing run to the AFC title game. They showed they deserved it by beating the Chiefs, but before that, they were very hot and cold during the regular season, 8-6 at Christmas, and they narrowly beat a mediocre Raiders team and a fraudulent Titans team.
Yes, but that's a function of the seeding. Once the divisional round was set, either the Bengals or Titans were guaranteed to be in the title game.
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 07:02:52 PM
Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.
In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:
1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles
I know way too many annoying Eagles fans. The only time I've ever actively rooted for them was when they won the Super Bowl with backup Nick Foles (and it helped that that was against the Patriots). I have no problem with the Chiefs but would be happy to see someone else win.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 22, 2023, 09:51:59 PM
Have some Doritos!
<snip blue bag of Nacho Year>
I haven't had Doritos in a while; but the blue bag (and that final play) has me thinking the flavor is Fool Ranch
It was gut-wrenching seeing the only team we had was left in our humble division, talking about Jacksonville, self-destruct like that (can't turn the ball over twice like that and still live to play another week).
On the very bright side: peace is once again restored here in my native Texas homeland (and the rest of America for that matter) thanks to the NINERS!! :clap:
So I believe it's 27 years down, another 81 more years to go before the Cowboys tie the Cubs' 108-year drought record....we're already a quarter-way there (cause, you know, 27 times four equals 108).
Thankfully, I was way too young to remember the last time Jerry Jones held the Lombardi Trophy.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
I think it's because the Cowboys are allegedly "America's Team" , with the Everything's Bigger in Texas aura that is like drawing moths to a flame. In this way, they're like the Lakers, the Yankees and (sigh) at least one Boston sports franchise. Lots of money, lots of talent, which don't always translate to wins (anymore), and the schadenfreude is irresistible.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 23, 2023, 01:36:23 AM
It was gut-wrenching seeing the only team we had was left in our humble division, talking about Jacksonville, self-destruct like that (can't turn the ball over twice like that and still live to play another week).
If they turned it over 3 more times they would've had a shot to win! :D
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 23, 2023, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
I think it's because the Cowboys are allegedly "America's Team" , with the Everything's Bigger in Texas aura that is like drawing moths to a flame. In this way, they're like the Lakers, the Yankees and (sigh) at least one Boston sports franchise. Lots of money, lots of talent, which don't always translate to wins (anymore), and the schadenfreude is irresistible.
Something else, at least for those of us in the DC area, is that Dallas fans act like their team is some sort of superpower, but their playoff history over the last 30 years isn't really all that much better than Washington's is in the overall scheme of things. Yes, Dallas won Super Bowls XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX, this after not having done anything since making it to the 1982 NFC Championship Game (where they lost to the Redskins), but then, Washington was a powerhouse from 1982—1991 when Dallas was down (playing in four Super Bowls, winning three, and losing in one other NFC Championship Game), so the two sort of cancel each other out in that respect. As was noted on the FOX broadcast last night, Dallas hasn't made it to the NFC Championship Game since they won Super Bowl XXX; similarly, Washington hasn't made it that far since they won Super Bowl XXVI. Neither franchise has much to brag about over the past quarter-century. Yet somehow, Dallas fans would have you think they're a mighty juggernaut.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
As a Cowboys fan that doesn't really get why everyone gets so much pleasure out of making fun of the Cowboys fans getting their hopes up only to watch them lose in the playoffs....I am no different than any other fan of any other team in the NFL. We all start the season off thinking this is our year. We all want our teams to win every Sunday. We all want our teams to keep winning if they make the playoffs. Is someone going to tell me that some fans of other teams say, "Nah, I'm taking this year off, I hope they lose every game."? Do Lions fans just expect to be crappy every year? Do Giants fans at the start of the season say, "most of the time we are mediocre or bad, and then we have one good year....I'm not thinking this is the good year, I hope they lose"? No, every fan of every fan base wants their team to win. Thats why they are fans.
It isn't so much we "expect something different from the Cowboys", it's just I am a fan of the team, so I am going to root for them, even though going into the game I had very little hope the Cowboys would even be competitive in that game. It's what I do. If I was a Cardinals fan, I would root for them every week and be sad when they lose. It's called being a fan.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 23, 2023, 08:35:53 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 23, 2023, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
I think it's because the Cowboys are allegedly "America's Team" , with the Everything's Bigger in Texas aura that is like drawing moths to a flame. In this way, they're like the Lakers, the Yankees and (sigh) at least one Boston sports franchise. Lots of money, lots of talent, which don't always translate to wins (anymore), and the schadenfreude is irresistible.
Something else, at least for those of us in the DC area, is that Dallas fans act like their team is some sort of superpower, but their playoff history over the last 30 years isn't really all that much better than Washington's is in the overall scheme of things. Yes, Dallas won Super Bowls XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX, this after not having done anything since making it to the 1982 NFC Championship Game (where they lost to the Redskins), but then, Washington was a powerhouse from 1982—1991 when Dallas was down (playing in four Super Bowls, winning three, and losing in one other NFC Championship Game), so the two sort of cancel each other out in that respect. As was noted on the FOX broadcast last night, Dallas hasn't made it to the NFC Championship Game since they won Super Bowl XXX; similarly, Washington hasn't made it that far since they won Super Bowl XXVI. Neither franchise has much to brag about over the past quarter-century. Yet somehow, Dallas fans would have you think they're a mighty juggernaut.
I don't know of these Cowboys fans. Me and my friends who are all Cowboys fans look at each other and say "1996" and start laughing, because we know that was the last time the Cowboys truly did anything except show up in the playoffs every other year and continually not make it past the divisional round. There is zero arrogance about it. We make fun of the franchise of being so inept for years despite having talented teams. We all remember where we were and what we were doing the last time the Cowboys made it to the NFC Championship game. Since then, it was Barry taking his gun to the airport, Chan Gailey and his crap, Dave Compost staring at the clock wanting the game to be over, the Bill Parcells experiment (which he almost turned it around had he not quit), the Son of Bum and his mediocrity and the The Clapper. It's been one coaching disaster after another from a franchise who for the first 28 seasons had one coach. The Cowboys fans I know are frustrated and agitated. Sure, we like to remember the good ol days, but again, what franchise doesn't. I would hope the Patriots fans think about the Brady years fondly and not think back fondly of their most current season.
We don't think the Cowboys are royalty like everyone thinks. We know how irrelevant they have been. Believe me, it's agonizing.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2023, 11:41:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 07:02:52 PM
Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.
Yes, I absolutely believe that's true in the big picture, but I was referring to a specific irony of the way this season ended for both teams.
The "America's Team" label mostly appeared to originate from a single sentence on an NFL Films highlight film. NFL Films was the main way people were able to follow the NFL nationally on local broadcasts in the 70's and 80's, before ESPN started taking over the way people got their sports news.
Jerry Jones was probably a better promotor of his team than most other owners. Dallas wasn't exactly a city where people lived, then left, growing their fanbase. Dallas instead was a city that won several Superbowls in the 1980's when the Superbowl really started becoming the nation's premiere matchup, maybe even more so than during the Steelers empire in the 70's.
Not only did the game draw in men to watch, but the commercials starting taking on a life of their own, drawing in women and making the game a family and party affair, which some people joke should be a national holiday. And to that, it does get a lot more people together than other actual national holidays, so there is some truth to that.
Washington, while they had their good years, has an awful owner that deteriorated that team's fanbase into shreads of its former self. And when you can't get a local fanbase to support a team, it's hard to get a national fanbase to support a team. It doesn't help that Washington fans, if they want to join another fanbase, only need to drive a few miles up the road to Baltimore, or continue on another 90 minutes to Philly, or another 90 minutes to the Meadowlands. Around Dallas, people within 3 hours of Arlington have barely encroached on the Texan's fanbase.
NFL Films, ironically, was (and still is) headquartered in Mt. Laurel, NJ, just outside of Philly. Baseball's Philadelphia Phillies main broadcaster for several decades including the 1980's, Harry Kalas, did a lot of narrating for NFL Films' productions. So there's a little sting that Dallas got that nod as "America's Team"!
They were also noted for their rivalries with the Giants, Redskins & Eagles. Giants and Redskins because they had all of their Superbowl wins. Eagles, because, well, they just wanted one. When the league did the major realignment many years ago, there was widespread agreement to keep the Cowboys in the NFC East because of the long-standing rivalries, even though geographically it didn't make much sense. Of all the issues the NFL has, very few true fans have any issues with this to this day. (Clickbait websites will try to create an issue with this, but that's what they do.)
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 23, 2023, 08:56:10 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 23, 2023, 08:35:53 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 23, 2023, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2023, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 22, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
Again, the Cowboys lose a winnable game in one of the most boneheaded, excruciating manners possible.
They just got out played and out coached by a better team. What I don't get is why anyone expects something different out of the Cowboys?
I think it's because the Cowboys are allegedly "America's Team" , with the Everything's Bigger in Texas aura that is like drawing moths to a flame. In this way, they're like the Lakers, the Yankees and (sigh) at least one Boston sports franchise. Lots of money, lots of talent, which don't always translate to wins (anymore), and the schadenfreude is irresistible.
Something else, at least for those of us in the DC area, is that Dallas fans act like their team is some sort of superpower, but their playoff history over the last 30 years isn't really all that much better than Washington's is in the overall scheme of things. Yes, Dallas won Super Bowls XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX, this after not having done anything since making it to the 1982 NFC Championship Game (where they lost to the Redskins), but then, Washington was a powerhouse from 1982—1991 when Dallas was down (playing in four Super Bowls, winning three, and losing in one other NFC Championship Game), so the two sort of cancel each other out in that respect. As was noted on the FOX broadcast last night, Dallas hasn't made it to the NFC Championship Game since they won Super Bowl XXX; similarly, Washington hasn't made it that far since they won Super Bowl XXVI. Neither franchise has much to brag about over the past quarter-century. Yet somehow, Dallas fans would have you think they're a mighty juggernaut.
I don't know of these Cowboys fans. Me and my friends who are all Cowboys fans look at each other and say "1996" and start laughing, because we know that was the last time the Cowboys truly did anything except show up in the playoffs every other year and continually not make it past the divisional round. There is zero arrogance about it. We make fun of the franchise of being so inept for years despite having talented teams. We all remember where we were and what we were doing the last time the Cowboys made it to the NFC Championship game. Since then, it was Barry taking his gun to the airport, Chan Gailey and his crap, Dave Compost staring at the clock wanting the game to be over, the Bill Parcells experiment (which he almost turned it around had he not quit), the Son of Bum and his mediocrity and the The Clapper. It's been one coaching disaster after another from a franchise who for the first 28 seasons had one coach. The Cowboys fans I know are frustrated and agitated. Sure, we like to remember the good ol days, but again, what franchise doesn't. I would hope the Patriots fans think about the Brady years fondly and not think back fondly of their most current season.
We don't think the Cowboys are royalty like everyone thinks. We know how irrelevant they have been. Believe me, it's agonizing.
I don't doubt your location is part of the issue. Your profile says you live in Austin. I have no doubt the prevailing attitude there is quite different than it is elsewhere. I've noticed a phenomenon, and it's hardly unique to Dallas fans, where a given team's "diaspora" fans feel the need to be overly vocal about calling attention to their team and themselves and also tend to inflate their team's performance far more than it really deserves. (No doubt this may be all the more noticeable to those of us living in the DC area because the government presence here means there are a lot of people from elsewhere who root for other teams. For some reason teams from Buffalo and Pittsburgh have a lot of fans here.)
The Cowboys could be considered the luckiest franchise in the NFL. When the NFL and AFL merged in 1970, there were five different options for organizing the NFC into divisions. Only one of the five grouped the Cowboys with the huge markets in NY, Philly and DC, and that's the one that got drawn. That undoubtedly improved their exposure.
I know what it feels like to be a long-suffering fan. My fondest memories of da Bears remain the Walter Payton-Mike Ditka era, which also included the legendary Monsters of the Midway defense and the Super Bowl Shuffle that preceded their first, and so far only, win back in '86. And to boot, this was in one of the darkest eras for the Packers, who wouldn't be a factor for several more years. But ever since that Super Bowl triumph, I've seen Chicago come up short in the playoffs and then miss them altogether thanks to increasingly incompetent ownership, and that Super Bowl loss to the Colts in '07 hurts the most. Meanwhile, I've had to suffer through the Packers' supremacy in the NFC Central/North in the same timeline, winning three conference championships and two Super Bowls (although I couldn't help but gloat when they lost to the Broncos in '98). On top of this, now there's talk of the Bears moving out to the suburbs and leaving Soldier Field in limbo; and speaking of which, it was once a glorious place to be due to its history, but the early-aughts renovations ruined it for me. As the old saying goes, at least we're not Detroit. (a reference to the fact that the Lions have never played in a Super Bowl, and most likely never will)
So yeah, count me in as someone who shares a Cowboys fan's pain.
^^^
Funny, people used to say the Cardinals would never play in a Super Bowl either. They got hot one year with Kurt Warner and almost won the whole thing as a 9-7 team. I don't consider myself "suffering" as a Lions given we have U of M football and every other Detroit team has won a championship in my lifetime. I guess if the Cardinals can get to a Super Bowl there is hope for any team.
That said, the Lions are the only team I follow that I would go pay to attend a championship game. The Lions winning the Super Bowl was more my Dad's dream, I was just happy they went 9-8.
If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.
Total record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 97-74
Bills: 96-74
Division titles over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 4
Bills: 3
Playoff berths over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 5
Bills: 5
Playoff record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 3-5
Bills: 4-5
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? :eyebrow: They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.
Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.
I was all in on the Bills...
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 23, 2023, 10:05:46 AM
The Cowboys could be considered the luckiest franchise in the NFL. When the NFL and AFL merged in 1970, there were five different options for organizing the NFC into divisions. Only one of the five grouped the Cowboys with the huge markets in NY, Philly and DC, and that's the one that got drawn. That undoubtedly improved their exposure.
I will respectfully disagree.
I have heard the "Cowboys are lucky" defense before and I honestly don't get it.
1966 NFL Championship game Dandy Don Meridith throws an interception in the endzone against Green Bay which sealed the deal or the Cowboys would have gone to the first Super Bowl.
1967 NLF Championship game, The Ice Bowl, Jerry Kramer delivers The Block to Jethro Pugh and he slips and can't stop Bart Starr from sneaking in for the game winning touchdown. If he's stopped, the Cowboys go to the second Super Bowl.
Super Bowl V, in the worst played Super Bowl ever, the Cowboys came a field goal away from winning.
Super Bowl VII, I don't want to get into Jackie Smith dropping the pass in the endzone. Had he made that catch, the inflection of that game would have been way different.
1982 NFC Championship Game, The Catch happens. So what, there were still 0:58 left. The Cowboys got the ball and Danny White hits Drew Pearson on a slant and he almost got away and The Catch would have been a footnote. It was a one-point game so even after Drew Pearson was tackled, they still had a shot, but Danny White muffed the snap, and the 49ers recovered the ice the game and missed a chance to go to another Super Bowl.
1995 NFC Championship Game, had Troy Aikman not started the game off with a pick 6 and Michael Irvin had not fumbled the ball for a 49er touchdown, they would have won that game and gone to Super Bowl XXIX.
It's arrogant to say, I know, that each of the times the Cowboys lost the game to advance to the Super Bowl it would also been a Super Bowl win given the disparity of the NFL/NFC vs the AFL/AFC at the time.
Everyone says the Cowboys are lucky, I just look at all the times their luck couldn't have been any worse. They were so close to having way more accolades than they currently do.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.
Total record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 97-74
Bills: 96-74
Division titles over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 4
Bills: 3
Playoff berths over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 5
Bills: 5
Playoff record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 3-5
Bills: 4-5
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? :eyebrow: They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.
Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.
Texas "exceptionalism" coupled with how Cowboy fans tend to behave spurs a lot of people to root against them. It's not too dissimilar to how people react to when the New York Yankees lose in the post season, the mentality of the fan base is similar. The Bills on the other hand come from a depressed blue collar city and are generally thought of as an underdog. More casual fans tend to find the so-called underdog appealing.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? :eyebrow: They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.
I wonder if it's simply that a lot of people hold to a conspiracy theory that Jerry Jones is somehow pulling s*** behind the scenes to benefit his team, and they still lose.
For me, hating on the Cowboys is a product of being football conscious 30 years ago. They had several players with off-field issues that made it easy to cast the whole team as villains. Hell, that characterization even made into 1998's "Baseketball" where the rival team for the good guys to beat is the Dallas Felons.
Element two for hating the Cowboys is that googly-eyed prick Jerry Jones. Most NFL owners are kind of shitheels; seems to be a requirement of the job; but it's worse when a billionaire shitheel wants to be popular. During any Cowboys game, you're 10 times more likely to see a shot of Jones in the luxury box compared to any other owner. The media likes to put him in the spotlight and I hate that about both sports media and the way Jones seems to relish the attention. Screw that guy.
Element three for hating the Cowboys is the mediocre broadcasting career of Troy Aikmen. I just don't like listening to Buck/Aikmen; they don't have good broadcasting voices, in my opinion, so add that to the fact that he's an ex-Cowboy and I relate my disdain for his calling games to my dislike of the Cowboys in general.
Jumping off what someone else mentioned, it bothers me that they are in a division with three east coast teams when it would make so much more geographic sense to put them in the West back when they went to four divisions per conference. This bullcrap that they have 'preserve the rivalries' with east coast teams reeked of sports media hogwash and Jerry Jones putting his thumb on the scale. More attention for me, the googly-eyed billionaire prick!
Finally, when I was a kid and "my" team was climbing its way out of the basement after a generation of being terrible, the Cowboys were the team to beat. They were the ones standing in the way of the promised land, so they are the bad guys forever now. The 13 year old inside of me still smiles every time they sputter out in the post-season or like their soon to be unemployed kicker misses three extra points in a row.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 23, 2023, 09:37:50 AM
NFL Films, ironically, was (and still is) headquartered in Mt. Laurel, NJ, just outside of Philly. Baseball's Philadelphia Phillies main broadcaster for several decades including the 1980's, Harry Kalas, did a lot of narrating for NFL Films' productions. So there's a little sting that Dallas got that nod as "America's Team"!
John Facenda was The Voice of NFL Films!
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2023, 09:00:04 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2023, 11:41:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 07:02:52 PM
Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.
Yes, I absolutely believe that's true in the big picture, but I was referring to a specific irony of the way this season ended for both teams.
Losing at home?
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment?
How many Superbowl victories are we talking about?
Dallas fans are much louder in proclaiming their 5 wins, even though any fan under 28 years of age has never seen one.
Their owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.
I don't think you really want the same reaction from people mocking the Bills' 4 straight SB losses.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 23, 2023, 02:11:08 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment?
even though any fan under 28 years of age has never seen one.
And this is precisely the cherry picking I spoke of:
QuoteSure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise.
QuoteTheir owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.
Yeah, my entire point was that the earful the Cowboys are receiving from NFL fans and media following yesterday's game is mostly rooted in emotions, not in what happened on the field. If it was 100% about the football being played, the Bills would be getting bashed the same amount (or harder because their loss was worse). But they're not.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 03:36:57 PM
QuoteTheir owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.
Yeah, my entire point was that the earful the Cowboys are receiving from NFL fans and media following yesterday's game is mostly rooted in emotions, not in what happened on the field. If it was 100% about the football being played, the Bills would be getting bashed the same amount (or harder because their loss was worse). But they're not.
There could be some toning down because of what the Bills went through over the past month. But remember...4 teams lost this weekend. None of those 3 have the national hatred towards them that the Cowboys have.
And not that a bunch of laterals usually works anyway, but the Cowboys' Turpin got pancaked before they even had a chance to try to get a game-ending TD. It was a spectacular ending to their season.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 23, 2023, 02:03:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2023, 09:00:04 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2023, 11:41:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 07:02:52 PM
Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.
Yes, I absolutely believe that's true in the big picture, but I was referring to a specific irony of the way this season ended for both teams.
Losing at home?
Yes, that's true as well - the only two teams to lose at home so far besides the Bucs.
But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2023, 09:31:02 PM
But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.
The Vikings losing by a touchdown is a lot less humiliating than what happened to the Bills. I don't see how you can compare the two performances.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 23, 2023, 02:11:08 PM
Dallas fans are much louder in proclaiming their 5 wins
Bingo! Bullseye! Jackpot! etc. You hit the nail on the head.
Every single Fall season, I have to hear it from the legions of Cowboys religious-like followers (even from many of my own relatives) here in my home-state:
"Cowboys have five Super Bowl rings; the Texans have ZERO!"
"Any JV team could beat the Texans!"Anybody remember the movie "The Little Giants?" It goes like that: The Cowboys is that accomplished big brother widely admired accordingly, and the Texans are the youngest franchise, the little brother if you will, that just wants to be counted as a pro NFL team, but is mostly ignored (in some cases ridiculed) even by many in my state; so they have something to prove with that burning desire to beat the big brother.
And normally I am adamant that any loss is on every player that played a minute in the game. But when you (talking about Dak) make salary demands (like $40 million) on a hard cap, and if you force management to cave in to your demands, then you (again on Dak) accept full responsibility of the results of the season. And if you don't deliver, then good luck finding another contract in your playing career; reputation ruined. That's what I anticipate will happen to Dak after his current contract expires; nobody else will want him no matter how dire the team's QB situation may be.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2023, 01:02:15 AM
That's what I anticipate will happen to Dak after his current contract expires; nobody else will want him no matter how dire the team's QB situation may be.
Wanna bet on that?
Quote from: jakeroot on January 23, 2023, 11:17:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2023, 09:31:02 PM
But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.
The Vikings losing by a touchdown is a lot less humiliating than what happened to the Bills. I don't see how you can compare the two performances.
Well, aside from the fact that the Bengals are also way better than the Giants... the point of comparison is that both teams did something they had not done all season. In other words, they suffered an atypical loss based on their season. But of course, it was still highly predictable to their fan base. Indicative in both cases of a team that seems to be allergic to winning a championship.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 23, 2023, 10:25:44 AM
^^^
Funny, people used to say the Cardinals would never play in a Super Bowl either. They got hot one year with Kurt Warner and almost won the whole thing as a 9-7 team. I don't consider myself "suffering" as a Lions given we have U of M football and every other Detroit team has won a championship in my lifetime. I guess if the Cardinals can get to a Super Bowl there is hope for any team.
That said, the Lions are the only team I follow that I would go pay to attend a championship game. The Lions winning the Super Bowl was more my Dad's dream, I was just happy they went 9-8.
You do have a point, because of the success of the other three Detroit teams. In a similar vein, I've seen every other Chicago team win its own championships after 1986, but the Cubs' 2016 World Series title is the one I've enjoyed the most, since prior to that I (and all the other Cub faithful) had to endure their drought going into the triple digits.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2023, 01:02:15 AM
Every single Fall season, I have to hear it from the legions of Cowboys religious-like followers (even from many of my own relatives) here in my home-state:
"Cowboys have five Super Bowl rings; the Texans have ZERO!"
"Any JV team could beat the Texans!"
Anybody remember the movie "The Little Giants?" It goes like that: The Cowboys is that accomplished big brother widely admired accordingly, and the Texans are the youngest franchise, the little brother if you will, that just wants to be counted as a pro NFL team, but is mostly ignored (in some cases ridiculed) even by many in my state; so they have something to prove with that burning desire to beat the big brother.
Don't act like your fanbase are saints. I constantly get trash talked by Texans fans who say, "Dallas hasn't done anything recently (it's true, I can't lie)" or "All the players are arrogant and overpaid". "The fans are obnoxious."
Mind you I didn't say anything in these beratings other than answer their question of "which NFL team do you root for?" Then get trash talk spewed at me for ten minutes. Like the Cowboys are the only team in the league that has underperformed or been an atrocity in the playoffs in the 21st century (look at the teams that have gone years without finishing better than last). I guess the Cowboys have the only arrogant and overpaid players in the league (Deshawn Watson I guess is not overpaid?) The Cowboys fans are obnoxious, I will own that, but I guess no other fanbase is obnoxious in the entire NFL?
I think those reasons to hate the Cowboys are just enough, I will admit, but if you are going to hate them for that, then you have to hate the other 30 teams for the same reason, except I guess the Rams since they won the Super Bowl last year so they don't qualify as "hasn't done anything lately" (although that joke of a season they just concluded might cancel that out).
I guess my point is, in a year when the Texans make the playoffs and the Cowboys don't, the Texan fans are insufferable. The road goes both ways. The kicker is most Texan fans I know are former Cowboys fans. Not a lot of Texan fans are former Oiler fans, so their fanbase is mostly ex-Cowboys fans. So, when they complain about the Cowboys fanbase, I'm like, "Don't pretend like you weren't just doing that exact thing you are mad about a few years ago." It's like when someone loses weight after being overweight for years, then they berate everyone for eating donuts like they weren't just doing that three months ago.
Quote from: US 89 on January 23, 2023, 12:29:58 AM
In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:
1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles
I know way too many annoying Eagles fans. The only time I've ever actively rooted for them was when they won the Super Bowl with backup Nick Foles (and it helped that that was against the Patriots). I have no problem with the Chiefs but would be happy to see someone else win.
Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and
especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.
Quote from: US 89 on January 23, 2023, 12:29:58 AM
In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:
1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles
I know way too many annoying Eagles fans.
I don't believe Jeff & myself are that obnoxious as Eagle phans.
At this point I think the 49ers would be the most interesting Super Bowl winner. It would absolutely drive my brother in law nuts (which has massive entertainment value) and quite the story unto itself with the emergence of Brock Purdy.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2023, 10:45:29 PM
Quote from: US 89 on January 23, 2023, 12:29:58 AM
In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:
1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles
I know way too many annoying Eagles fans. The only time I've ever actively rooted for them was when they won the Super Bowl with backup Nick Foles (and it helped that that was against the Patriots). I have no problem with the Chiefs but would be happy to see someone else win.
Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.
Can't blame them for rubbing the neutral site AFC championship back in everyone's faces. Media was literally talking about it becoming a permanent thing depending on how it went. Talk about jumping the gun. Honestly it's pretty funny how Cincy has ruined everyone's fantasies about coin flips and neutral site games and the NFL "scripting" a Bills Super Bowl win because of Hamlin. Speedrunning "lovable losers to big bad winners" even faster than the Chiefs did.
Quote from: thspfc on January 25, 2023, 10:59:33 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2023, 10:45:29 PM
Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.
Can't blame them for rubbing the neutral site AFC championship back in everyone's faces. Media was literally talking about it becoming a permanent thing depending on how it went. Talk about jumping the gun. Honestly it's pretty funny how Cincy has ruined everyone's fantasies about coin flips and neutral site games and the NFL "scripting" a Bills Super Bowl win because of Hamlin. Speedrunning "lovable losers to big bad winners" even faster than the Chiefs did.
They were
looking for motivation and fuel for the "no one believes in us" argument. Zac Taylor even admitted it this week. But the whole neutral site thing is so ridiculous because literally every team sells advance tickets to the championship before they know if they'll be in it. Are the Chiefs riled up because the Bengals sold tickets to a potential Jags-Bengals championship? Of course not.
And I'm actually glad there won't be a neutral site game FWIW. I didn't like anything about that situation or the narratives it created. But the Bengals spinning it as "us against the world" -- and especially that the NFL used the Hamlin situation to negatively impact their season -- is just a bad look and taking it way too far.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 24, 2023, 10:51:58 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 24, 2023, 01:02:15 AM
Every single Fall season, I have to hear it from the legions of Cowboys religious-like followers (even from many of my own relatives) here in my home-state:
"Cowboys have five Super Bowl rings; the Texans have ZERO!"
"Any JV team could beat the Texans!"
Anybody remember the movie "The Little Giants?" It goes like that: The Cowboys is that accomplished big brother widely admired accordingly, and the Texans are the youngest franchise, the little brother if you will, that just wants to be counted as a pro NFL team, but is mostly ignored (in some cases ridiculed) even by many in my state; so they have something to prove with that burning desire to beat the big brother.
The kicker is most Texan fans I know are former Cowboys fans. Not a lot of Texan fans are former Oiler fans, so their fanbase is mostly ex-Cowboys fans. So, when they complain about the Cowboys fanbase, I'm like, "Don't pretend like you weren't just doing that exact thing you are mad about a few years ago." It's like when someone loses weight after being overweight for years, then they berate everyone for eating donuts like they weren't just doing that three months ago.
I for one never had an interest in the NFL until September 8, 2002 because I never had a team to root for. I was way too young to remember the Oilers, and by the time I was old enough to realize Houston had the Oilers, Bud Adams was just about to announce his relocation to Tennessee in the mid-1990s so there was no point in even supporting them, although the Titans are in our division, so I do like to see them do well as well as the Jaguars. So yeah I, too, wasn't an Oilers fan.
And yeah there are sore fans in every base....those that take winning for granted are the worst ones. Many fans in every base don't realize how hard it is to win a single game, let alone win the Lombardi Trophy; only one winner per season, and the other 31 fall short. Since the Texans entry into the league only 13 of the 32 teams have won the Super Bowl, and still several teams who have never even played in the Super Bowl all-time. So I don't take winning for granted.
Since the Bengals are the only one of the last four teams standing that hasn't won a Super Bowl, I'll be rooting for them to go all the way. It was fun to see the Eagles do the same thing four years ago, when they also had no previous Lombardi trophies to show off.
Go Chiefs. Patty deserves more than one ring.
The media is getting worse and worse, coming up with stories that most people don't agree with. They may need to interview 30 people, but once they find someone who agrees with their side of the story, that'll be the person you see on the news, seemingly giving them credibility.
Almost no one - not the teams, and not the fans - want neutral site games. It's accepted for the Superbowl, but the few fans lucky enough to secure tickets also face steep pricing for airlines, hotels, and just about everything else involving the game.
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2023, 02:27:53 PM
But the whole neutral site thing is so ridiculous because literally every team sells advance tickets to the championship before they know if they'll be in it.
Eagles season ticket holders are charged for playoff tickets only when it's known what game they'll play. Using this year as an example, I was charged the day after the Eagles clinched the first round bye for the Divisional round. After the Eagles beat the Giants, I was then charged for the Championship game.
Tickets for the remaining unsold seats went on sale 5 days prior to the game being played.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2023, 09:45:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2023, 02:27:53 PM
But the whole neutral site thing is so ridiculous because literally every team sells advance tickets to the championship before they know if they'll be in it.
Eagles season ticket holders are charged for playoff tickets only when it's known what game they'll play. Using this year as an example, I was charged the day after the Eagles clinched the first round bye for the Divisional round. After the Eagles beat the Giants, I was then charged for the Championship game.
Tickets for the remaining unsold seats went on sale 5 days prior to the game being played.
Yes, and I'm sure most teams do something similar. The tickets are still "sold" before the game is confirmed.
On another note... the five COTY finalists have been announced: Sirianni (Eagles), Shanahan (49ers), Daboll (Giants), McDermott (Bills), Pederson (Jags).
And there's at least another handful that you could argue should be on the list: Campbell (Lions), Carroll (Seahawks), Tomlin (Steelers), O'Connell (Vikings)... not to mention the two AFC Championship coaches. I don't think there's ever been such a broad field.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 25, 2023, 09:34:26 PM
Go Chiefs. Patty deserves more than one ring.
Old: Go Pats
New: Go Pat
More news of Joe Judge being a confirmed terrible NFL coach: https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/01/26/inside-the-most-dysfunctional-patriots-season-under-bill-belichick-ive-never-seen-anything-like-it/
Especially considering the Giants' relative success in their first year without him, I don't understand why he's not up there in the discussion of worst recent head coaches.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2023, 09:45:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 25, 2023, 02:27:53 PM
But the whole neutral site thing is so ridiculous because literally every team sells advance tickets to the championship before they know if they'll be in it.
Eagles season ticket holders are charged for playoff tickets only when it's known what game they'll play. Using this year as an example, I was charged the day after the Eagles clinched the first round bye for the Divisional round. After the Eagles beat the Giants, I was then charged for the Championship game.
Tickets for the remaining unsold seats went on sale 5 days prior to the game being played.
Sounds similar to what at least the Washington Capitals, and I suspect other NHL teams, do for the Stanley Cup Playoffs: Season-ticket holders are eligible for "Pay as We Play," where you get billed a day after each playoff round for the home games actually played during that round (thus, for example, if they're the higher seed and they win the series four games to one, you get billed for three games). Anyone who doesn't have a season ticket either pays in full in advance for the entire playoffs or pays for individual games when buying them. All this mattered a little more in the days of paper tickets when season-ticket holders received ticket books in advance of the playoffs. Now, with fully electronic ticketing, they can make just a particular round available in the online account manager. (They don't do it game-by-game because people who already know they can't make a particular game, say due to business travel or whatever, need time to be able to transfer to a friend, sell the ticket, or donate it.)
It makes sense to offer something like that for season-ticket holders because the customer has an incentive to make good on the payment lest he lose his season ticket and the team has an incentive to keep the customers happy because they spend a lot of money with the team. (By all accounts the Washington Commanders' current ownership does not understand this principle, given their various lawsuits against season-ticket holders who run into financial trouble, but it's not like they have to deal with home playoff games anyway. A friend of ours and her husband were long-time season-ticket holders. He died in 2014 or 2015. The team refused to let her out of her season ticket and said either she paid in full for both seats or she'd face legal action.)
My prediction for this year's Super Bowl will a revenge of Super Bowl LIV -- Niners will avenge their last Super Bowl appearance and beat the Chiefs in Super Bowl LVII.
Most QB changes I've seen in one game
Quote from: jgb191 on January 29, 2023, 01:25:29 AM
My prediction for this year's Super Bowl will a revenge of Super Bowl LIV -- Niners will avenge their last Super Bowl appearance and beat the Chiefs in Super Bowl LVII.
The Eagles beat the 49ers in a score of 31-7! I was expecting a close game between the two teams...
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 29, 2023, 06:11:37 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 29, 2023, 01:25:29 AM
My prediction for this year's Super Bowl will a revenge of Super Bowl LIV -- Niners will avenge their last Super Bowl appearance and beat the Chiefs in Super Bowl LVII.
The Eagles beat the 49ers in a score of 31-7! I was expecting a close game between the two teams...
What other result could there have been when suddenly you have no QB?
When your star Running Back is on the QB depth chart (Christian McCaffrey) and is a legitimate possibility of playing, it won't end well. And for SF it didn't.
I can't think of a team that went from Super Bowl to dysfunction and back to the Super Bowl faster than the Eagles. Also, not to take credit away, but I can't think of a team that faced a less resistant playoff path to the Super Bowl. They played a marginally above average Giants team and a team that literally could not throw a pass in the second half. But that's why getting the 1 seed is so important.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2023, 07:05:57 PM
I can't think of a team that went from Super Bowl to dysfunction and back to the Super Bowl faster than the Eagles. Also, not to take credit away, but I can't think of a team that faced a less resistant playoff path to the Super Bowl. They played a marginally above average Giants team and a team that literally could not throw a pass in the second half. But that's why getting the 1 seed is so important.
Maybe it's the jilted Cowboy fan in me, but I think had the Eagles played the 49ers of last week, they would have lost.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2023, 07:05:57 PM
I can't think of a team that went from Super Bowl to dysfunction and back to the Super Bowl faster than the Eagles.
Interestingly, the Bengals and Eagles were both laughingstocks just two years ago. The Bengals lost Burrow to injury, and Wentz completely tanked. Both teams finished with just 4 wins and a tie - against each other! - to finish 4-11-1. There were major questions about Zac Taylor, and the season ended with an extremely low point for the Eagles (and the NFL) as they were the only team eliminated in the terrible NFC East and actively tanked in the season finale to avoid sending the 6-10 Giants to the playoffs. What a difference two years makes.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2023, 07:05:57 PM
Also, not to take credit away, but I can't think of a team that faced a less resistant playoff path to the Super Bowl. They played a marginally above average Giants team and a team that literally could not throw a pass in the second half. But that's why getting the 1 seed is so important.
I certainly can't think of an example where the score in both games was so lopsided. There were some Pats seasons where they didn't face a great opponent until the Super Bowl - ironically including the 2017 season, where they met the Eagles, but they still had to sweat it out against a surging Jags team. And yet, this year's Eagles don't seem like an untested team because of their relative struggles in December. I've downplayed the bye week in the past, but it was absolutely key for this Eagles team.
(Also, in hindsight, the 49ers really should have had the #1 seed. They just needed to win one of three against the Falcons, Bears, or Broncos. It seems almost impossible that they went 0-3 against those teams.)
The Chiefs are going to the Super Bowl after beating the Bengals by a score of 23-20...
Who dey? Dey staying home.
So, it is the Chiefs who will advance from the AFC.
I didn't think Mahomes would fall to 0-4 against Burrow, didn't think Burrow would start his playoff career 6-0 against the AFC, didn't think the Chiefs would fall to 2-3 in AFCCG's under Mahomes. I guess all that is to say that I don't have a take other than... I'm not surprised. And very glad I didn't have a real rooting interest. Not quite Bills-Chiefs level of heartbreak for the Bengals, but it's up there... and there will be a lot of scrutiny of the refs following this one.
Refs handed that game to the Chiefs on a silver platter. The last late hit was probably the right call, but there were a lot of things that raised some eyebrows. The lack of an intentional grounding call on Mahomes on that second-to-last play when the same thing was a foul on the other side of the field, for starters.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 29, 2023, 10:11:36 PM
Who dey? Dey staying home.
Yes, they are. Patrick Mahomes was due to win one over Cincinnati and Joe Burrow. Could this be the 2020's version of Tom Brady-Peyton Manning? Oh well, start to prepare for next season after a bit of decompression time.
Hopefully, Super Bowl LVII will be a good game to watch. The top teams from each conference are in--one easily, the other having to work harder for it.
As an aside, the mayor of Cincinnati is kind of idiotic, saying that there should be a paternity test to see if Joe Burrow is Patrick Mahomes father--a weak-assed attempt at saying "Who's your Daddy?". Sometimes it is better for politicians to just keep their mouths shut about matters they are not experts at. Nothing like stirring a pot that did not need to be stirred.
Apparently, officiating at the NFL level seems to be getting a bit worse every year based on what I am reading in these posts as I did not watch the game but would check my phone for score updates.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 29, 2023, 09:36:26 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2023, 07:05:57 PM
I can't think of a team that went from Super Bowl to dysfunction and back to the Super Bowl faster than the Eagles. Also, not to take credit away, but I can't think of a team that faced a less resistant playoff path to the Super Bowl. They played a marginally above average Giants team and a team that literally could not throw a pass in the second half. But that's why getting the 1 seed is so important.
Maybe it's the jilted Cowboy fan in me, but I think had the Eagles played the 49ers of last week, they would have lost.
A lot of people have been dismissing the Eagles like this throughout the season. It started with many people saying the Eagles had an easy schedule, which was based on how the teams finished in 2021. After everything was settled in 2022, Eagles had a fairly moderate schedule; certainly not an easy one, especially when you consider the entire Division which was 6 of their games made it to the playoffs.
The Giants won their Wild Card weekend game. The next weekend, they're "marginally above average". Being that they're playing in a weekend that 75% of the teams have already packed up for the year, that seems to be "above average" in most books.
If the Eagles played the 49ers of last week, then that also means the 49ers wouldn't have played the Cowboys of that week either. Good teams beat their opponents no matter who is playing.
The 49ers had some tough QB luck recently, which rarely pans out well entering the playoffs. For a recent example, the Eagles of 2017 lost their starting quarterback in week 14 of that season, had to go into the playoffs with their backup QB, and, oh, wait, yeah, nevermind.
Quote from: amroad17 on January 29, 2023, 10:50:13 PM
Apparently, officiating at the NFL level seems to be getting a bit worse every year based on what I am reading in these posts as I did not watch the game but would check my phone for score updates.
Overall, I wouldn't say so. But with the networks providing more and more cameras at each game, and the ease of commenting on social media, any possible error can instantly get blown out of proportion. The replays often show how many calls the refs get right, but those are going to be quickly forgotten, because they were correct.
^ Just like with the media, if it doesn't fit the narrative it is quickly dismissed.
Congratulations on the Eagles making the Super Bowl with the assumption that you are an Eagles fan. :thumbsup: I also believe that Jalen Hurts should be the NFL MVP.
Armchair referees everywhere. If the only times you watch football are the playoffs and Super Bowl, fine, I don't care, but don't go nuts over rules you don't understand and get #NFLRigged trending on Twitter because the team you've been rooting for for 8 days didn't win. The complaining over officiating gets wild at this time every year. If the Chiefs win the Super Bowl it's going to get even worse. Remember when Tee Higgins nearly tore off Jalen Ramsey's helmet, not drawing a flag, en route to a touchdown, and the narrative after the game was still that the refs handed the Rams the win?
Again, emotion-based more than football-based. Back in week 15 were two of the three most blatant and impactful referee mistakes I've ever seen. Who cared? Nobody, because it wasn't the Chiefs, but rather the Colts and Raiders that benefited.
Intentional grounding on Mahomes? Like, the one where Kelce was standing there?
Hold on the Mahomes run? Maybe. But it's not easy for the refs to see that, and holds are missed both ways all the time.
The late hit is not even worth addressing because anyone who thinks that wasn't a penalty is just deluding themselves.
If the Bengals won and the same calls went the Bengals way, nobody would be talking about officiating at all. And everyone knows that, but it doesn't stop them from whining anyway.
Once a football game is over, it is over--no matter if there were bad officiating calls involved. Teams can complain to the media about it, however, it will not change the outcome. It's not like the NBA, where if one team lodges a protest and it is upheld, the game re-starts from the point of the protest. The NFL has no such protest protocol system.
Quote from: amroad17 on January 29, 2023, 11:42:18 PM
Once a football game is over, it is over--no matter if there were bad officiating calls involved. Teams can complain to the media about it, however, it will not change the outcome. It's not like the NBA, where if one team lodges a protest and it is upheld, the game re-starts from the point of the protest. The NFL has no such protest protocol system.
I don't think that the NBA has ever done that before.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 29, 2023, 06:12:24 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 29, 2023, 06:11:37 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 29, 2023, 01:25:29 AM
My prediction for this year's Super Bowl will a revenge of Super Bowl LIV -- Niners will avenge their last Super Bowl appearance and beat the Chiefs in Super Bowl LVII.
The Eagles beat the 49ers in a score of 31-7! I was expecting a close game between the two teams...
What other result could there have been when suddenly you have no QB?
Nailed it! When you have Jalen Hurts vs a fourth (4th) string QB, it doesn't take a pro-sports analyst to figure out why the Eagles won. Speaking of.....has it ever happened before? A fourth (4th) string QB playing a playoff game? I know from personal experience that a third (3rd) string QB has.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 30, 2023, 12:16:39 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 29, 2023, 11:42:18 PM
Once a football game is over, it is over--no matter if there were bad officiating calls involved. Teams can complain to the media about it, however, it will not change the outcome. It's not like the NBA, where if one team lodges a protest and it is upheld, the game re-starts from the point of the protest. The NFL has no such protest protocol system.
I don't think that the NBA has ever done that before.
Yes, there have been 35 protests in NBA-ABA history. 8 games have been overturned and were replayed from the point of the protest (6 NBA games and 2 ABA games). The last two NBA protested games were played in 2008 and 1983. Two of the games resulted in the protest team winning the replayed games after losing the original game. One can find this on NBA Hoops Online. There is also a more detailed explanation of each instance on Reddit. I googled "NBA protested games".
I don't think the games were rigged, or even that the refs were deliberately biased, but those were two of the worst-officiated playoff games I can remember. They need to be better.
Quote from: amroad17 on January 30, 2023, 12:49:40 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 30, 2023, 12:16:39 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 29, 2023, 11:42:18 PM
Once a football game is over, it is over--no matter if there were bad officiating calls involved. Teams can complain to the media about it, however, it will not change the outcome. It's not like the NBA, where if one team lodges a protest and it is upheld, the game re-starts from the point of the protest. The NFL has no such protest protocol system.
I don't think that the NBA has ever done that before.
Yes, there have been 35 protests in NBA-ABA history. 8 games have been overturned and were replayed from the point of the protest (6 NBA games and 2 ABA games). The last two NBA protested games were played in 2008 and 1983. Two of the games resulted in the protest team winning the replayed games after losing the original game. One can find this on NBA Hoops Online. There is also a more detailed explanation of each instance on Reddit. I googled "NBA protested games".
So I didn't know this either, but this also in a way disproves that officiating is getting worse. If anything, these protested games from 15 & 40 years ago, the most recent, show that officiating was worse in the past.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 30, 2023, 07:16:33 AM
I don't think the games were rigged, or even that the refs were deliberately biased, but those were two of the worst-officiated playoff games I can remember. They need to be better.
This has been said about nearly every game this year. Yet, we've had games in the past which lead to rule changes. I don't see that happening with what happened in the playoffs here. A ball ruled a catch that may have not been fully controlled? We have seen that for decades. A late hit out of bounds? The players know the QBs will be protected. Intentional grounding? Many people have no clue what the definition of it is, although it's a bit subjective as to who "is in the area."
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 30, 2023, 07:48:40 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 30, 2023, 12:49:40 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 30, 2023, 12:16:39 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 29, 2023, 11:42:18 PM
Once a football game is over, it is over--no matter if there were bad officiating calls involved. Teams can complain to the media about it, however, it will not change the outcome. It's not like the NBA, where if one team lodges a protest and it is upheld, the game re-starts from the point of the protest. The NFL has no such protest protocol system.
I don't think that the NBA has ever done that before.
Yes, there have been 35 protests in NBA-ABA history. 8 games have been overturned and were replayed from the point of the protest (6 NBA games and 2 ABA games). The last two NBA protested games were played in 2008 and 1983. Two of the games resulted in the protest team winning the replayed games after losing the original game. One can find this on NBA Hoops Online. There is also a more detailed explanation of each instance on Reddit. I googled "NBA protested games".
So I didn't know this either, but this also in a way disproves that officiating is getting worse. If anything, these protested games from 15 & 40 years ago, the most recent, show that officiating was worse in the past.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 30, 2023, 07:16:33 AM
I don't think the games were rigged, or even that the refs were deliberately biased, but those were two of the worst-officiated playoff games I can remember. They need to be better.
This has been said about nearly every game this year. Yet, we've had games in the past which lead to rule changes. I don't see that happening with what happened in the playoffs here. A ball ruled a catch that may have not been fully controlled? We have seen that for decades. A late hit out of bounds? The players know the QBs will be protected. Intentional grounding? Many people have no clue what the definition of it is, although it's a bit subjective as to who "is in the area."
As always, I will say the same thing. This was not the worst officiated game in the history of the NFL, nor was it the best. It was pretty average. Intentional grounding, he through it at the feet of an ineligible receiver, you will get called for that all the time. Late hit out of bounds; if you push the face of the NFL when he is standing on the white and he hits the bench, it doesn't matter how soft or hard you touch him, you will get that flag every single time. You can argue whether or not they were ticky tack calls, but the league is consistent with those rules. There were several defensive holding calls in both games that were spot on.
I can't stand hearing people say "they (the officials) need to be better" or "they need to be accountable". There is no group of humans on a field that's more accountable. The players make mistakes, throw interceptions, fumble the ball and they just go back in and play the next down. When the officials make a mistake they are downgraded and about five different league officials and the supervisor of officials all replay that play ad nauseum to the point of exhaustion. The players have one reporter bring up their interception and they act like a baby and don't answer the question. The officials can't do that. They have to take the berating and asked why they are stupid enough to call what they called, and some mistakes cause loss of games or termination. The players and coaches can act like complete animals on the field when something slightly doesn't go their way and everything is fine, but the official has to remain emotionless and stoic even though you know they want to punch the daylights out of the coach or player yelling at them. Then the coach or player come back and say, "I was just emotional", like the guy they were yelling at that actually remained calm doesn't have emotions, but he is grown up enough to keep his emotions in check.
In conclusion, officials have to be accountable of every mistake they make, have to show zero emotion (like laugh or smile because God forbid it can be misconstrued that it looks like they are happy one team is winning, and the other team is losing) run all game (because remember, offensive players get to sit on the bench and jack around when their team is on defense, do the officials get that?), keep up with players half or 3/4 their age, make split second decisions using their rules knowledge and experience, know that every mistake will be extra scrutinized (and for some for the rest of their lives) while the players and coaches can make mistakes right and left and no craps are given (or they just blame it on the officials) and in the end always keep their cool and defuse the situation when things go awry but yet "they have to do better"? Seems like the way these punks act, they don't deserve the level of officiating they get.
I tend to pay more attention to the yardage lost as a result of penalties, rather than any implications they have on the game.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 30, 2023, 09:07:03 AM
In conclusion, officials have to be accountable of every mistake they make, have to show zero emotion (like laugh or smile because God forbid it can be misconstrued that it looks like they are happy one team is winning, and the other team is losing) run all game (because remember, offensive players get to sit on the bench and jack around when their team is on defense, do the officials get that?), keep up with players half or 3/4 their age, make split second decisions using their rules knowledge and experience, know that every mistake will be extra scrutinized (and for some for the rest of their lives) while the players and coaches can make mistakes right and left and no craps are given (or they just blame it on the officials) and in the end always keep their cool and defuse the situation when things go awry but yet "they have to do better"? Seems like the way these punks act, they don't deserve the level of officiating they get.
Well said!
Also: Players/coaches/fans having no problem when the same "injustice" is imposed on the opposing team.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 30, 2023, 10:39:33 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 30, 2023, 09:07:03 AM
In conclusion, officials have to be accountable of every mistake they make, have to show zero emotion (like laugh or smile because God forbid it can be misconstrued that it looks like they are happy one team is winning, and the other team is losing) run all game (because remember, offensive players get to sit on the bench and jack around when their team is on defense, do the officials get that?), keep up with players half or 3/4 their age, make split second decisions using their rules knowledge and experience, know that every mistake will be extra scrutinized (and for some for the rest of their lives) while the players and coaches can make mistakes right and left and no craps are given (or they just blame it on the officials) and in the end always keep their cool and defuse the situation when things go awry but yet "they have to do better"? Seems like the way these punks act, they don't deserve the level of officiating they get.
Well said!
Also: Players/coaches/fans having no problem when the same "injustice" is imposed on the opposing team.
Yes, another part of my sermon: your receiver can't make a catch because there was contact by the defensive back but no flag thrown "What are you looking at ref? Thats the worst call ever!" Later in the game, your corner does the exact same thing and again, there is no flag, "that's a good no call."
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 30, 2023, 10:59:20 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 30, 2023, 10:39:33 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 30, 2023, 09:07:03 AM
In conclusion, officials have to be accountable of every mistake they make, have to show zero emotion (like laugh or smile because God forbid it can be misconstrued that it looks like they are happy one team is winning, and the other team is losing) run all game (because remember, offensive players get to sit on the bench and jack around when their team is on defense, do the officials get that?), keep up with players half or 3/4 their age, make split second decisions using their rules knowledge and experience, know that every mistake will be extra scrutinized (and for some for the rest of their lives) while the players and coaches can make mistakes right and left and no craps are given (or they just blame it on the officials) and in the end always keep their cool and defuse the situation when things go awry but yet "they have to do better"? Seems like the way these punks act, they don't deserve the level of officiating they get.
Well said!
Also: Players/coaches/fans having no problem when the same "injustice" is imposed on the opposing team.
Yes, another part of my sermon: your receiver can't make a catch because there was contact by the defensive back but no flag thrown "What are you looking at ref? Thats the worst call ever!" Later in the game, your corner does the exact same thing and again, there is no flag, "that's a good no call."
Echoing wanderer... well said.
I'll add:
"There's too many calls & They're wussifying (and other terms) the game. Let them play"
Then in their next breath...
"The refs are horrible! Didn't they see that penalty? Why didn't they call it? These games are rigged!"
I didn't catch the second half of the game, and it was tough to find clips of these #NFLRigged calls (hmm, almost as if not posting the clip denies people the chance to form their own opinion . . . ), but from what I have seen, there was not a single missed/bad call that was not extremely subjective. The intentional grounding on Burrow was much more of an intentional grounding than the one Mahomes was not called for. The "late hit" on Burrow was not nearly as obvious as the one on Mahomes. The Chiefs' 5th down is ridiculously overblown because the play was going to be stopped regardless of the outcome. If you think a first down or touchdown on that play would've stood, you're crazy. And Joe Thomas, who might know a thing or two about holding, said today that there was no holding on the Mahomes run.
Of course, it doesn't matter because apparently whenever the Chiefs win it's always because of the refs no matter what.
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2023, 05:22:46 PM
Of course, it doesn't matter because apparently whenever the Chiefs win it's always because of the refs no matter what.
The Chiefs are getting into that Belichick/Brady Patriots territory that people are just sick of seeing them win, so it's always someone else's fault that they're winning.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 30, 2023, 05:45:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2023, 05:22:46 PM
Of course, it doesn't matter because apparently whenever the Chiefs win it's always because of the refs no matter what.
The Chiefs are getting into that Belichick/Brady Patriots territory that people are just sick of seeing them win, so it's always someone else's fault that they're winning.
Andy Reid has always been a very good coach, especially during the regular season and early in the playoffs. It was the Championship game and Superbowl where he always had issues, until recently.
At least KC isn't experiencing the cheating scandals that minorly tainted the Pat's wins.
So it'll be Andy Reid's former team vs. his current team...and also, one of the Kelce brothers will win his second ring after all is said and done. These two storylines will figure to be major ones in the two weeks leading up to the game itself.
Definitely an interesting game coming up, with Andy Reid facing his old team, the Kelce brothers facing each other, and two passionate fan bases clashing. Another big storyline is the impact of Mahomes's ankle injury and Hurts's shoulder.
YES!! We got him....again! :clap:
https://www.nfl.com/news/texans-hire-49ers-dc-demeco-ryans-as-their-next-head-coach
Welcome back home to Houston DeMeco Ryans! Hopefully this will re-energize the team. As a linebacker playing for my Texans, he was the leader, the team captain, the heart/soul of the roster.
In other coaching news, Miami hired Nick Fangio as their new DC, Sean Payton is the new HC of Denver, and Frank Reich is going to Charlotte to coach the Carolina Panthers.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 31, 2023, 06:07:10 PM
Miami hired Nick Fangio as their new DC
*Vic. As much as I wish it was official, it is not.
My mom is a longtime Chiefs fan, so I'm pleased they're going to the Super Bowl.
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
suuuuuure
Quote from: thspfc on January 30, 2023, 05:22:46 PM
I didn't catch the second half of the game, and it was tough to find clips of these #NFLRigged calls (hmm, almost as if not posting the clip denies people the chance to form their own opinion . . . ), but from what I have seen, there was not a single missed/bad call that was not extremely subjective. The intentional grounding on Burrow was much more of an intentional grounding than the one Mahomes was not called for. The "late hit" on Burrow was not nearly as obvious as the one on Mahomes. The Chiefs' 5th down is ridiculously overblown because the play was going to be stopped regardless of the outcome. If you think a first down or touchdown on that play would've stood, you're crazy. And Joe Thomas, who might know a thing or two about holding, said today that there was no holding on the Mahomes run.
Of course, it doesn't matter because apparently whenever the Chiefs win it's always because of the refs no matter what.
The 3rd down play that was shut down that everyone was thinking was a do-over; while the play was ending, the Line Judge or Down Judge (I can't remember what half the game was in when the play happened, so I don't remember if they were in first half or second half mechanics) was running in to Ron Torbert killing the clock. I thought there was a penalty on the play watching it live (like a pre-snap penalty false start or illegal shift reverting to a false start). So, to all the people saying they gave the Chiefs a do-over just because, no, they legitimately were killing the play, just no one knew they were killing it until the play was almost over.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Just caught the news on ESPN...
If anything, at least he played to age 45, which is what his goal was anyway. And chances are, we'll never see another QB of Brady's caliber. Remind me not to watch Fox next season if he's in the booth, since I've grown tired of him as the years go by.
(That Manningcast is beginning to look good now...)
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Let's check back in in a month.
Quote from: Henry on February 01, 2023, 10:07:15 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Just caught the news on ESPN...
If anything, at least he played to age 45, which is what his goal was anyway. And chances are, we'll never see another QB of Brady's caliber. Remind me not to watch Fox next season if he's in the booth, since I've grown tired of him as the years go by.
Well, FOX sure has an interesting conundrum on their hands now. They already promised the #1 analyst role to Brady when they handed him that thick contract, but Greg Olsen has, by most accounts, done a nice job along with Kevin Burkhardt this year taking over as the FOX A-team from Buck/Aikman. (It seems like the general internet consensus in recent weeks is that Olsen was much preferred over Romo on playoff coverage, who seems to have lost his touch and is grunting and "I DON'T KNOW JIMMM"ing his way thru games now.) Even if Olsen gets sent back to the B-team again next year, at least he gets to call a Superbowl first with FOX having their turn in the rotation this year.
Editted to add: With a surprising amount of the Twitter reaction this morning focusing on what this means for Olsen, I saw one tweet suggesting a hypothetical of Olsen moving to NBC and serving as Collinsworth's heir apparent in the same way that Tirico did for Michaels for several years until finally taking over this past season.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 01, 2023, 10:09:51 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Let's check back in in a month.
Although this announcement seems more genuine, I can't disagree. I even bought some of the retirement magazines that came out after last year's announcement.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 02, 2023, 09:17:20 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 01, 2023, 10:09:51 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Let's check back in in a month.
Although this announcement seems more genuine, I can't disagree. I even bought some of the retirement magazines that came out after last year's announcement.
Interesting to note, after listening to the recording he made five times, I couldn't help but notice he said retiring. He never said, "retiring from football" or "the NFL". I know that's nitpicky, but he's corny enough to come back in a month and say, "I said I was retiring...I never said I was retiring from football...I was retiring from badminton." or something as cringy.
At least it's not baseball, where "retire" simply means you've been put out.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
If his (ex) wife had just hung on for a couple of more years, she wouldn't have been able to use the 'he's never home!' excuse for leaving him. It just goes to show that however 'hot' and 'desirable' a guy is, be worried if she ever starts taking Jiu Jitsu lessons.
:poke:
Mike
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 02, 2023, 09:28:28 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 02, 2023, 09:17:20 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 01, 2023, 10:09:51 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 01, 2023, 08:39:50 AM
Tom Brady retires again, for good.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/01/tom-brady-announces-his-retirement-for-good/amp/
Let's check back in in a month.
Although this announcement seems more genuine, I can't disagree. I even bought some of the retirement magazines that came out after last year's announcement.
Interesting to note, after listening to the recording he made five times, I couldn't help but notice he said retiring. He never said, "retiring from football" or "the NFL". I know that's nitpicky, but he's corny enough to come back in a month and say, "I said I was retiring...I never said I was retiring from football...I was retiring from badminton." or something as cringy.
We'll see when training camp begins next summer.
The NBA has gone through this as well (in fact, that's where it originated), with Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson coming out of extended retirements. Hell, Magic's return to the Lakers was basically a warmup act for Kobe Bryant's arrival, so to speak. (It would've been nice to see them on the floor together, but alas, I guess it was never meant to be.)
30 years ago, you'd have never thought Magic would outlive Kobe. Life is weird.
I should try and be fair and give Brady a chance as a broadcaster, but I don't think I'll be able to let go of my dislike of him to do that. I am going to latch onto the first annoying thing out of his mouth next season and write him off forever.
I have a prejudice against douchebags, what can I say.
I didn't like Troy Aikman as Cowboy. I did like him as a broadcaster. We'll have to see how Brady does as a broadcaster.
Why does everyone care so much about broadcast teams? A few of them are great, most are average, and very few are bad. The only bad ones I've ever heard do college football.
Quote from: thspfc on February 02, 2023, 03:41:01 PM
Why does everyone care so much about broadcast teams?
Speaking for myself here and not everyone, most grew up during a time when a) play by play personnel were legitimate journalists and were as much a part of your team as the players were and B) wouldn't change for decades. I grew up listening to Harry Carray and Steve Stone. I can today just hear Steve Stone's voice on a TV I am not even watching and decades of memories come flooding to me. I grew up with Pat Summerall and John Madden. Their voices were as much a part of the game I was watching as the game itself, maybe more. I can still hear Pat Summerall telling me 60 minutes is up next in my head when I watch the end of the late afternoon game on CBS (likewise, even though it's been nearly 30 years that CBS has had the AFC, I still think it's weird). The broadcast team used to mean a lot. I don't know if it means as much as it used to, but I still have my favorites of the current ones.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 03, 2023, 10:30:23 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 02, 2023, 03:41:01 PM
Why does everyone care so much about broadcast teams?
Speaking for myself here and not everyone, most grew up during a time when a) play by play personnel were legitimate journalists and were as much a part of your team as the players were and B) wouldn't change for decades. I grew up listening to Harry Carray and Steve Stone. I can today just hear Steve Stone's voice on a TV I am not even watching and decades of memories come flooding to me. I grew up with Pat Summerall and John Madden. Their voices were as much a part of the game I was watching as the game itself, maybe more. I can still hear Pat Summerall telling me 60 minutes is up next in my head when I watch the end of the late afternoon game on CBS (likewise, even though it's been nearly 30 years that CBS has had the AFC, I still think it's weird). The broadcast team used to mean a lot. I don't know if it means as much as it used to, but I still have my favorites of the current ones.
In 30 years today's broadcast teams are going to be just as nostalgic. That's how it works.
Quote from: webny99 on January 22, 2023, 07:02:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 09, 2022, 10:20:09 AM
No Bills commentary from me until February if I can help it
Well, I had a meltdown after the Vikings game, but otherwise I intend to stick to my word here and save my commentary for, well, February. ... I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.
I apologize in advance for how long this post is. I realized as I went that I had quite a bit to say since I tried not to chirp about the Bills all year, so this turned into sort of a short story about their season. Anyways...
The 2022 Buffalo Bills are, to me, an important lesson in the weight of expectations. There was absolutely an emotional aspect to them being crowned Super Bowl favorites after the spectacular divisional loss last year, widely regarded as one of the greatest games in NFL history, yet an unfathomable blow for the losing franchise.
The follow up campaign started out in glamorous and fulfilling fashion. There was the beatdown over the defending Super Bowl champion, the 40-burger laid on the AFC's reigning #1 seed, the 17-point comeback against the Ravens, and the laugher against the Steelers, the most lopsided loss in the Mike Tomlin era. Then adversity struck, from one angle after another. There was the Ken Dorsey meltdown in an ugly loss to the Dolphins, the loss to the Zach Wilson Jets, and in early November, the loss to the Vikings in another heartbreaker dubbed "game of the year" . And that was just on the field. Dawson Knox tragically lost his brother, and back to back snowstorms forced two games in Detroit in a span of five days. The second, on Thanksgiving, was a turning point, when the Bills lost Von Miller, their "closer" , for the season, and from then on became the very definition of a team "finding a way to win" . There was the late game-winning drive against the Lions, a trio of grind-it-out divisional wins including a winter classic against Miami, and eventually a third straight division title, sealed up in less-than-impressive fashion against the Bears.
Then in the highly anticipated showdown against the Bengals, the unthinkable occurred when safety Damar Hamlin went into cardiac arrest on the field. The game was cancelled while players, staff and fans alike anxiously awaited an update, which finally came late in the week, and it was a fortunate one as Hamlin had regained consciousness and was making progress on what would be a long road to recovery. However, the emotions of the unprecedented situation carried over to the season finale a week later, encapsulated by a "storybook" kickoff return touchdown on the very first play. Lost in the drama of a great sports moment was the fact that the Bills didn't play very well. They won by 12, but looked very much the Patriots' equal aside from the two kickoff returns. But "a win is a win" , and they had ended the Patriots' season and kept their winning streak alive.
The following week was perhaps even more concerning. Despite Miami starting their third string QB, Josh Allen's turnovers continued, the Dolphins scored on defense, and put a few drives together to keep it dangerously close. But amidst a sea of clock management issues for the Dolphins, the Bills held on for dear life and escaped with a win, ending the Dolphins' season, and extending their winning streak to eight games. Up next: the mighty Bengals in a rematch of the cancelled game. It was the "game we never got to see" ; the "game of the week" ; "impossible to pick" .
Impossible to pick indeed. In hindsight, the two sides of the coin are clear: On one side is the fact that the Bills hadn't lost in over two months, that their upside was so high because they were winning
without playing very well, that they had become adept at "finding a way" despite tremendous adversity, that there was nothing but themselves to stop them from riding this roller coaster all the way to the Super Bowl.
On the other side, though, is the fact that they hadn't looked like a great or even very good team in almost three months, that they hadn't had a dominant performance since early October, that winning a litany of close games had covered up for their mediocrity, that they would be without two of their best players on defense, that these underlying issues would be exposed by a better opponent.
And as it turned out, not just a better opponent, but also an angry, locked-in, us-against-the-world opponent, fueled by being disrespected by the NFL, disregarded by NFL media, and most of all, excluded from the first-ever neutral-site championship game, a glamourous storyline that completely overlooked the present, one that meant absolutely nothing if they were better than the Bills for a mere three hours on a snowy January afternoon.
Unfortunately for the Bills, they could not afford to overlook anything against the Bengals if they hoped to continue their journey to Atlanta and beyond. That became a stunning reality within minutes of kickoff: they were down 14-0 almost immediately, outgained 165 yards to 8 in the first quarter, completely overwhelmed on both lines, and completely outschemed and confused by both Bengals coordinators. On the scoreboard, it was a situation they hadn't been in since September in Baltimore - but that might as well have been centuries ago. Now, everything was on the line, and the Bills — seemingly all of them — had been stunned into a malaise. As Burrow calmly hit open recievers, the snow on the ground hampered the Bills' already limited pass rush, and the snow in the air made the scene even more surreal. The Bills regained composure to pull within one score, only to give up another touchdown — fortuitously called back upon review — their ensuing drive stalled past midfield, and settling for a 10-point deficit at halftime felt like a win. A field goal drive after the half had the crowd back into the game — just one stop here, and they would have a game. Instead, Burrow was surgical, leading the Bengals on a touchdown drive that sucked away all of that energy and momentum.
Down 17 late, the Bills opted to go for a 4th down in easy field goal range instead of cutting the deficit to two scores. It was an aggressive call, but an understandable one. The result, though, was deflating. The Bengals got the stop, and it felt like that was when the Bills gave up. The weight of an extremely long and challenging season had become too much, the hope of Super Bowl glory had come crashing down in less than three hours before the eyes of thousands of fans who, for the first time in almost two seasons, started heading to the exits before the game was over.
Players were blunt in the aftermath: They just didn't have it. They lacked energy. They never really got into the game. For the second straight year, "disappointing" didn't feel strong enough to describe the result. And yet, what I found most interesting was the juxtaposition with last year. Last year's game was an absolute thriller. Watching two QB's at the peak of their powers put up 25 points in the final two minutes was nothing short of unbelievable. And it was almost impossible to take in what happened after the go-ahead touchdown with 13 seconds left. From the absolute peak of the mountaintop — the franchise high water mark of the century - to one of the most painful, unspeakable, gut-wrenching losses imaginable. Those 13 seconds quite literally
lived in Bills' fans heads for weeks, even months — and that's to say nothing of the players and coaches.
This year's loss couldn't have been more different. There was no real drama, no swinging pendulum of win probability, no spectacular fourth quarter plays, no coverage breakdowns or any one player or coach to assign credit or blame for the result — just wire to wire domination by a mentally and physically superior team and a better coaching staff. In many ways, this seemed like a more surprising result, but a closer analysis would have pointed to underlying potential for a major letdown. The Bills, in one of the most challenging regular seasons I can remember, had found a way to win 13 games to get to this point and just didn't have the fortitude or the talent to show up one more time against a great opponent when it mattered most. Painful, yes. Deflating, absolutely. But not agonizing, nor gut-wrenching, nor unspeakable. This time around, the message is clear, and it's for the front office as much as the players: You weren't good enough when it mattered, so learn from it and go get better this offseason. And that's a thousand times easier to bear than those 13 seconds.
Alright, I couldn't resist any longer. I'm diving in headfirst here. Trust me that this is the concise version...
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.
I'm not sure what you mean by emotion-based. To me, the mocking of the Cowboys has to do with two things: reputation for losing in the playoffs, and predictability of when and how it will occur. The Cowboys losing in the first two rounds of the playoffs, usually in high-profile and dramatic fashion, has been a regular occurrence for almost 30 years at this point.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
Total record over the last 10 seasons ... Division titles ... Playoff berths ... Playoff record
I don't understand this comparison. A decade ago, the Bills were amidst the longest playoff drought in professional sports. Since then, they've made the playoffs in 5 of 6 seasons. But if you want to cherry-pick, look at five years. Advantage Bills in all four categories. Now look at 20 years. The Bills have as many playoff wins as the Cowboys (4) despite a much worse winning percentage AND missing the playoffs for the first 14 years. That is a pretty stunning indictment of the Cowboys franchise. But I wonder who is going to be more heavily criticized for being good and then losing in the playoffs...
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? :eyebrow: They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is.
I've underlined the key word here: the Cowboys extended their
own record this season for most playoff appearances without a championship appearance. And it extends far beyond one coach or one quarterback... it's an organizational thing at this point.
Meanwhile, the Bills were irrelevant for decades and are still relatively new on the playoff scene. Yes, they've lost 4 years in a row: they've also made it to the playoffs 4 years in a row which is more than can be said of any Cowboys team since the "˜90's. Their playoff losing streak hasn't extended through multiple regimes, and is not even close to reaching the Cowboys level of predictability. And yes, Buffalo was dominated by Cincinnati and is absolutely getting criticized (including by me — see post above). But it's more disappointment than mockery, and that's precisely because it was a beatdown and there was no dramatic or comedic ending. Five straight Cowboys playoff losses have been within one score at the end and they've been right there with a chance to win but unable to close it out. The last two years in particular have been a brutal comedy of errors at the end. There is absolutely an organizational aspect to that, and a psychological aspect if you ask me. At least the Bills have mixed it up the last few years with a championship run, two lopsided losses, and two heartbreakers.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.
Well, the Bills and Cowboys are about as different as possible as far as NFL franchises go. But even setting that aside, the lack of context is just glaring. The Cowboys have been the same story for the last decade plus: good enough to get to the playoffs some years, but ultimately lose when they get there. Meanwhile, the Bills have undergone a notable transformation, from irrelevant in the 2000's and most of the 2010's, to relevant in 2019-2020, to title contender now. At no point during the past 10 years have they been "basically the same" .
And miss me with the Lamar injury unless you also want to asterisk the 2022 Bengals for the same reason, right down to the 14-point swing play (which was a Lamar interception in the Bills game, by the way). The Ravens scored 3 points (+2 missed FG's) in that game despite Lamar playing for three quarters, and it still wasn't as close as Ravens-Bengals.
What are everyone's favorite and least favorite announcers? I don't have a strong preference, but many people hate specific commentators.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 05, 2023, 01:23:09 AM
What are everyone's favorite and least favorite announcers? I don't have a strong preference, but many people hate specific commentators.
My favorites are Gus Johnson and Kevin Harlan, as well as Al Michaels and Jim Nantz. As for analysts, I liked Tony Romo at one point, but I'm pleasantly surprised by Greg Olsen.
Have not been able to watch hardly any live games being abroad. But my family back home has made a point of telling me how I should be glad, as I don't have to listen to Romo and his awful takes. Doubt he'll have a job for much longer.
This weekend was the Pebble Beach Golf Pro-Am, in which several NFL players generally compete. Due to weather delays, the pro-am portion of the event was shortened from four rounds to three. Aaron Rodgers' team ended up winning.
If they only played 3/4 of some NFC Championship games, Aaron would have been a lot more successful.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2023, 08:01:51 AM
Have not been able to watch hardly any live games being abroad. But my family back home has made a point of telling me how I should be glad, as I don't have to listen to Romo and his awful takes. Doubt he'll have a job for much longer.
Romo is arguably the most popular commentator out there right now.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 06, 2023, 10:24:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2023, 08:01:51 AM
Have not been able to watch hardly any live games being abroad. But my family back home has made a point of telling me how I should be glad, as I don't have to listen to Romo and his awful takes. Doubt he'll have a job for much longer.
Romo is arguably the most popular commentator out there right now.
He's only broadcasting one game a week. How does that make the entire NFL unwatchable?
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 05, 2023, 06:01:09 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 05, 2023, 01:23:09 AM
What are everyone's favorite and least favorite announcers? I don't have a strong preference, but many people hate specific commentators.
My favorites are Gus Johnson and Kevin Harlan, as well as Al Michaels and Jim Nantz. As for analysts, I liked Tony Romo at one point, but I'm pleasantly surprised by Greg Olsen.
I also like Vern Lundqui -- er, Kevin Harlan. :D :D :D
(I swear their vocal tone is eerily similar.)
My rankings:
Nantz/Romo
Davis/Johnston
Michaels/Herbstreit
Tirico/Collinsworth
Eagle/Davis
Amin/Schlereth
Brukhardt/Olsen
Harlan/Green
Gumbel/Archuleta
Albert/Vilma
Dedes/Feeley
Buck/Aikman
Let's change the subject for a bit: We just had the first-ever revamped Pro Bowl Games, with the new events including Kick-Tac-Toe, Best Catch, Move the Chains and three flag football games with two 10-minute halves. I was unsure of what to make of the new format which may sound too much like the NBA All-Star Weekend, but I was pleasantly surprised by how good it was, especially when compared to the last few games in the old incarnation. And while Eli may not be on Peyton's level, we have to give him his props for winning the games that matter the most, because he beat Tom Brady in two Super Bowls, and now he has bragging rights over his older brother with a comeback win in the last game for the NFC. I'm hoping this new format sticks around because everyone seems to like it, especially the players.
Quote from: Henry on February 06, 2023, 05:46:10 PM
Let's change the subject for a bit: We just had the first-ever revamped Pro Bowl Games, with the new events including Kick-Tac-Toe, Best Catch, Move the Chains and three flag football games with two 10-minute halves. I was unsure of what to make of the new format which may sound too much like the NBA All-Star Weekend, but I was pleasantly surprised by how good it was, especially when compared to the last few games in the old incarnation. And while Eli may not be on Peyton's level, we have to give him his props for winning the games that matter the most, because he beat Tom Brady in two Super Bowls, and now he has bragging rights over his older brother with a comeback win in the last game for the NFC. I'm hoping this new format sticks around because everyone seems to like it, especially the players.
Can't believe that the refs managed to mess up the pro bowl as well.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 06, 2023, 06:41:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 06, 2023, 05:46:10 PM
Let's change the subject for a bit: We just had the first-ever revamped Pro Bowl Games, with the new events including Kick-Tac-Toe, Best Catch, Move the Chains and three flag football games with two 10-minute halves. I was unsure of what to make of the new format which may sound too much like the NBA All-Star Weekend, but I was pleasantly surprised by how good it was, especially when compared to the last few games in the old incarnation. And while Eli may not be on Peyton's level, we have to give him his props for winning the games that matter the most, because he beat Tom Brady in two Super Bowls, and now he has bragging rights over his older brother with a comeback win in the last game for the NFC. I'm hoping this new format sticks around because everyone seems to like it, especially the players.
Can't believe that the refs managed to mess up the pro bowl as well.
The flag football game wasn't officiated by NFL Officials. Me thinks it was officiated by a local small college chapter in the Las Vegas area. Saying the officials messed up the Pro Bowl in relation to the rest of the season is akin to buying a Chevrolet and it breaks down on you and then you buy a Honda Accord that also breaks down on you and you curse and blame Chevrolet for the last breakdown as well. They are both cars yes but made by completely different organizations. They may be officials, but they are governed by completely different factions and don't deserve to take on the sins of others as well.
It was a little interesting to see the NFL follow the other major pro sports leagues in adding a skills competition.
Best Pro Bowl fun fact: Tyler Huntley threw 2 more touchdowns at the Pro Bowl than he did in the regular season. :-D
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 08, 2023, 07:38:40 PM
It was a little interesting to see the NFL follow the other major pro sports leagues in adding a skills competition.
This isn't the first time they've had a skills competition; they've had them on and off over the years, generally not nearly as prominently featured as this one was (in the past it was little more than Saturday afternoon filler programming type stuff).
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2023, 08:44:15 PM
Best Pro Bowl fun fact: Tyler Huntley threw 2 more touchdowns at the Pro Bowl than he did in the regular season. :-D
I still think the Ravens will work things out with Lamar.
I likely won't be watching tomorrow's big game here: https://goo.gl/maps/HHu6XfFUm9haykDg7 but the thought was dancing around in my mind. OTOH, that place is on the city's far northeastern periphery, while my favorite sports bar ('The Bar') is a two or so block walk from my residence here in downtown Appleton and the weather guys are expecting it to be a very nice day.
Mike
Not going to make a specific prediction because of Mahomes' status. I think the Chiefs win if he's 100%, but if not I don't see how they can score enough against Philly's defense.
This was one of the best Super Bowls ever. The Eagles didn't lose; they were beat by the better team. They don't have to hang their head in shame for any reason.
Highly questionable call at the end. The game was not rigged. If you think it was, you didn't watch it or you're clueless about the rules. I felt that a lot of the close calls were going to Philly - the one at the end went to KC, so obviously the game must have been rigged for the Chiefs. FWIW, JuJu clearly accelerated once Bradberry withdrew his hand. That doesn't necessarily mean it was holding, but I think that's what the ref saw.
Always knew Kadarius Toney had it. I remember a couple plays of his from a Monday night game against the Bucs in 2021 that blew me away. That punt return to set up the Chiefs 5th touchdown was crazy.
Here comes an offseason of Lamar Jackson drama, Rodgers drama for the 3rd straight year, and wondering where Bryce Young and CJ Stroud will land.
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
I guess we better petition to the head of officiating to call those refs up and lock them in a room Monday and find out how that call at the end of the game was allowed to go like it did because I can assure you, if I was heading the refs, heads be rolling, bruh! Otherwise, great effort by both Philly and KC. KC obviously gets the W, but oh boy, that call at the end. Can't say that ruined it totally, but it sure ruined a fruitful moment as the clock runs to all zeros.
Goodell on the other hand? Can I say that he's become the Brian France of the NFL? I mean, the methodology behind him is out of whack at times. No wonder people boo him during Draft Week.
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 12, 2023, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
Oh, they (understandably) are. My wife hails from Delaware originally, so her social media (and to a lesser extent, mine) is currently filled with angry posts about that holding call. I think Greg Olsen nailed it with his take immediately afterward that sure maybe it was technically holding, but they should've let it go as they'd been doing all game up to that point. (Great job by Burkhardt & Olsen in their first Superbowl by the way, IMHO).
Another common point I'm seeing from some Philly fans: The Eagles seemed to be having a far bigger issue sliding around on the turf than the Chiefs, to the point of several Eagles players changing cleats early on (which Erin Andrews briefly mentioned from the sideline).
https://twitter.com/JosinaAnderson/status/1624980336932450307
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 12, 2023, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
Just so you know, there are, at least, two Eagles fans on here. Myself and Jeffandnicole.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 13, 2023, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 12, 2023, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
Just so you know, there are, at least, two Eagles fans on here. Myself and Jeffandnicole.
Probably a few more. This forum is very northeast heavy. Also, I think that the call wasn't awful but people's minds are a bit clouded because they wanted a more exciting ending, which I got. Was a bit of a ticky-tacky hold however.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 13, 2023, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 12, 2023, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
Just so you know, there are, at least, two Eagles fans on here. Myself and Jeffandnicole.
And yeah, I never want to say it was one play, one call, one anything, but man did that holding call at the end sting. Did he pull on his jersey? I mean, we see the post above, but I don't think we even saw the jersey twitch, much less it getting yanked. That was as ticky-tacky a call as one could make at that point in the game.
The Eagles gave up 38 points. 1 on a fumble return, one nearly on a punt return. We recovered on the fumble return to still have a nice halftime lead going into the second half, but fell flat just after halftime. The Eagles have given up plenty of points in the second half throughout the season due to playing a softer defense. If they didn't give up points, they gave up yards. The same thing happened here, and it cost us.
One stat I saw, which without looking further is probably true: The 35 points the Eagles scored is the most scored by a losing team in the Super Bowl.
It stings more, personally, that while we finally got our first Super Bowl victory in 2018, we are still stuck with that one. A great season that came crashing to an end in the final 30 minutes of the game.
Many people have said it, and it's true...it would've been better to lose a poorly played game than a game where a questionable penalty may have lost it for us.
Congrats Chiefs on an exciting Super Bowl win!!!!!
If Phoenix doesn't get any rain, then how did the field become so slippery?? Somebody forgot to shut off the water hose until right before the game or something?
I can take some comfort that the Super Bowl Champions KC Chiefs needed extra mins in OT to pull off a lucky win against my Texans in Week 15, which goes to show that any team can be competitive in the NFL no matter its record.
It was a great Super Bowl from start to finish. Congrats to the Chiefs; condolences to the Eagles. Patrick Mahoomes was Brady-esque. Jalen Hurts was phenomenal as well. I would be POd too if I were an Eagles fan by the late holding call, but the offending Eagle (James Bradberry) admitted it was holding. Also, Hurts's fumble recovery for a Chiefs TD in the second quarter had more to do with their loss.
I only saw two questionable calls/no calls in this game. There was a play in the first half that was clear DPI on the Eagles not called, then there was the very weak hold that got called at the end.
In the end, the Eagles had the overall better team, but the Chiefs had the more experienced head coach and QB and that made the difference.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2023, 12:48:03 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 13, 2023, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 12, 2023, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2023, 10:46:22 PM
That was an great Super Bowl until the very end. It was back and forth, had a lot of scoring, a defensive score, a comeback factor, and came down to the wire. I hate to be the millionth person to say this, but that call at the end does unfortunately ruin it as a potential all-time classic. That simply cannot happen in that spot, three days after Goodell says officiating has never been better.
The thing was before that one call, the officials did a tremendous job letting both teams play IMO. But that one holding call, man...I would be pissed if I were an Eagles fan.
Just so you know, there are, at least, two Eagles fans on here. Myself and Jeffandnicole.
And yeah, I never want to say it was one play, one call, one anything, but man did that holding call at the end sting. Did he pull on his jersey? I mean, we see the post above, but I don't think we even saw the jersey twitch, much less it getting yanked. That was as ticky-tacky a call as one could make at that point in the game.
https://i.imgur.com/QvLlDll.jpg
They didn't show this angle on the broadcast. The jersey pull is clear, and keep in mind, this is the angle the ref was looking at when he threw the flag. By the rules, it is holding, but I agree that the refs shouldn't have called something so slight after not calling any defensive holding the entire game. Maybe there had legitimately been no defensive holding committed at all before that play, but it seems unlikely. So that's what makes it a highly questionable call, but not an outright incorrect one.
As video has improved, the NFL's officiating problems have increased. There has always been a disconnect between the letter of the rule and what is customarily called for most penalties.
Roughing the passer tends to get called very closely to the letter of the rule for more established quarterbacks and much less closely for younger quarterbacks. Historically good offensive teams also get more benefit of the doubt when it comes to defensive holding and pass interference.
Replay has cleaned up the 100% black and white issues like in/out of bounds, pass/fumble, catch/no catch, but there's a lot of improvement needed.
I don't understand why face mask isn't reviewable. It's pretty black and white as to whether or not a face mask was grabbed.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
As video has improved, the NFL's officiating problems have increased.
The officiating problems haven't increased. We're just able to review the play more vividly to determine if the call was correct. Plus, officials have mere fractions of a second to about 2 seconds to see if a penalty did or did not occur, and there's 7 officials watching over 22 players. Slow-mo HD quality replays can be viewed for 30 seconds or more between plays, and further dissected after the game.
QuoteReplay has cleaned up the 100% black and white issues like in/out of bounds, pass/fumble, catch/no catch, but there's a lot of improvement needed.
Replay still doesn't fully 100% get the call correct, and the more close a call is, the more people will disagree on the ultimate decision. If fact, a great example occurred last night when an Eagle dropped a pass and KC returned it for a TD, only to be ruled no catch.
QuoteI don't understand why face mask isn't reviewable. It's pretty black and white as to whether or not a face mask was grabbed.
There's a number of penalties that could be reviewed because they're pretty clear on instant replay, such as offsides/encroachment/neutral zone infractions. I'm hesitant to go this route because there's currently a limited number of challenges to begin with, and fans already complain about the length of the game. Do we want it to go longer looking for every penalty, which again, fans complain too many are called and they just want the players to play the game?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2023, 10:01:40 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
As video has improved, the NFL's officiating problems have increased.
The officiating problems haven't increased. We're just able to review the play more vividly to determine if the call was correct. Plus, officials have mere fractions of a second to about 2 seconds to see if a penalty did or did not occur, and there's 7 officials watching over 22 players. Slow-mo HD quality replays can be viewed for 30 seconds or more between plays, and further dissected after the game.
The reason it's a big deal now and was less of a big deal when there was zero instant replay is because the NFL has intentionally watered itself down so there is extreme parity in the league. What you get is the possibility of every game coming down to a last-minute score. That business model then makes every single move in the last 2 minutes of every game highly and overly scrutinized. Remember in the pre-salary cap days when many games were decided early in the third quarter? There were probably just as many (and maybe even more) officiating gaffes as there are now. People just A) realized it didn't effect the outcome of the 40-12 beatdown currently occurring and B) delt with it and moved on with their lives. I agree, there really isn't a spike or decrease in quality officiating. They do an excellent job for what they have to deal with and the amount of time they get to make a decision. It would be like a judge getting 2 seconds to make a determination if this guy gets to go to jail or not for armed robbery.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2023, 10:01:40 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
]Replay has cleaned up the 100% black and white issues like in/out of bounds, pass/fumble, catch/no catch, but there's a lot of improvement needed.
Replay still doesn't fully 100% get the call correct, and the more close a call is, the more people will disagree on the ultimate decision. If fact, a great example occurred last night when an Eagle dropped a pass and KC returned it for a TD, only to be ruled no catch.
Agreed. The second catch that was upheld still has me scratching my head. Not that I think they got it wrong, just it looked almost identical to the catch Dalton Shultz made on the sideline at the end of the Cowboys/49ers playoff game. The biggest problem with instant replay is you slow the game down to ridiculous speeds in high definition and at that moment a whole different set of physics take place to the point no one can clearly define what a catch is anymore. I say instant replay should be full speed, maybe you get 3 looks at it and it's over, make the call. It's like a do-over, but you still have to see it in full speed.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2023, 10:01:40 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
I don't understand why face mask isn't reviewable. It's pretty black and white as to whether or not a face mask was grabbed.
There's a number of penalties that could be reviewed because they're pretty clear on instant replay, such as offsides/encroachment/neutral zone infractions. I'm hesitant to go this route because there's currently a limited number of challenges to begin with, and fans already complain about the length of the game. Do we want it to go longer looking for every penalty, which again, fans complain too many are called and they just want the players to play the game?
It's Pandora's Box at its finest. You can't review facemask exclusively or you will then have to review everything, and if you are going to review everything, let's take the officials off the field and stick them all behind HD TVs and you play a play and then you wait for them to "grade" that play, and then assess the penalty and then move forward (because there will be like 5 fouls on every play if you really want to review penalties). Basically, I am saying you review one foul, you review them all and what you will get is a game that every play has a foul on it and the games will take 17 hours to complete.
Most people don't understand at all that fouls are only and completely real time relatable, and some fouls people think are open shut actually have several key factors that have to be there for it to actually be the foul they think it is. Let's take the aforementioned facemask for example. Most people see the hand on the facemask and want the foul. If you actually read the rule book instead of regurgitating then same crap you heard this one guy say in this crowded loud bar sitting three stools over, then you would see that the hand must actually go inside an orifice (yes, I said orifice, meaning you can have a facemask penalty and all the guy did was grab the earhole), he has to grab the material of said orifice, and then actually pull the orifice, usually in a manner to make the tackle. Remember, this is a 15-yard penalty so you can't have some smoke and no fire. You better have a burning fire. In other words, it better be bad (so no hands touching faces, no accidental grasps; no, it has to be wrapped around the facemask and the player being penalized better have ben yanking on said facemask). There is all that that comes from the written version in the rule book (also read all the approved rulings as well) but there has to be an element of real time as well, because the game is played in real time. You go back and slow down the film, yes it looks like the hand brushing the helmet is much worse than it really was, but in real time, I bump my head on the shower door harder than that.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
Roughing the passer tends to get called very closely to the letter of the rule for more established quarterbacks and much less closely for younger quarterbacks.
https://www.nflpenalties.com/roughing-the-passer-by-qb.php?view=all
For this year, here are the RTP calls by quarterback:
Goff (28) - 6 RTP calls
Geno (32), Cousins (34) - 5
Brissett (30), Tannehill (34), Wilson (34) - 4
Herbert (24), Burrow (26), Mariota (29), Allen (26), Rodgers (38) - 3
Hurts (24), Trubisky (28), Garoppolo (31), Mayfield (27), Prescott (29),
Mahomes (27), Dalton (35), Wentz (30),
Brady (45), Stafford (35) - 2
Ryan (37), Carr (31), Watson (27), Lamar (26), Henne (37), D. Jones (25), Colt McCoy (36), Taysom Hill (32) - 1
Mahomes and Brady with only 2 each hurts the narrative.
The average age of starting QBs this year was about 28.5. If we add up all the ages of all the RTP calls (i.e. 28x6 for Goff + 32x5 for Geno + 34x5 for Kirk and so on,) and divide that by the total number of RTP calls (71), we get 30.8. That's just a two year gap that can easily be explained by older quarterbacks simply being less mobile, and therefore easier to sack, and therefore likely to be sacked more often, and therefore likely to get more RTP calls because there is more potential for illegal sacks.
Don't forget that that second fumble recovery for a TD that was overturned on a replay review that favored the Eagles, so the 'bad' calls went both ways and the Chiefs were the better team. BTW, how many new joints will Mahomes be getting during this off-season?
Mike
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2023, 11:38:52 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
Roughing the passer tends to get called very closely to the letter of the rule for more established quarterbacks and much less closely for younger quarterbacks.
Historically good offensive teams also get more benefit of the doubt when it comes to defensive holding and pass interference.
https://www.nflpenalties.com/roughing-the-passer-by-qb.php?view=all
For this year, here are the RTP calls by quarterback:
Goff (28) - 6 RTP calls
Geno (32), Cousins (34) - 5
Brissett (30), Tannehill (34), Wilson (34) - 4
Herbert (24), Burrow (26), Mariota (29), Allen (26), Rodgers (38) - 3
Hurts (24), Trubisky (28), Garoppolo (31), Mayfield (27), Prescott (29),
Mahomes (27), Dalton (35), Wentz (30),
Brady (45), Stafford (35) - 2
Ryan (37), Carr (31), Watson (27), Lamar (26), Henne (37), D. Jones (25), Colt McCoy (36), Taysom Hill (32) - 1
Mahomes and Brady with only 2 each hurts the narrative.
The average age of starting QBs this year was about 28.5. If we add up all the ages of all the RTP calls (i.e. 28x6 for Goff + 32x5 for Geno + 34x5 for Kirk and so on,) and divide that by the total number of RTP calls (71), we get 30.8. That's just a two year gap that can easily be explained by older quarterbacks simply being less mobile, and therefore easier to sack, and therefore likely to be sacked more often, and therefore likely to get more RTP calls because there is more potential for illegal sacks.
[/quote]
It's not just quantity. QBs on worse teams are going to get hit a lot more, so their RTP calls should be higher.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 12:03:19 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2023, 11:38:52 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
Roughing the passer tends to get called very closely to the letter of the rule for more established quarterbacks and much less closely for younger quarterbacks.
Historically good offensive teams also get more benefit of the doubt when it comes to defensive holding and pass interference.
Quote
https://www.nflpenalties.com/roughing-the-passer-by-qb.php?view=all
For this year, here are the RTP calls by quarterback:
Goff (28) - 6 RTP calls
Geno (32), Cousins (34) - 5
Brissett (30), Tannehill (34), Wilson (34) - 4
Herbert (24), Burrow (26), Mariota (29), Allen (26), Rodgers (38) - 3
Hurts (24), Trubisky (28), Garoppolo (31), Mayfield (27), Prescott (29), Mahomes (27), Dalton (35), Wentz (30), Brady (45), Stafford (35) - 2
Ryan (37), Carr (31), Watson (27), Lamar (26), Henne (37), D. Jones (25), Colt McCoy (36), Taysom Hill (32) - 1
Mahomes and Brady with only 2 each hurts the narrative.
The average age of starting QBs this year was about 28.5. If we add up all the ages of all the RTP calls (i.e. 28x6 for Goff + 32x5 for Geno + 34x5 for Kirk and so on,) and divide that by the total number of RTP calls (71), we get 30.8. That's just a two year gap that can easily be explained by older quarterbacks simply being less mobile, and therefore easier to sack, and therefore likely to be sacked more often, and therefore likely to get more RTP calls because there is more potential for illegal sacks.
It's not just quantity. QBs on worse teams are going to get hit a lot more, so their RTP calls should be higher.
And how does that relate to your point?
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 09:20:17 AM
Historically good offensive teams also get more benefit of the doubt when it comes to defensive holding and pass interference.
I don't feel like typing an essay on this, but here's the data: https://www.nflpenalties.com/penalty/defensive-pass-interference?year=2022&view=team_per_game
And right away you see that the Chiefs were -
drumroll - #1 in PI calls on their defense, and #32 in PI calls benefiting their offense.
PI is both the most significant and the most subjective penalty in football. And the Chiefs are the team hurt the most by it. Am I implying that the refs are purposely against the Chiefs? Absolutely not. But the evidence is crystal clear that the Chiefs have not been favored at all by the refs this year.
Now you can add Mahomes to the list of qb's that have more super bowl rings than Rodgers. I can't believe anyone could even argue Rodgers being the best of all time with just one super bowl ring.
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:41:02 PM
Now you can add Mahomes to the list of qb's that have more super bowl rings than Rodgers. I can't believe anyone could even argue Rodgers being the best of all time with just one super bowl ring.
Rings should not be the only metric for determining a good quarterback.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 13, 2023, 06:31:35 PM
Rings should not be the only metric for determining a good quarterback.
Except for ones named Sonic.
Safe to say, this is Patrick Mahomes' league. He probably won't touch any of Tom Brady's records (and he's still five behind in Super Bowl championships), but it goes without saying that he's going to be the most dominant QB for many more years to come.
One U of M Quarterback seems to know to quit when you're on top:
https://sports.yahoo.com/2023-super-bowl-chiefs-backup-qb-chad-henne-rides-into-sunset-announces-retirement-after-win-over-eagles-060720798.html
The dilemma of all-time: Retire as a champion or defend your title? One may argue to quit while you're on top, while someone else may argue to keep defending your title as long as you're the champion. So which is the right decision?
Quote from: jgb191 on February 13, 2023, 11:54:52 PM
The dilemma of all-time: Retire as a champion or defend your title? One may argue to quit while you're on top, while someone else may argue to keep defending your title as long as you're the champion. So which is the right decision?
It depends on the individual player's psyche, attitude, and finances. I, myself, would choose to retire as a champion if I was in my mid 30's when it happened and if I played any professional sport. I might have done it if I was 29 if I were a pro football player.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 13, 2023, 06:31:35 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:41:02 PM
Now you can add Mahomes to the list of qb's that have more super bowl rings than Rodgers. I can't believe anyone could even argue Rodgers being the best of all time with just one super bowl ring.
Rings should not be the only metric for determining a good quarterback.
Yes, the QB's are tagged with win-loss-tied records, like they are
the reason a team wins, loses, or ties. This is similar to pitchers in baseball as if they play all defensive positions and hit in all nine spots.
It is a team game. All facets have to be hitting on all cylinders to be a champion. Look at great HOF QB's who never won a Super Bowl: Sonny Jurgensen, Dan Marino, Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, and Fran Tarkenton. There are QB's that have won one: Joe Namath, Len Dawson, Johnny Unitas (even though he was injured early in Super Bowl V and Earl Morrall finished the game), Ken Stabler, Joe Theismann, Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Steve Young (as a starter), Brett Favre, Kurt Warner, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Joe Flacco, Russell Wilson, and the aforementioned Aaron Rodgers.
It is a team effort to win championships. Yes, it helps to have a very good or excellent QB, however, he is not the
only reason championships are won. It is the media that seems to be enamored with how many rings a QB has as the metric, with the gullible sports fans blindly following that edict.
One interesting fact about Mahomes' already storied career is that he has never played a true road playoff game. In 14 playoff appearances, he's had 11 home games and 3 neutral site Super Bowls (I know SB LV was technically a home game for the Bucs, but that was unprecedented at the time, the crowd was way smaller than usual due to the pandemic, and the Chiefs lost by 20 points so we never got to see if that would have impacted a close game).
I really hope that streak of Mahomes not playing on the road comes to an end next year, as it's always a harder path when you have to win on the road. I'm actually much more annoyed by the Chiefs hosting the championship five straight years than I am by them winning another Super Bowl.
It's been great to see five different teams get a chance to host the NFC title game the last five years. In fact half (8 of 16) NFC teams have hosted a title game in the last decade. Meanwhile, the AFC couldn't be a more different story with the Patriots and now the Chiefs. Only three teams in the last decade, five teams in the last two decades, and you have to go back 30 years to the Bills in 1993 (!!) to find 8 different teams who have hosted. I really hope some other AFC teams will make it happen next season. It obviously starts with the Chargers (or maybe Broncos, who knows) knocking off the Chiefs in the division, but if that doesn't happen, maybe the Bills or Bengals or someone can close out the #1 seed.
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2023, 10:36:59 AM
One interesting fact about Mahomes' already storied career is that he has never played a true road playoff game. In 14 playoff appearances, he's had 11 home games and 3 neutral site Super Bowls (I know SB LV was technically a home game for the Bucs, but that was unprecedented at the time, the crowd was way smaller than usual due to the pandemic, and the Chiefs lost by 20 points so we never got to see if that would have impacted a close game).
I really hope that streak of Mahomes not playing on the road comes to an end next year, as it's always a harder path when you have to win on the road. I'm actually much more annoyed by the Chiefs hosting the championship five straight years than I am by them winning another Super Bowl.
It's been great to see five different teams get a chance to host the NFC title game the last five years. In fact half (8 of 16) NFC teams have hosted a title game in the last decade. Meanwhile, the AFC couldn't be a more different story with the Patriots and now the Chiefs. Only three teams in the last decade, five teams in the last two decades, and you have to go back 30 years to the Bills in 1993 (!!) to find 8 different teams who have hosted. I really hope some other AFC teams will make it happen next season. It obviously starts with the Chargers (or maybe Broncos, who knows) knocking off the Chiefs in the division, but if that doesn't happen, maybe the Bills or Bengals or someone can close out the #1 seed.
Don't sleep on Jacksonville to be the team to knock the Chiefs out of the #1 seed. Trevor Lawrence improved a bunch this past season, and the AFC South gets to play the NFC South in 2023.
I was thinking about Tom Brady's tenure and there are a few interesting notes. His first season (2000 albeit a backup) was Troy Aikman's last and Jerry Rice had four more years left. He was one year removed from Steve Young and Dan Marino. That season, the NFL had one less team than they do today. That season, the Patriots, who still played at Foxboro (or Shafer or Sullivan) Stadium, also played that season at Giants Stadium, Mile High Stadium, The RCA Dome and The Silverdome, making him the last active player to have played at those stadiums. He also played at the current Hard Rock Stadium when it was Pro Player Stadium and is the last player to have played there when it was named Pro Player and might possibly be the last player to have played there when it was in that configuration and was still a baseball field. The Patriots also played at Soldier Field in 2000, pre-spaceship, so he is the last active player to have played in the original Soldier Field. With all of those notes, he is the last active player to have played NFL games on the original Astroturf. There are of course others; I am sure he is the last active player to have played at Texas Stadium and The Georgia Dome. In his first season, nine teams played in baseball/football stadiums (either currently at the time or at once housed both). He is also the last active player to have played when the NFL had its old logo. He is the last active player to have played when the Seahawks had only worn one uniform in their existence. He is the last active player to have played when the officials' uniform was the 2" stripes and the last to be officiated by Bernie Kukar. I am pretty sure he is the last active player that started his career when games were still broadcast on standard definition and is the last player to have played when games were broadcast over the air on analog airwaves, when Pat Summerall and John Madden were a broadcasting team and when Monday Night Football was aired on ABC.
I know some of those tidbits are obscure, but it just showed you the world that existed when Tom Brady entered the league and the world right now when he has "left" the league. Feels like centuries, not 24 seasons.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 14, 2023, 10:48:06 AM
Don't sleep on Jacksonville to be the team to knock the Chiefs out of the #1 seed. Trevor Lawrence improved a bunch this past season, and the AFC South gets to play the NFC South in 2023.
Absolutely. It's way too early, but right now I would have Jacksonville as the front-runner for "most likely to win their division in 2023". There's an argument for them over the Bills (who have a very tough division now), Chiefs (who always play close games with the Chargers and barely beat the head-coach-less Broncos), and especially the Bengals (who went 3-3 in the AFC North last year).
And there's certainly no NFC teams that stand out as a heavy division favorite. At least 12 or 13 of them have to be thinking they can win their division in 2023.
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2023, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 14, 2023, 10:48:06 AM
Don't sleep on Jacksonville to be the team to knock the Chiefs out of the #1 seed. Trevor Lawrence improved a bunch this past season, and the AFC South gets to play the NFC South in 2023.
Absolutely. It's way too early, but right now I would have Jacksonville as the front-runner for "most likely to win their division in 2023". There's an argument for them over the Bills (who have a very tough division now), Chiefs (who always play close games with the Chargers and barely beat the head-coach-less Broncos), and especially the Bengals (who went 3-3 in the AFC North last year).
And there's certainly no NFC teams that stand out as a heavy division favorite. At least 12 or 13 of them have to be thinking they can win their division in 2023.
The Bills are going to be the next Chargers team. A team that contends every year but never reaches the super bowl. Josh Allen is the next Phillip Rivers.
Quote from: dvferyance on February 15, 2023, 10:01:10 PM
The Bills are going to be the next Chargers team. A team that contends every year but never reaches the super bowl. Josh Allen is the next Phillip Rivers.
Well, thanks a lot! :-D
I would think the actual Chargers would have first dibs on that role - they have arguably underperformed even more in the past 2-3 seasons.
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2023, 10:36:59 AM
One interesting fact about Mahomes' already storied career is that he has never played a true road playoff game.
Well, yeah, he's Mahomes, not Maways.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 16, 2023, 01:01:45 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2023, 10:36:59 AM
One interesting fact about Mahomes' already storied career is that he has never played a true road playoff game.
Well, yeah, he's Mahomes, not Maways.
Wow! Between this and the Nevada thing... you're on a roll. :-D
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2023, 10:16:50 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 15, 2023, 10:01:10 PM
The Bills are going to be the next Chargers team. A team that contends every year but never reaches the super bowl. Josh Allen is the next Phillip Rivers.
Well, thanks a lot! :-D
I would think the actual Chargers would have first dibs on that role - they have arguably underperformed even more in the past 2-3 seasons.
Just being a realist. They had such a great season and did not even make it to the AFC championship game. Just like the Chargers from the 2000's.
Quote from: dvferyance on February 16, 2023, 05:21:44 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2023, 10:16:50 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 15, 2023, 10:01:10 PM
The Bills are going to be the next Chargers team. A team that contends every year but never reaches the super bowl. Josh Allen is the next Phillip Rivers.
Well, thanks a lot! :-D
I would think the actual Chargers would have first dibs on that role - they have arguably underperformed even more in the past 2-3 seasons.
Just being a realist. They had such a great season and did not even make it to the AFC championship game. Just like the Chargers from the 2000's.
Yes, it is obviously concerning that it's happened two years in a row. That was probably the least enjoyable 13-win season in NFL history (although the Packers might have something to say about that). A little less hype in 2023 would certainly be for the better.
It looks like we got Eric Bieniemy.
I used up my yearly allotment of massive posts in this thread already, so I'm not going to do another one looking ahead to 2023, but just putting this here to mark the unofficial end of one season and start of another. It will be another offseason of intrigue in the NFL, with more Aaron Rodgers drama and a lot of teams in search of a new QB, so if anyone has any pre-free agency/pre-draft thoughts or takes, feel free to share.
Surprising absolutely no one, the Commanders just released Carson Wentz.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 27, 2023, 03:54:47 PM
Surprising absolutely no one, the Commanders just released Carson Wentz.
Hopefully they release their owner next.
This Sporcle quiz is surprisingly difficult (I got 100%, but it required some careful thought)–name every quarterback to start for Washington since the beginning of the 1999 season, updated through the end of the just-concluded season (https://www.sporcle.com/games/motrain24/redskinsqbs).
I kind of feel bad for Wentz. He never recovered from his injuries in 2017.
Take it with a grain of salt, but this is kind of interesting: https://nflpa.com/nfl-player-team-report-cards
Quote from: webny99 on March 02, 2023, 11:58:45 AM
Take it with a grain of salt, but this is kind of interesting: https://nflpa.com/nfl-player-team-report-cards
Vikings straight-As of all teams...
Commanders in last, to the suprise of no one.
Derek Carr has signed with the Saints! The Saints now have by far the best QB situation in their division, which is ironic considering Derek Carr was considered easily the worst QB in his old division just six months ago (turns out Russ was worse despite being ranked higher entering the season, but you get the idea)
I think Derek Carr is good enough to make a team a contender when surrounded with talent. That seems odd to say considering he had 0 playoff wins in 8 seasons, but you have to remember the Raiders perpetually have one of the worst defenses in the league, and the Saints have had a good to very good defense the past few seasons.
Quote from: webny99 on March 06, 2023, 07:02:34 PM
Derek Carr has signed with the Saints! The Saints now have by far the best QB situation in their division, which is ironic considering Derek Carr was considered easily the worst QB in his old division just six months ago (turns out Russ was worse despite being ranked higher entering the season, but you get the idea)
I think Derek Carr is good enough to make a team a contender when surrounded with talent. That seems odd to say considering he had 0 playoff wins in 8 seasons, but you have to remember the Raiders perpetually have one of the worst defenses in the league, and the Saints have had a good to very good defense the past few seasons.
The Saints with Derek Carr are in a good place to win a crappy division, but they will not sniff a Super Bowl, especially with his large cap hit.
Definitely an interesting team. I could imagine them being a decent 11-6 or 10-7, and I could imagine them not improving upon or even regressing from last year. Their defense was hot down the stretch, we'll see if that continues.
Quote from: thspfc on March 06, 2023, 07:44:12 PM
Definitely an interesting team. I could imagine them being a decent 11-6 or 10-7, and I could imagine them not improving upon or even regressing from last year. Their defense was hot down the stretch, we'll see if that continues.
I know he wanted to be by family. But for football related reasons Devante Adams beyond playing by family he must be thinking now "Why did I leave GB??!?" He's still on a HOF track as a WR but the differences of HC's and the QB situation he left in GB whether it's Love or Rodgers(plenty of Jets rumors today) as Packers QB are better than whatever is in Vegas. Along with chances to win a Superbowl and become a lock for Canton one day.
As for Rodgers feels like Jets or bust for him. Just curious in short vs long term how Rodgers offseason act over last few years will be looked at vs Favres offseason act their last years as Packers.
^^ Favre/Rodgers similarities would increase if Aaron declares retirement.
Quote from: gr8daynegb on March 07, 2023, 07:07:15 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 06, 2023, 07:44:12 PM
Definitely an interesting team. I could imagine them being a decent 11-6 or 10-7, and I could imagine them not improving upon or even regressing from last year. Their defense was hot down the stretch, we'll see if that continues.
I know he wanted to be by family. But for football related reasons Devante Adams beyond playing by family he must be thinking now "Why did I leave GB??!?" He's still on a HOF track as a WR but the differences of HC's and the QB situation he left in GB whether it's Love or Rodgers(plenty of Jets rumors today) as Packers QB are better than whatever is in Vegas. Along with chances to win a Superbowl and become a lock for Canton one day.
As for Rodgers feels like Jets or bust for him. Just curious in short vs long term how Rodgers offseason act over last few years will be looked at vs Favres offseason act their last years as Packers.
I was talking about the Saints, but I guess I do feel similarly about the Packers depending on who plays QB.
Sitting Love for another year would essentially end his career in Green Bay. Unless he does start in 2024 and plays like a top 5-10 QB, he's certainly not getting a second contract if he doesn't start this upcoming season. I thought he looked quite good against the Eagles. Nice throwing motion, accurate, got through reads quickly, tight spiral. Obviously a really small sample size, but he's shown that he's worth a shot.
Rodgers might be a better option when looking solely at 2023, but he's not a top 5 guy anymore and he's not getting that team anywhere close to the Super Bowl. Neither is Love, but seeing what Love's got will be more beneficial for the franchise long-term than keeping Rodgers in order to win a couple extra games this year. And, Rodgers' trade value will never be higher than it is now. If Love isn't it, having two 2024 first round picks would be real nice.
I don't think Love will be a bust, but if he is (or if the Packers hang onto Rodgers for too long and Love flourishes elsewhere), this has to go down as one of the dumbest situations in NFL history. A team on the brink of the Super Bowl in a prospectively weak conference, with a very limited number of years left on its HOF QB, with a major deficiency at WR in a WR-heavy draft, trades up to select a quarterback in the first round. And what do you know: in the playoff losses to the Bucs and 49ers, Davante Adams had twice as many targets and receptions (26, 18) than all their other WRs combined (14, 9). Against the Niners, Lazard had one catch on one target for 6 yards and that was it - no other receiver besides Adams had a single target. They were the 1 seed, dominated the conference in the regular season both years. It's not crazy at all to say that they'd have another championship if they selected a WR in 2020, especially with Tee Higgins and Michael Pittman still on the board at that point. Big mistake for a team that is known for being historically successful.
Giants have resigned Daniel Jones to a large contract. Lamar Jackson has been franchised tagged using the non exclusive tag.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 07, 2023, 09:11:52 PM
Giants have resigned Daniel Jones to a large contract. Lamar Jackson has been franchised tagged using the non exclusive tag.
I think things could get real ugly for the Giants over the next couple years, but I incessantly ripped on them the whole season and they proved me wrong (kind of? Or were they just a little less fraudulent than the Vikings?)
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2023, 09:16:15 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 07, 2023, 09:11:52 PM
Giants have resigned Daniel Jones to a large contract. Lamar Jackson has been franchised tagged using the non exclusive tag.
I think things could get real ugly for the Giants over the next couple years, but I incessantly ripped on them the whole season and they proved me wrong (kind of? Or were they just a little less fraudulent than the Vikings?)
They do get an easy out after year 2 if things get ugly.
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2023, 08:49:47 PM
Sitting Love for another year would essentially end his career in Green Bay. Unless he does start in 2024 and plays like a top 5-10 QB, he's certainly not getting a second contract if he doesn't start this upcoming season. I thought he looked quite good against the Eagles. Nice throwing motion, accurate, got through reads quickly, tight spiral. Obviously a really small sample size, but he's shown that he's worth a shot.
Rodgers might be a better option when looking solely at 2023, but he's not a top 5 guy anymore and he's not getting that team anywhere close to the Super Bowl. Neither is Love, but seeing what Love's got will be more beneficial for the franchise long-term than keeping Rodgers in order to win a couple extra games this year. And, Rodgers' trade value will never be higher than it is now. If Love isn't it, having two 2024 first round picks would be real nice.
And that's why I think the Packers are done with Rodgers and will move on with Love as their starter this season. It all makes too much sense. It would be extremely Packers-esque for Love to play great this season and go on to have a HOF career during which they'll win one and only one Super Bowl.
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2023, 09:16:15 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 07, 2023, 09:11:52 PM
Giants have resigned Daniel Jones to a large contract. Lamar Jackson has been franchised tagged using the non exclusive tag.
I think things could get real ugly for the Giants over the next couple years, but I incessantly ripped on them the whole season and they proved me wrong (kind of? Or were they just a little less fraudulent than the Vikings?)
I was actually correct about the Giants last year, so I'll try again (read: here's my chance to be wrong this year). I also think they could have a worse season this year before improving in future years, similar to the 2018 Bills. It's going to be very difficult to improve on last year, as it would require a championship run or at least being competitive in the divisional round. I think it's more likely that they go 7-10 or 8-9 and miss the playoffs, which isn't the end of the world because last year was a statement of intent from the new coach and GM, and that earns a bit of slack with the media, fans, and probably players too.
And FWIW... Daniel Jones does have more career playoff wins than Derek Carr, although you could argue that both are top five in the NFC at this point :-D
I find the Lamar Jackson situation fascinating. He got the non-exclusive tag which means he can negotiate with other teams and if they offer him a deal, the Ravens have to either match it or allow him to sign with that team in exchange for two first rounders. Yet many teams that could or should be interested in Lamar are saying they aren't, which is weird. The only thing I can figure is that teams respect the Ravens organization wanting to get a deal done and don't want to interfere with that, or are seriously concerned about Lamar's ability to stay healthy.
Either way, it's a smart move by the Ravens to find out if another team is willing to pay Lamar and how much. If they do, you know you're not paying more than market value, and if they don't, you can use it as leverage.
Quote from: webny99 on March 07, 2023, 10:20:10 PM
I find the Lamar Jackson situation fascinating. He got the non-exclusive tag which means he can negotiate with other teams and if they offer him a deal, the Ravens have to either match it or allow him to sign with that team in exchange for two first rounders. Yet many teams that could or should be interested in Lamar are saying they aren't, which is weird. The only thing I can figure is that teams respect the Ravens organization wanting to get a deal done and don't want to interfere with that, or are seriously concerned about Lamar's ability to stay healthy.
Very apt comparison by Dan Hanzus on the Around the NFL podcast yesterday comparing the Deshaun Watson deal to the Exxon-Valdez oil spill. It's very messy and head-turning at the time, but you eventually move on from it, only to then realize that it's layered and caused even more underlying problems that didn't occur to anyone at the time: https://www.stitcher.com/show/nfl-around-the-league-podcast/episode/lamar-landing-spots-danny-dimes-deal-rodgers-jets-meeting-300336615
And that's exactly what's happening now in the NFL with players like Lamar Jackson because of the Watson contract. Lamar is beyond all doubt a better player than Deshaun Watson, so there's no reason for him to accept anything less. But owners clearly believe the Browns set an unacceptable precedent, so they're putting a heavy finger on the scale leading to the current impasse.
Another interesting point is that Lamar doesn't have an agent, which could be hurting him here, and not just because an agent could handle the negotiations with the team. An agent could also help control the media narrative and prevent rampant speculation about what he's asking for. But because he doesn't have an agent, there's a lot less information out there, and agents have an incentive to speculate that teams are not interested and negatively influence media coverage to make Lamar look bad for not having an agent.
Quote from: webny99 on March 09, 2023, 10:18:02 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 07, 2023, 10:20:10 PM
I find the Lamar Jackson situation fascinating. He got the non-exclusive tag which means he can negotiate with other teams and if they offer him a deal, the Ravens have to either match it or allow him to sign with that team in exchange for two first rounders. Yet many teams that could or should be interested in Lamar are saying they aren't, which is weird. The only thing I can figure is that teams respect the Ravens organization wanting to get a deal done and don't want to interfere with that, or are seriously concerned about Lamar's ability to stay healthy.
Very apt comparison by Dan Hanzus on the Around the NFL podcast yesterday comparing the Deshaun Watson deal to the Exxon-Valdez oil spill. It's very messy and head-turning at the time, but you eventually move on from it, only to then realize that it's layered and caused even more underlying problems that didn't occur to anyone at the time: https://www.stitcher.com/show/nfl-around-the-league-podcast/episode/lamar-landing-spots-danny-dimes-deal-rodgers-jets-meeting-300336615
And that's exactly what's happening now in the NFL with players like Lamar Jackson because of the Watson contract. Lamar is beyond all doubt a better player than Deshaun Watson, so there's no reason for him to accept anything less. But owners clearly believe the Browns set an unacceptable precedent, so they're putting a heavy finger on the scale leading to the current impasse.
Another interesting point is that Lamar doesn't have an agent, which could be hurting him here, and not just because an agent could handle the negotiations with the team. An agent could also help control the media narrative and prevent rampant speculation about what he's asking for. But because he doesn't have an agent, there's a lot less information out there, and agents have an incentive to speculate that teams are not interested and negatively influence media coverage to make Lamar look bad for not having an agent.
Former NFL GM Joe Banner had some good takes on the Lamar Jackson situation on the Rich Eisen show (either yesterday or Tuesday).
Bears trade the #1 draft pick to the Panthers for draft picks and WR D.J. Moore.
The Texans and perhaps the Panthers are just going to keep on losing with all of these trades.
Quote from: Big John on March 10, 2023, 05:52:30 PM
Bears trade the #1 draft pick to the Panthers for draft picks and WR D.J. Moore.
I like it for both sides. DJ Moore is on a reasonable contract and fills a big need for the Bears.
The draft is getting very interesting, it looks like the top two picks will be QB's, the Colts will likely draft a QB, and several more teams are lurking, such as the Falcons, Lions, and Raiders. The Cardinals are at #3 are in prime position to trade down, so we could definitely see four QB's in the top five picks.
Chances are, the top pick will be a QB, and since the Bears already have Justin Fields, the Panthers could use the pick more than the Bears do. Plus, DJ Moore has a chance to be Fields' top target for next season and beyond.
Quote from: Henry on March 10, 2023, 09:35:03 PM
Chances are, the top pick will be a QB, and since the Bears already have Justin Fields, the Panthers could use the pick more than the Bears do. Plus, DJ Moore has a chance to be Fields' top target for next season and beyond.
The biggest thing is that the Bears need quantity. There are multiple holes on the OL, DL and LB. Even with the Bears' huge amount of cap space, they can't fill them all in free agency. They absolutely needed extra picks in this draft. Kinda disappointed that they got the lower of Carolina's two 2nd round picks. I think they could have gotten the higher pick.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 11, 2023, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 10, 2023, 09:35:03 PM
Chances are, the top pick will be a QB, and since the Bears already have Justin Fields, the Panthers could use the pick more than the Bears do. Plus, DJ Moore has a chance to be Fields' top target for next season and beyond.
The biggest thing is that the Bears need quantity. There are multiple holes on the OL, DL and LB. Even with the Bears' huge amount of cap space, they can't fill them all in free agency. They absolutely needed extra picks in this draft. Kinda disappointed that they got the lower of Carolina's two 2nd round picks. I think they could have gotten the higher pick.
I don't think they get the higher pick in the 2nd and then also a 1st next year.
Jalen Ramsey traded from the Rams to the Dolphins for a 3rd round pick.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 12, 2023, 09:56:56 PM
Jalen Ramsey traded from the Bears to the Dolphins for a 3rd round pick.
Actually from the Rams and the Dolphins threw in a backup tight end.
Raiders have signed QB Jimmy Garappolo.
And the Bears have signed former Bills linebacker Tremaine Edmunds.
Mike White signs with the Dolphins
Sam Darnold to the 49ers, and a Panthers fan on Reddit called the 49ers "Panthers West".
Quote from: epzik8 on March 13, 2023, 06:00:22 PM
Sam Darnold to the 49ers, and a Panthers fan on Reddit called the 49ers "Panthers West".
Besides Darnold and McCaffrey, there is another parallel: the 49ers also made a huge trade two years ago to get their QB of the future. Although the Panthers can only dream of being 49ers East :-P
Bears signed 2 LB, an OL and a DL yesterday. Plus they got a WR and a handful of picks from their trade with Carolina. Should be a markedly better team this year, in a very winnable division.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 13, 2023, 06:00:22 PM
a Panthers fan on Reddit called the 49ers "Panthers West".
That's kind of insulting to the 49ers.
The Cowboys are releasing Zeke. Similar to when they released Amari Cooper, I'm sad to see him go, but I 100% agree with the move. They'll be able to find somebody in the middle rounds of the draft to fill Zeke's role for much less money.
I remember thinking in 2016 through 2019 of Zeke being a future HOFer, playing for the Cowboys his entire career. Hard to believe he's no longer a Cowboy, but that's the reality of running backs nowadays.
Rodgers to the Jets is seemingly a done deal. When that happens, Dak will be the longest-tenured starting QB in the league. Nuts.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
https://twitter.com/NHLJets/status/1636072457411911682
There is nothing like one of your division rivals shooting themselves in the foot in the Super Bowl and then selling off most of their defensive line, except for the player who lost that Super Bowl for them.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2023, 03:42:25 PM
Dak will be the longest-tenured starting QB in the league. Nuts.
Felt like looking up the top 5. Year they joined the team:
Dak Prescott - 2016
Patrick Mahomes - 2017
Kirk Cousins - 2018
Josh Allen - 2018
Lamar Jackson - 2018
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2023, 03:42:25 PM
Dak will be the longest-tenured starting QB in the league. Nuts.
Also comfortably a top-2 QB in the NFC.
Today's the start of a new league year, when all the signings, trades and releases become official.
Upon hearing that Aaron Rodgers is (likely) going to play for the Jets next season, I say good riddance.
Case Keenum returns to Houston as a backup QB, where he played college and debuted for the Texans. I am hoping that the two most celebrated former Texans legends Andre Johnson and JJ Watt can join the Texans staff in any capacity (perhaps as team consultants or on coaching staff or management staff).
It seems like 95% of Texans fans (myself certainly included) have happily welcomed DeMeco Ryans back to Houston; DeMeco himself said he's glad to return to the city that drafted him.
Rodgers to the Jets in 2023 is becoming as weird, if not more, than Favre to the Jets in 2008.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2023, 03:42:25 PM
The Cowboys are releasing Zeke. Similar to when they released Amari Cooper, I'm sad to see him go, but I 100% agree with the move. They'll be able to find somebody in the middle rounds of the draft to fill Zeke's role for much less money.
I remember thinking in 2016 through 2019 of Zeke being a future HOFer, playing for the Cowboys his entire career. Hard to believe he's no longer a Cowboy, but that's the reality of running backs nowadays.
The last play Zeke played for the Cowboys was at center and he got run completely over! :-D
Running back is the position with the largest supply in relation to demand. Unless you have an elite guy like Henry, Taylor or Barkley, it doesn't make sense to pay big money for a RB when you can get a guy almost as good a lot cheaper.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 16, 2023, 06:32:38 AM
Rodgers to the Jets in 2023 is becoming as weird, if not more, than Favre to the Jets in 2008.
I think all of the memes & parody tweets surrounding Rodgers' supposed "free agent wish list" has been my favorite thing about NFL news this week.
As an example:
https://twitter.com/skipfoster/status/1635701845304791044?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
The Colts have released Matt Ryan just less than a year after trading for him last offseason. The one silver lining is that he will at least get paid $12M this season, but if this is the end of the road for his career, it is an almost impossibly brutal ending. What was supposed to be a perfect pairing between Ryan and the Colts turned into (one of?) the worst in-season train wrecks of all time.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2023, 11:23:45 AM
The Colts have released Matt Ryan just less than a year after trading for him last offseason. The one silver lining is that he will at least get paid $12M this season, but if this is the end of the road for his career, it is an almost impossibly brutal ending. What was supposed to be a perfect pairing between Ryan and the Colts turned into (one of?) the worst in-season train wrecks of all time.
I don't know of anyone who thought it was going to be great, but it was certainly much worse than most expected.
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 01:43:25 PM
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
I think a lot of us are blind to the fact that most of us know nothing about these players outside of game day and an occasional news article. The teams get to see their players almost every single day in a variety of settings and circumstances. They know far more about their players than anyone outside of the organization does.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 01:43:25 PM
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
Carson Wentz hasn't been even close to a Franchise QB for a few years now. Ryan is just old. Wilson I believe can still turn it around with Payton.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 16, 2023, 06:32:38 AM
Rodgers to the Jets in 2023 is becoming as weird, if not more, than Favre to the Jets in 2008.
Yeah, it feels strange that Green Bay is letting them take Aaron Rodgers. As if getting a 39-year-old QB that's probably past his prime would help them get into the playoffs.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 20, 2023, 03:34:06 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 01:43:25 PM
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
Carson Wentz hasn't been even close to a Franchise QB for a few years now.
But Philly let him go when he still was.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 05:43:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 20, 2023, 03:34:06 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 01:43:25 PM
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
Carson Wentz hasn't been even close to a Franchise QB for a few years now.
But Philly let him go when he still was.
He sure wasn't in 2020. He was historically bad that season.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 05:43:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 20, 2023, 03:34:06 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 20, 2023, 01:43:25 PM
I think if teams are eager to move on from "Franchise QBs" a la Carson Wentz, Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan, etc., then that should tell you something. Voluntarily getting rid of experience at the most important position in all of sports is only done if for a reason.
Carson Wentz hasn't been even close to a Franchise QB for a few years now.
But Philly let him go when he still was.
I agree to an extent, because I think the general perception of when his career took the critical blow is wrong. Most people cite the ACL tear, but it was really the loss to Jacksonville in 2021. He was quite good in all of 2019, 2018 when he was healthy, and most games in 2021. Had Indy won that game, they'd have entered the playoffs as the 6 seed, having won 9 of their last 12, facing a Buffalo team that they blew out earlier in the season. Even if they lost in the wild card, it's tough to get rid of a QB that was at least competent (27 TDs/7 INTs) en route to a 10-7 record and a playoff berth. But instead, he was the guy that couldn't make the playoffs with one of the most talented rosters in the league (they led the league in pro bowlers and all-pros).
Basically, if they won that game I think Wentz would still have been a Colt last season. Whether he would still be a Colt in 2023, who knows, but 2022 for sure.
Also worth noting that Indy actually blew two games to end the 2021 season. They lost in almost worse fashion to the Raiders the week prior, when Wentz returned (probably too early) from having covid as an unvaccinated player, and they lost at the last second to set up the must-win Jacksonville game, ultimately allowing the Raiders to take their spot in the playoffs. I agree that Wentz would have been a Colt in 2022 if not for those last two games, but the Colts brass clearly didn't like him and the covid situation with their season on the line probably helped seal his fate.
When you consider that the Colts had 98% playoff odds on December 31, 2021, the entire calendar year 2022 couldn't possibly have gone any worse for the franchise.
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 21, 2023, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Don't know how much work he actually does. I believe that the job has long hours but it's probably still worth the pay.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 09:26:01 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 21, 2023, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Don't know how much work he actually does. I believe that the job has long hours but it's probably still worth the pay.
Tough to find a job that's not worth $20m/year . . .
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 09:26:01 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 21, 2023, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Don't know how much work he actually does. I believe that the job has long hours but it's probably still worth the pay.
I meant in terms of him taking verbal shots on an almost daily basis from just about everyone as the commissioner of America's most popular sport.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 22, 2023, 05:14:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 09:26:01 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 21, 2023, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Don't know how much work he actually does. I believe that the job has long hours but it's probably still worth the pay.
I meant in terms of him taking verbal shots on an almost daily basis from just about everyone as the commissioner of America's most popular sport.
I thinks he's a tiny bit overhated. He could be Manfred.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 22, 2023, 11:26:31 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 22, 2023, 05:14:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 09:26:01 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 21, 2023, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 21, 2023, 02:01:03 PM
Roger Goodell has received a multi-year extension, so he's not going anywhere.
Being a $20m+ virtual punching bag sounds like good work if you can get it.
Don't know how much work he actually does. I believe that the job has long hours but it's probably still worth the pay.
I meant in terms of him taking verbal shots on an almost daily basis from just about everyone as the commissioner of America’s most popular sport.
I thinks he's a tiny bit overhated. He could be Manfred.
Agreed. I am not a Goodell defender, but he takes a lot of criticism for things he has completely no control over. Case in point was the pass interference no-call in the Rams v Saints NFC Championship Game. Everyone blamed him like he was on the field officiating the game, which was another bit of proof that the average uneducated fan has no idea what he/she is talking about.
Patriots linebacker Dont'a Hightower, who played a hugely underrated role in three of the Belichick/Brady era Super Bowl wins, has retired from the NFL.
Everytime I saw his name, it reminded me of Michael Winslow's character in the Police Academy movies. :-D
Quote from: Dellbeam on March 20, 2023, 03:38:28 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 16, 2023, 06:32:38 AM
Rodgers to the Jets in 2023 is becoming as weird, if not more, than Favre to the Jets in 2008.
Yeah, it feels strange that Green Bay is letting them take Aaron Rodgers. As if getting a 39-year-old QB that's probably past his prime would help them get into the playoffs.
Most Packers fans I know (including me) don't really want Rodgers back. He's taken the team as far as he can and he's not getting any younger. He's also as disenchanted with the front office as Favre was at the end. They should have traded Rodgers a couple years ago after his third MVP season when his value was at its peak but the coaching staff did a crap job of getting Love ready for the NFL. The pandemic is no excuse; Jalen Hurts, Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, and Justin Herbert were all drafted the same year. Not getting Love up to speed quicker is either pure incompetence on the staff and front office or Love is just not a capable NFL QB. I'm not expecting him to be another Favre or Rodgers, but I'd at least expect Matt Hasselbeck-level competence. I have a feeling this year will be a wash but if Love looks bad and the team wins five or less games, I think the entire staff will (or at least should) be jettisoned.
I'd be shocked if the Packers won five games or less this season. Winning 39 regular-season games in three years wasn't just about Aaron Rodgers - it was about a good roster and very good coaching staff. Even if Love is mediocre, they'll probably be a .500 fringe wild card team in a weak NFC. Being terrible just doesn't seem to be in the bones of the organization.
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 23, 2023, 08:41:20 PM
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Both teams are at an impasse to wha compensation to give. Odd due the usual practice of agreeing to terms of a trade before a team is given permission to talk trade to a player on the other team.
Quote from: Big John on March 23, 2023, 08:48:14 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 23, 2023, 08:41:20 PM
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Both teams are at an impasse to wha compensation to give. Odd due the usual practice of agreeing to terms of a trade before a team is given permission to talk trade to a player on the other team.
Mark Murphy massively screwed up by saying that they'd prefer to
not have Rodgers back - at a high school girls basketball game, no less. He said they'd welcome him back "if things don't work out they way we want them to." Which decreases Green Bay's bargaining power, and therefore the compensation they will get. Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
Quote from: thspfc on March 23, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 23, 2023, 08:48:14 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 23, 2023, 08:41:20 PM
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Both teams are at an impasse to wha compensation to give. Odd due the usual practice of agreeing to terms of a trade before a team is given permission to talk trade to a player on the other team.
Mark Murphy massively screwed up by saying that they'd prefer to not have Rodgers back - at a high school girls basketball game, no less. He said they'd welcome him back "if things don't work out they way we want them to." Which decreases Green Bay's bargaining power, and therefore the compensation they will get. Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
But the irony is that Green Bay still has a lot of leverage. The Jets basically have to get a deal done for Rodgers since they're stuck without a QB if they don't, and they have much more incentive to get it done quickly while Green Bay has no reason to be concerned about the time frame.
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2023, 09:35:27 AM
Quote from: thspfc on March 23, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 23, 2023, 08:48:14 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 23, 2023, 08:41:20 PM
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Both teams are at an impasse to wha compensation to give. Odd due the usual practice of agreeing to terms of a trade before a team is given permission to talk trade to a player on the other team.
Mark Murphy massively screwed up by saying that they'd prefer to not have Rodgers back - at a high school girls basketball game, no less. He said they'd welcome him back "if things don't work out they way we want them to." Which decreases Green Bay's bargaining power, and therefore the compensation they will get. Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
But the irony is that Green Bay still has a lot of leverage. The Jets basically have to get a deal done for Rodgers since they're stuck without a QB if they don't, and they have much more incentive to get it done quickly while Green Bay has no reason to be concerned about the time frame.
The Packers can also lessen their cap hit if they wait until after June 1st to trade him. The can trade him anywhere from June 1st to the start of week 1 of the season. So there is some incentive for the Packers to wait. The only thing is they also probably reduced what they'll get in return by waiting and only negotiating with one other team. They could've gotten another team involved to increase the competition and get other teams into a bidding war. But Rodgers called the shots there by saying he wanted to go to the Jets and took other teams out of the equation.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on March 25, 2023, 12:08:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2023, 09:35:27 AM
Quote from: thspfc on March 23, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 23, 2023, 08:48:14 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 23, 2023, 08:41:20 PM
Wondering what's taking so long to announce the Rodgers news.
Both teams are at an impasse to wha compensation to give. Odd due the usual practice of agreeing to terms of a trade before a team is given permission to talk trade to a player on the other team.
Mark Murphy massively screwed up by saying that they'd prefer to not have Rodgers back - at a high school girls basketball game, no less. He said they'd welcome him back "if things don't work out they way we want them to." Which decreases Green Bay's bargaining power, and therefore the compensation they will get. Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
But the irony is that Green Bay still has a lot of leverage. The Jets basically have to get a deal done for Rodgers since they're stuck without a QB if they don't, and they have much more incentive to get it done quickly while Green Bay has no reason to be concerned about the time frame.
The Packers can also lessen their cap hit if they wait until after June 1st to trade him. The can trade him anywhere from June 1st to the start of week 1 of the season. So there is some incentive for the Packers to wait. The only thing is they also probably reduced what they'll get in return by waiting and only negotiating with one other team. They could've gotten another team involved to increase the competition and get other teams into a bidding war. But Rodgers called the shots there by saying he wanted to go to the Jets and took other teams out of the equation.
Also, if they don't do it by draft day, they won't get any 2023 picks in return. They'd rather have extra 2023 picks than extra 2024 picks because it's important to have a competent roster around Love (o-line and receivers in particular) so that they can properly evaluate him this season.
Quote from: thspfc on March 23, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
Yeah because having a billionaire own the team will insulate it from generations of terrible decisions. :rolleyes: :eyebrow: :meh:
That's worked so well in Detroit, Houston, Chicago, Cleveland, Washington, or any other bastion of mediocrity from the last quarter century.
The Packers got the lack of ownership thing right. One less ego to stroke in an ecosystem that attracts the self-important like flies to corpse.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 25, 2023, 02:50:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 23, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Sometimes I wonder if the higher-ups in Green Bay realize that they're running a professional sports franchise, not a local restaurant. Having an owner would probably help.
Yeah because having a billionaire own the team will insulate it from generations of terrible decisions. :rolleyes: :eyebrow: :meh:
That's worked so well in Detroit, Houston, Chicago, Cleveland, Washington, or any other bastion of mediocrity from the last quarter century.
The Packers got the lack of ownership thing right. One less ego to stroke in an ecosystem that attracts the self-important like flies to corpse.
1) I never said that an owner is better for every situation, 2) it's ignorant to pin the blame for the failures of the teams you listed all on the owners, and 3) it's ignorant to attribute the successes of the Packers to the lack of an owner, and assume that they wouldn't be as strong as a franchise if they had an owner.
You said an owner would help. I dispute that, citing many examples of poorly-owned NFL franchises.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 26, 2023, 01:19:13 PM
You said an owner would help. I dispute that, citing many examples of poorly-owned NFL franchises.
So you're at least partially blaming the failures of those franchises on their owners.
Surely the opposite logic applies when it comes to successful teams, right? Can I just list the last 10 Super Bowl winners as evidence? Must have been the owners, right? Explain to me why it's different with successful teams.
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2023, 01:40:42 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 26, 2023, 01:19:13 PM
You said an owner would help. I dispute that, citing many examples of poorly-owned NFL franchises.
So you're at least partially blaming the failures of those franchises on their owners.
Surely the opposite logic applies when it comes to successful teams, right? Can I just list the last 10 Super Bowl winners as evidence? Must have been the owners, right? Explain to me why it's different with successful teams.
If owners are going to hog the spotlight and take the credit when their teams do well (as is their right), then they should accept (or privately acknowledge) the blame when their teams to poorly. Of course, a lot of reasons why teams win or lose.
A "well-run" or "poorly-run" franchise generally starts with ownership, but rarely is the owner anywhere close to the #1 factor in roster building or anything that actually happens on the field. (The 2022 Colts are possibly a notable exception.)
Agreed that the owner is far down on the list of what affects a team's success. And I wasn't saying that the Packers would be that much better as a franchise if they had an owner. I was simply saying that it would have helped in not squandering draft picks via trade because the team president talked too much.
I can think of one recent example where an owner significantly changed a team's course for the better: Stan Kroenke funding SoFi Stadium and moving the Rams to LA. And on the flip side, also one: Dan Snyder's entire existence. That's it.
The owners are the bosses. They make the hiring decisions about who runs their team. They absolutely are to blame if their team has sucked for a quarter century. A couple bad seasons are a fluke and attributable to any number of factors, but if they are consistently bad or mediocre for decades, then clearly there's something wrong at the top of the organization. Fish rots from the head, yo.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 27, 2023, 01:14:39 PM
The owners are the bosses. They make the hiring decisions about who runs their team. They absolutely are to blame if their team has sucked for a quarter century. A couple bad seasons are a fluke and attributable to any number of factors, but if they are consistently bad or mediocre for decades, then clearly there's something wrong at the top of the organization. Fish rots from the head, yo.
You're avoiding my question.
Quote from: thspfc on March 26, 2023, 01:40:42 PM
So you're at least partially blaming the failures of those franchises on their owners.
Surely the opposite logic applies when it comes to successful teams, right? Can I just list the last 10 Super Bowl winners as evidence? Must have been the owners, right? Explain to me why it's different with successful teams.
The least that any owner can do is hire an executive, Team VP or CEO/COO, and that executive does the rest: hire a General Manager, Talent scouts, public relations, marketing, etc. All the owner does is in this case is administer paychecks and be hands off and just sit back. The results fall on all levels; the only thing the owner can do is change his executive running a different show.
The most the owner could also take on all other roles himself outside of coaching and playing; Jerry Jones is the owner, president, and general manager of the Cowboys. In this case the weight of the results increase drastically on the owner compared to the silent owner.
I guess my point is that I believe the weight of the success/failure varies according to how much the owner does to his organization.
One month until the draft!
Lamar Jackson has requested a trade from the Ravens.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2023, 12:47:21 PM
Lamar Jackson has requested a trade from the Ravens.
He reported it himself. Definitely a unique situation, and you could argue whether he should want to leave the Ravens, but I kind of like the fact that he's going against the grain and not giving any agent or insider information.
Quote from: webny99 on March 28, 2023, 01:59:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2023, 12:47:21 PM
Lamar Jackson has requested a trade from the Ravens.
He reported it himself. Definitely a unique situation, and you could argue whether he should want to leave the Ravens, but I kind of like the fact that he's going against the grain and not giving any agent or insider information.
He also requested it a few weeks ago, and nobody else found out until now.
Lamar Jackson is playing the only cards he has the best he can. He (and the league) are haunted by the ghost of Deshaun Watson's Cleveland contract.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 28, 2023, 03:18:56 PM
Lamar Jackson is playing the only cards he has the best he can. He (and the league) are haunted by the ghost of Deshaun Watson's Cleveland contract.
Browns playing 4D chess to screw over a division rival
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 28, 2023, 03:18:56 PM
Lamar Jackson is playing the only cards he has the best he can. He (and the league) are haunted by the ghost of Deshaun Watson's Cleveland contract.
I think the Browns' strategy might have been to screw all the other teams, especially if they can't fix themselves, by the illusion that QBs are worth fully guaranteed contracts.
Quote from: thspfc on March 27, 2023, 02:37:55 PM
Surely the opposite logic applies when it comes to successful teams, right? Can I just list the last 10 Super Bowl winners as evidence? Must have been the owners, right? Explain to me why it's different with successful teams.
Well just as a couple crap seasons can be somewhat of a circumstantial fluke, so to can a couple of great seasons. It would take sustained success; repeated playoff appearances over many years, not just a single SB victory or even appearance as evidence of 'good' ownership. Take the Bears. They've been pretty awful my entire football-conscious life, except for that one year where they made it to the SB on the strength of a great defense, a once-a-generation return man and a quarterback who was just good enough to not fuck it up. It's basically a fluke season in the context of the last 30 years and says nothing about the ownership being good.
Of course by that measure, should-be sex offender Robert Kraft is a goddamn genius even though I've hated his guts long before he got the ol' rub n' tug down in Florida. Being a terrible person doesn't always go hand in hand with being a terrible owner. Kraft created the management that could build around Brady and do what they did.
For contrast, let's slide over to Dallas and the biggest ego in the owner's group. Here's an owner who has measurably fucked his team since Troy Aikmen retired by putting his thumb on the scale in terms of draft picks, coaching, and talent. And all it's gotten Dallas is successful broadcasting careers for ex players. And a lot of one-and-done Januaries. There's the saying of "always a bridesmaid, never the bride"; well for Dallas it's more like "always the flower girl, never the bride" since Aikmen retired. And that is squarely on Jerry Googly-Eyes Jones.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 28, 2023, 03:25:29 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 28, 2023, 03:18:56 PM
Lamar Jackson is playing the only cards he has the best he can. He (and the league) are haunted by the ghost of Deshaun Watson's Cleveland contract.
Browns playing 4D chess to screw over a division rival
Especially a division rival whose very existence came at their expense back in 1995.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 28, 2023, 07:21:27 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 27, 2023, 02:37:55 PM
Surely the opposite logic applies when it comes to successful teams, right? Can I just list the last 10 Super Bowl winners as evidence? Must have been the owners, right? Explain to me why it's different with successful teams.
Well just as a couple crap seasons can be somewhat of a circumstantial fluke, so to can a couple of great seasons. It would take sustained success; repeated playoff appearances over many years, not just a single SB victory or even appearance as evidence of 'good' ownership.
I don't know what your definition for this is, but 16/32 teams have had a stretch of at least 3 playoff apps in 4 years over the last decade:
- Patriots
- Bills
- Steelers
- Ravens
- Bengals
- Texans (who were on your list of teams cited in your initial reply)
- Titans
- Chiefs
- Broncos
- Eagles
- Saints
- Panthers
- Buccaneers
- Seahawks
- Rams
- 49ers
If we increase it to 4 apps in 5 years , then 12 teams qualify. Over a third of the league, that made the playoffs 80% of the time, in a system where only ~43% of teams make the playoffs (before 2020 it was ~37%).
QuoteTake the Bears. They've been pretty awful my entire football-conscious life, except for that one year where they made it to the SB on the strength of a great defense, a once-a-generation return man and a quarterback who was just good enough to not fuck it up. It's basically a fluke season in the context of the last 30 years and says nothing about the ownership being good.
That's fair. It's an extreme example though.
QuoteOf course by that measure, Robert Kraft is a goddamn genius even though I've hated his guts long before he got the ol' rub n' tug down in Florida. Being a terrible person doesn't always go hand in hand with being a terrible owner. Kraft created the management that could build around Brady and do what they did.
Exactly my point. For every bad example, using the same logic, there's a good one.
QuoteFor contrast, let's slide over to Dallas and the biggest ego in the owner's group. Here's an owner who has measurably fucked his team since Troy Aikmen retired by putting his thumb on the scale in terms of draft picks, coaching, and talent. And all it's gotten Dallas is successful broadcasting careers for ex players. And a lot of one-and-done Januaries. There's the saying of "always a bridesmaid, never the bride"; well for Dallas it's more like "always the flower girl, never the bride" since Aikmen retired. And that is squarely on Jerry Googly-Eyes Jones.
You're crediting the Cowboys success in the 90s to their players. Which I 100% agree with. But again, by the exact same logic, you should be placing the blame for the Cowboys more recent struggles on the players. You're giving Jones none of the credit when things go right but all the blame when things go wrong.
Quoteshould-be sex offender Robert Kraft
I'm not sure what you know about the case that the police don't, because Kraft was not charged with anything: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/sports/robert-kraft-prostitution-patriots.html
QuoteAnd a lot of one-and-done Januaries.
You're arguing on behalf of the Packers' lack of an owner. Using another team's playoff failures as evidence that the Packers are better off without an owner.
Surely you see the irony there? No team has choked more in the playoffs than Green Bay over the last decade. Dallas hasn't been to the playoffs as much, and they certainly haven't done a whole lot upon getting there. (Packers are 6-7, Cowboys are 3-5.) But in the last 10 years Green Bay has more postseason meltdowns than you can count on one hand. If we go back another 10 years, sure there's the championship in there, (what if that's a
fluke?) but in 2011 they had probably the most embarrassing one-and-done in NFL history, coming off a 15-1 season and getting ran out of their own stadium by a Giants team that barely made the playoffs. Plus Favre's blunder in 2007 and 4th & 26 in 2003.
Hi all. Apologies if this has come up before and I missed it.
What is the reasoning behind having a single bye week, and not two?
I've been trying to think of something, and I can't come up with anything that isn't overly technical (like programming difficulties or something). Neither my cousin or I can find any official explanation, either.
I originally thought it could be related to the Super Bowl, since that is planned in advance. But starting the season a little earlier could allow for an extra bye week and maintain the current Super Bowl schedule. Obviously some teams (Miami) would benefit from that more than others.
^^ They tried 2 bye weeks in 1993. They found the competition to be too diluted in the bye weeks.
Quote from: Big John on March 29, 2023, 07:08:23 PM
^^ They tried 2 bye weeks in 1993. They found the competition to be too diluted in the bye weeks.
Things have changed since then, though. There are four more teams, and 17 games over 18 weeks.
IIRC, each team also got two bye weeks from 1999 to 2001, when there were 31 teams. That setup made a whole lot more sense than it did in 1993, with the league still at 28 teams at the time.
Quote from: Henry on March 29, 2023, 10:18:59 PM
IIRC, each team also got two bye weeks from 1999 to 2001, when there were 31 teams. That setup made a whole lot more sense than it did in 1993, with the league still at 28 teams at the time.
There was only one bye week, but with 31 teams, it was spread out throughout the year with a team with a week 1 bye and another team with a week 17 bye.
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Of course, no one in the NYC area will notice. No wonder they're so eager to get Aaron Rodgers.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 30, 2023, 02:16:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Of course, no one in the NYC area will notice. No wonder they're so eager to get Aaron Rodgers.
Hopefully the Jets time with Rodgers goes about as well as their time with Favre.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 30, 2023, 02:16:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Of course, no one in the NYC area will notice. No wonder they're so eager to get Aaron Rodgers.
Hopefully the Jets time with Rodgers goes about as well as their time with Favre.
Even that would be their best season in 13 years.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 30, 2023, 02:16:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Of course, no one in the NYC area will notice. No wonder they're so eager to get Aaron Rodgers.
Hopefully the Jets time with Rodgers goes about as well as their time with Favre.
Rodgers wants to join the Jets, Favre didn't.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 30, 2023, 02:16:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 30, 2023, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 30, 2023, 03:07:51 AM
Congratulations to the NY Jets! With the Sacramento Kings winning tonight and clinching their first playoff berth since 2005-06, the Jets now have the longest playoff drought in the Big Four sports, last making it in 2010-11.
J! E! T! S!
May it never end
Of course, no one in the NYC area will notice. No wonder they're so eager to get Aaron Rodgers.
Hopefully the Jets time with Rodgers goes about as well as their time with Favre.
hopefully your life of sports is worse than mine
If the Jets were in the NFC, they'd be a near-lock to make the playoffs. They beat the Packers, who nearly made the playoffs last year, by 17 points with Zach Wilson, and the NFC QB rankings and teams in general have largely gotten even more suspect since then.
I don't remember at what point last offseason we started "forking" teams, but there's exactly 1 of 32 teams that I would feel comfortable forking right now, and that's the Arizona Cardinals. Other than the Cardinals there's not a single team that I would say has zero chance to win their division, much less make the playoffs as a wild card. Definitely not touching either East or North division, but there are a few new teams that I would at least put in the conversation: Titans, Colts (depending on what they do at QB), Bucs, and Rams. No idea how I got to 12 teams last year, even post-draft.
Quote from: webny99 on March 31, 2023, 10:16:22 AM
If the Jets were in the NFC, they'd be a near-lock to make the playoffs. They beat the Packers, who nearly made the playoffs last year, by 17 points with Zach Wilson, and the NFC QB rankings and teams in general have largely gotten even more suspect since then.
I don't remember at what point last offseason we started "forking" teams, but there's exactly 1 of 32 teams that I would feel comfortable forking right now, and that's the Arizona Cardinals. Other than the Cardinals there's not a single team that I would say has zero chance to win their division, much less make the playoffs as a wild card. Definitely not touching either East or North division, but there are a few new teams that I would at least put in the conversation: Titans, Colts (depending on what they do at QB), Bucs, and Rams. No idea how I got to 12 teams last year, even post-draft.
fork the jets
I think if OBJ had to choose between the Jets and Ravens, it would be based on which quarterback gets signed first between Aaron and Lamar.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 04, 2023, 08:17:46 PM
I think if OBJ had to choose between the Jets and Ravens, it would be based on which quarterback gets signed first between Aaron and Lamar.
Nope, it was all about the money.
The Haskins family is suing four people, a golf course, two restaurants, a hotel, a rental car company, the Florida DOT (???), the contractor that provided the signage for I-595 (ROFL), the truck company, and the truck driver in regards to Haskins' death: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36147099/dwayne-haskins-drugged-blackmail-conspiracy-death-lawsuit-alleges?platform=amp
I will partially reserve judgement until it's decided in court, but I think suing 13 completely different entities at once (a year later, after not pressing charges on anyone), is a pretty clear tell that this is a terrible attempt at a money grab.
I feel like the Ravens know that Lamar could come back. If they knew he was leaving they wouldn't have thrown all that money at OBJ.
Which will make it even more hilarious if Lamar doesn't come back and OBJ is left to rot
Quote from: ET21 on April 11, 2023, 10:07:08 AM
Which will make it even more hilarious if Lamar doesn't come back and OBJ is left to rot
Nah he was pro bowl QB Tyler Huntley throwing to him
The Washington, D.C. football fandom's long nightmare is almost over:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/13/business/washington-commanders-deal/index.html
Really looking forward to the Draft, lotta QB desperate teams and the Bears picking 9th
I would like to believe that Jalen Hurts will be a solid investment by the Eagles, but now signing him to be the highest paid QB in the league, I can only hope the Eagles won't regret it later down the road.
Quote from: jgb191 on April 18, 2023, 12:20:03 AM
I would like to believe that Jalen Hurts will be a solid investment by the Eagles, but now signing him to be the highest paid QB in the league, I can only hope the Eagles won't regret it later down the road.
What could they have done instead?
You need the guy. If you have the guy, you pay him what the market demands. It's crazy to me that in 2023 so many fans still don't understand how the quarterback market works. "Highest-paid player in the history of the league" means "most recent top 12 QB to sign a new contract" . He will be surpassed for sure by the end of next offseason, and likely within the next couple months by Burrow and Herbert.
Drafting Patrick Mahomes every 5 years is not an option, despite what fans on the internet will tell you. The narrative that big quarterback contracts will tank your franchise is dumbfounding, especially since the last 3 Super Bowl champions have had their QB on a big contract.
^ There are 22 starters on each team (eleven on each side), if one player get the largest slice of the pie, how much is there left for the remaining 21 players? It's like you buy two dozen donuts for your 22 employees and one of them is offered ten donuts, how do you divide the remaining donuts left for all your other players? I guess what I'm trying to get at is that one player can't beat an entire team all by himself?
NFL Sunday Ticket is finally available to everyone via YouTube TV! I'm a current user, so I got a $249 deal for the upcoming season - a no-brainer IMO.
Quote from: jgb191 on April 18, 2023, 01:38:24 PM
^ There are 22 starters on each team (eleven on each side), if one player get the largest slice of the pie, how much is there left for the remaining 21 players? It's like you buy two dozen donuts for your 22 employees and one of them is offered ten donuts, how do you divide the remaining donuts left for all your other players? I guess what I'm trying to get at is that one player can't beat an entire team all by himself?
Again: the quarterback market.
What should they have done instead? A top-tier QB in 2023 costs about $50 million per year. You either pay that $50 million or you roll with whoever you can find in the draft (who, overwhelmingly likely, will not be nearly as good). Teams without top-tier QBs are rarely successful.
You need a franchise quarterback, and keeping him on a small contract indefinitely is simply not an option. You pay him his market value, or you let him walk. If you let him walk, you have no franchise QB, and therefore you will almost certainly not be successful.
Whether this level of QB salary cap dominance is sustainable is a completely different question, but that's basically irrelevant. Next year the market value might be $55 million or it might be $45 million. It will still be a large portion of the cap that teams who are fortunate enough to have a franchise QB will have to pay.
It just stands out because we tend to associate best paid with best player. So when the highest paid QB is clearly not the best player in the league, people open their mouths based solely on that.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 11:51:16 AM
It just stands out because we tend to associate best paid with best player. So when the highest paid QB is clearly not the best player in the league, people open their mouths based solely on that.
It's all supply and demand.
With Brady's retirement, you could argue that the best player in the league is making only $6 million a year - Justin Tucker. He's the only GOAT of a position that's currently playing.
It's done. Aaron Rodgers has been traded to the Jets.
Wow, the Packers had to deal two draft picks as well as Rodgers? Interesting.
Jets get: Rodgers and GB's 1st and 5th round picks in this year's draft.
Packers get: Jets' 1st, 2nd, 6th round picks this year and a second round pick next year.
That 2024 pick will be a first rounder if Rodgers plays 65% of this year's snaps for the Jets. So stay healthy?
I hope the latest ARod to grace the New York sports scene can handle a much different media landscape than the one he left in Wisconsin.
And so ends the latest chapter in the Bears-Packers saga. (https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2023/4/24/23696938/goodbye-good-riddance-to-aaron-rodgers-packers-jets-trade-bears-justin-fields-jordan-love)
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 24, 2023, 06:23:35 PM
I hope the latest ARod former Packers QB to grace the New York sports scene can handle a much different media landscape than the one he left in Wisconsin.
FTFY
Of course, we remember the last time the Jets poached a signal-caller from the Cheeseheads; he was never the same again.
Quote from: Henry on April 24, 2023, 10:33:40 PM
And so ends the latest chapter in the Bears-Packers saga. (https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2023/4/24/23696938/goodbye-good-riddance-to-aaron-rodgers-packers-jets-trade-bears-justin-fields-jordan-love)
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 24, 2023, 06:23:35 PM
I hope the latest ARod former Packers QB to grace the New York sports scene can handle a much different media landscape than the one he left in Wisconsin.
FTFY
Of course, we remember the last time the Jets poached a signal-caller from the Cheeseheads; he was never the same again.
And just think, with any luck, the Packers will have yet another QB to own the Bears for the next 15 years. :bigass:
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 24, 2023, 04:45:40 PM
Wow, the Packers had to deal two draft picks as well as Rodgers? Interesting.
Jets get: Rodgers and GB's 1st and 5th round picks in this year's draft.
Packers get: Jets' 1st, 2nd, 6th round picks this year and a second round pick next year.
That 2024 pick will be a first rounder if Rodgers plays 65% of this year's snaps for the Jets. So stay healthy?
If you consider the first round swap is about the difference between the value of the 5th/6th swap, the deal is basically Rodgers for a second and a conditional first/second round pick with the pick swaps mostly a wash. Wanting to move up two spots could mean they're targeting someone like Smith-Njigba or Van Ness. But at least now all the speculation is over.
Quote from: skluth on April 25, 2023, 12:30:47 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 24, 2023, 04:45:40 PM
Wow, the Packers had to deal two draft picks as well as Rodgers? Interesting.
Jets get: Rodgers and GB's 1st and 5th round picks in this year's draft.
Packers get: Jets' 1st, 2nd, 6th round picks this year and a second round pick next year.
That 2024 pick will be a first rounder if Rodgers plays 65% of this year's snaps for the Jets. So stay healthy?
If you consider the first round swap is about the difference between the value of the 5th/6th swap, the deal is basically Rodgers for a second and a conditional first/second round pick with the pick swaps mostly a wash. Wanting to move up two spots could mean they're targeting someone like Smith-Njigba or Van Ness. But at least now all the speculation is over.
Knowing Green Bay, they'll probably pick another linebacker and leave Love out to dry just like they did Rodgers last year. Or God forbid a running back - I know Bijan is good, but RB is literally the last position they need right now. They have to go either WR or o-line. They also need a TE, but that's not as important as WR and OL.
Quote from: thspfc on April 25, 2023, 07:47:00 AM
Quote from: skluth on April 25, 2023, 12:30:47 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 24, 2023, 04:45:40 PM
Wow, the Packers had to deal two draft picks as well as Rodgers? Interesting.
Jets get: Rodgers and GB's 1st and 5th round picks in this year's draft.
Packers get: Jets' 1st, 2nd, 6th round picks this year and a second round pick next year.
That 2024 pick will be a first rounder if Rodgers plays 65% of this year's snaps for the Jets. So stay healthy?
If you consider the first round swap is about the difference between the value of the 5th/6th swap, the deal is basically Rodgers for a second and a conditional first/second round pick with the pick swaps mostly a wash. Wanting to move up two spots could mean they're targeting someone like Smith-Njigba or Van Ness. But at least now all the speculation is over.
Knowing Green Bay, they'll probably pick another linebacker and leave Love out to dry just like they did Rodgers last year. Or God forbid a running back - I know Bijan is good, but RB is literally the last position they need right now. They have to go either WR or o-line. They also need a TE, but that's not as important as WR and OL.
They also need an edge rusher badly. The pass rush fell apart after Gary was injured last year.
As a Packers fan, I am happy with the trade to the Jets. I really like the conditional 2nd that can easily become a 1st as long as Aaron is healthy.
I had a dream that C.J. Stroud fell to almost the end of the first round in the draft
Lamar Jackson finally agrees to a deal with the Ravens.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 27, 2023, 03:33:48 PM
I had a dream that C.J. Stroud fell to almost the end of the first round in the draft
Your dreams need work. :D :D :D
Green Bay astonishes me again. Every first round, four years running. WHY? You need to find out what you have in Love, and if he has no protection and nobody open, you're not going to. Picking defense there not only sets them back for this year, but for the future as well. If Love isn't it then Gutekunst needs to go. He might need to go anyway, but Love busting would be the last straw for sure.
Don't mind the Cowboys pick at all, maybe could have gone CB but DT is fine.
Seattle steals Smith-Njigba at 20 after drafting a corner at 5, which seemed puzzling at the time, but now looks like a genius move. If Geno continues to play well and everyone stays healthy, that offense will be dangerous.
Atlanta ranked bottom 10 in the league in passing offense, rushing defense, and passing defense. They ranked 3rd in rushing offense. And they drafted a running back with the 8th overall pick. I know Bijan should be good, but with a projected first round QB in Levis, four strong WRs, and plenty of defensive options, they went running back? While their list of weaknesses comprises basically everything except for rushing offense? Boggles the mind.
I can only hope Nick Caserio knows what he's doing this years draft. I don't know much about college football, but I'm hearing mixed reactions about C.J. and Will Jr. -- many feeling good about them and some are questioning both picks. And since NFL is a different game from college football, we won't know until after they've been adjusted to pros. Until then, I wouldn't be surprised if Davis Mills retains his starting role.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 12:36:27 AM
Green Bay astonishes me again. Every first round, four years running. WHY? You need to find out what you have in Love, and if he has no protection and nobody open, you're not going to. Picking defense there not only sets them back for this year, but for the future as well. If Love isn't it then Gutekunst needs to go. He might need to go anyway, but Love busting would be the last straw for sure.
Don't mind the Cowboys pick at all, maybe could have gone CB but DT is fine.
Seattle steals Smith-Njigba at 20 after drafting a corner at 5, which seemed puzzling at the time, but now looks like a genius move. If Geno continues to play well and everyone stays healthy, that offense will be dangerous.
Atlanta ranked bottom 10 in the league in passing offense, rushing defense, and passing defense. They ranked 3rd in rushing offense. And they drafted a running back with the 8th overall pick. I know Bijan should be good, but with a projected first round QB in Levis, four strong WRs, and plenty of defensive options, they went running back? While their list of weaknesses comprises basically everything except for rushing offense? Boggles the mind.
As a Bears fan, I rather enjoyed both the Packers and Lions picks. Lions took a RB after signing two in free agency.
Definitely interesting how the Jalen Carter situation ultimately played out (especially for me, as a Bears fan).
There was a part of me that wanted to see Ryan Poles take a chance on Carter once he fell to 9, but as soon as he swapped to 10 with Philly I knew that meant he was never going to pull the trigger (and he basically confirmed as much later by sidestepping any Carter questions). I think that 9-10 swap made sense to both sides - Philly is in a position to take a chance on a player with off-field concerns given their coming off a deep playoff run, and having multiple former Georgia teammates doesn't hurt either. Maybe (read, hopefully) Chicago can be in such a position in the future, but with where they are right now it was much smarter to go the safe route with Darnell Wright at RT, so getting an extra 4th out of it doesn't hurt. I imagine Poles's bargaining power was limited if other teams knew he was never going to take Carter, but at the end of the night he indicated it had more to do with not trading down so far as to risk missing out on Wright (and Peter Skoronski & Broderick Jones wound up both going not long afterward to round out the top 4 OT's).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on April 28, 2023, 09:02:03 AM
As a Bears fan, I rather enjoyed both the Packers and Lions picks. Lions took a RB after signing two in free agency.
Fun fact, apparently Van Ness is dating Cole Kmet's sister. A new wrinkle to add to the Packers-Bears rivalry after the departure of Rodgers :-D
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 28, 2023, 09:52:55 AM
Definitely interesting how the Jalen Carter situation ultimately played out (especially for me, as a Bears fan).
There was a part of me that wanted to see Ryan Poles take a chance on Carter once he fell to 9, but as soon as he swapped to 10 with Philly I knew that meant he was never going to pull the trigger (and he basically confirmed as much later by sidestepping any Carter questions). I think that 9-10 swap made sense to both sides - Philly is in a position to take a chance on a player with off-field concerns given their coming off a deep playoff run, and having multiple former Georgia teammates doesn't help either. Maybe (read, hopefully) Chicago can be in such a position in the future, but with where they are right now it was much smarter to go the safe route with Darnell Wright at RT, so getting an extra 4th out of it doesn't hurt. I imagine Poles's bargaining power was limited if other teams knew he was never going to take Carter, but at the end of the night he indicated it had more to do with not trading down so far as to risk missing out on Wright (and Peter Skoronski & Broderick Jones wound up both going not long afterward to round out the top 4 OT's).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on April 28, 2023, 09:02:03 AM
As a Bears fan, I rather enjoyed both the Packers and Lions picks. Lions took a RB after signing two in free agency.
Fun fact, apparently Van Ness is dating Cole Kmet's sister. A new wrinkle to add to the Packers-Bears rivalry after the departure of Rodgers :-D
Poles said that he had better offers to trade down farther than #10, but didn't want to risk Wright not being available. They had him rated much higher than Skoronski and Jones even though that wasn't the consensus.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 28, 2023, 09:52:55 AM
Definitely interesting how the Jalen Carter situation ultimately played out (especially for me, as a Bears fan).
There was a part of me that wanted to see Ryan Poles take a chance on Carter once he fell to 9, but as soon as he swapped to 10 with Philly I knew that meant he was never going to pull the trigger (and he basically confirmed as much later by sidestepping any Carter questions). I think that 9-10 swap made sense to both sides - Philly is in a position to take a chance on a player with off-field concerns given their coming off a deep playoff run, and having multiple former Georgia teammates doesn't help either. Maybe (read, hopefully) Chicago can be in such a position in the future, but with where they are right now it was much smarter to go the safe route with Darnell Wright at RT, so getting an extra 4th out of it doesn't hurt. I imagine Poles's bargaining power was limited if other teams knew he was never going to take Carter, but at the end of the night he indicated it had more to do with not trading down so far as to risk missing out on Wright (and Peter Skoronski & Broderick Jones wound up both going not long afterward to round out the top 4 OT's).
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on April 28, 2023, 09:02:03 AM
As a Bears fan, I rather enjoyed both the Packers and Lions picks. Lions took a RB after signing two in free agency.
Fun fact, apparently Van Ness is dating Cole Kmet's sister. A new wrinkle to add to the Packers-Bears rivalry after the departure of Rodgers :-D
And Kmet will likely be blocking Van Ness. That's hilarious
Quote from: Henry on April 24, 2023, 10:33:40 PM
And so ends the latest chapter in the Bears-Packers saga. (https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2023/4/24/23696938/goodbye-good-riddance-to-aaron-rodgers-packers-jets-trade-bears-justin-fields-jordan-love)
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 24, 2023, 06:23:35 PM
I hope the latest ARod former Packers QB to grace the New York sports scene can handle a much different media landscape than the one he left in Wisconsin.
FTFY
Of course, we remember the last time the Jets poached a signal-caller from the Cheeseheads; he was never the same again.
I heard through the grapevines that many Jets fans are comparing their deal for Rodgers with the deal that the Packers made in the early to mid 1970s for John Hadl.
:-P
Mike
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 12:36:27 AM
Green Bay astonishes me again. Every first round, four years running. WHY? You need to find out what you have in Love, and if he has no protection and nobody open, you're not going to. Picking defense there not only sets them back for this year, but for the future as well. If Love isn't it then Gutekunst needs to go. He might need to go anyway, but Love busting would be the last straw for sure.
Don't mind the Cowboys pick at all, maybe could have gone CB but DT is fine.
Seattle steals Smith-Njigba at 20 after drafting a corner at 5, which seemed puzzling at the time, but now looks like a genius move. If Geno continues to play well and everyone stays healthy, that offense will be dangerous.
Atlanta ranked bottom 10 in the league in passing offense, rushing defense, and passing defense. They ranked 3rd in rushing offense. And they drafted a running back with the 8th overall pick. I know Bijan should be good, but with a projected first round QB in Levis, four strong WRs, and plenty of defensive options, they went running back? While their list of weaknesses comprises basically everything except for rushing offense? Boggles the mind.
I was fine with the Packers pick. The rush disappeared after Gary's injury. I wanted either a pass rusher or OT and they can survive with their current OL group for one year. The Bears got someone to protect Fields before he becomes yet another banged up QB and the Vikings smartly got someone to try and replace Thielen. The Lions picks left me in hysterics. Is there any worse team at team development strategy than the Lions? The Cards and Bengals may have stupid, cheap owners, but no team consistently makes idiot decisions (remember Mullen) like the Lions.
Sliding Detroit into opening night at KC is a bold move by the league, though it makes a lot of sense from the standpoint that opening night will probably draw roughly the same ratings regardless of who's playing (save for the Cowboys). Lions @ Chiefs wouldn't be a ratings giant in other timeslots, especially if the Lions don't play up to expectations, while the Bills, Bengals, and Eagles @ Chiefs games will be huge for ratings. Though I'm surprised they have the Bills and Bengals playing the Chiefs so late in the season (weeks 14 and 17) considering the likelihood that they meet again in the playoffs.
Detroit has 2 national games in the first 4 weeks, 3 in the first 8, and only one (@ Dallas) after that, excluding their usual Thanksgiving game. To me that says that FWIW, the schedule makers are not confident that they're going to be good, so they're hedging their bets in the event they're bad, while also still getting ratings out of them while the hype is there early in the year. That might seem out there, but the same thing happened with the Broncos last year - they had 4 national games in the first 6 weeks, and only two after that (one of which got flexed out).
Same thing with the Jets to an extent - 9 of their first 11 are national games, and only 1 of their last 7 is. Even if they're still bad, we're going to be seeing a LOT of them, which might be kinda entertaining.
6 national games for the Bears. No thanks.
I tentatively have the Cowboys at 11-6, for I believe the 3rd straight year. Relatively tough start, could easily be 4-4 at midseason. Then a strong finish with losses only to Buffalo and somebody else.
Almost forgot, the Rams are this year's recipient of a free win by virtue of playing the Packers on the first week of November. Going on 11 years, it's always held true.
(https://i.imgur.com/QP5gvyz.png)
Commanders (http://'https://twitter.com/Commanders/status/1657128376291688448')
(https://i.imgur.com/ILkp0Go.png)
RapSheet (http://'https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1657117669743644682')
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2023, 09:38:48 PM
Lions @ Chiefs wouldn't be a ratings giant in other timeslots, especially if the Lions don't play up to expectations
The Lions have expectations?
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 13, 2023, 12:30:50 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2023, 09:38:48 PM
Lions @ Chiefs wouldn't be a ratings giant in other timeslots, especially if the Lions don't play up to expectations
The Lions have expectations?
Yes, they have the highest O/U win total in the NFC North and shortest odds to win the division. They're everyone's "sleeper team" that isn't really a sleeper at all. But they're still the Lions until proven otherwise. They would have been the 6 seed in the playoffs if they didn't self destruct in week 16 at Carolina.
I knew this day would eventually come:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/37657287/peacock-exclusively-carry-nfl-playoff-game
QuoteThe NFL is taking another big step into streaming by putting one of its playoff games exclusively on a digital platform for the first time.
The league and NBCUniversal announced Monday that the Saturday night game on wild-card weekend will be on Peacock.
The Peacock exclusive game on Jan. 13 will start at 8:15 or 8:30 p.m. ET. The game will be broadcast on NBC stations in the markets of the two teams. It will also be available on mobile devices through the NFL+ package. It will be preceded by a late afternoon playoff game on NBC and Peacock that will kick off at 4:30 p.m. ET.
One of the reasons the NFL is so popular is because the majority of the games are still available on free OTA TV. They're slowly chipping away at that. I realize streaming is the future with many people cord cutting, but not everyone has every streaming app and has internet that is fast enough to stream. And Peacock has a fraction of the subscribers of Amazon Prime.
Peacock+ comes free with my Xfinity.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 10:40:08 AM
Peacock+ comes free with my Xfinity.
xfinity/Comcast owns NBC/Peacock.
My cable provider is Spectrum and Peacock is not on it.
Quote from: Big John on May 16, 2023, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 10:40:08 AM
Peacock+ comes free with my Xfinity.
xfinity/Comcast owns NBC/Peacock.
My cable provider is Spectrum and Peacock is not on it.
Even if it didn't come free, I'd pay for it for its Premier League coverage.
What kills me is moving these games to streaming is not because those networks have such a crowded line-up they don't want to detract from. It's all just a scheme to get people signing up for more streaming services they probably won't use enough to make it worth their while. I had the same annoyance with the NFL when they started moving some games to cable back when that was the "premium" TV service.
Like I don't even know what's on a network like NBC any more. I assume wall-to-wall laws and orders, some stupid singing shows, and people yelling while cooking?
Can't preempt that for a sports game! :eyebrow:
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Big John on May 16, 2023, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 10:40:08 AM
Peacock+ comes free with my Xfinity.
xfinity/Comcast owns NBC/Peacock.
My cable provider is Spectrum and Peacock is not on it.
Even if it didn't come free, I'd pay for it for its Premier League coverage.
PL coverage at least gets you hundreds of games over 10 months out of the year. This is paying to watch a single game.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 16, 2023, 03:05:57 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Big John on May 16, 2023, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on May 16, 2023, 10:40:08 AM
Peacock+ comes free with my Xfinity.
xfinity/Comcast owns NBC/Peacock.
My cable provider is Spectrum and Peacock is not on it.
Even if it didn't come free, I'd pay for it for its Premier League coverage.
PL coverage at least gets you hundreds of games over 10 months out of the year. This is paying to watch a single game.
Sure. I was just talking about Peacock in general. If my Vikings happen to be in this game and I didn't already have a subscription, I'd probably subscribe for a month as that's still cheaper than my tab at a sports bar.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 16, 2023, 11:59:28 AM
What kills me is moving these games to streaming is not because those networks have such a crowded line-up they don't want to detract from. It's all just a scheme to get people signing up for more streaming services they probably won't use enough to make it worth their while. I had the same annoyance with the NFL when they started moving some games to cable back when that was the "premium" TV service.
Like I don't even know what's on a network like NBC any more. I assume wall-to-wall laws and orders, some stupid singing shows, and people yelling while cooking?
Can't preempt that for a sports game! :eyebrow:
I wouldn't doubt the $$$ is what moving to streaming is about. But just yesterday I was listening to a sports talk show host ranting about games moving to streaming, and his ire was not about the cost. He didn't even mention that. His knickers were in a knot about being "locked into" the game -- no commercial breaks during which he could channel surf to watch other games. This guy's rants usually make sense, even if one doesn't agree, but that one just floored me.
I don't even HAVE a TV receiver that I use in my residence. If there is something on that looks interesting (especially a news or special/current affairs anything), I'll catch it later on an 'on demand' feed. If it's a game, I'll sports bar it or even ignore it. Otherwise, especially for a local game that I don't have tickets for, the pictures really are much clearer for me on the radio.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on May 17, 2023, 12:50:56 PM
I don't even HAVE a TV receiver that I use in my residence. If there is something on that looks interesting (especially a news or special/current affairs anything), I'll catch it later on an 'on demand' feed. If it's a game, I'll sports bar it or even ignore it. Otherwise, especially for a local game that I don't have tickets for, the pictures really are much clearer for me on the radio.
Mike
I own an HD antenna that I used to use for over the air broadcast. It did surprisingly well for only $30.
Over the air can be tricky these days with the digital broadcasts. Frickin' Amazon van pulls up to deliver something to the neighbor and your signal suddenly gets all crunked.
Or at my place, I swear it seems like the TV has to "warm up" for a few minutes before certain channels come in clearly. Like it's a throwback to ye olden days with ancient cathode ray tubes that literally had to warm up before the damn thing would work.
Other times, I could swear the wind speed and direction is affecting which channels come in well and which channels are not. Probably not, but it's got me doing all these voodoo rituals to appease the vengeful digital over the air TV gods.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 18, 2023, 11:17:36 AM
Over the air can be tricky these days with the digital broadcasts. Frickin' Amazon van pulls up to deliver something to the neighbor and your signal suddenly gets all crunked.
Or at my place, I swear it seems like the TV has to "warm up" for a few minutes before certain channels come in clearly. Like it's a throwback to ye olden days with ancient cathode ray tubes that literally had to warm up before the damn thing would work.
Other times, I could swear the wind speed and direction is affecting which channels come in well and which channels are not. Probably not, but it's got me doing all these voodoo rituals to appease the vengeful digital over the air TV gods.
Gotta love vacuum tube electronics! When I was younger, we'd sometimes get interference on our analog TVs from on-board radars of aircraft on approach to land at ATW.
Mike
I have a 40+ year old rooftop antenna that I use to pull in the Madison stations from 60 miles away and almost never have issues. Once in a while if one of the channels is having transmitter issues might I get some pixelation. In the analog days all the stations would come in but be a little snowy, now they're all crystal clear. I haven't tried the rotor in years so I have no idea if it still works, but I also used to be able to get the Waterloo and Cedar Rapids, IA stations if I rotated the antenna to the west. I should try it again for shits and grins. But many times if you're having trouble getting reception it's the antenna, how it's located or pointed, etc. Digital TV's these days shouldn't really get interference from other appliances.
It looks like Green Bay, WI will be hosting the 2025 NFL draft.
:cheers:
Mike
The Bay Area is hosting Super Bowl LX!
So for a while now NBC has had the option to flex Sunday afternoon games to Sunday night to get a better game. That's a potential inconvenience to ticket holders, but at least it's the same day.
Now, Amazon is going to be able to flex Sunday afternoon games to Thursday nights. Much more of an inconvenience to ticket holders. I have a son in high school. What if we buy tickets for a Sunday game that gets flexed to Thursday, where we'd get home around midnight and he could have a calculus exam the next day? Not going to buy tickets and take that risk.
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Yeah, it sucks. Though, a couple things: 1) it's only available from weeks 13-17, and 2) the change has to be made at least 28 days in advance, which is double the requirement for normal time change flexes. Hopefully they use it very sparingly or not at all. The game would have to be a very obvious bust from a month out for them to move it, so I don't anticipate it being used this year.
I still don't think Thursday games are worth it, aside from Thanksgiving and opening night. And Amazon's product is not as good as Fox's was. Fox got far better ratings as well.
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
I'll fork the Cardinals
Quote from: jlam on May 27, 2023, 04:15:58 PM
I'll fork the Cardinals
I suppose I'll start the table then :-D
jlamCardinals
Everyone good with the point values and timeframes we used last year?
Quote from: thspfc on May 27, 2023, 04:30:49 PM
Quote from: jlam on May 27, 2023, 04:15:58 PM
I'll fork the Cardinals
I suppose I'll start the table then :-D
jlam
Cardinals
Everyone good with the point values and timeframes we used last year?
With Daniel Snyder finally ending his disastrous tenure as owner of the Redskins/WFT/Commanders, is Michael Bidwill becoming the next noxious owner who should be put out of his (ownership) misery?
Quote from: thspfc on May 27, 2023, 04:30:49 PM
Quote from: jlam on May 27, 2023, 04:15:58 PM
I'll fork the Cardinals
I suppose I'll start the table then :-D
jlam
Cardinals
Everyone good with the point values and timeframes we used last year?
Really we ought to just skip the game altogether and just use last year's final standings.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 30, 2023, 07:20:27 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 27, 2023, 04:30:49 PM
Quote from: jlam on May 27, 2023, 04:15:58 PM
I'll fork the Cardinals
I suppose I'll start the table then :-D
jlam
Cardinals
Everyone good with the point values and timeframes we used last year?
Really we ought to just skip the game altogether and just use last year's final standings.
Optimal strategy actually does include skipping a lot of games:
- You're tanking
- You're heavily favored to lose and need to rest for a winnable game 4 or 5 days later
- You both advance to the playoffs if you tie
- It doesn't matter for your team what happens, so you no show and get some rest for the first playoff game
- Both teams are evenly matched, and since a tie is half a win rather than 1/3 like in soccer, it's better to take a 1/2 win and get some rest rather than play with the same expected value of 1/2 win
Quote from: 1 on May 30, 2023, 07:26:52 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 30, 2023, 07:20:27 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 27, 2023, 04:30:49 PM
Quote from: jlam on May 27, 2023, 04:15:58 PM
I'll fork the Cardinals
I suppose I'll start the table then :-D
jlam
Cardinals
Everyone good with the point values and timeframes we used last year?
Really we ought to just skip the game altogether and just use last year's final standings.
Optimal strategy actually does include skipping a lot of games:
- You're tanking
- You're heavily favored to lose and need to rest for a winnable game 4 or 5 days later
- You both advance to the playoffs if you tie
- It doesn't matter for your team what happens, so you no show and get some rest for the first playoff game
- Both teams are evenly matched, and since a tie is half a win rather than 1/3 like in soccer, it's better to take a 1/2 win and get some rest rather than play with the same expected value of 1/2 win
So confused, is this serious?
Yes. While it would obviously be a problem for the team's revenue and would never happen, there are definitely some situations where no-showing or intentionally tying is better for playoff odds (or draft pick if you're tanking).
Quote from: 1 on May 31, 2023, 07:21:24 AM
Yes. While it would obviously be a problem for the team's revenue and would never happen, there are definitely some situations where no-showing or intentionally tying is better for playoff odds (or draft pick if you're tanking).
And the players, y'know, have to put food on the table.
Tanking doesn't really count for this because if the only goal for the season is to get the #1 pick, then of course you want to throw all your games. But if you're actually trying to do well . . .
Quote
You're heavily favored to lose and need to rest for a winnable game 4 or 5 days later
Over the past 10 seasons (my standard stats timeframe, didn't even look at seasons prior to that), teams win 52.8% of the time when coming off a bye. So a 2.8% increase. Forfeiting a game in order to rest up for the next game would functionally be a bye week. I know you specified Thursday games; there's likely not a meaningful amount of data regarding teams playing Thursday games off a bye. Conventional wisdom would say that a team coming into a Thursday game off a bye would have a sizeable advantage over a team coming off a game the previous Sunday, but for what it's worth, per a 2019 study, injury rates in Thursday games were actually less than those of Sunday and Monday games: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30848976/#:~:text=Results%3A%20The%20all%2Dcause%20injury,6%2C072%20per%201%2C000%20athletic%20exposures.
Whether that actually means anything is debatable. One might argue it's possible that players don't quite go 100% in Thursday games, but when you're getting paid millions to play only 17-20 games a year and there's four guys behind you on the depth chart ready to take your job at any moment, I would find it hard to believe that any player holds back in any game.
So all of that is to say, I suspect that with no other factors considered the hypothetical win probability of a team playing a Thursday night game off a bye against a team not coming off a bye is not much higher than that 52.8%. If we oversimplify it and caclulate it based on the marginal rest differential compared to a Sunday game:
14 day rest vs. 7 day rest: 7 day difference, team with more rest sees a win probability increase of 2.8%
14 day rest vs. 4 day rest: 10 day difference, so using a linear proportion, 2.8/7 = x/10, x=
4% win probability increase when forfeiting previous game
So now we compare that +4% to the win probability that the team loses in the game they forfeit. In the history of 538's game projections model, which dates back to I believe 2015, there has been exactly one game in which a team entered with a win probability of 4% or less: Giants at Eagles, 2022 week 18, in which it was known well in advance (and therefore taken into account for that 4%) that the Giants would be resting their starters to prepare for the playoffs.
So, my conclusion is that a situation in which forfeiting as a heavy underdog in order to rest for the next game - even if that game is on Thursday - increases the team's expected win total would be an extreme rarity and has not occurred in at least the last 8 seasons.
Quote
You both advance to the playoffs if you tie
Ah, 2021 Chargers/Raiders. Also an exceedingly rare spot to be in. It appeared with a couple minutes left in overtime that they were going to play to a tie, but once it became apparent to the Raiders that they had a chance to win on a long field goal and better their playoff seeding, they did. While the Raiders very, very slightly decreased their playoff chances by attemtping the field goal rather than kneeling and accepting the tie (due to the chance of the kick being blocked and returned for a Chargers touchdown), they definitely increased their Super Bowl odds by doing so, as they ended up playing the 4th-seeded Bengals rather than the 2nd-seeded Chiefs who blew them out twice that year. Ironically, it was the Bengals who went to the Super Bowl, but at the time you would have been hard-pressed to find someone who saw that coming (and I think Raiders fans would agree even now that they had a better chance to beat the Bengals than the Chiefs, that game was actually close).
Bottom line is, you can't rely on the other team to agree to tie with you, because they won't. Doing so would get you a big suspension anyways. The Chargers/Raiders game was 29-14 Raiders in the 4th quarter, so clearly the Raiders were out to win from the go, and the Chargers certainly expected as much.
Quote
It doesn't matter for your team what happens, so you no show and get some rest for the first playoff game
Yes, resting starters in meaningless week 18 games is commonplace.
Quote
Both teams are evenly matched, and since a tie is half a win rather than 1/3 like in soccer, it's better to take a 1/2 win and get some rest rather than play with the same expected value of 1/2 win
I mean, mathematically I get what you're saying, but it's
extremely oversimplified and goes against the entire concept of sports.
Quote from: thspfc on May 31, 2023, 05:07:54 PM
Ah, 2021 Chargers/Raiders. Also an exceedingly rare spot to be in. It appeared with a couple minutes left in overtime that they were going to play to a tie, but once it became apparent to the Raiders that they had a chance to win on a long field goal and better their playoff seeding, they did. While the Raiders very, very slightly decreased their playoff chances by attemtping the field goal rather than kneeling and accepting the tie (due to the chance of the kick being blocked and returned for a Chargers touchdown), they definitely increased their Super Bowl odds by doing so, as they ended up playing the 4th-seeded Bengals rather than the 2nd-seeded Chiefs who blew them out twice that year. Ironically, it was the Bengals who went to the Super Bowl, but at the time you would have been hard-pressed to find someone who saw that coming (and I think Raiders fans would agree even now that they had a better chance to beat the Bengals than the Chiefs, that game was actually close).
I really wanted to see both the Chargers and Raiders tie in that game and both advance to the playoffs; the reason for my preference was that this meant that Big Ben Rothlisberger could have retired with a 'W' on his would-have-been career finale in Baltimore on Week 18. Instead the Raiders choice to eliminate the Chargers caused Big Ben to lose his career finale at Kansas City in the Wild Card game. I really wanted Ben to go out winning his last career game. Furthermore, it dashed my hopes of seeing the LA vs LA Super Bowl in LA. I had a couple of hopes!
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654). (As a Bears fan, I'm just glad that Aaron Rodgers is finally out of the NFC North!)
A-Rod is now part of the AFC East, where he joins Josh Allen, Tula Tagovailoa and Mac Jones and their teams.
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2023, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
Wait for it.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 05, 2023, 11:06:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2023, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
Wait for it.
If Amazon Prime ends up with that sort of power, Amazon will be forced through antitrust law to either spin off or sell its media content creation group (NFL production, MGM+, etc).
Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 05, 2023, 11:06:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2023, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
Wait for it.
Sure, no problem.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2023, 09:21:32 AM
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
I would be shocked if neither make it.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 05, 2023, 11:06:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2023, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
Wait for it.
Under this conspiracy theory, both teams are most likely playing 4 games after their last game. NFL rules peohibit a team playing Monday and Thursday in the same week. To give a division contender a disadvantage, they would not only need to play a team whose playoff odds won't be affected by playing Thursday night, but also won't gain an advantage by resting longer for their next game, which would most likely be the following Sunday or Monday.
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654). (As a Bears fan, I'm just glad that Aaron Rodgers is finally out of the NFC North!)
And now the Bears can have a new owner, Jordan Love!
Quote from: thspfc on August 05, 2023, 11:40:55 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 05, 2023, 11:06:12 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 23, 2023, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 23, 2023, 09:02:40 AM
This means Amazon also has influence over the champion by forcing teams to play four (or even three) days after the previous game, lowering their chance of winning that game.
Amazon does not make that decision. The league has the final say.
Wait for it.
Sure, no problem.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2023, 09:21:32 AM
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
I would be shocked if either make it.
FTFY
Four more weeks . . .
Regarding 2023 NFL in general, I think it's gonna be a great season. Probably not on the level of 2021, which, IMO, was the best ever.
League-wide, the biggest thing I'll be watching is whether passing stats (mostly sheer volume stats such as completions, attempts, yards, big plays, and TDs) continue to drop off for what would be the 3rd year in a row.
We're in a crazy paradox. QB is far and away the most important position and it seems that gap is only widening. WRs have separated themselves from the pack and are definitively #2. The running back market is in shambles. Yet passing is actually declining on paper, while 2022 was literally the best year ever for rushing.
Instead of trying to predict every team's record, I just power ranked them 1-32 and used that to determine my playoff teams. This year seems wide open, with a lot of teams I think will be hovering around .500.
To start off, there are 9 teams that I think are locks to win 10+ games. I'll explain the rankings that might be "hot takes" . . .
1. Bengals: they're more complete than Kansas City. They split with the Chiefs last year, but the only thing anyone remembers is that KC got the AFC title game.
2. Chiefs: quietly, the Chiefs have one of the weakest WR rooms in the NFL. I know, I know, losing Tyreek Hill made basically no difference, but last year they at least had Smith-Schuster as a guy who was consistently able to beat man coverage. Kadarius Toney has the skillset, but hasn't proven that he's a legit threat as a high-volume receiver, rather than just a gadget guy like he was last year. MVS is the best-known commodity, and he's a solid deep threat, but I doubt he'll top 60 catches. Obviously Kelce is still there but they're going to need significant production from other guys as well.
(... I just wrote a paragraph about how light they are at WR, and still I have them as the 2nd-best team in the league. That tells you all you need to know about Patrick Mahomes.)
3. EaglesQuote from: thspfc on December 27, 2020, 07:56:25 PM
Also, the Eagles are eliminated. I can already see the future: the Hurts novelty wears off midway through 2021. He finishes 2021 with 21 touchdowns and 16 interceptions or some below average statline like that. The media babies him for two more years, focusing on a four game stretch when he was good instead of the rest of his career, before it becomes apparent that he's not the answer, and the cycle repeats itself with a different quarterback. I will be revisiting this post in 2023.
4. Bills5. Ravens: obviously the question mark is injuries, particulary for Lamar, but the whole team has been bit by the injury bug the last couple years. Maybe this falls in tinfoil hat territory, but I geniunely believe that finally getting the bag will allow Lamar to focus more on self-preservation, and he'll tweak his playstyle to avoid injury while still being a top 10 quarterback. If they can stay healthy I think they'll have one of the best offenses in the league. This is the best group of receivers Lamar has ever had, and I expect this to be his best year as a passer. We know they'll be able to run the ball. The defense is solid, really stepping up in Lamar's absence last year.
6. 49ers7. Cowboys: too much to say, will post my "tHiS iS oUr YeAr" rant later.
8. Jets: they went 7-10 with a combination of Joe Flacco, Zach Wilson, Mike White, and injured Mike White playing quarterback. Surely Rodgers alone is worth at least 3 additional wins as he replaces those guys.
9. Seahawks: had IMO the best 2023 draft as of now, getting both a potentially elite corner and a potentially elite receiver. The Metcalf/Lockett/JSN trio will be a handful for every defense they line up against. If Witherspoon lives up to his top 5 pick status, between him and Woolen, they'll be able to run straight up cover 1 single high safety, with Quandre Diggs deep and Jamal Adams moving up into the box - next to Bobby Wagner. In short, the secondary is nasty.
I'm confident that Geno was not a one-hit wonder. His stats slipped towards the end of the year, but that was a product of playing better teams. Accuracy and efficiency are the two most sustainable quarterback traits, and those two things are what made him successful last year.
Moving down into teams I expect to be over .500, but a losing season wouldn't shock me:
10. Browns: Watson returning to his old form (on the football field, mind you) is all it'll take for this team to be a contender. They're down here because that happening is certainly not a given.
11. Lions12. Vikings: we all know they're going to regress in terms of the win column, the question is how much. Ed Donatell's scheme was suicidal for that defense, but at the same time it's certainly not the most talented unit in the league either. New DC Brian Flores will help, but ultimately the defense is still the big concern.
13. Jaguars: during their 6 game win streak they beat the . . .
- dead Titans twice
- Cowboys
- Zach Wilson/Chris Streveler (who?) Jets
- Texans
- Chargers doing Chargers things
I'm not sold on this team elevating to the level of the AFC's big three. To me they're in the middle of the pack with a bajillion others, but the difference is Jacksonville is the only decent team in a terrible division.
14. Broncos: without question the team I'm most interested to watch this year. I'll leave it at that :spin:
15. Chargers: I see this team as Jacksonville with a worse coach and a tougher division. The teams they beat on their late-season 4 game win streak had a combined record of 3-20 from week 13 onward.
16. Saints: easy division.
Teams I expect to be below .500, but a winning season wouldn't shock me:
17. Patriots: snooze
18. Steelers: snooze
19. Dolphins: Tua's health is the obvious scapegoat here, but even if he stays healthy, this team is not the juggernaut that most seem to think it is. Baltimore massively blew coverages on back-to-back drives allowing Miami to come back and win that game. Buffalo in week 3 was, statistically, a maybe-once-a-year-occurence-in-the-NFL type fluke. They scraped past the Steelers during their 2-6 start, then exploded offensively in four straight games against defenses ranked 32nd, 30th, 29th, and 15th (Browns). All things considered, Cleveland was their best win of the year, by far. When December rolled around things fell off a cliff. Despite the score being close, they were clearly rolled over by a mediocre Chargers team. They kept it close with Buffalo, their only good offensive showing post-November, but other than that, it was ugly.
But, I say that a winning season wouldn't shock me because 1) they
were 8-4 when Tua played and 2) they did score a lot of points in those 8 W's. I might end up looking like an idiot here. But I also might not.
20. Packers: with a strong run-first offense, sufficient play from Love, and a defense that plays up to expectations, I could see this team sneaking into the playoffs. I do think Love will be decent. Nothing short of him being elite will justify Green Bay drafting him when they did, but that's not his fault.
Teams I'm very confident will be below .500:
21. Raiders: Garoppolo is not as bad as everyone says.
22. Giants: Jones eclipsed 230 yards passing 3 times last year: once against the Lions who would've let my grandma throw for 300, and twice against the Vikings who would've let my grandma throw for 350. He broke 25 completions three times, 40 attempts twice. 17 touchdowns in 18 games.
Now, he was quite productive running the ball. But signing him to a $40m/year extension based on just one year of slightly-above-replacement-level play is quite the decision. They were in a tough spot because they (understandably) didn't take his 5th-year. But there's no way he was going to get $40m/year from any other team.
If Jones' agents weren't willing to go below 40, they should've franchise tagged him and just bit the bullet on a long-term deal for Saquon. Yes, long-term deals for running backs are not in style, but Saquon is arguably the most valuable RB to any team right now, and even if it didn't end up being worth it, it would've been a much cheaper mistake. As far as I'm concerned, since Jones' rookie year which was alright, we've seen two bad years and one okay year. That's not enough evidence to pay him like he's the future of the franchise.
23. Rams24. Titans25. Bears: not on the Justin Fields hype train at all. Classic example of a guy whose insane highlights fool people into thinking he's a lot better than he is. Hasn't shown that he's a capable NFL passer yet, much less a franchise QB-level passer. What's for certain is that there are no more excuses. He has the weapons now.
26. Cardinals: they're not even that bad. They're going to start poorly with Kyler out, but once he gets back they'll win some games. Through Hopkins' six-game suspension, Marquise Brown was on pace to be top 10 in receptions, yards, and TDs.
27. Commanders28. Panthers29. Buccaneers30. Falcons31. Colts32. Texans: fewest total wins in the league the last 3 years and nothing about last year or the offseason makes me think that will change. Maybe Ryans is the permanent solution after back-to-back one-and-dones, but speculating about new and unproven head coaches is pointless to me. Stroud is transitioning from an Ohio State team that was more talented than 90% of its opponents to a Texans team that is more talented than 0% of its opponents. That won't be easy.
So according to that list, here are my playoff teams:
AFC1. Bengals (1)
2. Chiefs (2)
3. Bills (4)
4. Jaguars (13)
5. Ravens (5)
6. Jets (8)
7. Browns (10)
I think the Chiefs or Bills will actually grab the 1 seed over the Bengals because the AFCN is a bloodbath. Heck, it was a bloodbath last year - every team split their series with every other team - and one could argue that all 4 teams will be better this year. Similarily, the Jets could take the 5 seed over the Ravens because 1) AFCN and 2) the Jets face a 4th-place schedule while the Ravens face a 2nd-place schedule.
NFC1. Eagles (3)
2. 49ers (6)
3. Lions (11)
4. Saints (16)
5. Cowboys (7)
6. Seahawks (9)
7. Vikings (12)
I wouldn't be surprised if the Cowboys, Seahawks, or Vikings won their respective divisions.
Cincinnati is my Super Bowl pick. Burrow gets both regular season and Super Bowl MVP.
Fired coachesBrandon Staley (LAC)
Josh McDaniels (LV)
Arthur Smith (ATL)
Todd Bowles (TB)
Ron Rivera (WAS)
Matt Eberflus (CHI)
Andy Reid (KC)
Not a pretty game for C.J. Stroud in his NFL debut. All eyes are on Mills for the starting job.
Quote from: thspfc on August 10, 2023, 09:33:56 PM
25. Bears: not on the Justin Fields hype train at all. Classic example of a guy whose insane highlights fool people into thinking he's a lot better than he is. Hasn't shown that he's a capable NFL passer yet, much less a franchise QB-level passer. What's for certain is that there are no more excuses. He has the weapons now.
This is Fields' make-or-break year. He always shows his talent, but he has yet to produce. The rest of the team is getting better, so we'll find out if he becomes The Second Coming of Jim McMahon or remains The Second Coming of Bobby Douglass.
Quote26. Cardinals: they're not even that bad. They're going to start poorly with Kyler out, but once he gets back they'll win some games. Through Hopkins' six-game suspension, Marquise Brown was on pace to be top 10 in receptions, yards, and TDs.
I expect nothing less than tanking the season from the Same Old Cardinals. Nobody yet knows when Murray will be back, and even when he does return, I no longer expect much. He's deja vu Jay Cutler all over again: A million dollar arm and a two cent brain, and now with a ten cent knee to go along with it. I hope I'm wrong, but when you combine a fragile QB, a new coach, a new GM, and a hot, rancid pile of Bidwills, it doesn't look good.
QuoteFired coaches
Brandon Staley (LAC)
Josh McDaniels (LV)
Arthur Smith (ATL)
Todd Bowles (TB)
Ron Rivera (WAS)
Matt Eberflus (CHI)
Andy Reid (KC)
Eberfluss isn't going anywhere this season. Arthur Smith may be an early firing. But Andy Reid? Glad you crossed him out. He's got a 50-50 chance of going back to the Super Bowl, as long as Mahomes stays healthy.
Quote from: thspfc on August 10, 2023, 09:33:56 PM
Four more weeks . . .
Regarding 2023 NFL in general, I think it's gonna be a great season. Probably not on the level of 2021, which, IMO, was the best ever.
League-wide, the biggest thing I'll be watching is whether passing stats (mostly sheer volume stats such as completions, attempts, yards, big plays, and TDs) continue to drop off for what would be the 3rd year in a row.
We're in a crazy paradox. QB is far and away the most important position and it seems that gap is only widening. WRs have separated themselves from the pack and are definitively #2. The running back market is in shambles. Yet passing is actually declining on paper, while 2022 was literally the best year ever for rushing.
3. Eagles
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2020, 07:56:25 PM
Also, the Eagles are eliminated. I can already see the future: the Hurts novelty wears off midway through 2021. He finishes 2021 with 21 touchdowns and 16 interceptions or some below average statline like that. The media babies him for two more years, focusing on a four game stretch when he was good instead of the rest of his career, before it becomes apparent that he's not the answer, and the cycle repeats itself with a different quarterback. I will be revisiting this post in 2023.
So you're the Colin Cowherd of AAroads.
The Houston Texans defeated the New England Patriots in preseason action last night, 20-9.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 10, 2023, 11:56:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 10, 2023, 09:33:56 PM
25. Bears: not on the Justin Fields hype train at all. Classic example of a guy whose insane highlights fool people into thinking he's a lot better than he is. Hasn't shown that he's a capable NFL passer yet, much less a franchise QB-level passer. What's for certain is that there are no more excuses. He has the weapons now.
This is Fields' make-or-break year. He always shows his talent, but he has yet to produce. The rest of the team is getting better, so we'll find out if he becomes The Second Coming of Jim McMahon or remains The Second Coming of Bobby Douglass.
Quote26. Cardinals: they're not even that bad. They're going to start poorly with Kyler out, but once he gets back they'll win some games. Through Hopkins' six-game suspension, Marquise Brown was on pace to be top 10 in receptions, yards, and TDs.
I expect nothing less than tanking the season from the Same Old Cardinals. Nobody yet knows when Murray will be back, and even when he does return, I no longer expect much. He's deja vu Jay Cutler all over again: A million dollar arm and a two cent brain, and now with a ten cent knee to go along with it. I hope I'm wrong, but when you combine a fragile QB, a new coach, a new GM, and a hot, rancid pile of Bidwills, it doesn't look good.
QuoteFired coaches
Brandon Staley (LAC)
Josh McDaniels (LV)
Arthur Smith (ATL)
Todd Bowles (TB)
Ron Rivera (WAS)
Matt Eberflus (CHI)
Andy Reid (KC)
Eberfluss isn't going anywhere this season. Arthur Smith may be an early firing. But Andy Reid? Glad you crossed him out. He's got a 50-50 chance of going back to the Super Bowl, as long as Mahomes stays healthy.
Andy Reid was a joke. If Fields doesn't improve significantly I think they clean house and Eberflus is gone too.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 11, 2023, 01:15:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on August 10, 2023, 09:33:56 PM
Four more weeks . . .
Regarding 2023 NFL in general, I think it's gonna be a great season. Probably not on the level of 2021, which, IMO, was the best ever.
League-wide, the biggest thing I'll be watching is whether passing stats (mostly sheer volume stats such as completions, attempts, yards, big plays, and TDs) continue to drop off for what would be the 3rd year in a row.
We're in a crazy paradox. QB is far and away the most important position and it seems that gap is only widening. WRs have separated themselves from the pack and are definitively #2. The running back market is in shambles. Yet passing is actually declining on paper, while 2022 was literally the best year ever for rushing.
3. Eagles
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2020, 07:56:25 PM
Also, the Eagles are eliminated. I can already see the future: the Hurts novelty wears off midway through 2021. He finishes 2021 with 21 touchdowns and 16 interceptions or some below average statline like that. The media babies him for two more years, focusing on a four game stretch when he was good instead of the rest of his career, before it becomes apparent that he's not the answer, and the cycle repeats itself with a different quarterback. I will be revisiting this post in 2023.
So you're the Colin Cowherd of AAroads.
Yes
I just watched the Green Bay Packers defeat the Cincinatti Bengals 36-19. Green Bay only allowed one touchdown, a 43-yard pick-six by Tycen Anderson. Former USFL Championship MVP Alex McGough didn't play much; he handed the ball off a few times, and had a fumble recovered by Cincinatti. Green Bay's new kicker Anders Carlson missed two extra points, but a preseason win is a preseason win. I am looking greatly forward to next week's game against New England at Lambeau Field.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 11, 2023, 10:43:15 PM
Green Bay's new kicker Anders Carlson missed two extra points, but a preseason win is a preseason win. I am looking greatly forward to next week's game against New England at Lambeau Field.
If he does that next week, he'll be Green Bay's
former kicker. :)
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 11, 2023, 11:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 11, 2023, 10:43:15 PM
Green Bay's new kicker Anders Carlson missed two extra points, but a preseason win is a preseason win. I am looking greatly forward to next week's game against New England at Lambeau Field.
If he does that next week, he'll be Green Bay's former kicker. :)
There are already a lot of calls by Packer fans to bring back Crosby.
Quote from: jlam on August 10, 2023, 11:39:46 PM
Not a pretty game for C.J. Stroud in his NFL debut. All eyes are on Mills for the starting job.
I agree with keeping Davis Mills as our incumbent starter for the first couple weeks; I'd rather start with experience and then gradually work CJ into the game over the course of the season.
QuoteMaybe Ryans is the permanent solution after back-to-back one-and-dones, but speculating about new and unproven head coaches....
We already know that DeMeco, even as a rookie HC, is an upgrade over the veteran Lovie Smith. DeMeco was a born leader and it showed when he played for the Texans; he has re-energized our Texans fanbase. I'm expecting our best record so far this decade (five or more wins) in 2023. Remember we've never had the worst record in the league since 2013 and this year will be no different; even in the last three seasons other teams had less wins than the Texans did.
Quote from: Big John on August 11, 2023, 11:32:58 PM
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 11, 2023, 11:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 11, 2023, 10:43:15 PM
Green Bay's new kicker Anders Carlson missed two extra points, but a preseason win is a preseason win. I am looking greatly forward to next week's game against New England at Lambeau Field.
If he does that next week, he'll be Green Bay's former kicker. :)
There are already a lot of calls by Packer fans to bring back Crosby.
Yeah I don't see why he's an FA right now
Dalvin Cook signs with the Jets. Ezekiel Elliott signs with the Patriots.
Sad news: The 2023 season will march on without FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions and coverage, as their entire sports division was axed back in May as part of a major transition at ABC News. Needless to say I really liked their prediction model and relied on it heavily in this thread and elsewhere. It served as a great baseline from which to make predictions and analyze the season as it played out. The sports prediction models were one-of-a-kind in the sports industry and basically irreplaceable IMO, but if anyone has any suggestions for similar sites, please be free to share.
I'm planning to share some quick-hitting thoughts on this season a little later, but just wanted to share the bad news first.
Quote from: webny99 on August 16, 2023, 11:20:10 PM
Sad news: The 2023 season will march on without FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions and coverage, as their entire sports division was axed back in May as part of a major transition at ABC News. Needless to say I really liked their prediction model and relied on it heavily in this thread and elsewhere. It served as a great baseline from which to make predictions and analyze the season as it played out. The sports prediction models were one-of-a-kind in the sports industry and basically irreplaceable IMO, but if anyone has any suggestions for similar sites, please be free to share.
I'm planning to share some quick-hitting thoughts on this season a little later, but just wanted to share the bad news first.
Sad. But I wasted way too much time on that website last fall so maybe it's a blessing in disguise for me.
Quote from: thspfc on August 17, 2023, 08:54:45 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 16, 2023, 11:20:10 PM
Sad news: The 2023 season will march on without FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions and coverage, as their entire sports division was axed back in May as part of a major transition at ABC News. Needless to say I really liked their prediction model and relied on it heavily in this thread and elsewhere. It served as a great baseline from which to make predictions and analyze the season as it played out. The sports prediction models were one-of-a-kind in the sports industry and basically irreplaceable IMO, but if anyone has any suggestions for similar sites, please be free to share.
I'm planning to share some quick-hitting thoughts on this season a little later, but just wanted to share the bad news first.
Sad. But I wasted way too much time on that website last fall so maybe it's a blessing in disguise for me.
I'm thinking that they became economically and functionally obsolete with the current rise in the sports books.
:no:
Mike
Quote from: webny99 on August 16, 2023, 11:20:10 PM
Sad news: The 2023 season will march on without FiveThirtyEight's NFL predictions and coverage, as their entire sports division was axed back in May as part of a major transition at ABC News. Needless to say I really liked their prediction model and relied on it heavily in this thread and elsewhere. It served as a great baseline from which to make predictions and analyze the season as it played out. The sports prediction models were one-of-a-kind in the sports industry and basically irreplaceable IMO, but if anyone has any suggestions for similar sites, please be free to share.
I'm planning to share some quick-hitting thoughts on this season a little later, but just wanted to share the bad news first.
I was bummed to see this too. I really liked their Premier League predictions and Global Soccer Club Rankings.
^ Their NBA predictions were good too. Similar to the NFL predictions but even more in-depth with RAPTOR (which replaced CARMELO) and other metrics for detailed player stats and analytics.
Anyways... here goes...
AFC
Such a tough conference to predict this season. I know we said that last year too, but it's even more true this year. Seven playoff spots just isn't enough given how loaded the conference is across the board. Like it or not, a few really good teams are going to miss out on the playoffs. It's easy to see three playoff teams from the North, East, or West, but I would be stunned if the Jags don't win the AFC South and even more stunned if there are multiple playoff teams from the South.
That said, I ended up going with two playoff teams from every division but the South and forking the entire South except for the Jags. It seems crazy, but I'm just that certain that the wild cards will be out of reach for anyone in the South and the Jags are too much more talented to let anyone except maybe the Titans hang around in the division race.
Here are my predicted conference rankings:
Playoffs
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Jags
4. Ravens
5. Jets
6. Bengals
7. Chargers
On the bubble
8. Browns
9. Dolphins
10. Steelers
11. Patriots
12. Raiders
13. Broncos
Forked
14. Titans
15. Colts
16. Texans
NFC
This is not an easy conference to parse either, but for all the opposite reasons. The NFC is so mediocre that basically everyone has a shot at the playoffs, so the teams contending for the final wild cards might not be that great, similar to last year. This tends to make the wild card race less intense, but the division races could be interesting in all four divisions.
There's a decent chance we get two playoff teams from both the East and West; that would leave one spot up for grabs between the stew of mediocrity that is the NFC North and South. In that case, I'm actually reasonably certain that two South teams would make it - not because they're great, but because they can feast on an extremely easy schedule while the North teams beat each other up. So...
Here are my predicted conference rankings:
Playoffs
1. Cowboys
2. 49ers
3. Saints
4. Lions
5. Eagles
6. Seahawks
7. Falcons
On the bubble
8. Commanders
9. Giants
10. Vikings
11. Packers
12. Bears
Forked
13. Rams
14. Panthers
15. Bucs
16. Cardinals
Might as well post my W-L predictions:
AFC East:
1. Bills 13-4 (y)
2. Dolphins 9-8 (x)
3. Jets 9-8
4. Patriots 6-11
AFC North:
1. Bengals 13-4 (y)
2. Ravens 13-4 (x)
3. Steelers 9-8
4. Browns 7-10
AFC South:
1. Jaguars 10-7 (y)
2. Titans 8-9
3. Texans 7-10
4. Colts 6-11
AFC West:
1. Chiefs 14-3 (z)
2. Broncos 10-7 (x)
3. Chargers 8-9
4. Raiders 5-12
NFC East:
1. Eagles 14-3 (z)
2. Cowboys 10-7 (x)
3. Giants 8-9
4. Commanders 5-12
NFC North:
1. Lions 12-5 (y)
2. Vikings 10-7 (x)
3. Bears 5-12
4. Packers 5-12
NFC South:
1. Saints 10-7 (y)
2. Buccaneers 6-11
3. Falcons 5-12
4. Panthers 4-13
NFC West:
1. 49ers 12-5 (y)
2. Seahawks 10-7 (x)
3. Rams 7-10
4. Cardinals 2-15
Ravens' preseason win streak ends at 24 on a field goal by Washington's Joey Slye with 14 seconds remaining.
Quote from: epzik8 on August 22, 2023, 09:22:44 AM
Ravens' preseason win streak ends at 24 on a field goal by Washington's Joey Slye with 14 seconds remaining.
It's unlikely that streak will ever be matched. It would take a full 8 seasons of preseason games at 3 per year which is pretty incredible when you think about it. That being said, I was glad Washington got to end the streak. It was a fun moment and exciting ending which made for one of the more memorable preseason games in recent history, and possible a sign of better times ahead for the Washington franchise.
AFC East:
1. Bills 12-5
2. Jets 10-7
3. Dolphins 8-9
4. Patriots 7-10
AFC North:
1. Ravens 13-4
2. Bengals 12-5
3. Steelers 9-8
4. Browns 5-12
AFC South:
1. Jaguars 11-6
2. Titans 7-10
3. Texans 6-11
4. Colts 4-13
AFC West:
1. Chiefs 13-4
2. Chargers 11-6
3. Broncos 8-9
4. Raiders 5-12
2. Ravens over 7. Jets
6. Chargers over 3. Bills
5. Bengals over 4. Jaguars
1. Chiefs over 6. Chargers
2. Ravens over 5. Bengals
1. Chiefs over 2. Ravens
NFC East:
1. Eagles 14-3
2. Cowboys 11-6
3. Giants 9-8
4. Commanders 7-10
NFC North:
1. Vikings 11-6
2. Bears 10-7
3. Lions 9-8
4. Packers 4-13
NFC South:
1. Saints 10-7
2. Falcons 7-10
3. Panthers 5-12
4. Buccaneers 4-13
NFC West:
1. 49ers 12-5
2. Seahawks 10-7
3. Rams 5-12
4. Cardinals 3-14
2. 49ers over 7. Bears
3. Vikings over 6. Seahawks
5. Cowboys over 4. Saints
1. Eagles over 5. Cowboys
2. 49ers over 3. Vikings
1. Eagles over 2. 49ers
Chiefs over Eagles.
MVP: Patrick Mahomes
Offensive Rookie of the Year: Bijan Robinson
Defensive Rookie of the Year: Will Anderson, Jr.
Offensive Player of the Year: Christian McCaffrey
Defensive Player of the Year: Micah Parsons
Coach of the Year: Matt Eberflus
Coaches that aren't with their teams next year - Sean McVay (retiring), Todd Bowles. I think it's a light year for firings as so many got fired last year. Some of the teams that are down this year are particularly "sticky" with their coaches - Packers, Titans, etc.
I'd be... weirdly more surprised if the Eagles returned to the Super Bowl than the Chiefs? Their conference is easier, but they didn't get better this off-season, and it's rare in recent history for NFC teams to repeat, never mind the NFC East which seemingly never has a repeat champion.
Here are my projected records:
NFC North:
Vikings (12-5)
Lions (10-7)
Packers (6-11)
Bears (5-12)
NFC East:
Eagles (13-4)
Cowboys (11-6)
Giants (9-8)
Commanders (8-9)
NFC South:
Saints (10-7)
Falcons (8-9)
Panthers (5-12)
Buccaneers (4-13)
NFC West:
49ers (13-4)
Seahawks (8-9)
Rams (7-10)
Cardinals (3-14)
AFC North:
Bengals (13-4)
Ravens (11-6)
Steelers (7-10)
Browns (5-12)
AFC East:
Bills (12-5)
Jets (10-7)
Dolphins (8-9)
Patriots (7-10)
AFC South:
Jaguars (12-5)
Titans (7-10)
Texans (6-11)
Colts (4-13)
AFC West:
Chiefs (14-3)
Chargers (10-7)
Broncos (9-8)
Raiders (5-12)
I'll take things further into depth after week 3 of preseason.
Johnathon Taylor is up for sale. If Jacksonville can get him and pair him up with Trevor Lawrence before the season begins, (assuming the Jaguars can keep him for several years and Taylor improves his performance) it wouldn't surprise me if Jacksonville can make it as far as the AFC Championship Game (if not their first ever Super Bowl) during their years together....maybe not this season but next season (Playoffs 2025). I do have the Jaguars winning our division with double-digit wins and at least repeat Wild-Card game winners this year.
I don't think the Jags are only a slight RB upgrade away from being Super Bowl contenders. I think there are teams that are just much better all around. (And I like the Jags.)
Quote from: webny99 on August 22, 2023, 06:06:02 PM
I'd be... weirdly more surprised if the Eagles returned to the Super Bowl than the Chiefs? Their conference is easier, but they didn't get better this off-season, and it's rare in recent history for NFC teams to repeat, never mind the NFC East which seemingly never has a repeat champion.
They also had very few injuries, a fairly light regular season schedule, and an absolute cakewalk of a playoff run. The Giants were probably the worst team to make the divisional since the 2014 Panthers (the only other candidate being the 2017 Titans). And the 49ers essentially played the second half without a quarterback.
That's not to say that they weren't an elite team. I honestly don't know what the competition is going to look like in the NFC. Is Purdy for real? If so, the Niners are probably the best team. Dallas has been consistent the last two years, both in regular season success and postseason reality checks. I feel like from a neutral perspective the Cowboys are a tempting Super Bowl pick but at this point I won't believe it until I see it.
So anyway, I have the Eagles as favorites in the NFC simply because nobody else has proven themselves. The only previous teams to make the NFC title game whose rosters are even remotely recognizable today are last year's Eagles and the 49ers 3 of the last 4 years, but again, the Niners have question marks at QB.
The 49ers have traded Trey Lance to the Cowboys for a 4th round pick in 2024. Wow didn't see this coming.
Rumors are flying around that the Commanders might revert to Redskins, if Josh Harris has his way. FWIW, the Cleveland Guardians were a much better transition. However, we still have the Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks, so the Native American naming convention is not completely dead.
The New England Patriots finished the preseason with a thud against the Tennessee Titans, losing 7-23. Good thing the game doesn't count.
Quote from: Henry on August 25, 2023, 10:28:41 PM
Rumors are flying around that the Commanders might revert to Redskins, if Josh Harris has his way. FWIW, the Cleveland Guardians were a much better transition. However, we still have the Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks, so the Native American naming convention is not completely dead.
Many of the aboriginal themed names are quite honorable, and even the honored tribes have said so (ie, the Florida State Seminoles). One of my biggest turnoffs in life is rampant and uncontrolled political correctness and wokeness.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on August 26, 2023, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on August 25, 2023, 10:28:41 PM
Rumors are flying around that the Commanders might revert to Redskins, if Josh Harris has his way. FWIW, the Cleveland Guardians were a much better transition. However, we still have the Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks, so the Native American naming convention is not completely dead.
Many of the aboriginal themed names are quite honorable, and even the honored tribes have said so (ie, the Florida State Seminoles). One of my biggest turnoffs in life is rampant and uncontrolled political correctness and wokeness.
Mike
White people openly declaring these names to be acceptable is precisely why many people have a problem with them.
From the Native perspective (which I am not) many white people point to some Natives being OK with these names as justification. Someone put it well several years ago that it's likely Natives who have largely assimilated are generally OK while those more actively connected to their culture are not.
Quote from: mgk920 on August 26, 2023, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on August 25, 2023, 10:28:41 PM
Rumors are flying around that the Commanders might revert to Redskins, if Josh Harris has his way. FWIW, the Cleveland Guardians were a much better transition. However, we still have the Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks, so the Native American naming convention is not completely dead.
Many of the aboriginal themed names are quite honorable, and even the honored tribes have said so (ie, the Florida State Seminoles). One of my biggest turnoffs in life is rampant and uncontrolled political correctness and wokeness.
Mike
But I hardly think you can put "Redskins" in the same camp as "honorable".
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
Quote from: jgb191 on August 29, 2023, 11:29:13 AM
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
Maybe it's a Commander Buck Murdock tactic: "That's exactly what they'll be expecting us to do!"
Quote from: wanderer2575 on August 29, 2023, 12:04:57 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 29, 2023, 11:29:13 AM
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
Maybe it's a Commander Buck Murdock tactic: "That's exactly what they'll be expecting us to do!"
I'll wish you could be right. The Texans could change things up during the game, but our offense doesn't have too many play options at this time. My Texans need more upgrades on offense. In the meantime, our defense, while strong, is in for a very long season this fall.
Quote from: jgb191 on August 29, 2023, 11:29:13 AM
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
I don't think it was much of a secret, surely the Ravens knew that Stroud would be starting regardless of if/when it was formally announced. And they have to announce a starting QB at some point anyways, otherwise there will be needless media questioning until they do.
Quote from: webny99 on August 29, 2023, 10:55:27 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 29, 2023, 11:29:13 AM
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
I don't think it was much of a secret, surely the Ravens knew that Stroud would be starting regardless of if/when it was formally announced. And they have to announce a starting QB at some point anyways, otherwise there will be needless media questioning until they do.
Many from our fanbase was recommending Davis Mills for the first few month or two of the season, then slowly transition to CJ later on as the season progresses. At least Davis's performance is so erratic at times it's kind of hard to study his tendencies; he was among the interception leaders last year with a few flashes of greatness mixed into it.
Remember that last year the Texans had twelve 4th Quarter ties or leads last year and only won three of those games....one of those games was against the eventual Super Bowl Champions Chiefs. So it's not like Davis was a bust, he just needed to learn to finish the 4th quarter better.
Quote from: jgb191 on August 30, 2023, 10:03:05 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 29, 2023, 10:55:27 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on August 29, 2023, 11:29:13 AM
My Texans just started the season 0-1 before Week One. How is that so you ask? By telling the Ravens who our starting QB is going to be. Now the Ravens can study CJ Stroud very well and be well prepared for him in the first game of the season. The Ravens were already heavily favored to beat my Texans as it was, now the QB announcement sealed the win for them.
I don't think it was much of a secret, surely the Ravens knew that Stroud would be starting regardless of if/when it was formally announced. And they have to announce a starting QB at some point anyways, otherwise there will be needless media questioning until they do.
Many from our fanbase was recommending Davis Mills for the first few month or two of the season, then slowly transition to CJ later on as the season progresses. At least Davis's performance is so erratic at times it's kind of hard to study his tendencies; he was among the interception leaders last year with a few flashes of greatness mixed into it.
Remember that last year the Texans had twelve 4th Quarter ties or leads last year and only won three of those games....one of those games was against the eventual Super Bowl Champions Chiefs. So it's not like Davis was a bust, he just needed to learn to finish the 4th quarter better.
Unless he's throwing interceptions, shouldn't it be up to the Defense to finish the 4th quarter better, especially if the Texans had the lead?
In my view Texans didn't draft Stroud #2 overall to ride the bench. The days of a veteran seat warmer for a high draft pick are over.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on August 31, 2023, 12:50:27 AM
In my view Texans didn't draft Stroud #2 overall to ride the bench. The days of a veteran seat warmer for a high draft pick are over.
Unless you're the Packers and you trade up the draft Jordan Love only to have him sit behind Aaron Rodgers for three years. But the succession plan worked to have Rodgers sit behing Brett Favre for three years, so hopefully Love has similar success.
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
As a Vikings fan, my feelings could not be more opposite. :)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 31, 2023, 03:55:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
As a Vikings fan, my feelings could not be more opposite. :)
Same goes for Bears and Lions fans. Love so far shows me that he's the Second Coming of Dak Prescott, not Brett Favre or Aaron Rodgers.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 31, 2023, 11:26:28 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 31, 2023, 03:55:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
As a Vikings fan, my feelings could not be more opposite. :)
Same goes for Bears and Lions fans. Love so far shows me that he's the Second Coming of Dak Prescott, not Brett Favre or Aaron Rodgers.
Honestly, I think you're being quite generous. I'm thinking second coming of Akili Smith.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 31, 2023, 11:26:28 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 31, 2023, 03:55:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
As a Vikings fan, my feelings could not be more opposite. :)
Same goes for Bears and Lions fans. Love so far shows me that he's the Second Coming of Dak Prescott, not Brett Favre or Aaron Rodgers.
Second coming of Dak Prescott would be an excellent outcome considering Prescott is the longest-tenured starting quarterback in the league.
It's silly how people try to insult QBs by comparing them to Dak (actually, Kirk Cousins is an even more commonly used one). Green Bay would be elated to have a decade or so of stable, above-average QB play ahead of them, because at least 60% of the teams are at best unsure about what they have, and at worst know for sure they don't have it.
Quote from: thspfc on September 01, 2023, 01:39:58 PM
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on August 31, 2023, 11:26:28 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on August 31, 2023, 03:55:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
As a Vikings fan, my feelings could not be more opposite. :)
Same goes for Bears and Lions fans. Love so far shows me that he's the Second Coming of Dak Prescott, not Brett Favre or Aaron Rodgers.
Second coming of Dak Prescott would be an excellent outcome considering Prescott is the longest-tenured starting quarterback in the league.
It's silly how people try to insult QBs by comparing them to Dak (actually, Kirk Cousins is an even more commonly used one). Green Bay would be elated to have a decade or so of stable, above-average QB play ahead of them, because at least 60% of the teams are at best unsure about what they have, and at worst know for sure they don't have it.
Green Bay was really lucky to have a great QB follow a great QB. I'm glad that didn't happen to the cheaters out east.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 31, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
I hope Love has a good season as the Packers starting quarterback. I'd sure hate for him to turn out to be a bust.
Nah its time for another team to own the division for a few years
I guess I'll go ahead and take a stab at guessing the playoff teams this January:
AFC East: Buffalo
AFC North: Baltimore
AFC South: Jacksonville
AFC West: Kansas City
NFC East: Philadelphia
NFC North: Detroit
NFC South: New Orleans
NFC West: San Francsico
AFC Wild Cards: Cincinnati, San Diego, Miami
NFC Wild Cards: Seattle, Minnesota, NY Giants
Conference Championship (anticipated results):
San Francisco over Philadelphia
Jacksonville at Kansas City: hard to predict this one -- too close to call. Maybe KC by a field-goal I guess
I'll stand by my original prediction of doubling up from last year with six or seven wins for my Houston Texans this year.
I'm noticing a lot of chalk amongst those projecting division winners, especially in the AFC, where the Chiefs, Bengals, Bills and Jaguars are all expected to roll to division titles. But I expect at least one of the non-Jaguars heavyweights will not win their division, and I would pick the Chiefs first if forced to pick. There's just a little too much consensus around the Chiefs, even for how good they've been, and that has me wary, especially with the Broncos as a candidate for major improvement (remember, minor improvement would have easily been enough to sweep the Chiefs last season, even with how disastrous they were), and the Chargers lying in the weeds if they could ever stay healthy for a full season.
The NFC seems like a coin-flip or better to have no repeat division winners. The South will very likely have a new champion, the North seems probable (Lions or Packers>Vikings), and East and West have clear favorites in the Eagles and 49ers but not overwhelmingly so; I could certainly see the Cowboys or Seahawks taking their respective division, and I would even put the Commanders and Giants on the fringe of division contention (but not the Rams, and certainly not the Cardinals).
Overall, my sense of which teams should be "forked" pre-season have not changed much. It's the Rams, Cardinals, and non-Jaguars AFC South teams, with the Bears, Bucs, and Panthers right on the fringe. The other 24 teams have a realistic shot at a playoff berth.
I'll fork the Texans, Colts, Raiders, Commanders, Bears, Falcons, Buccaneers, Cardinals, and Giants. Tempted to get rid of the Titans and Panthers as well, but only leaving one unforked team in a division makes me nervous.
I see the forking has begun before the first snap is played!
For me, it'll be the Bears, Broncos, Browns, Buccaneers, Cardinals, Colts, Commanders, Cowboys, Falcons, Jets, Panthers, Patriots, Raiders, Rams, Ravens and Texans.
Quote from: thspfc on September 05, 2023, 03:27:37 PMTempted to get rid of the Titans and Panthers as well, but only leaving one unforked team in a division makes me nervous.
I know what you mean, but sometimes it can be an unavoidable fate.
Playoff time
NFC North:
y - Vikings (12-5)
x - Lions (10-7)Packers (6-11)
Bears (5-12)
NFC East:
z - Eagles (13-4)
x - Cowboys (11-6)
x - Giants (9-8)Commanders (8-9)
NFC South:
y - Saints (10-7)Falcons (8-9)
Panthers (5-12)
Buccaneers (4-13)
NFC West:
y - 49ers (13-4)Seahawks (8-9)
Rams (7-10)
Cardinals (3-14)
AFC North:
y - Bengals (13-4)
x - Ravens (11-6)Steelers (7-10)
Browns (5-12)
AFC East:
y - Bills (12-5)
x - Jets (10-7)Dolphins (8-9)
Patriots (7-10)
AFC South:
x - Jaguars (12-5)Titans (7-10)
Texans (6-11)
Colts (4-13)
AFC West:
z - Chiefs (14-3)
x - Chargers (10-7)Broncos (9-8)
Raiders (5-12)
NFC
- Eagles
- 49ers
- Vikings
- Saints
- Cowboys
- Lions
- Giants
Wild Card2. 49ers over 7. Giants
3. Vikings over 6. Lions
5. Cowboys over 4. Saints
Divisional5. Cowboys over 1. Eagles
2. 49ers over 3. Vikings
Conference2. 49ers over 5. Cowboys
AFC
- Chiefs
- Bengals
- Bills
- Jaguars
- Ravens
- Chargers
- Jets
Wild Card2. Bengals over 7. Jets
3. Bills over 6. Chargers
4. Jaguars over 5. Ravens
Divisional4. Jaguars over 1. Chiefs (there, I said it)
2. Bengals over 3. Bills
Conference2. Bengals over 4. Jaguars
Super Bowl2. Bengals over 2. 49ers
ForksCardinals
Colts
Buccaneers
Texans
Raiders
Panthers
Bears
Packers
Of course, everything rests on Ja'Marr's health and how the refs treat the Chiefs in the playoffs.
Dolphins kickoff is at 5:25am Monday morning, Sep 11, where I am. While I have the day off, I will certainly not be sleeping in.
NFL Predictions and Forks:
AFC:
1 - Chiefs
2 - Bengals
3 - Bills
4 - Jaguars
5 - Ravens
6 - Jets
7 - Chargers
NFC:
1 - Eagles
2 - 49ers
3 - Vikings
4 - Saints
5 - Cowboys
6 - Lions
7 - Seahawks
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
If we're still doing the forking competition, I'll submit mine:
Cardinals, Packers, Texans. Yeah, that's it. AFC is too strong and NFC is so weak that anyone could make it.
I'll put my 6 forks in:
Bears
Bucs
Cardinals
Colts
Packers
Texans
Everyone get your first forks in before kickoff tomorrow night.
To review, to "fork" a team is to say that they're not going to make the playoffs. The amount of points you get from forking a team decreases as the season goes on. There's a 30-point penalty for an incorrect fork (as in, one of your forked teams made the playoffs). Last year the point values were as follows:
Before week 1: 20
Weeks 1-4: 15
Weeks 5-8: 13
Weeks 9-13: 10
Weeks 14-16: 5
We could keep that the same or we could change it. I'll propose two other options:
Weeks 1-2: 18
3-4: 16
5-6: 14
7-8: 12
9-10: 10
11-12: 8
13-14: 6
15-16: 4
Weeks 1-3: 18
4-6: 15
7-9: 12
10-12: 9
13-16: 6
The official cutoff for each period being the following Thursday night game (for example, for the list above, week 3, and therefore the 18-point period, would end with the kickoff of the week 4 Thursday game).
Also last year we didn't clearly establish how the 30 points would be deducted - would it replace the points gained from the fork (making an incorrect 20-pt fork worth -30), or just subtracted from them (making an incorrect 20-pt fork worth -10?) We ended up choosing the latter.
I'll also put in my season standings predictions and playoff spots:
NFC East:
z Eagles - 13-4
x Cowboys - 12-5
x Giants - 10-7
Commanders - 7-10
NFC West:
y 49ers - 13-4
Seahawks - 10-7
Rams - 6-11
Cardinals - 3-14
NFC North:
y Vikings - 11-6
x Lions - 10-7
Packers - 5-12
Bears - 4-13
NFC South:
y Saints - 10-7
Falcons - 8-9
Panthers - 6-11
Buccaneers- 4-13
AFC East:
y Bills - 14-3
x Jets - 10-7
Dolphins - 8-9
Patriots - 8-9
AFC West:
z Chiefs - 14-3
x Chargers - 9-8
Raiders - 7-10
Broncos - 6-11
AFC North:
y Bengals - 12-5
x Ravens - 11-6
Steelers - 7-10
Browns - 6-11
AFC South:
y Jaguars - 12-5
Titans - 8-9
Texans - 5-12
Colts - 3-14
PLAYOFF PREDICTIONS:
Seeding:
AFC
1. Chiefs
2. Bills
3. Bengals
4. Jaguars
5. Ravens
6. Jets
7. Chargers
NFC
1. Eagles
2. 49ers
3. Vikings
4. Saints
5. Cowboys
6. Giants
7. Lions
Wild Cards:
2. Bills over 7. Chargers
3. Bengals over 6. Jets
5. Ravens over 4. Jaguars
2. 49ers over 7. Lions
6. Giants over 3. Vikings
5. Cowboys over 4. Saints
Divisional Rounds:
1. Chiefs over 5. Ravens
2. Bills over 3. Bengals
1. Eagles over 6. Giants
5. Cowboys over 2. 49ers
Conference Championships;
2. Bills over 1. Chiefs
5. Cowboys over 1. Eagles
SUPER BOWL LVIII:
Bills over Cowboys.
Finally getting their first Super Bowl win after 4 straight losses, against the team that gave them 2 of them.
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:44:17 PM
Everyone get your first forks in before kickoff tomorrow night.
To review, to "fork" a team is to say that they're not going to make the playoffs. The amount of points you get from forking a team decreases as the season goes on. There's a 30-point penalty for an incorrect fork (as in, one of your forked teams made the playoffs). Last year the point values were as follows:
Before week 1: 20
Weeks 1-4: 15
Weeks 5-8: 13
Weeks 9-13: 10
Weeks 14-16: 5
We could keep that the same or we could change it. I'll propose two other options:
Weeks 1-2: 18
3-4: 16
5-6: 14
7-8: 12
9-10: 10
11-12: 8
13-14: 6
15-16: 4
Weeks 1-3: 18
4-6: 15
7-9: 12
10-12: 9
13-16: 6
The official cutoff for each period being the following Thursday night game (for example, for the list above, week 3, and therefore the 18-point period, would end with the kickoff of the week 4 Thursday game).
Also last year we didn't clearly establish how the 30 points would be deducted - would it replace the points gained from the fork (making an incorrect 20-pt fork worth -30), or just subtracted from them (making an incorrect 20-pt fork worth -10?) We ended up choosing the latter.
We need to decide soon. I made my picks based on using last year's system. If we change it, I may remove a team or two from my preseason list.
I also think we should make the incorrect forking penalty harsher.
Chiefs
Browns
Ravens
Vikings
Panthers
Commanders
Jaguars
49ers
Titans
Raiders
Eagles
Seahawks
Chargers
Packers
Cowboys
Bills
I would support having the -30 points replace the points earned from the fork. This creates a better balance IMO, with higher upside and downside for forking early.
I don't have strong feelings on the point values, but would not be opposed to smoothing out last year's tiers, either using thespfc's suggestion in increments of 3 points, or in increments of 5 points as follows:
Preseason: 25
Wks 1-4: 20
Wks 5-8: 15
Wks 9-12: 10
Wks 13-16: 5
Quote from: webny99 on September 07, 2023, 02:21:04 PM
I would support having the -30 points replace the points earned from the fork. This creates a better balance IMO, with higher upside and downside for forking early.
I don't have strong feelings on the point values, but would not be opposed to smoothing out last year's tiers, either using thespfc's suggestion in increments of 3 pts, or in increments of 5 pts as follows:
Preseason: 25
Wks 1-4: 20
Wks 5-8: 15
Wks 9-12: 10
Wks 13-16: 5
All of that works for me.
Hey everyone, the 506 is back!
https://506sports.com/
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on September 07, 2023, 02:24:42 PM
Hey everyone, the 506 is back!
https://506sports.com/
I got NFL Sunday Ticket this year.
So if we're increasing the points you get for forking a team in the preseason, then I have to get riskier with the higher payoff.
I'll take Arizona, Carolina, Green Bay, and Tampa Bay in the NFC.
I'll take Cleveland, Denver, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, and New England in the AFC.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 07, 2023, 03:03:28 PM
So if we're increasing the points you get for forking a team in the preseason, then I have to get riskier with the higher payoff.
I'll take Arizona, Carolina, Green Bay, and Tampa Bay in the NFC.
I'll take Cleveland, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, and New England in the AFC.
Noted, I'll make the list later. I'm adding the Patriots and Steelers to mine.
Here are my Week 1 score predictions:
Lions 29 @ Chiefs 35
Panthers 17 @ Falcons 19
Texans 20 @ Ravens 33
Bengals 24 @ Browns 23
Jaguars 27 @ Colts 16
Buccaneers 14 @ Vikings 26
Titans 23 @ Saints 21
49ers 28 @ Steelers 23
Cardinals 9 @ Commanders 27
Packers 19 @ Bears 21
Raiders 16 @ Broncos 21
Dolphins 28 @ Chargers 34
Eagles 27 @ Patriots 22
Rams 20 @ Seahawks 27
Cowboys 24 @ Giants 26
Bills 23 @ Jets 20
Quote from: thspfc on September 07, 2023, 03:29:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 07, 2023, 03:03:28 PM
So if we're increasing the points you get for forking a team in the preseason, then I have to get riskier with the higher payoff.
I'll take Arizona, Carolina, Green Bay, and Tampa Bay in the NFC.
I'll take Cleveland, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, and New England in the AFC.
Noted, I'll make the list later. I'm adding the Patriots and Steelers to mine.
Just decided to tack the Broncos on too. You know I'm still not a Wilson believer.
Quote from: webny99 on September 07, 2023, 02:21:04 PM
I would support having the -30 points replace the points earned from the fork. This creates a better balance IMO, with higher upside and downside for forking early.
I don't have strong feelings on the point values, but would not be opposed to smoothing out last year's tiers, either using thespfc's suggestion in increments of 3 points, or in increments of 5 points as follows:
Preseason: 25
Wks 1-4: 20
Wks 5-8: 15
Wks 9-12: 10
Wks 13-16: 5
If this is the new scoring system I will stick with my original fork l ist.
Cordarrelle Patterson is designated as a "joker" on the Falcons depth chart which is hilarious.
The Lions beat the Chiefs for the first game of the 2023-24 season.
The score was 21-20. :spin:
Lions 21, Chiefs 20, Toney 0
Definitely didn't expect the Lions to walk into Kansas City and go toe to toe with Chiefs. That certainly makes me optimistic (I'm a Lions fan) that the end of last season wasn't a fluke.
That was one sloppy game. But well done, Lions. Never been a big Mahomes fan, happy to see him knocked down a peg!
Not entirely surprised by the Lions' victory. The Chiefs need Travis Kelce back, stat.
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2023, 12:42:31 AM
That was one sloppy game. But well done, Lions. Never been a big Mahomes fan, happy to see him knocked down a peg!
Just out of curiosity, why not a Mahomes fan? Seems like a good dude from all reports.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 07, 2023, 03:44:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 07, 2023, 03:29:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 07, 2023, 03:03:28 PM
So if we're increasing the points you get for forking a team in the preseason, then I have to get riskier with the higher payoff.
I'll take Arizona, Carolina, Green Bay, and Tampa Bay in the NFC.
I'll take Cleveland, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, and New England in the AFC.
Noted, I'll make the list later. I'm adding the Patriots and Steelers to mine.
Just decided to tack the Broncos on too. You know I'm still not a Wilson believer.
I don't believe in Wilson either (at least not that he will return to peak Seattle form), but the upside case for the Broncos is that they can still make the playoffs even if he's mediocre.
Also, since I stated what teams I would fork earlier but wasn't conclusive on all of them, my official preseason list is:
Colts, Texans, Titans, Bucs, Panthers, Rams, and Cardinals. (I considered the Bears and Raiders, but keeping both alive for now, and I'm not touching the AFC North or either East division yet.)
Quote from: Hunty2022 on September 07, 2023, 11:27:54 PM
The Lions beat the Chiefs for the first game of the 2023-24 season.
The score was 21-20. :spin:
You know it's going to be an interesting season when a notorious loser hands the defending Super Bowl champion a loss in their first game.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 08, 2023, 09:06:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2023, 12:42:31 AM
That was one sloppy game. But well done, Lions. Never been a big Mahomes fan, happy to see him knocked down a peg!
Just out of curiosity, why not a Mahomes fan? Seems like a good dude from all reports.
I took a day to think about this, but you're right. He is a good dude.
My point was just that, it's nice when someone who is on top of the world, fresh off a championship, comes into week 1 and loses. Puts the game back into perspective, reminds them that nothing is a given, and the best team always wins.
Quote from: jakeroot on September 09, 2023, 06:14:51 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 08, 2023, 09:06:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2023, 12:42:31 AM
That was one sloppy game. But well done, Lions. Never been a big Mahomes fan, happy to see him knocked down a peg!
Just out of curiosity, why not a Mahomes fan? Seems like a good dude from all reports.
I took a day to think about this, but you're right. He is a good dude.
My point was just that, it's nice when someone who is on top of the world, fresh of a championship, comes into week 1 and loses. Puts the game back into perspective, reminds them that nothing is a given, and the best team always wins.
As if he's never lost a game before? I think getting blown out in the Super Bowl, losing two AFC title games at home, and losing 66-10 to Iowa State in college will teach you that nothing's given. Frustrating loss, yes, but reality check, no, he didn't need one.
Quote from: thspfc on September 09, 2023, 11:02:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 09, 2023, 06:14:51 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 08, 2023, 09:06:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2023, 12:42:31 AM
That was one sloppy game. But well done, Lions. Never been a big Mahomes fan, happy to see him knocked down a peg!
Just out of curiosity, why not a Mahomes fan? Seems like a good dude from all reports.
I took a day to think about this, but you're right. He is a good dude.
My point was just that, it's nice when someone who is on top of the world, fresh off a championship, comes into week 1 and loses. Puts the game back into perspective, reminds them that nothing is a given, and the best team always wins.
As if he's never lost a game before? I think getting blown out in the Super Bowl, losing two AFC title games at home, and losing 66-10 to Iowa State in college will teach you that nothing's given. Frustrating loss, yes, but reality check, no, he didn't need one.
I understand that, of course he has lost games before. But few predicted a Chiefs loss in week 1. Even without Kelce or Jones, they were favored over the Lions, by quite a lot. Plus, they were at home, in the loudest stadium in the NFL. Shit, even I would have predicted a Chiefs win. Even after the game, some were throwing around it being an "asterisk" given the absence of Kelce and Jones. As though there is simply no way the Lions could have won over a fully-active roster. Comes back to my point: nothing is a given. And despite the odds, the underdog won it. Good for them. Onto week 2 (for them...)
I know no one cares about anyone else's fantasy teams, but I'm still coming here to vent. I'm in four leagues, and in all four, I'm probably without my "expensive" tight end for week 1. One league I had Kelce, two leagues I have Mark Andrews, and another I have Darren Waller (who is still questionable, but I picked up Bellinger just in case). That's really annoying and specific to one position.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 10, 2023, 10:04:11 AM
I know no one cares about anyone else's fantasy teams, but I'm still coming here to vent. I'm in four leagues, and in all four, I'm probably without my "expensive" tight end for week 1. One league I had Kelce, two leagues I have Mark Andrews, and another I have Darren Waller (who is still questionable, but I picked up Bellinger just in case). That's really annoying and specific to one position.
I'm down Kupp and Andrews. It would've been nice to know the severity of Kupp's injury before I took him in the first round. Andrews was my 3rd rounder.
The Bears suck whenever they play against the Packers... currently 38-20.
My team ended up being one of my few correct predictions to win TNF and today's early slate combined...
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2023, 06:58:42 PM
The Bears suck whenever they play against the Packers... currently 38-20.
Did Rodgers sign over his Bears ownership papers over to Love? :hmmm:
I appreciated the trip down memory lane from the Broncos. That same game happened like 7 times last year. 8th time in 18 games that they've scored either 16 or 9 points. Quite a bizarre one though, the two teams totaled just 3 punts on only 13 combined drives. Denver played just fine aside from kicking woes and a Hackett-esqe 3 & out in the 4th quarter, which ended up being their last chance as the Raiders sealed it with a 5-minute close-out drive. At this point I've made every excuse in the book for this team but that wasn't as bad of an offensive performance as 16 points indicates.
Team that had the worst record in the league didn't fix all their issues in one offseason, color me shocked. Love was excellent.
Perhaps the Rams put the league on notice again, massacring Seattle without Kupp. Undoubtebly the best performance of any team in week 1 (yes, better than the Lions beating the Chiefs who were down 2 of their 3 best players by a point, in part because Kadarius Toney forgot how to catch a football).
Here's our table . . .
jlam
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Texans (25)
Raiders (25)
Panthers (25)
Bears (25)
Packers (25)
Broncos (20)
Jets (20)
Patriots (20)
Giants (20)
Vikings (15)
Rams (15)
Steelers (15)
Commanders (15)
Titans (10)
Bengals (10)
Total: 360
webny99
Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Bears (20)
Raiders (20)
Steelers (20)
Patriots (20)
Giants (20)
Packers (15)
Bills (10)
Jets (10)
Commanders (10)
Bengals (10)
Falcons (10)
Total: 340
thspfc
Texans (25)
Colts (25)
Raiders (25)
Commanders (25)
Bears (25)
Falcons (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Cardinals (25)
Giants (25)
Patriots (25)
Steelers (25)
Broncos (20)
Panthers (20)
Jets (20)
Vikings (20)
Packers (15)
Titans (15)
Chargers (10)
Total: 395
Henry
Bears (25)
Broncos (25)
Browns (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Commanders (25)
Cowboys (25)
Falcons (25)
Jets (25)
Panthers (25)
Patriots (25)
Raiders (25)
Rams (25)
Ravens (25)
Texans (25)
Total: 400
defending champion NWI_Irish96
Patriots (25)
Colts (25)
Texans (25)
Raiders (25)
Commanders (25)
Packers (25)
Bucs (25)
Cardinals (25)
Bears (20)
Broncos (20)
Panthers (20)
Giants (20)
Titans (10)
Jets (10)
Rams (10)
Chargers (10)
Bengals (5)
Falcons (5)
Vikings (5)
Total: 340
jayhawkco
Cardinals (25)
Packers (25)
Panthers (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Texans (25)
Browns (25)
Broncos (25)
Colts (25)
Raiders (25)
Patriots (25)
Jets (20)
Giants (20)
Bears (20)
Vikings (20)
Bengals (20)
Steelers (20)
Commanders (15)
Total: 365
Hunty2022
Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Packers (25)
Texans (25)
Broncos (20)
Jets (20)
Panthers (15)
Giants (15)
Patriots (10)
Rams (10)
Titans (10)
Bills (10)
Bengals (10)
Commanders (10)
Chargers (5)
Total: 285
And the point values:
Preseason: 25
Wks 1-4: 20
Wks 5-8: 15
Wks 9-12: 10
Wks 13-16: 5
For an incorrect fork, the initial points are subtracted and replaced by a -30.
NYG got beat pretty badly... 40-0 against the Dallas Cowboys... :-/
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2023, 11:20:29 PM
NYG got beat pretty badly... 40-0 against the Dallas Cowboys... :-/
My two favorite teams in the NFL.. either Dallas is a monster now, or NYG is just total garbage now...
The New England Patriots hosted a ceremony to honor Tom Brady and to announce he will be inducted into the Patriots Hall of Fame on June 12, 2024, for reasons that are known to Pats fans. Unfortunately, he was unavailable to play and his appearance did not rub off on the team, as the Pats lost to the Philadelphia Eagles, 20-25..
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2023, 06:16:23 AM
The New England Patriots hosted a ceremony to honor Tom Brady and to announce he will be inducted into the Patriots Hall of Fame on June 12, 2024, for reasons that are known to Pats fans. Unfortunately, he was unavailable to play and his appearance did not rub off on the team, as the Pats lost to the Philadelphia Eagles, 20-25..
He was in the owner's suite throughout the evening, which the broadcast made everyone well aware of. After the Pats' first TD, they quickly switched the camera view up to Brady and the others in the suite to watch them celebrate, completely ignoring the players celebrating their TD on the field.
Let's see how Aaron Rodgers and the New York Jets do in their season opener against the Buffalo Bills. This is the game I was most looking forward to after the Packers/Bears game.
I must admit that I found Week 1 to be rather low-octane so far outside of the great Dolphins-Chargers showdown (and rather depressing for several NFC teams with high expectations for this season).
But Week 2 should make up for that. Almost every matchup has some real intrigue... Mahomes vs. Lawrence, Stroud vs. Richardson, Bengals looking to avoid 0-2 against the Ravens, and a Rodgers vs. Cowboys rematch.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2023, 11:20:29 PM
NYG got beat pretty badly... 40-0 against the Dallas Cowboys... :-/
Wow I was not expecting that, thought it was gonna be a close game.
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
What are you supposed to do instead? I thought things like this were public knowledge for every team.
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:11:58 PM
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
You do realize this is what every major league team in every sport does right? The starters are well known. The backups are well known. Every team has tape on every other player and every other team. This isn't some hiccup by the Texans. Every team announces their starters, and provides injury reports to the NFL.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 05:20:45 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:11:58 PM
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
You do realize this is what every major league team in every sport does right? The starters are well known. The backups are well known. Every team has tape on every other player and every other team. This isn't some hiccup by the Texans. Every team announces their starters, and provides injury reports to the NFL.
Though some teame (hiccup New England) will list every player as "questionable" on the injury report.
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:11:58 PM
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
Either that or Stroud is a rookie and can't avoid sacks, just like almost every other rookie and Baltimore has an opportunistic defense.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 05:20:45 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:11:58 PM
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
You do realize this is what every major league team in every sport does right? The starters are well known. The backups are well known. Every team has tape on every other player and every other team. This isn't some hiccup by the Texans. Every team announces their starters, and provides injury reports to the NFL.
I understand that teams are required to submit their active roster to the league (I don't know how soon though), but I don't like that requirement. I would say it's better to keep your next opponent guessing up until game time, the Texans announced CJ two weeks in advance, that's way too much time you gave the Ravens defense to prepare for him. It's just like in school: would you rather have only two days to study for a major exam or be given two weeks time to study? I guess that was the point I was trying to make.
You realize that basically every team announces who their starting QB is before the season begins, right? Because that lends confidence to the QB and gives the other players someone to focus on and work with.
I mean, a team's starting QB is the highest profile, highest paid, most important player on the team, without whom there would literally not be a game. So everyone knows who the QB is, their attributes, warts and all
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 03:33:43 PM
I must admit that I found Week 1 to be rather low-octane so far outside of the great Dolphins-Chargers showdown...
This was the only game I watched, but boy was it worth waking up for at 5am. What a game.
Rather unimpressed by Fangio's defense, to be honest.
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2023, 05:20:45 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on September 11, 2023, 05:11:58 PM
Texans set up CJ Stroud for a beating by announcing him as their starting QB, and the Ravens must have studied him well as they made the most of the Texans announcement. The Ravens targeted CJ and sacked him six times.
Like I said a couple weeks ago, never help your opponents by announcing your lineup. Let that be a painful lesson learned because something like this happens. I hope the Texans now realize that giving them a heads up as to who you plan to play means the opposition will study your players exceedingly well and be well prepared as the Ravens certainly were on Sunday.
You do realize this is what every major league team in every sport does right? The starters are well known. The backups are well known. Every team has tape on every other player and every other team. This isn't some hiccup by the Texans. Every team announces their starters, and provides injury reports to the NFL.
I understand that teams are required to submit their active roster to the league (I don't know how soon though), but I don't like that requirement. I would say it's better to keep your next opponent guessing up until game time, the Texans announced CJ two weeks in advance, that's way too much time you gave the Ravens defense to prepare for him. It's just like in school: would you rather have only two days to study for a major exam or be given two weeks time to study? I guess that was the point I was trying to make.
But to do that, you'd need to have two different guys taking first team reps at practice for all of training camp, which would be to the detriment of the eventual starter.
Quote from: webny99 on September 11, 2023, 03:33:43 PM
I must admit that I found Week 1 to be rather low-octane so far outside of the great Dolphins-Chargers showdown (and rather depressing for several NFC teams with high expectations for this season).
But Week 2 should make up for that. Almost every matchup has some real intrigue... Mahomes vs. Lawrence, Stroud vs. Richardson, Bengals looking to avoid 0-2 against the Ravens, and a Rodgers vs. Cowboys rematch.
Soooo much to like about next week. To me the only snoozer is Giants/Cardinals, and even there, the Giants are about as desperate as can be in week 2.
Aaron Rodgers has left the game vs. Bills with an ankle/calf issue.......
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2023, 08:40:43 PM
Aaron Rodgers has left the game vs. Bills with an ankle/calf issue.......
The Jets are now a guaranteed snoozer weeks 2-18
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2023, 08:40:43 PM
Aaron Rodgers has left the game vs. Bills with an ankle/calf issue.......
Was looking forward to my Cowboys and Giants playing Rodgers and the Jets... that's likely not happening.
Quote from: Alps on September 11, 2023, 09:12:44 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2023, 08:40:43 PM
Aaron Rodgers has left the game vs. Bills with an ankle/calf issue.......
The Jets are now a guaranteed snoozer weeks 2-18
Not week 1 though. What an effort.
Find two consecutive losses that were more catastrophic than the ones the Bills have (divisional round and now tonight).
More confident than ever of the Dolphins clinching AFC East.
I don't know what to make of the Bills-Jets showdown on MNF other than that it will be remembered by fans of both teams for a long time, (but hopefully quickly forgotten by Josh Allen)... and the Jets may have lost Rodgers to an Achilles injury which would be a HUGE blow and absolutely the most Jets thing ever... just like losing to the Jets with no Rodgers was absolutely the most Bills thing ever and 100% guaranteed once Rodgers went down. There was no way the Jets were going to lose Rodgers and the game, and the Bills unsurprisingly played their part to ensure that. I honestly would have felt uneasy if the Bills had stolen a win after 4 Allen turnovers anyways. At that point, they deserved to lose, and it just felt like the Jets' night from the 2nd half on. Better to get a tough loss out of the way early, reset, and use it to get better than roll into Week 2 with an undeserved W.
That said, perspective is never more important than it is in week 1, so I don't think the loss is "catastrophic" for the Bills in any remotely comparable sense to the last three playoff losses. The Allen-era Bills have often struggled against the Jets, and the Jets have a truly elite defense, even better than last year (when they also beat the Bills with Zach Wilson, I might add). Division games are always weird, the Jets are a tough opponent, and the result was well within the realm of pregame expectations. The 2021 home opener loss to the Steelers was much worse IMO.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 11, 2023, 08:40:43 PM
Aaron Rodgers has left the game vs. Bills with an ankle/calf issue.......
Hearing it might be a torn Achilles. MRI to be done today.
Sorry about Aaron Rodgers
Quote from: jakeroot on September 11, 2023, 11:40:14 PM
More confident than ever of the Dolphins clinching AFC East.
If Tua doesn't die on the field (I wish I were being hyperbolic), they have a good chance.
Aaron Rodgers has a torn Achilles.
https://www.nfl.com/news/jets-qb-aaron-rodgers-suffered-torn-achilles-will-miss-remainder-of-season
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2023, 02:03:36 PM
Aaron Rodgers has a torn Achilles.
https://www.nfl.com/news/jets-qb-aaron-rodgers-suffered-torn-achilles-will-miss-remainder-of-season
And that is an injury that one can never truly recover from. You may be back on the field in one or two seasons, but you'll never be the same. Rodgers should retire to coaching or broadcasting.
:no:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 12, 2023, 03:11:16 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2023, 02:03:36 PM
Aaron Rodgers has a torn Achilles.
https://www.nfl.com/news/jets-qb-aaron-rodgers-suffered-torn-achilles-will-miss-remainder-of-season
And that is an injury that one can never truly recover from. You may be back on the field in one or two seasons, but you'll never be the same. Rodgers should retire to coaching or broadcasting.
:no:
Mike
Yeah agree, think his playing career is nearing an end.
Quote from: Dough4872 on September 12, 2023, 03:24:10 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on September 12, 2023, 03:11:16 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2023, 02:03:36 PM
Aaron Rodgers has a torn Achilles.
https://www.nfl.com/news/jets-qb-aaron-rodgers-suffered-torn-achilles-will-miss-remainder-of-season
And that is an injury that one can never truly recover from. You may be back on the field in one or two seasons, but you'll never be the same. Rodgers should retire to coaching or broadcasting.
:no:
Mike
Yeah agree, think his playing career is nearing an end.
His career is in Jeopardy :colorful:
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2023, 02:03:36 PM
Aaron Rodgers has a torn Achilles.
https://www.nfl.com/news/jets-qb-aaron-rodgers-suffered-torn-achilles-will-miss-remainder-of-season
Let's not overreact to what the Jets doctors tell us about Aaron Rodgers' injury.
Better to let Rodgers do his own research.
(A tweet I read.)
In a rather bizarre coincidence, the sack that ended Rodgers's season (career?) was recorded by Leonard Floyd in his Bills debut, who played for the Bears from 2016 to 2019 and notched 7 total sacks on Rodgers during that span.
Quote from: Big John on September 12, 2023, 03:27:43 PM
His career is in Jeopardy :colorful:
Very well played. :cheers:
Maybe the Jets should just avoid going for the leftovers of the Packers?
Sorry to say, but, even if it's not Aaron's fault, it's still the shitty Jets. I'd avoid them like the plague now.
Clearly they have more going on than just Aaron Rodgers. They probably won't make the playoffs but they might be in it for awhile like last year.
I don't wish any evil on anyone, but Aaron Rodgers' injury is the latest in a long line of bad luck events for the Jets.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 12, 2023, 03:54:17 PM
In a rather bizarre coincidence, the sack that ended Rodgers's season (career?) was recorded by Leonard Floyd in his Bills debut, who played for the Bears from 2016 to 2019 and notched 7 total sacks on Rodgers during that span.
That's our Stat of the Week right here!
The Jets are going to be in league purgatory: too good to get a high draft pick (good D), not good enough for a deep playoff run, which was their expectation with NFL ARod at the helm.
The Jets should consider upgrading at QB, but they probably won't because of the resource invested in Zach Wilson.
There aren't any top shelf QBs left to get.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 13, 2023, 11:03:35 AM
There aren't any top shelf QBs left to get.
Maybe not top shelf, but there's plenty of upgrades over Zach Wilson that could be the difference between making the playoffs and not, even if they had to trade a mid/late round pick.
Quote from: webny99 on September 13, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 13, 2023, 11:03:35 AM
There aren't any top shelf QBs left to get.
Maybe not top shelf, but there's plenty of upgrades over Zach Wilson that could be the difference between making the playoffs and not, even if they had to trade a mid/late round pick.
If I'm the Bears I'd be willing to trade Justin Fields for one of their better pass rushers and an offensive lineman.
It was only four plays but Rodgers took 5 snaps.
:poke:
You know, some of the hype about Rodgers going to the Jets and how they were getting other good pieces was starting to remind of that Eagles team years ago, long before Jalen Hurts was around. Sports talking heads had a narrative that they were building a "super team" in Philly. And then they actually played and totally flamed out.
The Jets just managed to do it faster.
I only wish it was Tom Brady's career that ended like this. He deserved it more.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 13, 2023, 11:54:45 AM
You know, some of the hype about Rodgers going to the Jets and how they were getting other good pieces was starting to remind of that Eagles team years ago, long before Jalen Hurts was around. Sports talking heads had a narrative that they were building a "super team" in Philly. And then they actually played and totally flamed out.
The Jets just managed to do it faster.
They wildly outperformed expectations in week 1, winning a game they were already underdogs in
with Rodgers. Yes, their Super Bowl hopes are gone, but acting like Monday proved the "Jets overrated" crowd right is asinine. Rather, Monday cemented what most others thought: the team indeed was/is again just a good QB away from contention. If Rodgers didn't get hurt they'd be in the top 5 of everyone's power rankings right now.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 13, 2023, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 13, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 13, 2023, 11:03:35 AM
There aren't any top shelf QBs left to get.
Maybe not top shelf, but there's plenty of upgrades over Zach Wilson that could be the difference between making the playoffs and not, even if they had to trade a mid/late round pick.
If I'm the Bears I'd be willing to trade Justin Fields for one of their better pass rushers and an offensive lineman.
If I'm the Jets I'm not interested in Justin Fields. Wilson legitimately is a better passer. Fields' running ability isn't worth weakening the core of the team.
We saw how good their defense is. If on offense if they can build around the Hall/Cook RB duo and get top ~25 quarterback play from Wilson (or whoever they bring in, but it sounds like Wilson is the guy), I'm not counting them out of the postseason at all. Last year they were 5-2 before the injury bug bit them. Monday should have been a perfect storm for a second MetLife disaster in as many nights, and they won the game. Wilson looked noticeably better than last year.
Eagles
Bengals
Seahawks
Colts
Bucs
Chiefs
Packers
Bills
Chargers
49ers
Giants
Cowboys
Broncos
Patriots
Saints
Browns
Jets/Cowboys is kind of a reverse of Bengals/Cowboys in week 2 last year, when Dallas was missing Dak. The team without their starting QB pulled the upset in that one, but this time around the Cowboys pass rush is going to be too much for Wilson to handle, and Dak won't turn the ball over 4 times like Allen did.
Two divisional matchups set the tone in the AFC North. Plenty of teams coming off impressive wins and plenty of others coming off embarrassing losses.
I heard some radio sorts-talk chatter about calling for an inquiry regarding the NFL playing on artificial turf due to the scope of Rodgers' injury, as well. We shall see.
Mike
Yikes. 6-10 last week.
Vikings 20 @ Eagles 27
Packers 21 @ Falcons 19
Raiders 19 @ Bills 28
Ravens 23 @ Bengals 28
Seahawks 27 @ Lions 31
Chargers 17 @ Titans 20
Bears 24 @ Buccaneers 20
Chiefs 30 @ Jaguars 35
Colts 17 @ Texans 16
49ers 27 @ Rams 24
Giants 23 @ Cardinals 12
Jets 16 @ Cowboys 29
Commanders 15 @ Broncos 21
Dolphins 26 @ Patriots 21
Saints 23 @ Panthers 17
Browns 18 @ Steelers 20
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 13, 2023, 11:54:45 AM
I only wish it was Tom Brady's career that ended like this. He deserved it more.
Man, get outta here with that, no one deserves to have their career end like this.
Quote from: jakeroot on September 13, 2023, 11:04:54 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 13, 2023, 11:54:45 AM
I only wish it was Tom Brady's career that ended like this. He deserved it more.
Man, get outta here with that, no one deserves to have their career end like this.
Of course, but it is comically unfair that after decades of QB incompetence the Jets finally have a 4-time MVP and he plays one series before getting injured. That and the Bills then losing the game is such a perfect encompassment of the two franchises in a nutshell, it literally seems scripted.
I'm putting Brandon Staley on in-season firing watch. That's (unquestionably?) the four most inexcusable consecutive losses in NFL history. Four straight disastrous, gut-wrenching, same old Chargers type of losses, exactly the type of thing Staley was hired to prevent. Well, four in a row is enough for me to say he's not the guy.
The Packers thought they could just play 3 quarters. :banghead:
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
Okay well now that CJ Stroud was sacked six more times yesterday, that brings his total times sacked to twelve so far this season -- at this pace he will be sacked over a hundred times in his rookie season.....assuming he even survives by January. He is well on his way to breaking David Carr's incumbent record of 76 times sacked by Week 13. David Carr the first Texans QB in franchise history was sacked 76 times in 2002 -- our inaugural season -- the most in NFL history.
Rumors already flying around our fanbase (in fact a few bets already reportedly taken) that CJ Stroud might retire before Christmas.
Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2023, 09:19:00 PM
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
His 2015 injury was described as "grotesque"...from what I saw, this injury could be described similarly. :-o
Quote from: jakeroot on September 19, 2023, 02:23:31 AM
Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2023, 09:19:00 PM
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
His 2015 injury was described as "grotesque"...from what I saw, this injury could be described similarly. :-o
Apparently the UK broadcast of the game showed the injury from the angle that ESPN didn't show, and grotesque is almost not strong enough a word to describe it. Chubb's knee and lower leg basically shattered.
Fork both of the New York Jersey teams.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on September 19, 2023, 08:59:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 19, 2023, 02:23:31 AM
Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2023, 09:19:00 PM
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
His 2015 injury was described as "grotesque"...from what I saw, this injury could be described similarly. :-o
Apparently the UK broadcast of the game showed the injury from the angle that ESPN didn't show, and grotesque is almost not strong enough a word to describe it. Chubb's knee and lower leg basically shattered.
Bad compound fractures or knee blowouts are fully recoverable injuries, even though they are gross-out bad to watch. They'll just be out of action for a while. A torn Achilles tendon, OTOH (like was suffered by Aaron Rodgers), is far worse in that it may not have any 'yeech! factor' to see as it happens and you may return to the field at some point, you'll never be the same player.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 19, 2023, 01:17:27 PM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on September 19, 2023, 08:59:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 19, 2023, 02:23:31 AM
Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2023, 09:19:00 PM
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
His 2015 injury was described as "grotesque"...from what I saw, this injury could be described similarly. :-o
Apparently the UK broadcast of the game showed the injury from the angle that ESPN didn't show, and grotesque is almost not strong enough a word to describe it. Chubb's knee and lower leg basically shattered.
Bad compound fractures or knee blowouts are fully recoverable injuries, even though they are gross-out bad to watch. They'll just be out of action for a while. A torn Achilles tendon, OTOH (like was suffered by Aaron Rodgers), is far worse in that it may not have any 'yeech! factor' to see as it happens and you may return to the field at some point, you'll never be the same player.
Mike
There has been a ton of progress in repairing knee injuries since LT handed Joe Theismann his own leg. That being said, Chubb's previous injury makes this one more difficult to deal with. I hope he recovers, and not just because he's a fellow Bulldog!
Of course, if he doesn't recover, he can always take a coaching job at his collegiate alma mater. It looks like they could use a Running Backs coach based on this season so far.
As far as not choosing to not show the replay, MNF has experience with this (and probably a standing order on what not to do). From Wikipedia:
QuoteWhile initially only the players on the field could see the extent of the damage to Theismann's leg, the reverse-angle instant replay provided a clearer view of what had actually happened: Theismann's lower leg bones were broken midway between his knee and his ankle, such that his leg from his foot to his mid-shin was lying flat against the ground while the upper part of his shin up to his knee was at a 45-degree angle to the lower part of his leg. ABC's decision to screen the reverse-angle instant replay several times despite its palpably graphic content shocked millions of viewers, with some describing it as "the most horrific professional sports injury of all time." As the replays were shown, Gifford repeatedly urged viewers at home to exercise discretion: "If your stomach is weak, just don't watch." The repeated screening of this replay remains to this day one of the most controversial in-game television production decisions in NFL history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Theismann (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Theismann)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 19, 2023, 10:10:32 AM
Fork both of the New York Jersey teams.
Yep, I hate driving past their stadium on the New Jersey Turnpike in that polluted air.
Quote from: epzik8 on September 19, 2023, 03:35:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 19, 2023, 10:10:32 AM
Fork both of the New York Jersey teams.
Yep, I hate driving past their stadium on the New Jersey Turnpike in that polluted air.
And I think of only one team when I think of 'New York' and "NFL' - The Buffalo Bills.
Mike
Quote from: epzik8 on September 19, 2023, 03:35:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 19, 2023, 10:10:32 AM
Fork both of the New York Jersey teams.
Yep, I hate driving past their stadium on the New Jersey Turnpike in that polluted air.
It's really not polluted anymore, but if that's all you think of NJ, you are welcome to avoid our state so that those who know the 98% good parts of it have a little more quiet to ourselves.
I saw Moo's note on the 506 Sports Discord and thought it might be worth a mention here, that apparently the Thursday Night Amazon Prime games are available for streaming freely and legally on Twitch. I wasn't aware of that so I'll have to try that this week. It looks like the channel would be here (caution, auto start video, mute your sound first):
https://www.twitch.tv/primevideo (https://www.twitch.tv/primevideo)
Quote from: gonealookin on September 20, 2023, 12:10:07 AM
I saw Moo's note on the 506 Sports Discord and thought it might be worth a mention here, that apparently the Thursday Night Amazon Prime games are available for streaming freely and legally on Twitch. I wasn't aware of that so I'll have to try that this week. It looks like the channel would be here (caution, auto start video, mute your sound first):
https://www.twitch.tv/primevideo (https://www.twitch.tv/primevideo)
And while we're on the subject of TV and the NFL, ABC is expanding its dual coverage of MNF with ESPN due to the ongoing Hollywood strike. For the first time since 2005, all games will be included in the simulcast. I, for one, miss Hank Williams Jr. asking the nation "Are you ready for some football?" That question alone was enough reason to tune in and see the marquee matchups happen under the bright stadium lights, something that the current SNF hasn't been able to replicate. While I have nothing against Carrie Underwood, Mr. Williams remains the gold standard for primetime opening themes.
I just like the classic MNF instrumental. That can get me pumped.
The modern stuff with pop stars, or whatever, just reminds me of 30 Rock where Jenna sings a theme song for Tennis Night in America.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdOXfqXJE2s
Bryce Young...holy moly...
Quote from: fhmiii on September 19, 2023, 01:30:19 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on September 19, 2023, 01:17:27 PM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on September 19, 2023, 08:59:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 19, 2023, 02:23:31 AM
Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2023, 09:19:00 PM
Nick Chubb suffered an injury so bad that replay would not be shown.
His 2015 injury was described as "grotesque"...from what I saw, this injury could be described similarly. :-o
Apparently the UK broadcast of the game showed the injury from the angle that ESPN didn't show, and grotesque is almost not strong enough a word to describe it. Chubb's knee and lower leg basically shattered.
Bad compound fractures or knee blowouts are fully recoverable injuries, even though they are gross-out bad to watch. They'll just be out of action for a while. A torn Achilles tendon, OTOH (like was suffered by Aaron Rodgers), is far worse in that it may not have any 'yeech! factor' to see as it happens and you may return to the field at some point, you'll never be the same player.
Mike
There has been a ton of progress in repairing knee injuries since LT handed Joe Theismann his own leg. That being said, Chubb's previous injury makes this one more difficult to deal with. I hope he recovers, and not just because he's a fellow Bulldog!
Of course, if he doesn't recover, he can always take a coaching job at his collegiate alma mater. It looks like they could use a Running Backs coach based on this season so far.
As far as not choosing to not show the replay, MNF has experience with this (and probably a standing order on what not to do). From Wikipedia:
QuoteWhile initially only the players on the field could see the extent of the damage to Theismann's leg, the reverse-angle instant replay provided a clearer view of what had actually happened: Theismann's lower leg bones were broken midway between his knee and his ankle, such that his leg from his foot to his mid-shin was lying flat against the ground while the upper part of his shin up to his knee was at a 45-degree angle to the lower part of his leg. ABC's decision to screen the reverse-angle instant replay several times despite its palpably graphic content shocked millions of viewers, with some describing it as "the most horrific professional sports injury of all time." As the replays were shown, Gifford repeatedly urged viewers at home to exercise discretion: "If your stomach is weak, just don't watch." The repeated screening of this replay remains to this day one of the most controversial in-game television production decisions in NFL history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Theismann (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Theismann)
I think the more immediate reason for that decision was Damar Hamlin from last season - even after it was apparent that something serious had happened, multiple replays were shown of the hit that caused his cardiac arrest.
49ers
Lions
Vikings
Saints
Jaguars
Dolphins
Browns
Bills
Ravens
Jets
Seahawks
Chiefs
Cowboys
Raiders
Eagles
Bengals
Chargers/Vikings will be the first NFL game I've gone to since 2013. With how those two teams have started the season, and how they are in general, I expect nothing less than absolute chaos.
10-6 last week. Much better than week 1.
Giants 14 @ 49ers 26
Titans 19 @ Browns 16
Falcons 26 @ Lions 33
Saints 21 @ Packers 17
Broncos 23 @ Dolphins 27
Chargers 34 @ Vikings 31
Patriots 21 @ Jets 13
Bills 24 @ Commanders 23
Texans 19 @ Jaguars 24
Colts 22 @ Ravens 29
Panthers 20 @ Seahawks 28
Bears 21 @ Chiefs 31
Cowboys 28 @ Cardinals 12
Steelers 27 @ Raiders 24
Eagles 26 @ Buccaneers 18
Rams 21 @ Bengals 20
Quote from: thspfc on September 21, 2023, 12:54:50 PM
Chargers/Vikings will be the first NFL game I've gone to since 2013. With how those two teams have started the season, and how they are in general, I expect nothing less than absolute chaos.
Indeed. It is a classic "cornered animal game" in Around the NFL parlance as both teams will be desperate for their first W of the season. All the more so for the Chargers given their expectations this season. Factor in two franchises known for choking in big moments, and it's going to be a rough one for whoever loses.
https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1704950493687235002
:ded:
Outside of the second half last week the Giants have been outscored 90-12. They have been outgained 962-397. Those are historically awful numbers for the NFL. It's what you would expect from an FCS team playing Power 5 opponents. At what point do we begin to question whether Daboll is the franchise-saving genius most thought he was?
Some chalked up the comeback at Arizona to Daboll's halftime rant and/or adjustments. I know this is completely anecdotal, but from the competitive sports experience I have (more than the vast majority of people but nothing compared to NFL players), when you're losing to a team you believe to be vastly inferior, there is nothing a coach could ever say that would make a difference. It's one of the worst feelings in sports and the urgency has to come from within. Credit where credit is due for coming back, but clearly no momentum whatsoever was carried through to tonight's game. It was 17-12 at one point but that game was never in question.
I needed a "value" fork that nobody else was going to pick, and I'm pretty confident I got it right with the Giants.
There's a trick to beating the 49ers, if you care to pursue it: score 31 points. The Niners have won their first 3 games 30-7, 30-23, and 30-12.
Quote from: thspfc on September 22, 2023, 01:06:06 AM
Outside of the second half last week the Giants have been outscored 90-12. They have been outgained 962-397. Those are historically awful numbers for the NFL. It's what you would expect from an FCS team playing Power 5 opponents. At what point do we begin to question whether Daboll is the franchise-saving genius most thought he was?
There are strong parallels to the 2018 Bills. The first half of that season was abjectly terrible, even for a franchise coming off a long playoff drought (remember Nathan Peterman?). They were lucky to make the playoffs the year prior, and coaching was a big reason why they got there. But they're still not a very talented team.
I don't expect them the Giants to make the playoffs this year either, but Schoen and Daboll were hired to take on a known rebuild, so it's not playoffs or bust by any means, especially with the goodwill from overachieving last season. A year from now is the earliest I would expect true heat on them to make the playoffs or else.
Quote from: thspfc on September 22, 2023, 01:06:06 AM
I needed a "value" fork that nobody else was going to pick, and I'm pretty confident I got it right with the Giants.
Good choice.
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2023, 08:40:00 PM
webny99
Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Total: 200
OK, so the Bears were technically not on my final pre-season forks list. But I am forking them now, and don't care if I get 20 points or 25. (20 is fine, but pretend you didn't see this if I'm within 5 points of winning. :))
I am also forking the Raiders, Steelers, Patriots, and Giants. So I'm at 12 teams total.
Bucs and Rams look like terrible choices, but otherwise the list looks OK.
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2023, 08:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 22, 2023, 01:06:06 AM
Outside of the second half last week the Giants have been outscored 90-12. They have been outgained 962-397. Those are historically awful numbers for the NFL. It's what you would expect from an FCS team playing Power 5 opponents. At what point do we begin to question whether Daboll is the franchise-saving genius most thought he was?
There are strong parallels to the 2018 Bills. The first half of that season was abjectly terrible, even for a franchise coming off a long playoff drought (remember Nathan Peterman?). They were lucky to make the playoffs the year prior, and coaching was a big reason why they got there. But they're still not a very talented team.
I don't expect them the Giants to make the playoffs this year either, but Schoen and Daboll were hired to take on a known rebuild, so it's not playoffs or bust by any means, especially with the goodwill from overachieving last season. A year from now is the earliest I would expect true heat on them to make the playoffs or else.
That's a good comparison. I agree that he did enough last year to survive a bad season this year (unless they only win like 3 games, but I think that's unlikely). But if they finish last in the division there will be pressure next year.
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2023, 08:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2023, 08:40:00 PM
webny99
Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Total: 200
OK, so the Bears were technically not on my final pre-season forks list. But I am forking them now, and don't care if I get 20 points or 25. (20 is fine, but pretend you didn't see this if I'm within 5 points of winning. :))
I am also forking the Raiders, Steelers, Patriots, and Giants. So I'm at 12 teams total.
Bucs and Rams look like terrible choices, but otherwise the list looks OK.
Oops. Edited.
I didn't think the wild game I just saw could possibly be overshadowed in its own time slot, until an NFL team scored 70 points on another NFL team in the salary cap era.
Huh?
Last time that happened, humans hadn't been to the moon yet. I never fork teams before the week of the points cutoff, but for giving up 70 points I have to fork the Broncos on the spot. Especially for a team that actually had a very strong defense last year, this is stunning. Maybe the most shocking NFL final score I've ever seen. And I didn't have the Broncos winning either.
726 yards of offense is the MOST in the HISTORY of the NFL. Nuts.
As for Chargers/Vikings, chaos indeed delivered. It was a privilege to see both Justin Herbert and Keenan Allen's best game of their respective careers. Allen's 18 catches are tied for 3rd-most all-time, and the most since 2012. 264 total yards (including his 49-yard TD pass) isn't too bad either. Both offenses are very good to elite, both defenses are in absolute shambles.
Quote from: thspfc on September 24, 2023, 05:13:44 PM
I didn't think the wild game I just saw could possibly be overshadowed in its own time slot, until an NFL team scored 70 points on another NFL team in the salary cap era.
Huh?
Last time that happened, humans hadn't been to the moon yet. I never fork teams before the week of the points cutoff, but for giving up 70 points I have to fork the Broncos on the spot. Especially for a team that actually had a very strong defense last year, this is stunning. Maybe the most shocking NFL final score I've ever seen. And I didn't have the Broncos winning either.
726 yards of offense is the MOST in the HISTORY of the NFL. Nuts.
Sean Payton should have known so much better than to call Hackett's year as Broncos HC "worst coaching job in NFL history". He was guaranteed to turn in a worse performance from that moment, and arguably
already has through three games:
- Choked and lost by 1 point against a division rival in Week 1
- Blew an 18-point lead in Week 2
- Worst defensive performance in NFL history in Week 3
You have to feel for Broncos fans at this point. Brings up the age-old question: Is a Super Bowl win worth ~ten years of being terrible?
Right now, it's tempting to say no, but in context, there are still quite a few franchises that have
never won it all, and that's a different kind of pain, even if they're stacking regular season wins.
Matt Eberflus is officially a lost cause
I'll fork the Broncos. Time to tank for Caleb Williams.
Quote from: epzik8 on September 24, 2023, 07:34:53 PM
Matt Eberflus is officially a lost cause
Brings up another question: have we ever seen this many teams in panic mode after only three weeks? Bears, Broncos, I'd say Giants, and maybe Vikings too. The Jets offense looks even worse than last year. If the Bengals lose tomorrow that'll be another. And the Jags and Chargers, despite their win today, narrowly miss the list for me.
Hopefully that was the yearly stink bomb out of the way for Dallas. I'm surprised but not shocked. Arizona owns them. Arizona also now has a positive point differential. Which doesn't mean a whole lot through three weeks, but clearly they're not
that bad.
I'm joining the list of people to fork the Denver Broncos. I'm also forking the New York Jets.
Is it me, or do i think the Bears will get the #1 pick again, but this time as a 0-17 team?
Quote from: cwf1701 on September 24, 2023, 09:22:13 PM
Is it me, or do i think the Bears will get the #1 pick again, but this time as a 0-17 team?
They don't play the Jets so it's possible.
Quote from: Alps on September 24, 2023, 09:37:13 PM
Quote from: cwf1701 on September 24, 2023, 09:22:13 PM
Is it me, or do i think the Bears will get the #1 pick again, but this time as a 0-17 team?
They don't play the Jets so it's possible.
The loser of next week's Broncos-Bears game has the early inside track
They could even have the top 2 picks by virtue of holding Carolina's 1st rounder next year, as they're also 0-3 :pan:
At this point I'm just hoping for at least a halfway competitive game against the Commanders in a week & a half for the game at FedExField I have tickets for...
FOX was initially showing the Bears-Chiefs game here, but then switched over to Cowboys-Cardinals after halftime in order to "show a more competitive matchup" . Oof :ded:
Another one for "Random Thoughts: NFL Edition"...
This week was a great showcase for the unpredictable, juxtapositious nature of the NFL.
One one hand, there's such a clear and vast talent disparity between the best teams/units and the worst ones. We saw a 70-burger laid (in a 50 point victory) that rivals anything you'd get in even the most lopsided of college matchups. Last year's Super Bowl champion beat last year's worst team by 31 points*. And a QB in Sam Howell who'd looked good against two of the worst defenses in the league looked terrible against a much better defense. So, we should have a pretty good idea of who will be good and who will be bad on any given week, right?
Not so fast. Three teams favored by a touchdown-plus lost today, first time that's happened in almost a decade. Not only that, the team many/most people had ranked #1 in the entire league entering the week lost to the team that many/most people had ranked #32 in the entire league entering the week, and it didn't even necessarily feel like a fluky loss. And a team projected to coast to 10+ wins and a division title lost by double digits and was dominated by a division rival that was widely presumed to be the second-worst team in the league.
Then add on to that games like Chargers-Vikings that are predictably unpredictable... where you know it's probably going to come down to the wire, and it does, but it's still wildly entertaining and volatile in real time, and it's little wonder "any given Sunday" is such a common refrain across the NFL.
*Actually, the Bears hung for a quarter and outscored the Chiefs in the 2nd half, but a 27-point 2nd quarter from the Chiefs rendered that completely meaningless.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 24, 2023, 09:51:14 PM
They could even have the top 2 picks by virtue of holding Carolina's 1st rounder next year, as they're also 0-3 :pan:
At this point I'm just hoping for at least a halfway competitive game against the Commanders in a week & a half for the game at FedExField I have tickets for...
FOX was initially showing the Bears-Chiefs game here, but then switched over to Cowboys-Cardinals after halftime in order to "show a more competitive matchup" . Oof :ded:
They didn't switch here, likely because it was a divisional game.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 24, 2023, 09:38:35 PM
The loser of next week's Broncos-Bears game has the early inside track
Oh no. Two train wrecks colliding at high speeds. It could be dubbed the Tank Bowl, but it's especially ugly because both franchises/fanbases had true hopes of being in playoff contention this season and certainly didn't expect to start 0-3.
At this point, playoffs would be miraculous for either team, but 0-4 is a true death knell.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 24, 2023, 09:51:14 PM
They could even have the top 2 picks by virtue of holding Carolina's 1st rounder next year, as they're also 0-3 :pan:
Despite the Texans' win today, it's still very much possible that the top
four picks could all belong to Chicago and Arizona in some order.
Quote from: webny99 on September 24, 2023, 10:38:46 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 24, 2023, 09:38:35 PM
The loser of next week's Broncos-Bears game has the early inside track
Oh no. Two train wrecks colliding at high speeds. It could be dubbed the Tank Bowl, but it's especially ugly because both franchises/fanbases had true hopes of being in playoff contention this season and certainly didn't expect to start 0-3.
At this point, playoffs would be miraculous for either team, but 0-4 is a true death knell.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on September 24, 2023, 09:51:14 PM
They could even have the top 2 picks by virtue of holding Carolina's 1st rounder next year, as they're also 0-3 :pan:
Despite the Texans' win today, it's still very much possible that the top four picks could all belong to Chicago and Arizona in some order.
Howabout that game (let's call it the Tidy Bowl) ending of a 3-3 draw? :spin:
OTOH, the Lions @ Green Bay on Thursday night will indeed be interesting. :nod:
Mike
Fork the Bears and the Vikings.
Let's say Team A beats Team B, and then Team B beats Team C, well then logic would tell you that Team A should beat Team C right?
Well that's what sets our AFC South division apart from all other NFL divisions. The AFC South throws that logic out the window; practically every year Team C beats Team A. And this has been happening annually ever since I gained my NFL interest two decades ago.
Week One: Jaguars won at the Colts.
Week Two: Colts won at the Texans.
Week Three: Texans win at the Jaguars!
It's a full circle!! The AFC South is the NFL's version of Rock/Paper/Scissors....and all road victories to boot!
Quote from: jgb191 on September 26, 2023, 12:11:56 AM
Let's say Team A beats Team B, and then Team B beats Team C, well then logic would tell you that Team A should beat Team C right?
Well that's what sets our AFC South division apart from all other NFL divisions. The AFC South throws that logic out the window; practically every year Team C beats Team A. And this has been happening annually ever since I gained my NFL interest two decades ago.
It's an interesting phenomenon, but I hate to be the bearer of bad news: it's not unique to the AFC South by any stretch. You can find examples of it in every division, especially since the teams play twice a year. In fact, if all teams in the division split their season matchups, you would by definition be able to form
any set of A>B>C>A you wanted using those results.
It used to be quite common in the NFC West with 49ers>Rams>Seahawks>49ers, where each team not just beat the other, but swept them (see 2019 and 2020 seasons). And it happened last year in the AFC East with Jets>Bills>Patriots>Jets, and could happen again this year.
For a non-divisional example this season, Cowboys beat Giants, Giants (barely) beat Cardinals, Cardinals beat Cowboys. Now, that one is a little more fluky, but still worth noting.
Had the Lions last night.
Jaguars
Rams
Browns
Vikings
Bengals
Saints
Bills
Bears
Eagles
Texans
Chargers
49ers
Cowboys
Chiefs
Seahawks
I'm not surprised the Green Bay Packers fell to the Detroit Lions. The first half was pathetic. The second half was better, with the Packers outscoring the Lions 17-7, but unlike the game against the Saints, the mountain to victory was too high to climb. I hope the Packers do better in their next game on Monday, October 9th against the Las Vegas Raiders. It will be great to see former Packer Wide Receiver Devante Adams play against his former team.
I'll jump the gun with posting my final Week 1-4 fork picks:
- The aforementioned Broncos
- Jets
- Patriots
- Giants
Vance Joseph keeps taking steps in the wrong direction. At least we didn't give up 140
I guess everyone was a little early anointing the Dolphins. I do wonder though, how bad are the Bears if they still managed to lose to the Broncos?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 08:44:29 PM
I guess everyone was a little early anointing the Dolphins. I do wonder though, how bad are the Bears if they still managed to lose to the Broncos?
Speaking as a Bears fan, incredibly bad. They now hold the top 2 draft picks courtesy of them & the Panthers being the last 2 winless teams :ded:
After that game ended I immediately explained the paper-bag concept to my wife in preparation for heading to FedEx Field this Thursday night...
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 08:44:29 PM
I guess everyone was a little early anointing the Dolphins.
AFC East round robin of the 2020's. Bills own Dolphins, Dolphins own Patriots, Patriots own Jets, Jets own Bills.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on October 01, 2023, 09:20:53 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 08:44:29 PM
I do wonder though, how bad are the Bears if they still managed to lose to the Broncos?
Speaking as a Bears fan, incredibly bad. They now hold the top 2 draft picks courtesy of them & the Panthers being the last 2 winless teams :ded:
Of course, this is not breaking news. The Bears are terrible, the Broncos were their only real competition for worst team in the league. That's 14 straight losses and no one should have had any confidence that they would win, even against a team that just gave up 70 points.
As brutal as it was to lose that game, though, there is at least a double silver lining for Bears fans. First, you've got the top two draft picks at the moment, and no reason to think the Panthers pick is going to be tumbling anytime soon. And second, Fields had a career day with 300+ yards, and that gives you a bit of hope for the rest of the season. It's been almost impossible to evaluate him to this point, but if he stacks some more good performances, it will provide some clarity as to what path the organization should take going forward (hopefully with a new coach/GM as I think we've seen enough to know that Eberflus isn't it, further confirmed by the Claypool debacle).
If the Broncos had lost, though? Zero silver lining. Payton's coaching performance looks increasingly and hysterically worse, your defense just gave up 70 points and followed it up by making the laughingstock Bears offense look respectable, and you're tied to a middling version of Russell Wilson long term. If you keep losing, there's no top draft picks or potential QB of the future on the roster like there is in Chicago. It's win now or else, so to get that comeback win that shows the team hasn't completely given up must be a
massive sigh of relief to the entire organization.
Fork the Bengals and the Steelers.
The Texans win their first home game since Christmas 2021, snapping an eleven-game home losing streak; all of our last four wins were on the road while visiting division opponents.
That same stretch, we've also not won consecutive games since Christmas 2021; both of our two-game winning streak, then and now, included wins against Jacksonville.
Additionally, they have not won by 20+ points margin since 2017, six years ago; Texans won by 24 points today.
After being sacked twelve times in the first two games, CJ has not been sacked these last two games and has yet to throw an interception for his career.
Quote from: jgb191 on October 01, 2023, 10:43:06 PM
The Texans win their first home game since Christmas 2021 ...
Additionally, they have not won by 20+ points margin since 2017, six years ago; Texans won by 24 points today.
Wow! That was a solid win and Stroud looks really good.
Pretty rough for the Steelers though. Between that, Watson being out, and the Bengals being 1-3 while Burrow still deals with injury, the Ravens might end up rolling to a division title in a division expected to be a dogfight... not a sentence I expected to be typing one week after they lost to the Colts. :confused:
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 08:44:29 PM
I guess everyone was a little early anointing the Dolphins.
It's been quite a response from the Bills following the week 1 catastrophe.
Elizabeth II took the throne in 1952 and has missed 3 Bears wins since her death. Elon Musk's Twitter has never discussed a Bears win.
Zach Wilson outplaying Patrick Mahomes is a thing that happened. Mahomes also set a likely career low by being only the 4th person shown on the broadcast just before kickoff, after Kelce, Taylor Swift, and Aaron Rodgers. :-D
In addition to the Broncos my 20-point forks will be the Panthers, Jets, and *tentatively* Vikings pending tonight's result. I can't bring myself to write off the Bengals yet. I don't feel good about putting all my chips on the Saints in the NFCS, but the Panthers sure aren't winning it so there's no point in keeping them. The Jets and Vikings, despite somewhat encouraging performances this week, are just in a hole at 1-3. If the Seahawks drop to 2-2 I might rethink things, but if they win, the NFC will look like this:
4-0 Eagles
4-0 49ers
3-1 Lions
3-1 Bucs
3-1 Cowboys
3-1 Seahawks
2-2 Commanders, Saints, Falcons, Packers, Rams
1-3 Vikings
Too crowded.
Bill Belichick and the Patriots "mutually agreeing to part ways" (read: the Patriots agreeing that Belichick should agree to part ways) is really not that far-fetched if things don't get better.
Yeah, I think Bill's time as a Patriot coach is coming to an imminent end. Like all dynasties, they all come to an end at some point.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 02, 2023, 04:25:13 PM
Yeah, I think Bill's time as a Patriot coach is coming to an imminent end. Like all dynasties, they all come to an end at some point.
Oh, the dynasty has been over for nearly 4 years. Bill has tried, and failed, to rebuild it. Doesn't mean he's not the GOAT coach, but there's no doubt that his lack of success pre- and post-Brady will hurt his legacy.
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2023, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 02, 2023, 04:25:13 PM
Yeah, I think Bill's time as a Patriot coach is coming to an imminent end. Like all dynasties, they all come to an end at some point.
Oh, the dynasty has been over for nearly 4 years. Bill has tried, and failed, to rebuild it. Doesn't mean he's not the GOAT coach, but there's no doubt that his lack of success pre- and post-Brady will hurt his legacy.
You think that might put his Hall of Fame bid on ice?
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 02, 2023, 06:02:34 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2023, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 02, 2023, 04:25:13 PM
Yeah, I think Bill's time as a Patriot coach is coming to an imminent end. Like all dynasties, they all come to an end at some point.
Oh, the dynasty has been over for nearly 4 years. Bill has tried, and failed, to rebuild it. Doesn't mean he's not the GOAT coach, but there's no doubt that his lack of success pre- and post-Brady will hurt his legacy.
You think that might put his Hall of Fame bid on ice?
No, this isn't the NHL.
I'm hoping the Seahawks win today so the win/loss distribution is exactly as it should be: two 4-0, eight 3-1, twelve 2-2, eight 1-3, and two 0-4.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 02, 2023, 04:25:13 PM
Yeah, I think Bill's time as a Patriot coach is coming to an imminent end. Like all dynasties, they all come to an end at some point.
The only person(s) who can make that decision are Robert and Jonathan Kraft, and it's far from clear they'll do that anytime soon. That said, the team is effectively in a ditch. Retirements of key personnel (McCourty), injuries, boneheaded coaching decisions (Judge/Patricia), too many players not living up to their billing, and so on. The Patriots Dynasty ended in 2019, even when Tom Brady was still with the team. As great a coach as BB is, his post-Brady moves haven't moved the team forward, although I also think New England fans have been spoiled by 20 years of unprecedented success.
Quote from: 1 on October 02, 2023, 06:11:08 PM
I'm hoping the Seahawks win today so the win/loss distribution is exactly as it should be: two 4-0, eight 3-1, twelve 2-2, eight 1-3, and two 0-4.
You got your wish as Daniel Jones was sacked 11 times and the Seahawks coasted to a 24-3 victory.
Notably, both 4-0 teams
and both 0-4 teams are in the NFC. The entire AFC is either 3-1, 2-2, or 1-3, and the entire AFC South is 2-2.
There are five teams allowing 15 points per game or less through four weeks: Chiefs (15.0), Ravens (14.5), 49ers (14.5), Bills (13.8), and Cowboys (10.3). Amusingly, 68% of the Cowboys' points allowed have been to the Cardinals.
Only the Patriots (13.8), Bengals (12.3), and Giants (11.5) are scoring 15 points per game or less, while 10 teams have failed to eclipse the Dolphins' single game mark of 70 points through all four games
combined.
Commanders
Bills
Texans
Lions
Titans
Dolphins
Patriots
Ravens
Bengals
Eagles
Jets
Chiefs
49ers
Raiders
The deadline to fork for 20 points is tonight.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 06, 2023, 03:08:47 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Bucs might cost me.
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Bucs are going to cost all of us the same. So, no harm, no foul. The Bears are the only team that everyone has forked that everyone didn't do so in the preseason.
Just thought I'd see which teams have been forked by the most players:
7 Players - Bears, Bucs, Cardinals, Colts, Texans
6 Players - Broncos, Panthers, Patriots, Raiders
5 Players - Giants, Jets
4 Players - Packers
3 Players - Commanders, Steelers
2 Players - Browns, Falcons, Rams, Vikings
1 Player - Bengals (me), Cowboys (Henry), Ravens (Henry), Titans (webny99)
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2023, 08:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2023, 08:40:00 PM
webny99
Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Total: 200
...
I am also forking the Raiders, Steelers, Patriots, and Giants. So I'm at 12 teams total.
Bucs and Rams look like terrible choices, but otherwise the list looks OK.
I don't see any standout value forks to add (yes I am aware I haven't forked the Broncos or Jets yet). Sticking with this list for now.
Wow...the Bears prospects the rest of the season are no different and the rest of the games may be just like the first 4, but getting to be on hand for their first win in just under a calendar year was a pretty cool experience I won't soon forget.
Saw a number of Butkus jerseys (including the one visible here), though with the timing of the news on his passing it may have been purely coincidental. RIP #51
(https://i.imgur.com/CRh9I7S.jpg)
I happened to be driving home (DC area) a half hour before kickoff last night. WTOP (news radio in DC) was interviewing tailgating fans at FedEx Field. Reproter stated that several people stated belied that team "would be 5-2 when Philadelphia comes to town".
Oh well.
I highly suspect the fanbase overlooked the Bears. It would appear the team did too. From the Bears perspective, they must have been very annoyed after last Sunday's collapse.
Personal disclosure - I grew up in Philadelphia area, and moved to DC araa in 2001. Never have changed my Eagles fandom, part of that was due to Dan Snyder who was the owner by 2001, and part was because I saw all 3 of DC's SB victories while waiting 50 years for my Eagles to win one. So I sort of watch all this local stuff from a distance. I sincerely hope DC team gets its act back together, but only in years when the Eagles aren't also good.
So I guess Butkus' death inspired the Bears to get their first win. I agree, this moment was both happy and sad at the same time.
At least for one week, it feels good to finally see them win a game
As my aunt from Myrtle Beach via Rhode Island told me last Tuesday, either Mac Jones or Bill Belichick needs to be sent packing by the Patriots.
What a disgraceful performance by the Patriots. Not only losing big for two weeks in a row, but being lifeless while not getting it done. Note to Pats fans under 35: this is how the Pats were before 2000.
The Patriots were pretty respectable during the Parcels era in the 1990s.
Can we call them the Patsies again?
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on October 08, 2023, 07:11:39 PM
Note to Pats fans under 35: this is how the Pats were before 2000.
Patriots fans acting like they've gone through so much hardship because of the team's 20th century struggles is really no different from the Cowboys fans everyone loves to hate acting like their team is great because of the 90s.
I'm not into the constant drama between fanbases, your favorite football team shouldn't be your whole personality. But I will say that Patriots fans who witnessed the Brady years - regardless of how much bad football they witnessed before (or after) that - are incredibly spoiled and saying otherwise is just playing a useless game of "woe is me".
I can't imagine how good today's win felt for Nathaniel Hackett after Payton's offseason comments. Happy for him, and so far, Payton's coaching job has been worse than Hackett's.
Pittsburgh continues to be Pittsburgh, Cincy's offense gets on track, and the Vikings become probably the best 1-4 team since the Vikings three years ago.
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2023, 09:04:14 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on October 08, 2023, 07:11:39 PM
Note to Pats fans under 35: this is how the Pats were before 2000.
I can't imagine how good today's win felt for Nathaniel Hackett after Payton's offseason comments. Happy for him, and so far, Payton's coaching job has been worse than Hackett's.
I wholeheartedly agree. Every time we think the Broncos have hit absolute rock bottom, they find a new low level.
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2023, 09:04:14 PM
I can't imagine how good today's win felt for Nathaniel Hackett after Payton's offseason comments. Happy for him, and so far, Payton's coaching job has been worse than Hackett's.
Absolutely. Payton is overall a crummy guy. Negative comments towards other coaches and players and the Bountygate scandal are only part of what he has done.
Quote from: DenverBrian on October 08, 2023, 09:37:59 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2023, 09:04:14 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on October 08, 2023, 07:11:39 PM
Note to Pats fans under 35: this is how the Pats were before 2000.
I can't imagine how good today's win felt for Nathaniel Hackett after Payton's offseason comments. Happy for him, and so far, Payton's coaching job has been worse than Hackett's.
I wholeheartedly agree. Every time we think the Broncos have hit absolute rock bottom, they find a new low level.
Bring back the Dangerwich and see how deep that hole to the bottom really is.
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2023, 09:04:14 PM
Pittsburgh continues to be Pittsburgh
This could be interpreted in various ways, but to me it means being a mediocre to bad team that wins a lot of close, ugly games..
especially division games. "AFC North football" is cliché, but it's literally the reason Tomlin's non-losing season streak is somehow still alive despite being all but dead and buried in each of the last five seasons.
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2023, 09:04:14 PM
the Vikings become probably the best 1-4 team since the Vikings three years ago.
The Vikings play up or down to their competition to a level that transcends comedy. I saw somewhere that they have not won a game by 20+ points since 2019. For context, the Bears won by 20 last Thursday, and the Houston Texans have already done it twice this season. So I looked it up, and sure enough, the last Vikings win by 20+ was 39-10 over the Chargers at Dignity Health Sports Park in December 2019 (pre-SoFi!). That is truly next-level for a team that's been competitive that entire time. And while playing close games every week is entertaining, it's also very frustrating. Imposing your will and blowing out a team is something a good team needs to be able to do, and the Vikings have been incapable of doing it for almost four seasons. I guess being in 17 coin flip games a year is why they're never good or bad enough to break the eternal cycle of "stuck in the middle".
I hate to do it, but I'm forking the New York Football Giants, and the Panthers if I haven't forked them already.
As of this weekend's action, who is now on the clock for the 2024 draft?
Mike
If this is the Cowboys year then somebody else is gonna have to knock the 49ers out of the playoffs because Dallas sure isn't doing it. Very interesting game next week on both sides in Cowboys/Chargers.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 09, 2023, 12:40:03 AM
As of this weekend's action, who is now on the clock for the 2014 draft?
Mike
Houston, and they took Jadaveon Clowney. :-D
But seriously, the Bears still have to be the favorite at 1-4 themselves plus 0-5 Carolina's pick.
Quote from: thspfc on October 09, 2023, 12:47:23 AM
If this is the Cowboys year then somebody else is gonna have to knock the 49ers out of the playoffs because Dallas sure isn't doing it. Very interesting game next week on both sides in Cowboys/Chargers.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 09, 2023, 12:40:03 AM
As of this weekend's action, who is now on the clock for the 2014 draft?
Mike
Houston, and they took Jadaveon Clowney. :-D
But seriously, the Bears still have to be the favorite at 1-4 themselves plus 0-5 Carolina's pick.
I had a case of dyslexic figners with my previous posting, but I did correct it.
:-P
Mike
Niners came to the rescue and once again restored peace and quiet to my homeland of Texas! :clap:
Like a cold front sweeping clear the noise from the stormy conditions, the Niners abruptly swept away the noise from the Cowboys fans....for now....that is until the Cowboys play against the sub 0.500 teams again and their noise returns. Cowboys have loads of talent, but can't live up to their fans' hype.
Safe to call Bryce Young a bust yet?
Quote from: epzik8 on October 10, 2023, 04:15:35 PM
Safe to call Bryce Young a bust yet?
Nah, way too early for that. Only five games into his rookie year.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 10, 2023, 04:42:05 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 10, 2023, 04:15:35 PM
Safe to call Bryce Young a bust yet?
Nah, way too early for that. Only five games into his rookie year.
And Frank Reich teams notoriously start very slow. The playoffs (division) are likely out of reach but I wouldn't be surprised to see them stack some wins in the second half of the season.
Quote from: epzik8 on October 10, 2023, 04:15:35 PM
Safe to call Bryce Young a bust yet?
Well i would wait until the last game of the season if the Panthers finish 0-17 or 1-16 (only win against the Bears)
Chiefs
Ravens
Commanders
Vikings
Bengals
49ers
Dolphins
Jaguars
Texans
Patriots
Rams
Eagles
Lions
Bills
Cowboys
Lots of good ones this week.
Last night's final of 19-8 was the first instance of that score since October 12, 1927, when the New York Yankees (?) beat the Buffalo Bisons, exactly 96 years prior to yesterday. So saying Denver's offense set football back 100 years might not be an exaggeration. Oh, how far we haven't come.
Quote from: thspfc on October 13, 2023, 05:40:42 PM
Last night's final of 19-8 was the first instance of that score since October 12, 1927, when the New York Yankees (?) beat the Buffalo Bisons, exactly 96 years prior to yesterday.
Interestingly, the only thing that prevents that score, those two teams, and that year from being a
baseball game is that it would have been major league versus minor league.
Red Sox fans remember an ALCS game where the Yankees prevailed 19-8. Looked pretty grim at the time.
Patriots making a bold move signing Malik Cunningham to a three-year deal right off their practice squad...
Quote from: thspfc on October 13, 2023, 05:40:42 PM
Last night's final of 19-8 was the first instance of that score since October 12, 1927, when the New York Yankees (?) beat the Buffalo Bisons, exactly 96 years prior to yesterday. So saying Denver's offense set football back 100 years might not be an exaggeration. Oh, how far we haven't come.
And we'll be seeing what the Packers will be doing with the Broncos next weekend.
And yes, the Yankees were a team in the NFL at that time.
Mike
With their victory against New Orleans, the Texans win a home game against an NFC team for the first time in four years with their last one coming in 2019 snapping an eight-game losing streak. Texans also snap a twelve-game losing streak against the NFC overall with their last win at Detroit on Thanksgiving Day 2020. Furthermore, the Texans win consecutive home games for the first time since the 2018 season. So many things they've re-accomplished after so many years.
Good god did the Niners get screwed today.
Quote from: jgb191 on October 15, 2023, 06:10:02 PM
Furthermore, the Texans win consecutive home games for the first time since the 2018 season.
(Nitpick), they won four home games in a row in 2019.
The AFC South looks a bit clearer, with the Jags pulling ahead as clear favorites while the Titans fall behind.
The Raiders finally eclipsing 20 points in a game for the first time this season on a
safety is just poetic. The Iowa Hawkeyes of the NFL - except Vegas' defense isn't particularly good, they've just faced four struggling offenses in their first six games.
Quote from: epzik8 on October 15, 2023, 06:42:27 PM
Good god did the Niners get screwed today.
Yeah, some rough calls at the end for sure. Brock Purdy suffers the first regular season loss of his career and the first loss period in which he had a functioning throwing hand. There's no telling how critical that missed field goal will end up being at the end of the season. It could cost the 49ers the one seed and it could help the Browns earn a wild card spot or possibly win the division.
And for the second year in a row the Dolphins pop the champagne after an Eagles loss.
Philadelphia Eagles LOL...
Giants got jobbed last night. That holding went on longer than Aaron Rodgers' season.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 10:07:26 AM
Giants got jobbed last night. That holding went on longer than Aaron Rodgers' season.
It was a controversial non-call for sure, however, I'm astonished by the number of people I've seen try to use it as ammo for their "Vegas/Goodell/the refs who bet on somebody's moneyline rig(s) games" conspiracy. They literally called PI the play before on the exact same type of hold. If they're rigging the game, why would they give the Giants an untimed down from the 1 but then not give them another shot after the exact same thing happened on the untimed down? Just no critical thinking ability whatsoever.
This was a case of the refs being scared to throw back-to-back flags on a critical drive, and frankly, while it was a missed call, I can't blame them because the braindead outrage if they
did throw another flag ("LeT tHeM pLaY" or "yOu CaN't ThRoW tWo FlAgS iN a RoW iN tHaT sItUaTiOn") would be far louder than it is right now. They were going to be raked over the coals no matter what they did because people love to whine about the refs every play.
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 12:26:48 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 10:07:26 AM
Giants got jobbed last night. That holding went on longer than Aaron Rodgers' season.
It was a controversial non-call for sure, however, I'm astonished by the number of people I've seen try to use it as ammo for their "Vegas/Goodell/the refs who bet on somebody's moneyline rig(s) games" conspiracy. They literally called PI the play before on the exact same type of hold. If they're rigging the game, why would they give the Giants an untimed down from the 1 but then not give them another shot after the exact same thing happened on the untimed down? Just no critical thinking ability whatsoever.
This was a case of the refs being scared to throw back-to-back flags on a critical drive, and frankly, while it was a missed call, I can't blame them because the braindead outrage if they did throw another flag ("LeT tHeM pLaY" or "yOu CaN't ThRoW tWo FlAgS iN a RoW iN tHaT sItUaTiOn") would be far louder than it is right now. They were going to be raked over the coals no matter what they did because people love to whine about the refs every play.
"The NFL rigs games" guys are essentially Flat Earthers to me.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 10:07:26 AM
Giants got jobbed last night. That holding went on longer than Aaron Rodgers' season.
It was not mentioned here, but the Jets got much more thoroughly and blatantly jobbed against the Chiefs, IMO.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 12:30:37 PM
"The NFL rigs games" guys are essentially Flat Earthers to me.
I don't think it's that clear-cut, but there is a pattern of ref involvement in close, late game scenarios that almost always favors the bigger name team/superstar. There are dozens of instances at this point - including the last two Super Bowls. It's far too many to overlook as pure coincidence.
Two comments on recent posts:
If the 49ers and the Eagles were going to lose games, losing an interconference game is the best game to lose from a tiebreaker standpoint. Which they both did yesterday.
=====================================================
Scores of 19-8 (or 19-11) are much more likely now that there are 2 point conversions. You still can't get to 2 or 5 without a safety.
Not sure about my last statement here, can you also get 2 by returning a intercepted 2-point conversion to the other end zone??
Or, as others mention later, is it 1 point no matter whether it was a 1-point attempt or a 2-point attempt that was returned?
EDIT - Question answered several posts below.
Quote from: thspfc on October 15, 2023, 07:39:39 PM
And for the second year in a row the Dolphins pop the champagne after an Eagles loss.
Eagles fan here, don't care about whether or not they were undefeated. I am glad they did lose, I remember the 1985 Bears and the 2007 Patriots, and some other teams with that kind of start (Packers and Steelers come to mind) having to answer all sorts of questions about that.
As I mentioned in the last post, if you going to lose a game, from a tiebreaker standpoint, the interconference game is the one to lose.
Quote from: tmoore952 on October 16, 2023, 02:17:18 PM
You still can't get to 2 or 5 without a safety.
You're right about that, which makes me wonder:
Total Points -- What you need1 --
Impossible (without TD)2 -- Safety
3 -- Field Goal (FG)
4 -- Two Safeties
5 -- Safety and FG
6 -- Two FG or a Touchdown (TD)
7 -- TD and Extra Point (EP)
8 -- (TD and two-point conversion (TPC)) or (Safety and two FGs) or (four Safeties)
9 -- (three FGs) or (TD and FG) or (three safeties and a FG)
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
1 -- Impossible (without TD)
You can score just 1 point, but there needs to be a very specific setup (involving a safety off of an extra point), so I don't think it has happened.
Quote from: jlam on October 16, 2023, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
1 -- Impossible (without TD)
You can score just 1 point, but there needs to be a very specific setup, so I don't think it has happened.
On a 2-point conversion the ball falls back into the scoring team's end zone and results in a safety, it is 1 point for the defense instead od 2 since it was a point after touchdown attempt.
Quote from: jlam on October 16, 2023, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
1 -- Impossible (without TD)
You can score just 1 point, but there needs to be a very specific setup (involving a safety off of an extra point), so I don't think it has happened.
Correct - hasn't happened yet. And it's a relatively new way to get that.
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
6 -- Two FG or a Touchdown (TD)
Also - 3 Safetys
Quote7 -- TD and Extra Point (EP)
Also - FG & 2 Safetys
Quote9 -- (three FGs) or (TD and FG) or (three safeties and a FG)
Also - TD, EP, and Safety
And because of the 1 point EP Safety, there's going to be numerous other ways to get to every point total, but they're even more unlikely than the above scenarios.
Quote from: jlam on October 16, 2023, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
1 -- Impossible (without TD)
You can score just 1 point, but there needs to be a very specific setup (involving a safety off of an extra point), so I don't think it has happened.
What if there is a safety off an attempted 2 point conversion? Is that even possible -- or is the play dead as soon as the ball is touched by the defending team?
Quote from: tmoore952 on October 16, 2023, 04:23:19 PM
Quote from: jlam on October 16, 2023, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 03:51:35 PM
1 -- Impossible (without TD)
You can score just 1 point, but there needs to be a very specific setup (involving a safety off of an extra point), so I don't think it has happened.
What if there is a safety off an attempted 2 point conversion? Is that even possible -- or is the play dead as soon as the ball is touched by the defending team?
1 point.
Okay here are all the ways a team can score in a single possession:
1 -- (however you all said it could be done)
2 -- Safety
3 -- FG
6 -- TD
7 -- TD + EP
8 -- TD + TPC
I believe eight is the maximum score in a single possession. All this time I had always thought that '2' and '3' were prime numbers until several of you pointed out the single-point possibility....or improbability more like it....might even be unprecedented as I have never seen '1' as a final score by any team (since I started following football in 2002). Anything greater than three can all be composite numbers for football scores. i think even '4' as a final score might also be unprecedented, though certainly possible.
Let me add to that: 10 points is max possible without letting the opponent team have the ball again: Safety, then after the ensuing free kick, TD and TPC. The Texans have pulled that off before.
2 can also be scored by the defense of a point after TD try if they take over possession of the ball and run it all the wat to the end zone.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 01:15:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 12:30:37 PM
"The NFL rigs games" guys are essentially Flat Earthers to me.
I don't think it's that clear-cut, but there is a pattern of ref involvement in close, late game scenarios that almost always favors the bigger name team/superstar. There are dozens of instances at this point - including the last two Super Bowls. It's far too many to overlook as pure coincidence.
Pass interference is both the most significant and the most subjective penalty in football. Last year, the Chiefs had the
most PI's called against their defense (benefitting the opposing offense) and the
fewest PI's called against opposing defenses (benefitting their offense). That is indisputable evidence that the league is not favoring the Chiefs through refereeing.
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
Also, selective memory. We don't remember the controversial calls or non-calls that fell in favor of teams playing against the Mahomes-era Chiefs or Brady-era Patriots because they don't fit the narrative. They don't get talked about when they happen and they don't get remembered down the line because the team everyone was rooting for won so there's no reason to be mad.
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in
close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
So it's not really the refs throwing themselves into the mix, but rather the players causing the issue to occur in the first place. And then of course the fans on one team will see it one way, vs the other team's fans seeing it the other way.
With the Giants game last night, lost in the narrative is that the refs DID call a PI as time ran out, giving the Giants a 2nd chance. For everyone saying the refs were against the Giants, why would they have called a PI giving them a 2nd chance. And then on the 2nd chance, as there often is, the Giant's receiver was pushing the helmet of the Bills defender as he was trying to get close to the receiver, which in itself could be considered illegal hands to the face.
It's hard to say the narrative was the refs wanted the Bills to win. The score was 14 - 9. Were the refs that instrumental in keeping the Giants out of the endzone the entire game? And again - the refs did call the penalty that allowed the Giants another play at the 0:00 mark.
It's been often said that there's probably some sort of foul on every play. It's also said that many people want the refs to let the players play and stop calling so many penalties. Of course, these people also want the penalties that benefit their team called, and they're quick to ignore other potential penalties, or just sloppy play, throughout the game.
I'd say the macro view of why the Giants lost is because they didn't find the end zone all game. But the micro view isn't the final few plays, so much as the botched end to the first half where they wasted a first and goal scoring opportunity. The game is completely different if they come away with points there.
My only takeaway from the game is...how the hell did the Dolphins lose to that?
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
What do you suspect is the motivation for the refs to favor the Chiefs? (Because, let's be honest, that's almost exclusively who we're talking about here.)
The league office telling the refs to favor a certain team would never fly. Multiple referees would have blown the whistle on that (pun intended) a long time ago. There's too much money flowing as is for the league to risk completely destroying its reputation and future in order to make some extra pocket change in comparison to what they were already making.
If the refs themselves are betting on individual games, why are they seemingly/allegedly always betting on the Chiefs?
Vegas paying off the refs is slightly more plausible from a logical standpoint, but I don't think the numbers support it from a monetary standpoint:
Vegas decides they will make X amount of additional profit if a certain outcome occurs, so they pay the refs Y amount of money to attempt to ensure that outcome occurs (X must be greater than Y). So right away they're betting that the amount of influence the refs will be able to have on the outcome is enough to make it positive expected value for them to pay.
If we (wrongly) assume that it's indeed true that in this situation the refs wouldn't start favoring one team until late in the game, for the sake of simplicity, we'll say that they could influence all games that are decided by one score, which is almost exactly 50%.
On average the preferred outcome (the team winning) would occur anyway in half of those one score games, so right away we're down to a 1 in 4 chance that the referees will be able to make any difference. And that 1 in 4 is an extremely generous number because it does not account for how there needs to be oppurtunity for sketchy call(s) to be made
and the influence of those sketchy calls must be enough to sway the outcome in favor of the desired one.
But we'll use that extremely generous 25% number. If there's a 1 in 4 chance of the investment achieving its intended purpose, then the additional $$$ (amount gained when the desired outcome occurs compared to when it doesn't) must be 4 times greater. For example, if they paid the refs $100, they must stand to gain an extra $400.
We'll use the famous example of the holding call on James Bradberry in the Super Bowl. If Vegas does in fact pay off refs to make a profit, this was their absolute dream scenario: loads and loads of money on the game, tied in the last few minutes.
About 60% of moneyline bets and 66% of spread bets backed the Eagles. We don't know what percentage of the total amount gambled was put on the spread and moneylines. $153 million was wagered in total at Vegas casinos. We'll say $100 million was on the spread or moneylines (it was probably far less, but once again, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt).
Of that $100 million we'll say half was on the moneylines and half was on the spread. So it would have broken down like this:
MoneylineChiefs +105: 40% of $50 million = $20 million on Chiefs +105. If the Chiefs win, Vegas pays out 205% of $20 million for a total of $41 million.
Eagles -125: 60% of $50 million = $30 million on Eagles -125. If the Eagles win, Vegas pays out 180% of $30 million for a total of $54 million.
Net $$$ if the Chiefs win: $50 million wagered - $41 million paid out = $9 million
Net $$$ if the Eagles win: $50 million wagered - $54 million paid out = -$4 million
SpreadChiefs +1.5 at -110: 34% of $50 million = $17 million on Chiefs +1.5. If the Chiefs cover, Vegas pays out 191% of $17 million for a total of $32.47 million.
Eagles -1.5 at -110: 66% of $50 million = $33 million on Eagles -1.5. If the Eagles cover, Vegas pays out 191% of $33 million for a total of $63.03 million.
Net $$$ if the Chiefs cover: $50 million wagered - $32.47 million paid out = $17.53 million
Net $$$ if the Eagles cover: $50 million wagered - $63.03 million paid out = -$13.03 million
ESPN's FPI gave the Chiefs a 53.1% chance to win. The spread was Eagles -1.5 so clearly Vegas thought otherwise, and the public sided with the casinos, with most of the money being on Philly. The moneylines were also tight. So, for lack of a definitive value, we'll say it was 50/50 as to who would win.
Roughly 4% of games are decided by one point. Therefore we can assume there was a roughly 2% chance that the Eagles were going to win by 1 point (in which case the Eagles moneyline would hit but -1.5 would not).
So to get the expected value:
Outcome A: Eagles win and cover: -$17.03 million * 48% chance
+
Outcome B: Eagles win but don't cover: +$13.53 million * 2% chance
+
Outcome C: Chiefs win and cover: +$26.53 million * 50% chance
That calculates to an EV of +$5.36 million if they
don't pay off the refs.
If they pay off the refs and the refs succeed in flipping the outcome of the game in the casino's favor, defying the 1 in 4 odds, they'll make the difference between -$17.03 million and $26.53 million, which is $43.56 million. (I'm disregarding outcome B here because it's so negligible.)
43.56 (what they get if the refs succeed) - 5.36 (original EV) = $38.2 million. That is, when they choose to pay off the refs, Vegas has a 25% chance of winning an additional $38.2 million - and, on the other hand, a 75% chance of losing whatever they paid because it would not have changed the outcome of the game.
So for that to be positive expected value, Vegas can't pay out more than a quarter of $38.2 million, which is $9.55 million. A total of $9.55 million spread across the entire officiating crew, that is. Each crew has 9 members, so that would net each official just over $1 million.
Officials on average make around $200k/year (not counting income from any other jobs they have). Vegas would be asking these guys to risk everything they have in their lives for the amount of money they make in 5 years. Most of them are probably millionaires already. From an official's point of view it's an easy no and an easy call to the FTC or FBI or gaming commission or whatever, and poof, the casino is forced to close and a lot of people go to jail.
And to reiterate, I'm being extremely generous here. The scenario above is for the Super Bowl, not a random regular season game, and in this scenario
every casino in Vegas is banding together. It's completely impossible. The dollar amounts in the case of a game like Chiefs/Jets in week 4 would be exponentially lower. The money doesn't even support it
before the high chance of lawsuits is factored in.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
These are the only ones people remember. It's just like in poker. You rarely remember the big hands you win, especially the ones that you suck out on someone. But if someone else gets "lucky" on you? You can remember that for years. There are plenty of shitty calls that happen at the end of non-close games. There is just no attention paid because it didn't affect the outcome.
Quote from: jgb191 on October 16, 2023, 05:55:32 PM
Let me add to that: 10 points is max possible without letting the opponent team have the ball again: Safety, then after the ensuing free kick, TD and TPC. The Texans have pulled that off before.
If that happens in the playoffs, it is possible to score 18:
Safety
TD + 2PC as time expires (to force overtime)
TD + 2PC on opening drive of OT
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 09:00:44 PM
What do you suspect is the motivation for the refs to favor the Chiefs? (Because, let's be honest, that's almost exclusively who we're talking about here.)
The league office telling the refs to favor a certain team would never fly. Multiple referees would have blown the whistle on that (pun intended) a long time ago. There's too much money flowing as is for the league to risk completely destroying its reputation and future in order to make some extra pocket change in comparison to what they were already making.
To be clear, I don't think there's anything even close to a directive from the league to favor a certain team. It's more likely that there's clear implications passed down from the top to protect the league's players, especially the superstar players. So the refs making calls against a defense playing a superstar QB - or no-calling against an offense with a superstar QB - isn't even about the result of the game per se, and is done much more for political reasons than financial ones. (And for the record, I wouldn't say it's only the Chiefs, although they have been involved in several recent instances by virtue of having the league's biggest superstar on their roster.)
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 09:00:44 PM
If the refs themselves are betting on individual games, why are they seemingly/allegedly always betting on the Chiefs?
I hadn't even considered that the refs could be betting on the result, which is against league rules. It's just in their best political interest to support the teams with the biggest superstars in critical moments.
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 09:00:44 PM
Vegas paying off the refs is slightly more plausible from a logical standpoint, but I don't think the numbers support it from a monetary standpoint:
...
Officials on average make around $200k/year (not counting income from any other jobs they have). Vegas would be asking these guys to risk everything they have in their lives for the amount of money they make in 5 years. Most of them are probably millionaires already. From an official's point of view it's an easy no and an easy call to the FTC or FBI or gaming commission or whatever, and poof, the casino is forced to close and a lot of people go to jail.
And to reiterate, I'm being extremely generous here. The scenario above is for the Super Bowl, not a random regular season game, and in this scenario every casino in Vegas is banding together. It's completely impossible. The dollar amounts in the case of a game like Chiefs/Jets in week 4 would be exponentially lower. The money doesn't even support it before the high chance of lawsuits is factored in.
Interesting analysis, but this is way deeper (though not necessarily deeper-
seated) than anything I had considered plausible. I don't think NFL officials are directly involved with Vegas spreads or moneylines in any way. Any type of financial incentive would have to have a clear framework with many different parties involved and would cease to exist if it was discovered, so it's basically impossible on its face. But political motivations are a lot less explicit and a lot harder to track than financial ones, so it's perfectly realistic that they could be manifested in in-game scenarios.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:32:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 09:00:44 PM
What do you suspect is the motivation for the refs to favor the Chiefs? (Because, let's be honest, that's almost exclusively who we're talking about here.)
The league office telling the refs to favor a certain team would never fly. Multiple referees would have blown the whistle on that (pun intended) a long time ago. There's too much money flowing as is for the league to risk completely destroying its reputation and future in order to make some extra pocket change in comparison to what they were already making.
To be clear, I don't think there's anything even close to a directive from the league to favor a certain team. It's more likely that there's clear implications passed down from the top to protect the league's players, especially the superstar players. So the refs making calls against a defense playing a superstar QB - or no-calling against an offense with a superstar QB - isn't even about the result of the game per se, and is done much more for political reasons than financial ones. (And for the record, I wouldn't say it's only the Chiefs, although they have been involved in several recent instances by virtue of having the league's biggest superstar on their roster.)
I agree to an extent - protecting quarterbacks and recievers has clearly become a big emphasis in the last decade or so, and it's resulted in some questionable roughing the passer calls and defenseless receiver rulings such as the one in the 49ers/Browns game. It would be interesting to see if there's any correlation between the stardom of a QB and the amount of RTP calls they get in their favor.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
These are the only ones people remember. It's just like in poker. You rarely remember the big hands you win, especially the ones that you suck out on someone. But if someone else gets "lucky" on you? You can remember that for years. There are plenty of shitty calls that happen at the end of non-close games. There is just no attention paid because it didn't affect the outcome.
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
These are the only ones people remember. It's just like in poker. You rarely remember the big hands you win, especially the ones that you suck out on someone. But if someone else gets "lucky" on you? You can remember that for years. There are plenty of shitty calls that happen at the end of non-close games. There is just no attention paid because it didn't affect the outcome.
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 16, 2023, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 16, 2023, 06:16:57 PM
I've seen the "late game" argument plenty. Doesn't work. Games are 60 minutes. Again, basic critical thinking - if the refs want a certain team to win they're going to favor that team the entire game rather than wait for the last 5 minutes and pray they can do something about it then.
No, not necessarily, as that ignores the strategic element. The pattern is the refs inserting themselves not just late in games, but late in close games. These are by definition, games where one team has not been significantly better than the other over 3+ quarters. There's zero reason to stir up controversy by favoring one team all game when it could be a 30-point blowout. That's why almost every high-profile refereeing incident has involved a game that's close at the end - that's when the calls can swing the outcome.
These are the only ones people remember. It's just like in poker. You rarely remember the big hands you win, especially the ones that you suck out on someone. But if someone else gets "lucky" on you? You can remember that for years. There are plenty of shitty calls that happen at the end of non-close games. There is just no attention paid because it didn't affect the outcome.
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
So basically you're saying that there is human error either way and we have to live with it? And that, in no reasonable universe, is there any causality, i.e. the NFL rigging games, behind it? Then we agree. :)
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
They can, but at that point it's on the coaching staff to take their starters out of the game - and indeed, coaches often face criticism for leaving their starters in for too long in blowouts.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2023, 09:41:54 AM
So basically you're saying that there is human error either way and we have to live with it? And that, in no reasonable universe, is there any causality, i.e. the NFL rigging games, behind it? Then we agree. :)
I don't think there's any
direct causality, as in games are intentionally being rigged. But there is indirect pressure to protect the big name teams and players, and that can lead to suspect officiating that tends to favor some teams more than others.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2023, 09:41:54 AM
So basically you're saying that there is human error either way and we have to live with it? And that, in no reasonable universe, is there any causality, i.e. the NFL rigging games, behind it? Then we agree. :)
I don't think there's any direct causality, as in games are intentionally being rigged. But there is indirect pressure to protect the big name teams and players, and that can lead to suspect officiating that tends to favor some teams more than others.
I don't see how your other points lead to this conclusion.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
They can, but at that point it's on the coaching staff to take their starters out of the game - and indeed, coaches often face criticism for leaving their starters in for too long in blowouts.
This is not making sense at all.
If the league is aiming to protect star players, they're going to want to protect them no matter what the score is, regardless of if they should even be playing. And also you're ignoring the large amount of games that are not nail-biters late but also aren't lopsided enough for starters to logically be pulled.
There is no feasible connection between the two things you're saying. Yes, the league wants to protect star players; no, that would not in any way cause the refs to suddenly act differently in the last five minutes of the game than they were before.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2023, 10:54:00 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
I don't think there's any direct causality, as in games are intentionally being rigged. But there is indirect pressure to protect the big name teams and players, and that can lead to suspect officiating that tends to favor some teams more than others.
I don't see how your other points lead to this conclusion.
Which points...? There's mounds of evidence that officiating tends to favor the biggest name superstars, and therefore, their teams - at this point that's just an inherent part of the conversation, not a debate as to whether it's the case - but I think the reason behind it is very much an implicit directive rather than an explicit one.
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 01:22:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
They can, but at that point it's on the coaching staff to take their starters out of the game - and indeed, coaches often face criticism for leaving their starters in for too long in blowouts.
This is not making sense at all.
If the league is aiming to protect star players, they're going to want to protect them no matter what the score is, regardless of if they should even be playing. And also you're ignoring the large amount of games that are not nail-biters late but also aren't lopsided enough for starters to logically be pulled.
There is no feasible connection between the two things you're saying. Yes, the league wants to protect star players; no, that would not in any way cause the refs to suddenly act differently in the last five minutes of the game than they were before.
I'm saying the refs making calls near the end of a close game that wouldn't be called earlier in the game is, to a certain degree, part of the very broad umbrella of "protecting the star players", as interpreted by the officials. Doing so places extra emphasis on protecting the players and playing by the rules in critical moments, and encourages players to be more careful, in those moments when everything is on the line and there's a higher risk of them try to get away with something to help seal the game - remember the last Super Bowl when Bradberry admitted he was trying to get away with holding.
And that's exactly why officials love to crack down and make big, game-changing calls in those moments, because it puts the rules in the spotlight, and wins points with the league office for protecting the players in a big spot. In other words, late game calls are politically motivated in a way that calls earlier in the game are not because the officials know they're in the spotlight. I don't think that's exactly breaking news here.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 04:33:52 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2023, 10:54:00 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
I don't think there's any direct causality, as in games are intentionally being rigged. But there is indirect pressure to protect the big name teams and players, and that can lead to suspect officiating that tends to favor some teams more than others.
I don't see how your other points lead to this conclusion.
Which points...? There's mounds of evidence that officiating tends to favor the biggest name superstars, and therefore, their teams - at this point that's just an inherent part of the conversation, not a debate as to whether it's the case - but I think the reason behind it is very much an implicit directive rather than an explicit one.
QBs, sure. Star receiver vs. another receiver getting the PI call? I don't see it.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 04:33:52 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 01:22:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
They can, but at that point it's on the coaching staff to take their starters out of the game - and indeed, coaches often face criticism for leaving their starters in for too long in blowouts.
This is not making sense at all.
If the league is aiming to protect star players, they're going to want to protect them no matter what the score is, regardless of if they should even be playing. And also you're ignoring the large amount of games that are not nail-biters late but also aren't lopsided enough for starters to logically be pulled.
There is no feasible connection between the two things you're saying. Yes, the league wants to protect star players; no, that would not in any way cause the refs to suddenly act differently in the last five minutes of the game than they were before.
I'm saying the refs making calls near the end of a close game that wouldn't be called earlier in the game is, to a certain degree, part of the very broad umbrella of "protecting the star players", as interpreted by the officials. Doing so places extra emphasis on protecting the players and playing by the rules in critical moments, and encourages players to be more careful, in those moments when everything is on the line and there's a higher risk of them try to get away with something to help seal the game - remember the last Super Bowl when Bradberry admitted he was trying to get away with holding.
And that's exactly why officials love to crack down and make big, game-changing calls in those moments, because it puts the rules in the spotlight, and wins points with the league office for protecting the players in a big spot. In other words, late game calls are politically motivated in a way that calls earlier in the game are not because the officials know they're in the spotlight. I don't think that's exactly breaking news here.
I still don't understand what late game calls have to do with "star players". I'm bitching about Darren Waller, not a star, getting held by the Bills. No one involved in that play is a star. (Tyrod Taylor, Waller, whoever held him.) I'm aware you weren't replying to me with this response.
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 04:33:52 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 17, 2023, 10:54:00 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
I don't think there's any direct causality, as in games are intentionally being rigged. But there is indirect pressure to protect the big name teams and players, and that can lead to suspect officiating that tends to favor some teams more than others.
I don't see how your other points lead to this conclusion.
Which points...? There's mounds of evidence that officiating tends to favor the biggest name superstars, and therefore, their teams - at this point that's just an inherent part of the conversation, not a debate as to whether it's the case - but I think the reason behind it is very much an implicit directive rather than an explicit one.
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 01:22:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 17, 2023, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 17, 2023, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on October 16, 2023, 11:40:03 PM
But that's where it starts to become circular. Because any call they make in a blowout won't affect the outcome, the refs are more likely to just let the players play and let things slide. They're not officiating with nearly the same level of scrutiny in a 30-point regular season blowout as they are in the fourth quarter of one-score playoff game, because the incentive to do so just isn't there.
I thought the point was to protect players though? Players can get hurt in a blowout too.
They can, but at that point it's on the coaching staff to take their starters out of the game - and indeed, coaches often face criticism for leaving their starters in for too long in blowouts.
This is not making sense at all.
If the league is aiming to protect star players, they're going to want to protect them no matter what the score is, regardless of if they should even be playing. And also you're ignoring the large amount of games that are not nail-biters late but also aren't lopsided enough for starters to logically be pulled.
There is no feasible connection between the two things you're saying. Yes, the league wants to protect star players; no, that would not in any way cause the refs to suddenly act differently in the last five minutes of the game than they were before.
I'm saying the refs making calls near the end of a close game that wouldn't be called earlier in the game is, to a certain degree, part of the very broad umbrella of "protecting the star players", as interpreted by the officials. Doing so places extra emphasis on protecting the players and playing by the rules in critical moments, and encourages players to be more careful, in those moments when everything is on the line and there's a higher risk of them try to get away with something to help seal the game - remember the last Super Bowl when Bradberry admitted he was trying to get away with holding.
And that's exactly why officials love to crack down and make big, game-changing calls in those moments, because it puts the rules in the spotlight, and wins points with the league office for protecting the players in a big spot. In other words, late game calls are politically motivated in a way that calls earlier in the game are not because the officials know they're in the spotlight. I don't think that's exactly breaking news here.
That's a big stretch. All officials' performances are analyzed in depth by the NFL each week. It's not like the only time the bosses are paying attention is late in the game. If there are mistakes at any point they will be noted and discussed.
Almost all referee haters fall into this camp:
1) Referees are horrible.
2) I would never be a referee.
It's oh so convenient - you can carp to your heart's content and also secretly be insufferably pleased with yourself that you'd never do the job yourself.
Quote from: DenverBrian on October 19, 2023, 12:41:48 PM
Almost all referee haters fall into this camp:
1) Referees are horrible.
2) I would never be a referee.
It's oh so convenient - you can carp to your heart's content and also secretly be insufferably pleased with yourself that you'd never do the job yourself.
It's like the guys that complain about kickers, say they could make a 30 yarder, go out and try to kick one and it goes maybe 6 feet above the ground.
Saints
Falcons
Raiders
Browns
Giants
Ravens
Bills
Seahawks
Rams
Chiefs
Broncos
Eagles
49ers
Sneaky big game tonight, despite it being interconference and still early on. With a win, the Jags pull further clear in the AFCS and cement themselves among the AFC's best at 5-2. With a loss, suddenly the division becomes murky and they're behind the conference's elite. And for the Saints, a win perhaps re-establishes them as favorites in the NFCS, while a loss drops them a game and a half back.
Last year it was the Seahawks, who played remarkably great after losing Russell Wilson. Might it be the Buccaneers' turn this year? At 3-2 and on top of the NFC South, they're continuing to play great despite Tom Brady's retirement. Can't say the same about Brady's other former team, though, who is struggling at 1-4 and reverting back to pre-2001 form. Looks like karma has finally caught up to them...
Quote from: Henry on October 19, 2023, 10:30:06 PM
Last year it was the Seahawks, who played remarkably great after losing Russell Wilson. Might it be the Buccaneers' turn this year? At 3-2 and on top of the NFC South, they're continuing to play great despite Tom Brady's retirement. Can't say the same about Brady's other former team, though, who is struggling at 1-4 and reverting back to pre-2001 form. Looks like karma has finally caught up to them...
As I called last year, losing Wilson is a net positive. He is not the same player he was 4-5 years ago and the Seahawks saw it.
Foster Moreau, catch the damn ball.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 16, 2023, 08:00:35 PM
My only takeaway from the game is...how the hell did the Dolphins lose to that?
It is worth noting that 4 of the Dolphins' 5 wins have come against 4 of the worst 5 teams in the NFL. They have absolutely done what they should do to those teams... but the Eagles on SNF will be a great test.
The NFL might as well eliminate the "uncatchable" clause from the pass interference rule if a ball that lands much farther out of bounds than any human could physically stretch themselves isn't considered uncatchable.
At this point, I definitely think Lamar Jackson is indeed worth $260 million.
Quote from: webny99 on October 20, 2023, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 16, 2023, 08:00:35 PM
My only takeaway from the game is...how the hell did the Dolphins lose to that?
It is worth noting that 4 of the Dolphins' 5 wins have come against 4 of the worst 5 teams in the NFL. They have absolutely done what they should do to those teams... but the Eagles on SNF will be a great test.
Well, at least the Dolphins win the easy games. The Bills have now lost to both the Jets and the Pats :-D
The Jets also beat the Eagles, and should have beaten the Chiefs.
But yeah.. the 2023 Bills invoke the "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" meme.
Welcome back to the 70s/80s Packers. :ded:
Quote from: Big John on October 22, 2023, 07:43:22 PM
Welcome back to the 70s/80s Packers. :ded:
I cringe every time Love tries to throw the ball more than 20 yards.
What a statement by Minnesota. I'd say the 4th best game any team has played so far this year, after BAL vs. DET, BUF vs. MIA, and LAR vs. SEA.
I don't know how much it's gonna take to get the fact that Kirk Cousins is a top 10 quarterback through peoples' skulls. He just played one of the best games of any QB all year, without Jefferson, against the 49ers defense.
Quote from: thspfc on October 23, 2023, 11:21:32 PM
What a statement by Minnesota. I'd say the 4th best game any team has played so far this year, after BAL vs. DET, BUF vs. MIA, and LAR vs. SEA.
MIA vs DEN
Quote from: jlam on October 23, 2023, 11:22:51 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 23, 2023, 11:21:32 PM
What a statement by Minnesota. I'd say the 4th best game any team has played so far this year, after BAL vs. DET, BUF vs. MIA, and LAR vs. SEA.
MIA vs DEN
That was so absurd it hardly counts. They met absolutely no resistance in that game, just a defensive meltdown. If we're just talking biggest blowouts, obviously tonight doesn't come anywhere close to making the list.
I did forget one though, a certain week 5 game that I erased from my memory.
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 11:12:18 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
No, it's Geno Stone, safety for the Ravens. He has 4 picks. :-D
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2023, 12:18:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 11:12:18 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
No, it's Geno Stone, safety for the Ravens. He has 4 picks. :-D
Ha. Didn't know there was more than one Geno in the league. My bad!
Bills
Jets
Jaguars
Eagles
Cowboys
Vikings
Titans
Dolphins
Colts
Texans
Browns
49ers
Chiefs
Ravens
Chargers
Lions
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 12:25:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2023, 12:18:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 11:12:18 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
No, it's Geno Stone, safety for the Ravens. He has 4 picks. :-D
Ha. Didn't know there was more than one Geno in the league. My bad!
Never really thought about it before, but the phrase "leads the league in interceptions" is rather nebulous.
We at the Commanders are officially breaking apart our defensive core...
Quote from: webny99 on October 26, 2023, 02:40:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 12:25:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2023, 12:18:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 11:12:18 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
No, it's Geno Stone, safety for the Ravens. He has 4 picks. :-D
Ha. Didn't know there was more than one Geno in the league. My bad!
Never really thought about it before, but the phrase "leads the league in interceptions" is rather nebulous.
Well, the 'career interceptions thrown' record (I believe that it is now held by Brett Favre) is one of the weirdest NFL records of all. A QB has got to be VERY GOOD to have any chance of even remotely approaching it.
Mike
Cincinnati has arrived. 2021 Chiefs vibes. Then again, I said that about the Bucs last year. I don't know what happened to the Niners on that day in Cleveland, but since then they've been railed two weeks in a row.
In an awful break for the Vikings, Cousins tore his achilles. Sad to see considering how well he was playing, and how good the team as a whole has looked the last two weeks - probably as good as they ever have since 2017. With Cousins playing at a top 5 level, Addison breaking out, and Jefferson coming back in a couple weeks, that offense could have been nasty, and Flores' defense has come around. Instead, they're now facing a probable losing season and a highly uncertain future. They weren't going to the Super Bowl either way, but they certainly looked playoff-bound in the weak NFC.
Speaking of achilles . . . Aaron Rodgers appears to be making record time with his recovery, and there's chatter that he could return this season. The medical field is constantly evolving and improving. I don't think any of us non-doctors are in a position to say that it's impossible, regardless of what precedent indicates. And due in part to the Giants committing crimes against humanity today, the Jets are still very much in the hunt at 4-3.
Denver rolls over the Chiefs for their first victory in that rivalry since the Peyton Manning days, and in turn their first ever against Mahomes. From giving up 70 points in a game, to holding the Chiefs to one touchdown in two matchups . . . :confused:
I'm forking the Packers. With that, my NFC field is set: PHI, DAL, DET, NO, SEA, SF, LAR. The Falcons could really burn me, as I was one of only two people to fork them pre-season. Literally anybody else winning the NFC South is a non-negative outcome for me, since we're all out on the Bucs and Panthers. Even still, an 8-9 team could limp into the 7 seed in this conference. If it ends up being a team I forked, well, not much I can do about that.
I'll probably add an AFC team later in the week. Likely the Titans, possibly the Chargers if they manage to lose tonight.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 29, 2023, 04:44:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 26, 2023, 02:40:16 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 12:25:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2023, 12:18:38 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 25, 2023, 11:12:18 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 24, 2023, 03:59:35 PM
I have to say it's a bit shocking to me seeing Geno Stone lead the league in interceptions up to this point in the season.
I'm assuming this was an autocorrect error, but it's Geno Smith. Yeah, he hasn't played nearly as well as last year.
No, it's Geno Stone, safety for the Ravens. He has 4 picks. :-D
Ha. Didn't know there was more than one Geno in the league. My bad!
Never really thought about it before, but the phrase "leads the league in interceptions" is rather nebulous.
Well, the 'career interceptions thrown' record (I believe that it is now held by Brett Favre) is one of the weirdest NFL records of all. A QB has got to be VERY GOOD to have any chance of even remotely approaching it.
Mike
Along those lines, the QB with the most interceptions in a given season is rarely the worst starter, or even bottom 5. If they're
that bad they'll get benched and/or given few oppurtunites to make plays for better or worse.
Jets vs. Giants was everything we thought it would be, except that Zach Wilson had exactly one drive and it happened to be the last 30 seconds of regulation.
Carolina gets it's first win of the season against the Texans, who are playing OK football with a 3-4 record.
The New England Patriots showed some signs of life, but still lost to the Miami Dolphins, 31-17.
Dallas is so schizophrenic this year. One week, they look like contenders, the next week, they look like they should be dragged out back and put out their misery. This was a good week for them. Which means they'll probably shit the bed next week.
The Cousins injury forks the Vikes, as you folks like to say. Too bad for them as, yeah, it looked like they were on track to be one of those teams that bucks the statistics and makes the post season despite starting 0-3. Congrats on winning the 2023 North, Detroit.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 30, 2023, 10:21:42 AM
Dallas is so schizophrenic this year. One week, they look like contenders, the next week, they look like they should be dragged out back and put out their misery. This was a good week for them. Which means they'll probably shit the bed next week.
Let's hope that's the case.
Go Birds!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 30, 2023, 10:30:22 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 30, 2023, 10:21:42 AM
Dallas is so schizophrenic this year. One week, they look like contenders, the next week, they look like they should be dragged out back and put out their misery. This was a good week for them. Which means they'll probably shit the bed next week.
Let's hope that's the case.
Go Birds!
Eagles have been a little shaky too this year. Lost to the Jets and struggled in some of their wins. I think the Eagles-Cowboys game could go either way although I will lean to the Eagles as having a slight advantage as they are playing at home.
Quote from: Dough4872 on October 30, 2023, 03:02:21 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 30, 2023, 10:30:22 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 30, 2023, 10:21:42 AM
Dallas is so schizophrenic this year. One week, they look like contenders, the next week, they look like they should be dragged out back and put out their misery. This was a good week for them. Which means they'll probably shit the bed next week.
Let's hope that's the case.
Go Birds!
Eagles have been a little shaky too this year. Lost to the Jets and struggled in some of their wins. I think the Eagles-Cowboys game could go either way although I will lean to the Eagles as having a slight advantage as they are playing at home.
The Eagles have been the least shaky team this year. Everyone else has multiple losses and some ugly wins of their own. That'll be a good one next week.
Some rumors out there that Famous Jameis is headed to the Vikings.
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2023, 03:47:01 PM
Quote from: Dough4872 on October 30, 2023, 03:02:21 PM
Eagles have been a little shaky too this year. Lost to the Jets and struggled in some of their wins. I think the Eagles-Cowboys game could go either way although I will lean to the Eagles as having a slight advantage as they are playing at home.
The Eagles have been the least shaky team this year. Everyone else has multiple losses and some ugly wins of their own. That'll be a good one next week.
It could also be argued that the Eagles have been winning
despite being shaky. Sam Howell lit them up for 62 points in two games but they escaped those games 2-0. And at no point have the Eagles looked like world-beaters. Some quality wins, but none by more than two scores.
Quote from: webny99 on October 30, 2023, 05:23:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 30, 2023, 03:47:01 PM
Quote from: Dough4872 on October 30, 2023, 03:02:21 PM
Eagles have been a little shaky too this year. Lost to the Jets and struggled in some of their wins. I think the Eagles-Cowboys game could go either way although I will lean to the Eagles as having a slight advantage as they are playing at home.
The Eagles have been the least shaky team this year. Everyone else has multiple losses and some ugly wins of their own. That'll be a good one next week.
It could also be argued that the Eagles have been winning despite being shaky. Sam Howell lit them up for 62 points in two games but they escaped those games 2-0. And at no point have the Eagles looked like world-beaters. Some quality wins, but none by more than two scores.
I've never seen a championship awarded at the halfway point of the season. I expect the Eagles to lose some games going forward, but I think some losses are necessary to keep you sharp.
As far as losing to the Jets, as I say every year, if you're going to lose games, the interconference games are the ones to lose since those games are farther down the tiebreaker hierarchy.
Kirk Cousins suffered a torn Achilles tendon in their game this past Sunday at Green Bay. He might return to the field in a season or two, but he'll never play again at the same level.
Mike
I'll fork the Vikings, Rams, and Steelers at the end of Week 8. I was about to fork the Titans, but Will Levis surprised me. We'll see what they can do.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 31, 2023, 01:46:45 AM
Kirk Cousins suffered a torn Achilles tendon in their game this past Sunday at Green Bay. He might return to the field in a season or two, but he'll never play again at the same level.
Mike
I'm not a Vikings fan, but I hate to see Cousins go down. He seems to be a nice guy who worked hard and was having a great season. I hope he makes it back.
Quote from: webny99 on October 05, 2023, 02:33:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on September 22, 2023, 08:02:30 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 10, 2023, 08:40:00 PM
webny99
Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Total: 200
...
I am also forking the Raiders, Steelers, Patriots, and Giants. So I'm at 12 teams total.
I don't see any standout value forks to add (yes I am aware I haven't forked the Broncos or Jets yet). Sticking with this list for now.
OK, I am forking the Packers. Up to 7 NFC teams, with the Commanders and Vikings (sadly) on fork watch.
Leaving the AFC for now. Suddenly a bit nervous about the Titans but happy with the rest. Should have forked the Broncos earlier but there's no point doing it now, might as well keep riding with them after their most impressive win in some time. Schedule looks manageable, and the two Chargers games down the stretch could be fork-offs.
Browns and Jets are on fork watch-lite. I think both will stick around in the picture for a while.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 30, 2023, 10:21:42 AM
The Cousins injury forks the Vikes, as you folks like to say. Too bad for them as, yeah, it looked like they were on track to be one of those teams that bucks the statistics and makes the post season despite starting 0-3. Congrats on winning the 2023 North, Detroit.
While the division is likely out of play for the Vikings, just because of the mediocrity of the teams going for the 5-7 seeds it's tough for me to entirely write the Vikings off. The Vikings have games against Atlanta and New Orleans over the next 3 weeks which will be big because it may come down to that head-to-head tiebreaker if either/both of those teams don't win the NFC South.
I'll finally fork the Commanders. Looks like they're giving up via the trade market.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 31, 2023, 01:35:04 PM
I'll finally fork the Commanders. Looks like they're giving up via the trade market.
What a bizarre 48 hours for the Washington franchise. From having a 4th quarter lead against one of the best teams in the league (a game which, had they held on to win, would have put them firmly in the playoff picture until late in the season), to giving up three 4th quarter touchdowns, falling to 3-5, and promptly trading away two of the best defensive players on their roster. Wild times.
I think they're still too good to completely tank this season regardless of how the organization views it, but losing those two players is tough. I really thought the #7 seed would come down to Washington and loser of Saints-Falcons (with the Vikings briefly in the mix), so I certainly wasn't planning to fork them, but here I am on the clock with 48 hours to decide what to do. :paranoid:
Wow. I'll add the Commanders as well. That means my NFC field is fully set:
Lions
Eagles
Cowboys
Saints
Falcons
49ers
Seahawks
I might fork the remaining 2 AFC teams by Thursday.
Raiders fire Josh McDaniels.
...and GM Dave Zeigler. Can't blame the owner after what happened yesterday.
Wow. Was expecting this eventually, but not mid-season.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38791663/josh-mcdaniels-fired-las-vegas-raiders-bad-decisions-legacy-rebuild
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 10:05:19 AM
Wow. Was expecting this eventually, but not mid-season.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38791663/josh-mcdaniels-fired-las-vegas-raiders-bad-decisions-legacy-rebuild
And this was McDaniels' what, 3rd head coaching hire?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 01, 2023, 10:08:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 10:05:19 AM
Wow. Was expecting this eventually, but not mid-season.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38791663/josh-mcdaniels-fired-las-vegas-raiders-bad-decisions-legacy-rebuild
And this was McDaniels' what, 3rd head coaching hire?
Yes, if you count Indy, where he was hired and declined the job.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 01, 2023, 10:08:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 10:05:19 AM
Wow. Was expecting this eventually, but not mid-season.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38791663/josh-mcdaniels-fired-las-vegas-raiders-bad-decisions-legacy-rebuild
And this was McDaniels' what, 3rd head coaching hire?
If you count his Indianapolis fiasco...
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long
is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Does he have TSA?
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2023, 01:24:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Does he have TSA?
No doubt, but that won't speed up the plane. :)
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 05:05:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2023, 01:24:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Does he have TSA?
No doubt, but that won't speed up the plane. :)
The Patriots have their own charter plane so they don't go through TSA.
As gut-wrenching as it was seeing the last winless team win their first on Sunday, there was a bright note....it put the brakes on the Texans fans' talking about the playoffs this year, which serves as a jarring reminder that the Texans are still rebuilding, there will still be major hurdles to clear. Let's not get ahead of ourselves; it's still too early to be talking playoffs for the Texans right now. I don't want that kind of pressure on our players and coaches. There is way too much competition for just those three wild card spots; forget our division spot, the Jaguars have that.
The Texans lost at Charlotte the same way they lost at Atlanta -- on a last-second field goal. Sure one can make the argument that the Texans could have been five wins, two losses. That may be a fair point, but that's why our young players will have to figure out how not to give up 4th Q leads....something they did many games last year. It's going to be a learning and growing process....a long process.
Quote from: Big John on November 01, 2023, 05:20:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 05:05:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2023, 01:24:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Does he have TSA?
No doubt, but that won't speed up the plane. :)
The Patriots have their own charter plane so they don't go through TSA.
Did that joke go through TSA at the aiport before it flew over your head?
Steelers
Chiefs
Falcons
Saints
Rams
Patriots
Ravens
Buccaneers
Browns
Colts
Raiders
Eagles
Bengals
Chargers
Quote from: Big John on November 01, 2023, 05:20:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 05:05:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 01, 2023, 01:24:17 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2023, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 01, 2023, 10:21:24 AM
How long until he's back on staff in New England? :pan:
How long is a flight from Vegas to Boston?
Does he have TSA?
No doubt, but that won't speed up the plane. :)
The Patriots have their own charter plane so they don't go through TSA.
To comment on this -- I saw said plane sitting on the ground when landing at Providence RI airport in 2018. There are multiple Super Bowl trophies plastered on the side of it. (obviously not real ones)
The Week 9 schedule is looking prretty good. Can't ask for much better than Dolphins-Chiefs in Germany, the great Cowboys-Eagles rivalry, the suddenly division leading Seahawks vs. the should-be 8-0 Ravens, Falcons-Vikings for an important tiebreaker, Bills-Bengals in a playoff rematch on SNF, and oh by the way, MNF is Jets-Chargers for a tiebreaker that could well decide an AFC Wild Card. It's so great on paper that undoubtedly half of them will be duds. :meh:
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on October 05, 2023, 01:38:42 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 06, 2023, 03:08:47 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Bucs might cost me.
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
I'm going to resist adding anybody to the list right now.
Quote from: webny99 on October 31, 2023, 05:57:32 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 31, 2023, 01:35:04 PM
I'll finally fork the Commanders. Looks like they're giving up via the trade market.
What a bizarre 48 hours for the Washington franchise. From having a 4th quarter lead against one of the best teams in the league (a game which, had they held on to win, would have put them firmly in the playoff picture until late in the season), to giving up three 4th quarter touchdowns, falling to 3-5, and promptly trading away two of the best defensive players on their roster. Wild times.
I think they're still too good to completely tank this season regardless of how the organization views it, but losing those two players is tough. I really thought the #7 seed would come down to Washington and loser of Saints-Falcons (with the Vikings briefly in the mix), so I certainly wasn't planning to fork them, but here I am on the clock with 48 hours to decide what to do. :paranoid:
In typical fashion, I forgot to fork the Commanders. So, I'll be rooting for them the next few weeks (not that I needed any extra incentive this week :biggrin:).
This is my very subjective ranking... and will invite disagreement.
NFC Teams which I'm rooting to go to the Super Bowl this season... ranked!
- Detroit Lions
- Dallas Cowboys
- San Francisco 49ers
NFC Teams which I'm hoping to miss the playoffs... ranked!
- Philadelphia Eagles (Naturally)
- Seattle Seahawks (Of course)
- Washington Commandos... or is it Washington Team Football
- Green Bay Packers
Sorry, no AFC version.
Quote from: ZLoth on November 03, 2023, 10:41:25 AM
This is my very subjective ranking... and will invite disagreement.
NFC Teams which I'm rooting to go to the Super Bowl this season... ranked!
- Detroit Lions
- Dallas Cowboys
- San Francisco 49ers
NFC Teams which I'm hoping to miss the playoffs... ranked!
- Philadelphia Eagles (Naturally)
- Seattle Seahawks (Of course)
- Washington Commandos... or is it Washington Team Football
I still think of them as being the 'Washington Football Team', or even more ideally the 'Washington Redskins'.
Quote
Sorry, no AFC version.
Quote from: mgk920 on November 03, 2023, 01:55:26 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on November 03, 2023, 10:41:25 AM
This is my very subjective ranking... and will invite disagreement.
NFC Teams which I'm rooting to go to the Super Bowl this season... ranked!
- Detroit Lions
- Dallas Cowboys
- San Francisco 49ers
NFC Teams which I'm hoping to miss the playoffs... ranked!
- Philadelphia Eagles (Naturally)
- Seattle Seahawks (Of course)
- Washington Commandos... or is it Washington Team Football
I still think of them as being the 'Washington Football Team', or even more ideally the 'Washington Redskins'.
For me it's usually just "Washington". Occasionally Football Team, never Redskins anymore. For relocated teams, I still say Oakland and San Diego sometimes, but never St. Louis. Make it make sense.
It pleases me that the Cowboys blew out both the Redskins and the Football Team in the last and third-to-last games, respectively, of the existence of those monikers.
Quote from: ZLoth on November 03, 2023, 10:41:25 AM
This is my very subjective ranking... and will invite disagreement.
NFC Teams which I'm hoping to miss the playoffs... ranked!
- Philadelphia Eagles (Naturally)
- Seattle Seahawks (Of course)
- Washington Commandos... or is it Washington Team Football
- Green Bay Packers
Eagles fan in DC area, lived in Philly area for a long time, moved to DC area for work reasons in 2000.
I doubt you will get your Eagles wish this season.
Having lived in both Philly and DC areas, over the decades I've heard both cities claim that they have the best rivalry with the Cowboys. I also lived near NYC for about a year and don't remember hearing that from them (but then again it was only the one year 1996). I can see DC in the 70s-80s when they were good, and the Eagles for the most part weren't. Maybe it depends on who's good when?
I guess we can fork the Patriots.
I officially declare both C.J. Stroud and Anthony Richardson better than Bryce Young.
What a heartbreaker for the Cowboys. Things seem to be shaping up similarly to last year. Probably get the 5 seed, play the South champion in the wild card, then either the 1 or 2 seed in the divisional. This year's Saints would likely be a tougher matchup than last year's Bucs, but Dallas should still win such a game.
Upcoming for the Cowboys are the Giants, Panthers, and Commanders. Sounds like 8-3 entering a massive stretch of games: SEA, PHI, @BUF, @MIA, DET. Vs. Seahawks looks to be a battle for the 5 seed, vs. Eagles looks to be Dallas' last crack at the division. Of course, it's early to be saying all of this. Still gotta win the next three games.
Quote from: epzik8 on November 05, 2023, 07:47:33 PM
I officially declare both C.J. Stroud and Anthony Richardson better than Bryce Young.
Richardson hasn't played enough yet, but Stroud looks great. That 3-1 start is long gone for Tampa.
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 04, 2023, 02:19:26 PMI doubt you will get your Eagles wish this season.
What I wish for and what actually happens are in two different universes. Since I moved from NorCal, I have some affinity towards the 49ers, but thanks to my next-door neighbor, I'm also a Cowboys fan. It gets interesting whenever the 49ers and Cowboys meet, but that rivalry is intensified when the Cowboys play the Eagles.
And, it should be noted, the 2020 season was a funky season where the number 5-7 seed all had better records than the NFC East.
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2023, 08:07:35 PM
The Week 9 schedule is looking prretty good. Can't ask for much better than Dolphins-Chiefs in Germany, the great Cowboys-Eagles rivalry, the suddenly division leading Seahawks vs. the should-be 8-0 Ravens, Falcons-Vikings for an important tiebreaker, Bills-Bengals in a playoff rematch on SNF, and oh by the way, MNF is Jets-Chargers for a tiebreaker that could well decide an AFC Wild Card. It's so great on paper that undoubtedly half of them will be duds. :meh:
Well, only one dud of the four played so far, but that one was a whopper. 37-3 for the Ravens over the Seahawks after they similarly pasted the Lions a few weeks ago. Looking at the overall body of work, the Ravens and Eagles are pretty clearly the best team in their respective conferences so far.
Quote from: webny99 on November 05, 2023, 09:33:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 02, 2023, 08:07:35 PM
The Week 9 schedule is looking prretty good. Can't ask for much better than Dolphins-Chiefs in Germany, the great Cowboys-Eagles rivalry, the suddenly division leading Seahawks vs. the should-be 8-0 Ravens, Falcons-Vikings for an important tiebreaker, Bills-Bengals in a playoff rematch on SNF, and oh by the way, MNF is Jets-Chargers for a tiebreaker that could well decide an AFC Wild Card. It's so great on paper that undoubtedly half of them will be duds. :meh:
Well, only one dud of the four played so far, but that one was a whopper. 37-3 for the Ravens over the Seahawks after they similarly pasted the Lions a few weeks ago. Looking at the overall body of work, the Ravens and Eagles are pretty clearly the best team in their respective conferences so far.
I think you have to throw the Chiefs up there with them just because of recent history. The AFC goes through Kansas City until proven otherwise. That's the clear top 3, order can be argued.
Jumping the gun a bit, with how things are going in Cincy right now, here's the rest of my top 10:
4. Bengals
5. Jaguars
6. Lions
7/8/9/10: Cowboys, 49ers, Seahawks, Bills, any order
Miami has shut down every time they've played a good team. The only team on that list without a +.500 win is Dallas, who gave Philly all they could handle down to the yard today.
Quote from: thspfc on November 05, 2023, 10:03:09 PM
I think you have to throw the Chiefs up there with them just because of recent history. The AFC goes through Kansas City until proven otherwise. That's the clear top 3, order can be argued.
Jumping the gun a bit, with how things are going in Cincy right now, here's the rest of my top 10:
4. Bengals
5. Jaguars
6. Lions
7/8/9/10: Cowboys, 49ers, Seahawks, Bills, any order
Miami has shut down every time they've played a good team. The only team on that list without a +.500 win is Dallas, who gave Philly all they could handle down to the yard today.
Midseason is where it gets tricky to decipher between "right now" and "this season so far".
For the Chiefs, I think losing to the Broncos by double digits counts for something. They looked great against the Bears and Chargers, but haven't looked great in any other games. Yet I can't confidently put anyone ahead of them at #3. I'd certainly have the Bengals ahead right now, but not for the season as a whole (but the early season Bengals were a very different team with an injured Burrow)
I'd bump the Lions down into a 6-10 tier with your 7-10 teams. They're good, but I can't justify separating them above the rest after getting completely blown out against the Ravens. Dolphins are probably 11th, and that rounds out the likely playoff teams if you figure someone has to win the NFC South and the final wild card in each conference is up for grabs.
The Bills wouldn't even be sniffing the top 10 if not for weeks 2-4. Part of it is a bunch of major injuries on defense, but that can't be used as an excuse. They've looked exceedingly average, sometimes closer to bad, for weeks on end. And I'd be OK with just accepting that they're average and just enjoying each week as a new adventure, if expectations weren't so high. The 2019 and 2020 Bills were fun. Falling short of expectations for the third straight year is just wearing.. and I say that as a casual observer. I can't even imagine what it's like for the team, and if it continues there will be some well-deserved questions surrounding this coaching staff. I saw a comment somewhere that McDermott is the type of coach that could take the 2017 Bills to the wild card round... but also take the 2023 Bills to the wild card round. I thought that was well-put. He may have just maxed out his potential as an NFL head coach, and that's unfortunately not enough.
As ridiculous as it is I don't know if I've ever been prouder of a Vikings effort in today's win over the Falcons. A long and emotional week, going on the road to a decent but not great Falcons team that is right in the thick of its dividion race and had a lot to play for today. We lost 4 key players to injuries over the weekend. Dobbs who has been here less than a week is forced to play basically a full game and understandably he was awful on his first 2-3 drives. We had to play from behind most of the game, and then it looked like the Falcons had made the knockout blow late before Dobbs somehow, some way, made some unbelievable plays to pull out the win.
Well, I'm not happy that the Steelers have a better record than the Bills at midseason, but this insane stat at least gives me a micron of solace: https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/1721300185156903292
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 10:28:10 AM
Well, I'm not happy that the Steelers have a better record than the Bills at midseason, but this insane stat at least gives me a micron of solace: https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/1721300185156903292
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
Texans (vs. Steelers) - 451
Browns - 408
49ers - 391
Jaguars - 377
Raiders - 362
Rams - 354
Titans - 340
Ravens - 335
Steelers - 333
Steelers - 326
Steelers - 300
Steelers - 289
Steelers - 261
Steelers - 255
Steelers - 239
Steelers - 225
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them. It's one thing to win games with a good defense carrying a bad offense, but I don't think their defense is even that good. The whole team stinks. This cannot continue for the rest of the year.
I still remember Johnny Carson self-deprecating over the Rams, especially after their games at the Packers.
:-o
Mike
Man, talk about a battle of the behemoths - Thursday night the 1-7 Panthers at the 2-7 Bears!
:meh:
Still gonna have the first TWO picks in the 2024 draft?
Mike
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
...
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them. It's one thing to win games with a good defense carrying a bad offense, but I don't think their defense is even that good. The whole team stinks. This cannot continue for the rest of the year.
Wow. It's no fun to agree, but on this I couldn't possibly agree more.
Their 5 wins have all been one-score while the 3 losses have all been multi-score. So if you do the "flip the results in one score games" thing, they'd be 0-8. And they've certainly looked more like an 0-8 team than a 5-3 one, but we're somehow stuck with 5-3 in the standings.
Quote from: thspfc on November 05, 2023, 08:20:12 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on November 05, 2023, 07:47:33 PM
I officially declare both C.J. Stroud and Anthony Richardson better than Bryce Young.
Richardson hasn't played enough yet, but Stroud looks great.
Please don't jinx it for CJ! While he has looked phenomenal since the first two games, I'm still worried for him about two things:
1) back in 2017, the injury bug hit Deshaun Watson midway into his rookie year and our promising season derailed the rest of that year. Can CJ's career survive should he be unfortunately hit with injury as well? He's already taken 19 sacks so far his rookie year, with eleven of them in his first two games. I do feel better that we have a worthy back-up QB Case Keenum to take over. I'm not too worried about this season since Case is a good safety net and that we have nothing to play for this fall, but I hope CJ's health can hold up over the next several years.
2) not very many rookies in NFL history have blown away initial expectations the way CJ has; my big worry is the possibility of that infamous "second-year slump" stage. How will he respond once HCs and DCs of other teams have studied him and figured him out. Can CJ hold up to greater expectation loads after his successful rookie year? The answer to that question remains to be seen.
Shifting gears, our next game is at Cincinnati. The Texans haven't lost there since 2003, which was our team's second year. The Bengals will look to snap what is either four or five straight losses at Paul Jones when the Texans come knocking. As always, the Texans are the underdogs at Paul Jones Stadium, as had been the case every time the Texans visit there; can they upset the home team yet again??? Stay tuned!
OK, off topic, but: I wonder how many 20-somethings have any comprehension of the phrase "stay tuned." :D :D :D
Quote from: DenverBrian on November 06, 2023, 04:40:23 PM
OK, off topic, but: I wonder how many 20-somethings have any comprehension of the phrase "stay tuned." :D :D :D
Un/fortunately, we're not that dumb :-D
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 05, 2023, 10:53:12 PM
As ridiculous as it is I don't know if I've ever been prouder of a Vikings effort in today's win over the Falcons. A long and emotional week, going on the road to a decent but not great Falcons team that is right in the thick of its dividion race and had a lot to play for today. We lost 4 key players to injuries over the weekend. Dobbs who has been here less than a week is forced to play basically a full game and understandably he was awful on his first 2-3 drives. We had to play from behind most of the game, and then it looked like the Falcons had made the knockout blow late before Dobbs somehow, some way, made some unbelievable plays to pull out the win.
Absolutely, a great moment that will be forever etched in Vikings history, especially if they go on to make the playoffs. And at this point, it's very realistic. They've got the tiebreaker over the Falcons, and the Commanders are the only other team with a decent shot and just traded away two of their best players.
Quote from: webny99 on November 05, 2023, 10:52:03 PM
The Bills wouldn't even be sniffing the top 10 if not for weeks 2-4. Part of it is a bunch of major injuries on defense, but that can't be used as an excuse. They've looked exceedingly average, sometimes closer to bad, for weeks on end. And I'd be OK with just accepting that they're average and just enjoying each week as a new adventure, if expectations weren't so high. The 2019 and 2020 Bills were fun. Falling short of expectations for the third straight year is just wearing.. and I say that as a casual observer. I can't even imagine what it's like for the team, and if it continues there will be some well-deserved questions surrounding this coaching staff. I saw a comment somewhere that McDermott is the type of coach that could take the 2017 Bills to the wild card round... but also take the 2023 Bills to the wild card round. I thought that was well-put. He may have just maxed out his potential as an NFL head coach, and that's unfortunately not enough.
Also worth noting: The Bills are now in the unenviable position of next Monday's showdown vs. the Broncos being a must-win game... and I don't say that the least bit jokingly. If they fall to 5-5, their season is
over, and I will be forking them right then and there. The fact that they've only stacked five wins through the "easy" part of their schedule is bad enough; one peek at their remaining schedule is downright dizzying:
Week 11: vs Jets
Week 12: at Eagles
Week 14: at Chiefs
Week 15: vs Cowboys
Week 16: at Chargers
Week 17: vs Patriots
Week 18: at Dolphins
That's a playoff gauntlet. I have zero doubt that was intentional on the part of the NFL's schedule makers - and that's great for late-season drama, but they weren't accounting for the Bills' struggles this season. After the Broncos, the Patriots are the only team left on the schedule where they're definitely a better team, and they've already proved they can lose to them, too. Interestingly, the Bills are undefeated at home this season, and at Washington is their only road win. Now, with only four home games remaining, they will have to win
on the road against a contender (Philly, Kansas City, or Miami) - and possibly multiple of those games - to make the playoffs. And that's assuming they hold serve at home against some tough opponents
and beat the Chargers at SoFi.
So, when you consider all of that, maybe it's not too surprising that the NYT playoff calculator gives them just a 47% chance to make the playoffs: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 06:11:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 05, 2023, 10:52:03 PM
The Bills wouldn't even be sniffing the top 10 if not for weeks 2-4. Part of it is a bunch of major injuries on defense, but that can't be used as an excuse. They've looked exceedingly average, sometimes closer to bad, for weeks on end. And I'd be OK with just accepting that they're average and just enjoying each week as a new adventure, if expectations weren't so high. The 2019 and 2020 Bills were fun. Falling short of expectations for the third straight year is just wearing.. and I say that as a casual observer. I can't even imagine what it's like for the team, and if it continues there will be some well-deserved questions surrounding this coaching staff. I saw a comment somewhere that McDermott is the type of coach that could take the 2017 Bills to the wild card round... but also take the 2023 Bills to the wild card round. I thought that was well-put. He may have just maxed out his potential as an NFL head coach, and that's unfortunately not enough.
Also worth noting: The Bills are now in the unenviable position of next Monday's showdown vs. the Broncos being a must-win game... and I don't say that the least bit jokingly. If they fall to 5-5, their season is over, and I will be forking them right then and there. The fact that they've only stacked five wins through the "easy" part of their schedule is bad enough; one peek at their remaining schedule is downright dizzying:
Week 11: vs Jets
Week 12: at Eagles
Week 14: at Chiefs
Week 15: vs Cowboys
Week 16: at Chargers
Week 17: vs Patriots
Week 18: at Dolphins
That's a playoff gauntlet. I have zero doubt that was intentional on the part of the NFL's schedule makers - and that's great for late-season drama, but they weren't accounting for the Bills' struggles this season. After the Broncos, the Patriots are the only team left on the schedule where they're definitely a better team, and they've already proved they can lose to them, too. Interestingly, the Bills are undefeated at home this season, and at Washington is their only road win. Now, with only four home games remaining, they will have to win on the road against a contender (Philly, Kansas City, or Miami) - and possibly multiple of those games - to make the playoffs. And that's assuming they hold serve at home against some tough opponents and beat the Chargers at SoFi.
So, when you consider all of that, maybe it's not too surprising that the NYT playoff calculator gives them just a 47% chance to make the playoffs: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html
Bills >>>>>> Jets
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 10:28:10 AM
Well, I'm not happy that the Steelers have a better record than the Bills at midseason, but this insane stat at least gives me a micron of solace: https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/1721300185156903292
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
Texans (vs. Steelers) - 451
Browns - 408
49ers - 391
Jaguars - 377
Raiders - 362
Rams - 354
Titans - 340
Ravens - 335
Steelers - 333
Steelers - 326
Steelers - 300
Steelers - 289
Steelers - 261
Steelers - 255
Steelers - 239
Steelers - 225
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them. It's one thing to win games with a good defense carrying a bad offense, but I don't think their defense is even that good. The whole team stinks. This cannot continue for the rest of the year.
this is fascinating. thank you for compiling.
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 06:11:43 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 05, 2023, 10:52:03 PM
The Bills wouldn't even be sniffing the top 10 if not for weeks 2-4. Part of it is a bunch of major injuries on defense, but that can't be used as an excuse. They've looked exceedingly average, sometimes closer to bad, for weeks on end. And I'd be OK with just accepting that they're average and just enjoying each week as a new adventure, if expectations weren't so high. The 2019 and 2020 Bills were fun. Falling short of expectations for the third straight year is just wearing.. and I say that as a casual observer. I can't even imagine what it's like for the team, and if it continues there will be some well-deserved questions surrounding this coaching staff. I saw a comment somewhere that McDermott is the type of coach that could take the 2017 Bills to the wild card round... but also take the 2023 Bills to the wild card round. I thought that was well-put. He may have just maxed out his potential as an NFL head coach, and that's unfortunately not enough.
Also worth noting: The Bills are now in the unenviable position of next Monday's showdown vs. the Broncos being a must-win game... and I don't say that the least bit jokingly. If they fall to 5-5, their season is over, and I will be forking them right then and there. The fact that they've only stacked five wins through the "easy" part of their schedule is bad enough; one peek at their remaining schedule is downright dizzying:
Week 11: vs Jets
Week 12: at Eagles
Week 14: at Chiefs
Week 15: vs Cowboys
Week 16: at Chargers
Week 17: vs Patriots
Week 18: at Dolphins
That's a playoff gauntlet. I have zero doubt that was intentional on the part of the NFL's schedule makers - and that's great for late-season drama, but they weren't accounting for the Bills' struggles this season. After the Broncos, the Patriots are the only team left on the schedule where they're definitely a better team, and they've already proved they can lose to them, too. Interestingly, the Bills are undefeated at home this season, and at Washington is their only road win. Now, with only four home games remaining, they will have to win on the road against a contender (Philly, Kansas City, or Miami) - and possibly multiple of those games - to make the playoffs. And that's assuming they hold serve at home against some tough opponents and beat the Chargers at SoFi.
So, when you consider all of that, maybe it's not too surprising that the NYT playoff calculator gives them just a 47% chance to make the playoffs: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html
I think they'll get to 10-7. For sure wins over the Broncos, Jets, and Patriots. Yes, they already lost to the Jets and Pats, but in the McDermott era, excluding Brady's Patriots, they're 6-0 when facing a divisional opponent they previously lost to that season.
With their backs against the wall, they'll win at least two of those other five - Cowboys and Chargers if I had to bet, and they'd certainly have good chances against the Dolphins but we have no idea what week 18 will look like. Not to mention, they've won in Kansas City two years in a row in the regular season, and three times in a row if you go back to the beginning of McDermott's tenure.
They were in a similar spot later in the season two years ago, right on the cut line in a crowded playoff picture at 7-6 after two soul-crushing losses. Granted, they had a much easier remaining schedule then. I agree that if they lose in week 10 they're in big trouble. And if they miss the playoffs people will get fired.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 07:28:08 PM
With their backs against the wall, they'll win at least two of those other five - Cowboys and Chargers if I had to bet, and they'd certainly have good chances against the Dolphins but we have no idea what week 18 will look like.
It's way too early, but I would sign up for Bills-Dolphins Week 18 to decide the AFC East. It's been a while since the AFC East race was this interesting, especially if the Jets win tonight.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 07:28:08 PM
Not to mention, they've won in Kansas City two years in a row in the regular season, and three times in a row if you go back to the beginning of McDermott's tenure.
It would be nice if that game was in Buffalo for a change. A Tuesday afternoon covid-era game with no fans is the only time Mahomes has played in Buffalo in his career. And it's probably not happening in the playoffs this season either.
Quote from: Alps on November 06, 2023, 06:47:28 PM
Bills >>>>>> Jets
Agreed on the whole, but it's been a tough matchup lately and I don't trust these Bills to make anything easy.
Panthers
Colts
Ravens
Steelers
49ers
Saints
Bengals
Buccaneers
Chargers
Falcons
Cowboys
Seahawks
Jets
Bills
Tonight's game is a perfect example of why the NFL voted to make Thursday night games flexible.
Quote from: epzik8 on November 09, 2023, 04:03:05 PM
Tonight's game is a perfect example of why the NFL voted to make Thursday night games flexible.
I predict that the Bears will improve their draft position, and also make it worse.
Quote from: epzik8 on November 09, 2023, 04:03:05 PM
Tonight's game is a perfect example of why the NFL voted to make Thursday night games flexible.
Like it or not, Giants-Jets is still worse than Panthers-Bears.
I'm forking the Patriots, I don't know why I didn't do it earlier in the season.
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 09, 2023, 11:31:49 PM
I'm forking the Patriots, I don't know why I didn't do it earlier in the season.
Looks like the dynasty is finally dead.
After the latest loss to my Bears, it also looks like the Panthers will be playing for the top overall draft pick again.
Quote from: Henry on November 11, 2023, 01:06:44 AM
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 09, 2023, 11:31:49 PM
I'm forking the Patriots, I don't know why I didn't do it earlier in the season.
Looks like the dynasty is finally dead.
After the latest loss to my Bears, it also looks like the Panthers will be playing for the top overall draft pick again.
in which the Bears own.
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 05:38:46 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 05, 2023, 10:53:12 PM
As ridiculous as it is I don't know if I've ever been prouder of a Vikings effort in today's win over the Falcons. A long and emotional week, going on the road to a decent but not great Falcons team that is right in the thick of its dividion race and had a lot to play for today. We lost 4 key players to injuries over the weekend. Dobbs who has been here less than a week is forced to play basically a full game and understandably he was awful on his first 2-3 drives. We had to play from behind most of the game, and then it looked like the Falcons had made the knockout blow late before Dobbs somehow, some way, made some unbelievable plays to pull out the win.
Absolutely, a great moment that will be forever etched in Vikings history, especially if they go on to make the playoffs. And at this point, it's very realistic. They've got the tiebreaker over the Falcons, and the Commanders are the only other team with a decent shot and just traded away two of their best players.
Beating the Saints would be nice insurance since then the Vikings would have tiebreakers over both Atlanta and New Orleans regardless of which of those two teams doesn't win the NFC South.
As for Washington (whom Minnesota does not play), Vikings already have a healthy lead in coference record over them if it comes to that, so I hope that holds out. Commanders have a brutal remaining schedule with both Dallas games, Seattle, Miami, and the 49ers.
I'll also fork the Rams and the Titans.
The Falcons and Commanders are on my watchlist for forking.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 30, 2023, 04:44:52 PM
Some rumors out there that Famous Jameis is headed to the Vikings.
Glad the Vikings did not make this trade after he threw two ugly picks in the 4th quarter of today's Saints loss to Minnesota. We got the full Jameis experience just in two quarters today - two amazing TD passes, but two backbreaking interceptions.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 13, 2023, 12:36:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 30, 2023, 04:44:52 PM
Some rumors out there that Famous Jameis is headed to the Vikings.
Glad the Vikings did not make this trade after he threw two ugly picks in the 4th quarter of today's Saints loss to Minnesota. We got the full Jameis experience just in two quarters today - two amazing TD passes, but two backbreaking interceptions.
Agreed. And Dobbs has been great.
I'll fork the Chargers, Falcons, Rams, and Titans.
The three games so far this weekend that had exclusive national windows featured exactly one offensive touchdown in each game, and only two of the six teams reaching 300 yards in total offense.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 11, 2023, 04:38:10 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 05:38:46 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 05, 2023, 10:53:12 PM
As ridiculous as it is I don't know if I've ever been prouder of a Vikings effort in today's win over the Falcons. A long and emotional week, going on the road to a decent but not great Falcons team that is right in the thick of its dividion race and had a lot to play for today. We lost 4 key players to injuries over the weekend. Dobbs who has been here less than a week is forced to play basically a full game and understandably he was awful on his first 2-3 drives. We had to play from behind most of the game, and then it looked like the Falcons had made the knockout blow late before Dobbs somehow, some way, made some unbelievable plays to pull out the win.
Absolutely, a great moment that will be forever etched in Vikings history, especially if they go on to make the playoffs. And at this point, it's very realistic. They've got the tiebreaker over the Falcons, and the Commanders are the only other team with a decent shot and just traded away two of their best players.
Beating the Saints would be nice insurance since then the Vikings would have tiebreakers over both Atlanta and New Orleans regardless of which of those two teams doesn't win the NFC South.
As for Washington (whom Minnesota does not play), Vikings already have a healthy lead in coference record over them if it comes to that, so I hope that holds out. Commanders have a brutal remaining schedule with both Dallas games, Seattle, Miami, and the 49ers.
At this point, the Vikings are the easy favorite to be the #7 seed in the NFC and no one else even looks like a legitimate candidate. The division is probably out of reach, but even so, it seems more likely that they could snag the #5 or #6 seed than it is that they'd miss out entirely. And they would be a fun, entertaining entry especially if Dobbs continues to play well.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
The Giants so bad you're forking them twice? :)
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
They weren't losing that early in the game.
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
Texans (vs. Steelers) - 451
Browns - 408
49ers - 391
Jaguars - 377
Raiders - 362
Rams - 354
Titans - 340
Ravens - 335
Steelers - 333
Steelers - 326
Steelers - 300
Steelers - 289
Steelers - 261
Steelers - 255
Steelers - 239
Steelers - 225
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them. It's one thing to win games with a good defense carrying a bad offense, but I don't think their defense is even that good. The whole team stinks. This cannot continue for the rest of the year.
Oh no.
Packers, 399 total yards.
Steelers, 324 total yards.
Still holds true for at least another week. :angry:
The Texans have guaranteed themselves the best record this decade with five wins with still almost a half-season left. Barring an injury, CJ is a lock for offensive Rookie of the Year, and DeMeco should be somewhere in consideration for Coach of the Year. With their remaining reschedule, it wouldn't surprise me if they win nine games this season, which could put them in the hunt for that last Wild Card spot at least until the New Year. If the Texans make the playoffs this January, CJ might be in the list of MVP considerations and DeMeco should be a lock for Coach of the Year.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 02:53:27 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
They weren't losing that early in the game.
The only part they weren't losing was when it was 0-0. https://www.espn.com/nfl/game/_/gameId/400791568
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 04:33:48 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 02:53:27 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
They weren't losing that early in the game.
The only part they weren't losing was when it was 0-0. https://www.espn.com/nfl/game/_/gameId/400791568
Exactly my point. They made it longer in the game still tied at 0-0. There was 6 minutes and 12 seconds of scoreless football in that game. There was 40 seconds of scoreless football in the Browns/Ravens game.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 04:41:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 04:33:48 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 02:53:27 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
They weren't losing that early in the game.
The only part they weren't losing was when it was 0-0. https://www.espn.com/nfl/game/_/gameId/400791568
Exactly my point. They made it longer in the game still tied at 0-0. There was 6 minutes and 12 seconds of scoreless football in that game. There was 40 seconds of scoreless football in the Browns/Ravens game.
Wait, if I'm reading this correctly, this is overcomplicating it way too much.. and that's coming from someone known for overcomplicating things.
If the eventual winning team had been trailing since the first score, why on earth would it matter when that score occurred? Can't it just suffice to say "they won after trailing all game" or if you want to be technical "they won after leading for 0 seconds of game time"? There have been plenty of instances of a team giving up the first score, trailing all game, and then kicking a game winning FG as time expires. I don't see any relevance at all to how and when the scoring started, and certainly don't think there's any increased noteworthiness to what the Browns did yesterday just because they let the Ravens score so early.
This was the post:
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
Keyword being
trailed. If it's 0-0 nobody is trailing.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 13, 2023, 04:22:47 PM
The Texans have guaranteed themselves the best record this decade with five wins with still almost a half-season left. Barring an injury, CJ is a lock for offensive Rookie of the Year, and DeMeco should be somewhere in consideration for Coach of the Year. With their remaining reschedule, it wouldn't surprise me if they win nine games this season, which could put them in the hunt for that last Wild Card spot at least until the New Year. If the Texans make the playoffs this January, CJ might be in the list of MVP considerations and DeMeco should be a lock for Coach of the Year.
MVP and COTY on the same team is redundant, especially if that team barely slips into the playoffs. That's not to say making the playoffs wouldn't be great for the Texans - after all, they only won 11 games in the previous three seasons - but if you're going to say that the most valuable player in the league and the best coach in the league are on the same team, that team better be tearing it up.
I think Stroud for MVP has a much better case, since Ryans is a defensive coach and the team's strong suit has been the offense. Then again, the thought process of voters awarding COTY is basically "who coached the team that had the most surprising turnaround?" with no other factors considered. Matt Nagy in 2018 is a glaring example - won COTY as an offensive coach of a team that surprisingly went 12-4 on the back of one of the best defenses of the decade. When that defense regressed to being merely above league average, the team fell into mediocrity and Nagy's seat got real hot real fast. But still, I think the bar for awarding both MVP and COTY to the same team is extremely high, and a hypothetical 10-7 Texans team, while impressive, would not reach it.
I looked it up, and MVP/COTY on the same team has happened 5 times in the last 30 years: '99 Rams (13-3), '07 Patriots (16-0), '10 Patriots (14-2), '15 Panthers (15-1), '19 Ravens (14-2).
Oh god
Quote from: webny99 on November 06, 2023, 06:11:43 PM
Also worth noting: The Bills are now in the unenviable position of next Monday's showdown vs. the Broncos being a must-win game... and I don't say that the least bit jokingly. If they fall to 5-5, their season is over, and I will be forking them right then and there.
That was absolutely insane, and the Bills are FORKED. At least I left the Broncos alive.
No need to repeat this mess next week, so I will also fork the Jets now.
That means Chiefs/Ravens/Dolphins/Jaguars/Bengals/Browns are my AFC 1-6 seeds and I'll wait a few weeks to decide between Chargers and Broncos for the 7 seed (Too bad I forked the Texans, but at least I wasn't the only one.)
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 11:34:49 PM
That was absolutely insane, and the Bills are FORKED. At least I left the Broncos alive.
ESPN featured the Bills' special teams coordinator as part of the Veterans Day theme.
After that final 12-men-on-the-field penalty, tomorrow morning McDermott is going to greet him with "Thank you for your service! And there's the door!" That wasn't the Bills only problem, but they had a win despite it all and that screw-up got them FORKED by webny99 and probably most other observers as well.
I'll fork the Titans. I'm unsure whether my last fork will be the Chargers or the Bills. I guess I'll wait until week 13.
The AFC East outside of Miami can be forked.
FORK the BILLS.
My forks:
Texans (5-4)
Bills (5-5)
Colts (5-5)
Broncos (4-5)
Buccaneers (4-5)
Jets (4-5)
Packers (3-6)
Rams (3-6)
Titans (3-6)
Bears (3-7)
Cardinals (2-8)
Giants (2-8)
Patriots (2-8)
Panthers (1-8)
This is kind of unrelated, but one thing I can't stand about NFL media (and probably all sports media, but I'm just noticing it more with the NFL), is using baseless self-criticism as an engagement tool.
The worst one is "Remember fourth down conversion x next time the media is critical of fourth down aggressiveness! The media is critical when fourth downs fail but doesn't say anything when they're successful!"
WHAT!? That entire statement is 100% false and incomprehensibly backwards. Not only is the media overall extremely supportive of fourth down aggressiveness, they're so critical of conservative coaching decisions that they're literally part of the reason coaches are going for it more. The so-called media that's anti-going for it on fourth down literally does not exist. And not only that, by being part of the media and attempting to self-criticize, you're generating even more clicks and likes and building up even more media engagement around a false narrative, to the point where said false anti-media narrative dominates the media coverage and overrides the original storyline... so that somehow in this twisted reality, being anti-media makes you even more prominent in the media and shifts the coverage even more towards your false narrative to the point where anyone that's *actually* critical of fourth down aggressiveness is completely drowned out anyways. The whole thing is just a giant façade with zero substance and zero accountability.
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 05:31:42 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 04:41:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 04:33:48 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 02:53:27 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 13, 2023, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2023, 01:30:25 PM
Yesterday the Browns became the first team in this millennium to win a game after having trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds
I think the Rodgers hail Mary in 2015 with zero on the clock qualified.
They weren't losing that early in the game.
The only part they weren't losing was when it was 0-0. https://www.espn.com/nfl/game/_/gameId/400791568
Exactly my point. They made it longer in the game still tied at 0-0. There was 6 minutes and 12 seconds of scoreless football in that game. There was 40 seconds of scoreless football in the Browns/Ravens game.
Wait, if I'm reading this correctly, this is overcomplicating it way too much.. and that's coming from someone known for overcomplicating things.
If the eventual winning team had been trailing since the first score, why on earth would it matter when that score occurred? Can't it just suffice to say "they won after trailing all game" or if you want to be technical "they won after leading for 0 seconds of game time"? There have been plenty of instances of a team giving up the first score, trailing all game, and then kicking a game winning FG as time expires. I don't see any relevance at all to how and when the scoring started, and certainly don't think there's any increased noteworthiness to what the Browns did yesterday just because they let the Ravens score so early.
I mean, we also talk about largest comebacks from a halftime deficit, etc. Why would the earliest losing position in an eventual win not be somewhat noteworthy?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2023, 10:07:33 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 05:31:42 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 13, 2023, 04:41:01 PM
Exactly my point. They made it longer in the game still tied at 0-0. There was 6 minutes and 12 seconds of scoreless football in that game. There was 40 seconds of scoreless football in the Browns/Ravens game.
Wait, if I'm reading this correctly, this is overcomplicating it way too much.. and that's coming from someone known for overcomplicating things.
If the eventual winning team had been trailing since the first score, why on earth would it matter when that score occurred? Can't it just suffice to say "they won after trailing all game" or if you want to be technical "they won after leading for 0 seconds of game time"? There have been plenty of instances of a team giving up the first score, trailing all game, and then kicking a game winning FG as time expires. I don't see any relevance at all to how and when the scoring started, and certainly don't think there's any increased noteworthiness to what the Browns did yesterday just because they let the Ravens score so early.
I mean, we also talk about largest comebacks from a halftime deficit, etc. Why would the earliest losing position in an eventually win not be somewhat noteworthy?
Halftime is at least after a consistent 30 minutes of play has occurred. At that point, it could be tied 0-0 or tied 28-28 and it wouldn't matter. I just don't see the bearing of when the first score occurred on the outcome - whether it's a safety on the first play or a field goal in the second quarter, it could be any type of play at any point in the game but it still doesn't tell you anything.
I dunno. If the first score of the game is in the 2nd quarter and then you come back and win at the end, it's less impressive than being basically behind the 8-ball for the whole game since you spotted them 7 with a pick-six. YMMV.
If a team trailed for 59 minutes and 20 seconds in a given game, it's very likely that they lost. Obviously if someone were to tell me with no context, "team A was losing for 59 minutes and 20 seconds", I would assume they ended up winning because otherwise that stat would not be notable. So I guess the stat just shows how unique the Browns' victory was.
I'm not disputing that it was notable, but the early deficit doesn't say anything about the size of the comeback. The game could have been scoreless between the pick-six and the end of the game and the 59:20 stat would still be true, yet the trailing team's victory would be much less notable. And to kick a game winning FG after trailing since the first score is not exceedingly rare on its own, so I just see the early pick-six as a cherry on top rather than part of the sundae.
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2023, 03:03:09 PM
I'm not disputing that it was notable, but the early deficit doesn't say anything about the size of the comeback. The game could have been scoreless between the pick-six and the end of the game and the 59:20 stat would still be true, yet the trailing team's victory would be much less notable. And to kick a game winning FG after trailing since the first score is not exceedingly rare on its own, so I just see the early pick-six as a cherry on top rather than part of the sundae.
I suppose. It was unique, but not earth-shattering.
With the holidays (sort of) coming up, I stumbled across the Bills' 18 Days of Christmas . . . ugh.
4th & 18
17 year playoff drought
16-0 lead on the Texans
15 straight losses to the Patriots
14 turnovers in their last 8 games
13 seconds
12 men
11 Josh Allen picks this year
10-27
9-0 lead on the Chiefs
8 straight touchdown drives in the playoffs, to still lose
7 Tom Brady championships
6 points against Urban Meyer
5 Nathan Peterman interceptions
4 Super Bowls in a row
3 pass attempts
2 losses to Zach Wilson
1 Hail Murray
And 0 neutral-site AFC championship games.
In more meaningful news, the Bills have relieved OC Ken Dorsey of his duties. Had to happen. If not for a missed holding call against the Giants and Godwin missing a Hail Mary by a few inches, they'd be 0-6 since thrashing the Dolphins, and it's pretty much all on the offense. The injury-riddled defense hasn't allowed more than 24 points despite being put in a lot of tough spots and bailing out the offense time after time, while the mostly healthy offense that should be bailing out the defense hasn't scored more than 25 points in that span.
Quote from: thspfc on November 14, 2023, 03:33:32 PM
With the holidays (sort of) coming up, I stumbled across the Bills' 18 Days of Christmas . . . ugh.
4th & 18
17 year playoff drought
16-0 lead on the Texans
15 straight losses to the Patriots
14 turnovers in their last 8 games
13 seconds
12 men
11 Josh Allen picks this year
10-27
9-0 lead on the Chiefs
8 straight touchdown drives in the playoffs, to still lose
7 Tom Brady championships
6 points against Urban Meyer
5 Nathan Peterman interceptions
4 Super Bowls in a row
3 pass attempts
2 losses to Zach Wilson
1 Hail Murray
And 0 neutral-site AFC championship games.
LOL!! The pain is real! :-D
I was musing over 13 seconds and now 12 men on the field, but hadn't gone that far with it. You could probably get a few k likes by posting this in the Bills-Broncos youtube comments, if you care for such things.
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2023, 03:53:17 PM
In more meaningful news, the Bills have relieved OC Ken Dorsey of his duties. Had to happen. If not for a missed holding call against the Giants and Godwin missing a Hail Mary by a few inches, they'd be 0-6 since thrashing the Dolphins, and it's pretty much all on the offense. The injury-riddled defense hasn't allowed more than 24 points despite being put in a lot of tough spots and bailing out the offense time after time, while the mostly healthy offense that should be bailing out the defense hasn't scored more than 25 points in that span.
Eh, the it's mostly the defense's fault (largely through injury). From the godfather of football analytics:
(https://i.postimg.cc/X7TKQQP6/Bills.png)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2023, 04:01:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2023, 03:53:17 PM
In more meaningful news, the Bills have relieved OC Ken Dorsey of his duties. Had to happen. If not for a missed holding call against the Giants and Godwin missing a Hail Mary by a few inches, they'd be 0-6 since thrashing the Dolphins, and it's pretty much all on the offense. The injury-riddled defense hasn't allowed more than 24 points despite being put in a lot of tough spots and bailing out the offense time after time, while the mostly healthy offense that should be bailing out the defense hasn't scored more than 25 points in that span.
Eh, the it's mostly the defense's fault (largely through injury). From the godfather of football analytics:
[img snipped]
The stats are what they are, but when you look at it game by game, the offense has been putting the defense in terrible spots and they've held up OK for the most part (6 Broncos points off of 5 turnovers, for example). You can't ask for much better than 21 points per game allowed considering the state of the defense, but you can ask a LOT more than 20 points per game from a supposed Super Bowl contending offense that's been mostly healthy.
Not saying the offense is performing great, but DVOA is a measure of how well an average defense would do in a given spot. So it basically is how it performs on any given play. Allowing a first down on 2nd and 1 isn't a huge deal. Allowing one on 3rd and 18 is. So, this statistic is pretty independent from any bad positions the offense would have put them in.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2023, 04:23:10 PM
Not saying the offense is performing great, but DVOA is a measure of how well an average defense would do in a given spot. So it basically is how it performs on any given play. Allowing a first down on 2nd and 1 isn't a huge deal. Allowing one on 3rd and 18 is. So, this statistic is pretty independent from any bad positions the offense would have put them in.
Sure, they have allowed offenses to move the ball, but have mostly been bend but don't break. I'm not disagreeing with their poor DVOA, but offense is still the team's biggest issue. The last second Patriots TD drive is the only truly embarrassing moment on defense. The offense has been 6 straight games of embarrassment.
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 11:34:49 PM
That means Chiefs/Ravens/Dolphins/Jaguars/Bengals/Browns are my AFC 1-6 seeds and I'll wait a few weeks to decide between Chargers and Broncos for the 7 seed (Too bad I forked the Texans, but at least I wasn't the only one.)
I am also forking the Commanders.
That means Eagles/Lions/49ers/Saints/Cowboys/Seahawks are my NFC 1-6 seeds, and I'm leave the Falcons alive along with the likely 7 seed Vikings for a few more weeks.
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 02:54:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
Texans (vs. Steelers) - 451
Browns - 408
49ers - 391
Jaguars - 377
Raiders - 362
Rams - 354
Titans - 340
Ravens - 335
Steelers - 333
Steelers - 326
Steelers - 300
Steelers - 289
Steelers - 261
Steelers - 255
Steelers - 239
Steelers - 225
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them. It's one thing to win games with a good defense carrying a bad offense, but I don't think their defense is even that good. The whole team stinks. This cannot continue for the rest of the year.
Oh no.
Packers, 399 total yards.
Steelers, 324 total yards.
Still holds true for at least another week. :angry:
but the Steelers are 6-3. meanwhile the Jets are surprisingly not dead last in every offensive category
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2023, 06:14:55 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2023, 04:23:10 PM
Not saying the offense is performing great, but DVOA is a measure of how well an average defense would do in a given spot. So it basically is how it performs on any given play. Allowing a first down on 2nd and 1 isn't a huge deal. Allowing one on 3rd and 18 is. So, this statistic is pretty independent from any bad positions the offense would have put them in.
Sure, they have allowed offenses to move the ball, but have mostly been bend but don't break. I'm not disagreeing with their poor DVOA, but offense is still the team's biggest issue. The last second Patriots TD drive is the only truly embarrassing moment on defense. The offense has been 6 straight games of embarrassment.
This isn't exactly the same measurement, but in case anyone hasn't seen it yet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIDKWEzr_Kk
Quote from: thspfc on November 15, 2023, 09:01:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 14, 2023, 06:14:55 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 14, 2023, 04:23:10 PM
Not saying the offense is performing great, but DVOA is a measure of how well an average defense would do in a given spot. So it basically is how it performs on any given play. Allowing a first down on 2nd and 1 isn't a huge deal. Allowing one on 3rd and 18 is. So, this statistic is pretty independent from any bad positions the offense would have put them in.
Sure, they have allowed offenses to move the ball, but have mostly been bend but don't break. I'm not disagreeing with their poor DVOA, but offense is still the team's biggest issue. The last second Patriots TD drive is the only truly embarrassing moment on defense. The offense has been 6 straight games of embarrassment.
This isn't exactly the same measurement, but in case anyone hasn't seen it yet:[video snipped]
Exactly, it almost defies logic. Anyone looking at stats says the offense is great, the defense is terrible. Anyone looking at the scoreboard can tell the opposite is somehow true, despite the stats.
SF, SEA, PIT, JAX, CLE, DAL, MIA, all at 6-3: "we are not the same"
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/002/212/235/185.jpg)
Bengals
Browns
Dolphins
Lions
Jaguars
Chargers
Texans
Cowboys
Commanders
49ers
Bills
Seahawks
Broncos
Chiefs
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2023, 12:14:30 PM
Bengals
Browns
Dolphins
Lions
Jaguars
Chargers
Texans
Cowboys
Commanders
49ers
Bills
Seahawks
Broncos
Chiefs
What do these lists mean? I've wanted to know for the whole season.
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 16, 2023, 07:35:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2023, 12:14:30 PM
Bengals
Browns
Dolphins
Lions
Jaguars
Chargers
Texans
Cowboys
Commanders
49ers
Bills
Seahawks
Broncos
Chiefs
What do these lists mean? I've wanted to know for the whole season.
My guess is that those are his predictions on who will win their game this week.
Quote from: Big John on November 16, 2023, 07:46:48 PM
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 16, 2023, 07:35:55 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 16, 2023, 12:14:30 PM
Bengals
Browns
Dolphins
Lions
Jaguars
Chargers
Texans
Cowboys
Commanders
49ers
Bills
Seahawks
Broncos
Chiefs
What do these lists mean? I've wanted to know for the whole season.
My guess is that those are his predictions on who will win their game this week.
That is correct. I'm 95-56 so far.
Pretty sure I was the only one that had forked the Bengals. They face a pretty uphill battle now being .500 with an injured QB.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 17, 2023, 08:48:35 AM
Pretty sure I was the only one that had forked the Bengals. They face a pretty uphill battle now being .500 with an injured out-for-the-season QB.
I think we're going to go from people talking about all four AFC North teams getting in to only Baltimore making it in. I'm still not a believer in Pittsburgh.
I'm forking the Bengals.
I hate to do it, but I'll fork the Kitties as well. A disappointing fork since I had them winning the Super Bowl in the preseason. That means my playoff field is officially set, with some questionable choices:
NFC- Eagles
- Lions
- 49ers
- Saints
- Cowboys
- Seahawks
- Falcons
AFC
- Ravens
- Chiefs
- Dolphins
- Jaguars
- Browns
- Bills
- Chargers
The Texans might end up making the playoffs after all. Good thing everyone forked them.
Quote from: jlam on November 17, 2023, 03:22:23 PM
I hate to do it, but I'll fork the Kitties as well. A disappointing fork since I had them winning the Super Bowl in the preseason.
They were my Super Bowl pick as well. It really does suck. And I thought they were rounding into form when they beat the 49ers and Bills.
Quote from: webny99 on November 15, 2023, 11:02:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 11:34:49 PM
That means Chiefs/Ravens/Dolphins/Jaguars/Bengals/Browns are my AFC 1-6 seeds and I'll wait a few weeks to decide between Chargers and Broncos for the 7 seed (Too bad I forked the Texans, but at least I wasn't the only one.)
I am also forking the Commanders.
That means Eagles/Lions/49ers/Saints/Cowboys/Seahawks are my NFC 1-6 seeds, and I'm leave the Falcons alive along with the likely 7 seed Vikings for a few more weeks.
Alright, this is brutal business, but I am also going to fork the Bengals. Without Burrow and a remaining schedule consisting entirely of teams at or above .500, I don't see a path to 10 wins. And at this point, I don't see any point keeping the Falcons alive either. So I'll make it a clean sweep and complete my playoff field.
AFC:
25 points: Colts, Titans, Texans
20 points: Raiders, Steelers, Patriots
10 points: Bills, Jets, BengalsPlayoffs: Chiefs, Ravens, Dolphins, Jaguars, Browns, Chargers, Broncos
NFC:
25 points: Rams, Cardinals, Bucs, Panthers
20 points: Bears, Giants
15 points: Packers
10 points: Commanders, FalconsPlayoffs: Eagles, Lions, 49ers, Saints, Cowboys, Seahawks, Vikings
Overall rating: B-
I'm happy with the NFC field, which looks pretty much locked up, even though I know it's way too early to say that. If anyone else besides the Falcons or Bucs makes it, it will be a surprise to everyone, so I'm relatively safe there. I also want to throw out that the Panthers could still be alive in the NFC South race in December. It's unlikely, but stranger things have happened (see: the 2014 Panthers)
The AFC is pretty thorny. The Patriots and Titans are the only truly "safe" forks - everyone else has at least four wins. I'm weirdly looking forward to rooting for the Broncos, and the Texans would be an interesting but not particularly costly entry because pretty much everyone had them forked. The AFC South could still be messy, with the Jags looking uninspired lately and the Colts and Texans hanging around.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 17, 2023, 02:51:11 PM
I think we're going to go from people talking about all four AFC North teams getting in to only Baltimore making it in. I'm still not a believer in Pittsburgh.
At this point, just the Ravens getting in is a
lot more likely than all 4 getting in. From the other three divisions, there's the Bills, Jets, Chargers, Broncos, Texans, and theoretically the Colts and Raiders all vying for those spots. And you could certainly make a strong case that three or more of those teams are better than the Burrow-less Bengals, Watson-less Browns, and offense-less (more like offens
ive) Steelers. I don't think I can cope with the Steelers winning 3 more games, much less making the playoffs.
The Jaguars and Texans are basically guaranteed playoff teams at this point IMO. I think Trevor Lawrence in particular is underrated.
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 02:54:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
...
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them.
Oh no.
Packers, 399 total yards.
Steelers, 324 total yards.
Still holds true for at least another week. :angry:
The latter condition of the streak has fallen, with the Browns only putting up 259 yards. But Cleveland did outgain the Steelers so that part lives on.
Quote from: epzik8 on November 19, 2023, 04:47:54 PM
The Jaguars and Texans are basically guaranteed playoff teams at this point IMO. I think Trevor Lawrence in particular is underrated.
Whoa! Let's slow down about my Texans just yet, remember this is the same team that handed the Panthers their only win of the season just a few games ago, which likely can come back to haunt us come Christmas time. There are way too many playoff-capable teams in the AFC. Also
please note that the Broncos have been on a roll this month; they are very capable of scooping up a playoff spot. Not saying we can't make it; but nothing is ever guaranteed until officially clinched. I'm not sure if the Texans are done rebuilding just yet; their loss at Charlotte is a jarring reminder that something could be still missing.
The Seahawks really blew it by losing to the Rams today. They're 6-4, but now staring down a very possible fall to 6-8 with the Eagles, Cowboys, and 49ers twice in the next four weeks. Unless they pull off an upset or two, they may have just opened the NFC Wild Card race back up to a few teams that have no business being there... including the Rams!
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2023, 09:44:54 PM
The Seahawks really blew it by losing to the Rams today. They're 6-4, but now staring down a very possible fall to 6-8 with the Eagles, Cowboys, and 49ers twice in the next four weeks. Unless they pull off an upset or two, they may have just opened the NFC Wild Card race back up to a few teams that have no business being there... including the Rams!
The problem with suggesting any team sitting behind the pack lke that could make a run is there's a reason they're there to begin with. The Rams do have games against Cleveland and Baltimore in the final stretch, plus a likely 50/50 gamr with New Orleans and their other game with the 49ers (which may or may not be important to San Francisco when we get to Week 18). 8-9 or 7-10 looks like their ceiling to me barring upsetting multiple teams that are better than they are. 8-9 may be enough to finish in a tie for the 7, but there are a lot of 4-6 teams right now too (Packers, Bucs, Falcons, Commanders, though I expect those latter two to go away).
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on November 19, 2023, 11:53:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 19, 2023, 09:44:54 PM
The Seahawks really blew it by losing to the Rams today. They're 6-4, but now staring down a very possible fall to 6-8 with the Eagles, Cowboys, and 49ers twice in the next four weeks. Unless they pull off an upset or two, they may have just opened the NFC Wild Card race back up to a few teams that have no business being there... including the Rams!
The problem with suggesting any team sitting behind the pack lke that could make a run is there's a reason they're there to begin with. The Rams do have games against Cleveland and Baltimore in the final stretch, plus a likely 50/50 gamr with New Orleans and their other game with the 49ers (which may or may not be important to San Francisco when we get to Week 18). 8-9 or 7-10 looks like their ceiling to me barring upsetting multiple teams that are better than they are. 8-9 may be enough to finish in a tie for the 7, but there are a lot of 4-6 teams right now too (Packers, Bucs, Falcons, Commanders, though I expect those latter two to go away).
Certainly not disagreeing with any of that. The Rams aren't favorites to get in by any stretch, but they are now going to be alive through much of December and it would not be shocking if they have a better record than the Seahawks entering the stretch run. The Seahawks are now just a coin flip to make it (53% per NYT's calculator), with the remaining probability roughly split between the Rams, Packers, Bucs, and Falcons, so I guess "more interesting than it had to be" is how I would put it.
The Commanders have a 7th loss, so they're pretty much out of it already. With the Rams and Jets being the most winnable games left on their schedule, losing out to finish 4-13 seems more likely than a playoff berth.
Over the past few decades, the Packers have also made a habit out of gelling late in the season and backing into the playoffs, see the team's 2010-2011 SB run after backing in (they ran the table after Thanksgiving) as the last NFC wild card. We shall see.
Mike
"How the hell did da Bears lose in Detroit???"
--Me and every disgruntled fan after the latest come-from-ahead loss where everything went right until the last minute
On that note, there seems to be this perception that Justin Fields has no future with the Bears and they're sure to draft a QB with the Panthers' top pick. With no real evidence other than gut feeling, I disagree. I think it's very likely they keep Fields, who has at this point, shown plenty of flashes and is more of a sure thing than another highly drafted QB.
The coaching staff is a much bigger issue. Eberflus has shown zero reason why he should be an NFL head coach and zero ability to win close games, as we saw again yesterday. Fields isn't blameless, but they've been competitive when he's on the field, while poor coaching decisions keep costing them in close game scenarios.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 09:41:54 PM
On that note, there seems to be this perception that Justin Fields has no future with the Bears and they're sure to draft a QB with the Panthers' top pick. With no real evidence other than gut feeling, I disagree. I think it's very likely they keep Fields, who has at this point, shown plenty of flashes and is more of a sure thing than another highly drafted QB.
The coaching staff is a much bigger issue. Eberflus has shown zero reason why he should be an NFL head coach and zero ability to win close games, as we saw again yesterday. Fields isn't blameless, but they've been competitive when he's on the field, while poor coaching decisions keep costing them in close game scenarios.
As of now, I disagree, but there's still time. The coaches have to make him throw the ball in these last six games. 35, 40, 45 times. If that means abandoning the run in a situation where you would not normally abandon the run, so be it. It's not like their typical offensive strategy has been working anyways. They have to see whether Fields can keep the team in a game with his arm, because if he can't, he's not a franchise QB and almost certainly never will be.
In Fields' whole career, he's thrown >30 passes in a game five times; two were blowouts, one time they led by 6 at half and lost by 15, one time they trailed by double digits throughout the second half before scoring a meaningless TD with 0:00 on the clock. The fifth was the Broncos game this year, which he played well in, but 1) Denver's defense gave up 70 points the week before, and 2) the Bears offense shut down in the second half en route to blowing a 28-7 lead.
Fields has
1 0 career game-winning drives, against 13 one-score losses (a game-winning FG against the Texans was immediately after an interception). Some of the blame falls on the coaching staff, for sure, but all the signs point to Fields simply not being a competent NFL passer. He's shown growth in the last few games he's played. (though the Commanders statline is deceiving - his eyes were locked onto Moore all night, and Moore happened to have an insane performance against a terrible defense.)
Essentially the question is "who is more likely to become a franchise QB: Fields or Caleb Williams?" Williams is considered the best QB prospect in the last 3 drafts, while Fields still doesn't look convincing 3 years in. If he throws it well for the rest of the season then it becomes a very difficult decision for the Bears, and it would probably come down to just how much they like Williams (or Maye or whoever) as a prospect. But if it's more of what we've seen throughout his career, they'll be glad to take a second or third round pick from whichever team wants to take a flyer.
Of course, the other variable is how much the Bears could get if they traded Carolina's #1 pick, assuming that's how it plays out. Another DJ Moore-caliber player and a couple first rounders is massive, but how much does it really matter if you don't have the QB?
Eberflus is good as gone, that's for certain.
Quote from: webny99 on November 17, 2023, 10:18:39 PM
... So I'll make it a clean sweep and complete my playoff field.
AFC:
25 points: Colts, Titans, Texans
20 points: Raiders, Steelers, Patriots
10 points: Bills, Jets, Bengals
Playoffs: Chiefs, Ravens, Dolphins, Jaguars, Browns, Chargers, Broncos
What a disaster for the Chargers. They are on the watch list for forcing me to make last-second changes to my forks list. I'd have to unfork the Jets, Bills, or Bengals before Week 13.
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2023, 10:25:11 PM
Essentially the question is "who is more likely to become a franchise QB: Fields or Caleb Williams?" Williams is considered the best QB prospect in the last 3 drafts, while Fields still doesn't look convincing 3 years in. If he throws it well for the rest of the season then it becomes a very difficult decision for the Bears, and it would probably come down to just how much they like Williams (or Maye or whoever) as a prospect. But if it's more of what we've seen throughout his career, they'll be glad to take a second or third round pick from whichever team wants to take a flyer.
I agree that's the right question and think that Caleb Williams is probably the right answer... but everything I know about Bears ownership (including their choice of GM and coach) makes me think they will be very hesitant to make another big swing at QB and more than willing to convince themselves that Fields is the answer.
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2023, 10:25:11 PM
Eberflus is good as gone, that's for certain.
One would hope so. There are fans saying it's better to keep losing, but to keep blowing games you should be winning is unacceptable and almost entirely on coaching.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 10:30:03 PM
I'd have to unfork the Jets, Bills, or Bengals before Week 13.
We can do that?
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 20, 2023, 10:50:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 10:30:03 PM
I'd have to unfork the Jets, Bills, or Bengals before Week 13.
We can do that?
Not sure it's been discussed before. Whatever everyone thinks, but I would say yes if it's within the same points window. For example, since all forks made between Weeks 9-12 are worth 10 points, switches could be made only on teams forked within that time frame.
I recall saying long ago that takebacks would not be allowed at all after the start of the season, but now I can't find that post.
I would say within the same points period, it's fine if everyone's okay with that.
No take backs. You commit, you eat it when you're wrong. I have plenty of crappy picks. Otherwise, I'd like to rescind all my picks that are now bad.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 20, 2023, 11:28:09 PM
No take backs. You commit, you eat it when you're wrong. I have plenty of crappy picks. Otherwise, I'd like to rescind all my picks that are now bad.
That just incentivizes waiting until the end of the points period. I could have had the exact same takes and kept them to myself as they evolved, saved up and unloaded them all on the Thursday of Week 13, and there would be zero difference in the game or the results... except that the thread was less interesting for four weeks.
TBH, I wouldn't dare touch the Bills fork, and there's zero reason to regret forking the Bengals or Jets, so despite being mad at the Chargers, I don't stand to gain much by changing anything. So I am fine with no changes personally, but also OK with it in principle if it's during the same points period.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 11:41:29 PM
That just incentivizes waiting until the end of the points period. I could have had the exact same takes and kept them to myself as they evolved, saved up and unloaded them all on the Thursday of Week 13, and there would be zero difference in the game or the results... except that the thread was less interesting for four weeks.
Nah. Gotta roll with the spontaneity and impulse fork immediately. Like with the Vikings.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 20, 2023, 11:28:09 PM
No take backs. You commit, you eat it when you're wrong. I have plenty of crappy picks. Otherwise, I'd like to rescind all my picks that are now bad.
That just incentivizes waiting until the end of the points period. I could have had the exact same takes and kept them to myself as they evolved, saved up and unloaded them all on the Thursday of Week 13, and there would be zero difference in the game or the results... except that the thread was less interesting for four weeks.
TBH, I wouldn't dare touch the Bills fork, and there's zero reason to regret forking the Bengals or Jets, so despite being mad at the Chargers, I don't stand to gain much by changing anything. So I am fine with no changes personally, but also OK with it in principle if it's during the same points period.
We're not playing for money. Some of my forks are as much for the bit as anything else. You say "call" in a game of poker, it's binding. Sometimes the second you say it, you regret it. But it is what it is.
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 20, 2023, 11:28:09 PM
No take backs. You commit, you eat it when you're wrong. I have plenty of crappy picks. Otherwise, I'd like to rescind all my picks that are now bad.
That just incentivizes waiting until the end of the points period.
That's what I do anyway.
6 more weeks of torture as a Bears fan :ded:
Quote from: thspfc on November 21, 2023, 10:18:21 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 20, 2023, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 20, 2023, 11:28:09 PM
No take backs. You commit, you eat it when you're wrong. I have plenty of crappy picks. Otherwise, I'd like to rescind all my picks that are now bad.
That just incentivizes waiting until the end of the points period.
That's what I do anyway.
I would too, but I'm too lazy to go back and see which weeks delineate each period.
Quote from: Henry on November 20, 2023, 08:30:25 PM
"How the hell did da Bears lose in Detroit???"
--Me and every disgruntled fan after the latest come-from-ahead loss where everything went right until the last minute
I (most decidedly a fan of the Green Bay Packers) was also very disappointed in how the Bears came through in that game at Detroit. (GRRrrrr.. . . ).
Mike
Incredible and gutsy win by the Eagles at Arrowhead! This was the toughest game for the Eagles this fall, if they could win in spite of pouring rain and a frenzied crowd, then they could win anywhere! I think now the Eagles look to be the favorite to win it all; I can't see anybody beating them now.
This is the game of the decade so far for the Texans: Jacksonville at Houston! Is it too late to flex this game to prime time? Because I would like to think that the game deserves national broadcast. Anyway, just because my team blew out the Jaguars in Jacksonville that doesn't mean anything. The Texans don't get a 20-point head start; the scores are reset to 0-0. And if anybody is expecting an easy win for the Texans, you got another thing coming! This is NOT going to be easy; I'm expecting an hard-fought battle because both teams know exactly what's on the line. I also believe it's make-or-break for the Texans, the outcome will determine their season's fate: a loss will seriously hurt our team's chances of making the playoffs, and a win means the Texans sweep the Jaguars and control of our division; our playoff chances would be tremendously boosted. What will happen on Sunday? Stay tuned! I'm already excited! Reliant Park/NRG Stadium will be electric.
Quote from: mgk920 on November 21, 2023, 12:14:58 PM
Quote from: Henry on November 20, 2023, 08:30:25 PM
"How the hell did da Bears lose in Detroit???"
--Me and every disgruntled fan after the latest come-from-ahead loss where everything went right until the last minute
I (most decidedly a fan of the Green Bay Packers) was also very disappointed in how the Bears came through in that game at Detroit. (GRRrrrr.. . . ).
Mike
I'm not. I thought the Lions finally figured out how to wins even when down near the end. It's rare, and kind of nice to be on top of the NFC North for once at 8 and 2. Hopefully Thursday goes even better.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 21, 2023, 07:43:41 PM
Incredible and gutsy win by the Eagles at Arrowhead! This was the toughest game for the Eagles this fall, if they could win in spite of pouring rain and a frenzied crowd, then they could win anywhere! I think now the Eagles look to be the favorite to win it all; I can't see anybody beating them now.
While I am happy the Eagles won, and do think that winning this game was a necessary/important step for their psyche, I also feel they were lucky to win, thanks to Chiefs turnovers or missed plays. To a lesser extent I also feel that way about their win over the Cowboys. On the other hand, I do realize that "good" teams find a way to win close games. And so I'm a little more cautiously optimistic.
The weather conditions yesterday favored the Eagles relative to the Chiefs. I'm not saying that they're not better than the Chiefs (I think they are), but the rain helped them, not hurt them.
Another one for the Takes I'm Guaranteed to Regret™ file: I thought Eagles-Chiefs played out perfectly from a Bills perspective (they face the Eagles this week and the Chiefs after their Week 13 bye). Both teams looked beatable, the Eagles winning streak stays alive, and the Chiefs have winnable games at Raiders and Packers before playing the Bills.
Also, since it was not mentioned here: the Steelers fired OC Matt Canada yesterday.
https://www.nfl.com/news/steelers-fire-offensive-coordinator-matt-canada-amid-fourth-season-with-team
Meanwhile, Tom Brady has elected to weigh in on the state of play in the NFL this season:
https://sports.yahoo.com/tom-brady-thinks-theres-a-lot-of-mediocrity-in-todays-nfl-165956606.html
Lions
Cowboys
49ers
Dolphins
Colts
Patriots
Bengals
Titans
Texans
Saints
Rams
Broncos
Eagles
Chiefs
Chargers
Vikings
For a proper use of his name, John Madden patches will be worn by all teams today.
It's nice to see the Lions do well for a change, and it makes my rooting for them today a little easier, since they're playing my most hated rivals (the Packers) in the early game. Happy Thanksgiving!
All division games this year.
I noticed over the years, for the traditional Thanksgiving home teams Detroit and Dallas, that many times their Thanksgiving game would be one of their home interconference games for one or both teams (and if only one, usually Detroit).
I haven't paid as much attention to the evening games to see if there has been any pattern there.
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 23, 2023, 11:20:31 AM
All division games this year.
I noticed over the years, for the traditional Thanksgiving home teams Detroit and Dallas, that many times their Thanksgiving game would be one of their home interconference games for one or both teams (and if only one, usually Detroit).
I haven't paid as much attention to the evening games to see if there has been any pattern there.
It was set that way to satisfy the TV contacts as if carried the if a NFC team was the visiting or CBS carried the game if an AFC team was the visitor.
Exceptions came up a few years ago, and this year there is no formal distincton so CBS can carry a game between 2 NFC teams.
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2023, 11:27:34 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 23, 2023, 11:20:31 AM
All division games this year.
I noticed over the years, for the traditional Thanksgiving home teams Detroit and Dallas, that many times their Thanksgiving game would be one of their home interconference games for one or both teams (and if only one, usually Detroit).
I haven't paid as much attention to the evening games to see if there has been any pattern there.
It was set that way to satisfy the TV contacts as if carried the if a NFC team was the visiting or CBS carried the game if an AFC team was the visitor.
Exceptions came up a few years ago, and this year there is no formal distincton so CBS can carry a game between 2 NFC teams.
Thanks for the reminder. I knew when I was writing the earlier post that I was forgetting something, that's what it was.
I was also noticing how in past years how Detroit and Dallas would jump between FOX and CBS, and how whoever got Detroit normally got screwed both with an early game and a generally lousy one. But with the demise of the "visiting team network broadcasts" rule dictating the inclusion of an AFC team, there still must have been a conscious decision to do all division games (and thus all NFC).
The demise of that rule definitely seems to have benefited CBS, they get more of the NFC marquee games and seem to take advantage of it. No disrespect to AFC intended.
Quote from: Big John on November 23, 2023, 10:33:05 AM
For a proper use of his name, John Madden patches will be worn by all teams today.
Also this heartwarming piece:
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38964598/nfl-thanksgiving-tribute-john-madden-includes-coin-toss
Quote from: Henry on November 23, 2023, 11:01:58 AM
It's nice to see the Lions do well for a change, and it makes my rooting for them today a little easier, since they're playing my most hated rivals (the Packers) in the early game. Happy Thanksgiving!
Unfortunately, as Thanksgiving is a traditional type day, the Lions followed tradition against the Packers.
Quote from: Brandon on November 23, 2023, 07:29:17 PM
Quote from: Henry on November 23, 2023, 11:01:58 AM
It's nice to see the Lions do well for a change, and it makes my rooting for them today a little easier, since they're playing my most hated rivals (the Packers) in the early game. Happy Thanksgiving!
Unfortunately, as Thanksgiving is a traditional type day, the Lions followed tradition against the Packers.
But the Cowboys did not follow suit, blowing a team away on Thanksgiving for the first time that I can remember. Looking at past schedules, today was their first double-digit Thanksgiving win since 2009.
Of course, this is roughly the time of the season where I try, and ultimately fail, to not be the stereotypical delusional Cowboys fan after a blowout win. DaRon Bland broke the all-time record for single-season pick sixes with 5, Dak is playing at an MVP level, Brandin Cooks is becoming the high-level no. 2 receiver I expected him to be this year, and a host of other young offensive weapons are making an impact.
If Trevon Diggs was healthy, this secondary of Diggs, Kearse, Hooker, Gilmore, and Bland would be quite possibly the best the league has seen since Denver's No Fly Zone. Unfortunately, Gilmore will be an unrestricted free agent in 2024 and it's unlikely the team chooses to bring him back as a 33-year-old corner, so we might not get to see it next year.
Quote from: thspfc on November 05, 2023, 08:20:12 PM
Upcoming for the Cowboys are the Giants, Panthers, and Commanders. Sounds like 8-3 entering a massive stretch of games: SEA, PHI, @BUF, @MIA, DET. Vs. Seahawks looks to be a battle for the 5 seed, vs. Eagles looks to be Dallas' last crack at the division.
8-3 indeed, but five tests in a row are to come.
It's halftime of Dolphins at Jets: I'm not sure if there has ever been this kind of a pick-six: Intercepted out of a Hail Mary pass and returned by the defense from one endzone to the other with just a couple of seconds left in the first half. I've certainly never seen anything like it, but then again, I've only been watching NFL for barely two decades.
I'll fork the Commanders.
I'll have to say this officially: the Jets are the WORST team in the NFL this season!
Quote from: Hunty2022 on November 24, 2023, 10:41:00 PM
I'll fork the Commanders.
While listening to their game on the radio yesterday, I was thinking of them more sand more as the NFL's version of the Generals.
Mike
Quote from: jgb191 on November 24, 2023, 04:32:47 PM
It's halftime of Dolphins at Jets: I'm not sure if there has ever been this kind of a pick-six: Intercepted out of a Hail Mary pass and returned by the defense from one endzone to the other with just a couple of seconds left in the first half. I've certainly never seen anything like it, but then again, I've only been watching NFL for barely two decades.
I watched the last quarter of this game last night on NFL Network via tape delay. From what I saw, I'm glad I did not watch this game at the time of broadcast, would have been a waste of my time with the limited daylight.
Amazon put up a graphic that called this play the "Hell Mary". Al Michaels also said he had the "honor" of broadcasting both that and the Butt Fumble, which also happened to occur on Thanksgiving weekend prior to Sunday.
I've been watching for about five decades and do not remember anything like that, either. But I'm not likely to remember if it wasn't a team I follow closely.
Don't remember exactly this in the NFL, but it's somewhat reminiscent of the Iron Bowl where Alabama attempted a long field goal at the end of the game, it came up short, and Auburn returned it for a touchdown.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 25, 2023, 12:07:51 PM
Don't remember exactly this in the NFL, but it's somewhat reminiscent of the Iron Bowl where Alabama attempted a long field goal at the end of the game, it came up short, and Auburn returned it for a touchdown.
Devin Hester with the Bears did it against the Giants.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 25, 2023, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 25, 2023, 12:07:51 PM
Don't remember exactly this in the NFL, but it's somewhat reminiscent of the Iron Bowl where Alabama attempted a long field goal at the end of the game, it came up short, and Auburn returned it for a touchdown.
Devin Hester with the Bears did it against the Giants.
As did Chris McAlistar for the Ravens vs the Broncos in 2002.
I was kinda referring to a pick six at the end of a half, but I phrased it poorly.
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 25, 2023, 11:45:34 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on November 24, 2023, 04:32:47 PM
It's halftime of Dolphins at Jets: I'm not sure if there has ever been this kind of a pick-six: Intercepted out of a Hail Mary pass and returned by the defense from one endzone to the other with just a couple of seconds left in the first half. I've certainly never seen anything like it, but then again, I've only been watching NFL for barely two decades.
I watched the last quarter of this game last night on NFL Network via tape delay. From what I saw, I'm glad I did not watch this game at the time of broadcast, would have been a waste of my time with the limited daylight.
Amazon put up a graphic that called this play the "Hell Mary". Al Michaels also said he had the "honor" of broadcasting both that and the Butt Fumble, which also happened to occur on Thanksgiving weekend prior to Sunday.
I've been watching for about five decades and do not remember anything like that, either. But I'm not likely to remember if it wasn't a team I follow closely.
It's kinda amazing this play was even allowed to occur. Usually on Hail Marys, there's about 10 people in the area of where the ball is being thrown, with the losing team's fans complaining that there was multiple pass interferences, which is true albeit by both teams. The fact that the defender was open by about 1-2 yards all around him is quite unusual.
I do remember a pick-six (at the end of a half) with a nearly 100 yd runback that Philadelphia did at the end of game against Dallas around 1995. Dallas was driving for what would have been a go-ahead score. As I recall, time expired during the interception return, so the final margin (~12 or 13 point Philadelphia victory) was not really indicative of the game as a whole.
But this was NOT a Hail Mary pass. Dallas was around the 10 yd line (more or less) when Aikman made that pass.
Minnesota almost did the same thing against Wisconsin until Wisconsin's QB tackled the defender.
The Jaguars looked every bit the division champs that they are, give them credit for holding on. For the first time since starting 0-2, the Texans failed to lead at any point in the 4th quarter, and first time since then that they trailed by double-digits. The Texans have had eight straight 4th Q leads before that streak snapped today; the Texans had twelve 4th Q leads last year but coughed up 8 of those 12 leads in 2022.
The Texans fall to third place in the AFC South, and playoff chances look very slim to almost improbable the rest of the way. With only three division games left this season, my team should still win at least one, maybe two, of those division games, even so that will only get us to 8 wins & 9 losses (8-9 record for 2023)....not even close enough to clinch a wild card unless we get help from other teams to tack on losses to current wild card holders (Colts and Browns). It's been a great resurgence for the Texans this season, achieving significantly ahead of schedule; preseason predictions were widely believed to have been five wins for 2023.
With respect to Jacksonville-Houston division rivalry, the road team taken five straight games going back to the first game of 2021 (last time the home team won any division game involving the Texans) and 13 straight division games in which the road team won.
I really don't like the Eagles at all.
Nobody find more dramatic ways to lose than the Bills. Not even the Cowboys, even despite my arguments to the contrary last offseason.
I want to deep dive into this a little more, and there should be plenty of time to do so in January and February, but the consistent failures of the Bills in close games under McDermott has to be unprecedented in NFL history. 0-6 in overtime is insane, and all 6 were absolutely incomprehensible, sickening, and enough to make a grown man weep. Some teams go entire seasons without one loss that bad, and the Bills have six in five years in overtime alone, and well over a dozen more in regulation, including two others (Broncos and Patriots) already this season.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 26, 2023, 04:37:08 PM
the Texans had twelve 4th Q leads last year but coughed up 8 of those 12 leads in 2022.
Last year they had 8 fourth quarter leads, and ended up with a 3-4-1 record in those games.
Quote
the road team taken five straight games going back to the first game of 2021 (last time the home team won any division game involving the Texans) and 13 straight division games in which the road team won.
The Colts beat the Texans in Indianapolis in week 6 of 2021.
I have to ask, where are you getting these specific numbers from? They're on the right track in that they indicate a trend that does exist, but the details can still be debunked in a matter of seconds . . . :-D
Here's a quick comparison . . . since week 7:
Team A: 5-0, average MOV of 7.4, opponents' combined record is 32-24, 2 double-digit wins
Team B: 5-0, average MOV of 6.6, opponents' combined record is 34-23, 1 double-digit win, 1 overtime win
Team A is the Broncos, team B is the Eagles. I can't comprehend that this is the same team - especially the same defense - that lost a game 70-20 two months ago. Not to mention, the only defense to make the Jets offense look good in the last 365 days. Now they're on legitimately the best five game run any team has had this season.
Quote from: thspfc on November 19, 2023, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 13, 2023, 02:54:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 06, 2023, 10:57:17 AM
Pittsburgh's 5-3 record is a joke. Here are the total offensive yardage numbers for each team in Steelers games this season:
...
Not only have they been outgained every single time, their highest yardage total of the season is lower than their opponents' lowest yardage total against them.
Oh no.
Packers, 399 total yards.
Steelers, 324 total yards.
Still holds true for at least another week. :angry:
The latter condition of the streak has fallen, with the Browns only putting up 259 yards. But Cleveland did outgain the Steelers so that part lives on.
Well it's finally over for good. They put up 400 yards of offense for the first time since 2020. Immediately after firing their OC.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2023, 09:26:51 PM
Nobody find more dramatic ways to lose than the Bills. Not even the Cowboys, even despite my arguments to the contrary last offseason.
I want to deep dive into this a little more, and there should be plenty of time to do so in January and February, but the consistent failures of the Bills in close games under McDermott has to be unprecedented in NFL history. 0-6 in overtime is insane, and all 6 were absolutely incomprehensible, sickening, and enough to make a grown man weep. Some teams go entire seasons without one loss that bad, and the Bills have six in five years in overtime alone, and well over a dozen more in regulation, including two others (Broncos and Patriots) already this season.
They manage to lose games in which they have more total yards, more first downs, more time with the ball, and fewer turnovers at a puzzling frequency. It's also incredible that they're always on the losing end of the game of the year: 2023 to this point with today's game, 2022 with the Vikings game, 2021 with the Chiefs game, arguably 2020 with the Hail Murray, and an honorable mention to 2019 with the Texans game.
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2023, 09:29:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2023, 09:26:51 PM
Nobody find more dramatic ways to lose than the Bills. Not even the Cowboys, even despite my arguments to the contrary last offseason.
I want to deep dive into this a little more, and there should be plenty of time to do so in January and February, but the consistent failures of the Bills in close games under McDermott has to be unprecedented in NFL history. 0-6 in overtime is insane, and all 6 were absolutely incomprehensible, sickening, and enough to make a grown man weep. Some teams go entire seasons without one loss that bad, and the Bills have six in five years in overtime alone, and well over a dozen more in regulation, including two others (Broncos and Patriots) already this season.
They manage to lose games in which they have more total yards, more first downs, more time with the ball, and fewer turnovers at a puzzling frequency. It's also incredible that they're always on the losing end of the game of the year: 2023 to this point with today's game, 2022 with the Vikings game, 2021 with the Chiefs game, arguably 2020 with the Hail Murray, and an honorable mention to 2019 with the Texans game.
It's fair to point to suspect officiating in today's loss specifically (not to go down that road again, but it was a massive factor)...
But the common thread in all of these losses is coaching, and coaching on defense in particular. McDermott's defense always seems to gag in the biggest moments. It would seem he learned absolutely nothing from "13 seconds" - both due to how he handled the end of regulation AND how they handled the final Eagles drive. Part of me wonders if he really was content to play for OT, thinking he was long overdue for a win with an 0-5 record, and it nearly worked if not for a miscommunication between Allen and Davis, but of course they got burned by having to give the ball back.
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2023, 10:20:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2023, 09:29:01 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 26, 2023, 09:26:51 PM
Nobody find more dramatic ways to lose than the Bills. Not even the Cowboys, even despite my arguments to the contrary last offseason.
I want to deep dive into this a little more, and there should be plenty of time to do so in January and February, but the consistent failures of the Bills in close games under McDermott has to be unprecedented in NFL history. 0-6 in overtime is insane, and all 6 were absolutely incomprehensible, sickening, and enough to make a grown man weep. Some teams go entire seasons without one loss that bad, and the Bills have six in five years in overtime alone, and well over a dozen more in regulation, including two others (Broncos and Patriots) already this season.
They manage to lose games in which they have more total yards, more first downs, more time with the ball, and fewer turnovers at a puzzling frequency. It's also incredible that they're always on the losing end of the game of the year: 2023 to this point with today's game, 2022 with the Vikings game, 2021 with the Chiefs game, arguably 2020 with the Hail Murray, and an honorable mention to 2019 with the Texans game.
It's fair to point to suspect officiating in today's loss specifically (not to go down that road again, but it was a massive factor)...
But the common thread in all of these losses is coaching, and coaching on defense in particular. McDermott's defense always seems to gag in the biggest moments. It would seem he learned absolutely nothing from "13 seconds" - both due to how he handled the end of regulation AND how they handled the final Eagles drive. Part of me wonders if he really was content to play for OT, thinking he was long overdue for a win with an 0-5 record, and it nearly worked if not for a miscommunication between Allen and Davis, but of course they got burned by having to give the ball back.
Being that the Eagles won I'll go a little softer on the officiating, but along with the questionable calls notably on us against Bill's QB, #2 Slay gets away with a lot before the receiver catches the ball. Not only in this game, but in several other games this year.
The Eagles have to be the worst 10-1 team in the NFL, they haven't played well in most of their games despite winning. They have gotten lucky either due to officiating (the refs have been generous to the Eagles this year) or other teams making mistakes.
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2023, 11:19:50 PM
Being that the Eagles won I'll go a little softer on the officiating, but along with the questionable calls notably on us against Bill's QB, #2 Slay gets away with a lot before the receiver catches the ball. Not only in this game, but in several other games this year.
Well of course, but the most egregious was a no-call of an obvious horse collar tackle by Haason Reddick on Josh Allen...
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/bills-eagles-horse-collar-tackle-josh-allen-jersey-penalty/177f3c931eec5250a84e75eb
It will be forgotten because of the insanity that ensued in the 2nd half and OT, but the Eagles were lucky to only be down 10 at the half. Lack of halftime adjustments = yet another reason to pin the Bills loss on coaching.
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 08:10:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2023, 11:19:50 PM
Being that the Eagles won I'll go a little softer on the officiating, but along with the questionable calls notably on us against Bill's QB, #2 Slay gets away with a lot before the receiver catches the ball. Not only in this game, but in several other games this year.
Well of course, but the most egregious was a no-call of an obvious horse collar tackle by Haason Reddick on Josh Allen...
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/bills-eagles-horse-collar-tackle-josh-allen-jersey-penalty/177f3c931eec5250a84e75eb
It will be forgotten because of the insanity that ensued in the 2nd half and OT, but the Eagles were lucky to only be down 10 at the half. Lack of halftime adjustments = yet another reason to pin the Bills loss on coaching.
There's been a lot of debate regarding the horse collar. By definition, this may not have been a horse collar. Simply grabbing the jersey behind the neck doesn't constitute a horse collar, and the subsequent throwdown isn't typical of a horse collar.
Now, if this is roughing the passer...it may be closer to that. At least closer than the roughing the passer that was called later on against the Eagles.
And the intentional grounding - gotta get the ball a little closer to the receiver. Throwing it straight into the ground is why that was called.
Quote from: thspfc on November 26, 2023, 09:29:01 PM
The Colts beat the Texans in Indianapolis in week 6 of 2021.
Yeah you're right about that. Jogging my memory, I tend to overlook the Colts games at times because they don't feel too much like division opponents due to their northerly location. But you kind of get the idea, home/road locations hasn't really been a factor in our division games because the road team has won nearly every division game the Texans have played the last few years.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
My last fork is the Chargers. My AFC field is MIA, BUF, BAL, CLE, CIN, JAX, KC. Obviously I'd rather not have the Bengals on that list, but they're a game ahead of the Chargers right now with a lot of backup QBs, and Kenny Pickett, left on their schedule. I think it's more likely that the Bengals win a bunch of 16-13 type games than it is that the Chargers stop being the Chargers.
I still have more faith than most in the Bills, and even if I didn't, they're in a better spot than the Chargers and Bengals.
3 of the 4 (notable) teams I'm rooting against in our compeition won yesterday - ATL, PIT, DEN, with the Vikings probably making it 4/4 against the Bears tonight. Great.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
Yikes. Yet another sign of bad ownership in Carolina. I feel for Reich. He was nowhere near their biggest problem and was given no chance to succeed. No reason not to let a bad season play out other than just change for the sake of change.
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
My last fork is the Chargers. My AFC field is MIA, BUF, BAL, CLE, CIN, JAX, KC. Obviously I'd rather not have the Bengals on that list, but they're a game ahead of the Chargers right now with a lot of backup QBs, and Kenny Pickett, left on their schedule. I think it's more likely that the Bengals win a bunch of 16-13 type games than it is that the Chargers stop being the Chargers.
I still have more faith than most in the Bills, and even if I didn't, they're in a better spot than the Chargers and Bengals.
Weird dynamics all around the AFC. A bunch of presumed contenders (Bills, Chargers and Bengals) are in rough shape, though I agree the Bills have the best shot at the playoffs of those three.
Meanwhile, a bunch of presumed middling teams (Browns, Steelers, Texans, Colts, and Broncos) are in decent shape and could end up comprising the entire wild card field.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 27, 2023, 10:22:00 AM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 08:10:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 26, 2023, 11:19:50 PM
Being that the Eagles won I'll go a little softer on the officiating, but along with the questionable calls notably on us against Bill's QB, #2 Slay gets away with a lot before the receiver catches the ball. Not only in this game, but in several other games this year.
Well of course, but the most egregious was a no-call of an obvious horse collar tackle by Haason Reddick on Josh Allen...
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/bills-eagles-horse-collar-tackle-josh-allen-jersey-penalty/177f3c931eec5250a84e75eb
It will be forgotten because of the insanity that ensued in the 2nd half and OT, but the Eagles were lucky to only be down 10 at the half. Lack of halftime adjustments = yet another reason to pin the Bills loss on coaching.
There's been a lot of debate regarding the horse collar. By definition, this may not have been a horse collar. Simply grabbing the jersey behind the neck doesn't constitute a horse collar, and the subsequent throwdown isn't typical of a horse collar.
Now, if this is roughing the passer...it may be closer to that. At least closer than the roughing the passer that was called later on against the Eagles.
And the intentional grounding - gotta get the ball a little closer to the receiver. Throwing it straight into the ground is why that was called.
There are two reasons why this might not have been a horse collar. The first one is horse collar does not apply to the quarterback while he is in the pocket. He was in the pocket when he initially was grabbed from the front.
The second is for it to be a penalty, the knees of the person being tackled have to buckle due to horse collar. Josh Allen's knees were flexed when Reddick grabbed the back. Reddick's grasp STRAIGHTENED the Quarterback's knees. He literally flung him.
Jim Nantz went on and on about the torn jersey. The jersey was torn from the front, not the back. There is no rule about grabbing the front of the jersey or pads.
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 11:42:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
Yikes. Yet another sign of bad ownership in Carolina. I feel for Reich. He was nowhere near their biggest problem and was given no chance to succeed. No reason not to let a bad season play out other than just change for the sake of change.
He got fired because Bryce Young has, thus far, been a bust. The only real reason. If the front office bungled the pick, he paid for it.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 02:14:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 11:42:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
Yikes. Yet another sign of bad ownership in Carolina. I feel for Reich. He was nowhere near their biggest problem and was given no chance to succeed. No reason not to let a bad season play out other than just change for the sake of change.
He got fired because Bryce Young has, thus far, been a bust. The only real reason. If the front office bungled the pick, he paid for it.
But it was the owner David Tepper himself that bungled the pick. Reports are that Reich didn't even want to pick Bryce Young, and though he was talked into it by draft day, it was the owner's decision.
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 02:34:29 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 02:14:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 11:42:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
Yikes. Yet another sign of bad ownership in Carolina. I feel for Reich. He was nowhere near their biggest problem and was given no chance to succeed. No reason not to let a bad season play out other than just change for the sake of change.
He got fired because Bryce Young has, thus far, been a bust. The only real reason. If the front office bungled the pick, he paid for it.
But it was the owner David Tepper himself that bungled the pick. Reports are that Reich didn't even want to pick Bryce Young, and though he was talked into it by draft day, it was the owner's decision.
Unfortunately, owners aren't about to fire themselves.
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2023, 10:25:11 PM
Fields has 1 0 career game-winning drives
Well that has promptly been made outdated. And for the first time in his career, Fields threw 30+ passes in a win.
Granted, the Bears forced 4 turnovers and scored 12 points. Not exactly a career-defining moment for Fields, but at least he came through at the end.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2023, 12:04:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2023, 10:25:11 PM
Fields has 1 0 career game-winning drives
Well that has promptly been made outdated. And for the first time in his career, Fields threw 30+ passes in a win.
Granted, the Bears forced 4 turnovers and scored 12 points. Not exactly a career-defining moment for Fields, but at least he came through at the end.
It's so hard to pinpoint the issues watching on TV since you don't see the receivers downfield until the ball is thrown, but Fields holds the ball for an awful long time. He either isn't finding his open man or guys just aren't open. I imagine it's some of both. In any case, they need to bring in someone to work with him on that. I don't have a lot of faith in any of the guys who will be available in this year's draft.
On a good note, the offensive and defensive lines are improved. They aren't actually good yet, but good is now achievable for next season.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 8 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
Bryce Young has to be the worst first-overall draft pick since JaMarcus Russell.
Quote from: thspfc on November 28, 2023, 12:04:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 20, 2023, 10:25:11 PM
Fields has 1 0 career game-winning drives
Well that has promptly been made outdated. And for the first time in his career, Fields threw 30+ passes in a win.
Granted, the Bears forced 4 turnovers and scored 12 points. Not exactly a career-defining moment for Fields, but at least he came through at the end.
FWIW Joe Buck & an ESPN graphic claimed that Fields had 2 previous game-winning drives (none this year) going into what turned out to be the game-winning drive last night, but I have no idea what 2 games they would have been referring to.
Editted to add: PFF lists the 2 games in question as the 2022 games against San Francisco (week 1) & Houston (week 3), and presumably it was PFF that Buck/ESPN were citing. Had to brush up a bit on what happened in each of those games, but:
-The Bears were down 10-0 against SF midway thru the 3rd, and then scored 3 TD's the rest of the way to reach the final 19-10 mark (2 missed XP's). The go-ahead TD happened at 12:50 left in the 4th, and the final score happened at 7:24 left.
-The Bears were tied 20-20 with Houston throughout the 4th, and then Roquan Smith intercepted Davis Mills with 1:13 left in the 4th. Already well within FG range, Fields simply kneeled a few times to drain the clock and then Santos hit the game-winner as time expired for the 23-20 final score.
So...both games were apparently considered to have game-winning drives by PFF, but definitely debatable in both cases. Neither one involved what we finally saw last night with Fields stepping up and hitting that deep strike to Moore with under 2 minutes left to get well into FG range (and then, speaking of kneeldowns to bleed clock ahead of a go-ahead FG try...)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 07:05:05 AM
It's so hard to pinpoint the issues watching on TV since you don't see the receivers downfield until the ball is thrown, but Fields holds the ball for an awful long time. He either isn't finding his open man or guys just aren't open. I imagine it's some of both. In any case, they need to bring in someone to work with him on that. I don't have a lot of faith in any of the guys who will be available in this year's draft.
On a good note, the offensive and defensive lines are improved. They aren't actually good yet, but good is now achievable for next season.
The overreliance on screens last night was maddening as well. Clearly Luke Getsy did his homework and concluded that Brian Flores loves to blitz (which we saw plenty of until he mysteriously backed off on the final drive, which Troy Aikman noted on the broadcast), but calling screens all night might have been overcorrecting a little, not to mention makes it more difficult to evaluate Fields :banghead:
As for the lines - it's amazing the impact 2 players (1 per side) can have on the entire units. For the o-line, I go back to Teven Jenkins's return against Washington - he's become the nasty presence the Bears were missing post-Kyle Long, and it seems like the whole line steps it up with him in there. If the Bears can find a new center in the offseason, they might suddenly be set on the o-line. As for the d-line, the Montez Sweat trade is providing immediate returns despite the steep price - he notched 1.5 sacks last night, and it seemed like Aikman was calling Gervon Dexter Sr's name multiple times on replays as well.
As a final note - I don't generally like to harp on officiating, but what on earth was that sequence with Kyler Gordon getting a taunting penalty because his facemask got ripped off by Brandon Powell (which wasn't flagged) and the only reason he then took off his helmet while still on the field was to show the refs his facemask dangling from the rest of his helmet?
Quote from: epzik8 on November 28, 2023, 09:45:36 AM
Bryce Young has to be the worst first-overall draft pick since JaMarcus Russell.
Baker Mayfield?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 28, 2023, 10:56:39 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on November 28, 2023, 09:45:36 AM
Bryce Young has to be the worst first-overall draft pick since JaMarcus Russell.
Baker Mayfield?
Probably somewhere in between. Bryce Young has no known work ethic or off-field issues, and barring injury will notch 17 starts as a rookie, so he's already well on the way to being less of a bust than JaMarcus Russell. He's played poorly, but the situation and lack of surrounding talent makes an evaluation almost impossible. He is far from Carolina's biggest problem as a player, although the trade to get him looks like a disaster.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on November 28, 2023, 10:18:56 AM
-The Bears were tied 20-20 with Houston throughout the 4th, and then Roquan Smith intercepted Davis Mills with 1:13 left in the 4th. Already well within FG range, Fields simply kneeled a few times to drain the clock and then Santos hit the game-winner as time expired for the 23-20 final score.
So, it sounds great...
"Fields completes a Game-Winning Drive Late in the 4th Quarter!!"
But in reality:
"Fields Game-Winning Drive nets a 3 yard loss"
I refuse to count out Bryce Young just yet. Let's see what happens next year. It was unfortunate for him that CJ entered the same draft year. CJ was selected by the team (Texans) whose skyrocketing culture set by our new HC DeMeco Ryans happened to be the right fit for him. If Bryce had been selected by the Texans, I would believed that he could have fared a lot better than in his current situation right now. Let's see if the next Panthers HC could raise the culture and performance.
And nobody would have expected CJ and the Texans to be doing as well as they have been this season. People forgotten about the 11 sacks he took in the first two games alone, which had been on pace for around 94 sacks for the season. Even with the current team, everybody on here had forked them even before preseason began. A couple on here even believed the Texans would remain at the bottom of the NFL. Most of the NFL experts on TV during preseason predicted only five to six wins total for the year. Nobody would have expected him to break passing yardage records like he did.
Just goes to show you, the Draft is simply rolling the dice and nothing more. How many times was Tom Brady passed over the year he was drafted?
Clinching the Playoff Scenarios, Week 13:
The Eagles have the first opportunity to clinch a playoff spot this year, which they can do this weekend by...
1. Eagles win over 49ers + Rams loss/tie vs. Browns
2. Eagles win over 49ers + Packers loss/tie to Chiefs + Lions loss to Saints
3. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Falcons loss/tie to Jets
4. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Saints loss/tie to Lions
Watching the Playoffs scenarios:
Panthers: Simple - If they lose to the Bucs, Carolina is out.
Patriots:
1. Patriots loss to Chargers + Steelers win/tie vs. Cardinals + Colts win/tie vs. Titans + Browns win/tie vs. Rams
2. Patriots loss + Steelers win/tie + Colts win/tie + Texans win over Broncos + Bengals win over Jaguars
3. Patriots loss + Steelers win/tie + Colts win/tie + Bengals-Jaguars tie
4. Patriots loss + Steelers win/tie + Colts win + Texans-Broncos tie
5. Patriots loss + Steelers win/tie + Colts tie + Texans-Broncos tie + Bengals win/tie with Jaguars
Cardinals:
1. Cardinals loss to Steelers + Seahawks win/tie vs. Cowboys + Rams win vs. Browns
2. Cardinals loss + Seahawks win/tie + Packers win/tie vs. Chiefs
3. Cardinals loss + Seahawks win/tie + Falcons win vs. Jets + Buccaneers win/tie vs. Panthers
4. Cardinals loss + Seahawks win/tie + Falcons-Jets tie + Buccaneers win
5. Cardinals loss + Rams win vs. Browns + Packers win/tie
6. Cardinals loss + Rams win vs. Browns + Falcons win + Buccaneers win + Saints win/tie vs. Lions
7. Cardinals loss + Rams win vs. Browns + Falcons win + Buccaneers-Panthers tie + Saints win
8. Cardinals loss + Rams win vs. Browns + Falcons-Jets tie + Buccaneers win + Saints win
9. Cardinals tie + Seahawks win + Packers win
Quote from: epzik8 on November 28, 2023, 09:45:36 AM
Bryce Young has to be the worst first-overall draft pick since JaMarcus Russell.
more like since Andre Ware
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 06:34:52 PM
Clinching the Playoff Scenarios, Week 13:
The Eagles have the first opportunity to clinch a playoff spot this year, which they can do this weekend by...
1. Eagles win over 49ers + Rams loss/tie vs. Browns
2. Eagles win over 49ers + Packers loss/tie to Chiefs + Lions loss to Saints
3. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Falcons loss/tie to Jets
4. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Saints loss/tie to Lions
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 09:55:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 06:34:52 PM
Clinching the Playoff Scenarios, Week 13:
The Eagles have the first opportunity to clinch a playoff spot this year, which they can do this weekend by...
1. Eagles win over 49ers + Rams loss/tie vs. Browns
2. Eagles win over 49ers + Packers loss/tie to Chiefs + Lions loss to Saints
3. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Falcons loss/tie to Jets
4. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Saints loss/tie to Lions
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
If you follow any of the Eagles Facebook fan/group pages, there's always a lot of bad info that gets passed around, and probably repeated elsewhere.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 10:23:38 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 09:55:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 06:34:52 PM
Clinching the Playoff Scenarios, Week 13:
The Eagles have the first opportunity to clinch a playoff spot this year, which they can do this weekend by...
1. Eagles win over 49ers + Rams loss/tie vs. Browns
2. Eagles win over 49ers + Packers loss/tie to Chiefs + Lions loss to Saints
3. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Falcons loss/tie to Jets
4. Eagles tie 49ers + Rams loss + Packers loss/tie + Saints loss/tie to Lions
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
If you follow any of the Eagles Facebook fan/group pages, there's always a lot of bad info that gets passed around, and probably repeated elsewhere.
Something like that must have popped up in my FB feed.
Quote from: jgb191 on November 28, 2023, 05:47:26 PM
Just goes to show you, the Draft is simply rolling the dice and nothing more. How many times was Tom Brady passed over the year he was drafted?
Just to compare, Peyton Manning was the top draft pick 25 years ago, and everybody was predicting him to be the GOAT. But then, when the 199th overall pick in the 2000 Draft began to flourish, they were beginning to forget about their Chosen One from two years before. However, Peyton's had a respectable career, with a Super Bowl championship in Indianapolis and another in Denver, and the latter ending his career, which TB12 wishes he had. As they say, don't judge a book by its cover.
(BTW, Tom Brady is Steph Curry to Peyton Manning's LeBron James)
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 10:31:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 10:23:38 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 09:55:01 PM
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
If you follow any of the Eagles Facebook fan/group pages, there's always a lot of bad info that gets passed around, and probably repeated elsewhere.
Something like that must have popped up in my FB feed.
The NYT's NFL Playoff Calculator was briefly showing the Eagles had clinched a spot. It's since been revised to >99%, but at this point, it's little more than a mathematical technicality.
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2023, 08:29:21 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 10:31:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 10:23:38 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 09:55:01 PM
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
If you follow any of the Eagles Facebook fan/group pages, there's always a lot of bad info that gets passed around, and probably repeated elsewhere.
Something like that must have popped up in my FB feed.
The NYT's NFL Playoff Calculator was briefly showing the Eagles had clinched a spot. It's since been revised to >99%, but at this point, it's little more than a mathematical technicality.
There must be some weird combination (I'm guessing involving ties), that keeps it from being 100%.
I assume these calculation algorithms take into account things like two other contending teams playing each other, in which case some combination of a loss (a full loss for one team, or (if a tie) a 1/2 loss for each team) will occur (or said another way -- both teams can't win).
I remember having to take that into account many years ago when figuring out magic numbers for baseball teams in the simple pre-1995 years when you had to win the division to be in, if you didn't you were out. That was a lot simpler than football now -- one, baseball has no ties --- and two, football has all sorts of tiebreaking hierarchy rules (division games most important, intraconference less so, interconference even less so, etc. and other things which I don't know).
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 29, 2023, 09:56:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 29, 2023, 08:29:21 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 10:31:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 28, 2023, 10:23:38 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on November 28, 2023, 09:55:01 PM
I could have sworn that I heard (or saw) somewhere that they would clinch by beating the Bills last Sunday. But that must have been wrong. It's sort of a moot point anyway. To me, it seemed a little early for playoff clinching since every team has at least 5 games to play (6 for those who have already had byes).
If you follow any of the Eagles Facebook fan/group pages, there's always a lot of bad info that gets passed around, and probably repeated elsewhere.
Something like that must have popped up in my FB feed.
The NYT's NFL Playoff Calculator was briefly showing the Eagles had clinched a spot. It's since been revised to >99%, but at this point, it's little more than a mathematical technicality.
There must be some weird combination (I'm guessing involving ties), that keeps it from being 100%.
Basically, the teams in the scenarios above are the reason why they haven't clinched.
If as of last week, the Rams, Packers, Lions, Falcons and Saints all had one more loss than they currently have, the Eagles would've clinched last week.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 27, 2023, 07:38:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 02:34:29 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 02:14:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 27, 2023, 11:42:07 AM
Quote from: thspfc on November 27, 2023, 10:43:48 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Frank Reich is not the coach I thought would be fired today.
Yikes. Yet another sign of bad ownership in Carolina. I feel for Reich. He was nowhere near their biggest problem and was given no chance to succeed. No reason not to let a bad season play out other than just change for the sake of change.
He got fired because Bryce Young has, thus far, been a bust. The only real reason. If the front office bungled the pick, he paid for it.
But it was the owner David Tepper himself that bungled the pick. Reports are that Reich didn't even want to pick Bryce Young, and though he was talked into it by draft day, it was the owner's decision.
Unfortunately, owners aren't about to fire themselves.
Not to keep harping on this, but after hearing a few snippets from Tepper... he is not a competent NFL owner. The list of terrible organizational decisions he has made or had a hand in is growing longer by the month. He seems to have no comprehension that, while money and power can do a lot of things,
stability is an integral part of on-field success in an NFL organization, and stability starts with ownership. As a new owner, creating a stable environment means having self-awareness about your roster, having patience with a new coaching staff, and giving young players a chance to develop, and Tepper has failed miserably in all three areas. Keep letting impatience reign, and it becomes a vicious cycle of candidates inheriting a mess, performing poorly, having no chance to succeed, and getting fired, which then becomes a strong deterrent to future candidates.
Cowboys
Colts
Jets
Lions
Broncos
Chargers
Steelers
Dolphins
Bucs
49ers
Browns
Chiefs
Jaguars
I'm all-in on another Joe Flacco comeback arc.
Post-week 12 check in:
8 teams are playoff locks.
Ravens, Chiefs, Jaguars, Dolphins // Eagles, 49ers, Lions, Cowboys
10 teams are fork locks.
Jets, Patriots, Bengals, Titans, Raiders // Commanders, Giants, Bears, Panthers, Cardinals
14 teams are in the hunt for the final 6 playoff spots.
Bills, Browns, Steelers, Colts, Texans, Broncos, ~Chargers // Vikings, Packers, Bucs, Saints, Falcons, Rams, Seahawks
I had a dream last night that the Patriots backed into the playoffs under Bailey Zappe's leadership and amid the collapses of other AFC teams
^^ When I see "back into the playoffs" I see a team that had a good record prior to the home stretch make the playoffs despite having a poor record at the end of the season
If I hadn't said it before, fuck Tom Brady. 3 of those SB wins were because the opposing coach made shitty decisions at the end of the game.
Quote from: hobsini2 on December 03, 2023, 02:27:08 PM
If I hadn't said it before, fuck Tom Brady. 3 of those SB wins were because the opposing coach made shitty decisions at the end of the game.
BREAKING: per sources, the NFL has rescinded three of the Patriots' six championships due to the other team making mistakes. The league will conduct a further review of all mistakes made by football teams in the Super Bowl era to determine which other championships should be vacated.
The New England Patriots lost 0-6 to the San Diego, er. Los Angeles Chargers 0-6 to fall to 2-10 on the season. That lottery pick is looking more attractive.
People on my screen on Commanders socials really acting like there was no chance in hell for Tua to throw for almost 300 yards against us and that we're not shaking up our defense right now. Gotta love it.
Quote from: thspfc on December 03, 2023, 03:28:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on December 03, 2023, 02:27:08 PM
If I hadn't said it before, fuck Tom Brady. 3 of those SB wins were because the opposing coach made shitty decisions at the end of the game.
BREAKING: per sources, the NFL has rescinded three of the Patriots' six championships due to the other team making mistakes. The league will conduct a further review of all mistakes made by football teams in the Super Bowl era to determine which other championships should be vacated.
Love da snark my frient.
While it's tiebreaker-based, despte two ugly losses in a row for the Vikings, they've actually moved *up* to the 6 seed. Sums up how the middle of the NFC is.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 03, 2023, 08:10:38 PM
While it's tiebreaker-based, despte two ugly losses in a row for the Vikings, they've actually moved *up* to the 6 seed. Sums up how the middle of the NFC is.
There's as many NFC teams
at .500 (four) as above .500 (four). Meaning the other eight teams all have losing records. So yeah, about as messy as it gets.
If I remember correctly, DeMeco Ryans was initially invited to Denver for the Broncos Head Coach interview to which DeMeco shot down the invitation and then successfully persuaded the Texans to hire him and here we are! DeMeco led the Texans snapping the Broncos five-game winning streak today.
And this is a real head-scratcher: Texans beat the Steelers earlier this fall, yet the Steelers are ahead of us despite identical 7-5 records??? Steelers are #5th seed and Texans are #8th despite the Texans winning this tiebreaker due to the Texans 30-6 victory over the Steelers? Anybody care to explain this one?
Quote from: jgb191 on December 03, 2023, 09:50:43 PM
And this is a real head-scratcher: Texans beat the Steelers earlier this fall, yet the Steelers are ahead of us despite identical 7-5 records??? Steelers are #5th seed and Texans are #8th despite the Texans winning this tiebreaker due to the Texans 30-6 victory over the Steelers? Anybody care to explain this one?
It's a bit complicated, but tiebreaks involving three or more teams are done within the division first, and the Colts have the tiebreaker over the Texans, so they are the South team that advances to further tiebreakers.
The official NFL rules are
here (https://www.nfl.com/standings/tie-breaking-procedures), but
this Wikipedia table (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_NFL_season#Conference) is my go-to; I find it much easier to understand because it's updated with the real-life scenarios and team names, rather than generic rules lingo.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 03, 2023, 09:50:43 PM
If I remember correctly, DeMeco Ryans was initially invited to Denver for the Broncos Head Coach interview to which DeMeco shot down the invitation and then successfully persuaded the Texans to hire him and here we are! DeMeco led the Texans snapping the Broncos five-game winning streak today.
And this is a real head-scratcher: Texans beat the Steelers earlier this fall, yet the Steelers are ahead of us despite identical 7-5 records??? Steelers are #5th seed and Texans are #8th despite the Texans winning this tiebreaker due to the Texans 30-6 victory over the Steelers? Anybody care to explain this one?
This gets into the more complicated nature of 3+ way ties. There's currently a 4-way tie between Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Indy, and Houston.
Quote
Three or More Clubs
(Note: If two clubs remain tied after one-or-more clubs are eliminated during any step, tiebreaker restarts at Step 1 of two-club format. If three clubs remain tied after a fourth club is eliminated during any step, tiebreaker restarts at Step 2 of three-club format.)
Apply division tiebreaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tiebreaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.
Head-to-head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others.)
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.
Strength of victory in all games.
Strength of schedule in all games.
Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed in all games.
Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed in all games.
Best net points in conference games.
Best net points in all games.
Best net touchdowns in all games.
Coin toss
When the first Wild Card team has been identified, the procedure is repeated to name the second and third Wild Card (i.e., eliminate all but the highest-ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to Step 2). In situations in which three teams from the same division are involved in the procedure, the original seeding of the teams remains the same for subsequent applications of the tiebreaker if the top-ranked team in that division qualifies for a Wild Card berth.
Basically it's a stepladder of progressive tiebreaking that even though Team A may have a direct tiebreaker over Team D, they don't have one over Team B or C which was broken first that also involves if they're teams in the same division (which in this case is 2 and 2).
The good news is Houston will have its chances to earn H2H breakers over Cleveland and negate the H2H of the Colts beating them still.
Great win for the Packers over the Chefs! I was sweating it out at the end there but the Packers held on.
And with the Packers' win over the Chefs, if the season ended with this weekend they would be in the playoffs. :-o
The TV guys did put an interesting graphic up during tonight's game, at this point in this, his first full season starting with the Packers, Jordan Love has nearly identical stats to what Aaron Rodgers had at the same point in his first full season starting with the Packers.
Mike
I was at the game and the only celebrity they recognized being there was Tony Shalhoub. Heard on the radio there were 2 other celebrities there.
Quote from: Big John on December 04, 2023, 05:41:17 AM
I was at the game and the only celebrity they recognized being there was Tony Shalhoub. Heard on the radio there were 2 other celebrities there.
Taylor Swift was there, and also the network TV guys showed an Olympian in the crowd.
Mike
I think what we're seeing in Green Bay is a bunch of young players starting to come into their own in this winning streak. If they can keep it up, the remaining schedule has a LOT of winnable games on it.
Another factor is that coach LaFleur has never lost a game in December.
I must say, the lack of whining about the refs when it's the Chiefs who got the tough end of a controversial non-PI is noticeable.
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2023, 03:43:26 PM
I must say, the lack of whining about the refs when it's the Chiefs who got the tough end of a controversial non-PI is noticeable.
There were multiple questionable calls and non-calls that went both ways in the last minute. That was probably just the most egregious one.
Plus, the TV commentators were such Chiefs homers on the Hail Mary pass at the end that things needed to balance out. You never see PI called on a Hail Mary unless it's particularly egregious, and I've seen plenty worse let go in those situations, but they whined about the lack of a PI there for the rest of the broadcast.
Very sorry about Trevor Lawrence. I had no idea the Jags would have had the first seed in the AFC if they won last night.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 05, 2023, 08:47:54 AM
Very sorry about Trevor Lawrence. I had no idea the Jags would have had the first seed in the AFC if they won last night.
Reported as a sprained ankle. He'll walk it off. And if he does, his little tantrum after the injury is going to look juvenile.
Quote from: DenverBrian on December 05, 2023, 09:38:26 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 05, 2023, 08:47:54 AM
Very sorry about Trevor Lawrence. I had no idea the Jags would have had the first seed in the AFC if they won last night.
Reported as a sprained ankle. He'll walk it off. And if he does, his little tantrum after the injury is going to look juvenile.
If there was a tantrum, I missed it. The main issue after Lawrence's injury seemed to be the lack of a cart to assist him off the field.
This is not good news for the AFC South. With Trevor Lawrence and Tank Dell injured for god know how long, there went my hope of our division making a big splash in this year's playoffs.
And it's not looking good for the Texans on Sunday; CJ and his offense now have to deal with the wrath of Sauce Gardner and the formidable NY Jets defense, which I've heard is one of the best in the NFL this year. During the preseason, it was widely believed that this would have been an easy win for the Jets. But now this has trap game written all over it for the Texans and I'm worried about the same outcome as we suffered at Charlotte and Atlanta snatching a last-second defeat from the jaws of victory (the demons of Texans past years conspiring to hold the team back). Last year's draft 2022, I really wanted the Texans to draft Sauce instead of Derek Jr. as I thought Sauce Gardner would be a better fit for us.
Steelers
Texans
Rams
Saints
Bengals
Buccaneers
Browns
Lions
49ers
Raiders
Chargers
Bills
Cowboys
Packers
Dolphins
Quote from: jgb191 on November 13, 2023, 04:22:47 PM
If the Texans make the playoffs this January, CJ might be in the list of MVP considerations and DeMeco should be a lock for Coach of the Year.
Any chance of either of these things happening was extinguished today, in a simply horrible loss in every facet of the game. People won't care because expectations for the Texans were so low entering the season, but that's a haunting loss. The good news is that remaining on their schedule, they have two games against teams they're directly competing with (Browns, Colts) and two games against the Titans.
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2023, 05:19:34 PM
Bills
The last three years, I've picked the Chiefs to lose exactly twice (including the playoffs). Both times they were at home against Buffalo, and both times they lost. The Bills are 3-1 in their last four games at Arrowhead, but due to 13 seconds, the narrative is still that the Chiefs own them. Interesting juxtaposition with the narrative around the 49ers/Rams matchup - the 49ers have dominated in the regular season, the Rams won in the NFC title game, but the perception is that the 49ers own that rivalry. :hmmm:
The entire AFC is now 7-6, with only the Ravens and Dolphins being comfortably in the playoffs.
If I were DeMeco Ryans, I'd now save CJ and Will Jr. until next fall. I'm not sure about risking more injury to our draftees by playing them more this season, especially now that this playoffs is practically out of the Texans reach....a 9-8 record (my projected finish) simply won't be good enough to snag a Wild Card spot especially teams like Denver and Buffalo on a tear lately and Cincinnati unaffected by Joe Burrow's injury. We already lost Dell and possibly Nico Collins, among several other players.
Quote from: thspfc on December 10, 2023, 07:53:14 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 07, 2023, 05:19:34 PM
Bills
The last three years, I've picked the Chiefs to lose exactly twice (including the playoffs). Both times they were at home against Buffalo, and both times they lost. The Bills are 3-1 in their last four games at Arrowhead, but due to 13 seconds, the narrative is still that the Chiefs own them.
Three wins at Arrowhead in the Mahomes era is not something a lot of teams can claim, and yet, it is still fair to keep that in the context of 0-2 in the playoffs until proven otherwise. And so much for that bonkers McDermott report sabotaging their season (which, I believe, is what the author of that piece intended).
Enough said about the Bills, but it's worth noting that it's turning into a strange season for the Chiefs, too. Sub-30 point outings have very much become the norm rather than the exception, and with five losses (and suddenly only a 1-game lead in the AFC West!) it's very likely that Mahomes will have to play on the road in the playoffs, and that the AFC title game will be hosted somewhere other than Arrowhead, both of which are long overdue.
Quote from: thspfc on December 10, 2023, 07:53:14 PM
Interesting juxtaposition with the narrative around the 49ers/Rams matchup - the 49ers have dominated in the regular season, the Rams won in the NFC title game, but the perception is that the 49ers own that rivalry. :hmmm:
I don't think it's the least bit unfair to say that the 49ers own that rivalry. The Rams have a single HUGE win, but the 49ers are otherwise 9-0 against the Rams in the last five seasons.
Quote from: thspfc on December 10, 2023, 07:53:14 PM
The entire AFC is now 7-6, with only the Ravens and Dolphins being comfortably in the playoffs.
I know this was meant as hyperbole, but you actually don't have to change it that much to be true:
"With only the Ravens and Dolphins being comfortably in the playoffs, the
rest of the AFC playoff contenders are now 7-6
or 8-5"
As another reference point, the Bills somehow fell from the 10 seed to the 11 seed today while doubling their playoff odds from 20% to 40% (per NYT). There's just so many middling teams in that mix and they all seem to be playing each every week. It's become hard to even decipher rooting interests, since one middling team losing just bumps another one back up the standings.
My quick and dirty conference power rankings:
AFC
---Division leaders---
1. Ravens
2. Dolphins
3. Chiefs
4. Jaguars
---Wild Card contenders---
5. Bills
6. Broncos
7. Browns
8. Texans
9. Bengals
10. Colts
11. Steelers
---Playing out the string---
12. Chargers
13. Jets
14. Titans
15. Raiders
16. Patriots
NFC
---Division leaders---
1. 49ers
2. Cowboys*
3. Lions
4. LOL
---Wild Card contenders---
5. Eagles*
6. Packers
7. Rams
8. Seahawks
9. Vikings
10/11. Bucs/Falcons/Saints
---Playing out the string---
12. Bears**
13. Giants
14. Cardinals
15. Commanders
16. Panthers
* Pending the result of tonight's game
** Don't look now, but they could make the playoffs if they win out
After tonight I hope the Cowboys don't meet the Eagles again in the playoffs, even though I'm confident Dallas would win such a game regardless of location. It's clear that the Cowboys have "won" the season series, with Philly's W coming by a matter of inches (on 3 different plays!), while Dallas' W was domination from the first drive.
This is the best Cowboys team since 1995 (and therefore, the best of my lifetime). I wasn't all that broken up over the previous two playoff losses. 2021 was a pleasant surprise overall, 2022 was a case of running into a white-hot team on an 11-game win streak. But this year, not at least snapping the NFC championship appearence streak would be crushing.
Unfortunately, winning the division still seems less likely than not. Philly has the Seahawks, Giants twice, and Cardinals left on their schedule. Dallas has the Bills, Fins, Lions, and Commies. It's a carbon copy of last year: being a wild card means going to either San Fran or Philly in the divisional, and let's hope to the heavens above it's Philly.
Cowboys/Bills next week is a very intruiging game because both teams have their backs against the wall for different reasons. Dallas has a massive seeding swing on the line, while Buffalo has playoff status period on the line. I'm interested to see what Vegas does with the odds for that one as well.
One final note on the week: Brock Purdy should not be anywhere near the MVP discussion. This is not just me being salty. We have no concrete reason to believe Purdy is anything more than slightly better than peak Jimmy Garoppolo. A QB proven to be the epitome of mediocre having only slightly less success in the same offense, when that offense wasn't even as talented as it is now, should tell anyone that Purdy is not the most valuable player in the league. A franchise QB? Absolutely. But if you took Hurts off the Eagles, Lamar off the Ravens, Dak off the Cowboys, or Tua off the Dolphins, those teams would suffer far more than the Niners would in the absence of Purdy. (And that's not even mentioning Mahomes and Allen, who prop up their entire offenses on a weekly basis but don't have enough W's or raw stats to be in contention.)
The Chiefs no longer run the NFL.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 11, 2023, 08:24:30 AM
The Chiefs no longer run the NFL.
and complaining about the refs again.
Seemed to me that Toney's foot was on right the line of scrimmage and therefore the refs called it correctly unless I need better glasses. Mahomes has nobody to blame but Buffalo; in my opinion it's the Bills fault for the Chiefs losing, in fact it'd be more accurate to say that Bills won the game instead of the Chiefs losing it.
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2023, 12:47:58 AM
One final note on the week: Brock Purdy should not be anywhere near the MVP discussion.
I would like to think that Christian McCaffrey is the best player on the NFL's best team and probably my choice for MVP.
^^ Better picture of him offsides: https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1734210600471822339?s=20
Quote from: jgb191 on December 11, 2023, 11:36:39 AM
I would like to think that Christian McCaffrey is the best player on the NFL's best team and probably my choice for MVP.
McCaffrey is not in my top 10 either. Shanahan has made almost every starting running back he's coached look very good to elite. McCaffrey is obviously the best one he's had, but they would still be running the ball just fine without him, and they could find someone to fill his role in the passing game to decent success.
The 49ers are simply an incredibly talented and well coached team on both sides of the ball, with no single player who is head and shoulders above the rest. The best team is not required to have the MVP on it. Hastily awarding the MVP to the best player on the best team lacks any sort of nuance whatsoever.
The Jets are back :-) Even from a fair-weather Pats fan (and the weather is cloudy again), that was a fun game. Respect.
(Also, the Pats being terrible made the Pittsburgh outcome much more entertaining. A 6-6 Pats team out of the playoff picture squeaking by in PGH would not be the same.)
Quote from: Big John on December 11, 2023, 09:28:00 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 11, 2023, 08:24:30 AM
The Chiefs no longer run the NFL.
and complaining about the refs again.
That offsides call WAS correct at Andy Reid is a big whiner.
Mike
I guess this isn't surprising, but 31 teams in the NFL are either in position for a top-10 draft pick or have at least a 15% chance to make the playoffs. The Panthers, of course, are the exception. You probably have to go back to the 0-16 Browns to find a team that was as lost as this Panthers team, and the fact that they have a rookie QB and no first round pick while being this terrible is just sad.
Wow, two pretty huge upsets tonight to cap what was already an upset-heavy week.
In less than 36 hours we've gone from Bills being on the cusp of irrelevance to maybe still having a shot at the division. The chances of Bills-Dolphins Week 18 being a division title game are certainly back on the rise.
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
Moreso commissioner Goodell wanted 18 games and the players didn't, so 17 was the compromise.
Quote from: webny99 on December 11, 2023, 06:17:59 PM
I guess this isn't surprising, but 31 teams in the NFL are either in position for a top-10 draft pick or have at least a 15% chance to make the playoffs. The Panthers, of course, are the exception. You probably have to go back to the 0-16 Browns to find a team that was as lost as this Panthers team, and the fact that they have a rookie QB and no first round pick while being this terrible is just sad.
Well, Bears fans are rooting for every one of the Panthers' opponents. :nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on December 12, 2023, 12:04:36 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 11, 2023, 06:17:59 PM
I guess this isn't surprising, but 31 teams in the NFL are either in position for a top-10 draft pick or have at least a 15% chance to make the playoffs. The Panthers, of course, are the exception. You probably have to go back to the 0-16 Browns to find a team that was as lost as this Panthers team, and the fact that they have a rookie QB and no first round pick while being this terrible is just sad.
Well, Bears fans are rooting for every one of the Panthers' opponents. :nod:
Mike
On a related note, how bizarre is it as a Bears fan to have the #1 pick close to being locked up while simultaneously having a slim chance at sneaking in to the playoffs?
I'm sure Ryan Poles had no way of knowing the Panthers would be this bad when he traded the #1 pick to them this year, but....wow, what a fleece it's turned out to be. And I'd love to see him trade down again should the Panthers maintain their 2-game margin against Arizona & New England (thanks for the massive assist there all within the past week, Pittsburgh!) :biggrin:
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 01:16:16 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
We're on our third year of having 17 games. It's adding up.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 01:54:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 01:16:16 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
We're on our third year of having 17 games. It's adding up.
I don't understand this argument. Due to the playoffs, there's always been teams playing 17, 18, 19, or even 20 games a season. Did the teams that repeatedly went to the playoffs in the 16 game era have more injuries in future seasons? I certainly don't recall that being the case, or even being mentioned as a factor. It sure didn't hinder the Patriots' success, and they were playing 2-3 extra games per season for almost two decades.
Quote from: webny99 on December 12, 2023, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 01:54:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 01:16:16 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
We're on our third year of having 17 games. It's adding up.
I don't understand this argument. Due to the playoffs, there's always been teams playing 17, 18, 19, or even 20 games a season. Did the teams that repeatedly went to the playoffs in the 16 game era have more injuries in future seasons? I certainly don't recall that being the case, or even being mentioned as a factor. It sure didn't hinder the Patriots' success, and they were playing 2-3 extra games per season for almost two decades.
I wonder if a second bye week would help.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 13, 2023, 07:07:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 12, 2023, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 01:54:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 01:16:16 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
We're on our third year of having 17 games. It's adding up.
I don't understand this argument. Due to the playoffs, there's always been teams playing 17, 18, 19, or even 20 games a season. Did the teams that repeatedly went to the playoffs in the 16 game era have more injuries in future seasons? I certainly don't recall that being the case, or even being mentioned as a factor. It sure didn't hinder the Patriots' success, and they were playing 2-3 extra games per season for almost two decades.
I wonder if a second bye week would help.
That was tried in 1993. Was deemed to dilute the number of games played per week too much. There are now more teams and the extra week so the dilution wouldn't be as much.
Some say the NFL season doesn't start until Thanksgiving, but I say it doesn't start until the Saturday tripleheader!
There's a LOT to be decided the next few weeks with 13 playoff spots unclinched and 20+ teams still very relevant in the playoff picture.
Easton Stick vs. Aidan O'Connell tonight LOL
Quote from: Big John on December 13, 2023, 07:27:25 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 13, 2023, 07:07:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 12, 2023, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 01:54:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 01:16:16 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 12, 2023, 07:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 12, 2023, 06:46:13 AM
This season gas been marred by injuries, especially to quarterbacks:
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/12/11/23997145/quarterback-injuries-justin-herbert-trevor-lawrence-joe-burrow
Everybody wanted that 17th regular season game, well those hits add up.
But we're only thru Week 14. Those injuries would've occurred in a 16 gane season as well.
We're on our third year of having 17 games. It's adding up.
I don't understand this argument. Due to the playoffs, there's always been teams playing 17, 18, 19, or even 20 games a season. Did the teams that repeatedly went to the playoffs in the 16 game era have more injuries in future seasons? I certainly don't recall that being the case, or even being mentioned as a factor. It sure didn't hinder the Patriots' success, and they were playing 2-3 extra games per season for almost two decades.
I wonder if a second bye week would help.
That was tried in 1993. Was deemed to dilute the number of games played per week too much. There are now more teams and the extra week so the dilution wouldn't be as much.
There were a lot less teams back in 1993, the Jaguars, Panthers, Titans, Ravens, and Texans never existed. I was never even interested in the NFL back then because I never had a team to cheer for until the Texans began in 2002.
If a time traveler told them before week 1, fans of New York teams would have been horrified to find out which of their players won the AFC/NFC Offensive Player of the Week awards in week 14.
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2023, 05:52:24 PM
If a time traveler told them before week 1, fans of New York teams would have been horrified to find out which of their players won the AFC/NFC Offensive Player of the Week awards in week 14.
Has anyone from the Bills earned the AFC award yet this season?
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on December 14, 2023, 08:35:38 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2023, 05:52:24 PM
If a time traveler told them before week 1, fans of New York teams would have been horrified to find out which of their players won the AFC/NFC Offensive Player of the Week awards in week 14.
Has anyone from the Bills earned the AFC award yet this season?
Mike
Bernard defense week 3, Allen offense week 4
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/awards/players-of-the-week.htm
Quote from: mgk920 on December 14, 2023, 08:35:38 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2023, 05:52:24 PM
If a time traveler told them before week 1, fans of New York teams would have been horrified to find out which of their players won the AFC/NFC Offensive Player of the Week awards in week 14.
Has anyone from the Bills earned the AFC award yet this season?
The only
real NY team, though I don't think
thespfc was including the Bills with that comment. :)
But in many ways, the Bills couldn't be more far removed from the city of NY despite being the only team to play their home games in the state of NY: As aptly point out by Rockland County native Dan Hanzus of Around the NFL last week when McDermott's past comments about 9/11 resurfaced, those comments would undoubtedly be a fireable offense for a coach of the Jets or Giants. Not so in Buffalo, 400 miles away from the events of that fateful day in our nation's history. And I don't mean that as commentary on McDermott's comments themselves, just thought it was an interesting and very valid point.
Quote from: mgk920 on December 14, 2023, 08:35:38 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 14, 2023, 05:52:24 PM
If a time traveler told them before week 1, fans of New York teams would have been horrified to find out which of their players won the AFC/NFC Offensive Player of the Week awards in week 14.
Has anyone from the Bills earned the AFC award yet this season?
Mike
☝️🤓
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 14, 2023, 10:57:04 PM
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
Is it the Power Glove?
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 14, 2023, 10:57:04 PM
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
I just checked the score and thought Google was bugging.
The Raiders lost 3 TO 0 last week. This is the worst game any NFL team has played in a very long time. In the case of 70-20, at least the Dolphins have an elite offense and the Broncos were breaking in a new coaching staff.
Also, the thick irony of Easton Stick gloating about his success at FCS North Dakota State, only to get blasted like an FCS team playing Alabama in his first NFL start.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 14, 2023, 10:57:04 PM
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
The Raiders have set a franchise record for points scored in a single game just four days after being shut out by the Minnesota Vikings. They're up to 63 points, with the last 7 coming on one of the coolest pick-sixes you'll ever see.
And the Chargers have set a franchise record for points allowed with almost a whole quarter still to go. The entire Chargers franchise is being exposed right now. I almost feel bad for Staley, it's just one awful superlative after another with this team.
The Chargers are the third team in NFL history to allow 60+ points to a team that got shut out the week before, joining the . . . Oorang Indians and Cincinnati Reds, of course.
I'm going to fork the Chargers now that they have 9 losses.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 14, 2023, 10:57:04 PM
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
Coach and GM just fired.
Quote from: Big John on December 15, 2023, 12:16:06 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 14, 2023, 10:57:04 PM
The Chargers head coach is going to get fired after this game against the Raiders... it's SOOOOOOOO bad! :pan:
Coach and GM just fired.
https://sports.yahoo.com/chargers-fire-head-coach-brandon-staley-gm-tom-telesco-after-loss-to-raiders-170810563.html?guccounter=1
Some more irony: it was a week 15 Thursday night game in 2021 when Staley became perhaps the most polarizing coach in the league, with his 4th down decisions throughout the game against the Chiefs. As cliche as it is, that was the most Chargers game of all time - it should have worked, but it didn't, with a blown 4th-quarter lead to top it off.
You could also say that everything was pretty much downhill from that point forward. After starting 8-5 with a loaded roster and an elite offense in the wide open AFC, they had a chance to take full control of the division. Instead, they missed the playoffs in the most spectacular fashion, then had a mediocre season that wasn't even worse only because of an extremely weak schedule late in the year, blew a 27-point lead in their only playoff game of the Herbert/Staley "era", and finally crashed and burned this year.
Staley was a bad head coach, but he certainly left his mark on the game as the first HC to fully embrace analytics.
I know this will never happen, but I'd love to see the NFL ditch the Thursday games, except opening week and Thanksgiving. It's been a lot of really bad football. Add a second Monday night game in its place.
I'd like the Thursday Night Games to leave Amazon Prime and return to network TV. I liked it when Fox aired Thursday night games and I didn't need an Amazon Prime subscription to watch them.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2023, 05:06:44 PM
I'd like the Thursday Night Games to leave Amazon Prime and return to network TV. I liked it when Fox aired Thursday night games and I didn't need an Amazon Prime subscription to watch them.
All three current Sunday networks had a turn with the Thursday games and felt they weren't profitable (some of that was they had to split part of the package with NFL Network, which Amazon does not)
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 15, 2023, 01:51:43 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 27, 2023, 12:24:48 AM
No one does less with more than Brandon Staley.
Indeed.
Worth pointing out, their roster was also very overrated. Herbert covered up for a lot of flaws. Clearly ownership thought so too since they also fired the GM. It takes a lot more than just bad coaching to lose by 42 points to a division rival coming off being shutout that already fired their HC this season.
Quote from: Hunty2022 on December 15, 2023, 09:00:05 AM
I'm going to fork the Chargers now that they have 9 losses.
With 9 losses, the Chargers are guaranteed a losing record. Among teams that are mathematically alive, they're by far the safest fork in the AFC and second only to the Cardinals in the entire NFL.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 15, 2023, 04:54:23 PMI know this will never happen, but I'd love to see the NFL ditch the Thursday games, except opening week and Thanksgiving. It's been a lot of really bad football. Add a second Monday night game in its place.
The NFL initially did TNF because of the advertising dollars attached to Thursday night programming such as advertising for that weekends film openings. And, because Amazon paid $11 billion dollars for 11 seasons of Thursday Night Football, that means each game costs $67 million. Since the regular season runs from September until January, that covers a peak shopping season. Also, by NFL rules, games have to be broadcast OTA in the primary markets for the teams playing that week if they are on either cable (MNF, NFL Network specials) or streamed. It's the NFL that sets the schedules, and they tend to reserve the marque games for SNF now.
And, yes, I believe that TNF should be done away with. The short week between Sunday and Thursday isn't good for the players. And, the NFL setting some non-competitive match ups doesn't help. It may be great if your team is blowing out your opponent, but in my opinion, a close matchup makes for a more enjoyable and memorable viewing experience.
Are the Colts a lock for the playoffs?
Quote from: epzik8 on December 16, 2023, 07:41:45 PM
Are the Colts a lock for the playoffs?
Too many AFC teams have a record close to the Colts so it still could run many ways.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 16, 2023, 07:41:45 PM
Are the Colts a lock for the playoffs?
No. It's week 15, but it still feels like it's too early to be speculating about the AFC playoffs because of how many teams are jumbled up between the 3 and 11 seeds.
Why is nobody talking about how Jake Browning has been a top 5 quarterback over the last 3 weeks? Everything about him screams Joe Burrow, though he doesn't have that level of raw talent. Instead it's all Tommy DeVito, who isn't playing nearly as well as Browning, but admittedly has a much more intruiging story surrounding him with his mafia agent.
Browning probably isn't anything more than a "Linsanity run", as it's dubbed nowadays, but it's fun to watch, and fun to fantasize about what the Bengals would do if they won it all . . .
Quote from: epzik8 on December 16, 2023, 07:41:45 PM
Are the Colts a lock for the playoffs?
See NFL Playoff Scenarios (https://markholtz.info/nflplayoffscenarios). IND cannot be knocked out of 1 seed contention this week. The scenarios were:
QuoteIND is knocked out of 1 seed contention with:
1) IND loss + BAL win/tie
OR 2) IND loss + MIA win/tie
OR 3) IND tie + BAL win
OR 4) IND tie + BAL tie + MIA win
Remember, going into this weekend, AFC seeds six through eleven all have a 7-6 record, resulting in multiple tiebreakers into play.
Houston Texans @ Houston Oilers
I want to say Tennessee has done one of these throwbacks before, possibly against Houston as well, but dang that's kinda jarring to see and must be tough for older Houston fans to see.
Wonder how the Browns feel now about giving away Baker Mayfield for Deshaun Watson???
Quote from: Buck87 on December 17, 2023, 02:55:27 PM
Houston Texans @ Houston Oilers
I want to say Tennessee has done one of these throwbacks before, possibly against Houston as well, but dang that's kinda jarring to see and must be tough for older Houston fans to see.
Those uniforms are incredibly ugly, I don't understand why everyone likes them. Same can be said of Tampa's creamsicles.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 17, 2023, 04:00:18 PM
Wonder how the Browns feel now about giving away Baker Mayfield for Deshaun Watson???
Letting Baker go was not a bad decision; replacing him with Watson was.
The Browns are a charmed team this year apparently. Darnell Mooney had that ball in his stomach. But lucky or not, it's quite impressive to be 9-5 despite having to start four different QBs over the course of the season. Speaks to the strength of the rest of the roster and the coaching staff.
Dolphins next two games: DAL, @ BAL
Bills next two games: @ LAC, NE
Incredibly, those two teams will be playing for a division title in week 18.
This was a good week for my forks, just about everything went right. :clap:
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 15, 2023, 04:54:23 PM
I know this will never happen, but I'd love to see the NFL ditch the Thursday games, except opening week and Thanksgiving. It's been a lot of really bad football. Add a second Monday night game in its place.
I agree with no Thursday Night. Either replace it with a Tuesday Night game, or a double-header on Monday Night played consecutively and NOT concurrently.....one Eastern game 7 pm Eastern time and then one Western game 7 pm Pacific Time.
And talk about Rock-Paper-Scissor: Jets beat the Texans, Dolphins beat the Jets, Titans beat the Dolphins, and the Texans beat the Titans. Is there any detailed explanation for this other than the cliched "Any Given Sunday"?
And one more thing I don't understand: A receiver must make both feet contact the endzone in order for a TD to count as valid, but if a rusher extends only his arm over the line even with both feet not in the endzone, the TD also counts. So which is it? Don't both feet need to be in the endzone or not whether it's receiving or rushing?
Quote from: jgb191 on December 17, 2023, 08:06:01 PM
And one more thing I don't understand: A receiver must make both feet contact the endzone in order for a TD to count as valid, but if a rusher extends only his arm over the line even with both feet not in the endzone, the TD also counts. So which is it? Don't both feet need to be in the endzone or not whether it's receiving or rushing?
A receiver must have both feet in bounds to make any catch. He may catch the ball on the 1-yard line and stretch the ball over the goal line and it will count as a TD.
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2023, 06:47:36 PM
Dolphins next two games: DAL, @ BAL
Bills next two games: @ LAC, NE
Incredibly, those two teams will be playing for a division title in week 18.
So, Bills-Dolphins is not a quite a lock for the season finale yet because the Bills are still two games back. They must pick up at least one game to force a division title game. If the Dolphins beat both the Cowboys and Ravens, they will clinch the division. If they lose one or both and the Bills hold serve, Week 18 decides the AFC East.
But either way, Week 18 will be meaningful for both teams. If the Dolphins have clinched the division, they will be playing for the #1 seed. If the Bills are eliminated from division contention, they will likely still a need a win to lock up a playoff spot because they lose almost every tiebreaker.
Quite the stakes for the Dolphins the next 3 weeks:
- Beat Cowboys: Clinch Playoffs
- Beat Ravens: Clinch Division
- Beat Bills: Clinch #1 seed
Quote from: jgb191 on December 17, 2023, 08:06:01 PM
And one more thing I don't understand: A receiver must make both feet contact the endzone in order for a TD to count as valid, but if a rusher extends only his arm over the line even with both feet not in the endzone, the TD also counts. So which is it? Don't both feet need to be in the endzone or not whether it's receiving or rushing?
Both feet must be inbounds to make a catch anywhere on the playing field. If this occurs in the end zone, then it's a TD. If the catch is made prior to the endzone, then the receiver can advance the ball until a knee or other body part hits the ground, or he runs out of bounds, at which point the ball is spotted where the ball was located when the play ends. If the ball is over the plane of the goal line, regardless if the player is being tackled or runs it in, then it's a TD.
It should also be noted that the goal line extends "around the world". If a receiver or rusher holds the ball over the sideline but enters the endzone inbounds, it's a TD.
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2023, 11:34:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2023, 06:47:36 PM
Dolphins next two games: DAL, @ BAL
Bills next two games: @ LAC, NE
Incredibly, those two teams will be playing for a division title in week 18.
So, Bills-Dolphins is not a quite a lock for the season finale yet because the Bills are still two games back. They must pick up at least one game to force a division title game. If the Dolphins beat both the Cowboys and Ravens, they will clinch the division. If they lose one or both and the Bills hold serve, Week 18 decides the AFC East.
But either way, Week 18 will be meaningful for both teams. If the Dolphins have clinched the division, they will be playing for the #1 seed. If the Bills are eliminated from division contention, they will likely still a need a win to lock up a playoff spot because they lose almost every tiebreaker.
Quite the stakes for the Dolphins the next 3 weeks:
- Beat Cowboys: Clinch Playoffs
- Beat Ravens: Clinch Division
- Beat Bills: Clinch #1 seed
I know it's not guaranteed, I was just making a bold prediction. It's really not that bold though, as the Bills will be overwhelming favorites in their next two while the Dolphins might be underdogs in both.
With two 8-6 teams out of playoff position in the AFC, this might be the first time a 10-win team misses the playoffs in the 17-game era.
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2023, 09:53:27 AM
With two 8-6 teams out of playoff position in the AFC, this might be the first time a 10-win team misses the playoffs in the 17-game era.
It could absolutely happen. However, a lot of these teams don't feel primed for a playoff run even if they win 10 games, and most of them are starting backup QB's. For that reason, the Bills feel a bit like that clown in the army meme, with their record being what makes them the clown. They should not be sweating it out with the Colts, Texans, and Bengals for a playoff spot, but that's the result of six one score losses including three epic chokes. Which is to say... a 10 (or 11!) win team missing the playoffs would be disappointing, but aside from the Bills, it would likely be a "happy to be here" team anyways and not one with real Super Bowl aspirations.
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2023, 09:53:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2023, 11:34:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2023, 06:47:36 PM
Dolphins next two games: DAL, @ BAL
Bills next two games: @ LAC, NE
Incredibly, those two teams will be playing for a division title in week 18.
So, Bills-Dolphins is not a quite a lock for the season finale yet because the Bills are still two games back. They must pick up at least one game to force a division title game. If the Dolphins beat both the Cowboys and Ravens, they will clinch the division. If they lose one or both and the Bills hold serve, Week 18 decides the AFC East.
But either way, Week 18 will be meaningful for both teams. If the Dolphins have clinched the division, they will be playing for the #1 seed. If the Bills are eliminated from division contention, they will likely still a need a win to lock up a playoff spot because they lose almost every tiebreaker.
Quite the stakes for the Dolphins the next 3 weeks:
- Beat Cowboys: Clinch Playoffs
- Beat Ravens: Clinch Division
- Beat Bills: Clinch #1 seed
I know it's not guaranteed, I was just making a bold prediction. It's really not that bold though, as the Bills will be overwhelming favorites in their next two while the Dolphins might be underdogs in both.
With two 8-6 teams out of playoff position in the AFC, this might be the first time a 10-win team misses the playoffs in the 17-game era.
I'm a Jets fan. 10-6 is a better record than 10-7 and we missed the playoffs with Fitzmagic.
Quote from: Alps on December 18, 2023, 07:16:58 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2023, 09:53:27 AM
...
With two 8-6 teams out of playoff position in the AFC, this might be the first time a 10-win team misses the playoffs in the 17-game era.
I'm a Jets fan. 10-6 is a better record than 10-7 and we missed the playoffs with Fitzmagic.
It makes more sense to look at it since the expansion to 14 playoff teams, but in 2020 (the lone season with 16 games and 14 playoff teams), the 10-6 Dolphins missed out. When the 17th game was added in 2021, it actually became
more likely that a 10-win team would miss out, it just hasn't happened yet.
Quote from: thspfc on December 18, 2023, 09:53:27 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 17, 2023, 11:34:22 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 17, 2023, 06:47:36 PM
Dolphins next two games: DAL, @ BAL
Bills next two games: @ LAC, NE
Incredibly, those two teams will be playing for a division title in week 18.
So, Bills-Dolphins is not a quite a lock for the season finale yet
...
I know it's not guaranteed, I was just making a bold prediction. It's really not that bold though, as the Bills will be overwhelming favorites in their next two while the Dolphins might be underdogs in both.
...
I would give Bills-Dolphins a ~50% chance of being the regular season finale (and a nearly 100% chance if it is a division title game), but here are some other potential options. As of right now, Jets-Patriots is the only Week 18 matchup with no playoff or seeding implications.
- Browns-Bengals, could be a win and in for both teams
- Colts-Texans, could be a win and in for both teams
- Rams-49ers, could be a win and in for the Rams + win to clinch #1 seed for the 49ers
Saw this and it was simply too insane not to share. Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I wasn't high on the Chargers either, but I didn't expect them to crash this hard. The Bills just about avoided what would have been yet another Bills classic tonight.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 12:36:27 AM
Atlanta ranked bottom 10 in the league in passing offense, rushing defense, and passing defense. They ranked 3rd in rushing offense. And they drafted a running back with the 8th overall pick. I know Bijan should be good, but with a projected first round QB in Levis, four strong WRs, and plenty of defensive options, they went running back? While their list of weaknesses comprises basically everything except for rushing offense? Boggles the mind.
Bijan has had a solid year but unless he turns out to be at least a perennial pro bowler, that pick will have been pretty much lit on fire.
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
But I'm much more down on the Falcons than I was before the season. Arthur Smith coached this team
up to 7 wins the last two years, but this year, despite a much improved roster, coaching hasn't provided them any advantage in close games. They also can't seem to do anything on offense, and opposing defenses have their running game figured out. I know they're struggling at QB too, but they still can't lose to 4 of the 6 worst teams in the league, barely beat a 5th, and be in 3rd place in the NFC South and be taken seriously. With a schedule that easy they would be an 11 or 12 win team if Arthur Smith is who we thought he was.
Quote
I wasn't high on the Chargers either, but I didn't expect them to crash this hard. The Bills just about avoided what would have been yet another Bills classic tonight.
Excuse me while I put my heart back in my ribcage... Anyone expecting the Bills with their season on the line to blow out the floating Easton Stick led Chargers is definitely not familiar with either team! :paranoid:
But that ugly win coupled with a Bengals loss means the Bills will clinch a playoff berth if they win their last two games. They were the #9 seed but have now jumped the Bengals, and will jump the loser of Colts-Texans to get to at least #7 as long as they take care of their own business. It was a weird to suddenly be rooting for a Steelers win, but their three week implosion more or less removed them from the picture already so the Bengals losing was a bigger help to the rest of the playoff field.
Jaxon Smith-Njigba...ouch.
The Browns have been looking utterly indestructible....even their reserve units could win the Super Bowl, in fact Flacco has one! All those injuries to the starters isn't slowing them down one bit, in fact it's looking more like injuries is making them even better. I would not bet against them in the playoffs no matter who they face against.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 24, 2023, 06:25:46 PM
The Browns have been looking utterly indestructible....even their reserve units could win the Super Bowl, in fact Flacco has one! All those injuries to the starters isn't slowing them down one bit, in fact it's looking more like injuries is making them even better. I would not bet against them in the playoffs no matter who they face against.
Their QB situation has arguably improved. Picking up Deshaun Watson is looking like it will ultimately be a dud.
In the other conference the Lions finally got a division title for the first time since 1993. Suffice to say the outlook back then was way more optimistic than things ended up ultimately turned out during the Barry Sanders years.
Quote from: jgb191 on December 24, 2023, 06:25:46 PM
The Browns have been looking utterly indestructible....even their reserve units could win the Super Bowl, in fact Flacco has one! All those injuries to the starters isn't slowing them down one bit, in fact it's looking more like injuries is making them even better. I would not bet against them in the playoffs no matter who they face against.
38-year old Flacco throwing for almost 400 yards in one game (never mind that it was against Davis Mills) is not something I had on my NFL bingo card for this year at all.
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Quote from: Alps on December 24, 2023, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Poor wording on my part, I meant the defense is
currently good and they just need a QB, but also true that the O-line needs help.
Wow, that's twice now this season that the Patriots basically ended their opponent's season while also angering their own fanbase.
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 11:30:58 PM
Wow, that's twice now this season that the Patriots basically ended their opponent's season while also angering their own fanbase.
Bears fans appreciating being one step closer to the #1 pick via Carolina.
I'm not surprised at the relatively muted local response to the Pats win - happy for any semblance of competent play after many losses while being slightly miffed at the diminishing likelihood for a top draft pick with each win. For all of BB's flaws this season, tanking is not in his DNA, nor is it in most football players DNA.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 25, 2023, 10:50:07 AM
I'm not surprised at the relatively muted local response to the Pats win - happy for any semblance of competent play after many losses while being slightly miffed at the diminishing likelihood for a top draft pick with each win. For all of BB's flaws this season, tanking is not in his DNA, nor is it in most football players DNA.
Players don't tank. They have to put food on the table, every game is an audition for next season even if the team is way out of playoff contention.
Tanking is always orchestrated by upper management constructing a terrible roster. Neither Belichick nor Kraft had that in mind. In the case of the Patriots, they're just bad. Nobody in that organization wants to lose, even if it means a marginally better draft pick.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 25, 2023, 09:35:29 AM
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 11:30:58 PM
Wow, that's twice now this season that the Patriots basically ended their opponent's season while also angering their own fanbase.
Bears fans appreciating being one step closer to the #1 pick via Carolina.
Bowing to the north, I see! :nod:
Mike
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 24, 2023, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Poor wording on my part, I meant the defense is currently good and they just need a QB, but also true that the O-line needs help.
the O-line is the reason young QBs keep failing in the system. they just keep getting knocked around.
Quote from: Alps on December 25, 2023, 12:39:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 24, 2023, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Poor wording on my part, I meant the defense is currently good and they just need a QB, but also true that the O-line needs help.
the O-line is the reason young QBs keep failing in the system. they just keep getting knocked around.
Both can be true . . . their o-lines have been terrible, and they also haven't drafted good quarterbacks.
The Chiefs are eliminated from #1 seed contention before the Cleveland Browns who are on their 4th QB. Who had that on their 2023 bingo card?
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2023, 01:25:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 25, 2023, 12:39:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 24, 2023, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Poor wording on my part, I meant the defense is currently good and they just need a QB, but also true that the O-line needs help.
the O-line is the reason young QBs keep failing in the system. they just keep getting knocked around.
Both can be true . . . their o-lines have been terrible, and they also haven't drafted good quarterbacks.
No they've drafted QBs who should be good, but ruined them. These guys might've found success with a different team as mentor.
Quote from: Alps on December 26, 2023, 12:44:46 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 25, 2023, 01:25:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 25, 2023, 12:39:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 24, 2023, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 24, 2023, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
To me the Jets have been the biggest letdown. Even considering Rodgers' injury, they shouldn't be even worse than they were last year.
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
I don't know, my feelings on the Jets haven't changed much this season. They're still a good defense and a QB away from being competitive.
No, they're a good Offensive Line and a QB away.
Poor wording on my part, I meant the defense is currently good and they just need a QB, but also true that the O-line needs help.
the O-line is the reason young QBs keep failing in the system. they just keep getting knocked around.
Both can be true . . . their o-lines have been terrible, and they also haven't drafted good quarterbacks.
No they've drafted QBs who should be good, but ruined them. These guys might've found success with a different team as mentor.
Darnold has been off the team for 3 years and still looks only marginally better, if not the exact same, as when he was a Jet.
Wilson constantly missing receivers by several feet in every direction is not because of the Jets. As bad as their offensive staff may be, I think NFL coaches know how to teach a QB to throw a pass to a wide open receiver. He can't even do that consistently. I don't know how you watch that guy and say "he would be good somewhere else". He had a big year in college against inferior competition. Like countless other Group-of-5 and FCS QBs, he couldn't make the transition to the league, where everyone's faster, his o-line doesn't hold up every play, and his receivers aren't always wide open.
Would he be better somewhere else? Barely, but he wouldn't be going into next year with a starting job. He's not good.
Quote from: thspfc on December 11, 2023, 12:47:58 AM
One final note on the week: Brock Purdy should not be anywhere near the MVP discussion. This is not just me being salty. We have no concrete reason to believe Purdy is anything more than slightly better than peak Jimmy Garoppolo. A QB proven to be the epitome of mediocre having only slightly less success in the same offense, when that offense wasn't even as talented as it is now, should tell anyone that Purdy is not the most valuable player in the league. A franchise QB? Absolutely. But if you took Hurts off the Eagles, Lamar off the Ravens, Dak off the Cowboys, or Tua off the Dolphins, those teams would suffer far more than the Niners would in the absence of Purdy. (And that's not even mentioning Mahomes and Allen, who prop up their entire offenses on a weekly basis but don't have enough W's or raw stats to be in contention.)
Well it looks like that's settled. My point was not that Purdy wasn't playing well, but if anyone still had questions as to whether Lamar or Purdy is more valuable to their team, they got their answer last night.
As far as I'm concerned...
- Dallas Cowboys, if they win one more game, have a lock on the 5 seed in the NFC. I don't see them taking the division seed from Philadelphia, thus they will be visiting and beating the NFC South team. While they might be able to make it to the NFC championship, I don't see them winning it.
- I give the Detroit Lions better chances than the Cowboys in making it to the NFC championship, and maybe a dark horse making the Super Bowl.
- I give the Baltimore-San Francisco rematch a strong possibility for the Super Bowl.
So does a quarterback's total pass yardage in an individual game include the yardage of any interceptions he throws?
Quote from: epzik8 on December 26, 2023, 01:02:36 PM
So does a quarterback's total pass yardage in an individual game include the yardage of any interceptions he throws?
no
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
Benching him sounds Dangerwich.
So much for 5%
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
Yeah, it's been a disaster. A month ago things were actually looking up. Certainly not anymore.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I wouldn't go that far. Wilson has been "OK" this season - not Seattle good, certainly not good enough to justify the massive trade, but not terrible either.
But more importantly, this is not a performance-related benching; it's being done strictly for financial reasons. There's 0% chance it happens if they don't gag against the Patriots, because they'd have a real shot at the playoffs. Instead, season over.
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I wouldn't go that far. Wilson has been "OK" this season - not Seattle good, certainly not good enough to justify the massive trade, but not terrible either.
But more importantly, this is not a performance-related benching; it's being done strictly for financial reasons. There's 0% chance it happens if they don't gag against the Patriots, because they'd have a real shot at the playoffs. Instead, season over.
It's at least partially performance-related, because if he was playing well, they wouldn't be letting him go, and therefore he wouldn't be getting benched.
He's been pretty much average this year, and there are many worse QBs that are still starting. But the Broncos needed a lot more than average from all the money, draft capital, and players they gave up. The trade was undeniably a flop for the Broncos - though, astonishingly, it's only the 3rd worst trade of the last 3 offseasons.
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I wouldn't go that far. Wilson has been "OK" this season - not Seattle good, certainly not good enough to justify the massive trade, but not terrible either.
But more importantly, this is not a performance-related benching; it's being done strictly for financial reasons. There's 0% chance it happens if they don't gag against the Patriots, because they'd have a real shot at the playoffs. Instead, season over.
I'm not patting myself on the back too much, since I've had plenty of misses too. But when the Broncos signed him, so many people around the country (and on this website) thought for sure he would make them a playoff team and a possible Super Bowl candidate. I said he would be a net negative, and I still maintain he has been. He's a guy with a "holier than thou" public persona that isn't that same person in the locker room and he lost his deep ball about 4 years ago. If you can't throw for yardage with DK Metcalf and Lockett, you're not going to be successful doing it with anyone. And, add the fact that none of his former teammates seem all that fond of him, I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
Oh, quit while you're ahead. :-D
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2023, 04:10:04 PM
The trade was undeniably a flop for the Broncos - though, astonishingly, it's only the 3rd worst trade of the last 3 offseasons.
IMO both the Lance and Watson trades were worse. The 49ers got
nothing from Lance. 3 first round picks, just vanished for literally nothing. Just imagine how good that team could be if they'd kept those picks and hit on them. Sure, you can say that they needed a new QB at that time, but the same applies to the Broncos so that's a non-argument.
As for Watson, the jury is partially still out, but through two seasons they've gotten pretty close to nothing. And now a basically retired Joe Flacco, who hasn't been any good since 2016, is flourishing after being picked up off his couch. Watson's contract is also bigger than Wilson's.
The Texans playoff requirements this season is simple: Win and they're in!
They hold the cards and control the playoff picture the way things stand entering this weekend.
A. Win both of the final regular season games, or....
B. Just win Week 18 and hope the Raiders win this weekend.
The Texans also have a chance at winning the division with
A. Win both games plus a Jaguars loss, or
B. Win on Week 18 plus both Jaguars losses in their two remaining games.
If the Texans lose out, then no chance for the Division title, and practically improbable odds for even a wild card seed (will need a lot of help from other teams). Of the teams that haven't been eliminated yet, only the Browns will hold the tiebreaker edge.
If both the Texans and Colts win this weekend, then this could set up a win-or-go home matchup on Week 18 at Indianapolis where the winner is in and season ends for the loser.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 04:59:14 PM
I'm not patting myself on the back too much, since I've had plenty of misses too. But when the Broncos signed him, so many people around the country (and on this website) thought for sure he would make them a playoff team and a possible Super Bowl candidate. I said he would be a net negative, and I still maintain he has been. He's a guy with a "holier than thou" public persona that isn't that same person in the locker room and he lost his deep ball about 4 years ago. If you can't throw for yardage with DK Metcalf and Lockett, you're not going to be successful doing it with anyone. And, add the fact that none of his former teammates seem all that fond of him, I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
I don't disagree that the trade was a terrible one, and this certainly puts a bow on it. My point is just that his specific performance against the Patriots wasn't the reason for the benching, considering Payton's timeout usage and the defense are what cost them the game, and if they won the game, there's no consideration of benching Russ.
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2023, 04:10:04 PM
It's at least partially performance-related, because if he was playing well, they wouldn't be letting him go, and therefore he wouldn't be getting benched.
Sure, if he played better over the course of the season, they'd probably have more wins, and their season might not have hinged on beating the floating Patriots. But much like the Bills firing of Ken Dorsey after the 12 men on the field penalty, I still think that one Patriots completion which Russ had nothing to do with ultimately caused the benching. If that doesn't happen and they beat the Pats in OT (probable), he's starting Week 17.
Quote from: thspfc on December 27, 2023, 06:14:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
Oh, quit while you're ahead. :-D
You attributed this quote to me, but I must point out it was from Jayhawkco. :D
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 04:59:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I wouldn't go that far. Wilson has been "OK" this season - not Seattle good, certainly not good enough to justify the massive trade, but not terrible either.
But more importantly, this is not a performance-related benching; it's being done strictly for financial reasons. There's 0% chance it happens if they don't gag against the Patriots, because they'd have a real shot at the playoffs. Instead, season over.
I'm not patting myself on the back too much, since I've had plenty of misses too. But when the Broncos signed him, so many people around the country (and on this website) thought for sure he would make them a playoff team and a possible Super Bowl candidate. I said he would be a net negative, and I still maintain he has been. He's a guy with a "holier than thou" public persona that isn't that same person in the locker room and he lost his deep ball about 4 years ago. If you can't throw for yardage with DK Metcalf and Lockett, you're not going to be successful doing it with anyone. And, add the fact that none of his former teammates seem all that fond of him, I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
The Cleveland Browns would like a word re Deshaun Watson...
Quote from: DenverBrian on December 28, 2023, 12:04:04 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 04:59:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 27, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
I wouldn't go that far. Wilson has been "OK" this season - not Seattle good, certainly not good enough to justify the massive trade, but not terrible either.
But more importantly, this is not a performance-related benching; it's being done strictly for financial reasons. There's 0% chance it happens if they don't gag against the Patriots, because they'd have a real shot at the playoffs. Instead, season over.
I'm not patting myself on the back too much, since I've had plenty of misses too. But when the Broncos signed him, so many people around the country (and on this website) thought for sure he would make them a playoff team and a possible Super Bowl candidate. I said he would be a net negative, and I still maintain he has been. He's a guy with a "holier than thou" public persona that isn't that same person in the locker room and he lost his deep ball about 4 years ago. If you can't throw for yardage with DK Metcalf and Lockett, you're not going to be successful doing it with anyone. And, add the fact that none of his former teammates seem all that fond of him, I think this is arguably the worst trade/extension in NFL history.
The Cleveland Browns would like a word re Deshaun Watson...
I'd argue he's played better than Wilson, when he's been healthy. Not by a ton, but slightly better.
Reminder that today is the last day to fork teams. Everyone count up and make sure you have 18.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 7 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
This has been such an unpredictable season that it's going to take some luck to win, unlike last year when it was clearly all skill.
Pretty likely to be wrong on at least one of Colts/Bucs if not both.
Gonna take the Broncos and Bengals for my last AFC teams and the Falcons and Vikings for my last NFC teams.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 27, 2023, 12:21:30 PM
Russell Wilson getting benched. I have never had a more correct sports take.
This gives those of us in DC another reason to be glad Dan Snyder is no longer the owner here. Imagine what sort of crazy trade package he might have put together to try to land Wilson.
BTW, assuming Jacoby Brissett in fact starts as scheduled this weekend, check out the following graphic a local reporter posted to Twitter. It contains one minor error in that Josh Johnson was the starter after Mark Sanchez, not before. The "Haskins era," such it was, doesn't seem all that long ago, yet look at how many quarterbacks they've had since then.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GCXdAXYXgAADvTS?format=png&name=medium)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 28, 2023, 09:50:19 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 7 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
This has been such an unpredictable season that it's going to take some luck to win, unlike last year when it was clearly all skill.
Pretty likely to be wrong on at least one of Colts/Bucs if not both.
Gonna take the Broncos and Bengals for my last AFC teams and the Falcons and Vikings for my last NFC teams.
If my count is correct, that puts you at 19 teams. (You already had the Broncos, way back in September.) So you can have two of those other three. :-D
jayhawkco and
Hunty2022 both have one left to use if I count correctly.
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 10:59:23 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 28, 2023, 09:50:19 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 7 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
This has been such an unpredictable season that it's going to take some luck to win, unlike last year when it was clearly all skill.
Pretty likely to be wrong on at least one of Colts/Bucs if not both.
Gonna take the Broncos and Bengals for my last AFC teams and the Falcons and Vikings for my last NFC teams.
If my count is correct, that puts you at 19 teams. (You already had the Broncos, way back in September.) So you can have two of those other three. :-D
jayhawkco and Hunty2022 both have one left to use if I count correctly.
I'm having the worst time trying to keep these straight.
Before today, I had:
NFC - Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals, Bears, Panthers, Giants, Rams
AFC - Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Broncos, Titans, Jets
So, I will take the Vikings for my last NFC team and the Bengals and Steelers for my last AFC teams. I think I have 9 from each conference now.
Green = eliminated, or extremely unlikely to make it
Black = out for now, but has a plausible path
Orange = in for now, but not clinched
Red = clinched
jlamCardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Texans (25)
Raiders (25)
Panthers (25)
Bears (25)
Packers (25)
Broncos (20)
Jets (20)
Patriots (20)
Giants (20)
Vikings (15)
Rams (15)
Steelers (15)
Commanders (15)
Titans (10)
Bengals (10)
Total: 360Out: 10
Clinched: 0
webny99Rams (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Titans (25)
Texans (25)
Bucs (25)
Panthers (25)
Bears (20)
Raiders (20)
Steelers (20)
Patriots (20)
Giants (20)
Packers (15)
Bills (10)
Jets (10)
Commanders (10)
Bengals (10)
Falcons (10)
Total: 340Out: 9
Clinched: 0
thspfcTexans (25)
Colts (25)
Raiders (25)
Commanders (25)
Bears (25)
Falcons (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Cardinals (25)
Giants (25)
Patriots (25)
Steelers (25)
Broncos (20)
Panthers (20)
Jets (20)
Vikings (20)
Packers (15)
Titans (15)
Chargers (10)
Total: 395Out: 11
Clinched: 0
HenryBears (25)
Broncos (25)
Browns (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Commanders (25)
Cowboys (25)
Falcons (25)
Jets (25)
Panthers (25)
Patriots (25)
Raiders (25)
Rams (25)
Ravens (25)
Texans (25)
Total: (400 - 25 - 25 - 30 - 30) = 290Out: 8
Clinched: 2
NWI_Irish96Patriots (25)
Colts (25)
Texans (25)
Raiders (25)
Commanders (25)
Packers (25)
Bucs (25)
Cardinals (25)
Bears (20)
Broncos (20)
Panthers (20)
Giants (20)
Titans (10)
Jets (10)
Rams (10)
Chargers (10)
Bengals (5)
Vikings (5)
Total: 330Out: 11
Clinched: 0
jayhawkcoCardinals (25)
Packers (25)
Panthers (25)
Buccaneers (25)
Texans (25)
Browns (25)
Broncos (25)
Colts (25)
Raiders (25)
Patriots (25)
Jets (20)
Giants (20)
Bears (20)
Vikings (20)
Bengals (20)
Steelers (20)
Commanders (15)
Total: 365Out: 9
Clinched: 0
Hunty2022Bears (25)
Bucs (25)
Cardinals (25)
Colts (25)
Packers (25)
Texans (25)
Broncos (20)
Jets (20)
Panthers (15)
Giants (15)
Patriots (10)
Rams (10)
Titans (10)
Bills (10)
Bengals (10)
Commanders (10)
Chargers (5)
Total: 285Out: 10
Clinched: 0
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 28, 2023, 11:40:32 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 10:59:23 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 28, 2023, 09:50:19 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 7 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
This has been such an unpredictable season that it's going to take some luck to win, unlike last year when it was clearly all skill.
Pretty likely to be wrong on at least one of Colts/Bucs if not both.
Gonna take the Broncos and Bengals for my last AFC teams and the Falcons and Vikings for my last NFC teams.
If my count is correct, that puts you at 19 teams. (You already had the Broncos, way back in September.) So you can have two of those other three. :-D
jayhawkco and Hunty2022 both have one left to use if I count correctly.
I'm having the worst time trying to keep these straight.
Before today, I had:
NFC - Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals, Bears, Panthers, Giants, Rams
AFC - Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Broncos, Titans, Jets
So, I will take the Vikings for my last NFC team and the Bengals and Steelers for my last AFC teams. I think I have 9 from each conference now.
You also have the Chargers in the AFC:
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 28, 2023, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
So I'm currently at 7 AFC teams and 8 NFC teams. Going to give the Saints/Falcons a couple more weeks before I make my last call in the NFC. Safe to add the Chargers in the AFC. Will hold off on my last one, though I'm leaning Bengals.
So my updated list:
AFC: Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts
NFC: Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers
Prior to today, you had the . . .
Patriots, Jets, Titans, Chargers, Raiders, Texans, Colts, Broncos (8)
Panthers, Cardinals, Commanders, Bears, Giants, Bucs, Packers,
Rams (8)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 13, 2023, 01:15:24 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 02, 2023, 08:51:57 PM
Forks: Patriots, Colts, Texans, Raiders, Commanders, Packers, Bucs, Cardinals
Add Bears, Broncos, Panthers, Giants
Add Titans, Jets, Giants, Rams
For now I'm giving you the Vikings and Bengals to get to 18, unless you'd rather have the Steelers.
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 12:40:11 PM
For now I'm giving you the Vikings and Bengals to get to 18, unless you'd rather have the Steelers.
Bengals.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 28, 2023, 12:49:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 12:40:11 PM
For now I'm giving you the Vikings and Bengals to get to 18, unless you'd rather have the Steelers.
Bengals.
Sounds good.
I wanted to calculate everyone's chances of winning as of right now, but with the chaos of the standings, it seems like a lot more work than it's worth. In short, I believe these are the simplest scenarios for each of us to win:
thspfc wins if: the Rams make the playoffs, the Falcons do not, and at least one of the following five things happens: Bills make it, Bengals make it, Steelers miss, Vikings miss, Packers miss. According to NYT, there is a 58% chance of that happening (discounting the final leg, as it's essentially guaranteed.) That's not the only scenario in which I win, but it is the simplest.
jlam wins if: the Rams miss, the Bengals miss, the Browns make it, and the Falcons make it. Roughly 3%.
Irish wins if: the Rams miss, the Bengals miss, the Falcons make it, and the Steelers make it. 0.03%.
webny99 wins if: the Rams miss, the Bills miss, the Bengals miss, the Falcons miss, the Vikings make it, and the Broncos make it. That's an astonishing 0.04%.
jayhawkCO wins if: for starters, the Browns would have to miss. We'll cross that bridge when we (probably don't) get there.
Hunty2022 wins if: I'm not sure, it might be possible, but incredibly unlikely.
Obviously those percentages add up to nowhere close to 100. I think most of the remaining ~38% is my equity. My guess is I'm in the 90-95% range. Go Rams, and go whoever plays the Falcons.
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 01:37:16 PM
I wanted to calculate everyone's chances of winning as of right now, but with the chaos of the standings, it seems like a lot more work than it's worth. In short, I believe these are the simplest scenarios for each of us to win:
Thought I had the NFC nailed down but the Rams and Bucs may ultimately cost me. I should still have 7 of 9 as long as the Vikings
or Seahawks make it, or if the Saints somehow make it, I'll have a backup. But by the same token, at no point during the 10+ points period did it made sense to fork the Vikings, Seahawks, or Saints... so I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed.
Not forking the Chargers was easily my biggest whiff. A 2nd AFC South team will likely get in, but that was the chance I took by forking them all in the preseason. The Broncos getting in at 9-8 is my most likely path to getting 8 of 9 in the AFC, so it's looking like it will be 7 of 9, at least barring the Jags falling right out of the picture.
That should be at least 14 of 18 correct. Imperfect, but I'll take it.
Quote from: ZLoth on December 26, 2023, 10:50:21 AM
As far as I'm concerned...
- I give the Detroit Lions better chances than the Cowboys in making it to the NFC championship, and maybe a dark horse making the Super Bowl.
I used to give the apocalypse better odds than the Lions making the Super Bowl. If they somehow don't screw this up and make it, Giant Meteor 2024 anyone?
I've been long committed to making a very expensive purchase of two tickets if the Lions ever make the Super Bowl. My dad went into his grave wanting to see the Lions in the Super Bowl. I might as take the opportunity if it ever comes to fruition.
Quote from: thspfc on August 05, 2023, 11:40:55 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2023, 09:21:32 AM
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
I would be shocked if neither make it.
Through an apocalypse of quarterback injuries, it got there eventually. :spin: First team in league history to make the playoffs after starting four different QBs in a season.
Got home from work around halftime of the TNF game (Jets @ Browns). The half I missed saw fifty-one points scored.
The next half? Three (per team). First game in NFL History to see 50+ 1st half points and see no touchdowns the next.
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 11:17:16 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 05, 2023, 11:40:55 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2023, 09:21:32 AM
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
I would be shocked if neither make it.
Through an apocalypse of quarterback injuries, it got there eventually. :spin: First team in league history to make the playoffs after starting four different QBs in a season.
Strange, I could have swore the 1988 Browns got into the playoffs with 4 starting QBs (Kosar, Danielson, Pagel, & Strock)
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on December 29, 2023, 01:43:29 AM
Quote from: thspfc on December 28, 2023, 11:17:16 PM
Quote from: thspfc on August 05, 2023, 11:40:55 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2023, 09:21:32 AM
Quote from: Henry on August 04, 2023, 09:59:18 PM
The preseason has officially begun, with the Hall of Fame game between the Browns and Jets (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401547654).
And...both teams are officially out of the playoffs.
I would be shocked if neither make it.
Through an apocalypse of quarterback injuries, it got there eventually. :spin: First team in league history to make the playoffs after starting four different QBs in a season.
Strange, I could have swore the 1988 Browns got into the playoffs with 4 starting QBs (Kosar, Danielson, Pagel, & Strock)
Very good catch. I looked it up to verify.
Isn't Russell Wilson's benching as much financial and contractual as it is performance (although he hasn't been that great).
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 29, 2023, 12:56:12 PM
Isn't Russell Wilson's benching as much financial and contractual as it is performance (although he hasn't been that great).
Insofar as he's played like shit so they want to have financial flexibility to cut him. If he was playing well, even if they weren't in the playoff hunt, he'd be starting no matter what contractual guarantees kicked in.
It'd be so crazy if there were somehow a Ravens-Browns AFCCG.
And now there are reports that Jacoby Brissett has a hamstring injury and is questionable for the Commies on Sunday.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 29, 2023, 04:03:25 PM
It'd be so crazy if there were somehow a Ravens-Browns AFCCG.
There's also a decent chance of a Rams-Lions in which both Matt Stafford and Jared Goff would play their former team. That would be awesome with great narratives on both sides. It would most likely occur in the wild card round.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 29, 2023, 12:57:59 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 29, 2023, 12:56:12 PM
Isn't Russell Wilson's benching as much financial and contractual as it is performance (although he hasn't been that great).
Insofar as he's played like shit so they want to have financial flexibility to cut him. If he was playing well, even if they weren't in the playoff hunt, he'd be starting no matter what contractual guarantees kicked in.
I maintain it's tied to their season being over. He hasn't been good but is still their best option to win games if that was their objective.
Quote from: webny99 on December 30, 2023, 12:33:50 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 29, 2023, 12:57:59 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 29, 2023, 12:56:12 PM
Isn't Russell Wilson's benching as much financial and contractual as it is performance (although he hasn't been that great).
Insofar as he's played like shit so they want to have financial flexibility to cut him. If he was playing well, even if they weren't in the playoff hunt, he'd be starting no matter what contractual guarantees kicked in.
I maintain it's tied to their season being over. He hasn't been good but is still their best option to win games if that was their objective.
But if he's not better than what they can get NEXT year, then it makes sense to bench him now.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 30, 2023, 01:19:20 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 30, 2023, 12:33:50 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 29, 2023, 12:57:59 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 29, 2023, 12:56:12 PM
Isn't Russell Wilson's benching as much financial and contractual as it is performance (although he hasn't been that great).
Insofar as he's played like shit so they want to have financial flexibility to cut him. If he was playing well, even if they weren't in the playoff hunt, he'd be starting no matter what contractual guarantees kicked in.
I maintain it's tied to their season being over. He hasn't been good but is still their best option to win games if that was their objective.
But if he's not better than what they can get NEXT year, then it makes sense to bench him now.
I mean, may as well, right? That Christmas Eve game was a sloppy shitshow. And, the worst part about it is that they lost to a frickin 5-11 Patriots team who had WAAAAY worse games than the Broncos, yet somehow, those orange and blue horses coughed up a doogie. On their hometurf nonetheless! I doubt Sean Payton will be in Denver much longer than what his current contract bears out to be. I mean, yeah, he's still getting the $10 million, but, god dang, those Broncos SUUUUUCK. I am amazed they're still active in the NFL given the completely obsurd mediocrity they've shown after Elway left following their 1998 Super Bowl, and Manning (Peyton, of course) following Super Bowl 50. It's like "Broncos, who?" "Wait, who are the Broncos?" "Where are the Broncos playing?" That's how bad the Denver Broncos are right now. They're becoming an almost-forgotten team where not even an scentilla of its fanbase knows who they are.
Lord Jesus Christ.
Absolutely mind-numbing decision from Campbell to go for two down by one from the 7. 50% chance of winning in overtime. Conversion rate of far less than 50%. Not to mention, the odds of Dallas finding a way to get a field goal to win in regulation increase when they're trailing compared to when it's tied. It seems he's officially crossed into "aggression just for the sake of aggression" territory, if he wasn't already there.
Anyone whining about the ineligible penalty is a clown.
What a night for Lamb, what a way to snap a two-game slide. A wild card game @ the NFCS champion is now essentially guaranteed, and chances are it'll be a rematch with the Bucs. I don't know if I'm more or less confident this time - Tampa looks a lot better this year, but the threat of playoff Brady won't be hanging over.
From an Eagles standpoint, the Lions loss helps us overall for the number 2 seed, with the number 1 still in play. But the best case scenario would have been a tie, which would've been a possibility if Campbell didn't go for the high-risk 2 pointer from the 7, or even the 3.5.
As far as I can determine, the 49ers in the NFC West and the Lions in the NFC North can do no worse than the number 3 seed. For the NFC East, both the Cowboys and the Eagles can do no worse than the fifth seed. Whoever in the NFC East gets the fifth seed will visit the "champions" of the NFC South with a worse record.
As a Washington fan, I'm tempted to say the Cowboys got handed that one last night, even though I haven't actually watched the clip of the play in question and would thus sound like a complete idiot.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 31, 2023, 07:33:47 AM
As a Washington fan, I'm tempted to say the Cowboys got handed that one last night, even though I haven't actually watched the clip of the play in question and would thus sound like a complete idiot.
So, the replay of the activity before the snap suggests that #68 did go to the ref to report as eligible. The problem is, the ref got it wrong and announced #70, so the Lions are responsible for noticing that and correcting him before the snap. For whatever reason they didn't do that, and at that point Dallas does not have to worry about #68.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 31, 2023, 07:43:16 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 31, 2023, 07:33:47 AM
As a Washington fan, I'm tempted to say the Cowboys got handed that one last night, even though I haven't actually watched the clip of the play in question and would thus sound like a complete idiot.
So, the replay of the activity before the snap suggests that #68 did go to the ref to report as eligible. The problem is, the ref got it wrong and announced #70, so the Lions are responsible for noticing that and correcting him before the snap. For whatever reason they didn't do that, and at that point Dallas does not have to worry about #68.
In addition, the Lions sent 3 linemen over to the ref at the same time. It's very loud in the stadium. Both parties clearly failed to communicate who was actually eligible - by rule, only one of them could be.
The "rigged" crowd of course forgets that the Lions were given a third try from 3.5 yards after Parsons was flagged for offsides. Not to mention the tripping penalty on Hendershot on the Cowboys last drive, which gave the Lions a chance to tie it with a touchdown drive. Both were correct calls.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on December 31, 2023, 07:43:16 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 31, 2023, 07:33:47 AM
As a Washington fan, I'm tempted to say the Cowboys got handed that one last night, even though I haven't actually watched the clip of the play in question and would thus sound like a complete idiot.
So, the replay of the activity before the snap suggests that #68 did go to the ref to report as eligible. The problem is, the ref got it wrong and announced #70, so the Lions are responsible for noticing that and correcting him before the snap. For whatever reason they didn't do that, and at that point Dallas does not have to worry about #68.
Beyond the officiating issues, Dan Campbell was a bit too aggressive, and it cost the Lions. Had they gone for the extra point, the game would go to OT.
Looks like the Cowboys and Eagles will separately be battling for the NFC East title next week, which probably means no resting starters for either team.
Lamar locks up his 2nd MVP and, on his current trajectory, unofficially inserts himself into the Hall of Fame discussion. The world descended into chaos the last time the 49ers and Ravens were the one seeds, so that's fun.
Despite there being 3 teams at 9-7, the AFCS is actually quite simple: if the Jags win next week, they're champs; the winner of Colts/Texans could be a wild card depending on other results; the loser of Colts/Texans is out no matter what, and the Jags would be in trouble with a loss to Tennessee.
Quote from: epzik8 on December 31, 2023, 04:01:12 PMLooks like the Cowboys and Eagles will separately be battling for the NFC East title next week, which probably means no resting starters for either team.
But, will it be Eagles for the early game and Cowboys for the late gate, or a head-to-head with both teams having the late game. Only the NFL knows at the moment.
My guess on the Bill-Dolphins as next week's SNF game.
My ideal scenario next week is a Steelers win and a Jags win, locking the 10-7 Steelers out of the playoffs. If there's one team that I would ever wish a playoff-less 10-win season on, it's this Steelers team. Let them continue to think they're on the right track with that roster.
Bengals have officially missed the playoffs. So have the Broncos.
On the other side (NFC/clinching), the LA Rams secured a spot in the Wild Card with a win over the NY Giants.
The only two teams (that I'm aware of) that haven't played a night game yet are the Texans and Colts. Apparently the league has secretly saved their only night game for the final week of the regular season; now that the secret's out, it will happen this Saturday night nationwide broadcast. Even though, it's not officially a playoff game, the Texans @ Colts game has all the makings of the playoffs -- season is on the line for both teams; winner's next game will be January 13/14, and loser's next game won't be until next September.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on December 31, 2023, 09:06:59 AM
Beyond the officiating issues, Dan Campbell was a bit too aggressive, and it cost the Lions. Had they gone for the extra point, the game would go to OT.
According to thspfc a few posts up, the Lions had only a 7.5% chance of winning in overtime. You two should get together and figure it out.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 31, 2023, 11:41:10 PM
According to thspfc a few posts up, the Lions had only a 7.5% chance of winning in overtime. You two should get together and figure it out.
Quote from: thspfc on December 30, 2023, 11:30:53 PM
Absolutely mind-numbing decision from Campbell to go for two down by one from the 7. 50% chance of winning in overtime.
|thspfc| separated that into two sentences. Detroit's two-point conversion attempt was from the 7, and if they chose to bring the game into OT instead, they would have had about a 50% chance of winning (assumedly).
Bears only way to avoid elimination last night was for the Vikings and Packers to tie, which did not happen.
Bears have clinched the #1 overall pick though. Caleb Williams available to the highest bidder.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 01, 2024, 11:15:53 AM
Bears only way to avoid elimination last night was for the Vikings and Packers to tie, which did not happen.
Bears have clinched the #1 overall pick though. Caleb Williams available to the highest bidder.
Yup! Time for the Bears to grab MHJ or other teams can send us your 1st round picks for a chance at Caleb
Quote from: ET21 on January 01, 2024, 12:37:06 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 01, 2024, 11:15:53 AM
Bears only way to avoid elimination last night was for the Vikings and Packers to tie, which did not happen.
Bears have clinched the #1 overall pick though. Caleb Williams available to the highest bidder.
Yup! Time for the Bears to grab MHJ or other teams can send us your 1st round picks for a chance at Caleb
My thoughts exactly! When was the last time the Bears had a good QB anyway?
Quote from: ET21 on January 01, 2024, 12:37:06 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 01, 2024, 11:15:53 AM
Bears only way to avoid elimination last night was for the Vikings and Packers to tie, which did not happen.
Bears have clinched the #1 overall pick though. Caleb Williams available to the highest bidder.
Yup! Time for the Bears to grab MHJ or other teams can send us your 1st round picks for a chance at Caleb
I think they're taking a QB in the first round, but they might still trade back and pick one up with either their pick or the pick they get from the team they trade 1.1 to. Fields will probably net them a second round pick, adding to their draft riches.
Fields lately has been as good as we've ever seen him, but he's still not even where he was supposed to be at this time two years ago. There's no precedent that comes to mind for a QB finally blossoming into a franchise anchor in their fourth season. Even Josh Allen, a well-known example of a late-blooming QB, was in the MVP conversation by his third year. Hoping for a Geno Smith renaissance is silly because for every Geno Smith that saved his career, there's 30 guys that didn't.
In essence, the fact it's such a difficult decision should tell you that it's not a difficult decision at all - after three years, he still hasn't proved it. Are they going to pass up a strong QB class on the chance that next year is finally the year he does prove it?
Quote from: jlam on December 31, 2023, 11:59:04 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 31, 2023, 11:41:10 PM
According to thspfc a few posts up, the Lions had only a 7.5% chance of winning in overtime. You two should get together and figure it out.
Quote from: thspfc on December 30, 2023, 11:30:53 PM
Absolutely mind-numbing decision from Campbell to go for two down by one from the 7. 50% chance of winning in overtime.
|thspfc| separated that into two sentences. Detroit's two-point conversion attempt was from the 7, and if they chose to bring the game into OT instead, they would have had about a 50% chance of winning (assumedly).
What were the odds of the game ending in a draw?
Mike
Quote from: Henry on January 01, 2024, 02:13:55 PM
Quote from: ET21 on January 01, 2024, 12:37:06 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 01, 2024, 11:15:53 AM
Bears only way to avoid elimination last night was for the Vikings and Packers to tie, which did not happen.
Bears have clinched the #1 overall pick though. Caleb Williams available to the highest bidder.
Yup! Time for the Bears to grab MHJ or other teams can send us your 1st round picks for a chance at Caleb
My thoughts exactly! When was the last time the Bears had a good QB anyway?
Sid Luckman
Quote from: ZLoth on December 31, 2023, 05:55:04 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on December 31, 2023, 04:01:12 PMLooks like the Cowboys and Eagles will separately be battling for the NFC East title next week, which probably means no resting starters for either team.
But, will it be Eagles for the early game and Cowboys for the late gate, or a head-to-head with both teams having the late game. Only the NFL knows at the moment.
My guess on the Bill-Dolphins as next week's SNF game.
Both the Cowboys @ Commandos and Eagles @ Giants games are afternoon games. Bills @ Dolphins are SNF games to determine the AFC East division title and the AFC 2 and 6 seeds.
Quote from: mgk920 on January 01, 2024, 04:08:33 PM
Quote from: jlam on December 31, 2023, 11:59:04 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 31, 2023, 11:41:10 PM
According to thspfc a few posts up, the Lions had only a 7.5% chance of winning in overtime. You two should get together and figure it out.
Quote from: thspfc on December 30, 2023, 11:30:53 PM
Absolutely mind-numbing decision from Campbell to go for two down by one from the 7. 50% chance of winning in overtime.
|thspfc| separated that into two sentences. Detroit's two-point conversion attempt was from the 7, and if they chose to bring the game into OT instead, they would have had about a 50% chance of winning (assumedly).
What were the odds of the game ending in a draw?
Mike
Functionally it doesn't matter. Any equity of a tie would be split 50/50 between the two teams (since a tie is half a win). So it's still an expected value of 0.5 wins, or theoretically a 50% chance of winning.
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2023, 07:41:16 PM
My ideal scenario next week is a Steelers win and a Jags win, locking the 10-7 Steelers out of the playoffs. If there's one team that I would ever wish a playoff-less 10-win season on, it's this Steelers team. Let them continue to think they're on the right track with that roster.
I know we share the same general sentiment regarding the Steelers, but I couldn't possibly disagree more about wanting them to win next week. I will be FURIOUS if the Ravens don't play their starters with three GREAT reasons to do so; (1) to show they learned their lesson from 2019 when they took a double bye and came out extremely flat in the divisional round, (2) to beat their most hated rival and end their season, and (3) to get revenge for that
terrible Week 5 loss that was the biggest travesty of the season and is the only reason Pittsburgh is alive in the playoff conversation to begin with.
And of course, a Steelers loss will clinch a playoff berth for the Buffalo Bills. I simply cannot fathom an elimination game on SNF that would give the Bills' playoff spot to the Steelers if they lose. I already can't believe they beat the Seahawks to draw out Western NY's collective agony for another week (Bills would have clinched a playoff berth with a Seahawks win) and am sick to my stomach just thinking about them potentially winning again this week. I generally don't publicize my rooting interests, but I'm making an exception this week. GO RAVENS!!!
Quote from: webny99 on January 01, 2024, 09:55:32 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 31, 2023, 07:41:16 PM
My ideal scenario next week is a Steelers win and a Jags win, locking the 10-7 Steelers out of the playoffs. If there's one team that I would ever wish a playoff-less 10-win season on, it's this Steelers team. Let them continue to think they're on the right track with that roster.
I know we share the same general sentiment regarding the Steelers, but I couldn't possibly disagree more about wanting them to win next week. I will be FURIOUS if the Ravens don't play their starters with three GREAT reasons to do so; (1) to show they learned their lesson from 2019 when they took a double bye and came out extremely flat in the divisional round, (2) to beat their most hated rival and end their season, and (3) to get revenge for that terrible Week 5 loss that was the biggest travesty of the season and is the only reason Pittsburgh is alive in the playoff conversation to begin with.
And of course, a Steelers loss will clinch a playoff berth for the Buffalo Bills. I simply cannot fathom an elimination game on SNF that would give the Bills' playoff spot to the Steelers if they lose. I already can't believe they beat the Seahawks to draw out Western NY's collective agony for another week (Bills would have clinched a playoff berth with a Seahawks win) and am sick to my stomach just thinking about them potentially winning again this week. I generally don't publicize my rooting interests, but I'm making an exception this week. GO RAVENS!!!
The normal starters may start, but they'll play a series or less. Teams don't risk playing starters in meaningless games before they move on to the playoffs..
I'll fork the Vikings.
Quote from: Hunty2022 on January 01, 2024, 11:20:38 PM
I'll fork the Vikings.
Too late. Past week 17 and they're already out.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2024, 11:59:53 PM
Quote from: Hunty2022 on January 01, 2024, 11:20:38 PM
I'll fork the Vikings.
Too late. Past week 17 and they're already out.
The Vikings can theoretically still make the playoffs if they win and the Packers, Seahawks, and Saints/Buccaneers lose—still a 3% chance.
Quote from: thspfc on January 01, 2024, 11:59:53 PM
Quote from: Hunty2022 on January 01, 2024, 11:20:38 PM
I'll fork the Vikings.
Too late. Past week 17 and they're already out.
Their chances are about as slim as a gnat's nose hair, but they are not eliminated. They can get the NFC 7th slot if all of the following happen:
Vikings beat the Lions (Fox early game)
Falcons beat the Saints (CBS early game)
Cardinals beat the Seahawks (Fox late game)
Bears beat the Packers (CBS late game)
Quote from: jlam on January 02, 2024, 12:24:19 AM
The Vikings can theoretically still make the playoffs if they win and the Packers, Seahawks, and Saints/Buccaneers lose—still a 3% chance.
A Bucs loss won't affect the Vikings if the other scenarios I listed come true, but it will give the Falcons the NFC South title and the 4th seed if they beat the Saints.
You know, I hate to admit but for all my personal grumbling about how the added wild cards lower the bar to let mediocre teams play in January, all this chatter about who can get in and how is kinda fun. Maybe I'll be back to that opinion after all the 7 seeds get stomped, but for now, I get it. I can see why they did it. We're engaged. Talking about games that would not have mattered before.
I'll still bemoan the added game, however. Props to CeeDee for breaking those season records this week so they're legitimate.
No record broken in week 18 can be legitimately compared to any record set when there were 16 games.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 01, 2024, 10:27:13 PM
The normal starters may start, but they'll play a series or less. Teams don't risk playing starters in meaningless games before they move on to the playoffs..
That's often true, but not always. Last years Chargers were widely criticized for playing starters in a meaningless game, so did the Bills in an almost-meaningless season finale in 2020 in quite similar circumstances where they could end a division rival (Dolphins) season.
And the double bye factor cannot be overlooked, especially with the Ravens having that recent experience in 2019 of being one of the most dominant teams in NFL history and following it up with one of the biggest playoff stinkers/upsets in NFL history after a two-week bye. That year, they beat Pittsburgh in the regular season finale with their backups. I would be rooting for them to do the same this year, but would still vastly prefer they play their starters.
I love the annual list of playoff clinching scenarios going into the final week.
Here's this year's, taken from the NFL website:
AFC:
CLINCHED:
Baltimore Ravens (13-3) – AFC North division title, No. 1 seed, lone first-round bye and homefield advantage
Kansas City Chiefs (10-6) – AFC West division title
Cleveland Browns (11-5) – playoff berth, No. 5 seed
Miami Dolphins (11-5) – playoff berth
*****
BUFFALO BILLS (10-6) at Miami (11-5); Sunday, 8:20 p.m. ET, NBC
Buffalo clinches AFC East division title with:
BUF win
Buffalo clinches playoff berth with:
BUF tie OR
PIT loss or tie OR
JAX loss or tie OR
HOU-IND tie
HOUSTON TEXANS (9-7) at Indianapolis (9-7); Saturday, 8:15 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Houston clinches AFC South division title with:
HOU win + JAX loss or tie
Houston clinches playoff berth with:
HOU win OR
HOU tie + JAX loss + PIT loss or tie
** **
INDIANAPOLIS COLTS (9-7) vs. Houston (9-7); Saturday, 8:15 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Indianapolis clinches AFC South division title with:
IND win + JAX loss or tie OR
IND tie + JAX loss
Indianapolis clinches playoff berth with:
IND win OR
IND tie + PIT loss or tie
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS (9-7) at Tennessee (5-11); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
Jacksonville clinches AFC South division title with:
JAX win OR
JAX tie + IND-HOU tie
Jacksonville clinches playoff berth with:
JAX tie + PIT loss or tie OR
PIT loss + DEN loss or tie + HOU-IND doesn't end in tie
MIAMI DOLPHINS (11-5) vs. Buffalo (10-6); Sunday, 8:20 p.m. ET, NBC
Miami clinches AFC East division title with:
MIA win or tie
PITTSBURGH STEELERS (9-7) at Baltimore (13-3); Saturday, 4:30 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Pittsburgh clinches playoff berth with:
PIT win + BUF loss OR
PIT win + JAX loss or tie OR
PIT win + HOU-IND tie OR
PIT tie + JAX loss + HOU-IND doesn't end in tie OR
JAX loss + DEN win + HOU-IND doesn't end in tie
NFC:
CLINCHED:
San Francisco 49ers (12-4) – NFC West division title, No. 1 seed, lone first-round bye and homefield advantage
Detroit Lions (11-5) – NFC North division title
Dallas Cowboys (11-5) – playoff berth
Los Angeles Rams (9-7) – playoff berth
Philadelphia Eagles (11-5) – playoff berth
*****
ATLANTA FALCONS (7-9) at New Orleans (8-8); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
Atlanta clinches NFC South division title with:
ATL win + TB loss
DALLAS COWBOYS (11-5) at Washington (4-12); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, FOX
Dallas clinches NFC East division title with:
DAL win OR
DAL tie + PHI tie OR
PHI loss
GREEN BAY PACKERS (8-8) vs. Chicago (7-9); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, CBS
Green Bay clinches playoff berth with:
GB win OR
GB tie + SEA loss or tie + NO loss or tie OR
GB tie + SEA loss + TB loss OR
GB tie + SEA tie + TB loss or tie OR
MIN loss or tie + SEA loss + TB loss OR
MIN loss or tie + SEA loss + NO loss
MINNESOTA VIKINGS (7-9) at Detroit (11-5); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, FOX
Minnesota clinches playoff berth with:
MIN win + GB loss + SEA loss + TB loss OR
MIN win + GB loss + SEA loss + NO loss
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS (8-8) vs. Atlanta (7-9); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
New Orleans clinches NFC South division title with:
NO win + TB loss or tie OR
NO tie + TB loss
New Orleans clinches playoff berth with:
NO win + SEA loss or tie + GB loss or tie OR
NO tie + SEA loss + GB loss
** **
PHILADELPHIA EAGLES (11-5) at N.Y. Giants (5-11); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, CBS
Philadelphia clinches NFC East division title with:
PHI win + DAL loss or tie OR
PHI tie + DAL loss
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (8-8) at Arizona (4-12); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, FOX
Seattle clinches playoff berth with:
SEA win + GB loss or tie OR
SEA tie + GB loss + TB loss or tie OR
SEA tie + GB loss + NO loss or tie
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS (8-8) at Carolina (2-14); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, FOX
Tampa Bay clinches NFC South division title with:
TB win OR
TB tie + NO loss or tie
Tampa Bay clinches playoff berth with:
TB tie + SEA loss + GB loss or tie
Sunday is a win-win for Bears fans.
A loss secures a higher draft pick and the 4th place schedule for next season (games against CAR and NE).
A win likely knocks the Packers out of the playoffs and is more confidence heading into next season.
^
It's crazy to think how, if not for the 3 blown leads against Denver, Detroit & Cleveland, the Bears would likely be controlling their own destiny for a wild-card spot. Setting that small disappointment aside and looking at the bigger picture, the Bears have definitely come a long way from the start of the season. The Montez Sweat trade immediately elevated the entire defense, to the point where I think the 2 largest needs (ignoring the QB situation for a moment) are now WR & C.
The strong finish to the season coupled with the arrow seemingly pointing up sets up quite the interesting offseason, and there's a lot of different ways to go given the clinched #1 pick from Carolina. The latest "insider" rumor seems to be that Eberflus has saved his job with the strong finish & defensive turnaround (especially given he took over playcalling), but I wonder whether Getsy could still be shown the door at OC. Meanwhile, the Bears could reset at QB and take Williams first overall, or they could repeat last year and trade down again...and given the QB crop this year, I can't help but wonder if the potential trade haul could be even higher this year compared to the already-large haul they received from Carolina.
I may have previously mentioned this, but I'll never forget being in attendance at FedEx Field earlier this season for what turned out to be the Bears's first win in nearly a calendar year as well as DJ Moore's career day (speaking of the Carolina trade...his performance this season makes his inclusion in that trade even more of a robbery than it already was). Also made the trek to Cleveland for the Browns game a few weeks ago, but that was far less memorable courtesy of the aforementioned blown lead (as well as certain Browns fans, but that's neither here nor there).
Looking ahead to next season, the Bears will have an away game at either FedEx Field (again) or MetLife Stadium depending on how Bears/Vikings & Commanders/Giants finish within their divisions, and I might also consider the Colts game as an excuse to take a roadtrip west. Taking advantage of Bears away games along the east coast over the past couple seasons has started to turn into a hobby of checking out different football stadiums, and Lucas Oil Stadium has always looked like a pretty cool venue.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on January 02, 2024, 12:31:07 AM
Quote from: jlam on January 02, 2024, 12:24:19 AM
The Vikings can theoretically still make the playoffs if they win and the Packers, Seahawks, and Saints/Buccaneers lose—still a 3% chance.
A Bucs loss won't affect the Vikings if the other scenarios I listed come true, but it will give the Falcons the NFC South title and the 4th seed if they beat the Saints.
The Bucs are the only team where, barring tie scenarios, nothing matters for them except their own game. If they win, they're NFC South champions. If they lose, they're eliminated from playoff contention.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 02, 2024, 10:36:14 AM
You know, I hate to admit but for all my personal grumbling about how the added wild cards lower the bar to let mediocre teams play in January, all this chatter about who can get in and how is kinda fun. Maybe I'll be back to that opinion after all the 7 seeds get stomped, but for now, I get it. I can see why they did it. We're engaged. Talking about games that would not have mattered before.
Yup. 13 of 16 games in Week 18 (including 8 of 8 in the NFC!) have playoff or seeding implications. Every division except the AFC West has at least one team with their playoff fate hanging in the balances.
And a whole bunch of eliminated teams have great opportunities to play spoiler. In fact, there are only 5 eliminated teams in the NFC and they can
all shake up the playoff picture with a win in Week 18:
- Giants vs. Eagles - could eliminate Eagles from division contention
- Commanders vs. Cowboys - could allow Eagles to steal NFC East
- Panthers vs. Bucs - could eliminate Bucs and make Saints-Falcons a division title game
- Bears vs. Packers - could eliminate Packers and allow Seahawks or Vikings to sneak in
- Cardinals vs. Seahawks - could eliminate Seahawks and allow Saints or Vikings to sneak in
Meanwhile, over in the AFC there are only four games that truly matter but they're all pretty good. Steelers-Ravens is interesting for reasons mentioned upthread, the Colts and Texans face off Saturday in an elimination game, and the Bills and Dolphins play for the AFC East on SNF. The Titans, playing the Jags, are the only AFC team with a true "spoiler" opportunity. If the Titans win, the winner of Colts-Texans wins the AFC South, but the Jags would still have a chance at a Wild Card. Because of tiebreakers, they would need a Steelers loss and a Raiders win, which is the lone playoff implication of Broncos-Raiders.
Chiefs-Chargers has no playoff implications with the Chiefs already locked into the #3 seed. Likewise the Browns, playing the Bengals, are locked into the #5 seed. And finally, the Patriots and Jets are both eliminated so there's no implications there other than it would be nice if the Jets beat Belichick for a change.
Quote from: Buck87 on January 02, 2024, 11:47:56 AM
I love the annual list of playoff clinching scenarios going into the final week.
Same here, but if you don't mind, I did a bit of trimming and removed any scenario that involves a tie to create a more concise version. :sombrero:
Quote
AFC:
CLINCHED:
Baltimore Ravens (13-3) – AFC North division title, No. 1 seed, lone first-round bye and homefield advantage
Kansas City Chiefs (10-6) – AFC West division title
Cleveland Browns (11-5) – playoff berth, No. 5 seed
Miami Dolphins (11-5) – playoff berth
*****
BUFFALO BILLS (10-6) at Miami (11-5); Sunday, 8:20 p.m. ET, NBC
Buffalo clinches AFC East division title with: BUF win
Buffalo clinches playoff berth with: PIT loss OR JAX loss
HOUSTON TEXANS (9-7) at Indianapolis (9-7); Saturday, 8:15 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Houston clinches AFC South division title with: HOU win + JAX loss
Houston clinches playoff berth with: HOU win
INDIANAPOLIS COLTS (9-7) vs. Houston (9-7); Saturday, 8:15 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Indianapolis clinches AFC South division title with: IND win + JAX loss
Indianapolis clinches playoff berth with: IND win
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS (9-7) at Tennessee (5-11); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
Jacksonville clinches AFC South division title with: JAX win
Jacksonville clinches playoff berth with: PIT loss + DEN loss
MIAMI DOLPHINS (11-5) vs. Buffalo (10-6); Sunday, 8:20 p.m. ET, NBC
Miami clinches AFC East division title with: MIA win
PITTSBURGH STEELERS (9-7) at Baltimore (13-3); Saturday, 4:30 p.m. ET, ESPN/ABC
Pittsburgh clinches playoff berth with:
PIT win + BUF loss OR
PIT win + JAX loss OR
JAX loss + DEN win
NFC:
CLINCHED:
San Francisco 49ers (12-4) – NFC West division title, No. 1 seed, lone first-round bye and homefield advantage
Detroit Lions (11-5) – NFC North division title
Dallas Cowboys (11-5) – playoff berth
Los Angeles Rams (9-7) – playoff berth
Philadelphia Eagles (11-5) – playoff berth
*****
ATLANTA FALCONS (7-9) at New Orleans (8-8); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
Atlanta clinches NFC South division title with: ATL win + TB loss
DALLAS COWBOYS (11-5) at Washington (4-12); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, FOX
Dallas clinches NFC East division title with: DAL win OR PHI loss
GREEN BAY PACKERS (8-8) vs. Chicago (7-9); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, CBS
Green Bay clinches playoff berth with: GB win OR MIN loss + SEA loss + (NO loss OR TB loss)
MINNESOTA VIKINGS (7-9) at Detroit (11-5); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, FOX
Minnesota clinches playoff berth with: MIN win + GB loss + SEA loss + (NO loss OR TB loss)
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS (8-8) vs. Atlanta (7-9); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS
New Orleans clinches NFC South division title with: NO win + TB loss
New Orleans clinches playoff berth with: NO win + SEA loss + GB loss
PHILADELPHIA EAGLES (11-5) at N.Y. Giants (5-11); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, CBS
Philadelphia clinches NFC East division title with: PHI win + DAL loss
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (8-8) at Arizona (4-12); Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, FOX
Seattle clinches playoff berth with: SEA win + GB loss
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS (8-8) at Carolina (2-14); Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, FOX
Tampa Bay clinches NFC South division title with: TB win
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 02, 2024, 10:36:14 AM
You know, I hate to admit but for all my personal grumbling about how the added wild cards lower the bar to let mediocre teams play in January, all this chatter about who can get in and how is kinda fun. Maybe I'll be back to that opinion after all the 7 seeds get stomped, but for now, I get it. I can see why they did it. We're engaged. Talking about games that would not have mattered before.
I'll still bemoan the added game, however. Props to CeeDee for breaking those season records this week so they're legitimate.
No record broken in week 18 can be legitimately compared to any record set when there were 16 games.
I slightly disagree on the week 18 point - what matters are the averages across all games. If you go off for a huge performance in week 18 to break a record, that's no different than someone doing that in week 17 before. Regress all the numbers from 17 to 16 games to determine whether a record withstands the extra game asterisk.
Victory in our forks competition is not yet locked up with one week to go. I need
any of the following things to happen:
- Bills make it, or
- Falcons don't, or
- Steelers don't, or
- Both the Packers and Vikings don't
Therefore, I win unless all of the following things occur:
- Steelers beat Ravens
- Jaguars beat Titans
- Falcons beat Saints
- Panthers beat Bucs
- Dolphins beat Bills
- Packers beat Bears OR the rocket sceince that leads to either the 8-9 Packers or 8-9 Vikings getting in
I still can't get over what happened last year: My Christmas wish was for Chargers and Raiders to tie each other up in Week 18 and both clinch Wild Cards. Instead the Raiders went against my wish and beat the Chargers, sending the Steelers to KC in the First round of playoffs. I may have mentioned this before, but my wish was ultimately for Big Ben Rothlissberger to end his career-finale game with a 'W' at Baltimore against his long-time nemesis Ravens, instead of ending his career in a loss at Arrowhead, hence why I wanted the Chargers/Raiders tie game.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 02, 2024, 06:12:49 PM
I still can't get over what happened last year: My Christmas wish was for Chargers and Raiders to tie each other up in Week 18 and both clinch Wild Cards. Instead the Raiders went against my wish and beat the Chargers, sending the Steelers to KC in the First round of playoffs. I may have mentioned this before, but my wish was ultimately for Big Ben Rothlissberger to end his career-finale game with a 'W' at Baltimore against his long-time nemesis Ravens, instead of ending his career in a loss at Arrowhead, hence why I wanted the Chargers/Raiders tie game.
2 years ago.
Quote from: Big John on January 02, 2024, 06:18:16 PM
2 years ago.
Amazing how fast time flew by faster than I can keep up with. I keep seeing in my head it like it happened just yesterday. As you can see I'm still not over it.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 02, 2024, 06:45:59 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 02, 2024, 06:18:16 PM
2 years ago.
Amazing how fast time flew by faster than I can keep up with. I keep seeing in my head it like it happened just yesterday. As you can see I'm still not over it.
That Chargers-Raiders season finale remains one of the wildest games in NFL history. Came down to the final seconds of OT to determine who would advance to the postseason.
Quote from: webny99 on January 02, 2024, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 02, 2024, 06:45:59 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 02, 2024, 06:18:16 PM
2 years ago.
Amazing how fast time flew by faster than I can keep up with. I keep seeing in my head it like it happened just yesterday. As you can see I'm still not over it.
That Chargers-Raiders season finale remains one of the wildest games in NFL history. Came down to the final seconds of OT to determine who would advance to the postseason.
It might have altered the course of the playoffs and perhaps even the Super Bowl. The Bengals, Chiefs, and Bills could have had different Wild Card opponents, which might have had different results than what actually happened, resulting in another team (not the Bengals) making it to the Super Bowl, and if that had happened, we're not sure if the LA Rams (and Matthew Stafford) would have won the Super Bowl LVI.
Just goes to show the "Butterfly" effect of a single decision by the Raiders to kick the winning FG in OT probably would have changed the season's ultimate outcome. Maybe Matthew Stafford ought to mail a Thank-You card to the Raiders for the AFC Playoffs and Super Bowl unfolding the way it did.
Quote from: webny99 on January 02, 2024, 01:19:07 PM
If the Titans win, the winner of Colts-Texans wins the AFC South, but the Jags would still have a chance at a Wild Card. Because of tiebreakers, they would need a Steelers loss and a Raiders win, which is the lone playoff implication of Broncos-Raiders.
To phrase this another way: If the Steelers and Jaguars both lose, Broncos-Raiders will decide the final AFC Wild Card spot.
If the Broncos win, the Steelers are the 7 seed.
If the Raiders win, the Jaguars are the 7 seed.
I'm FAR more afraid of Joe Flacco at this moment in time than I am of Lamar, Patrick, Josh, Tua, Dak, Jalen or Brock.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 03, 2024, 04:06:06 PM
I'm FAR more afraid of Joe Flacco at this moment in time than I am of Lamar, Patrick, Josh, Tua, Dak, Jalen or Brock.
I'm not.
One more week, and 11 teams are still alive (6 NFC, 5 AFC). The six teams in both South Divisions have a title to play for (with only the Panthers and Titans out of it for sure). Also, it's going to come down to the Packers and Vikings in the NFC North, and knowing that I hate Green Bay with a passion, I hope the Bears and Vikings win their respective season finales, especially since the Lions are playing in a game that won't matter for them, since they already locked up their first division title in 30 years (back when it was called the NFC Central).
At the start of the season, I pegged this year's Pack as an 8-8 team (yeah, yeah; 17 games, whatever). And here we are.
Love is a competent quarterback, I can at least say. If he can start hitting deep receivers in stride, that will be a huge next step. Presently, almost every deep throw, the receiver has to either lay out for it or wait for the ball. A lot to ask, but a lot about Love's game is looking pretty good. I think we can work with this. Get these young receivers developed, keep drafting great linemen, and then above all, get the goddamn defense's house in order and the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 04, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
...
the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Fortunately, the 17-game season didn't change the nature of the term "January football" that much. Sure, the last week of the regular season is now in January, but that often contains a bunch of playoff games anyways, and the first three rounds of the playoffs are still guaranteed to be in January. The only game that's not is the Super Bowl, but that was already the case even with 16 games.
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:19:07 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 04, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
...
the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Fortunately, the 17-game season didn't change the nature of the term "January football" that much. Sure, the last week of the regular season is now in January, but that often contains a bunch of playoff games anyways, and the first three rounds of the playoffs are still guaranteed to be in January. The only game that's not is the Super Bowl, but that was already the case even with 16 games.
Super Bowl was in January with a 16 game season for the most part (although there may have been one Feb 1 exception IIRC) before the bye week came along. After that, it has always been in February.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 04:31:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:19:07 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 04, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
...
the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Fortunately, the 17-game season didn't change the nature of the term "January football" that much. Sure, the last week of the regular season is now in January, but that often contains a bunch of playoff games anyways, and the first three rounds of the playoffs are still guaranteed to be in January. The only game that's not is the Super Bowl, but that was already the case even with 16 games.
Super Bowl was in January with a 16 game season for the most part (although there may have been one Feb 1 exception IIRC) before the bye week came along. After that, it has always been in February.
Are you referring to the regular season bye week or the one before the Super Bowl? Either way, the Super Bowl has been in February since the 2001 season.
^^ The Super Bowl was always held in January through the 2000 season (Jan 2001) Then in February the next year because of 9/11, then back to January 2003. Then it was always in February since the 2003 season (Feb 2004).
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:36:59 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 04:31:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:19:07 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 04, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
...
the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Fortunately, the 17-game season didn't change the nature of the term "January football" that much. Sure, the last week of the regular season is now in January, but that often contains a bunch of playoff games anyways, and the first three rounds of the playoffs are still guaranteed to be in January. The only game that's not is the Super Bowl, but that was already the case even with 16 games.
Super Bowl was in January with a 16 game season for the most part (although there may have been one Feb 1 exception IIRC) before the bye week came along. After that, it has always been in February.
Are you referring to the regular season bye week or the one before the Super Bowl? Either way, the Super Bowl has been in February since the 2001 season.
I was referring to the regular season bye week, but I stand corrected.
I know (for the most part, there have been some exceptions) that there have been 2 weeks before the SB since at least the late '70s.
I did not realize that the SB had been in Feb for 20 years. Even so, there were about 24 seasons with 16 game schedule (started 1978) + January SB, so I'm not that senile.
What was the change in early 2000s that caused permanent shift of SB into Feb? I remember there was a change to delay the opening of the season a week to get it off of Labor Day weekend (due to bad attendance and/or bad TV ratings), but I'm not sure when that was.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 05:59:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:36:59 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 04:31:02 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 04, 2024, 04:19:07 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 04, 2024, 11:09:41 AM
...
the Packers can continue to be competitive and play a LOT of January football. (Yeah, yeah again; 17 games. You know what I mean.)
Fortunately, the 17-game season didn't change the nature of the term "January football" that much. Sure, the last week of the regular season is now in January, but that often contains a bunch of playoff games anyways, and the first three rounds of the playoffs are still guaranteed to be in January. The only game that's not is the Super Bowl, but that was already the case even with 16 games.
Super Bowl was in January with a 16 game season for the most part (although there may have been one Feb 1 exception IIRC) before the bye week came along. After that, it has always been in February.
Are you referring to the regular season bye week or the one before the Super Bowl? Either way, the Super Bowl has been in February since the 2001 season.
I was referring to the regular season bye week, but I stand corrected.
I know (for the most part, there have been some exceptions) that there have been 2 weeks before the SB since at least the late '70s.
I did not realize that the SB had been in Feb for 20 years. Even so, there were about 24 seasons with 16 game schedule (started 1978) + January SB, so I'm not that senile.
What was the change in early 2000s that caused permanent shift of SB into Feb? I remember there was a change to delay the opening of the season a week to get it off of Labor Day weekend (due to bad attendance and/or bad TV ratings), but I'm not sure when that was.
I believe it happened in the 2001 season sometime after the 9/11 attacks.
There was no bye week prior to the Super Bowl in the 2001 season. The Superdome was booked the weekend after the scheduled date. After everything was pushed back a week because of 9/11, the NFL had to pay a good amount of money to get the following event to reschedule. Two years later the NFL permanently put in a bye week before the Super Bowl.
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2024, 07:12:05 PM
There was no bye week prior to the Super Bowl in the 2001 season. The Superdome was booked the weekend after the scheduled date. After everything was pushed back a week because of 9/11, the NFL had to pay a good amount of money to get the following event to reschedule. Two years later the NFL permanently put in a bye week before the Super Bowl.
I believe that (2001) was one of the exceptions I was referring to, where there was no bye week before SB. There has been a bye week before SB for most years for as long as I have been watching the NFL (mid 1970s), and actually online it says there has been a bye week all the way back to (what we now call) the first Super Bowl in 1967 (it was called the NFL-AFL Championship Game at the time).
So that isn't what pushed the SB permanently into February.
I looked it up -- the last time the NFL opened on Labor Day weekend was in the 2000 season. So everything must have slipped a week starting in 2001 due to opening a week later (and that season was further complicated by 9/11). But by then, the date of the Super Bowl had already been set until the one in early 2003, so the bye week did not return until early 2004 -- and starting then the SB has permanently been in February.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 07:22:54 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2024, 07:12:05 PM
There was no bye week prior to the Super Bowl in the 2001 season. The Superdome was booked the weekend after the scheduled date. After everything was pushed back a week because of 9/11, the NFL had to pay a good amount of money to get the following event to reschedule. Two years later the NFL permanently put in a bye week before the Super Bowl.
I believe that (2001) was one of the exceptions I was referring to, where there was no bye week before SB. There has been a bye week before SB for most years for as long as I have been watching the NFL (mid 1970s), and actually online it says there has been a bye week all the way back to (what we now call) the first Super Bowl in 1967 (it was called the NFL-AFL Championship Game at the time).
So that isn't what pushed the SB permanently into February.
I looked it up -- the last time the NFL opened on Labor Day weekend was in the 2000 season. So everything must have slipped a week starting in 2001 due to opening a week later (and that season was further complicated by 9/11). But by then, the date of the Super Bowl had already been set until the one in early 2003, so the bye week did not return until early 2004 -- and starting then the SB has permanently been in February.
This is how I remember it. TV ratings weren't great on Labor Day weekend, so that's why they pushed the start of the season, and the subsequent pushing of the Super Bowl had to lag a few years because the venues were already booked. This led to two Super Bowls on my birthday. This year would have been the third but the 17th game added three years ago pushed it back yet another week.
Quote from: Big John on January 04, 2024, 05:11:33 PM
^^ The Super Bowl was always held in January through the 2000 season (Jan 2001) Then in February the next year because of 9/11, then back to January 2003. Then it was always in February since the 2003 season (Feb 2004).
Yes, thanks for clarifying. It was not full time in February until the 2003 season.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 04, 2024, 07:22:54 PM
I looked it up -- the last time the NFL opened on Labor Day weekend was in the 2000 season. So everything must have slipped a week starting in 2001 due to opening a week later (and that season was further complicated by 9/11). But by then, the date of the Super Bowl had already been set until the one in early 2003, so the bye week (before the SB) did not return until early 2004 -- and starting then the SB has permanently been in February.
I did look it up rather than rely on my faulty memory. I have the correct years above. The SB in early 2004 was for the 2003 season.
I also remember the NFL not being happy with bad attendance and/or bad TV ratings on Labor Day weekend, which prompted their move off of that weekend.
As I also mentioned in my earlier post, there has (almost all the time) been a bye week before the Super Bowl, with the early 2000s being exceptions to that rule, not the end of an older rule.
Which then brought me to a different question:
Why, despite the Fall 1971 and Fall 1976 calendars being identical (meaning correspondence of days of the week to the dates) was Super Bowl VI played on Sunday Jan. 16. 1972, and Super Bowl XI played on Sunday Jan. 9, 1977?
Turns out that the 1971 regular season was played from Sept. 19-Dec 19, 1971, and the 1976 regular season was played from Sept. 12-Dec, 12, 1976 (one week earlier). These were both 14 game seasons (playoff structure must have been similar, if not identical). Note that neither season started on Labor Day weekend.
The next question for me was -- when did the NFL start playing on Labor Day weekend?
For this I looked at Philadelphia Eagles schedules, and the answer is no surprise.
1978 -- which was the first year of the 16 game schedule.
Last season for this (opening on Labor Day weekend) was 2000 season -- as discussed above.
So why are the Ravens sitting Lamar tomorrow when 1) it didn't quite work out for them when they did it in 2019, and 2) the Steelers are still in playoff contention and the Ravens are imaginably going to want to have the honors of eliminating their biggest rival?
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 10:56:18 PM
I'm not sure there's ever been a more "all in" team than the 2021 Los Angeles Rams. After signing Stafford, OBJ, and (perhaps craziest of all) Von Miller, they had to win a Super Bowl. And after squeaking past the GOAT, grinding out a win over their toughest division rival, and closing strong against the hottest team in the league, the entire organization can now breathe a massive sigh of relief. Somehow, some way, they are Super Bowl 56 champions!
They did it in about the most improbable fashion possible, losing Robert Woods in November, backing in to a division title thanks to a Cardinals meltdown, avoiding Lambeau by letting the 49ers into the playoffs, ending Tom Brady's career despite a crazy comeback, and losing OBJ during the Super Bowl... but they found a way and won the trophy, and that's all that matters... what happens next, we'll see!
As another NFL regular season draws to a frenetic conclusion, I am reminded of this quote for a few different reasons.
One, it's crazy how much has happened with the Rams since this moment. Not only are they back in the playoffs, they're a
surprise playoff entry after floating through one of the worst Super Bowl follow up campaigns in NFL history and undergoing what was widely viewed as a full teardown/rebuild this offseason.
Two, and I guess this is obvious, sometimes the little things that seem trivial at the time end up being extremely important factors in how the future plays out. And that point is never in finer distinction than Week 18 of the NFL season - there's the playoff race, the future of coaches, GM's, and players, and draft position for next year all on the line, and so many little moments will help shape how that plays out this weekend.
And that's where I think looking back on Week 18 two years ago is particularly instructive. In hindsight, it's painstakingly obvious that the way things played out was the "perfect storm" for a Rams Super Bowl run. If the Cardinals had beat the Seahawks that week, the Rams would have suddenly been in a different scenario, needing a win to avoid losing the division to the Cardinals. Instead, with the division clinched, their overtime loss to the 49ers wasn't as impactful - it still knocked them out of the #2 seed, but they only fell to the #4 seed rather than a Wild Card team. Simultaneously, however, the Rams loss allowed the 49ers into the playoffs. That ended up being an extremely critical combination, because the 49ers then went on a run, knocking off the Cowboys, then heading to Green Bay and knocking off the Packers in a wintry divisional round classic. It's never safe to assume anything, but if if the Rams had been the #2 seed and it had been the Saints or Eagles heading to Dallas instead, that would have set up an entirely different playoff field. In that scenario, it seems highly unlikely that the remaining lowest seed pulls off an upset over Green Bay. With that being the case, the Rams likely would have had to travel to Green Bay at some point, and would have been significant underdogs in that scenario. Instead, the 49ers knocked off both the #3 and the #1 seeds, so the Rams got an easy home game, a nail-biter against #2 Tampa, and were able to return home for the NFC title game and squeak out a win against those same 49ers. With all that taken into account, it's pretty safe to say the Rams only made the Super Bowl because they got that exact combination of a Cardinals loss to clinch the division AND a loss of their own to let the 49ers into the playoffs in Week 18.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 05, 2024, 04:04:33 PM
So why are the Ravens sitting Lamar tomorrow when 1) it didn't quite work out for them when they did it in 2019, and 2) the Steelers are still in playoff contention and the Ravens are imaginably going to want to have the honors of eliminating their biggest rival?
You and I both live in Ravens country (me in both Ravens and Commanders country being halfway between those two cities [and I am an Eagles fan as a Philly-area native]). Two of my neighbors are big Ravens fans.
My take is that 1) they think 2019 won't repeat and 2) Steelers are not in even if they win, they need help.
----------------
As an Eagles fan, I'm going to go back a ways here for some of this, but whatever. I don't live and die by them, always take them with a grain of salt because of four reasons.
1). SB XV (big favorites going in, and blown out). 2). 1981 season (the next year) 6-0 start. Finished 10-6. Lost in WC round to Giants -- they were down 20-0 in first quarter due to muffed special teams play. 3). 1994. 7-2 start. Lost last 7 games to finish 7-9. 4). At least three different times since 1989 if I remember right -- they won 10 or 11 games and missed the playoffs because of tiebreakers.
2023 season is going to join these, most likely. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it. Washington could do us a big favor and upset Dallas on Sunday, but honestly the Eagles shouldn't have put themselves in a position where that was necessary.
Quote from: webny99 on January 05, 2024, 05:06:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2022, 10:56:18 PM
I'm not sure there's ever been a more "all in" team than the 2021 Los Angeles Rams. After signing Stafford, OBJ, and (perhaps craziest of all) Von Miller, they had to win a Super Bowl. And after squeaking past the GOAT, grinding out a win over their toughest division rival, and closing strong against the hottest team in the league, the entire organization can now breathe a massive sigh of relief. Somehow, some way, they are Super Bowl 56 champions!
They did it in about the most improbable fashion possible, losing Robert Woods in November, backing in to a division title thanks to a Cardinals meltdown, avoiding Lambeau by letting the 49ers into the playoffs, ending Tom Brady's career despite a crazy comeback, and losing OBJ during the Super Bowl... but they found a way and won the trophy, and that's all that matters... what happens next, we'll see!
As another NFL regular season draws to a frenetic conclusion, I am reminded of this quote for a few different reasons.
One, it's crazy how much has happened with the Rams since this moment. Not only are they back in the playoffs, they're a surprise playoff entry after floating through one of the worst Super Bowl follow up campaigns in NFL history and undergoing what was widely viewed as a full teardown/rebuild this offseason.
And starting with this upcoming draft, they finally have their first round picks again. Everyone thought they would stink for years once the Super Bowl team broke apart - admittedly, myself included:
Quote from: thspfc on November 15, 2022, 04:10:41 PM
Cooper Kupp is going on IR with a high ankle sprain that requires surgery, basically ending the Rams season if it wasn't over already. I think Rams are gonna be one of the more interesting teams to watch this offseason. Of the core group that won the Super Bowl: Von Miller, Whitworth, and OBJ are already gone, and Donald, Stafford, and Ramsey have somewhat uncertain futures. Kupp and Floyd are under contract for a while yet but that seems to matter less and less each offseason.
There are rumors that McVay doesn't want to go through a rebuild. He could "retire" , go into broadcasting, then come back whenever there's an opening he likes. If that happens, the Rams, having traded away a ton of draft picks, could be in for a very rough next few seasons. Obviously worth it for the championship though.
If I got to choose any team's HC/GM pairing to start a new franchise, I would take McVay and Les Snead. They sold off years' worth of high picks and yet they've still drafted plenty of servicable starters over that span. Nacua and Kyren Williams have been absolute home runs from the late rounds. They reconstructed the defense in no time, largely through the draft, with the only remaining key pieces from the championship team being Donald and safety Jordan Fuller. It's incredible that they were able to replace as much talent as they did in so little time. As head coach, McVay has now overseen three very good to elite offenses comprised of mostly different players from the others; 2017-18, 2021, 2023. They have a great coach, a great quarterback, they draft well, and they're not afraid to bet on themselves with big acqusitions. No wonder they're good again. It's hard to say how much more Stafford and Donald have left in the tank - and even Kupp is getting up there in receiver years - but with a few more upgrades this offseason, we could be looking at a very quick resurrection and perhaps another 'all in' year in 2024.
Along those lines, it took the Eagles five years to properly rebuild the team post-championship, and only two to go from rock bottom to the Super Bowl, which is why Philly fans wanting Roseman gone is hilarious.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
With 20 teams still able to win the Super Bowl, somehow I've heard more about the Bears than any of them this week. The worst-case scenario for Chicago is a defense-driven win at Green Bay to close out the season, compelling the team to stick with Fields because they're "on the right track" after a 5-1 finish and their first W over the Packers since 2018. And yes, they are on the right track, but not largely because of Fields. Bears fans want to stick with him because they literally don't know what a good QB in a Bears uniform looks like, and finally beating the rivals would make it impossible for them to realistically evaluate why this team still hasn't won more than 8 games since 'Covid' sounded like an upstart competitor of YouTube. Would the front office be able to resist the pressure? Who knows.
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2024, 10:22:58 PM
...Along those lines, it took the Eagles five years to properly rebuild the team post-championship, and only two to go from rock bottom to the Super Bowl, which is why Philly fans wanting Roseman gone is hilarious...
You should see the comments from Philly fans who they want gone this year, because of the last 5 weeks. And the team is still in the running for winning the Division.
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2024, 10:22:58 PM
With 20 teams still able to win the Super Bowl, somehow I've heard more about the Bears than any of them this week. The worst-case scenario for Chicago is a defense-driven win at Green Bay to close out the season, compelling the team to stick with Fields because they're "on the right track" after a 5-1 finish and their first W over the Packers since 2018. And yes, they are on the right track, but not largely because of Fields. Bears fans want to stick with him because they literally don't know what a good QB in a Bears uniform looks like, and finally beating the rivals would make it impossible for them to realistically evaluate why this team still hasn't won more than 8 games since 'Covid' sounded like an upstart competitor of YouTube. Would the front office be able to resist the pressure? Who knows.
I think that's because Bears-Packers is pretty clearly the NFC game of the week, especially since the playoff picture busts wide open if the Packers lose. It's a bummer the Bears lost so many close games early in the season or this could have been a win-and-in for both teams. It's still got plenty of juice though, Packers with a chance to flip last year's script, Bears with an opportunity to (likely) end the Packers season, and if Fields plays well in a win, Bears offseason intrigue will reach staggering new heights.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 05, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2024, 10:22:58 PM
...Along those lines, it took the Eagles five years to properly rebuild the team post-championship, and only two to go from rock bottom to the Super Bowl, which is why Philly fans wanting Roseman gone is hilarious...
You should see the comments from Philly fans who they want gone this year, because of the last 5 weeks. And the team is still in the running for winning the Division.
This is why it is nice to follow the Eagles from afar. I don't hear all of that stuff.
WIP (now WYSP? I know it is at WYSP's frequency) existed for 15 years before I left the area, guess it is the same (or worse) than before. (Philly's sports radio station)
---------------------------------------------
One nice thing about the recent breaking of the strict NFC on FOX, AFC on CBS, and road team network getting the interconference games is that -- for instance --- I will be able to watch/peruse both the Dallas-Washington game (on FOX) and the Eagles-Giants game (on CBS). Prior to that, if both Commanders and Eagles are playing at the same time (and obviously not playing each other), both games would have been on FOX --- and DC shows Commanders no matter what --- I had to rig my antenna and hope that Baltimore FOX station had the Eagles game -- which often does happen when the Eagles are good, since the eastern part of Baltimore broadcast area gets within 40 miles or so of Philly.
I usually have other things to do on Sunday, and it is very very rare that I sit down to watch a game without doing anything else. So not being able to see certain games is not a big deal to me. In previous years that might have been the case with this Sunday's Eagles game, but fortunately not now.
It could very well be that for all intents and purposes, this will be decided in the first hour, it all depends on Dallas.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 05, 2024, 04:04:33 PM
So why are the Ravens sitting Lamar tomorrow when 1) it didn't quite work out for them when they did it in 2019, and 2) the Steelers are still in playoff contention and the Ravens are imaginably going to want to have the honors of eliminating their biggest rival?
Given the weather, sitting key players seems like the right move.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 06, 2024, 11:21:24 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 05, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2024, 10:22:58 PM
...Along those lines, it took the Eagles five years to properly rebuild the team post-championship, and only two to go from rock bottom to the Super Bowl, which is why Philly fans wanting Roseman gone is hilarious...
You should see the comments from Philly fans who they want gone this year, because of the last 5 weeks. And the team is still in the running for winning the Division.
This is why it is nice to follow the Eagles from afar. I don't hear all of that stuff.
WIP (now WYSP? I know it is at WYSP's frequency) existed for 15 years before I left the area, guess it is the same (or worse) than before. (Philly's sports radio station)
I'd say worse. I don't even listen to it. Callers drive me nuts.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 06, 2024, 11:21:24 AM
One nice thing about the recent breaking of the strict NFC on FOX, AFC on CBS, and road team network getting the interconference games is that -- for instance --- I will be able to watch/peruse both the Dallas-Washington game (on FOX) and the Eagles-Giants game (on CBS). Prior to that, if both Commanders and Eagles are playing at the same time (and not playing each other), both games would have been on FOX --- and DC shows Commanders no matter what --- I had to rig my antenna and hope that Baltimore FOX station had the Eagles game -- which often does happen when the Eagles are good, since the eastern part of Baltimore broadcast area gets within 40 miles or so of Philly.
I usually have other things to do on Sunday, and it is very very rare that I sit down to watch a game without doing anything else. So not being able to see certain games is not a big deal to me. In previous years that might have been the case with this Sunday's Eagles game, but fortunately not now.
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 06, 2024, 11:21:24 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 05, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on January 05, 2024, 10:22:58 PM
...Along those lines, it took the Eagles five years to properly rebuild the team post-championship, and only two to go from rock bottom to the Super Bowl, which is why Philly fans wanting Roseman gone is hilarious...
You should see the comments from Philly fans who they want gone this year, because of the last 5 weeks. And the team is still in the running for winning the Division.
This is why it is nice to follow the Eagles from afar. I don't hear all of that stuff.
WIP (now WYSP? I know it is at WYSP's frequency) existed for 15 years before I left the area, guess it is the same (or worse) than before. (Philly's sports radio station)
I'd say worse. I don't even listen to it. Callers drive me nuts.
Sorry to hear. It was bad in the 90s also. It was decent for a short time when they started in 1986, but that didn't last long.
WRT to Dallas-Washington game, it is probably in Washington's best interest to lose, to keep the high draft pick.
It used to be at a prime spot on my radio dial until about ten or eleven years ago. Now it's just another FM station to me. (If I surf by it and it sounds interesting, I'll listen for a little bit. But I haven't kept up with it.)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
Sounds boring.
My fellow fans in Landover sure want that second-overall draft pick and for the Bears to select Marvin Harrison Jr.
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2024, 01:30:15 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
Sounds boring.
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2024, 01:30:15 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
Sounds boring.
It wasn't in its day and did provide for which was the best team overall that season.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 07, 2024, 01:58:59 PM
My fellow fans in Landover sure want that second-overall draft pick and for the Bears to select Marvin Harrison Jr.
They can always dream, but there's basically zero chance the Bears draft Marvin Harrison Jr first overall. It's either draft a QB or trade down.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
It appears this last occurred in 1964.
There were 14 teams. 2 made it to the Playoffs.
Maybe the argument could be made that we shouldn't have doubled the number of teams. That seems to be the start of the money grab.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 02:08:52 PM
It wasn't in its day and did provide for which was the best team overall that season.
*In its day*
We're a long way from that day.
If this was today, the 49ers have already locked up the NFC. The Ravens have already locked up the AFC. There would be absolutely no reason for any team to even play today, unless they were trying for the best draft pick in which case every team would try to play worse than their opponent.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2024, 02:26:41 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 06, 2024, 06:23:14 PM
What's helped this year were all the prime-time games Eagles had. They only had 3, 1pm games this year. All 8pm Sun & Mon games are on TV. Their 4pm games were often the Fox 'Game of the Week', which had nearly a nationwide audience. So that just left their Thu night game and the few 1pm games without a national TV coverage.
I can recall when all the games kicked off at one o'clock locally on Sunday afternoons in the NFL's pre-greed era. (The Baltimore Colts home games were an exception with two o'clock kickoffs due to Blue Laws there.) This was good for the spectators. The games were played during the warmest part of the day and not in the late afternoon as some are now, even in the colder weather. With few exceptions, there were no night games. Certainly none ending at Midnight in the East to accommodate a TV network which wanted a large West coast viewership at the expense of the spectators.
The NFL Championship Game was played on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's in one of the teams' stadiums. It was played between the teams at the top of the table from each of the two conferences. There were no money grabbing playoffs then. The game was between the two teams which had proven themselves to be the best over the full season. There was no opportunity for a team with a poorer record to knock out a team with a better record from playing in the big game.
It appears this last occurred in 1964.
There were 14 teams. 2 made it to the Playoffs.
Maybe the argument could be made that we shouldn't have doubled the number of teams. That seems to be the start of the money grab.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 07, 2024, 02:08:52 PM
It wasn't in its day and did provide for which was the best team overall that season.
*In its day*
We're a long way from that day.
If this was today, the 49ers have already locked up the NFC. The Ravens have already locked up the AFC. There would be absolutely no reason for any team to even play today, unless they were trying for the best draft pick in which case every team would try to play worse than their opponent.
Yeah, we got to the point where there were too many teams to limit it to such a small playoff field.
Worth noting that, with the Steelers winning last night, if the Jaguars were to lose to the Titans:
1) They would be eliminated from playoff contention
2) The Houston Texans would clinch the AFC South and host the Cleveland Browns next weekend
3) The Buffalo Bills would clinch a playoff berth and either host Pittsburgh or return to Miami next weekend
4) The Pittsburgh Steelers would clinch a playoff berth and travel to either Buffalo or Kansas City next weekend
Not as fun as Broncos-Raiders deciding who gets the #7 seed, but at least the Titans showed up to play with the entire playoff picture hanging in the balance. And it would be very AFC South-y of the Jaguars to lose, much like the Colts' similarly impossible collapse against the Jaguars at the end of the 2021 season. Stakes!
^^ The Jaguars are currently losing.
Quote from: thspfc on January 02, 2024, 02:16:44 PM
Therefore, I win unless all of the following things occur:
- Steelers beat Ravens
- Jaguars beat Titans
- Falcons beat Saints
- Panthers beat Bucs
- Dolphins beat Bills
- Packers beat Bears OR the rocket sceince that leads to either the 8-9 Packers or 8-9 Vikings getting in
Woohoo!
Quote from: webny99 on January 07, 2024, 02:11:57 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 07, 2024, 01:58:59 PM
My fellow fans in Landover sure want that second-overall draft pick and for the Bears to select Marvin Harrison Jr.
They can always dream, but there's basically zero chance the Bears draft Marvin Harrison Jr first overall. It's either draft a QB or trade down.
I am expecting the Bears to trade that pick down for later round journeymen picks.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 07, 2024, 03:41:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 07, 2024, 02:11:57 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 07, 2024, 01:58:59 PM
My fellow fans in Landover sure want that second-overall draft pick and for the Bears to select Marvin Harrison Jr.
They can always dream, but there's basically zero chance the Bears draft Marvin Harrison Jr first overall. It's either draft a QB or trade down.
I am expecting the Bears to trade that pick down for later round journeymen picks.
Mike
That would be fine with me if the Bears waste the number one pick. Fields doesn't really have the numbers to suggest he is long term solution.
Eagles...LOL...
NFC matchups are set:
1 49ers get the bye
7 Packers at 2 Cowboys
6 Rams at 3 Lions
5 Eagles at 4 Bucs
AFC teams are set but matchups depend on tonight's outcome.
Ravens are 1 no matter what
Texans are 4 no matter what
Browns are 5 no matter what
Dolphins can be 2 or 6
Bills can be 3 or 7
Chiefs can be 2 or 3
Steelers can be 6 or 7
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 07, 2024, 07:26:02 PM
NFC matchups are set:
1 49ers get the bye
7 Packers at 2 Cowboys
6 Rams at 3 Lions
5 Eagles at 4 Bucs
AFC teams are set but matchups depend on tonight's outcome.
Ravens are 1 no matter what
Texans are 4 no matter what
Browns are 5 no matter what
Dolphins can be 2 or 6
Bills can be 3 or 7
Chiefs can be 2 or 3
Steelers can be 6 or 7
Chiefs are locked into the 3. Bills can be 2 or 7.
AFC matchups with a Bills win:
7) Steelers at 2) Bills
6) Dolphins at 3) Chiefs
5) Browns at 4) Texans
AFC matchups with a Bills loss:
7) Bills at 2) Dolphins
6) Steelers at 3) Chiefs
5) Browns at 4) Texans
Gonna be a good slate. This is the first time in the 7-team era that I really don't think anybody is safe in wild card weekend. To me the Steelers are the worst team in the playoffs, but both of their potential opponents have their flaws (wide receivers and random letdown games, I'm sure everyone knows which is which). And as much as I've been hating on Pittsburgh all year, they have been legit the last few weeks thanks to the best QB on their roster finally getting on the field.
Dallas
should beat Green Bay. Yes, the Packers are hot right now, but the Cowboys have been hot the whole year. I would not be shocked by a loss, but I would be thoroughly disappointed, and the Cowboys being the first two seed to lose in the wild card would be the hot topic all offseason.
My NFC bracket:
2) Cowboys defeat 7) Packers
6) Rams defeat 3) Lions
5) Eagles defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) 49ers defeat 6) Rams
2) Cowboys defeat 5) Eagles
1) 49ers defeat 2) Cowboys
Fork the Saints. :)
AFC North
Baltimore 13-4
Cleveland 11-6
Pittsburgh 10-7
Cincinnati 9-8
First post merger NFL division to have all of its teams finish above .500
The last time an NFL division accomplished this feat was 1935 (NFL Western Division - Lions, Packers, Cardinals, Bears)
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2024, 07:56:42 PM
My NFC bracket:
2) Cowboys defeat 7) Packers
6) Rams defeat 3) Lions
5) Eagles defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) 49ers defeat 6) Rams
2) Cowboys defeat 5) Eagles
1) 49ers defeat 2) Cowboys
My NFC bracket....
2 Cowboys bear 7 Packers
3 Lions beat 6 Rams
4 Bucs beat 5 Eagles because Eagles are in a slump. Game could go either way as neither team was impressive during week 18. Will this be the Peacock game?
1 49ers beat 4 Bucs/5 Eagles
3 Lions beat 2 Cowboys. Call it Christmas payback.
1 49ers beat 3 Lions
This is my NFC Bracket:
2. Cowboys > 7. Packers
3. Lions > 6. Rams
5. Eagles > 4. Bucs
1. 49ers > 5. Eagles
2. Cowboys > 3. Lions
1. 49ers > 2. Cowboys
AFC
7 Steelers @ 2 Bills - CORRECT
6 Dolphins @ 3 Chiefs - CORRECT
5 Browns @ 4 Texans - CORRECT
1 Ravens vs. 4 Texans - CORRECT
2 Bills vs. 3 Chiefs - INCORRECT (Chiefs win)
1 Ravens vs. 2 Bills 3 Chiefs
NFC
7 Packers @ 2 Cowboys - INCORRECT (Packers win)
6 Rams @ 3 Lions - CORRECT
5 Eagles @ 4 Buccaneers - CORRECT
1 49ers vs. 4 Buccaneers 1 49ers vs. 7 Packers - CORRECT
2 Cowboys vs. 3 Lions 4 Buccaneers @ 3 Lions - CORRECT
1 49ers vs. 2 Cowboys 3 Lions
Super Bowl: Ravens vs. 49ers
Congrats Dolphins! Because you choked the division, you've been sentenced to playing in 17 degree weather at Arrowhead next Saturday!
The Falcons' head coach got fired (Arthur Smith) at 12:01 am EST... Let the firing of coaches begin since it's Black Monday!
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 08, 2024, 12:04:45 AM
Congrats Dolphins! Because you choked the division, you've been sentenced to playing in 17 degree weather at Arrowhead next Saturday!
It will be a brutal game, but I remain optimistic. Chiefs really aren't playing that great, and Mostert and Waddle should be back. Hopefully Van Ginkel is back too.
Connor Williams (C) and Bradley Chubb (LB) ACL tears, however, are a massive loss.
Quote from: webny99 on December 23, 2023, 09:32:39 PM
Saw this and it was simply too insane not to share. Falcons = biggest disappointment of 2023, even accounting for some tough competition (Chargers, Jets)
https://twitter.com/greggrosenthal/status/1737893169461944407
And, predictably, Coach Arthur Smith was just fired.
Today is Black Monday for the NFL. Which coaches will get terminated, or "moving on to other opportunities"?
Ron Rivera gone.
Just saw this on Twitter: This is the first time in league history that all three Lake Erie teams (perhaps extending the definition of Lake Erie just a bit) made the playoffs in the same season.
Today is a great day for Luke Getsy to be fired
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
The pundits really want Bill Belichick or Jim Harbaugh to come to Washington...
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
I think I saw somewhere that it's being simulcast on tv in the local markets - so anyone in Miami or Kansas City will be fine, but everyone else is still SOL (and yes, agreed with your point and equally confused/annoyed on the NFL's newest obsession with trying to push games onto streaming).
On another point, I find it interesting that the wildcard schedule is such that all 3 AFC games will be played before all 3 NFC games - not sure if that's ever happened before (a quick review of every "super" wild card weekend since the 7-seed was added shows it hasn't, but maybe it happened sometime before that). The AFC divisional round will now be finalized by ~4-4:30 next Sunday, whereas the NFC side won't be finalized until late Monday night.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
It will be simulcast on a local channel in KC and Miami.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
Every single thing that I watch is on some streaming platform.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 08, 2024, 05:47:24 AM
Today is Black Monday for the NFL. Which coaches will get terminated, or "moving on to other opportunities"?
There are now five teams with a head coaching vacancy, but I don't see any other clear cut, obvious candidates to be dismissed.
Already fired (5): Panthers, Raiders, Chargers, Falcons, Commanders
On the radar (5): Bears, Saints, Jaguars, Patriots, Titans
Likely Safe (22): Playoff teams plus Bengals, Broncos, Cardinals, Colts, Giants, Jets, Vikings, Seahawks
However, I wouldn't completely rule out the loser of Bucs-Eagles getting fired.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 08, 2024, 05:45:47 AM
And, predictably, Coach Arthur Smith was just fired.
This is an interesting one. I'm not shocked because it fits with the longstanding mantra that NFL head coaches have three seasons to make the playoffs or they're out. Yet before the season, I thought there was almost zero chance Smith was fired because their roster looked much improved and the path to the NFC South title or at least a winning record looked so easy. And their defense did improve, but it did not translate to more wins. While I don't think Smith was a terrible coach, there's simply no excuse for a third-straight 7-win season. Especially when the coach wanted to run the ball and couldn't do it with some really good weapons, and (IMO) mishandled the QB situation by not bringing in a better backup and flip flopping on the starter all season.
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2024, 07:56:42 PM
Gonna be a good slate. This is the first time in the 7-team era that I really don't think anybody is safe in wild card weekend. To me the Steelers are the worst team in the playoffs, but both of their potential opponents have their flaws (wide receivers and random letdown games, I'm sure everyone knows which is which). And as much as I've been hating on Pittsburgh all year, they have been legit the last few weeks thanks to the best QB on their roster finally getting on the field.
Good might be an understatement. Week 18 played out almost perfectly IMO. I think we're getting the best 14 teams in the NFL
right now, with no completely undeserving entries (no one with a losing record!), and no glaring omissions, even despite five 9-8 teams missing out. It didn't go well for my forks, but I will admit that I would much rather see the Packers in the playoffs than the Saints or Seahawks. And with the Jaguars stumbling, there won't be any 10-win teams that missed out.
The 49ers absolutely understood the assignment with letting the Rams steal one to set up the Rams-Lions revenge game we needed. I had decided that I would have been "OK" with Rams/Cowboys and Packers/Lions, but the two games we got are even better.
Not happy about the Steelers, but appreciate the irony that the Bills will have to knock them out to advance - and they are ultimately a better matchup than the Texans, who I would not want to face right now.
Quote from: Buck87 on January 07, 2024, 08:33:16 PM
AFC North
Baltimore 13-4
Cleveland 11-6
Pittsburgh 10-7
Cincinnati 9-8
First post merger NFL division to have all of its teams finish above .500
Every division except for one finished 2023 with multiple teams above .500.
Which one probably wouldn't be your first guess, maybe not even in your first few guesses - it's not the NFC South or NFC North, but the supposed juggernaut
AFC West that ended with the Chiefs as the lone team above .500.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
NFL rules have long permitted a local channel for each team to broadcast any game that's primarily on ESPN, the NFL network, or streaming.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2024, 12:48:57 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 08, 2024, 05:45:47 AM
And, predictably, Coach Arthur Smith was just fired.
This is an interesting one. I'm not shocked because it fits with the longstanding mantra that NFL head coaches have three seasons to make the playoffs or they're out. Yet before the season, I thought there was almost zero chance Smith was fired because their roster looked much improved and the path to the NFC South title or at least a winning record looked so easy. And their defense did improve, but it did not translate to more wins. While I don't think Smith was a terrible coach, there's simply no excuse for a third-straight 7-win season. Especially when the coach wanted to run the ball and couldn't do it with some really good weapons, and (IMO) mishandled the QB situation by not bringing in a better backup and flip flopping on the starter all season.
Arthur Smith was fired because of fantasy football. Fans can't understand why the team doesn't win AND doesn't take full advantage of perceived stars Kyle Pitts, Drake London, and Bijan Robinson. If the team had a lot of nobodies on it, I would tend to think that fans would think he over achieved.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 08, 2024, 11:51:21 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
Every single thing that I watch is on some streaming platform.
You never watch local channels or traditional cable channels like ESPN? Those are not considered to be streaming platforms even if you happen to watch them via stream.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 08, 2024, 01:47:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2024, 12:48:57 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 08, 2024, 05:45:47 AM
And, predictably, Coach Arthur Smith was just fired.
This is an interesting one. I'm not shocked because it fits with the longstanding mantra that NFL head coaches have three seasons to make the playoffs or they're out. Yet before the season, I thought there was almost zero chance Smith was fired because their roster looked much improved and the path to the NFC South title or at least a winning record looked so easy. And their defense did improve, but it did not translate to more wins. While I don't think Smith was a terrible coach, there's simply no excuse for a third-straight 7-win season. Especially when the coach wanted to run the ball and couldn't do it with some really good weapons, and (IMO) mishandled the QB situation by not bringing in a better backup and flip flopping on the starter all season.
Arthur Smith was fired because of fantasy football. Fans can't understand why the team doesn't win AND doesn't take full advantage of perceived stars Kyle Pitts, Drake London, and Bijan Robinson. If the team had a lot of nobodies on it, I would tend to think that fans would think he over achieved.
I fully agree with the idea that the Falcons optimism was from fantasy:
Quote from: thspfc on December 23, 2023, 11:01:47 PM
The Falcons are actually doing better than I expected them to. The hype was derived from fantasy football. People went crazy at the thought of their 3 first round skill position picks of the last 3 drafts (Bijan, London, Pitts). Turns out you need a competent QB and competent coaching for that to matter. Not to mention that prospects are just that . . . prospects.
However, that's not why Smith was fired. He was fired because he's coached the same bad team three years in a row with no progress.
Also on Bijan/London/Pitts . . . fantasy maniacs often make no sense to me. They're literally just first round picks. That's it, that's the entire reason why they're hyped up. Here are all the teams with better skill position trios than those three:
49ers (McCaffrey/Kittle/Deebo/Aiyuk)
Dolphins (Mostert/Hill/Waddle)
Rams (Williams/Nacua/Kupp)
Cowboys (Pollard/Lamb/Ferguson)
Lions (Montgomery/Gibbs/St. Brown/La Porta)
Chiefs (Pacheco/Kelce/Rice)
Bills (Cook/Diggs/Davis)
Eagles (Swift/Brown/Smith)
Bengals (Mixon/Chase/Higgins)
Seahawks (Walker/Metcalf/Lockett)
Jaguars (Etienne/Ridley/Engram)
Buccaneers (White/Evans/Godwin)
Vikings (Jefferson/Addison/Hockenson)
Steelers (Harris/Warren/Pickens)
Browns (Chubb/Ford/Cooper/Njoku)
Colts (Taylor/Pittman/Downs)
That's over half the rest of the league. Atlanta's supposed strength was never a strength at all. Hype trains are weird.
I was correct in my prediction that the AFCN would be the league's best division. Looking back at my preseason power rankings . . .
Quote from: thspfc on August 10, 2023, 09:33:56 PM
To start off, there are 9 teams that I think are locks to win 10+ games.
1. Bengals
2. Chiefs
3. Eagles
4. Bills
5. Ravens
6. 49ers
7. Cowboys
8. Jets
9. Seahawks
6/9. Of the other three, two suffered a major QB injury, and two were one win away from 10. Could be a lot worse.
Moving down into teams I expect to be over .500, but a losing season wouldn't shock me:
10. Browns
11. Lions
12. Vikings
13. Jaguars
14. Broncos
15. Chargers
16. Saints
4/7. Again, two of the other three lost their franchise QB. My assessments of the Jags and Saints were spot on, they just ended up facing more competition than expected within the division.
Teams I expect to be below .500, but a winning season wouldn't shock me:
17. Patriots
18. Steelers
19. Dolphins
20. Packers
3 of these 4 had winning seasons. Not shocked by any of them, clearly wrong about the Dolphins but I was on the "can't beat good teams" bandwagon way before everyone else :-D
Teams I'm very confident will be below .500:
21. Raiders
22. Giants
23. Rams
24. Titans
25. Bears
26. Cardinals
27. Commanders
28. Panthers
29. Buccaneers
30. Falcons
31. Colts
32. Texans
8/12. Arizona was indeed not the worst team in the league. The offseason consensus trainwreck almost never is.
Playoffs
AFC
1. Bengals (1)
2. Chiefs (2)
3. Bills (4)
4. Jaguars (13)
5. Ravens (5)
6. Jets (8)
7. Browns (10)
4/7
NFC
1. Eagles (3)
2. 49ers (6)
3. Lions (11)
4. Saints (16)
5. Cowboys (7)
6. Seahawks (9)
7. Vikings (12)
4/7
Quote from: thspfc on January 07, 2024, 07:56:42 PM
My NFC bracket:
2) Cowboys defeat 7) Packers
6) Rams defeat 3) Lions
5) Eagles defeat 4) Buccaneers
1) 49ers defeat 6) Rams
2) Cowboys defeat 5) Eagles
1) 49ers defeat 2) Cowboys
AFC bracket:
2) Bills defeat 7) Steelers
3) Chiefs defeat 6) Dolphins
5) Browns defeat 4) Texans
1) Ravens defeat 5) Browns
2) Bills defeat 3) Chiefs
2) Bills defeat 1) Ravens
Super Bowl: Bills defeat 49ers
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 08, 2024, 10:10:20 AM
Just saw this on Twitter: This is the first time in league history that all three Lake Erie teams (perhaps extending the definition of Lake Erie just a bit) made the playoffs in the same season.
A very heavy Rust Belt representation if you add Pittsburgh and Green Bay to the three "Lake Erie" teams.
I'll analyze my preseason predictions:
Quote from: jlam on September 06, 2023, 01:14:41 AM
NFC North:
y - Vikings 12-5 (7-10, -5*)
x - Lions 10-7 (12-5, +2)
Packers 6-11 (9-8, +3)
Bears 5-12 (7-10, +2)
NFC East:
z - Eagles 13-4 (11-6, -2)
x - Cowboys 11-6 (12-5, +1)
x - Giants 9-8 (6-11, -3)
Commanders 8-9 (4-13, -4)
NFC South:
y - Saints 10-7 (9-8, -1)
Falcons 8-9 (7-10, -1)
Panthers 5-12 (2-15, -3)
Buccaneers 4-13 (9-8, +5)
NFC West:
y - 49ers 13-4 (12-5, -1)
Seahawks 8-9 (9-8, +1)
Rams 7-10 (10-7, +3)
Cardinals 3-14 (4-13, +1)
AFC North:
y - Bengals 13-4 (9-8, -4*)
x - Ravens 11-6 (13-4, +2)
Steelers 7-10 (10-7, +3)
Browns 5-12 (11-6, +6)
AFC East:
y - Bills 12-5 (11-6, -1)
x - Jets 10-7 (7-10, -3*)
Dolphins (8-9) (11-6, +3)
Patriots (7-10) (4-13, -3)
AFC South:
x - Jaguars 12-5 (9-8, -3*)
Titans 7-10 (6-11, -1)
Texans 6-11 (10-7, +4)
Colts 4-13 (9-8, +5)
AFC West:
z - Chiefs 14-3 (11-6, -3)
x - Chargers 10-7 (5-12, -5*)
Broncos 9-8 (8-9, -1)
Raiders 5-12 (8-9, +3)
NFC
- Eagles (5)
- 49ers (1)
- Vikings (10*)
- Saints (9)
- Cowboys (2)
- Lions (3)
- Giants (13)
4/7
AFC
- Chiefs (3)
- Bengals (8*)
- Bills (2)
- Jaguars (9)
- Ravens (1)
- Chargers (15*)
- Jets (13*)
3/7
*team lost their starting QB to injury
I'll predict the postseason in a bit.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 08, 2024, 01:47:00 PM
Arthur Smith was fired because of fantasy football. Fans can't understand why the team doesn't win AND doesn't take full advantage of perceived stars Kyle Pitts, Drake London, and Bijan Robinson. If the team had a lot of nobodies on it, I would tend to think that fans would think he over achieved.
I'm not questioning fantasy affected the narrative around the team, but that's more about fans and the media. I doubt it was a huge factor in the owner's decision. Owners just get antsy and tend to pull the plug after three seasons of no progress (specifically no playoffs).
And it is definitely worth distinguishing between the last two seasons and this season. They
did overachieve in 2021 and 2022. But they added a lot of talent on defense this offseason (and the defense did have a much better season until imploding the last two weeks), drafted an RB in the top 10 to help them win now, and played a historically soft schedule and division - about as good a recipe as you could possibly concoct for a big improvement record-wise. And unlike the last two seasons, the failures cannot be "blamed" on the roster rebuild. There was zero excuses not to get at least 10 wins and a playoff berth, so the blame for underachieving falls on the coach.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 08, 2024, 03:18:17 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 08, 2024, 10:10:20 AM
Just saw this on Twitter: This is the first time in league history that all three Lake Erie teams (perhaps extending the definition of Lake Erie just a bit) made the playoffs in the same season.
A very heavy Rust Belt representation if you add Pittsburgh and Green Bay to the three "Lake Erie" teams.
Hmm, I'd never thought about this before, but there's also a strong case that these are five of the best fanbases, or at least most hard core fanbases, in the league. Pretty sure I'd have all five in the top ten.
Didn't do very well predicting the regular season, let's see if I can do any better with the playoffs:
AFC
2 Bills over 7 Steeers
3 Chiefs over 6 Dolphins
5 Browns over 4 Texans
1 Ravens over 5 Browns
2 Bills over 3 Chiefs
2 Bills over 1 Ravens
NFC
2 Cowboys over 7 Packers
6 Rams over 3 Lions
5 Eagles over 4 Bucs
1 49ers over 6 Rams
2 Cowboys over 5 Eagles
2 Cowboys over 1 49ers
Super Bowl
Bills over Cowboys
Quote from: webny99 on August 22, 2023, 06:06:02 PM
I'd be... weirdly more surprised if the Eagles returned to the Super Bowl than the Chiefs? Their conference is easier, but they didn't get better this off-season, and it's rare in recent history for NFC teams to repeat, never mind the NFC East which seemingly never has a repeat champion.
Well, it took until Week 18, and for a while there I was trying to comprehend the level of panic in Philly if the Cowboys lost to the Commanders but still backed into a division title because the Eagles were barely competitive against the Giants, but Dallas ended up pulling away handily and extending the streak without a repeat champion.
AFC
(2) Bills defeat (7) Steelers
(3) Chefs defeat (6) Dolphins
(5) Browns defeat (4) Texans
(5) Browns defeat (1) Ravens
(2) Bills defeat (3) Chiefs
(2) Bills defeat (5) Browns
NFC
(2) Cowboys defeat (7) Packers
(6) Rams defeat (3) Lions
(5) Eagles defeat (4) Buccaneers
(1) 49ers defeat (6) Rams
(5) Eagles defeat (2) Cowboys
(1) 49ers defeat (5) Eagles
Super Bowl
49ers defeat Bills
Minorly annoyed that they put the Eagles-Bucs games (two East Coast, with East Coast fans) teams on the Monday night of a three day weekend.
It would have been nice if they had put a game from farther west on at that time.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 08, 2024, 07:36:40 PM
Minorly annoyed that they put the Eagles-Bucs games (two East Coast, with East Coast fans) teams on the Monday night of a three day weekend.
It would have been nice if they had put a game from farther west on at that time.
My guess is that they are always going to put a #4/#5 seed matchup on Monday night so that all but one divisional round matchup will be set by Sunday night. Then the divisional schedule can be released on Sunday and is not waiting on that game to determine the divisional round hosts. This is the third straight year they've put the NFC #4/#5 matchup in that slot.
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2024, 08:13:03 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 08, 2024, 07:36:40 PM
Minorly annoyed that they put the Eagles-Bucs games (two East Coast, with East Coast fans) teams on the Monday night of a three day weekend.
It would have been nice if they had put a game from farther west on at that time.
My guess is that they are always going to put a #4/#5 seed matchup on Monday night so that all but one divisional round matchup will be set by Sunday night. Then the divisional schedule can be released on Sunday and is not waiting on that game to determine the divisional round hosts. This is the third straight year they've put the NFC #4/#5 matchup in that slot.
Yes, because Monday's winner can't play the following Saturday, so they can't have a 3/6 or 2/7 game where there might be a different opponent based on who wins.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 08, 2024, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 08, 2024, 11:51:21 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 08, 2024, 10:51:03 AM
I'd be pissed if I was a Chiefs or Dolphins fan with that game only being available on some streaming platform. DUMB!
Every single thing that I watch is on some streaming platform.
You never watch local channels or traditional cable channels like ESPN? Those are not considered to be streaming platforms even if you happen to watch them via stream.
The only thing I watch live is sports. So, while I do watch ESPN or USA, I watch them via YouTubeTV. So, true, not streaming exclusive, but I'd say 95% is streaming exclusive.
It's going to be interesting how the Bears handle the top pick in the upcoming draft. Keep Fields or draft another QB?
Also, for the Wild Card round, Go Dallas!
My AFC side/SB predictions:
2. Bills > 7. Steelers
3. Chiefs > 6. Dolphins
5. Browns > 4. Texans
1. Ravens > 5. Browns
2. Bills > 3. Chiefs
1. Ravens > 2. Bills
Ravens > 49ers - Super Bowl LVIII
The Patriots season has mercifully ended. The big story now is if (when) Bill Belichick is replaced as coach.
Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2024, 11:15:09 PM
It's going to be interesting how the Bears handle the top pick in the upcoming draft. Keep Fields or draft another QB?
Also, for the Wild Card round, Go Dallas!
Keep Fields, get a haul again for the #1
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 08, 2024, 01:26:37 PM
NFL rules have long permitted a local channel for each team to broadcast any game that's primarily on ESPN, the NFL network, or streaming.
The Packers were definitely not on a local channel for this year's stupid Thursday night game. And last season, none of the Monday night games were locally broadcast. We only got Monday night games on TV this season because of the Hollywood strikes and ABC had time to fill.
I think that local broadcast arrangement is in the past, for regular season at least.
It's all well and good for Chiefs fans in KC, but their market is geographically much larger than that. What if you live in Wichita or Omaha? Springfield? Jeff City?
It's a cynical loss-leader to force people to get another streaming service for one event. If you have to coerce people into buying your product, you're doing something wrong.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 09, 2024, 11:08:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 08, 2024, 01:26:37 PM
NFL rules have long permitted a local channel for each team to broadcast any game that's primarily on ESPN, the NFL network, or streaming.
The Packers were definitely not on a local channel for this year's stupid Thursday night game. And last season, none of the Monday night games were locally broadcast. We only got Monday night games on TV this season because of the Hollywood strikes and ABC had time to fill.
I think that local broadcast arrangement is in the past, for regular season at least.
It's all well and good for Chiefs fans in KC, but their market is geographically much larger than that. What if you live in Wichita or Omaha? Springfield? Jeff City?
It's a cynical loss-leader to force people to get another streaming service for one event. If you have to coerce people into buying your product, you're doing something wrong.
Local markets can still broadcast any game on cable or streaming. Are you saying that Green Bay didn't have those Packers games on a local channel?
I know local channels in Chicago always pick up any Bears games on cable/streaming.
Feels like the right time for a look at how the playoff picture has changed from last season:
New playoff teams in 2023-24:AFC: Cleveland Browns, Pittsburgh Steelers, Houston Texans
NFC: Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Los Angeles Rams
Repeat playoff teams from 2022-23 (active playoff streaks in parentheses):AFC: Kansas City Chiefs (9), Buffalo Bills (5), Baltimore Ravens (2), Miami Dolphins (2)
NFC: Tampa Bay Buccaneers (4), Dallas Cowboys (3), Philadelphia Eagles (3), San Francisco 49ers (3)
Playoff teams from 2022-23 that failed to repeat:AFC: Cincinnati Bengals, Jacksonville Jaguars, Los Angeles Chargers
NFC: Minnesota Vikings, New York Giants, Seattle Seahawks
Teams with 2+ year playoff droughts (active playoff droughts in parentheses):AFC: Las Vegas Raiders (2), New England Patriots (2), Tennessee Titans (2), Indianapolis Colts (3), Denver Broncos (8), New York Jets (13)
NFC: Arizona Cardinals (2), Chicago Bears (3), New Orleans Saints (3), Washington Commanders (3), Carolina Panthers (6), Atlanta Falcons (6)
- 28 of 32 teams (87.5%) have made the playoffs in the 2020's.
- Hilariously, the Bucs have longest active playoff streak in the NFC, while the Panthers and Falcons are tied for the longest playoff drought in the NFC
- The Jets' 13 year playoff drought is the longest active drought in North American professional sports
- The Lions and Dolphins have the longest active playoff WIN droughts in the league at 32 and 23 years respectively. Both have an opportunity to change that this weekend. If they both win, the Raiders will have the longest playoff win drought at 21 years
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 09, 2024, 11:08:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 08, 2024, 01:26:37 PM
NFL rules have long permitted a local channel for each team to broadcast any game that's primarily on ESPN, the NFL network, or streaming.
The Packers were definitely not on a local channel for this year's stupid Thursday night game. And last season, none of the Monday night games were locally broadcast. We only got Monday night games on TV this season because of the Hollywood strikes and ABC had time to fill.
I think that local broadcast arrangement is in the past, for regular season at least.
It's all well and good for Chiefs fans in KC, but their market is geographically much larger than that. What if you live in Wichita or Omaha? Springfield? Jeff City?
It's a cynical loss-leader to force people to get another streaming service for one event. If you have to coerce people into buying your product, you're doing something wrong.
It is limited to one channel in the home city of the teams involved (with Boston for the Patriots), with the exception of the Packers which have a local station in Green Bay and in Milwaukee.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 09, 2024, 11:08:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 08, 2024, 01:26:37 PM
NFL rules have long permitted a local channel for each team to broadcast any game that's primarily on ESPN, the NFL network, or streaming.
The Packers were definitely not on a local channel for this year's stupid Thursday night game. And last season, none of the Monday night games were locally broadcast. We only got Monday night games on TV this season because of the Hollywood strikes and ABC had time to fill.
I think that local broadcast arrangement is in the past, for regular season at least.
It was on TV in Detroit (Fox Ch. 2). Guess whatever market would serve Green Bay elected not to air it for their fans.
Quote
It's all well and good for Chiefs fans in KC, but their market is geographically much larger than that. What if you live in Wichita or Omaha? Springfield? Jeff City?
It's a cynical loss-leader to force people to get another streaming service for one event. If you have to coerce people into buying your product, you're doing something wrong.
Loss-leaders are a common sales tactic to get people to purchase a product or do their shopping at a specific store. Whether it be a Black Friday special or even free coffee, pulling customers in by offering a deeply discounted product or freebie is a proven way to encourage further purchasing, either then or in the future.
^^ It was on NBC26 in Green Bay and on FOX6 in Milwaukee. The "local area" did not include Madison where 3MX lives.
https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2023&wk=4
And now Mike Vrabel has been sacked by the Tennessee Titans.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 09, 2024, 01:36:07 PM
And now Mike Vrabel has been sacked by the Tennessee Titans.
Wow! That is a mild surprise. A sure sign of discord between Vrabel and the new GM, who was hired last offseason, and the rare coach firing that fans of the team aren't happy about, or at least aren't sure what to think.
Unlike any of the other fired head coaches, I think it's a lock that Vrabel will get another head coaching opportunity. The Titans have overachieved in pretty much every season he was their head coach except for this one, and even this year, in a lost season, he led them to a huge upset over the Dolphins in December and had them fired up to end their division rival's season in Week 18.
Quote from: Big John on January 09, 2024, 12:29:01 PM
^^ It was on NBC26 in Green Bay and on FOX6 in Milwaukee. The "local area" did not include Madison where 3MX lives.
https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2023&wk=4
That's SOP for this situation. The local market that has to show it OTA is strictly limited to the markets physically containing the local teams. Any other markets do not get one, whether they should be able to or not.
Quote from: webny99 on January 09, 2024, 03:36:17 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 09, 2024, 01:36:07 PM
And now Mike Vrabel has been sacked by the Tennessee Titans.
Wow! That is a mild surprise. A sure sign of discord between Vrabel and the new GM, who was hired last offseason, and the rare coach firing that fans of the team aren't happy about, or at least aren't sure what to think.
Unlike any of the other fired head coaches, I think it's a lock that Vrabel will get another head coaching opportunity. The Titans have overachieved in pretty much every season he was their head coach except for this one, and even this year, in a lost season, he led them to a huge upset over the Dolphins in December and had them fired up to end their division rival's season in Week 18.
That's certainly un-Titan-like to just oust the guy. Seriously. What the hell is the Titans GM's definition of "good enough"? I know it ain't money, 'cause they got plenty of that. I know it's not a draft pick. Not sure how that would spell the end of Vrabel's tenure.
Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I believe that in the minds of Tennessee's front office, Vrabel's days as a Titan have been numbered for the better part of two years.
Vrabel and former GM Jon Robinson wanted to win games by pounding Derrick Henry 30 times a game, chewing the clock, and playing strong defense. Of course, many teams, even recently, have found success by predominantly running the ball and playing defense. Legion of Boom Seahawks. No Fly Zone Broncos. '12, '19, and '23 Ravens. '17 Jaguars. Shanahan's 49ers, Sirianni's Eagles until December of this season. But they all had the following things:
1)
elite, not just
good defenses;
2) competent QBs and passing offenses that could play from behind and come up with a big drive late in the game when necessary;
3) a quite serviceable second string running back, if not a pretty much even 1-2 or even 1-2-3 punch at RB.
Tennessee had none of those things during the Vrabel/Robinson era. Their defense was good, never great. Tannehill was solid in the regular season in 2019 and 2020, but when he had to make a game-changing play/drive, he usually didn't. And in the backfield, it was Henry or nobody.
In the 2019 postseason, Henry literally carried them to wins against a dying Patriots team and a (probably overconfident) Ravens team that just didn't show up on that particular night. Tannehill did next to nothing in either game, because all he had to do to win was hand it to Henry. After that, they bombed three straight playoff games, and every time it was because their opponents forced them to win by throwing the ball. Or, perhaps, not even that; their opponents forced them to come up with one or two big
drives that weren't just Henry runs, and they couldn't.
2020 ended in a highly disappointing wild card exit. Henry ran wild for over 2,000 yards in the regular season. That, predictably, opened things up for Tannehill, who had the best season of his career. In the playoffs, the Ravens stuffed Henry to the tune of just 40 yards on 18 carries. Tennessee had to throw to win, and they couldn't. 209 yards of offense, 12 first downs, 13 points.
How did Vrabel and Robinson address this problem? By not re-signing two of their top three pass catchers in Corey Davis and Jonnu Smith, who were both coming off career years. Aging Julio Jones didn't do a whole lot. To the retrospective surprise of no one, their offense fell off a cliff:
2020Total offense: 3rd
Scoring offense: 4th
2021Total offense: 18th
Scoring offense: 15th
Tannehill's stats also plummeted . . .
2020Yards: 3819
Y/A: 7.9
TDs: 33
INTs: 7
TD%: 6.9
INT%: 1.5
Sacks: 24
Rating: 106.5
2021Yards: 3734
Y/A: 7.0
TDs: 21
INTs: 14
TD%: 4.0
INT%: 2.6
Sacks: 47
Rating: 89.6
It should be noted that Henry was hurt for about half the season in 2021. But if losing a running back to injury - a position believed to be injury-prone, easily replaceable, and having a short shelf life per player - kills your entire offense . . . is your offense sustainable? Sure, you have to build around your best players, but counting on a running back to go for literally 2,000 yards, as he did in 2020, just isn't smart.
Anyway, after going one-and-done again with a dreadful loss to the Bengals in the divisional, spearheaded by three Tannehill interceptions and yet more failed fourth quarter drives - despite sacking Burrow nine times - what did Vrabel and Robinson do? Trade AJ Brown, of course. In his place, they tried to cheap out with Robert Woods coming off an ACL tear and rookie Treylon Burks. The combined production from those two didn't equal what Brown did himself. At that point, the front office was just waiting for a reason to get rid of both Vrabel and Robinson. Robinson went first after a blowout loss to Philly in which Brown buried them for 119 yards and two touchdowns, and they pretty much got exposed at every position on the field. The front office pulled the trigger even though they were leading the division by a mile at the time.
Quote from: thspfc on December 06, 2022, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: thspfc on December 04, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Titans/Eagles today showed the difference between a run-first team that is capable of throwing effectively when they need to, and a run-first team that is not. Here's my question with Tennessee: if you're committed to the "put everything on Derrick Henry" offensive strategy, why are you paying your QB $30 million a year? He's not influencing the game beyond simply not losing it all by himself. Might as well pick up someone like Teddy Bridgewater for dirt cheap and use the extra money to strengthen the o-line and defense.
Guess what, they just fired their GM. The fact that they pulled the trigger midseason, while in the thick of the playoff race, shows just how clearly that game Sunday exposed their issues.
Then they waited for the team to lose enough so that they didn't catch an incredible amount of heat for firing Vrabel. Nothing changed at all this season. It wasn't a success, it wasn't a disappointment to anyone who was honest with themselves. If he was safe after 2022, he should still have been safe after 2023. But before the 2022 season even started, the decision had already been made - they were going to start new with a new GM, a new QB, and a new head coach. They just had to delay the latter in order to avoid being crucified by fans and media. No more putting the team on Henry's back - he's likely played his last down as a Titan.
Do I think Vrabel is a bad coach? Absolutely not. With a good offensive coordinator, he could have a lot of success with, for example, the Chargers. Do I disagree with the Titans' decision to fire him? . . . no. The team has gone stale and this is a needed reboot.
Also, there are very few coaches that would not be in hot water after going 6-18 over a 24-game span. Reid, McVay . . . I think that's it. Belichick is the greatest coach in the history of the game, and his job security is in question, having gone . . . 6-18 in his last 24 games.
Of course, if Vrabel succeeds as a head coach elsewhere while the Titans continue to sputter, then that raises the question of whether he was actually at any fault for the team's decline over the past few years. But based on his background, his demeanor, and how it's been on the field, I think some of that blame does fall on him.
In addition, Vrabel's predecessor, Mike Mularkey, inherited a team that had won a total of five games across the previous two seasons, went 9-7 twice, notched the franchise's first playoff win in 15 years, and was promptly dismissed after his second season. They've done this before. Sometimes, it seems fine on the surface, but deep down you just know it's time. The end of Doug Pederson's Super Bowl-winning tenure in Philadelphia is another example.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PM
Do I think Vrabel is a bad coach? Absolutely not. With a good offensive coordinator, he could have a lot of success with, for example, the Chargers. Do I disagree with the Titans' decision to fire him? . . . no. The team has gone stale and this is a needed reboot.
I think them being stale and needing a reboot is because the roster is bad, not because the coaching is bad. Vrabel is now one of the top coaches available, so it's a pretty big risk. They're letting him go in hopes of hitting a home run on an unknown replacement, but it seems more likely that the replacement is worse than Vrabel.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PMAlso, there are very few coaches that would not be in hot water after going 6-18 over a 24-game span. Reid, McVay . . . I think that's it. Belichick is the greatest coach in the history of the game, and his job security is in question, having gone . . . 6-18 in his last 24 games.
I would also add Kyle Shanahan to that list. Maybe not with the current roster, but certainly if they were entering a known roster reset much like last year's Rams.
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PM
Of course, if Vrabel succeeds as a head coach elsewhere while the Titans continue to sputter, then that raises the question of whether he was actually at any fault for the team's decline over the past few years. But based on his background, his demeanor, and how it's been on the field, I think some of that blame does fall on him.
I am curious how much blame you think falls on Vrabel. The team went downhill after the AJ Brown trade, and they brought in a new GM last season which usually means a roster reboot. I'm not sure there's any coach who get more than 6 wins and competitive December football out of that roster.
Quote from: Big John on January 09, 2024, 12:29:01 PM
^^ It was on NBC26 in Green Bay and on FOX6 in Milwaukee. The "local area" did not include Madison where 3MX lives.
https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2023&wk=4
Yeah, what are we, chopped liver? Same problem for my folks up north in the Wausau media market.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 10, 2024, 10:33:32 AM
Quote from: Big John on January 09, 2024, 12:29:01 PM
^^ It was on NBC26 in Green Bay and on FOX6 in Milwaukee. The "local area" did not include Madison where 3MX lives.
https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2023&wk=4
When ESPN first airing games, Madison and Wausau were also included as the local market, then the "brilliant" minds shrunk the definition of local markets for all teams when NFL Network started airing games.
Yeah, what are we, chopped liver? Same problem for my folks up north in the Wausau media market.
Pete Carroll out as coach of Seattle. Might stay with team in different capacity.
Bears have decided to retain head coach Matt Eberflus but have fired their offensive coordinator as well as most of the offensive assistants.
I did not see Pete Carrol's "reassignment" upstairs coming.
Wow, just realized the Jags' choke in Week 18 prevented all four teams that have never been to a Super Bowl from appearing in the playoffs this season. The other three (Browns, Lions, and Texans) are in the playoffs.
Belichick is leaving the Patriots.
The collective reactions to the Belichick and Carroll news have been a lot milder than the collective reaction to the Vrabel news . . . both Belichick and Carroll are far, far more accomplished than Vrabel. Make it make sense. "Well, they're good coaches, but it was time to move on." Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying about Vrabel - and he's proved absolutely nothing about his coaching abilities in comparison to those guys.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2024, 09:04:20 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PM
Do I think Vrabel is a bad coach? Absolutely not. With a good offensive coordinator, he could have a lot of success with, for example, the Chargers. Do I disagree with the Titans' decision to fire him? . . . no. The team has gone stale and this is a needed reboot.
I think them being stale and needing a reboot is because the roster is bad, not because the coaching is bad. Vrabel is now one of the top coaches available, so it's a pretty big risk. They're letting him go in hopes of hitting a home run on an unknown replacement, but it seems more likely that the replacement is worse than Vrabel.
I never said the coaching was bad. And I agree that it's not going to be easy to find someone better than him - but trying to do so is the only logical choice, because, from what I said on the last page, I don't believe Vrabel was ever going to have a chance to win a Super Bowl in Tennessee. It was not working.
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2024, 09:04:20 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PM
Of course, if Vrabel succeeds as a head coach elsewhere while the Titans continue to sputter, then that raises the question of whether he was actually at any fault for the team's decline over the past few years. But based on his background, his demeanor, and how it's been on the field, I think some of that blame does fall on him.
I am curious how much blame you think falls on Vrabel. The team went downhill after the AJ Brown trade, and they brought in a new GM last season which usually means a roster reboot. I'm not sure there's any coach who get more than 6 wins and competitive December football out of that roster.
Estimating which rosters are good and which ones are not, and in turn basing coaching evaluations off that, is always a very uncertain science. Honestly, I think that the perception is based on whether or not a team plays a lot of nationally televised games. If a team is on TV a lot but loses a lot, people will assume coaching is the problem (because they're on TV for a reason, right?). If they're always playing at noon on Sunday, people will assume they're bad, and if they win games, it's because of coaching. Fantasy football also factors into it - Henry and an aging DHop were their only viable fantasy options this year, so the fantasy hivemind extrapolates that across the entire team.
Not to mention, winning 6 games is not a tall task. A really bad NFL roster should go about 4-13. With how slim the margin between winning and losing is in many games, a team that "should" win 4 - assuming that's actually the case for Tennessee's current roster - is not super unlikely to win 6, even if the coaching is average. That's why I think this season was neither a success nor a failure for Vrabel. 6 wins is never going to be a feather in a coach's cap, but in this situation it wasn't a fireable offense either. If he was safe after 2022, he should have been safe after this year, but he wasn't, and that leads to my theory that this has been in the works for two years.
The Seahawks management overestimate how good their team is. Carroll has been the one coaching them into being competitive.
Belichick ought to just to retire. At this point it is clear he can't get things done anymore.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2024, 09:39:55 AM
The collective reactions to the Belichick and Carroll news have been a lot milder than the collective reaction to the Vrabel news . . . both Belichick and Carroll are far, far more accomplished than Vrabel. Make it make sense. "Well, they're good coaches, but it was time to move on." Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying about Vrabel - and he's proved absolutely nothing about his coaching abilities in comparison to those guys.
The difference is that Belichick and Pete Carroll are old, so they've been collectively viewed as past their prime for years now. They may still be "good coaches" but don't necessarily provide a schematic advantage a la McVay or Shanahan in today's NFL. I think Vrabel is actually somewhat similar despite being much younger - really good at the "coaching" things like game management, leadership, and having the team ready to play, but didn't necessarily bring a high level offensive staff (outside of Arthur Smith, and even that is now questionable) or any distinct offensive coaching advantage. They hadn't scored 30 points since Halloween of
2021 (over two full seasons ago!), which is just outrageous. Even the floating Panthers put up 30 once this year in a completely lost season.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2024, 09:39:55 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 10, 2024, 09:04:20 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 09, 2024, 11:55:33 PM
Do I think Vrabel is a bad coach? Absolutely not. With a good offensive coordinator, he could have a lot of success with, for example, the Chargers. Do I disagree with the Titans' decision to fire him? . . . no. The team has gone stale and this is a needed reboot.
I think them being stale and needing a reboot is because the roster is bad, not because the coaching is bad. Vrabel is now one of the top coaches available, so it's a pretty big risk. They're letting him go in hopes of hitting a home run on an unknown replacement, but it seems more likely that the replacement is worse than Vrabel.
I never said the coaching was bad. And I agree that it's not going to be easy to find someone better than him - but trying to do so is the only logical choice, because, from what I said on the last page, I don't believe Vrabel was ever going to have a chance to win a Super Bowl in Tennessee. It was not working.
I agree that he probably wasn't going to win a Super Bowl in Tennessee, but trying to upgrade when you know you have a good one already is just a really tricky needle to thread.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 11, 2024, 10:09:46 AM
The Seahawks management overestimate how good their team is. Carroll has been the one coaching them into being competitive.
Belichick ought to just to retire. At this point it is clear he can't get things done anymore.
Tom Brady in his prime WAS the Patriots.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 11, 2024, 12:41:13 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 11, 2024, 10:09:46 AM
The Seahawks management overestimate how good their team is. Carroll has been the one coaching them into being competitive.
Belichick ought to just to retire. At this point it is clear he can't get things done anymore.
Tom Brady in his prime WAS the Patriots.
Mike
What's interesting is that there is a fair data set on Belichick before Brady. He was 36-44 in Cleveland with his best coaching year coming during the 11 win 1994 season. I wouldn't call that a terrible record considering it was the Browns, but there wasn't much to suggest he was some sort of diamond in the rough. His career really took off once Tom Brady became the Patriots starter after Drew Bledsoe got hurt.
Conversely I'd argue Pete Carroll got quite a bit out of Drew Bledsoe. Russell Wilson and Geno Smith both sure looked way better with Carroll as their head coach.
This is great, all three of my least favorite coaches are out in football. Belichick, Saban and Carroll. Late Christmas present for me! :)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2024, 05:08:39 PM
This is great, all three of my least favorite coaches are out in football. Belichick, Saban and Carroll. Late Christmas present for me! :)
The first two I understand but what's wrong with Pete Carroll?
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2024, 06:01:40 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2024, 05:08:39 PM
This is great, all three of my least favorite coaches are out in football. Belichick, Saban and Carroll. Late Christmas present for me! :)
The first two I understand but what's wrong with Pete Carroll?
Being a WI resident, I'm gonna guess 2014 NFC Championship.
I will never forget Pete Carroll finally coming through for the Patriots in SB 49.
Quote from: thspfc on January 11, 2024, 06:29:15 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2024, 06:01:40 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2024, 05:08:39 PM
This is great, all three of my least favorite coaches are out in football. Belichick, Saban and Carroll. Late Christmas present for me! :)
The first two I understand but what's wrong with Pete Carroll?
Being a WI resident, I'm gonna guess 2014 NFC Championship.
Or the Fail Mary.
BTW, your location says MN.
If you're going to fire a Head Coach or General Manager, who is going to replace them?? If I was an owner I would consider all available candidates before parting ways with the incumbent coach/GM. If you fire someone with no replacement in mind, it's only going to set the team back. If you're incumbent coach is bad, then what if the next coach is worse? If you keep firing them one-by-one after a single-season trial, then no one would want the job. "Failing to Prepare" = "Preparing to Fail"
-------------------------------------
Even though the Texans team is the only division champion underdog, there is a tremendous excitement for this playoff game like never felt before....almost like the biggest game in franchise history type of vibe. I would not be shocked nor disappointed if the Texans came up short, after all it is a Super Bowl MVP (Flacco), vs a first-timer playoff game (Stroud). But this game will be a lot closer than the Christmas Eve game, when the Texans lost by two TDs. It could even come down to the last minute or two. I still believe DeMeco Ryans has earned the Coach of the Year honors, but if the Texans pull off the upset win, then he will be a lock for the award.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 11, 2024, 09:13:01 PM
If you're going to fire a Head Coach or General Manager, who is going to replace them?? If I was an owner I would consider all available candidates before parting ways with the incumbent coach/GM. If you fire someone with no replacement in mind, it's only going to set the team back. If you're incumbent coach is bad, then what if the next coach is worse? If you keep firing them one-by-one after a single-season trial, then no one would want the job. "Failing to Prepare" = "Preparing to Fail"
-------------------------------------
Even though the Texans team is the only division champion underdog, there is a tremendous excitement for this playoff game like never felt before....almost like the biggest game in franchise history type of vibe. I would not be shocked nor disappointed if the Texans came up short, after all it is a Super Bowl MVP (Flacco), vs a first-timer playoff game (Stroud). But this game will be a lot closer than the Christmas Eve game, when the Texans lost by two TDs. It could even come down to the last minute or two. I still believe DeMeco Ryans has earned the Coach of the Year honors, but if the Texans pull off the upset win, then he will be a lock for the award.
The Bucs are also underdogs as division champions. I agree the Texans could keep this game much closer with Stroud on the field this time, however, that won't factor in to the COTY or any other season awards as those are all voted on this week and based on the regular season only.
Wow! Eight head coach openings for this season alone. That has to be a record, is it? (and if it isn't, what is?)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 09, 2024, 11:08:46 AM
It's all well and good for Chiefs fans in KC, but their market is geographically much larger than that. What if you live in Wichita or Omaha? Springfield? Jeff City?
It's a cynical loss-leader to force people to get another streaming service for one event. If you have to coerce people into buying your product, you're doing something wrong.
As someone who lives in Springfield, I'll check if the local NBC station has the game.
I know of some people who are at least considering freezing their ass off at Arrowhead this weekend, because the tickets are only 50 bucks.
Quote from: Henry on January 11, 2024, 09:51:19 PM
Wow! Eight head coach openings for this season alone. That has to be a record, is it? (and if it isn't, what is?)
record is 10, set 4 times most recently after 2021.
Quote from: Big John on January 11, 2024, 11:53:50 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 11, 2024, 09:51:19 PM
Wow! Eight head coach openings for this season alone. That has to be a record, is it? (and if it isn't, what is?)
record is 10, set 4 times most recently after 2021.
While not setting a record, the turnover this year seems more significant due to the departures of Belichick (expected) and Carroll (not quite as expected), as well as Nick Saban from Alabama. Also, besides natural turnover due to age and long tenures, it looks as though teams are prioritizing offensive-minded coaches instead of defensive-minded coaches.
Pats owner choice for new coach:
(https://www.seprod.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/kraftmayo30oz.png)
I am sure Patrick loves Mayo being a head coach, but what about Squidward? :-D
Quote from: webny99 on January 11, 2024, 06:01:40 PM
The first two I understand but what's wrong with Pete Carroll?
This is going to sound silly because a lot of coaches get all on the refs for stuff, even when the coach is clearly wrong, but when Carroll does it, there's something about how animated he gets that makes me wish someone would punch him in the face and tell him to STFU. He's so over the top, it's the coach equivalent of a player flopping to draw a penalty.
I don't hold those Packer losses against Carroll. The Fail Mary; that was just incompetent scab refs. I'm more mad at the guys on "our" side of the line for those other post season L's.
But I'm also sore about that Super Bowl against New England. Idiotic play call gave another ring to that cheating, smarmy douche. Just hand it off to fucking Beast Mode! DUH!!
QuoteBut I'm also sore about that Super Bowl against New England. Idiotic play call gave another ring to that cheating, smarmy douche. Just hand it off to fucking Beast Mode! DUH!!
I actually rooted for the Patriots in that one because I was so mad about the NFC Championship Game.
I would have cheered for Al Qaeda in a game against the Tom Brady New England Patriots.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 11:54:46 AM
I would have cheered for Al Qaeda in a game against the Tom Brady New England Patriots.
Aaaaaayyyy! Whoa, brother! Let's tick it down a notch. Not quite the smart idea to imply the most powerful terrorist organization into a joke.
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2024, 11:50:51 AM
QuoteBut I'm also sore about that Super Bowl against New England. Idiotic play call gave another ring to that cheating, smarmy douche. Just hand it off to fucking Beast Mode! DUH!!
I actually rooted for the Patriots in that one because I was so mad about the NFC Championship Game.
Mad that the Seahawks were undeserving, or what caused you to be mad?
Quote from: webny99 on January 12, 2024, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2024, 11:50:51 AM
QuoteBut I'm also sore about that Super Bowl against New England. Idiotic play call gave another ring to that cheating, smarmy douche. Just hand it off to fucking Beast Mode! DUH!!
I actually rooted for the Patriots in that one because I was so mad about the NFC Championship Game.
Mad that the Seahawks were undeserving, or what caused you to be mad?
Just how the Seahawks won that game, and how the Packers kinda gave it to them. It felt like the Seahawks were getting every single break possible.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
And the roads near Buffalo are now expected to be impassable.
Quote from: Big John on January 12, 2024, 04:12:13 PM
And the roads near Buffalo are now expected to be impassable.
Bills stadium in Orchard Park gets hammered with almost every early season lake effect snow event (using "early season" loosely because Nov/Dec were so mild). That being said, projected snowfall totals for Saturday night-Sunday are currently 1 foot with up to 30 inches in the most intense bands. That's a lot, but still relatively tame by Buffalo Southtowns standards. Plus, the high winds and temperatures quickly dropping into the lower 20's will likely serve to reduce snowfall totals, even if the wind makes travel conditions worse. There's also bound to be the usual high variance, with the north side of Buffalo where many fans will be traveling from (including those traveling on the Thruway from Rochester etc.) seeing much less snowfall.
Throw in the fact that it's a 1PM game, and there's a high chance the weather impacts the game, but a pretty low chance it gets moved or rescheduled.
Loved seeing Jim Cantore on Pat McAfee today to talk about the weather situations for some of the wild card games.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 12, 2024, 09:25:37 PM
Loved seeing Jim Cantore on Pat McAfee today to talk about the weather situations for some of the wild card games.
Anybody is a better guest than somebody spouting insane conspiracy theories.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
When I was very young, this was the weekend when the Super Bowl was played. And always in a warm city like LA, Miami, or New Orleans. Which always turned out to be a neutral site since the Rams, Dolphins, or Saints never got in to a Super Bowl in their own stadium.
And so, I am not very sympathetic to the NFL schedlulng 6 games on this weekend (for their own greedy reasons) and them getting impacted by the one thing that can't control (weather). I feel sorry for the fans who are going to those cold/snowy games, but then again it's their choice.
I was the one who posted earlier about the Eagles-Bucs game being scheduled for Monday night of a 3-day weekend. And there were legitimate responses about solidifying most of the home teams before a 4/5 game (a 4/5 team would most likely not be hosting the next weekend, unless there were upsets in both 2/7 and 3/6). IMHO, they should be playing the Monday night game on Sunday night, but the NFL will do things the way it wants to do them.
I'm not the biggest NFL fan, I have no problem not watching. That would be the most effective statement I could make, although it won't make a damn bit of difference. Especially since 90% of the most watched TV shows in 2023 were NFL games.
One last thought --- boxing used to be very popular when I was young, and then it went by the wayside, after some televised deaths in the ring. It is not out of the realm of the possibility that the same thing could happen to the NFL in a few decades, but it probably won't be in my lifetime, nor in most of the people reading this.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 13, 2024, 11:30:03 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
When I was very young, this was the weekend when the Super Bowl was played. And always in a warm city like LA, Miami, or New Orleans. Which always turned out to be a neutral site since the Rams, Dolphins, or Saints never got in to a Super Bowl in their own stadium.
And so, I am not very sympathetic to the NFL schedlulng 6 games on this weekend (for their own greedy reasons) and them getting impacted by the one thing that can't control (weather). I feel sorry for the fans who are going to those cold/snowy games, but then again it's their choice.
I was the one who posted earlier about the Eagles-Bucs game being scheduled for Monday night of a 3-day weekend. And there were legitimate responses about solidifying most of the home teams before a 4/5 game (a 4/5 team would most likely not be hosting the next weekend, unless there were upsets in both 2/7 and 3/6). IMHO, they should be playing the Monday night game on Sunday night, but the NFL will do things the way it wants to do them.
I'm not the biggest NFL fan, I have no problem not watching. That would be the most effective statement I could make, although it won't make a damn bit of difference. Especially since 90% of the most watched TV shows in 2023 were NFL games.
I wonder if we might be headed to a split season kind of how European soccer leagues do it. They take a break in mid-winter and then resume the season. The NFL could start a bit later in September, take a break in January, then resume in February, with the playoffs in March. Yes, that would screw March Madness but the NFL is king and can do what they want.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
The Packers would like to have some words with you . . .
Mike
Now that the game in Buffalo has been rescheduled, the NFL should move the Kansas City game to Sunday afternoon. The temperature would not be as severe then.
There is always the possibility of the county stepping in as happened up in Erie County.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 13, 2024, 01:01:41 PM
Now that the game in Buffalo has been rescheduled, the NFL should move the Kansas City game to Sunday afternoon. The temperature would not be as severe then.
There is always the possibility of the county stepping in as happened up in Erie County.
Heavy snow can be a real problem for travel. Cold weather? "Bundle up!" I've been to Packer games that were played in colder weather than expected tonight at Kansas City.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 13, 2024, 01:10:55 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 13, 2024, 01:01:41 PM
Now that the game in Buffalo has been rescheduled, the NFL should move the Kansas City game to Sunday afternoon. The temperature would not be as severe then.
There is always the possibility of the county stepping in as happened up in Erie County.
Heavy snow can be a real problem for travel. Cold weather? "Bundle up!" I've been to Packer games that were played in colder weather than expected tonight at Kansas City.
Mike
According to https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2022/01/17/coldest-green-bay-packers-games-lambeau-field-history-after-ice-bowl/6526808001/ , no you haven't. The coldest games, other than the Ice Bowl, are:
1/20/08: -1 degrees
12/26/93: 0 degrees
12/22/90: 3 degrees
Quote from: Big John on January 13, 2024, 12:48:54 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
I think most Buffalo fans agree that's a bummer. At least Monday is sort of a holiday, and there's still a high likelihood of a more manageable snow game on Monday evening.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:40:36 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 13, 2024, 12:48:54 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 12, 2024, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 12, 2024, 12:01:15 PM
I'm really surprised the NFL is going to allow a game to be played at Kansas City Saturday night. by the end of the game, the expected temperature is -3 with a wind chill of -22.
No rescheduling games if it's not going to be colder than the Ice Bowl. :bigass:
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
I think most Buffalo fans agree that's a bummer. At least Monday is sort of a holiday, and there's still a high likelihood of a more manageable snow game on Monday evening.
That rescheduling is because Governor Hochul is implementing a full travel ban in Erie County beginning tonight. Can't have a game if you can't legally get to the stadium.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 01:15:27 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on January 13, 2024, 01:10:55 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 13, 2024, 01:01:41 PM
Now that the game in Buffalo has been rescheduled, the NFL should move the Kansas City game to Sunday afternoon. The temperature would not be as severe then.
There is always the possibility of the county stepping in as happened up in Erie County.
Heavy snow can be a real problem for travel. Cold weather? "Bundle up!" I've been to Packer games that were played in colder weather than expected tonight at Kansas City.
Mike
According to https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2022/01/17/coldest-green-bay-packers-games-lambeau-field-history-after-ice-bowl/6526808001/ , no you haven't. The coldest games, other than the Ice Bowl, are:
1/20/08: -1 degrees
12/26/93: 0 degrees
12/22/90: 3 degrees
I don't rely much on Gannett to get things like that right.
There was a playoff game that was played in Cincinnati in (1983?) that was -5/-8f and windy at game time, also a night night playoff game in Green Bay v. the Giants in the mid 00s that was below 0F at game time. Also, the Raiders at Green Bay 'first Lambeau Leap' game was +2f at game time.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 13, 2024, 01:44:43 PM
I don't rely much on Gannett to get things like that right.
There was a playoff game that was played in Cincinnati in (1983?) that was -5/-8f and windy at game time, also a night playoff game in Green Bay v. the Giants in the mid 00s that was below 0F at game time. Also, the Raiders at Green Bay 'first Lambeau Leap' game was +2f at game time.
Mike
Game in Cincinnati was in January 1982. Giants game was January 2008.
Quote from: US 89 on January 13, 2024, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:40:36 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 13, 2024, 12:48:54 PM
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
I think most Buffalo fans agree that's a bummer. At least Monday is sort of a holiday, and there's still a high likelihood of a more manageable snow game on Monday evening.
That rescheduling is because Governor Hochul is implementing a full travel ban in Erie County beginning tonight. Can't have a game if you can't legally get to the stadium.
Attention-grabbing move IMO. The majority of the region - quite possibly including the majority
of Erie County! - isn't even forecasted to get more than a foot. And even for the Southtowns, forecasted storm totals have been ticking
down over the last 24 hours.
Quote from: mgk920 on January 13, 2024, 01:44:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 01:15:27 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on January 13, 2024, 01:10:55 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 13, 2024, 01:01:41 PM
Now that the game in Buffalo has been rescheduled, the NFL should move the Kansas City game to Sunday afternoon. The temperature would not be as severe then.
There is always the possibility of the county stepping in as happened up in Erie County.
Heavy snow can be a real problem for travel. Cold weather? "Bundle up!" I've been to Packer games that were played in colder weather than expected tonight at Kansas City.
Mike
According to https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2022/01/17/coldest-green-bay-packers-games-lambeau-field-history-after-ice-bowl/6526808001/ , no you haven't. The coldest games, other than the Ice Bowl, are:
1/20/08: -1 degrees
12/26/93: 0 degrees
12/22/90: 3 degrees
I don't rely much on Gannett to get things like that right.
There was a playoff game that was played in Cincinnati in (1983?) that was -5/-8f and windy at game time, also a night night playoff game in Green Bay v. the Giants in the mid 00s that was below 0F at game time. Also, the Raiders at Green Bay 'first Lambeau Leap' game was +2f at game time.
Mike
I think the link was for games at "Lambeau Field only", if I am reading the link right. That wouldn't include the one non-Lambeau game you are mentioning at Cincinnati.
The Cincinnati game was on 1/10/82. According to Wikipedia the temperature was -9 F (didn't say when in the game that temp was, not that it really matters), with a 27 MPH sustained wind. It started at 1 PM EST.
I was at a friend's house that afternoon (in Delaware) and I remember that day being rather cold, and that game being on the TV.
FWIW, there is the players health themselves to consider. On that same Wikipedia article, it is mentioned that Kellen Winslow and Ken Anderson are still feeling residual effects of the frostbite they got that day.
My NFL playoff bracket:
AFC Wild Card
2 Buffalo over 7 Pittsburgh
3 Kansas City over 6 Miami
5 Cleveland over 4 Houston
AFC Divisional
2 Buffalo over 3 Kansas City
1 Baltimore over5 Cleveland
AFC Championship
2 Buffalo over 1 Baltimore
NFC Wild Card
7 Green Bay over 2 Dallas
3 Detroit over 4 LA Rams
4 Tampa Bay over 5 Philadelphia
NFC Divisional
1 San Francisco over 7 Green Bay
3 Detroit over 4 Tampa Bay
NFC Championship
1 San Francisco over 3 Detroit
Super Bowl
Buffalo 24 San Francisco 20
Since the Eagles season will likely be done no later than next weekend, I hope it comes out what the hell has been going on with them the last two months.
At least two ESPN talking heads have said that they think the problem goes deeper than players and coaches --- possibly into the front office and ownership.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 13, 2024, 02:37:06 PM
Since the Eagles season will likely be done no later than next weekend, I hope it comes out what the hell has been going on with them the last two months.
At least two ESPN talking heads have said that they think the problem goes deeper than players and coaches --- possibly into the front office and ownership.
That's what Talking Heads do. I'm not disputing they're 1-5 in their last six games, but they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 03:24:26 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 13, 2024, 02:37:06 PM
Since the Eagles season will likely be done no later than next weekend, I hope it comes out what the hell has been going on with them the last two months.
At least two ESPN talking heads have said that they think the problem goes deeper than players and coaches --- possibly into the front office and ownership.
That's what Talking Heads do. I'm not disputing they're 1-5 in their last six games, but they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
No one knows except those on the inside.
I thought that 10-1 was a mirage. And especially so when you looked at the points allowed column.
If you had told me in April, or even September, that C.J. Stroud would be in the playoffs while Bryce Young would be watching them on the couch, I would have called you crazy.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 13, 2024, 03:30:24 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 03:24:26 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 13, 2024, 02:37:06 PM
Since the Eagles season will likely be done no later than next weekend, I hope it comes out what the hell has been going on with them the last two months.
At least two ESPN talking heads have said that they think the problem goes deeper than players and coaches --- possibly into the front office and ownership.
That's what Talking Heads do. I'm not disputing they're 1-5 in their last six games, but they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
No one knows except those on the inside.
I thought that 10-1 was a mirage. And especially so when you looked at the points allowed column.
Granted, they were a pretty lucky 10-1 team. I think 1 win was convincing. The other 9 were holding off the other team at the end.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 03:24:26 PM
...
they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
Are you saying they
do need a full change of staff or just that that's how the media talks about them?
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 06:28:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 03:24:26 PM
...
they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
Are you saying they do need a full change of staff or just that that's how the media talks about them?
In response to tmoore, that's how the media talks about them.
That said, there's a lot of Philly fans that say it too.
Personally, my opinion is they need to get rid of the OC and DC. They're both in their first year coaching for the Eagles so that's some pressure to begin with, but the defense has been giving up way too many points lately, and the offense is running plays that have been a bit obvious, detailing to opposing teams defenses what's coming. I saw someone point out that when Hurts (the QB) is under center, every play but 1 has been a running play this year.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: US 89 on January 13, 2024, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:40:36 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 13, 2024, 12:48:54 PM
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
I think most Buffalo fans agree that's a bummer. At least Monday is sort of a holiday, and there's still a high likelihood of a more manageable snow game on Monday evening.
That rescheduling is because Governor Hochul is implementing a full travel ban in Erie County beginning tonight. Can't have a game if you can't legally get to the stadium.
Attention-grabbing move IMO. The majority of the region - quite possibly including the majority of Erie County! - isn't even forecasted to get more than a foot. And even for the Southtowns, forecasted storm totals have been ticking down over the last 24 hours.
In an attempt not to be a poster child WNY'er, I will walk this back just a bit and say it was probably the correct decision. But only because of the challenges of getting fans, players, coaches and stadium personnel to and from the stadium and not because of the game itself.
When Deshaun Watson returned to Houston to play the Texans last season, I was highly disappointed when the Browns won an ugly defensive battle. I was similarly disappointed when the Browns blew out the Texans earlier this season. Turns out the Texans were just waiting for an even bigger, higher-profile moment to stick it to Watson and the Browns for that awful trade. I can't applaud the Texans organization for how they handled the last few seasons, but it must be an incredible feeling of vindication to beat that "team that no one wants to face in the playoffs". To heck with that, the media absolutely overhyped the Browns this week and just loaded on the bandwagon until it couldn't even move under its own weight. Good on the Texans for sticking it to them in dominant fashion.
Is that it for Flacco?
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 07:17:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: US 89 on January 13, 2024, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 01:40:36 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 13, 2024, 12:48:54 PM
But rescheduling in case of snow. PIT/BUF rescheduled to 4:30 ET Monday.
I think most Buffalo fans agree that's a bummer. At least Monday is sort of a holiday, and there's still a high likelihood of a more manageable snow game on Monday evening.
That rescheduling is because Governor Hochul is implementing a full travel ban in Erie County beginning tonight. Can't have a game if you can't legally get to the stadium.
Attention-grabbing move IMO. The majority of the region - quite possibly including the majority of Erie County! - isn't even forecasted to get more than a foot. And even for the Southtowns, forecasted storm totals have been ticking down over the last 24 hours.
In an attempt not to be a poster child WNY'er, I will walk this back just a bit and say it was probably the correct decision. But only because of the challenges of getting fans, players, coaches and stadium personnel to and from the stadium and not because of the game itself.
I agree. If you have the game, fans will try to get there, and if that's not safe, then the league has some serious issues if anybody is seriously inured or dies trying to do so.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 06:37:26 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 06:28:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2024, 03:24:26 PM
...
they're probably the most talked about playoff team needing a full change of staff.
Are you saying they do need a full change of staff or just that that's how the media talks about them?
In response to tmoore, that's how the media talks about them.
That said, there's a lot of Philly fans that say it too.
Personally, my opinion is they need to get rid of the OC and DC. They're both in their first year coaching for the Eagles so that's some pressure to begin with, but the defense has been giving up way too many points lately, and the offense is running plays that have been a bit obvious, detailing to opposing teams defenses what's coming. I saw someone point out that when Hurts (the QB) is under center, every play but 1 has been a running play this year.
I agree with jeffandnicole about the OC and the DC.
They need to pilfer someone else's OC and DC, as that is what happened to them last year. I had great fears they would not be the same after they lost their OC and DC after last year.
To go back to the extreme weather issue, why is it accepted that the SB gets played at a neutral site when we also insist on having playoff games played at home stadiums, in possibly extreme conditions in the coldest part of the year? We don't do that with any other major sport's championship round.
Historically, what is now called the SB was an extra game at the end of the year between the NFL and AFL champions, and putting it at a neutral site made sense. But the leagues merged in 1970, which is more than 50 years ago. Why should the NFL continue to be different than the other major sports?
I know the SB has now gotten so big that the locations need to be announced years in advance. It should have changed 50 years ago. I suspect Rozelle (the commissioner then) and the other people with power (owners and whoever else) at that time, wanted that warm weather location with its amenities (as opposed to having it be played in outdoor Minnesota as might have happened then if it was not at a neutral site --- no we can't have that).
If we're going to accept playoff games like last night, we should accept that for the SB as well. I know that will never happen as the genie's out of the bottle. But that's how it should be IMO.
Disclaimer - this thought occurred to me last night while watching the Browns-Texans game (with one eye, was doing something else at the same time). Goodell was sitting there in the stadium. Notice how he wasn't in Kansas CIty.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:50:44 AM
To go back to the extreme weather issue, why is it accepted that the SB gets played at a neutral site when we also insist on having playoff games played at home stadiums, in possibly extreme conditions in the coldest part of the year? We don't do that with any other major sport's championship round.
The other major sports play a championship series and not a single game, so playing at a neutral site doesn't make sense.
There are so many events that accompany a Super Bowl to the extent that it's not practical to wait until the outcome of the championship games to determine the site.
Quote from: webny99 on January 13, 2024, 07:45:41 PM
When Deshaun Watson returned to Houston to play the Texans last season, I was highly disappointed when the Browns won an ugly defensive battle. I was similarly disappointed when the Browns blew out the Texans earlier this season. Turns out the Texans were just waiting for an even bigger, higher-profile moment to stick it to Watson and the Browns for that awful trade. I can't applaud the Texans organization for how they handled the last few seasons, but it must be an incredible feeling of vindication to beat that "team that no one wants to face in the playoffs". To heck with that, the media absolutely overhyped the Browns this week and just loaded on the bandwagon until it couldn't even move under its own weight. Good on the Texans for sticking it to them in dominant fashion.
Well your support is greatly appreciated by us and Deshaun very much deserved what the Browns got last night for bailing on us two years ago (seemed like forever ago since the last time he wore a Texans jersey). But deep down, I do wish his career well and hope the Browns get at least ten percent of his contract worth (25 million), which wouldn't surprise me if the Browns did make to one Super Bowl before he bails on
them. But I also believe the Browns are appropriately hyped due to their top ranked defense; they have the talent to contend for the AFC in my opinion and Joe Flacco, a Super Bowl MVP himself, deserves to remain starter when Nick Chubb returns next year.
As for my Texans, their performance last night speaks for itself; at their best they
can compete with any other team. It wouldn't surprise me if our team pushed the Ravens to the final minute either next weekend or the following (depending on the Steelers tomorrow). I know the regular season determines the awards, but there should be an exception to every rule: Last night DeMeco Ryans thoroughly outcoached Stefanski, proving that he is the best coach in the league right now and deserves the Coach of the Year; it was preparation-perfection for the game (he was perfectly prepared). One more thing, last night's game also proved that our
defense also deserves tremendous amount of credit along with C.J. Stroud. It's not just the QB, it's everybody on our roster, every game is a total team effort....offense, defense, special teams, coaches, management, and so on.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 14, 2024, 12:02:17 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:50:44 AM
To go back to the extreme weather issue, why is it accepted that the SB gets played at a neutral site when we also insist on having playoff games played at home stadiums, in possibly extreme conditions in the coldest part of the year? We don't do that with any other major sport's championship round.
The other major sports play a championship series and not a single game, so playing at a neutral site doesn't make sense.
There are so many events that accompany a Super Bowl to the extent that it's not practical to wait until the outcome of the championship games to determine the site.
My larger point is also that the NFL has put itself in this position, by insisting on February SBs (for the ratings sweeps) which force you into double digits numbers of mid January playoff games.
As I said in the earlier post from yesterday, SBs used to be played the 2nd or 3rd week of January, with the championship games being no later than about Jan 2 or 3. So this weather thing only became an issue for much fewer numbers of games, not (potentially) several.
Re your first point: I was not suggesting that the other major sports championship rounds be played at neutral sites (although --- that did occur during the pandemic). The NFL championship (not the same thing as the SB for the first 4 years) WAS played at home fields until 1970. Which leads me to my next paragraph.
Re your last point - I more or less said the same thing -- it got too big.
before SBs 1 and 2, the AFL and NFL championship games were played in December.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on January 14, 2024, 12:43:44 PM
before SBs 1 and 2, the AFL and NFL championship games were played in December.
Mike
up until the last non-Super Bowl championship game. The 1965 NFL championship game was played on January 2, 1966.
For the last two posters -- I said "no later than Jan. 2 or 3". Given that the calendar varies from year to year, depending on what date Sunday falls on, this could have put the games anywhere in a week's time --- from Dec 26-27 to about Jan 2-3. If there has always been two weeks before the SB (already established - exceptions being the early 2000s due to other schedule changes), and the SB fell anywhere from Jan. 9 to Jan. 16 between 1967 and the late '70s, that would have put the conference championship games anywhere from Dec. 26 to Jan. 2. So I wasn't ruling out December.
Other thoughts:
If you are going to have 17 games and 14 playoff teams, why not start the season a little earlier so you aren't playing double digit numbers of January playoff games (12 this year). If you're going to say it's too hot in August, since when has the NFL cared about players health (not talking game penalties here)?
Quote from: Big John on January 14, 2024, 12:53:43 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on January 14, 2024, 12:43:44 PM
before SBs 1 and 2, the AFL and NFL championship games were played in December.
Mike
up until the last non-Super Bowl championship game. The 1965 NFL championship game was played on January 2, 1966.
You're right, I still have my late father's ticket stub from the Browns at Packers championship game of 1966-01-02.
Mike
Go Packers...
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:50:44 AM
If we're going to accept playoff games like last night, we should accept that for the SB as well. I know that will never happen as the genie's out of the bottle. But that's how it should be IMO.
The NFL took that chance once - XLVIII was played at MetLife stadium in the Meadowlands in NJ on Feb 2, 2014. The NFL got lucky (depending how you define lucky). The game time temp was a seasonably warm 49 degrees, after a high of 55. The next day it snowed, with temps around 30 at 6pm.
Go Bills, I guess. Would be fun to see them finally win a chip. After everyone left them for dead earlier this year, no less. I'd also like to see Hurts or Lamar get one.
Hopefully those whiners in Detroit lose tonight and the 49ers don't win it all so their fans are less annoying next year. I'm going to find it difficult to pay attention to the Cowboys in the regular season next year, if they can play so well in so many games only for this to happen in the first round. Just not worth my energy. It was already hard to appreciate all the blowout wins this year, because exactly this was in the back of my mind. Call me a fair-weather supporter, but if winning makes me indifferent and losing makes me unhappy . . . what's the point?
McCarthy has to go because the team was flat out not ready to play today. That can't happen in the postseason, and yet it's already the second time it's happened during McCarthy's short tenure in Dallas.
Dak Prescott throws for more than 400 yards still loses...
Quote from: epzik8 on January 14, 2024, 07:53:27 PM
Dak Prescott throws for more than 400 yards still loses...
And the loss is still not despite him. I won't say it was because of him, since the defense was even worse, but he spotted the Packers two touchdowns in the first half. It was partially because of him. 14-7 is a completely different game from 27-7.
A funny thing I was watching that nobody else cares about is that Dak's 41 completions are the most by any player in a game this season, topping Justin Herbert's 40 in the Chargers/Vikings game I was at. The context behind those numbers could not be more polarized - Herbert shredded the Vikings from the first quarter to the fourth in a game that was close all the way through, throwing every down because the Chargers had no run game, and got out of Minneapolis with the W. Today, Dak did nothing in the first half, then moved the ball on deep shell coverage the entire second half, while never threatening the Packers' lead at all. (Which, to be fair, was partially the defense's fault.) I guess it was nice to see some fight from the offense in the second half, but it does nothing to alleviate how crushing of a loss it was.
HOW ABOUT THEM PACKERS! GO PACK GO!
It's remarkable that the Dallas Cowboys continue to get such high television ratings, always being on Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football as often as permitted, and so much attention from the media, when you consider their record since their last Super Bowl win in January 1996:
28 total seasons
15 seasons: missed playoffs
8 seasons: one and done in the playoffs
5 seasons: won their first playoff game but lost the next one
That's nearly three decades of what can only be described as mediocrity.
I might be wrong, but I'm tempted to believe that Mike McCarthy's job is numbered since coaches like Bill Belichick, Peter Carroll, Mike Vrabel, Ron Rivera, Josh McDaniels, and (soon to be fired) Nick Siriani are now available.
And now makes it 28 years down, another eight more decades left to go before the Cowboys tie the all-time record for most years between World championships in any sport set by the Cubs. The bad news is that it won't be too long before I have to hear all over again the Cowboys fans here in my area restart their mouths and prematurely crowning their team Super Bowl champions before the next preseason even starts, and keep bragging about how many Super Bowl rings they have.
With 5 minutes left in tonight's Rams-Lions game, I was very torn.
If Rams won, Eagles would host them, if they win tomorrow.
If Lions won. They haven't won in forever (but I was around to see them win a playoff game in 1991).
Now that the Lions have won, I am glad it turned out this way. Although, now the Eagles would play in Detroit if they win tomorrow. I don't think the Eagles are good enough to win it all, and if they can't, I'd rather see them lose relatively soon and get some rest.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 14, 2024, 09:57:56 PM
I might be wrong, but I'm tempted to believe that Mike McCarthy's job is numbered since coaches like Bill Belichick, Peter Carroll, Mike Vrabel, Ron Rivera, Josh McDaniels, and (soon to be fired) Nick Siriani are now available.
And now makes it 28 years down, another eight more decades left to go before the Cowboys tie the all-time record for most years between World championships in any sport set by the Cubs. The bad news is that it won't be too long before I have to hear all over again the Cowboys fans here in my area restart their mouths and prematurely crowning their team Super Bowl champions before the next preseason even starts, and keep bragging about how many Super Bowl rings they have.
I can see Belicick going there, he would want to go to a team that could win quickly, he is going to be 72 next season. Also one that has a quarterback, which he hasn't had since Brady left.
28 years is nothing compared to the 57 years the Eagles went between championships. Or the 66 years the Lions are at now.
I think you're jumping the gun on Siriani, it depends a bit on what happens in the playoffs. It would be hard for them to do any worse than the Cowboys just did.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:13:43 PM
With 5 minutes left in tonight's Rams-Lions game, I was very torn.
If Rams won, Eagles would host them, if they win tomorrow.
If Lions won. They haven't won in forever (but I was around to see them win a playoff game in 1991).
Now that the Lions have won, I am glad it turned out this way. Although, now the Eagles would play in Detroit if they win tomorrow. I don't think the Eagles are good enough to win it all, and if they can't, I'd rather see them lose relatively soon and get some rest.
January 1992 actually, the Lions had a first round bye for that playoffs. I distinctly recall watching them throttle the Cowboys and thinking that they were going to have a prosperous future with Barry Sanders.
I wasn't torn, I'm a Lions fan and 32 years to wait for one playoff win was way too long.
What a moment. The Lions are the 32nd and final NFL team to win a playoff game in the 21st century, and the Dolphins now hold the crown for longest playoff win drought having last won a playoff game in December 2000.
I am speechless about the other game played today.
My mind races back to the first-ever #2/#7 seed matchup between the Bills and Colts in which Philip Rivers nearly led the Colts to victory in what went on to become the only 1PM Saturday playoff game in NFL history after a Monday game was added the following season. It came down to the final play with the Colts driving and only needing a field goal to force overtime. But the Bills squeaked it out to start what ended up being a three-year 6-0 run for #2 seeds over #7 seeds. That was never going to last forever, but ended with a resounding thud this evening. Crazy to think that under the 12-team format, the Cowboys would have been on bye while the Packers would have missed the playoffs entirely.
An underrated subplot of the expanded playoffs: the Lions were playing tonight for an opportunity to host a divisional playoff game, and with the win they will now get to host the winner of tomorrows Bucs-Eagles matchup. That was not possible under the 12-team format as the #1 and #2 seeds automatically hosted the divisional games. But with the way today played out, I could legitimately see any one of the remaining teams coming out of the NFC. I mean probably not the Bucs, but stranger things have happened.
In the end, the Cowboys issues boil down to four words: General Manager Jerry Jones.
With many high caliber coaches on the market (witness the Belichick to Big D memes), Mike McCarthy could be on his way out. But if JJ is unwilling to cede some control of the franchise, why would an elite coach want to go there (besides the $$ and the spectacle)?
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:20:15 PM
I think you're jumping the gun on Siriani, it depends a bit on what happens in the playoffs. It would be hard for them to do any worse than the Cowboys just did.
In my opinion, Siriani should be fine so I agree with you. However this offseason is considered "Manager's Choice" with several big-name coaches now available, which is very rare. So I can imagine many teams out there contemplating getting one of the free agent coaches.
One more name I'm going to throw out there: Bobby Slowik (currently Texans' OC) -- I believe a couple of teams might examine the possibility of him being a fit for a Head Coaching position.
Quote from: gonealookin on January 14, 2024, 09:39:08 PM
It's remarkable that the Dallas Cowboys continue to get such high television ratings, always being on Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football as often as permitted, and so much attention from the media, when you consider their record since their last Super Bowl win in January 1996:
28 total seasons
15 seasons: missed playoffs
8 seasons: one and done in the playoffs
5 seasons: won their first playoff game but lost the next one
That's nearly three decades of what can only be described as mediocrity.
The Cowboys are not 'America's Team', they are '¡El Equipo de Mexico!'.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 15, 2024, 10:06:24 AM
In the end, the Cowboys issues boil down to four words: General Manager Jerry Jones.
It's the one consistent factor in Dallas' post-1993 playoff woes.
The schadenfreude in watching his little post-game interview was delicious.
Some times the world seems like an unjust place, but then a bad thing happens to a bad person and all feels right again.
Alright, I won't dunk on the 'boys too much more. They got run over by a red hot Packer team that's suddenly firing on all cylinders.
I do wonder if a trend wasn't just started that reverses the previous default of deferring the kickoff if you win the toss. The mentality for many years now has been kick it away to start so that maybe you can score at the end of the half, then get the ball to start the second half and score again, thus stacking points.
But maybe there's something to be said about saying nuts to that over-thinking strategy; take the ball first and score. Make the other team play from behind right away. The Pack marched down the field on that first drive and set the tone for the rest of the game. I wonder if that'll become the thing teams try and replicate for a while.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 15, 2024, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 15, 2024, 10:06:24 AM
In the end, the Cowboys issues boil down to four words: General Manager Jerry Jones.
It's the one consistent factor in Dallas' post-1993 playoff woes.
The schadenfreude in watching his little post-game interview was delicious.
Some times the world seems like an unjust place, but then a bad thing happens to a bad person and all feels right again.
And this is also why they will likely struggle to attract top coaching talent. People are already throwing out the big names like Belichick and Harbaugh, but both of those guys will want more control than Jones is willing to give them. Jones's ego isn't about to let anyone else run anything.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 15, 2024, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 15, 2024, 10:06:24 AM
In the end, the Cowboys issues boil down to four words: General Manager Jerry Jones.
It's the one consistent factor in Dallas' post-1993 playoff woes.
Dallas won SB for (at end of) 1995 season as well (with Switzer as coach). But that's still a long time.
I personally feel things started going downhill for them when they let Jimmy Johnson go. Although, I do not remember the apecific details of why Johnson was let go and Switzer was brought in (and what I mean by that is -- was there a power struggle between Johnson and Jones?).
^^ 49ers won the SB in the 1994 season.
Quote from: Big John on January 15, 2024, 12:48:34 PM
^^ 49ers won the SB in the 1994 season.
Noted and corrected.
Probably should go into the "minor sports things that annoy you" but I'll put it here, since the specific thought that is inspiring this post is NFL-related.
ESPN (and others) have been touting a statistic that "Dallas is the first team to win 12 games 3 years in a row, and fail to make Conference Championship game".
It's a bit easier to win 12 games in a 17 game season, and 17 game season has only been around for 3 years.
The more meaningful statistic would be to include teams to win 11-win seasons in a 16 game season.
That would take the stat back to 1978, and would be a bit more representative of the league's history.
My general rant -- Way too often, on FB, ESPN, you name it ---- statistics like this are posted, but very important caveats such as what is mentioned above (that might possibly change the answer) are not mentioned. I have a specific example in mind that is not NFL related, if I think about it I'll post it in the other thread.
I'm amused that at the end of the day the bad call that gave Cowboys the win over the Lions really meant nothing. The streak of folding in playoff games the Cowboys are on is quite fascinating considering they usually have a solid roster.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:13:43 PM
With 5 minutes left in tonight's Rams-Lions game, I was very torn.
If Rams won, Eagles would host them, if they win tomorrow.
If Lions won. They haven't won in forever (but I was around to see them win a playoff game in 1991).
Now that the Lions have won, I am glad it turned out this way. Although, now the Eagles would play in Detroit if they win tomorrow. I don't think the Eagles are good enough to win it all, and if they can't, I'd rather see them lose relatively soon and get some rest.
That's if the Eagles who are in a freefall wake up. I got Tampa winning.
Quote from: hobsini2 on January 15, 2024, 02:09:30 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 14, 2024, 11:13:43 PM
With 5 minutes left in tonight's Rams-Lions game, I was very torn.
If Rams won, Eagles would host them, if they win tomorrow.
If Lions won. They haven't won in forever (but I was around to see them win a playoff game in 1991).
Now that the Lions have won, I am glad it turned out this way. Although, now the Eagles would play in Detroit if they win tomorrow. I don't think the Eagles are good enough to win it all, and if they can't, I'd rather see them lose relatively soon and get some rest.
That's if the Eagles who are in a freefall wake up. I got Tampa winning.
I did say "if", in what you quoted from me.
Although, after yesterday's Cowboys game, who knows?
Bills won... Now it's time for an ugly game between the Eagles and the Bucs!
The entire Bills organization, players, and fans have been waiting quite literally years for an opportunity to host the Chiefs in a big game. They've played five straight at Arrowhead dating back to the 2020 AFC Championship which feels like a lifetime ago. But this year, they squeaked past the Chiefs in the regular season to clinch the tiebreaker they ended up needing to earn the #2 seed and the right to play at home in the divisional playoffs. And so they will face off against the Chiefs next Sunday night in Orchard Park in what should be an electric divisional round finale. It will also be the first true "road" playoff game of Mahomes' career, excluding the two neutral site Super Bowls and the one coincidental road Super Bowl which had limited fan attendance.
Oh, and they did absolutely have to beat the Steelers tonight and thank goodness they did so without too much drama (aside from a missed 27-yard field goal that would have made it a 3-score game).
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
Quote from: epzik8 on January 15, 2024, 08:12:54 PM
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
I don't follow college football
all that much. Was there some Ohio State/Maryland game of impact I'm not remembering?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 15, 2024, 08:12:54 PM
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
I don't follow college football all that much. Was there some Ohio State/Maryland game of impact I'm not remembering?
No. The Ravens did however crush the Texans in Week 1 of this year.
I should've known that the playoffs are where Dallas' biggest downfall lies. So now I'll be rooting for the 49ers in the Divisional round.
And although I'm a diehard Bears fan, I enjoyed watching the Lions win their first playoff game since 1992. Also, Jared Goff beating Matthew Stafford was quite a fun thing to see, as they were traded for each other, and one of them led the Rams to a Super Bowl win in 2022.
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 15, 2024, 09:58:22 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 15, 2024, 08:12:54 PM
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
I don't follow college football all that much. Was there some Ohio State/Maryland game of impact I'm not remembering?
No. The Ravens did however crush the Texans in Week 1 of this year.
25-9 is a crushing and worthy of a revenge game?
With the Eagles' horrible loss over the Bucs, expect a ton of firings to happen sometime this week!
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 15, 2024, 11:22:52 PM
With the Eagles' horrible loss over the Bucs, expect a ton of firings to happen sometime this week!
I expect the OC and DC to go. I'm not sure about the head coach.
Outside of OC and DC problems, I wonder if there is something much more deep rooted going on (don't ask me to define what, I have no idea). I do wholeheartedly believe that Hurts is injured more than was let on. And with Brown out, and all the injuries in the 4th quarter tonight, even if they won tonight, they weren't going to last too much longer.
Aikman IMO hit it on the head when he said in the 4th quarter that the change in OC and DC can (and did) have a huge effect on a team.
What needs to happen is that the Eagles need to hire away an OC or a DC from one of the teams that reach the championship games or the Super Bowl. That's what happened to them last year. Some other team can collapse next year. Every fan base should experience a year like this. It will humble you. (I said in an earlier post that 10-1 was a mirage. I still feel that way. I never saw the team play this year like it did last year, except maybe in one or two games).
But then two minutes later the broadcasters mentioned how the Bucs had a new OC this year too. Sometimes you can't win (that's the Eagles fan in me saying that).
I somewhat expected the Eagles to lose, but not as thoroughly as this. But I will say, Tampa Bay has a very good defense. It'll be interesting to see how they match up with the Lions.
I feel bad for Hurts, who has become one of my favorite players in the league this year, and Kelce, who will seemingly go out on a very bitter note having won only one of his final seven games as a pro.
But Eagles fans fully deserve every last bit of how the last month and a half has gone for them. The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2024, 12:10:05 AM
I feel bad for Hurts, who has become one of my favorite players in the league this year, and Kelce, who will seemingly go out on a very bitter note having won only one of his final seven games as a pro.
But Eagles fans fully deserve every last bit of how the last month and a half has gone for them. The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
Yes, all of us Eagles fans are evil.
Does Jason Kelce's retirement mean the Eagles' championship window has closed?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 15, 2024, 09:58:22 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 15, 2024, 08:12:54 PM
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
I don't follow college football all that much. Was there some Ohio State/Maryland game of impact I'm not remembering?
No. The Ravens did however crush the Texans in Week 1 of this year.
25-9 is a crushing and worthy of a revenge game?
Yeah, usually the term "revenge game" refers to a player or coach going up against their former team, especially if the circumstances surrounding their departure were unfavorable. But I don't know of anything that Stroud would have against the Ravens in particular.
A rematch of a regular season game is usually just called... a rematch? Or redemption game? Or, if I were going to coin a term I don't think I've heard used before, maybe
avenge game?
Quote from: epzik8 on January 16, 2024, 08:14:59 AM
Does Jason Kelce's retirement mean the Eagles' championship window has closed?
Not that on its own, but it may have closed just by virtue of their 2023 season being over. They definitely have a lot of questions to answer this offseason and their path to the Super Bowl will probably never be remotely close to as easy as the path they had last year.
I'm not sure what's more amusing, zero NFC East teams making the divisional playoffs or the fact that we could have a Bucs-Packers NFC title game (although I sure hope that doesn't happen and don't think it will, the possibility is hilarious).
The Eagles don't even look like a playoff team next year. The collapse they went through is pretty next level bad.
In all honesty, I am surprised they got back to SB contenders as quickly as they did after winning SB in 2017 season. Especially after getting rid of Pedersen. Five years between SBs is very fast for Eagles fans.
Not that it really matters -- but many of the Cowboys points late in their game were garbage time points with first team against second team players. Which only happened when the Cowboys were down 30+ points (when I turned on the game after doing something else, there were 6 minutes left and it was 48-16 Packers). So while the Cowboys margin of defeat was less, whether the Eagles or the Cowboys defeat was more thorough is debatable. At least the Cowboys showed some signs of life in their death throes. The Eagles looked like they quit three weeks ago.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 15, 2024, 09:58:22 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 15, 2024, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 15, 2024, 08:12:54 PM
C.J. Stroud revenge game in Baltimore next week???
I don't follow college football all that much. Was there some Ohio State/Maryland game of impact I'm not remembering?
No. The Ravens did however crush the Texans in Week 1 of this year.
25-9 is a crushing and worthy of a revenge game?
I would hope the Texans are out for revenge from the first week. Texans lost at Baltimore by 16 points the same margin as against Cleveland on Christmas. C.J. is out to prove to the Ravens he's far better than back in September, when he was sacked six times in Week One. The Texans are also tremendously better now than in September.
I predict the Texans will score more than double the points than they did in Week One; also predict the Ravens won't even make half that sacks this Saturday, and lastly I predict the final score's margin will be within one full score (<= 8 points either way).
My Houston Texans are also playing to remove themselves as the only NFL club to have never appeared in a conference championship game; with a win, the Texans would be the 32nd and final club to experience that.
I still think we're using the word "revenge" far differently. If I play a game of one on one basketball against you, and I lose 11-7, I want to play again. I also want to win, like I always do. I don't need "revenge" against you.
But c'est la vie. Cheering for Houston this week.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2024, 12:10:05 AM
I feel bad for Hurts, who has become one of my favorite players in the league this year, and Kelce, who will seemingly go out on a very bitter note having won only one of his final seven games as a pro.
But Eagles fans fully deserve every last bit of how the last month and a half has gone for them. The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
Even though that's what the scoreboard says, the reality is the Cowboys last 2 touchdowns were in garbage time. That game was over by the end of the 3rd quarter. And I picked Tampa to win not because I think Tampa is any good but I thought the Eagles were a fraud and the freefall the last 6 weeks proves it.
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2024, 12:10:05 AM
The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
I absolutely agree that the Packers are better than the Bucs. They would probably be close to a touchdown favorite against the Bucs on a neutral field. But there is a bit more nuance to the points thing because the Eagles-Bucs game was considerably more competitive including being a one score game for most of the third quarter. I do give the Cowboys credit for continuing to put up points late in the game, but their win probability chart tells a story of a game that was basically over before halftime, while the Eagles had real chance deep into the second half.
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2024, 08:52:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2024, 12:10:05 AM
The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
I absolutely agree that the Packers are better than the Bucs. They would probably be close to a touchdown favorite against the Bucs on a neutral field. But there is a bit more nuance to the points thing because the Eagles-Bucs game was considerably more competitive including being a one score game for most of the third quarter. I do give the Cowboys credit for continuing to put up points late in the game, but their win probability chart tells a story of a game that was basically over before halftime, while the Eagles had real chance deep into the second half.
Did you forget that the Bucs beat the Packers at home last month? (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap?gameId=401547598)
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 17, 2024, 09:03:17 AM
Did you forget that the Bucs beat the Packers at home last month? (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap?gameId=401547598)
Don't have to remind me as I was there.
Packers D made Mayfield look like a first ballot hall of famer that day.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 17, 2024, 09:03:17 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 17, 2024, 08:52:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 16, 2024, 12:10:05 AM
The Cowboys' loss will remain more infamous because it was to a 7 seed, but Philly lost by more points to a worse team than who the Cowboys lost to.
I absolutely agree that the Packers are better than the Bucs. They would probably be close to a touchdown favorite against the Bucs on a neutral field. But there is a bit more nuance to the points thing because the Eagles-Bucs game was considerably more competitive including being a one score game for most of the third quarter. I do give the Cowboys credit for continuing to put up points late in the game, but their win probability chart tells a story of a game that was basically over before halftime, while the Eagles had real chance deep into the second half.
Did you forget that the Bucs beat the Packers at home last month? (https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap?gameId=401547598)
I actually did forget, but it is somewhat besides the point because they've been very different teams since then. The Packers have been on a tear on offense while the Bucs lost badly to the Saints, barely beat the floating Panthers, and caught the Eagles at a great time.
To look at it a different way, the Lions are 6.5 point favorites over the Bucs, and the Packers also beat the Lions pretty handily on Thanksgiving. It's certainly no guarantee that the Packers would win a rematch with the Bucs but I do think they are a better team with a better QB right now.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 08, 2024, 10:52:22 AM
The pundits really want Bill Belichick or Jim Harbaugh to come to Washington...
Now they really want them to come to Atlanta, who has interviewed both of them.
Jerry Jones is giving Mike McCarthy one more chance, so the Cowboys are standing pat on the head coaching front, despite losing at home to the Packers in the Wild-Card round.
Quote from: Henry on January 17, 2024, 10:35:37 PM
Jerry Jones is giving Mike McCarthy one more chance, so the Cowboys are standing pat on the head coaching front, despite losing at home to the Packers in the Wild-Card round.
Cool. At least we know who won't be winning the Superbowl in 2025.
GM Jones wins again. He clearly values loyalty to his people over winning.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 18, 2024, 08:34:17 AM
GM Jones wins again. He clearly values loyalty to his people over winning.
I dunno, if there was ever a time to make a coaching change it was now.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 15, 2024, 01:59:59 PM
I'm amused that at the end of the day the bad call that gave Cowboys the win over the Lions really meant nothing.
You mean, it really meant nothing
to the Cowboys. But by comparison, it was quite meaningful to the Lions. Yes, it basically locked them into the #3 NFC seed, but it also reinforced the notion that they should expect no favors from the refs and reaffirmed their resolve. It also helped the Lions to avoid facing the Packers in the wild card round (remember how the Pack trashed the Lions on Thanksgiving much like they did to the Cowboys). If the Lions are to face Green Bay for a third time this year, they want it at home for the NFC Championship.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2024, 11:16:29 AM
The Eagles don't even look like a playoff team next year. The collapse they went through is pretty next level bad.
Lions karma at work. The consensus seems to be that the Eagles' collapse began when Sirianni took the defensive play calling away from DC Sean Desai and gave it to good ol' Matt Patricia, the former Lions head coach (and insufferably smug SOB when he was here). Patricia once again proved that he's nothing without Belichick.
Quote from: vegas1962 on January 18, 2024, 03:59:21 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 15, 2024, 01:59:59 PM
I'm amused that at the end of the day the bad call that gave Cowboys the win over the Lions really meant nothing.
You mean, it really meant nothing to the Cowboys. But by comparison, it was quite meaningful to the Lions. Yes, it basically locked them into the #3 NFC seed, but it also reinforced the notion that they should expect no favors from the refs and reaffirmed their resolve. It also helped the Lions to avoid facing the Packers in the wild card round (remember how the Pack trashed the Lions on Thanksgiving much like they did to the Cowboys). If the Lions are to face Green Bay for a third time this year, they want it at home for the NFC Championship.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2024, 11:16:29 AM
The Eagles don't even look like a playoff team next year. The collapse they went through is pretty next level bad.
Lions karma at work. The consensus seems to be that the Eagles' collapse began when Sirianni took the defensive play calling away from DC Sean Desai and gave it to good ol' Matt Patricia, the former Lions head coach (and insufferably smug SOB when he was here). Patricia once again proved that he's nothing without Belichick.
2022 proved that Patricia is nothing even with Belichick by now.
I can only imagine what guys like Jason Kelce, around for the Super Bowl win over the Pats in Patricia's last game as Pats DC, thought when he was promoted to calling plays.
Entering this Saturday, Lamar Jackson and C.J. Stoud are both tied with each other at one playoff win apiece in their respective individual careers. Lamar is also trying to advance to his first ever AFC conference championship, and also are the Texans franchise the only team left in the NFL that has never played in a conference championship game.
I predict the Texans offense, defense, and special teams to combine for at least 21 points on Saturday -- will that be enough to overcome the Ravens? Will Lamar win his second playoff game of his career or will C.J. win his second? Will the Texans become the 32nd and final franchise to advance to their first ever conference championship game or will it be Lamar playing in his first? Stay tuned sports fans!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 15, 2024, 01:59:59 PM
I'm amused that at the end of the day the bad call that gave Cowboys the win over the Lions really meant nothing.
I know you mean this as far as the Lions and Cowboys are concerned, given what ultimately happened in the playoffs.
At the time that call happened, though, it changed the "destiny controllers" of the NFC East from the Eagles to the Cowboys. It could have meant something, had the Eagles won out in what remained of the regular season. But given the Eagles general collapse, it is a non-factor there as well.
My general rule, when I do not have a horse in the game, is to root for teams I have not seen personally win it all before. Although in this case, everyone else hasn't either, at least in Super Bowl era, and I'm not counting the AFL.
And so for the NFL, that means I am rooting for the Texans, Bills, and Lions.
Houston has never been in a Super Bowl much less won one, that includes all the years (30 or so in SB era?) that the Oilers were there.
Bills should have won SB 25 (I won't go into that any more, we all know what happened there).
Lions have never been to SB either.
I doubt any of them will get there, but we will see.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PM
Houston has never been in a Super Bowl much less won one, that includes all the years (30 or so in SB era?) that the Oilers were there.
Didn't the Oilers go to the Super Bowl back in the 1999 season when they were the Tennessee Oilers I believe (before the name-change to the Titans)? Wasn't that when the Dyson/Wycheck pulled off the "Music City Miracle" to win the AFC championship against Buffalo or something like that?
And what I was told was that by the time the Texans concluded their inaugural season in 2002, just about every NFL franchise (if not all 31 of them) had appeared in a conference championship. By your general rule, the team you'd be rooting for would be the Texans since (as I mentioned above) they're the only team left in the NFL that never even won a divisional playoff round.
Texans have never reached a conference championship game (funnily enough, the closest they've ever been was also against the Ravens, when they lost to them in the 2011 divisional by only a touchdown. As I recall all other Houston divisional losses were blowouts.)
Quote from: jgb191 on January 19, 2024, 05:18:18 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PM
Houston has never been in a Super Bowl much less won one, that includes all the years (30 or so in SB era?) that the Oilers were there.
Didn't the Oilers go to the Super Bowl back in the 1999 season when they were the Tennessee Oilers I believe (before the name-change to the Titans)? Wasn't that when the Dyson/Wycheck pulled off the "Music City Miracle" to win the AFC championship against Buffalo or something like that?
And what I was told was that by the time the Texans concluded their inaugural season in 2002, just about every NFL franchise (or just about all of them) had appeared in a conference championship. By your general rule, the team you'd be rooting for would be the Texans since (as I mentioned above) they're the only team left in the NFL that never even won a divisional playoff round.
1999 was the first year they were known as the Titans.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 19, 2024, 05:18:18 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PM
Houston has never been in a Super Bowl much less won one, that includes all the years (30 or so in SB era?) that the Oilers were there.
Didn't the Oilers go to the Super Bowl back in the 1999 season when they were the Tennessee Oilers I believe (before the name-change to the Titans)? Wasn't that when the Dyson/Wycheck pulled off the "Music City Miracle" to win the AFC championship against Buffalo or something like that?
"Music City Miracle" was at the end of a wild card game. I believe it happened on January 8, 2000, so I remember it for that reason too (the fact that it was just after the change to 2000).
To go back to the Houston Oilers, I remember they were good around 1979-1980 when Bum Phillips (Wade's father) was the coach. They got to the AFC Championship game in both Jan. 1979 and Jan. 1980 but lost to the Steelers both times (and Steelers won SB both years).
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
Quote from: ZLoth on January 19, 2024, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
1966 to 1969 had a NFL championship game, followed by the Super Bowl, then called AFL-NFL Championship Game.
Quote from: Big John on January 19, 2024, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 19, 2024, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
1966 to 1969 had a NFL championship game, followed by the Super Bowl, then called AFL-NFL Championship Game.
The Jets have won a Super Bowl but never an NFL Championship. Same was true of the Chiefs until 4 years ago.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 19, 2024, 05:18:18 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PM
Houston has never been in a Super Bowl much less won one, that includes all the years (30 or so in SB era?) that the Oilers were there.
Didn't the Oilers go to the Super Bowl back in the 1999 season when they were the Tennessee Oilers I believe (before the name-change to the Titans)? Wasn't that when the Dyson/Wycheck pulled off the "Music City Miracle" to win the AFC championship against Buffalo or something like that?
And what I was told was that by the time the Texans concluded their inaugural season in 2002, just about every NFL franchise (if not all 31 of them) had appeared in a conference championship. By your general rule, the team you'd be rooting for would be the Texans since (as I mentioned above) they're the only team left in the NFL that never even won a divisional playoff round.
Actually, the Oilers had become the Titans when they made Super Bowl XXXIV and came within a Dre Bly tackle of winning it too.
Quote from: ZLoth on January 19, 2024, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
Yes, but I specifically said Super Bowl, which started after the 1966 season.
(and the post above regarding 1966-1969 seasons is also accurate)
If I was referring to a championship before the 1966 season, I would have specifically said NFL Championship.
I'm actually one of those people who do not want people to forget about pre-1966. But I try to use the correct terms, and when I use them I only refer to the time periods when they are accurate.
If you watch ESPN, you'd think pre-
19661970 (pre-merger) doesn't exist. The only time they ever mention it is times like right now (due to the Lions' history) and around SB 52 with the Eagles' history.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 20, 2024, 10:58:47 AM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 19, 2024, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
Yes, but I specifically said Super Bowl, which started after the 1966 season.
(and the post above regarding 1966-1969 seasons is also accurate)
If I was referring to a championship before the 1966 season, I would have specifically said NFL Championship.
I'm actually one of those people who do not want people to forget about pre-1966. But I try to use the correct terms, and when I use them I only refer to the time periods when they are accurate.
If you watch ESPN, you'd think pre-1966 doesn't exist. The only time they ever mention it is times like right now (due to the Lions' history) and around SB 52 with the Eagles' history.
I would say 1970 when the NFL-AFL merger was complete for BSPN.
Quote from: Big John on January 20, 2024, 11:20:56 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 20, 2024, 10:58:47 AM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 19, 2024, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 19, 2024, 02:02:51 PMLions have never been to SB either.
Technically, the Super Bowl is the NFL Championship Game. The Detroit Lion won the NFL Championship in 1957.
Yes, but I specifically said Super Bowl, which started after the 1966 season.
(and the post above regarding 1966-1969 seasons is also accurate)
If I was referring to a championship before the 1966 season, I would have specifically said NFL Championship.
I'm actually one of those people who do not want people to forget about pre-1966. But I try to use the correct terms, and when I use them I only refer to the time periods when they are accurate.
If you watch ESPN, you'd think pre-1966 doesn't exist. The only time they ever mention it is times like right now (due to the Lions' history) and around SB 52 with the Eagles' history.
I would say 1970 when the NFL-AFL merger was complete for BSPN.
Yes, I stand corrected. They are always saying "since the merger", so 1970 is better, not 1966.
But OTOH, they do also say "in the Super Bowl era".
The Ravens saw what the Chiefs and Bills played in last week and said, we want some of that too...
The Ravens are moving on to the AFC Championship game after beating the Texans (Strouds) 34-10!
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 20, 2024, 08:00:44 PM
The Ravens are moving on to the AFC Championship game after beating the Texans (Strouds) 34-10!
:cheers:
And so the AFC title game will NOT be hosted in Kansas City for the first time since Blake Bortles and the Jaguars faced Tom Brady and the Patriots in Foxborough six years ago. An unprecedented run of five straight home conference title games for the Chiefs, in which they went 3-2 and won two Super Bowls, has come to an end.
The 49ers barely beat the Packers to make it back to the NFC Championship Game.
Remaining Teams:
Ravens
49ers
Bills
Chiefs
Lions
Bucs
The 49ers did not look good in that game, and they should've lost... BUT they squeaked their way into the NFC playoffs thanks to the Packers missing a FG attempt and two interceptions thrown by Jordan Love (one of which ended the game for the Packers)...
Glad the 49ers were able to pull it off last night.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 21, 2024, 02:20:10 AM
The 49ers did not look good in that game, and they should've lost... BUT they squeaked their way into the NFC playoffs thanks to the Packers missing a FG attempt and two interceptions thrown by Jordan Love (one of which ended the game for the Packers)...
Purdy was having a hard time throwing a wet ball and a dirty blow to the head knocked out his best receiver.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 21, 2024, 02:20:10 AM
The 49ers did not look good in that game, and they should've lost... BUT they squeaked their way into the NFC playoffs thanks to the Packers missing a FG attempt and two interceptions thrown by Jordan Love (one of which ended the game for the Packers)...
That game is really all on Jordan Love. 52 seconds left, not fourth down, you have time outs, you can either scramble/run to extend the play or chuck it out of bounds...and he threw it up into midfield with no particular target as if he was a third-string QB on a Pop Warner team.
There was also the missed Packers 4th and one conversion in the first half, when they were in the 49ers red zone. Additional lost points.
I can't believe I'm the only one (who has posted) mentioning this.
Packers choked at the end. Missed field cascaded into allowing an easy touchdown then cascaded into the Love interception.
I observe, without further comment, that NBC just showed Roger Goodell in a box at the Tampa Bay-Detroit game (indoor stadium). Not in snowy Buffalo.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 21, 2024, 04:20:27 PM
I observe, without further comment, that NBC just showed Roger Goodell in a box at the Tampa Bay-Detroit game (indoor stadium). Not in snowy Buffalo.
Smart man. :D :D :D
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 21, 2024, 05:34:18 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 21, 2024, 04:20:27 PM
I observe, without further comment, that NBC just showed Roger Goodell in a box at the Tampa Bay-Detroit game (indoor stadium). Not in snowy Buffalo.
Smart man. :D :D :D
Not so sure about that. Boxes are heated and Taylor is in Buffalo.
LIONS are heading to the NFC Championship game! Congrats!! :clap:
Quote from: Hunty2022 on January 20, 2024, 11:26:21 PM
The 49ers barely beat the Packers to make it back to the NFC Championship Game.
Remaining Teams:
Ravens
49ers
Bills
Chiefs
Lions
Bucs
Apparently the Buccaneers could have taken a timeout at the end?
Happy to see the Lions make it to the NFC Championship Game.
My wife wants to go to the NFC championship game next week. I'm committed to the idea (given I'm a Lions fan) if we can find a halfway reasonable ticket price.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 07:00:08 PM
My wife wants to go to the NFC championship game next week. I'm committed to the idea (given I'm a Lions fan) if we can find a halfway reasonable ticket price.
That would be a new venture for Gribblenation I think if you made a blog article about your experience.
Are the Bills poised for their 13 Seconds revenge?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 07:00:08 PM
My wife wants to go to the NFC championship game next week. I'm committed to the idea (given I'm a Lions fan) if we can find a halfway reasonable ticket price.
As the week goes on you'll see if prices go up or down from what they are now. You could always take the chance and travel anyway, and wait till Sunday morning to purchase tickets. I've seen often enough it's a decent trend that prices will fall the morning of the game, but rise slightly later as the then-cheapest tickets are scuffed up.
Many people will also have tickets for sale that if they don't sell, they're going to the game anyway, so it's not like they need to sell them. I did this once last season - I was tailgating and about 2 hours before the game, the tix sold. I already had my alternate plans ready to watching the game and we did that instead.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 21, 2024, 07:37:12 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 07:00:08 PM
My wife wants to go to the NFC championship game next week. I'm committed to the idea (given I'm a Lions fan) if we can find a halfway reasonable ticket price.
As the week goes on you'll see if prices go up or down from what they are now. You could always take the chance and travel anyway, and wait till Sunday morning to purchase tickets. I've seen often enough it's a decent trend that prices will fall the morning of the game, but rise slightly later as the then-cheapest tickets are scuffed up.
Many people will also have tickets for sale that if they don't sell, they're going to the game anyway, so it's not like they need to sell them. I did this once last season - I was tailgating and about 2 hours before the game, the tix sold. I already had my alternate plans ready to watching the game and we did that instead.
My wife's cousin did that this week with the Green Bay game. Apparently that wasn't even a total sellout until very late in the week.
The Green Bay Packers have a very bright future ahead of them. They are going to be a scary force to be reckoned with for many years to come; it shouldn't be too long before the Packers become the NFL's next empire like the NE Patriots have been adding several more Vince Lombardi trophies to their history (some consecutively).
The phrase "house money" is starting to drive me nuts. People thought the Jaguars, Giants, and Seahawks were "playing with house money" in the playoffs last year because they were still in rebuilds and had a very good outlook for the future. None of those teams made the playoffs this year. The house money ran out real quick.
What's my point? I don't know. It's just weird to me that the narratives surrounding teams that netted essentially the same results are so different because of arbitrary expectations from five months ago, that we already know are often wildly inaccurate. The Texans had essentially the same season as whichever team loses tonight's game, yet tonight's loser will be relentlessly slandered all offseason for losing in the divisional while Houston will get nothing but praise.
Not to mention - this looks like a down year for the AFC, aside from the Ravens. Burrow hurt to some degree almost all season. Chiefs offense by far the worst they've been in the Mahomes era. Teams like the Jets, Chargers, and Jags, that have the potential to be dangerous, dying out largely because of injuries (or a bad coach that has since been fired). The Browns and Dolphins had pretty stacked IRs as well. Buffalo managing the 2 seed despite playing downright bad for the entireties of October and November is evidence of all that. So the grass won't always be greener next year.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 21, 2024, 05:37:17 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 21, 2024, 05:34:18 PM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 21, 2024, 04:20:27 PM
I observe, without further comment, that NBC just showed Roger Goodell in a box at the Tampa Bay-Detroit game (indoor stadium). Not in snowy Buffalo.
Smart man. :D :D :D
Not so sure about that. Boxes are heated and Taylor is in Buffalo.
Well, Taylor has her reasons that don't have anything to do with football.
I wasn't really referring to boxes in Buffalo, which I am sure are heated, as they are in Kansas City and every other stadium (I assume).
The larger point was that Goodell was not in Buffalo this week, nor was he in Kansas City last week, dealing with the outside conditions. I know he's free to do as he wishes, and my opinion doesn't matter, but I'd respect him more if he went to the bad weather sometimes.
I'm sure everyone who complained about the end zone fumble fule when it benefitted the Chiefs against the Browns 3 years ago is remaining consistent in their disdain for the rule now that the Chiefs are on the other end of it.
Chiefs are going to the AFC Championship game after the Bills missed a critical FG attempt to tie the game!
What a way for Buffalo to lose....bad decisions by Josh Allen and a wide right muffed field goal, of all things.
I was thinking Buffalo winning the OT coin toss, scoring a touchdown on the first drive, and then losing afterwards due to the new rules that they basically created would have been the funniest outcome. But Wide Right II, as it's already dubbed on Wikipedia, is a close second. Eh, third actually, now that I think about seconds.
Also, I think Mahomes has earned his way above Rodgers and Brees in terms of all-time great QBs. Mahomes is now 4th, Rodgers and Brees 5th and 6th respectively, in my opinion.
Anders Carlson 🤝 Tyler Bass
On killing their respective team's playoff run by a missed game-tying field goal.
What I hate the most is how much more that game meant to the Bills than the Chiefs. Not just the players, but the entire organization. Not even remotely comparable stakes. Sure, the Chiefs are happy to win but I will not be convinced there is any comparison to how devastated the Bills are right now with how the Chiefs would feel if they lost. Nor is there any comparison with how ecstatic the Bills would be if they won to how ecstatic the Chiefs are right now. And there are dozens of examples of this with the Bills... probably a dozen since 2020 for that matter.
At this point I'm ready to hit a deep dive on which NFL - heck, sports franchise period - has dealt with the most heartbreak and I can tell you right now it'll be Bills in a landslide. Chargers and Vikings are the only NFL teams that might be in the same ballpark but they don't do it in the way the Bills do... 6-6, left for dead, 6 straight wins, the hype and momentum building, win a playoff game, set up an insanely great game back and forth with the defending champs... and then the knife twist. Simply can NOT happen AGAIN. The only reason the Bills aren't as parodied as the Cowboys is because of Allen and because they were sentimental favorites due to having never won a Super Bowl. Literally who is going to be rooting for the Chiefs next weekend? 1 fanbase. For the other 30 teams and fanbases watching there is zero joy in rooting for the Chiefs.
And (webny99 enters salty mode) I won't be hearing any crap about the snowball throwing. Spend a decade or two in WNY rooting for the Bills and see how you feel about it then. I'm seeing people saying "Bills Mafia does not condone this activity"... false, 99%+ of them do and you would too if you were in their shoes. It's snow, literally water in lightly frozen form. It's western NY and we've got a crap ton of it, have some for the road and get over it. (no throwing at anyone's face though).
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2024, 09:11:58 PM
And so the AFC title game will NOT be hosted in Kansas City for the first time since Blake Bortles and the Jaguars faced Tom Brady and the Patriots in Foxborough six years ago. An unprecedented run of five straight home conference title games for the Chiefs, in which they went 3-2 and won two Super Bowls, has come to an end.
I apologize to all of Western NY for clinching the Chiefs' ticket to a 6th straight title game. It was foolish, unhinged and uncalled for and I know better.
I cannot apologize for the Lions winning to set up the Bills to be the only home team to lose in 2023 after being the only road team to lose in 2021, as that was not in fact the clincher, but only some pre-salting of the wound.
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 10:59:12 PM
The only reason the Bills aren't as parodied as the Cowboys is because of Allen and because they were sentimental favorites due to having never won a Super Bowl.
Precisely.
Quote from: thspfc on January 23, 2023, 11:13:47 AM
If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.
Total record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 97-74
Bills: 96-74
Division titles over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 4
Bills: 3
Playoff berths over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 5
Bills: 5
Playoff record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 3-5
Bills: 4-5
If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? :eyebrow: They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.
Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.
Granted, I agree with this post less now than I did a year ago. Buffalo's loss was worse last year, Dallas' loss was much worse this year. And it seems like most people are catching on anyway.
I think being the first 2 seed to lose to a 7 seed, and getting blown out at that, really bumps the Cowboys into a different tier of playoff choking. I'd say the Bills are more so the Packers of the AFC, minus, you know, the four championships. The Steelers are the Cowboys of the AFC right now, except their team is worse and their winless streak is longer, but they do have a title (two actually) this milennium. One could also argue the Chargers or Dolphins are the Cowboys of the AFC, but I think that's just insulting.
Disagreed on the Cowboys-Steelers comparison only because the Steelers are never as good as their record and haven't even shown the upside of being a great team. Cowboys at least earn it by beating up on bad teams, while the Steelers only squeak by the bad teams which I find almost more annoying.
I do see some Cowboys-Dolphins parallels developing but will not yet make that comparison definitively. But not the Chargers, they are in their own category.
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:43:33 PM
Disagreed on the Cowboys-Steelers comparison only because the Steelers are never as good as their record and haven't even shown the upside of being a great team. Cowboys at least earn it by beating up on bad teams, while the Steelers only squeak by the bad teams which I find almost more annoying.
I do see some Cowboys-Dolphins parallels developing but will not yet make that comparison definitively. But not the Chargers, they are in their own category.
My favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:50:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:43:33 PM
Disagreed on the Cowboys-Steelers comparison only because the Steelers are never as good as their record and haven't even shown the upside of being a great team. Cowboys at least earn it by beating up on bad teams, while the Steelers only squeak by the bad teams which I find almost more annoying.
I do see some Cowboys-Dolphins parallels developing but will not yet make that comparison definitively. But not the Chargers, they are in their own category.
My favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
Hopefully this will not be the last. Of course, approaching it as a Lions fan, you take it one at a time, just hopeful they don't embarrass themselves in the next game. If they get at least this far next year, it's something I might get used to - want to get used to.
Quote from: Brandon on January 22, 2024, 06:35:29 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:50:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:43:33 PM
Disagreed on the Cowboys-Steelers comparison only because the Steelers are never as good as their record and haven't even shown the upside of being a great team. Cowboys at least earn it by beating up on bad teams, while the Steelers only squeak by the bad teams which I find almost more annoying.
I do see some Cowboys-Dolphins parallels developing but will not yet make that comparison definitively. But not the Chargers, they are in their own category.
My favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
Hopefully this will not be the last. Of course, approaching it as a Lions fan, you take it one at a time, just hopeful they don't embarrass themselves in the next game. If they get at least this far next year, it's something I might get used to - want to get used to.
The good news is, they've reached the point where any performance aside from maybe getting shutout or blown out by 20+ points wouldn't be that embarrassing. Much like the 2020 Bills, it's still an incredible season regardless of what happens next week.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:50:12 PMMy favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
This will also apply to the Houston Texans, Miami Dolphins, the Cleveland Browns, and the Washington Commandos. Of course, with the Detroit Lions winning a playoff game last weekend, the Miami Dolphins now hold the current longest playoff losing streak with no playoff wins since the 2000 AFC Wild Card.
Quote from: ZLoth on January 22, 2024, 11:59:26 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:50:12 PMMy favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
This will also apply to the Houston Texans, Miami Dolphins, the Cleveland Browns, and the Washington Commandos. Of course, with the Detroit Lions winning a playoff game last weekend, the Miami Dolphins now hold the current longest playoff losing streak with no playoff wins since the 2000 AFC Wild Card.
Last conference championship game appearance for that franchise was in the 1991 season.
Quote from: Big John on January 22, 2024, 12:03:09 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 22, 2024, 11:59:26 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:50:12 PMMy favorite meme of the day pointed out that the Lions have been to one NFC championship this century and the Cowboys have not.
This will also apply to the Houston Texans, Miami Dolphins, the Cleveland Browns, and the Washington Commandos. Of course, with the Detroit Lions winning a playoff game last weekend, the Miami Dolphins now hold the current longest playoff losing streak with no playoff wins since the 2000 AFC Wild Card.
Last conference championship game appearance for that franchise was in the 1991 season.
Yes, no appearance this century is why they're on this list. I did a double take as well but this list is teams that could replace the
Cowboys in the analogy, not the Lions.
After last night's game, I will repeat my plea for the NFL to get rid of conferences so we can get an Allen vs Mahomes Super Bowl.
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:21:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2024, 09:11:58 PM
And so the AFC title game will NOT be hosted in Kansas City for the first time since Blake Bortles and the Jaguars faced Tom Brady and the Patriots in Foxborough six years ago. An unprecedented run of five straight home conference title games for the Chiefs, in which they went 3-2 and won two Super Bowls, has come to an end.
I apologize to all of Western NY for clinching the Chiefs' ticket to a 6th straight title game. It was foolish, unhinged and uncalled for and I know better.
I cannot apologize for the Lions winning to set up the Bills to be the only home team to lose in 2023 after being the only road team to lose in 2021, as that was not in fact the clincher, but only some pre-salting of the wound.
At least you don't have people on this forum telling you that your fanbase "deserved" to lose (see posts 5200 and 5201 [5201 is by me]).
I made light of it, but was still rather annoyed. Like the person who posted #5200 really knows all X million people in that fanbase.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 22, 2024, 03:26:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:21:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2024, 09:11:58 PM
And so the AFC title game will NOT be hosted in Kansas City for the first time since Blake Bortles and the Jaguars faced Tom Brady and the Patriots in Foxborough six years ago. An unprecedented run of five straight home conference title games for the Chiefs, in which they went 3-2 and won two Super Bowls, has come to an end.
I apologize to all of Western NY for clinching the Chiefs' ticket to a 6th straight title game. It was foolish, unhinged and uncalled for and I know better.
I cannot apologize for the Lions winning to set up the Bills to be the only home team to lose in 2023 after being the only road team to lose in 2021, as that was not in fact the clincher, but only some pre-salting of the wound.
At least you don't have people on this forum telling you that your fanbase "deserved" to lose (see posts 5200 and 5201 [5201 is by me]).
I made light of it, but was still rather annoyed. Like the person who posted #5200 really knows all X million people in that fanbase.
I wouldn't say any fans "deserve" to lose but I would say that my life is much more enjoyable when the Packers, Steelers, Cowboys and Patriots have all been eliminated.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 22, 2024, 03:26:21 PM
At least you don't have people on this forum telling you that your fanbase "deserved" to lose (see posts 5200 and 5201 [5201 is by me]).
I made light of it, but was still rather annoyed. Like the person who posted #5200 really knows all X million people in that fanbase.
Well, I would expect that from a fan of a division rival, and it would be the same in the AFC East. But anyone saying that about a fan base outside their own division that has never won a chip is completely unhinged :crazy:
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 22, 2024, 03:26:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 11:21:00 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 20, 2024, 09:11:58 PM
And so the AFC title game will NOT be hosted in Kansas City for the first time since Blake Bortles and the Jaguars faced Tom Brady and the Patriots in Foxborough six years ago. An unprecedented run of five straight home conference title games for the Chiefs, in which they went 3-2 and won two Super Bowls, has come to an end.
I apologize to all of Western NY for clinching the Chiefs' ticket to a 6th straight title game. It was foolish, unhinged and uncalled for and I know better.
I cannot apologize for the Lions winning to set up the Bills to be the only home team to lose in 2023 after being the only road team to lose in 2021, as that was not in fact the clincher, but only some pre-salting of the wound.
At least you don't have people on this forum telling you that your fanbase "deserved" to lose (see posts 5200 and 5201 [5201 is by me]).
I made light of it, but was still rather annoyed. Like the person who posted #5200 really knows all X million people in that fanbase.
Yeah, I should have been more specific. Only a (sizeable) minority of Eagles fans deserved it.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 21, 2024, 07:57:29 PM
The Green Bay Packers have a very bright future ahead of them. They are going to be a scary force to be reckoned with for many years to come; it shouldn't be too long before the Packers become the NFL's next empire like the NE Patriots have been adding several more Vince Lombardi trophies to their history (some consecutively).
They already have been. They had Favre and Rodgers for how many years?
Quote from: dvferyance on January 22, 2024, 06:11:11 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 21, 2024, 07:57:29 PM
The Green Bay Packers have a very bright future ahead of them. They are going to be a scary force to be reckoned with for many years to come; it shouldn't be too long before the Packers become the NFL's next empire like the NE Patriots have been adding several more Vince Lombardi trophies to their history (some consecutively).
They already have been. They had Favre and Rodgers for how many years?
Favre: 16 seasons, 1 ring
Rodgers: 18 seasons, 1 ring
Bart Starr has 2 rings for Super Bowl I and II.
If GB becomes an empire and wins multiple Lombardis, Love could surpass Favre and Rodgers pretty quickly
^^ and Starr had 3 more champions that happened before Super Bowl I.
Suggesting that the Packers will be the NFL's "next empire", as if the 'next' empire hasn't been underway for over half a decade, is certainly an idea.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 21, 2024, 09:48:10 PM
Chiefs are going to the AFC Championship game after the Bills missed a critical FG attempt to tie the game!
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 21, 2024, 09:50:23 PM
What a way for Buffalo to lose....bad decisions by Josh Allen and a wide right muffed field goal, of all things.
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...of course, we all know what happened at the end of Super Bowl XXV. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler Bass is being compared to Scott Norwood right now.
It would be nice to see the Lions make it to the Super Bowl, as they're the only NFC North team that has never been there. But beating the 49ers will be a tall order, so Detroit has their work cut out for them.
And the Ravens will have to contend with the defending Super Bowl champs in the AFC title game. That being said, it'll be one of the most exciting pair of conference championships to watch in years.
Quote from: Henry on January 22, 2024, 11:22:37 PM
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...
I'm sure a Bills kicker has missed at least one other field goal/extra point wide right in the history of their organization, though those two misses are by far the most famous.
Quote from: kurumi on January 22, 2024, 10:47:58 PM
If GB becomes an empire and wins multiple Lombardis, Love could surpass Favre and Rodgers pretty quickly
My extremely long-term take is that only getting one SB trophy per HOF QB while otherwise losing in the playoffs is part of the penalty the Packers pay for having HOF QB play for 45 years. It's still easily a worthwhile tradeoff, though. 90% of fanbases would sign up for that in a heartbeat.
What stings this year for the Packers is that, even though it was a surprise run, it's still a huge missed opportunity because they know they could've beaten the Lions. The Bucs, Texans, and even Bills would not have been as confident as the Packers about punching their tickets to the Super Bowl had they won.
Quote from: thspfc on January 22, 2024, 11:00:41 PM
Suggesting that the Packers will be the NFL's "next empire", as if the 'next' empire hasn't been underway for over half a decade, is certainly an idea.
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately, depending on your perspective) I think beating the desperate Bills on the road essentially "clinches" dynasty/empire status for the Chiefs. That big road win was the only thing missing from their resume. This post (http://tinyurl.com/5n7x52nh) from former KC center summed it up well.
Quote from: Henry on January 22, 2024, 11:22:37 PM
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...of course, we all know what happened at the end of Super Bowl XXV. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler Bass is being compared to Scott Norwood right now.
I'm getting slightly annoyed at all these comparisons to the Norwood kick. The two scenarios are quite different.
If Norwood had made his kick the Bills would have had a 2 point lead with 4 seconds left. It's pretty safe to say that the result of the Norwood kick determined who would win Super Bowl XXV.
If Tyler Bass had make his kick, the Bills would have been in a tie game with 1:43 left and the Chiefs possessing 2 timeouts and a Patrick Mahomes lead offense. In my opinion it's likely that the Bass kick only determined whether Buffalo's loss in regulation would be by a 24-27 score or something more like 27-30 or even 27-34.
Quote from: Buck87 on January 23, 2024, 11:12:43 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 22, 2024, 11:22:37 PM
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...of course, we all know what happened at the end of Super Bowl XXV. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler Bass is being compared to Scott Norwood right now.
I'm getting slightly annoyed at all these comparisons to the Norwood kick. The two scenarios are quite different.
If Norwood had made his kick the Bills would have had a 2 point lead with 4 seconds left. It's pretty safe to say that the result of the Norwood kick determined who would win Super Bowl XXV.
If Tyler Bass had make his kick, the Bills would have been in a tie game with 1:43 left and the Chiefs possessing 2 timeouts and a Patrick Mahomes lead offense. In my opinion it's likely that the Bass kick only determined whether Buffalo's loss in regulation would be by a 24-27 score or something more like 27-30 or even 27-34.
I was also thinking about this, realizing that the scenarios were different.
The only other playoff game I can remember off the top of my head, similar to SB XXV, where a missed FG very late in regulation kept a team "from taking the lead" (as opposed to tying) was on Dec. 24, 1978 in a Wild Card game between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Atlanta Falcons. Missed FG with 13 seconds left by the Eagles kept the score as 14-13 Falcons (and that was the final score).
I'm sure there have been others.
There's a tendency to focus on one kick when it goes awry, but every moment like that was preceded by a dozen that would have made the kick irrelevant. It's just a recency bias that makes fans blame the one missed field goal or the one dropped pass or the one blown coverage near the end of the game. That's what happened last, so that's what they lament.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 23, 2024, 11:21:03 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 23, 2024, 11:12:43 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 22, 2024, 11:22:37 PM
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...of course, we all know what happened at the end of Super Bowl XXV. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler Bass is being compared to Scott Norwood right now.
I'm getting slightly annoyed at all these comparisons to the Norwood kick. The two scenarios are quite different.
If Norwood had made his kick the Bills would have had a 2 point lead with 4 seconds left. It's pretty safe to say that the result of the Norwood kick determined who would win Super Bowl XXV.
If Tyler Bass had make his kick, the Bills would have been in a tie game with 1:43 left and the Chiefs possessing 2 timeouts and a Patrick Mahomes lead offense. In my opinion it's likely that the Bass kick only determined whether Buffalo's loss in regulation would be by a 24-27 score or something more like 27-30 or even 27-34.
I was also thinking about this, realizing that the scenarios were different.
The only other playoff game I can remember off the top of my head, similar to SB XXV, where a missed FG very late in regulation kept a team "from taking the lead" (as opposed to tying) was on Dec. 24, 1978 in a Wild Card game between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Atlanta Falcons. Missed FG with 13 seconds left by the Eagles kept the score as 14-13 Falcons (and that was the final score).
I'm sure there have been others.
Don't forget Double Doink!
Regarding the Bills, my opinion is that they had already lost the game by settling for a field goal on that drive. They were not going to win without scoring another touchdown in regulation, full stop. Their extremely injured defense had very little hope of stopping the Chiefs, so by settling for a field goal their best shot to win was probably to allow a quick touchdown and get the ball back... still needing a touchdown. In other words, the macro view of why they lost is that they couldn't play defense (largely due to injuries but that's somewhat besides the point), but the
micro view of why they lost is not because of the missed kick, but rather their inability to score a touchdown on their last possession. That's partially on Allen for two bad decisions, but also Diggs and Sherfield for drops that would have set up more favorable scoring scenarios.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 23, 2024, 11:32:31 AM
There's a tendency to focus on one kick when it goes awry, but every moment like that was preceded by a dozen that would have made the kick irrelevant. It's just a recency bias that makes fans blame the one missed field goal or the one dropped pass or the one blown coverage near the end of the game. That's what happened last, so that's what they lament.
The missed kick was a "typical Bills" type of moment but I think everyone recognizes they were in a bad spot even if the kick was made. Tied at 27, a Chiefs game winning field goal or a repeat of 2021 with a last-second flurry of scoring would have felt inevitable.
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2024, 11:47:51 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 23, 2024, 11:21:03 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 23, 2024, 11:12:43 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 22, 2024, 11:22:37 PM
Second time in their history that a kick went wide right...of course, we all know what happened at the end of Super Bowl XXV. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler Bass is being compared to Scott Norwood right now.
I'm getting slightly annoyed at all these comparisons to the Norwood kick. The two scenarios are quite different.
If Norwood had made his kick the Bills would have had a 2 point lead with 4 seconds left. It's pretty safe to say that the result of the Norwood kick determined who would win Super Bowl XXV.
If Tyler Bass had make his kick, the Bills would have been in a tie game with 1:43 left and the Chiefs possessing 2 timeouts and a Patrick Mahomes lead offense. In my opinion it's likely that the Bass kick only determined whether Buffalo's loss in regulation would be by a 24-27 score or something more like 27-30 or even 27-34.
I was also thinking about this, realizing that the scenarios were different.
The only other playoff game I can remember off the top of my head, similar to SB XXV, where a missed FG very late in regulation kept a team "from taking the lead" (as opposed to tying) was on Dec. 24, 1978 in a Wild Card game between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Atlanta Falcons. Missed FG with 13 seconds left by the Eagles kept the score as 14-13 Falcons (and that was the final score).
I'm sure there have been others.
Don't forget Double Doink!
In addition to the 1978 game I mentioned:
The infamous Tony Romo botched snap hold occurred on a field goal attempt with 1 minute left in a 2006 season WC game (in early 2007), Would have put Dallas up 23-21 --- they lost 21-20 (to Seattle).
Almost the same, except here it wasn't the kicker's fault.
QuoteThe infamous Tony Romo botched snap hold occurred on a field goal attempt with 1 minute left in a 2006 season WC game (in early 2007), Would have put Dallas up 23-21 --- they lost 21-20.
It is still weird to me that people hate Romo the most for a play when he was not even the QB.
How can I forget that Double Doink game? I kind of expected the Bears to lose to the then-defending champions, but not in the manner that they did. On a side note, Chris Collinsworth, who used the phrase on the air that night, is actually the second announcer to do so, after Chris Berman at a Lions game in 2000; he also credits the late John Madden with the "doink" term.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 23, 2024, 08:52:58 PM
QuoteThe infamous Tony Romo botched snap hold occurred on a field goal attempt with 1 minute left in a 2006 season WC game (in early 2007), Would have put Dallas up 23-21 --- they lost 21-20.
It is still weird to me that people hate Romo the most for a play when he was not even the QB.
And yet, Romo was stopped JUST SHORT of the very best thing that the Cowboys could have possibly gotten out of that play - a first down. Remember that there was nearly a minute left in the game, PLENTY of time for Hassleback to get the Seahawks (who were out of time outs) to the other end of the field and in a position to tie or win that game. With the first down, the Cowboys would have 'kneed' the clock down to a couple of seconds and they were NOT going to botch that field goal try a second time.
Mike
The Packers have fired DC Joe Barry...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoqjULS-EII
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 24, 2024, 11:26:32 AM
The Packers have fired DC Joe Barry...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoqjULS-EII
Could we said the Packers packed Joe Barry? Sorry, I couldn't resist to do this name gam ^_^;
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 21, 2024, 06:29:44 PM
Apparently the Buccaneers could have taken a timeout at the end?
Just catching up on this... yeah, that was crazy. You
have to call the timeout in that spot with your season on the line. Forget the probability, not calling the timeout takes you from having a very slim chance to having no chance at all. It might even be forgivable in the regular season but with a trip to the NFC Championship on the line, you cannot choose no chance.
Quote from: ZLoth on January 07, 2024, 09:06:08 PM
My NFC bracket....
2 Cowboys bear 7 Packers
3 Lions beat 6 Rams
4 Bucs beat 5 Eagles because Eagles are in a slump. Game could go either way as neither team was impressive during week 18. Will this be the Peacock game?
1 49ers beat 4 Bucs/5 Eagles
3 Lions beat 2 Cowboys. Call it Christmas payback.
1 49ers beat 3 Lions
Boy was I wrong.
Quote from: ZLoth on January 24, 2024, 05:34:28 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 07, 2024, 09:06:08 PM
My NFC bracket....
2 Cowboys bear 7 Packers
3 Lions beat 6 Rams
4 Bucs beat 5 Eagles because Eagles are in a slump. Game could go either way as neither team was impressive during week 18. Will this be the Peacock game?
1 49ers beat 4 Bucs/5 Eagles
3 Lions beat 2 Cowboys. Call it Christmas payback.
1 49ers beat 3 Lions
Boy was I wrong.
You got the championship game matchup right (we'll see about the result). The Packers upset messed up all of your divisional game matchups but you still got those winners right.
Jim Harbaugh is leaving Michigan for the San Diego (er Los Angeles) Chargers.
^ I was worried Bill Belichick might end up with the Chargers. Now I can keep rooting against the Chargers (issues with ownership, not coaches or players).
The "genius" part of Belichick's "evil genius" rep has been fading badly lately. But I'm open to rooting for him once more, if he can mount a comeback with a team I can stand.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 24, 2024, 07:25:22 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on January 24, 2024, 05:34:28 PM
Boy was I wrong.
You got the championship game matchup right (we'll see about the result). The Packers upset messed up all of your divisional game matchups but you still got those winners right.
Must have been sarcasm. Pretty much nailed it except for Cowboys/Packers.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on January 24, 2024, 07:26:51 PM
Jim Harbaugh is leaving Michigan for the San Diego (er Los Angeles) Chargers.
The AFC West just got more spicy. Andy Reid, Sean Payton, and Jim Harbaugh... and Antonio Pierce.
Quote from: oscar on January 24, 2024, 08:08:06 PM
^ I was worried Bill Belichick might end up with the Chargers. Now I can keep rooting against the Chargers (issues with ownership, not coaches or players).
I'm curious what the issues are with Chargers ownership. I haven't heard of anything controversial publicly, except a reputation for complacency dating back to the Philip Rivers days.
Quote from: webny99 on January 21, 2024, 10:59:12 PM
And (webny99 enters salty mode) I won't be hearing any crap about the snowball throwing. Spend a decade or two in WNY rooting for the Bills and see how you feel about it then. I'm seeing people saying "Bills Mafia does not condone this activity"... false, 99%+ of them do and you would too if you were in their shoes. It's snow, literally water in lightly frozen form. It's western NY and we've got a crap ton of it, have some for the road and get over it. (no throwing at anyone's face though).
Oh if it were only that easy.
I still get crap about Philadelphia even though said event happened in 1968.
You really don't need to worry about it. The media won't mention it every single year. The media will say that Buffalo is more remembered for its multi-foot snowstorms then anything else. I first became aware of Buffalo in the late 1970s because of such storms.
and the 1995 Giants game after a big snowstorm. Many fans were throwing ice and snowballs onto the field throughout the game, hitting players and officials in the process. The NFL was close to postponing the game to clear the stands before resuming the game to an empty stadium.
My wife and I will be at the NFC Championship game. I figure that it is my best interest to go given the close proximity and the fact that I've waited 31 years for the Lions to get this far again.
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2024, 08:39:04 PM
Quote from: oscar on January 24, 2024, 08:08:06 PM
^ I was worried Bill Belichick might end up with the Chargers. Now I can keep rooting against the Chargers (issues with ownership, not coaches or players).
I'm curious what the issues are with Chargers ownership. I haven't heard of anything controversial publicly, except a reputation for complacency dating back to the Philip Rivers days.
They range from big (their exit from San Diego, where they didn't get the new taxpayer-subsidized stadium the Chargers wanted) to small (their attempt to nickel-and-dime Joey Bosa on his rookie contract).
My championship round guesses are;
Ravens > Chiefs
49ers > Lions
Super Bowl is still Ravens > 49ers.
Quote from: oscar on January 24, 2024, 09:59:18 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 24, 2024, 08:39:04 PM
Quote from: oscar on January 24, 2024, 08:08:06 PM
^ I was worried Bill Belichick might end up with the Chargers. Now I can keep rooting against the Chargers (issues with ownership, not coaches or players).
I'm curious what the issues are with Chargers ownership. I haven't heard of anything controversial publicly, except a reputation for complacency dating back to the Philip Rivers days.
They range from big (their exit from San Diego, where they didn't get the new taxpayer-subsidized stadium the Chargers wanted) to small (their attempt to nickel-and-dime Joey Bosa on his rookie contract).
I mean, there were good reasons for the Manning family to tell the Chargers not to draft Eli at the 2004 NFL draft.
(Technically, the Chargers ignored this and drafted Eli, but then traded him to the NY Giants for Phillip Rivers and some draft picks before the 1st round was over)
For the reasons stated and more, the Chargers sound as though they are less popular then UCLA and USC with their own fan base. Hiring the most recent National Championship Coach (Harbaugh), and one who beat a regional rival no less, will address at least some of that.
Can it safely be said that Kyle Hamilton is the essence of the Ravens' defense in the same way Lamar is the essence of their offense?
Quote from: epzik8 on January 25, 2024, 03:37:34 PM
Can it safely be said that Kyle Hamilton is the essence of the Ravens' defense in the same way Lamar is the essence of their offense?
I'd say Roquan is the anchor of that defense, but it's close between the two. Lamar, though, is far and away the essence of the offense.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 25, 2024, 03:37:34 PM
Can it safely be said that Kyle Hamilton is the essence of the Ravens' defense in the same way Lamar is the essence of their offense?
Yes, anybody who watched him in college for 3 years knew he was going to be a superstar in the NFL.
Well, Bill Belichick is not going to Atlanta, because Raheem Morris is the Falcons' new head coach. So his next destination is still up in the air.
Personally, I'd say time to hang up the hoodie; there's nothing left to prove.
Quote from: Henry on January 25, 2024, 10:07:03 PM
Personally, I'd say time to hang up the hoodie; there's nothing left to prove.
Agreed. Make sure to trim his sleeves on his way out.
Quick heat check: who are the top 5 QB's in the NFL right now?
I'm curious, not how many NFC QB's are clearly top 5 (spoiler alert: it's zero), but if there are any NFC QB's who even have an argument to be top 5.
To me it's Mahomes*, then Lamar, Allen, Burrow in some order, then it gets interesting. CJ Stroud, Herbert and Lawrence could all be above anyone in the NFC. There is no reasonable ranking that has any fewer than 7 of the top 10 in the AFC right now. If you want to put someone in the NFC ahead of one of those (most likely Lawrence) it's Jordan Love and possibly Dak and that's probably it. You could maybe argue Goff or Brock Purdy, but only in the right situation, while most above them can overcome a bad situation.
*Is it just me or is this already starting to feel like a repeat of the Brady era...?
Pending the rest of this postseason, here's my list:
Tier 1: elite1. Mahomes
2. Lamar
3. Burrow
4. Allen
Tier 2: franchise QB, not elite right now6-13: Stroud, Herbert, Love, Dak, Goff, Cousins, Stafford, Purdy, Hurts; ranking these eight is splitting hairs. Obviously I'd rather have Stroud or Love than Cousins or Stafford moving forward because of age, but as of today they're all at the same level.
Tier 3: time to prove it14. Tua
15. Lawrence
16. Baker
17. Kyler
18. Geno
19. Carr
20. Watson
That's every somewhat proven QB that I think has a realistic chance of earning a big money contract in the future, from whatever team it may be. Young and Richardson are complete unknowns at this point, no sense in ranking them anywhere. While the AFC has the top 4, the NFC has 7 of my top 13.
Quote from: Henry on January 25, 2024, 10:07:03 PM
Well, Bill Belichick is not going to Atlanta, because Raheem Morris is the Falcons' new head coach. So his next destination is still up in the air.
Personally, I'd say time to hang up the hoodie; there's nothing left to prove.
He's cooked. I didn't understand the narrative that he was going to be an attractive candidate. He is at fault for destroying the Patriots through awful personnel moves post-Brady.
I must say the Panthers hire is perplexing. Canales was an OC for one season, in which he coached a below average offense that marginally improved from the previous year (23rd total 20th scoring, vs. 15th total 25th scoring in 2022). And that was with registered football terrorist Byron Leftwich at OC. They beat the Eagles? Yeah, them and literally everyone else that played them after November. They kept it close against a below average Lions defense? Wow!
Quote from: Henry on January 25, 2024, 10:07:03 PM
Well, Bill Belichick is not going to Atlanta, because Raheem Morris is the Falcons' new head coach. So his next destination is still up in the air.
Personally, I'd say time to hang up the hoodie; there's nothing left to prove.
I think his desire is to pass Don Shula in the all-time wins record. He only needs 15. This means he will need a team with a winning record and good prospects moving forward. Conventional wisdom had BB being taken by now. That it hasn't happened, and won't happen at least for now isn't as much of a surprise as it seems. He's been in the same place for 24 seasons. He's a defense-oriented coach in a league now defined by offense, his last few years as coach/GM have been dreadful, he's got a 4-13 season behind him, and he wants total control when that hasn't worked for him. And of course there is his age and notoriety that would come from hiring perhaps the greatest coach in league history, which is a burden for him and for whoever ends up hiring him. Circumstances have actually supported the best outcome for him....spend some more time on his boat in Nantucket, sit out the season, "consult" for a team, and wait for the inevitable in-season firing or parting of the ways by a would-be contender.
There definitely is something to prove. The narrative is now that Belichick was mostly a product of Tom Brady's success. Winning elsewhere would go a long way to proving otherwise. Functionally I don't think Belichick's brand of coaching fits the modern player oriented game, so that would be a tall order.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 08:21:01 AM
There definitely is something to prove. The narrative is now that Belichick was mostly a product of Tom Brady's success. Winning elsewhere would go a long way to proving otherwise. Functionally I don't think Belichick's brand of coaching fits the modern player oriented game, so that would be a tall order.
I think the bigger issue is that Bill has always had total control over personnel and no team is going to give him that when he's going to be there at most 2-3 years. If he wants to coach again, he's going to have to accept that he would be a coach only.
Quote from: thspfc on January 26, 2024, 01:24:37 AM
I must say the Panthers hire is perplexing. Canales was an OC for one season, in which he coached a below average offense that marginally improved from the previous year (23rd total 20th scoring, vs. 15th total 25th scoring in 2022). And that was with registered football terrorist Byron Leftwich at OC. They beat the Eagles? Yeah, them and literally everyone else that played them after November. They kept it close against a below average Lions defense? Wow!
It's not the most inspired hire overall, but Mayfield was much improved from his last two stops and had his second-best season in the NFL. The bar in Carolina is so low that I think there's a good chance Bryce Young improves and it looks like a good hire after year 1.
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2024, 08:35:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 26, 2024, 01:24:37 AM
I must say the Panthers hire is perplexing. Canales was an OC for one season, in which he coached a below average offense that marginally improved from the previous year (23rd total 20th scoring, vs. 15th total 25th scoring in 2022). And that was with registered football terrorist Byron Leftwich at OC. They beat the Eagles? Yeah, them and literally everyone else that played them after November. They kept it close against a below average Lions defense? Wow!
It's not the most inspired hire overall, but Mayfield was much improved from his last two stops and had his second-best season in the NFL. The bar in Carolina is so low that I think there's a good chance Bryce Young improves and it looks like a good hire after year 1.
"The bar is so low" is never a good way to justify a coaching hire.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 26, 2024, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 08:21:01 AM
There definitely is something to prove. The narrative is now that Belichick was mostly a product of Tom Brady's success. Winning elsewhere would go a long way to proving otherwise. Functionally I don't think Belichick's brand of coaching fits the modern player oriented game, so that would be a tall order.
I think the bigger issue is that Bill has always had total control over personnel and no team is going to give him that when he's going to be there at most 2-3 years. If he wants to coach again, he's going to have to accept that he would be a coach only.
Clearly it wasn't his forte like it was with his predecessor. The Patriots used to win in spite of those questionable personnel decisions because they had the best QB that ever played. Belichick essentially ran Brady out the door and got exposed.
Quote from: thspfc on January 26, 2024, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 26, 2024, 08:35:51 AM
Quote from: thspfc on January 26, 2024, 01:24:37 AM
I must say the Panthers hire is perplexing. Canales was an OC for one season, in which he coached a below average offense that marginally improved from the previous year (23rd total 20th scoring, vs. 15th total 25th scoring in 2022). And that was with registered football terrorist Byron Leftwich at OC. They beat the Eagles? Yeah, them and literally everyone else that played them after November. They kept it close against a below average Lions defense? Wow!
It's not the most inspired hire overall, but Mayfield was much improved from his last two stops and had his second-best season in the NFL. The bar in Carolina is so low that I think there's a good chance Bryce Young improves and it looks like a good hire after year 1.
"The bar is so low" is never a good way to justify a coaching hire.
I'm not justifying the hire yet, just predicting that it will be viewed more favorably 365 days from now than it is now.
One of the Lions players, Josh Paschal, is the nephew of one of my co-workers.
This co-worker told me on the afternoon before the beginning of the 2022 draft to watch for his nephew that evening -- Josh Paschal from Kentucky University. So I watched for a couple hours until he was selected by Detroit in the second round. Had forgotten about this until this week when said co-worker mentioned him again.
My co-worker is a Ravens fan, and wants a Lions-Ravens SB.
For that reason, and others, I am rooting for the Lions.
If the 49ers play the way they did last week, the Lions might have a shot. We'll see.
Quote from: Oscar on January 24, 2024, 08:08:06 PMThe "genius" part of Belichick's "evil genius" rep has been fading badly lately. But I'm open to rooting for him once more, if he can mount a comeback with a team I can stand.
Meh. In my opinion, both Bill Belichick and Terry Bradshow should go off and enjoy retirement.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 22, 2024, 01:09:00 PM
After last night's game, I will repeat my plea for the NFL to get rid of conferences so we can get an Allen vs Mahomes Super Bowl.
Just swap Chiefs and Cardinals in their divisions. Chiefs to the NFC West, Cardinals to the AFC West.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 26, 2024, 10:13:28 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 22, 2024, 01:09:00 PM
After last night's game, I will repeat my plea for the NFL to get rid of conferences so we can get an Allen vs Mahomes Super Bowl.
Just swap Chiefs and Cardinals in their divisions. Chiefs to the NFC West, Cardinals to the AFC West.
Chiefs aren't going to give up their rivalries with the Raiders and Broncos, plus are you going to make swaps every time a new pair of teams from the same conference do this?
There's no real point to conferences anymore. You play 6 division games, 6 non-division conference games, and 5 inter-conference games. Just keep the 8 divisions but seed them together instead of in 2 groups.
I think the Lions are doomed now that Deebo Samuel is good to go for tomorrow.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 22, 2024, 01:09:00 PM
After last night's game, I will repeat my plea for the NFL to get rid of conferences so we can get an Allen vs Mahomes Super Bowl.
The Bills are starting to look a lot like the Chargers from the 2000's. A team that contends every year but just can never get to the big one.
Quote from: dvferyance on January 27, 2024, 10:41:03 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 22, 2024, 01:09:00 PM
After last night's game, I will repeat my plea for the NFL to get rid of conferences so we can get an Allen vs Mahomes Super Bowl.
The Bills are starting to look a lot like the Chargers from the 2000's. A team that contends every year but just can never get to the big one.
Not to mention a fair number of head-scratching and face planting moments.
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 28, 2024, 08:14:19 AM
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
I'm not.
Quote from: Brandon on January 28, 2024, 08:40:08 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 28, 2024, 08:14:19 AM
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
I'm not.
Same for me, btw, am I the only one who wish to see the Lions in SuperBowl finals?
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on January 28, 2024, 09:28:10 AM
Quote from: Brandon on January 28, 2024, 08:40:08 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 28, 2024, 08:14:19 AM
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
I'm not.
Same for me, btw, am I the only one who wish to see the Lions in SuperBowl finals?
It's only you and about 96% of the rest of the country.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on January 28, 2024, 09:28:10 AM
Quote from: Brandon on January 28, 2024, 08:40:08 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on January 28, 2024, 08:14:19 AM
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
I'm not.
Same for me, btw, am I the only one who wish to see the Lions in SuperBowl finals?
I said that about 10 days ago, in a post I made about wanting to see teams win the SB who had not won it before (Buffalo, Houston, Detroit). I've seen SF win 5 times already.
Mentioned it a couple days before, I'm Lions fan. I'm actually about to walk out the door to drive to Santa Clara.
The Ravens' championship game performance reminded me of when they fell flat against the Titans in the 2019 playoffs, just on an even bigger stage against a better opponent. An incredible defensive performance wasted by penalties and mistakes on offense.
Was of course hoping the Chiefs would fall to 0-3 after beating the Bills in the playoffs, but I gotta say, I don't hate Lamar joining Josh Allen among "top tier" QB's that have not yet appeared in the Super Bowl. It is frustrating that Allen played much better than Lamar played tonight and still couldn't beat the Chiefs, but also encouraging to see that a great defense can stop the Chiefs... which I believe the Bills can be when fully healthy.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on January 08, 2024, 12:01:32 AM
AFC
7 Steelers @ 2 Bills - CORRECT
6 Dolphins @ 3 Chiefs - CORRECT
5 Browns @ 4 Texans - CORRECT
1 Ravens vs. 4 Texans - CORRECT
2 Bills vs. 3 Chiefs - INCORRECT (Chiefs win)
1 Ravens vs. 2 Bills 3 Chiefs - INCORRECT (Chiefs win)
NFC
7 Packers @ 2 Cowboys - INCORRECT (Packers win)
6 Rams @ 3 Lions - CORRECT
5 Eagles @ 4 Buccaneers - CORRECT
1 49ers vs. 4 Buccaneers 1 49ers vs. 7 Packers - CORRECT
2 Cowboys vs. 3 Lions 4 Buccaneers @ 3 Lions - CORRECT
1 49ers vs. 2 Cowboys 3 Lions
Super Bowl: Ravens vs. 49ers Chiefs vs. 49ers
Am I surprised that the Chiefs are in the Super Bowl? Not really...
Will the Chiefs win the Super Bowl? Possibly!
https://www.foxsports.com/live-blog/nfl/nfc-championship-game-live-updates-score-lions-vs-49ers (https://www.foxsports.com/live-blog/nfl/nfc-championship-game-live-updates-score-lions-vs-49ers)
For now the Kansas City Chiefs is going to have to wait for the outcome of the 49ers Vs. Lions Game.
https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-ravens-score-afc-championship-2d7d4c43fe8fc614b27bf5fc7f4e94d1 (https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-ravens-score-afc-championship-2d7d4c43fe8fc614b27bf5fc7f4e94d1)
Mahomes, Kelce are headed to the Super Bowl after Chiefs shut down Ravens 17-10
Quote from: epzik8 on January 28, 2024, 08:14:19 AM
Praying for my Ravens-49ers rematch at the end of today.
Okay then
"Live by the 4th down, die by the 4th down."
-Dan Campbell
One thing today proved is that playoff experience matters a TON. In both conference championships, it was clear in the biggest moments which teams were more experienced. Chiefs have been here 6 straight years and 49ers have been here 4 of the last 5 years.
The Lions are an incredible story and it's a bummer they couldn't hold on to a 17 point lead... but the Shanahan era 49ers deserve a chip too IMO. Was shaping up to be a brutal loss but they didn't fold and they have never been more battle tested than they are now. With big second half comebacks in both of their playoff victories, I think that experience matters too facing a Chiefs team known for comebacks themselves (as the 49ers know all too well).
This obviously isn't the Super Bowl that "America wants", but at the same time, I am already drawing parallels to the Patriots dynasty. I think that means a 9-year title drought for the Chiefs if they win this one, and I will sign up for that in a heartbeat.
Quote from: LM117 on January 28, 2024, 09:50:16 PM
"Live by the 4th down, die by the 4th down."
-Dan Campbell
This is absolutely a part of my point about big game experience. With a 14 point lead in the NFC title game, against a notoriously conservative opponent, you
have to go up three scores there. It's OK to play it a little safe there because you cannot risk the downside of failure to convert, which is exactly what happened, that you blink and are in a tight one score game against an experienced opponent. Not tying up the game late was bad too and still changed how the end of the game played out, but ended up not looking as bad because the 49ers scored a TD anyways.
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:08:00 PM
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Bested by the two historically bad 4th down calls.
Maybe the "house money" will buy a championship next year . . .
Campbell is the most overrated coach in the league, and that's not because of his situational decision making. He is not the reason that team is good. Defensive coach, defense is flat bad. Offense is as talented as any in the league save for the other one on the field today.
^What is overrated about Campbell if not for the situational decision making?
My final point on that is that the right balance of aggressive/conservative is absolutely different in the playoffs, especially deep in the playoffs. I agree with sticking to what got you here to a certain point, but when the stakes are that high, with a trip to the Super Bowl on the line, situational awareness matters more, and with those decisions Campbell's stubbornness (and lack of big game experience) got in the way of maximizing their chance of winning.
https://apnews.com/article/49ers-lions-score-nfc-championship-bed96677697deb0dfb1fa757288ab4bb
49ers rally from 17 points down, beat Lions 34-31 to advance to Super Bowl to face the Chiefs.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:08:00 PM
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Bested by the two historically bad 4th down calls.
I didn't get to watch the whole game, but I'm completely okay with not going for the FG. Wasting a timeout that essentially dropped their chances of winning from maybe 10% to 0.2% was football malpractice.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:08:00 PM
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Bested by the two historically bad 4th down calls.
I didn't get to watch the whole game, but I'm completely okay with not going for the FG. Wasting a timeout that essentially dropped their chances of winning from maybe 10% to 0.2% was football malpractice.
It wouldn't have been that 10% (or whatever is was) if they had gone for the safer options earlier. The 1st 4th down in the 3rd Quarter was where they were well within FG range. After they didn't convert, SF fairly quickly scored two TDs to tie the score, then eventually kicked their own FG to take the lead. In the 4th quarter, when DET was down by 3, they could've kicked a FG to tie it, but instead went for it on 4th down and again failed to convert.
Sometimes you take a risk. This was probably not the game to risk it when they had the momentum and a decent lead.
https://www.chiefs.com/news/remembering-joe-montana-and-the-kansas-city-chiefs-1993-season-14616866
The last time the 49ers fans paid attention to the Chiefs was when Joe Montana was sent there before he retired from the NFL.
Both the "logo script" and the "first game rematch" super bowl "scripts" got proven wrong today.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:08:00 PM
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Bested by the two historically bad 4th down calls.
I didn't get to watch the whole game, but I'm completely okay with not going for the FG. Wasting a timeout that essentially dropped their chances of winning from maybe 10% to 0.2% was football malpractice.
It wouldn't have been that 10% (or whatever is was) if they had gone for the safer options earlier. The 1st 4th down in the 3rd Quarter was where they were well within FG range. After they didn't convert, SF fairly quickly scored two TDs to tie the score, then eventually kicked their own FG to take the lead. In the 4th quarter, when DET was down by 3, they could've kicked a FG to tie it, but instead went for it on 4th down and again failed to convert.
Sometimes you take a risk. This was probably not the game to risk it when they had the momentum and a decent lead.
4th and 2 are converted 57.2% of the time. 4th and 3 are converted 47.4% of the time
They get at least one of the two 77.5% of the time. These were not unreasonable risks given the field position.
Not to mention the kicks aren't guaranteed either.
Edit: looks like the worst call of all of them was NOT going for it at the end of the first half and kicking the field goal instead. Looks like Campbell should have been more aggressive.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2024, 10:42:40 PM
^What is overrated about Campbell if not for the situational decision making?
My final point on that is that the right balance of aggressive/conservative is absolutely different in the playoffs, especially deep in the playoffs. I agree with sticking to what got you here to a certain point, but when the stakes are that high, with a trip to the Super Bowl on the line, situational awareness matters more, and with those decisions Campbell's stubbornness (and lack of big game experience) got in the way of maximizing their chance of winning.
I'm not saying he's bad, but the perception of him is extremely inflated among fans, probably for a few reasons: 1) it's the lovable loser Lions, 2) he's quirky, and 3) the team has improved drastically two years in a row.
Their front office has hit home run after home run after home run in the draft. Last 3 years: Gibbs, La Porta, Branch, Hutchinson, Joseph, Sewell, St. Brown. That's nuts. The Stafford/Goff trade was a total steal for Detroit - they very marginally downgraded at QB, but only in the short term as Goff is much younger, and picked up a load of draft picks. They've also hit home runs with cheap but highly productive free agents like Montgomery, Reynolds, Raymond, and Anzalone. As plagued as the franchise has been over its history, that team is stacked right now, and I'm confident that at least 20 current head coaches could have gone 12-5 or better.
Their playoff run was nice, but let's be honest, drawing the 9-8 Buccaneers in the divisional is about as light as it gets. The stars will likely never align for them the way they did this year - most often, that divisional game will be either at home against a team much better than that Tampa team at best, or on the road against the Super Bowl favorites at worst.
His background also doesn't offer anything convincing. He was never an OC, only a TE coach and an "assistant head coach" under Payton in New Orleans. His current OC is an attractive head coaching candidate, and there must be a reason for that in terms of the influence Ben Johnson has over the offense. Nobody hired Eric Bienemy away from KC, despite him "coordinating" a perennially elite offense, because everyone knew he was in Reid's shadow. And Campbell's defenses have been downright bad. Bottom 5 in '21 and '22, bottom 10-12 this year.
Point being, I think he gets too much credit for supposedly taking a bottom of the barrel team and making them NFC contenders. The front office and personnel departments did that. Campbell has more or less been along for the ride. There's a perception that the team is poverty and therefore it must be the coach that's pulling them up. Not true.
. . . oh, the fourth down decisions. I understand both sides, I don't know how the numbers are there. But the twist in those two scenarios (7:03 3Q 24-10 and 7:42 4Q 24-27) is this: not only are you betting on yourself to get the first down, you're also betting on yourself to score a touchdown thereafter when you're still 25 yards from the end zone at that point. Otherwise, you might as well have kicked it without risking coming away with nothing by failing on 4th.
Doing some nonscientific exploration, it's roughly like this:
% of 4th down conversion * % expected points of the drive given the 4th down has been converted (which probably falls between 4 and 6)
or
% of FG from that distance * 3 points from field goal. FGs from that range are converted at about 75%, so call it 2.25 XP.
4th and 2 is converted at a 57% clip, 4th and 3 at 47%. We'll meet in the middle and say 52%. So according to my armchair analytics:
2.25 = .52(XP) ; 2.25/.52 = XP given the 4th down has been converted must be at least
4.3So do analytics support it? Probably. Can you reduce football to raw numbers the same way you can poker or blackjack? No, that's fundamentally flawed. There are always outside factors because there are humans involved, not just cards. In this case, outside factors as blatant as the numbers on the scoreboard. 27-10 is a three possession lead, 24-10 is a two possession lead. 27-27 is a tied game, 24-27 is losing. In both cases, those 3 points would functionally have been worth more than 3 points, and that was known at the time.
At the end of the day, a coach will be called a genius when it works and an idiot when it doesn't, so when it's close like this, I've come to refrain from one side or the other. Except the one in Dallas, because that was not close. That was raw stupidity.
The one right at the end (0:56 24-34) was the correct decision. They had a far better chance of scoring the one TD they needed with one play from the 3 yard line than with a rushed miracle drive starting from their own territory. Burning the timeout was awful though, at that point you've just gotta snap the ball and throw it to your best receiver somewhere in the end zone. Whatever benefit the timeout provided did not outweigh the cost of needing an onside recovery to have a chance.
Dan Campbell is got out coached during the second half of all three Lions playoff games. It worked out against the Rams and Bucs, not so much with the 49ers. Hopefully it doesn't take another 32 years to get back to the NFC Championship Game.
Leaving Levi's Stadium was wild. Basically followed a bunch of high clearance vehicles through a community college to escape the Green Lot and get to US 101. Lots of intoxicated people were wandering through Great America Parkway. Crowd control left something to be desired.
Quote from: webny99 on January 28, 2024, 10:07:07 PM
The Lions are an incredible story and it's a bummer they couldn't hold on to a 17 point lead... but the Shanahan era 49ers deserve a chip too IMO. Was shaping up to be a brutal loss but they didn't fold and they have never been more battle tested than they are now. With big second half comebacks in both of their playoff victories, I think that experience matters too facing a Chiefs team known for comebacks themselves (as the 49ers know all too well).
My roommate is all-in on the 49ers because he wants Shanahan to have a ring.
One thing regarding the decision to kick it at the end of the second quarter: the half was about to be over, so the 49ers field position on their ensuing drive was not going to be a factor. Normally, a major benefit of going for it on 4th and goal is that if you miss, your opponent has terrible field position.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 11:26:10 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2024, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 28, 2024, 10:08:00 PM
That run call on 3rd down was one of the historically bad calls in the history of the NFL.
Bested by the two historically bad 4th down calls.
I didn't get to watch the whole game, but I'm completely okay with not going for the FG. Wasting a timeout that essentially dropped their chances of winning from maybe 10% to 0.2% was football malpractice.
It wouldn't have been that 10% (or whatever is was) if they had gone for the safer options earlier. The 1st 4th down in the 3rd Quarter was where they were well within FG range. After they didn't convert, SF fairly quickly scored two TDs to tie the score, then eventually kicked their own FG to take the lead. In the 4th quarter, when DET was down by 3, they could've kicked a FG to tie it, but instead went for it on 4th down and again failed to convert.
Sometimes you take a risk. This was probably not the game to risk it when they had the momentum and a decent lead.
4th and 2 are converted 57.2% of the time. 4th and 3 are converted 47.4% of the time
They get at least one of the two 77.5% of the time. These were not unreasonable risks given the field position.
Not to mention the kicks aren't guaranteed either.
Edit: looks like the worst call of all of them was NOT going for it at the end of the first half and kicking the field goal instead. Looks like Campbell should have been more aggressive.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2024, 12:25:17 AM
. . . oh, the fourth down decisions. I understand both sides, I don't know how the numbers are there. But the twist in those two scenarios (7:03 3Q 24-10 and 7:42 4Q 24-27) is this: not only are you betting on yourself to get the first down, you're also betting on yourself to score a touchdown thereafter when you're still 25 yards from the end zone at that point. Otherwise, you might as well have kicked it without risking coming away with nothing by failing on 4th.
Doing some nonscientific exploration, it's roughly like this:
% of 4th down conversion * % expected points of the drive given the 4th down has been converted (which probably falls between 4 and 6)
or
% of FG from that distance * 3 points from field goal. FGs from that range are converted at about 75%, so call it 2.25 XP.
4th and 2 is converted at a 57% clip, 4th and 3 at 47%. We'll meet in the middle and say 52%. So according to my armchair analytics:
2.25 = .52(XP) ; 2.25/.52 = XP given the 4th down has been converted must be at least 4.3
So do analytics support it? Probably. Can you reduce football to raw numbers the same way you can poker or blackjack? No, that's fundamentally flawed. There are always outside factors because there are humans involved, not just cards. In this case, outside factors as blatant as the numbers on the scoreboard. 27-10 is a three possession lead, 24-10 is a two possession lead. 27-27 is a tied game, 24-27 is losing. In both cases, those 3 points would functionally have been worth more than 3 points, and that was known at the time.
At the end of the day, a coach will be called a genius when it works and an idiot when it doesn't, so when it's close like this, I've come to refrain from one side or the other. Except the one in Dallas, because that was not close. That was raw stupidity.
The one right at the end (0:56 24-34) was the correct decision. They had a far better chance of scoring the one TD they needed with one play from the 3 yard line than with a rushed miracle drive starting from their own territory. Burning the timeout was awful though, at that point you've just gotta snap the ball and throw it to your best receiver somewhere in the end zone. Whatever benefit the timeout provided did not outweigh the cost of needing an onside recovery to have a chance.
Perfect summary.
I'll add:
The stats themselves don't tell the whole story. When they converted 4th downs, was that to keep drives alive at the end of the game? Where were they on the field? What was the opponent's success rate in stopping 4th down conversions (are the 49ers better than, say, the Jaguars)? Going for 4th down with a 17 point lead is different than going for it trying to win the game late in the 4th quarter when you're down by 4 or more. It can be argued that it's the same, but defenses set up differently depending on what they're trying to accomplish.
The Lions were 52.5% in 4th down conversion this year. Honestly, not great. Sure, more than 50%, but barely. And that barely shows itself in raw numbers: They were 21 for 40. One above halfway. (Their opponents were actually better: 57.5% of 4th downs converted; 15 for 26). In fact, they kinda sucked - they were only 12th in the league in successful conversions. Only one team had more successful conversions - the Panthers - but their percentage sucked even more since they tried more often.
I also get intrigued when it's mentioned "kicks aren't guaranteed either"...
The first one would've been about a 45 yard attempt. The 2nd would've been about a 47 yard attempt. The Lions FG success average for the season between 40-49 yards? 100%. Now granted, the Lions actually kicked very few FGs during the season: Just 21. 19 were converted. And somehow they only kicked 3 between 40-49 yards. But on the road in a game where they had the momentum - take the points. Not only do you likely have 3 additional points, but you kick the ball, and more often than not, the 49ers would be starting from their 25. Instead, they started from their 28 & 30, respectively, and with the extra momentum of stopping the opponent when they should have likely scored.
When you added that they should've gone for it on 4th down at the end of the 1st half, I started wondering if this was just a post to trigger. 49ers get the ball to start the 3rd quarter. Go for the (almost) sure 3 rather than risking ending the half with no points when deep in the red zone.
Momentum is a myth.
Super Bowl LVIII: San Francisco 49ers vs Taylor Swift
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2024, 12:25:17 AM
Their playoff run was nice, but let's be honest, drawing the 9-8 Buccaneers in the divisional is about as light as it gets. The stars will likely never align for them the way they did this year - most often, that divisional game will be either at home against a team much better than that Tampa team at best, or on the road against the Super Bowl favorites at worst.
I think they know that too. A clip of Campbell literally telling the players postgame it would be twice as hard next year.. and he's probably right. You never know, but with the Packers on the rise again, they could easily be underdogs in their own division for much of the next decade. And that does make the loss hurt even worse, but I think the ability to be honest about it in the moment is, ironically, part of Campbell's charm.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2024, 12:25:17 AM
Point being, I think he gets too much credit for supposedly taking a bottom of the barrel team and making them NFC contenders. The front office and personnel departments did that. Campbell has more or less been along for the ride. There's a perception that the team is poverty and therefore it must be the coach that's pulling them up. Not true.
He doesn't deserve
all the credit, certainly, but there is something to be said for a culture change, and Campbell is at least partially responsible for that. The GM + coach + team combination led to one of the most impressive turnarounds in recent memory*, and that does account for a lot beyond strictly talent... even though the front office deserves a ton of credit too.
*We need a way to measure this. Most impressive this century are probably Bengals, Lions, Bills? I can't think of any other single regime changes that took a team that was either moribund or mired in decades of mediocrity to a conference championship or beyond.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50%
even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
Heck, in the Lions game, how come the Lions didn't get momentum when they were passive and kicked the field goal at the end of the first half instead of going for it?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
There are not, however, far more such examples
in the NFC title game, with the opportunity to take a three score lead. That context absolutely matters against a great opponent that's no doubt feeling great about preserving a two score deficit coming off a big stop.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
There are not, however, far more such examples in the NFC title game, with the opportunity to take a three score lead. That context absolutely matters against a great opponent that's no doubt feeling great about preserving a two score deficit coming off a big stop.
Do you have evidence to suggest that they play better because of "feeling great" though? Would Baltimore not having been "feeling great" after they stopped KC on downs? How come their great feelings only allowed them to run five plays for 19 yards before they punted? Its there some kind of difference between the AFC and NFC Championship Games that makes the outcomes of decisions different?
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:19:25 PM
*We need a way to measure this. Most impressive this century are probably Bengals, Lions, Bills? I can't think of any other single regime changes that took a team that was either moribund or mired in decades of mediocrity to a conference championship or beyond.
Yeah this is literally my point though, the Lions turnaround was not due that single regime change at all, and for that matter neither were the Bills or Bengals or any other team ever. In all those cases, the team became good because first and by far foremost, they found a way to put good players on the field. Going back to my take on why I thought Vrabel was getting too much benefit of the doubt: historically unsuccessful and irrelevant franchise, always played at noon on Sundays, people don't watch and figure the team is bad, so if they're good, it must be the coach. Nope. DET, BUF, and CIN built great rosters over a short period of time. Coaching is a distant second on the list of reasons why they got good. The narrative with Campbell is that coaching is a distant first.
If we're using your logic, Reid, McVay, Shanahan, Arians, Carroll, LaFleur, Payton in New Orleans, Pederson in Philly, and maybe more inherited bad teams and have been more successful than Campbell. "Decades" doesn't matter because what happened decades ago is not relevant to what kind of team the new coach inherited.
You're incorrectly using "mediocrity", because "decades of mediocrity" should mean one Super Bowl on average and a handful of trips to the conference championship game in that timeframe. What the Lions have been going through is decades of being god awful, and it's really just them, the Browns, and maybe the Jets in that category.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 01:04:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
There are not, however, far more such examples in the NFC title game, with the opportunity to take a three score lead. That context absolutely matters against a great opponent that's no doubt feeling great about preserving a two score deficit coming off a big stop.
Do you have evidence to suggest that they play better because of "feeling great" though? Would Baltimore not having been "feeling great" after they stopped KC on downs? How come their great feelings only allowed them to run five plays for 19 yards before they punted?
Of course not, but that's missing the point which is that the context around the decision, including the relative best and worse case scenarios has to be considered.
We saw the (pretty much) worst case scenario, we didn't see the best case scenario which was a TD on that drive, which is a three score lead - same as if they just kicked the FG.The relative value of a TD to a FG in that scenario, when a FG
also prevents the worst case scenario, isn't worth the risk of failure to convert.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 02:03:43 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 01:04:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
There are not, however, far more such examples in the NFC title game, with the opportunity to take a three score lead. That context absolutely matters against a great opponent that's no doubt feeling great about preserving a two score deficit coming off a big stop.
Do you have evidence to suggest that they play better because of "feeling great" though? Would Baltimore not having been "feeling great" after they stopped KC on downs? How come their great feelings only allowed them to run five plays for 19 yards before they punted?
Of course not, but that's missing the point which is that the context around the decision, including the relative best and worse case scenarios has to be considered.
We saw the (pretty much) worst case scenario, we didn't see the best case scenario which was a TD on that drive, which is a three score lead - same as if they just kicked the FG.The relative value of a TD to a FG in that scenario, when a FG also prevents the worst case scenario, isn't worth the risk of failure to convert.
They're also based it off general percentages and analytics, which at best are a marginally better option, sometimes, but without more precise detail.
In this game, even if percentages said go for it on 4th down (again, Lions were 21 for 40...not exactly a sure thing), after the failed conversion attempt in the 3rd quarter, in the 4th quarter, don't just go for it again. Even if the Lions did convert the 4th down, they would likely have been using more time to eventually socre a FG to tie or a TD to take the lead. Then SF gets the ball with a better opportunity to control the clock, reducing the amount of time Lions would've had to get the ball back - if any time at all.
So looking at just one sole factor - the 4th down conversion rate - ignores other factors - like the time clock.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 29, 2024, 02:45:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 02:03:43 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 01:04:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:56:27 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:24:37 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 11:17:27 AM
Momentum is a myth.
If that 4th down stop in the 3rd quarter followed by a 49ers TD, Lions fumble, and 49ers TD doesn't convince you that it's not a myth, then nothing ever will. The only "myth" is that we don't know for a fact how it would have played out had they kicked the FG, but no matter how you look at it, there is simply no way their win probability would have tumbled that precipitously and in that fashion with a three score lead... and even if it did, it's tumbling from a higher baseline to likely still above 50% even if you give up a two TD's and a fumble.
Anecdotal. There are far more examples where one team goes for it on fourth, misses, and no such series of effects happens. Hell, it happened in the Chiefs game yesterday. IIRC, KC went for it on fourth and missed and Baltimore promptly scored no points on their next drive and punted.
There are not, however, far more such examples in the NFC title game, with the opportunity to take a three score lead. That context absolutely matters against a great opponent that's no doubt feeling great about preserving a two score deficit coming off a big stop.
Do you have evidence to suggest that they play better because of "feeling great" though? Would Baltimore not having been "feeling great" after they stopped KC on downs? How come their great feelings only allowed them to run five plays for 19 yards before they punted?
Of course not, but that's missing the point which is that the context around the decision, including the relative best and worse case scenarios has to be considered.
We saw the (pretty much) worst case scenario, we didn't see the best case scenario which was a TD on that drive, which is a three score lead - same as if they just kicked the FG.The relative value of a TD to a FG in that scenario, when a FG also prevents the worst case scenario, isn't worth the risk of failure to convert.
They're also based it off general percentages and analytics, which at best are a marginally better option, sometimes, but without more precise detail.
In this game, even if percentages said go for it on 4th down (again, Lions were 21 for 40...not exactly a sure thing), after the failed conversion attempt in the 3rd quarter, in the 4th quarter, don't just go for it again. Even if the Lions did convert the 4th down, they would likely have been using more time to eventually socre a FG to tie or a TD to take the lead. Then SF gets the ball with a better opportunity to control the clock, reducing the amount of time Lions would've had to get the ball back - if any time at all.
So looking at just one sole factor - the 4th down conversion rate - ignores other factors - like the time clock.
I only gave the 4th down conversion rate as a simplistic stat to explain my point. If you look at any of the "fourth down bots" out there, they consider score, time remaining, down and distance timeouts remaining, etc. in calculating whether to go for it or not. All three of their 4th downs increased their winning by two percentage points or greater according to the one I looked at.
Edit: Here are the three decisions we're discussing:
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNGnZ63P/Fourth-Down-1.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/MKhQVyFQ/Fourth-Down-2.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/XYdy8pRD/Fourth-Down-3.png)
In any other business, seemingly other than sports, if you could gain a 2% edge on your competition, you'd be fired as a CEO if you didn't take advantage of it.
Again, there is no such thing as momentum; things regress to the mean. If a bad team is playing great, eventually they'll play shitty. If a great team is playing poorly, eventually they'll play better. Given that I think that the 49ers are ostensibly a better team than the Lions, the likelihood was always high that the 49ers would come back to some degree against the Lions. What the Lions could have done to mitigate this, however, is to play as optimally as possible given the scenario. To play optimally, in these three cases, would be to go for it every single time. Yeah, sucks they didn't convert two of them. But, in poker, 72o beats AA 12% of the time, too.
Just watching as a general fan without a dog in the fight, it really felt like Detroit left the door wide open every time they failed to convert on 4th down in the second half instead of taking points. That's what I felt at the time, not just looking back after it was over.
In the other game, Baltimore's offense disappointed. They stopped the bleeding on defense to give themselves a shot, but never got going. Deadly turnovers, man. That's why they're going home and Mahomes gets to put another notch on the bedpost.
I've waited for several years (basically since the Tennessee beatdown in the 2019 divisional) for Lamar Jackson to win a game like this one, with the season in the balance, with his arm. Once again he was unable to do so. The other Baltimore dumbs didn't help, but they have tried to give him weapons to throw to and he still can't make it happen. They gave him Zay Flowers and OBJ in addition to Mark Andrews. Flowers had the one nice TD but arguably cost the team the game with the other mistakes, and OBJ's name wasn't heard until the middle of the 3rd quarter.
Why couldn't the Ravens have played like that last weekend instead of waiting until Yesterday to have a off-day.
And if the Texans are smart, they'll go after free agent Derrick Henry.....offer him a good deal way too good to pass up, they have a cap space. Texans are in a dire need of help with more talent, especially upgrading their running game.
Quote from: jgb191 on January 29, 2024, 07:52:36 PM
Why couldn't the Ravens have played like that last weekend instead of waiting until Yesterday to have a off-day.
So, you would have rather seen them lose in the Divisional round instead?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 03:20:59 PM
I only gave the 4th down conversion rate as a simplistic stat to explain my point. If you look at any of the "fourth down bots" out there, they consider score, time remaining, down and distance timeouts remaining, etc. in calculating whether to go for it or not. All three of their 4th downs increased their winning by two percentage points or greater according to the one I looked at.
Another reason I am suspect that the decision bots are taking enough context into account: the 4th down right before halftime. One big advantage of going for it in goal to go scenarios is that if you fail, the opponent is pinned deep in their own territory. That's irrelevant with just seven seconds left in the half, as I'm sure Campbell knew or had someone on staff that knew. If that was factored in properly, the bot wouldn't have recommended "go for it" as strongly.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 03:20:59 PM
In any other business, seemingly other than sports, if you could gain a 2% edge on your competition, you'd be fired as a CEO if you didn't take advantage of it.
It's never exactly a 2% edge though - it's either more than 2% if you convert, or less than 2% - sometimes a negative percentage - if you fail. That's why you have to consider
all of the four numbers on the far right of each fourth down bot decision graph - and some of those "Win % if fail" numbers are probably too high for the real life scenarios.
Quote from: bing101 on January 28, 2024, 11:05:54 PM
https://www.chiefs.com/news/remembering-joe-montana-and-the-kansas-city-chiefs-1993-season-14616866
The last time the 49ers fans paid attention to the Chiefs was when Joe Montana was sent there before he retired from the NFL.
Uh ,,,, Super Bowl LIV (54)???
Aside - am I the only one who sees "LIV" and (now) thinks of golf?
Continuing the Lamar Jackson conversation --
He is currently going down the road of John Elway and Donovan McNabb (the latter coached by Andy Reid) who couldn't win the big one.
Elway eventually did of course, but not until he was 37 yo. And Reid also did, in another town ("sigh" from me).
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 29, 2024, 09:04:07 PM
Quote from: bing101 on January 28, 2024, 11:05:54 PM
https://www.chiefs.com/news/remembering-joe-montana-and-the-kansas-city-chiefs-1993-season-14616866
The last time the 49ers fans paid attention to the Chiefs was when Joe Montana was sent there before he retired from the NFL.
I see LIV as a really good golf score of -18.
Uh ,,,, Super Bowl LIV (54)???
Aside - am I the only one who sees "LIV" and (now) thinks of golf?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 29, 2024, 08:13:44 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on January 29, 2024, 07:52:36 PM
Why couldn't the Ravens have played like that last weekend instead of waiting until Yesterday to have a off-day.
So, you would have rather seen them lose in the Divisional round instead?
As a Texans fan, I wanted to see my team win their first Divisional game against whomever that may be, even if it was to be against the Ravens. As mentioned earlier on here a few times, the Texans still remain the only team in NFL history that has never been to a Conference Championship game. Even Lions had won a number of divisional games.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 08:29:14 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 03:20:59 PM
I only gave the 4th down conversion rate as a simplistic stat to explain my point. If you look at any of the "fourth down bots" out there, they consider score, time remaining, down and distance timeouts remaining, etc. in calculating whether to go for it or not. All three of their 4th downs increased their winning by two percentage points or greater according to the one I looked at.
Another reason I am suspect that the decision bots are taking enough context into account: the 4th down right before halftime. One big advantage of going for it in goal to go scenarios is that if you fail, the opponent is pinned deep in their own territory. That's irrelevant with just seven seconds left in the half, as I'm sure Campbell knew or had someone on staff that knew. If that was factored in properly, the bot wouldn't have recommended "go for it" as strongly.
I think you're actually proving my point. You are correct that that's why the bots are more eager in the opponent's end -- because there's less chance of it "coming back to bite you". In this case, since it was the end of the half and if you miss, your opponent is almost certainly just taking a knee and going to halftime, there's basically zero risk of the opponent getting a positive benefit of field position. With this situation, you CAN literally boil it down to "how likely are you to score a touchdown" vs. "how likely are you to make the field goal".
If the TD is a 50/50 proposition, then you get an expected value of ~3.5 points if you go for it, vs. ~3 points if you kick the field goal -- a clear rationale to go for it.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 08:29:14 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 03:20:59 PM
In any other business, seemingly other than sports, if you could gain a 2% edge on your competition, you'd be fired as a CEO if you didn't take advantage of it.
It's never exactly a 2% edge though - it's either more than 2% if you convert, or less than 2% - sometimes a negative percentage - if you fail. That's why you have to consider all of the four numbers on the far right of each fourth down bot decision graph - and some of those "Win % if fail" numbers are probably too high for the real life scenarios.
I don't think you're considering all four numbers to be fair. Those are the numbers that are creating the numbers on the left. If failing drops you 2% of your chance to win but success gains you 4% to win, and the chance is somewhere remotely near 50%, that means you're gaining 2% of expected value. Expected value (not to sound like I'm mansplaining, but in case you're not familiar with the term) is the probability of success times reward of success minute the probability of failure times the penalty of failure. If you're 99% to win something, but the gains are minimal and the cost is astronomical if you fail, yeah, it might make sense not to do something. But there are no decisions in football that are that drastic.
If I paid you $51 every time you guessed the toss of a coin against me, and you owed me $49 when you got it wrong, you'd want to play forever, since you have an EV of +$2. That's the same thing the Lions were giving up if they didn't go for it. Yeah, over the short term, you might lose money if you don't have an unlimited bankroll, but if you play forever you WILL win. Yeah, small sample size got to the Lions, too. But if they make the same decisions forever, they WILL win.
I'm sure everyone wanted a Ravens-Lions Super Bowl, but the NFL doesn't work that way. So what we get is a rematch of a title contest from four years ago. and once again, it guarantees that Joe Montana's team will win. As it stands, Mahomes will most likely get another championship ring and become the new Tom Brady. Well, maybe not, but he's still young, and has lots of years left in him. OTOH, a 49ers win will place them in a three-way tie with the Patriots and Steelers for most Super Bowl wins of all-time. So we'll see what happens two Sundays from now.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 10:34:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 08:29:14 PM
Another reason I am suspect that the decision bots are taking enough context into account: the 4th down right before halftime. One big advantage of going for it in goal to go scenarios is that if you fail, the opponent is pinned deep in their own territory. That's irrelevant with just seven seconds left in the half, as I'm sure Campbell knew or had someone on staff that knew. If that was factored in properly, the bot wouldn't have recommended "go for it" as strongly.
I think you're actually proving my point. You are correct that that's why the bots are more eager in the opponent's end -- because there's less chance of it "coming back to bite you". In this case, since it was the end of the half and if you miss, your opponent is almost certainly just taking a knee and going to halftime, there's basically zero risk of the opponent getting a positive benefit of field position. With this situation, you CAN literally boil it down to "how likely are you to score a touchdown" vs. "how likely are you to make the field goal".
If the TD is a 50/50 proposition, then you get an expected value of ~3.5 points if you go for it, vs. ~3 points if you kick the field goal -- a clear rationale to go for it.
The field position here is always a negative for the opponent because you have them pinned deep, but in this case, field position doesn't matter because there's no time left. Hence the incentive to go for isn't as strong as it would be earlier in the half when they would have to drive 90+ yards to score instead of 75 with a field goal. Also if my research is correct, odds of a TD on 4th and 3 are a bit less than 50/50, so it's basically a coin flip, so you might as well take the sure thing and ensure a three score lead heading into the half since a TD wouldn't get you more than that anyways, and I am sure Campbell and staff factored that in.
To throw another wrench in the works, here's a relevant article from good old FiveThirtyEight on two-point conversions that I point out because it has some really interesting tables on the relative value of specific points based on how much you're leading or trailing. Not all three points are created equal - in the case above, the three points between a 14 pt lead and a 17 pt lead are more valuable than the four points between a 17 pt lead and a 21 pt lead because the 17th point - which you'd have with either a TD or FG - changes how many possessions you're leading by, which is hugely important: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-to-go-for-2-for-real/
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 10:34:41 PM
If I paid you $51 every time you guessed the toss of a coin against me, and you owed me $49 when you got it wrong, you'd want to play forever, since you have an EV of +$2. That's the same thing the Lions were giving up if they didn't go for it. Yeah, over the short term, you might lose money if you don't have an unlimited bankroll, but if you play forever you WILL win. Yeah, small sample size got to the Lions, too. But if they make the same decisions forever, they WILL win.
I understand that perfectly, but real life game scenarios aren't on continuous replay where the odds will eventually roll around. There's only so many fourth downs in a game, and each fourth down decision has to be made within its own specific context. If you have a big lead in the title game, a risk averse strategy gets you to the Super Bowl. It's OK to
intentionally do the safer thing with the lower EV there and recognize that it's a part of an overall strategy to win the game.
And then there's also a conversation to be had about the quality of opponent and the fact that the historical conversion rate factors in the regular season so it's is almost certainly too high when compared to the playoff-caliber defense being faced, and the fact that defenses adjust and respond to offenses going for it more so that conversion rate will drop over time, etc.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2024, 01:40:55 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 12:19:25 PM
*We need a way to measure this. Most impressive this century are probably Bengals, Lions, Bills? I can't think of any other single regime changes that took a team that was either moribund or mired in decades of mediocrity to a conference championship or beyond.
Yeah this is literally my point though, the Lions turnaround was not due that single regime change at all, and for that matter neither were the Bills or Bengals or any other team ever. In all those cases, the team became good because first and by far foremost, they found a way to put good players on the field.
Yeah, in the Bills and Lions case, putting good players on the field was literally due to the regime change. It's not so clear cut with the Bengals since Tobin has been there for decades, but their turnaround was made easy by having the #1 overall pick in a draft with a great QB and a top 5 pick in a draft with a great #1 receiver.
Quote from: thspfc on January 29, 2024, 01:40:55 PM
You're incorrectly using "mediocrity", because "decades of mediocrity" should mean one Super Bowl on average and a handful of trips to the conference championship game in that timeframe. What the Lions have been going through is decades of being god awful, and it's really just them, the Browns, and maybe the Jets in that category.
What? Multiple conference championship appearances? A Super Bowl? 37.5% of the league has
never won a Super Bowl, much less won one while being mediocre. Mediocre teams rarely make the playoffs or win playoff games, much less sniff the Super Bowl - especially in the 12 team playoff era (which is relevant since we're talking decades). The Giants are literally the only one of 32 NFL franchises that fit the description of being largely mediocre for decades but also winning one or more Super Bowls.
I'm talking teams like the Bengals pre-Burrow, the Bills this century until Beane/McDermott, the Commanders, Dolphins, Vikings of the past few decades, the Chargers franchise for basically its entire existence, the Broncos since Peyton Manning left.. I could go on but you get the idea.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 29, 2024, 09:04:07 PM
Quote from: bing101 on January 28, 2024, 11:05:54 PM
https://www.chiefs.com/news/remembering-joe-montana-and-the-kansas-city-chiefs-1993-season-14616866
The last time the 49ers fans paid attention to the Chiefs was when Joe Montana was sent there before he retired from the NFL.
Uh ,,,, Super Bowl LIV (54)???
Aside - am I the only one who sees "LIV" and (now) thinks of golf?
Probably not, but I was also thinking that the 49ers were definitely paying attention to the Chiefs during the SB four years ago, and probably also after Alex Smith was traded there.
Quote from: tmoore952 on January 29, 2024, 09:08:52 PM
Continuing the Lamar Jackson conversation --
He is currently going down the road of John Elway and Donovan McNabb (the latter coached by Andy Reid) who couldn't win the big one.
Elway eventually did of course, but not until he was 37 yo. And Reid also did, in another town ("sigh" from me).
There are a lot of great young QB's in the AFC. None of them have won a SB since Mahomes was drafted. Burrow is the only one to even appear in the SB and the only one to beat Mahomes in the playoffs. The Chiefs are well on their way to becoming a dynasty and not to sound pouty, but it is no fun for anyone stuck in their conference. The Bills have known it for a while now but I think more people are seeing it with the Chiefs finding a way to yet another SB. That Bengals run in the 2021 postseason may go down in infamy as a lost opportunity as the only time anyone other than Brady has beat Mahomes in the playoffs.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 11:43:21 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 10:34:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 08:29:14 PM
Another reason I am suspect that the decision bots are taking enough context into account: the 4th down right before halftime. One big advantage of going for it in goal to go scenarios is that if you fail, the opponent is pinned deep in their own territory. That's irrelevant with just seven seconds left in the half, as I'm sure Campbell knew or had someone on staff that knew. If that was factored in properly, the bot wouldn't have recommended "go for it" as strongly.
I think you're actually proving my point. You are correct that that's why the bots are more eager in the opponent's end -- because there's less chance of it "coming back to bite you". In this case, since it was the end of the half and if you miss, your opponent is almost certainly just taking a knee and going to halftime, there's basically zero risk of the opponent getting a positive benefit of field position. With this situation, you CAN literally boil it down to "how likely are you to score a touchdown" vs. "how likely are you to make the field goal".
If the TD is a 50/50 proposition, then you get an expected value of ~3.5 points if you go for it, vs. ~3 points if you kick the field goal -- a clear rationale to go for it.
The field position here is always a negative for the opponent because you have them pinned deep, but in this case, field position doesn't matter because there's no time left. Hence the incentive to go for isn't as strong as it would be earlier in the half when they would have to drive 90+ yards to score instead of 75 with a field goal. Also if my research is correct, odds of a TD on 4th and 3 are a bit less than 50/50, so it's basically a coin flip, so you might as well take the sure thing and ensure a three score lead heading into the half since a TD wouldn't get you more than that anyways, and I am sure Campbell and staff factored that in.
To throw another wrench in the works, here's a relevant article from good old FiveThirtyEight on two-point conversions that I point out because it has some really interesting tables on the relative value of specific points based on how much you're leading or trailing. Not all three points are created equal - in the case above, the three points between a 14 pt lead and a 17 pt lead are more valuable than the four points between a 17 pt lead and a 21 pt lead because the 17th point - which you'd have with either a TD or FG - changes how many possessions you're leading by, which is hugely important: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-to-go-for-2-for-real/
Shockingly, I disagree with your premise. :) If you go for it on 4th and 3 on the 10 yard line with 5:00 left, let's say there's a 20% chance (making that up) that if you miss, they can drive and score. If you do the same thing with 0:07 left, there's essentially a 0% chance of scoring. So you go from allowing an expected point value of say, 1 point (20% chance times 5 points (the average of a FG and a TD+XP)) vs. an expected value of 0 points, if you do the same thing with only 0:07 left. It makes it MORE imperative you go for it because there's less risk.
And I fully understand that some three points are better than others. Making it a three possession game is, indeed, important. But so is making it a 21 point game vs. a 17 point game, since, while they both require three possessions to tie or go ahead, the latter makes it have to be three TDs vs. allowing for a FG to matter.
Quote from: webny99 on January 29, 2024, 11:43:21 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on January 29, 2024, 10:34:41 PM
If I paid you $51 every time you guessed the toss of a coin against me, and you owed me $49 when you got it wrong, you'd want to play forever, since you have an EV of +$2. That's the same thing the Lions were giving up if they didn't go for it. Yeah, over the short term, you might lose money if you don't have an unlimited bankroll, but if you play forever you WILL win. Yeah, small sample size got to the Lions, too. But if they make the same decisions forever, they WILL win.
I understand that perfectly, but real life game scenarios aren't on continuous replay where the odds will eventually roll around. There's only so many fourth downs in a game, and each fourth down decision has to be made within its own specific context. If you have a big lead in the title game, a risk averse strategy gets you to the Super Bowl. It's OK to intentionally do the safer thing with the lower EV there and recognize that it's a part of an overall strategy to win the game.
And then there's also a conversation to be had about the quality of opponent and the fact that the historical conversion rate factors in the regular season so it's is almost certainly too high when compared to the playoff-caliber defense being faced, and the fact that defenses adjust and respond to offenses going for it more so that conversion rate will drop over time, etc.
Smaller sample sizes don't change the optimal play. To return to my poker example, just because you get AA less often than you get KQo doesn't mean that you should play it differently if someone pushes all-in in front of you heads up.
Being risk averse, if you're taking a sub-optimal approach, is not going to get you to the Super Bowl. You're looking at just this one game. I don't have one off the top of my head, but I bet I can find more examples of coaches being risk averse and losing than I can find examples of coaches being optimally aggressive and losing.
For the last portion of your statement, the fact that SF has a playoff caliber defense doesn't negate the fact that Detroit has a playoff caliber offense; you can't make that argument and just casually ignore one side of the equation.
Anyway, my original point stands. Detroit running the ball on 3rd down was a criminal coaching call, and even if you're going to run it, they would have been better served to then immediately get up to the line and run a 4th down play. Using a time out in any circumstance was akin to handing the win to SF given the success rate of onside kicks with the new rule. Oh, and momentum doesn't exist.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Shockingly, I disagree with your premise. :) If you go for it on 4th and 3 on the 10 yard line with 5:00 left, let's say there's a 20% chance (making that up) that if you miss, they can drive and score. If you do the same thing with 0:07 left, there's essentially a 0% chance of scoring. So you go from allowing an expected point value of say, 1 point (20% chance times 5 points (the average of a FG and a TD+XP)) vs. an expected value of 0 points, if you do the same thing with only 0:07 left. It makes it MORE imperative you go for it because there's less risk.
OK, but the expected value lost from a turnover on downs is already very minimal near the end zone. That's why it typically makes more sense to go for it closer to the end zone you are. But in this case, part of the advantage of going for it is nullified by them not getting the ball back. There's not
less risk because you're
already in a nearly optimal situation risk wise - which would be to pin them at the 1 yard line - but that doesn't matter with no time left.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Being risk averse, if you're taking a sub-optimal approach, is not going to get you to the Super Bowl. You're looking at just this one game. I don't have one off the top of my head, but I bet I can find more examples of coaches being risk averse and losing than I can find examples of coaches being optimally aggressive and losing.
That first statement is true when the clock is at 15:00 in the first quarter, but it's not true when you have a 14-point lead deep into the third quarter. You're not looking at a single play anymore - you're looking at a 90% win probability and basically tickets punched to the Super Bowl unless you blow the game. The way not to blow the game is to look beyond the odds of conversion on that one particular play and recognize that a three-score lead is extremely valuable - much more valuable than a two-score lead, and almost certainly more valuable than the expected value added by going for what is basically a toss-up against a good defense, especially when a failure gives the ball to the best offense in the league with the chance to instantly make it a one-score game.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Oh, and momentum doesn't exist.
We can agree to disagree on that. The way I see it, the perception of momentum undeniably exists, and the perception that it exists determines a reality in which it exists. So it's not necessarily quantifiable but I believe it's hard/impossible to argue that it does not exist as a concept.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 03:53:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Shockingly, I disagree with your premise. :) If you go for it on 4th and 3 on the 10 yard line with 5:00 left, let's say there's a 20% chance (making that up) that if you miss, they can drive and score. If you do the same thing with 0:07 left, there's essentially a 0% chance of scoring. So you go from allowing an expected point value of say, 1 point (20% chance times 5 points (the average of a FG and a TD+XP)) vs. an expected value of 0 points, if you do the same thing with only 0:07 left. It makes it MORE imperative you go for it because there's less risk.
OK, but the expected value lost from a turnover on downs is already very minimal near the end zone. That's why it typically makes more sense to go for it closer to the end zone you are. But in this case, part of the advantage of going for it is nullified by them not getting the ball back. There's not less risk because you're already in a nearly optimal situation risk wise - which would be to pin them at the 1 yard line - but that doesn't matter with no time left.
This is from 2013 (https://phdfootball.blogspot.com/2013/06/field-position-and-scoring.html), but I doubt the numbers are tooooo different. Looks like starting on your own one yard line still results in points about 15% of the time. So I would argue that is a substantial difference from having no time on the clock and having a ~0% chance.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 03:53:46 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Being risk averse, if you're taking a sub-optimal approach, is not going to get you to the Super Bowl. You're looking at just this one game. I don't have one off the top of my head, but I bet I can find more examples of coaches being risk averse and losing than I can find examples of coaches being optimally aggressive and losing.
That first statement is true when the clock is at 15:00 in the first quarter, but it's not true when you have a 14-point lead deep into the third quarter. You're not looking at a single play anymore - you're looking at a 90% win probability and basically tickets punched to the Super Bowl unless you blow the game. The way not to blow the game is to look beyond the odds of conversion on that one particular play and recognize that a three-score lead is extremely valuable - much more valuable than a two-score lead, and almost certainly more valuable than the expected value added by going for what is basically a toss-up against a good defense, especially when a failure gives the ball to the best offense in the league with the chance to instantly make it a one-score game.
I would argue that you can also blow it by all of a sudden turning into a chicken and making suboptimal decisions. We don't need to beat this dead horse, but I'd much rather do everything I can to play to win rather than play not to lose. Obviously you have to have risk in mind when you make your decisions, but that risk is calculable.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 03:53:46 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 02:48:46 PM
Oh, and momentum doesn't exist.
We can agree to disagree on that. The way I see it, the perception of momentum undeniably exists, and the perception that it exists determines a reality in which it exists. So it's not necessarily quantifiable but I believe it's hard/impossible to argue that it does not exist as a concept.
Just to clarify. If you flip a coin and call it correctly six times in a row, do you think you have momentum?
Momentum, if it exists, is psychological, so the comparison to a coin flip doesn't quite work. The team might be excited for winning a whole bunch or upset for losing a bunch in a row.
----
Playing once and playing a whole bunch of times (referring to expected value, not iterated game theory) are mathematically equivalent. You should do the same in both situations.
Quote from: 1 on January 30, 2024, 04:13:16 PM
Momentum, if it exists, is psychological, so the comparison to a coin flip doesn't quite work. The team might be excited for winning a whole bunch or upset for losing a bunch in a row.
----
Playing once and playing a whole bunch of times are mathematically equivalent. You should do the same in both situations.
I have no doubt teams are excited or upset. I just don't think that affects performance statistically significantly.
And to your second point, yes. You follow the math either way, no matter if it's in the 1st quarter of Week 1 or the 4th quarter of the NFC Championship game.
Let's bring this 49ers song back to life this Super Bowl!
Quote from: JayhawkCO on January 30, 2024, 04:16:40 PM
And to your second point, yes. You follow the math either way, no matter if it's in the 1st quarter of Week 1 or the 4th quarter of the NFC Championship game.
My final point on this will be to echo a take from Kyle Brandt on 10 Takes... making it all about the math is reductive to the entire concept of coaching. You're not doing your job as coach if you're only looking at numbers to inform your decision and don't have a good sense for the game script and what makes logical sense in the moment. Not saying that about Campbell at all - after all, he took the FG to end the half, and is getting plenty of criticism for that too! Just that there's a whole bunch of factors that go into those decisions and it's both unrealistic and unfair to the coach to reduce it to math only and always.
And my last point as well. There are a whole bunch of factors that go into every chess move too. That doesn't mean that it's incalculable to come up with the best strategy given a particular game state.
Ok. Onto bitching about Taylor Swift and other things...
https://www.nbcsportsbayarea.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/standing-ovation-chase-center-warriors/1697534/
49ers stars appear at the Golden State Warriors game on the sidelines.
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 12:30:07 PM
The Chiefs are well on their way to becoming a dynasty and not to sound pouty, but it is no fun for anyone stuck in their conference. The Bills have known it for a while now but I think more people are seeing it with the Chiefs finding a way to yet another SB.
Josh Allen is Payton Manning to Patrick Mahomes' Tom Brady.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 31, 2024, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 12:30:07 PM
The Chiefs are well on their way to becoming a dynasty and not to sound pouty, but it is no fun for anyone stuck in their conference. The Bills have known it for a while now but I think more people are seeing it with the Chiefs finding a way to yet another SB.
Josh Allen is Payton Manning to Patrick Mahomes' Tom Brady.
All of western NY would sign up for that in a heartbeat, the real fear is that he is Philip Rivers.
And I hate to say it but there is a tiny bit of solace in the fact that, while the Bills have not beaten the Chiefs, at least Allen played well against them both this year and in 2021. The same could not be said of the presumptive league MVP Lamar Jackson, who is viewed as the same "tier" of QB as Allen but has ultimately had even less postseason success with just a 2-4 record (while not playing at an MVP level in any of the four losses), while Allen is 5-5 (while playing great in two of the losses).
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:35:28 PM
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
The biggest difference between the Chiefs and Bills is definitely not Mahomes vs Allen. Mahomes has the perfect coach and perfect scheme for him.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 31, 2024, 01:30:25 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:35:28 PM
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
The biggest difference between the Chiefs and Bills is definitely not Mahomes vs Allen. Mahomes has the perfect coach and perfect scheme for him.
I would have said both QB's are pretty much scheme-proof. To me the biggest difference, at least in the playoffs, is that the Chiefs defense makes big plays and the Bills defense does not.
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:10:17 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 31, 2024, 01:30:25 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:35:28 PM
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
The biggest difference between the Chiefs and Bills is definitely not Mahomes vs Allen. Mahomes has the perfect coach and perfect scheme for him.
I would have said both QB's are pretty much scheme-proof. To me the biggest difference, at least in the playoffs, is that the Chiefs defense makes big plays and the Bills defense does not.
And the Chiefs offense is never coming away with 0 points on the drive where the Bills missed the FG. Either they're scoring a TD or Butker is making the kick.
Quote from: thspfc on January 31, 2024, 03:19:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on January 31, 2024, 03:10:17 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on January 31, 2024, 01:30:25 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:35:28 PM
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
The biggest difference between the Chiefs and Bills is definitely not Mahomes vs Allen. Mahomes has the perfect coach and perfect scheme for him.
I would have said both QB's are pretty much scheme-proof. To me the biggest difference, at least in the playoffs, is that the Chiefs defense makes big plays and the Bills defense does not.
And the Chiefs offense is never coming away with 0 points on the drive where the Bills missed the FG. Either they're scoring a TD or Butker is making the kick.
Well, that's kind of what I mean. Allen had a sure touchdown to Shakir on that drive, but Chris Jones made a great play to create the pressure that forced the throw to be just a bit off.
On this day January 31st:
2021: Deshaun Watson publicly declared he would no longer play for the Texans again further deflating a fanbase that had been morally devastated early in 2020 losing at Arrowhead in another divisional loss after racing out to a 24-point lead (lost by twenty points final margin), and inexplicably handing over our best player at the time DeAndre Hopkins for almost nothing only about a month later. Despite signing what was the second richest contract in NFL history in September, Deshaun demanded to leave Houston in January (only four months into his new four-year deal) culminating in coaching change from Bill O'Brien to David Culley (Romeo Crennel was briefly the interim coach in between).
::Exactly two years later::2023: Texans hired DeMeco Ryans re-galvanizing our fanbase to excitement levels not seen in over a decade when the Texans first made the playoffs, and probably even excitement levels when the Texans NFL debut in 2002. It was a mutual agreement as both DeMeco wanted to return to Houston and the Texans wanted him back in the organization. He has recieved a tremendous outpouring of support almost immediately upon his return; us Texans fans loved him when he was our linebacker. Even I was greatly overjoyed when I heard of the hiring:
Quote from: jgb191 on January 31, 2023, 06:07:10 PM
YES!! We got him....again! :clap:
https://www.nfl.com/news/texans-hire-49ers-dc-demeco-ryans-as-their-next-head-coach
Welcome back home to Houston DeMeco Ryans! Hopefully this will re-energize the team. As a linebacker playing for my Texans, he was the leader, the team captain, the heart/soul of the roster.
Happy one-year anniversary....plus many, many more to come.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 31, 2024, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2024, 12:30:07 PM
The Chiefs are well on their way to becoming a dynasty and not to sound pouty, but it is no fun for anyone stuck in their conference. The Bills have known it for a while now but I think more people are seeing it with the Chiefs finding a way to yet another SB.
Josh Allen is Payton Manning to Patrick Mahomes' Tom Brady.
I would say right now Josh Allen is more like Phillip Rivers. Manning did eventually get to the super bowl.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:35:28 PM
Josh Allen has been by far more successful than Phillip Rivers. At the very least the Bills have been far more consistently good than the Chargers ever were.
IMO, Lamar Jackson at this moment draws a parallel to Rivers as far as dominating in the regular season before falling flat in the playoffs.
Josh Allen is Payton Manning in that Tom Brady won like all* of the playoff matchups between them the way Allen is still O-fer against Mahomes.
Another way of saying if Allen and Mahomes were in separate conferences, Allen would have been to a Super Bowl by now.
( *Don't remember if that's literally true, but it feels like it.)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 02, 2024, 09:49:17 AM
Josh Allen is Payton Manning in that Tom Brady won like all* of the playoff matchups between them the way Allen is still O-fer against Mahomes.
Another way of saying if Allen and Mahomes were in separate conferences, Allen would have been to a Super Bowl by now.
( *Don't remember if that's literally true, but it feels like it.)
It's not even close to true and it doesn't feel like it either. Manning was 3-2 against Brady in the playoffs.
I think I would take the over on 5 career playoff matchups between Mahomes and Allen. I'm sure it won't align every year, but only three times in the next decade with room to spare if they play longer than that seems relatively safe.
"The Shanahandler" is a great nickname for new Seahawks HC Mike MacDonald. I believe it was coined by Mina Kimes of ESPN in reference to MacDonald's ability to shut down Shanahan offenses around the league. And fittingly, that will be extremely important in Seattle, as arguably their biggest problem under Pete Carroll was their inability to stop the Rams and 49ers four times a year. If that changes under MacDonald, he's got a ready-made nickname for the ages.
Quote from: thspfc on February 02, 2024, 09:54:37 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 02, 2024, 09:49:17 AM
Josh Allen is Payton Manning in that Tom Brady won like all* of the playoff matchups between them the way Allen is still O-fer against Mahomes.
Another way of saying if Allen and Mahomes were in separate conferences, Allen would have been to a Super Bowl by now.
( *Don't remember if that's literally true, but it feels like it.)
It's not even close to true and it doesn't feel like it either. Manning was 3-2 against Brady in the playoffs.
If you count Eli's 2-0 record against Brady in the Super Bowl, then the Manning brothers own a 5-2 all-time postseason record when they faced him.
The last few years, family needs have caused me to miss the first half of several Super Bowls. I did not, for example, see the first half of the Atlanta-New England SB where Atlanta led 28-3. And so I have also missed most halftime shows (no big loss). And also the commercials. I do try to watch the 4th quarter.
I try not to get too wrapped up in the game, unless I have a rooting interest, because of its Sunday night time slot for those of us in the eastern part of the country. Same complaint I have about the last Wild Card game being at the end of a three day weekend.
Unlike last year, have no rooting interest this year, probably am not going to a party, and am a little "meh" about the game. I'll watch and be aware of it enough so I am able to talk about it at work on Monday (and also years from now), but I won't be glued to the TV.
You can probably tell from my accumulated posts over the last few months that I am not in love with the NFL. But I do pay enough attention to it to be conversant.
It's flag football day...
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-patrick-mahomes-father-arrest-cfcca2814d423c6411948c30e38d98cf
Mahomes' father arrested on DWI suspicion in Texas as Chiefs prepare to face 49ers in the Super Bowl
Even if the 49ers don't hoist the Lombardi in Vegas next week, at least their Pro Bowlers can say they won the tug of war.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 04, 2024, 07:43:07 PM
Even if the 49ers don't hoist the Lombardi in Vegas next week, at least their Pro Bowlers can say they won the tug of war.
Players in the Super Bowl don't participate in the Pro Bowl games.
Quote from: Big John on February 04, 2024, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 04, 2024, 07:43:07 PM
Even if the 49ers don't hoist the Lombardi in Vegas next week, at least their Pro Bowlers can say they won the tug of war.
Players in the Super Bowl don't participate in the Pro Bowl games.
Moving it to the week before the Super Bowl was stupid, for this reason. A lot of conference championship participants from the losing teams who are eligible to play also withdraw as a result. I know Baltimore's Justin Tucker and at least a couple Lions were there, though.
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 05, 2024, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
Vikings never won the Super Bowl.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 05, 2024, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
For SB appearances, yes.
For SBs V to X!V (at end of 1970-79 seasons), only Baltimore in SB V, Washington in SB VII, Denver in SB XII, and LA Rams in SB XIV are the exceptions.
Raiders had a hard time getting to SB (as did the Rams), and as mentioned Vikings never won.
Add SB IV at end of 1969 season (Vikings) and SB XV at end of 1980 season (Raiders) - and over 12 years you have 18 out of 24 SB slots taken up by those five teams.
Quote from: epzik8 on February 05, 2024, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
The NFL wanted more parity, and it worked.
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 05, 2024, 09:18:51 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 05, 2024, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
For SB appearances, yes.
For SBs V to X!V (at end of 1970-79 seasons), only Baltimore in SB V, Washington in SB VII, Denver in SB XII, and LA Rams in SB XIV are the exceptions.
Raiders had a hard time getting to SB (as did the Rams), and as mentioned Vikings never won.
Add SB IV at end of 1969 season (Vikings) and SB XV at end of 1980 season (Raiders) - and over 12 years you have 18 out of 24 SB slots taken up by those five teams.
And then came the NFC dominance, where its teams won the Super Bowl 13 years in a row. Now it's the AFC who is dominating, with a 16-10 edge since John Elway finally got the Broncos on the winning side after losing four previous times.
Quote from: Big John on February 05, 2024, 08:21:05 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 05, 2024, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 05, 2024, 07:57:22 PM
https://apnews.com/article/super-bowl-repeat-champs-101926f021719c8c7667bb8de22f1277
Repeating in NFL used to be more common, but Chiefs aim to be first back-to-back champs in 19 years
It's wild how for example in the '70s, it was basically all the Dolphins, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders and Vikings.
Vikings never won the Super Bowl.
The Packers winning two consecutive in the 1960s, too, along with several pre-Super Bowl championships.
Mike
https://twitter.com/49ers/status/1753463293296144877
ROFL. Team was favored in every single game they played this season, including on the road against a 10-1 team. Go Chiefs.
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2024, 09:41:31 AM
ROFL. Team was favored in every single game they played this season, including on the road against a 10-1 team. Go Chiefs.
Ironically enough, they were significant in-game underdogs in both of their playoff games. But they did benefit from the two other supposed superpowers, Eagles and Cowboys, both getting knocked off in the wild card round. Sure, this would make more sense as a catchphrase for the
Chiefs, considering the season and playoff run they had.
But if this is enough to make you not root for a team that (a) hasn't won a Super Bowl in 30 years and (b) has not won a Super Bowl despite appearing in 50% of the title games since 2010 (meaning more championship or Super Bowl heartbreak than any other franchise in that span), over a team that's
won two Super Bowls in the last four years as a neutral fan, I don't know what to say other than the counter-narrative you're inventing might be the only thing sadder than the narrative they're inventing.
Also looking forward to whatever bullshit "controversy" comes out of this Super Bowl. There's one every year. Sometimes it's about a ref's call/no call. Sometimes it's about a player's actions. Sometimes it's about the half time show. Sometimes it's even about a damn commercial. But every year, there's some bullcrap that gets the thumb-typers in a tizzy. They're already trying to tee one up with this whole Taylor Swift thing.
Can't just be a football game with some harmless, funny commercials.
Quote from: webny99 on February 06, 2024, 10:35:56 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2024, 09:41:31 AM
ROFL. Team was favored in every single game they played this season, including on the road against a 10-1 team. Go Chiefs.
Ironically enough, they were significant in-game underdogs in both of their playoff games. But they did benefit from the two other supposed superpowers, Eagles and Cowboys, both getting knocked off in the wild card round. Sure, this would make more sense as a catchphrase for the Chiefs, considering the season and playoff run they had.
But if this is enough to make you not root for a team that (a) hasn't won a Super Bowl in 30 years and (b) has not won a Super Bowl despite appearing in 50% of the title games since 2010 (meaning more championship or Super Bowl heartbreak than any other franchise in that span), over a team that's won two Super Bowls in the last four years as a neutral fan, I don't know what to say other than the counter-narrative you're inventing might be the only thing sadder than the narrative they're inventing.
I don't like the 49ers. I am indifferent to the Chiefs. Therefore I am rooting for the Chiefs. I'm not sure what's so sad about that. I don't want to see the 49ers win a championship.
Quote from: thspfc on February 06, 2024, 11:46:35 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 06, 2024, 10:35:56 AM
...
But if this is enough to make you not root for a team that (a) hasn't won a Super Bowl in 30 years and (b) has not won a Super Bowl despite appearing in 50% of the title games since 2010 (meaning more championship or Super Bowl heartbreak than any other franchise in that span), over a team that's won two Super Bowls in the last four years as a neutral fan, I don't know what to say other than the counter-narrative you're inventing might be the only thing sadder than the narrative they're inventing.
I don't like the 49ers. I am indifferent to the Chiefs. Therefore I am rooting for the Chiefs. I'm not sure what's so sad about that. I don't want to see the 49ers win a championship.
Which is fine, it just means you were predisposed to root against the 49ers, and therefore, not a neutral fan.
Didn't realize it had been 30 years (well, 29 really) since SF won the SB. They won so many back there in a relatively short time (5 in 13 years).
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 06, 2024, 07:30:05 PM
Didn't realize it had been 30 years (well, 29 really) since SF won the SB. They won so many back there in a relatively short time (5 in 13 years).
And while the first decade of the 2000s were leaner years, they've been soundly back to form in the 2010s, but haven't been able to recapture the Lombardi.
Amusing how much better the same time period looks for the 49ers versus nearly the same for the Cowboys.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 07, 2024, 05:54:43 PM
Amusing how much better the same time period looks for the 49ers versus nearly the same for the Cowboys.
At least this century, there is very little overlap in terms of when they lose in the playoffs. The Cowboys always lose in the first two rounds while the 49ers always lose in the
second two rounds (with a pair of early exits in 2001/2002 but then 7-0 in the divisional round since 2010 with four title game losses, two Super Bowl losses, and one TBD).
Ravens QB Lamar Jackson is (unsurprisingly) the MVP for his second time. Congrats to him!
Browns QB Joe Flacco is Comeback Player of the Year, which is what I think is right.
It is interesting that Flacco narrowly edged out Damar Hamlin in Comeback Player of the Year voting. Not saying right or wrong, but Hamlin has been the presumed winner ever since he recovered from going into cardiac arrest on the field last season. It seems some voters put more emphasis on the improvement in on-field play this season rather than the scale and nature of what the player was coming back from.
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2024, 11:40:24 PM
It is interesting that Flacco narrowly edged out Damar Hamlin in Comeback Player of the Year voting. Not saying right or wrong, but Hamlin has been the presumed winner ever since he recovered from going into cardiac arrest on the field last season. It seems some voters put more emphasis on the improvement in on-field play this season rather than the scale and nature of what the player was coming back from.
I just hope the voters voted without any outside influences.
I get a gnawing feeling that the NFL would like the cardiac arrest episode to just go away, and Hamlin getting that award doesn't help with that.
Quote from: webny99 on February 08, 2024, 11:40:24 PM
It is interesting that Flacco narrowly edged out Damar Hamlin in Comeback Player of the Year voting. Not saying right or wrong, but Hamlin has been the presumed winner ever since he recovered from going into cardiac arrest on the field last season. It seems some voters put more emphasis on the improvement in on-field play this season rather than the scale and nature of what the player was coming back from.
Why should it be anything else? Isn't that the intent of the award?
Here's Hamlin's stats: He played in 5 games, and had 2 tackles. Is there anything that says "Comeback player of the year"? And not for nothing - he was decent in 2022, but tied for 71st with 91 tackles.
Hamlin's cardiac arrest was unusual in that it occurred on the field, during the game, on live TV and then rebroadcasted everywhere. What if it happened while at home, or on the practice field, where it would've been more private without cameras rolling? Would people have named that person a presumed winner in the comeback category? A lot of players have health issues and injuries, and come back strong.
Is it great that Hamlin came back? Absolutely. Is it award worthy? At least not in this category it's not.
It still depends on how you interpret the concept of a comeback. There is plenty of precedent for players coming back from injury/physical impairment to win the award, in fact in recent years it has been the case more often than not.
I agree with a take I saw somewhere last night that there should be two separate awards, one for Most Improved Player that's specific to on-field improvement, and one for Comeback Player (or call it something else if you wish) that's specific to players making a return from injury.
Pat McAfee took the words out of my mouth when he said during his progrum earlier that this year's MVP was Lamar's to lose, though I'm still desperate for a non-QB to win it again.
DeMeco Ryans got royally robbed for Coach of the Year. I don't know if there had ever been a rookie head coach who took a team that won just three wins last year to eleven wins, including a playoff win this season. The Texans were almost universally predicted to finish dead last once again in the preseason. He massively transformed the entire culture of the organization; he thoroughly outcoached everybody else in the NFL.
Also I would have understood if Puka Nacua won Offensive Rookie of the Year over CJ; Puka accomplished somethings no other rookie in history has ever pulled off; but CJ also deserved the award. I would have insisted on co-Rookies of the Year.
My complaints with the awards:
1) Puka should have been OROY
2) agree that CPOY and Most Improved should be separated, with Hamlin getting CPOY due to the circumstance he had to come back from to play at all, and Mayfield getting most improved. Both Baker and Flacco were backup caliber players last year, and while Flacco's resurgence was impressive, he played for a month while Baker played for the whole season. Flacco also had way too many turnovers.
Rooting more for SF than KC. Have more dislike for KC team (after last year, being a Philly fan) than like for SF (but in the same breath, I do feel that Shanahan has paid his dues).
Heard on a radio report that Chiefs and 49ers are staying away from the strip (makes sense, keeps them out of trouble), but they didn't say where. When I investigated further, I saw they are staying at Lake Las Vegas, which is due east of downtown (about 15-20 miles) and due north of Henderson.
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 09, 2024, 08:33:15 PM
Rooting more for SF than KC. Have more dislike for KC team (after last year, being a Philly fan) than like for SF (but in the same breath, I do feel that Shanahan has paid his dues).
Not to mention that Taylor Swift will have to jet quickly to Las Vegas after her concert marathon in Tokyo.
It's going to be interesting who the former Oakland Raiders fans will be rooting for more: Do they go with their old cross-bay neighbors, or a perennial division rival? I feel that it would be more of the former than the latter, especially since the Raiders now play in the host stadium.
It's Super Bowl day!! I'll make my official score guess now.
KC wins 31-30 on an SF missed extra point.
Since there was a lack of football block pools this year to play, I made some legal bets in NJ.
Each ticket $10 each:
The coin toss to be tails. (If I win, I get $19.50 back).
Jersey Number of first TD scorer: 80-99 (wins $43).
Any kickoff to be returned for a TD (wins $210).
Any FG 60+ yards (wins $360).
And a 6 way parlay of both Purdy & Mahomes throwing INTs, Jake Moody kicking 7 or more points, Harrison Butker kicking 8 or more points, Travis Kelce getting 100+ receiving yards, and the total points being 55 or greater (wins $760).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 11, 2024, 10:22:57 AM
Since there was a lack of football block pools this year to play, I made some legal bets in NJ.
Each ticket $10 each:
The coin toss to be tails. (If I win, I get $19.50 back).
Jersey Number of first TD scorer: 80-99 (wins $43).
Any kickoff to be returned for a TD (wins $210).
Any FG 60+ yards (wins $360).
And a 6 way parlay of both Purdy & Mahomes throwing INTs, Jake Moody kicking 7 or more points, Harrison Butker kicking 8 or more points, Travis Kelce getting 100+ receiving yards, and the total points being 55 or greater (wins $760).
Those are some gutsy bets. Might pay off big time for you though.
Quote from: plain on February 11, 2024, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 11, 2024, 10:22:57 AM
Since there was a lack of football block pools this year to play, I made some legal bets in NJ.
Each ticket $10 each:
The coin toss to be tails. (If I win, I get $19.50 back).
Jersey Number of first TD scorer: 80-99 (wins $43).
Any kickoff to be returned for a TD (wins $210).
Any FG 60+ yards (wins $360).
And a 6 way parlay of both Purdy & Mahomes throwing INTs, Jake Moody kicking 7 or more points, Harrison Butker kicking 8 or more points, Travis Kelce getting 100+ receiving yards, and the total points being 55 or greater (wins $760).
Those are some gutsy bets. Might pay off big time for you though.
The relative safe bets (who will win, over/under, etc) don't pay out much unless you're willing to risk a lot. Note the coin toss - the odds are the same regardless if Heads or Tails was picked; I bet 10, get 19.50 back if I win, and the house basically wins 50 cents, so they always have some sort of edge. So having some fun on the "Specials" as the betting terminal terms it: unusual prop bets.
And of course this is low money. Many of those placing bets are spending big money. Bigger than I'm willing to wager.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:25:58 PM
Nickelodeon is broadcasting the Super Bowl with SpongeBob and Patrick commentating. I was surprised by this for some reason.
Sweet victory incoming.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:44:00 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 11, 2024, 07:42:05 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:25:58 PM
Nickelodeon is broadcasting the Super Bowl with SpongeBob and Patrick commentating. I was surprised by this for some reason.
Sweet victory incoming.
We need confirmation that Mayonnaise is in fact an instrument.
In regard to horseradish..
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:44:00 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 11, 2024, 07:42:05 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:25:58 PM
Nickelodeon is broadcasting the Super Bowl with SpongeBob and Patrick commentating. I was surprised by this for some reason.
Sweet victory incoming.
We need confirmation that Mayonnaise is in fact an instrument.
No, Plutonic Panda, mayonnaise is
not an instrument.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 08:50:15 PM
Quote from: Hunty2022 on February 11, 2024, 08:47:21 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:44:00 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 11, 2024, 07:42:05 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:25:58 PM
Nickelodeon is broadcasting the Super Bowl with SpongeBob and Patrick commentating. I was surprised by this for some reason.
Sweet victory incoming.
We need confirmation that Mayonnaise is in fact an instrument.
No, Plutonic Panda, mayonnaise is not an instrument.
:wave:
Horse radish is not an instrument either.
The KANSAS CITY CHIEFS are SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS, AGAIN!!!
I don't recall if we had a hunch during Super Bowl 55 that we were watching the two greatest QBs to ever play the game . . .
Yes, Mahomes has now surpassed Manning and Montana, and I don't even think it's up for debate. To come back from 10 points down and pull off multiple incredibly clutch drives in the 4th quarter/OT of the Super Bowl three times? The man is ridiculous.
Purdy pretty much silenced (in my view) any controversy regarding whether he should be the starter.
Only the 2nd SB in history to go to overtime, and it was a "good game" by all counts, but it somehow it just didn't feel that exciting. It just felt over as soon as the 49ers settled for a FG on their opening possession of OT. For the 49ers to get that close again and fall short is just brutal. It felt like it was happening in slow motion all night.
Also, the new playoff OT rules have been weirdly under-discussed. Like what happens if there's a defensive score or a safety on the first possession? Is it game over or does the team that just scored still get an offensive possession? And what happens if (as came very close to happening tonight) each team has not completed their initial "guaranteed" possession by the end of the first overtime period? Do they have to score before 0:00 just like in regulation or does the clock keep rolling into a second overtime? Definitely questions to find answers to this offseason.
Ugh. Can't wait for more Taylor Swift spam.
Happy for her and her boyfriend.
QuoteAlso, the new playoff OT rules have been weirdly under-discussed. Like what happens if there's a defensive score or a safety on the first possession? Is it game over or does the team that just scored still get an offensive possession? And what happens if (as came very close to happening tonight) each team has not completed their initial "guaranteed" possession by the end of the first overtime period? Do they have to score before 0:00 just like in regulation or does the clock keep rolling into a second overtime? Definitely questions to find answers to this offseason.
I thought this was resolved in the Hail Flacco game when Peyton Manning did not throw the INT until the 2nd OT.
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mile_High_Miracle
QuoteAfter the first three drives of overtime ended in punts, Corey Graham made his second interception of a pass from Manning intended for Stokley on the Broncos 45-yard line. On the last play of the first overtime period, Rice's 11-yard run moved the Ravens into field goal range. Four plays later, rookie kicker Justin Tucker kicked a 47-yard field goal to win the game.
And the Chiefs win because of the overtime rule that was brought into existence because of themselves.... fireworks are being shot off near me.
Congrats to Moody for holding a SB record for maybe an hour.
Quote from: webny99 on February 11, 2024, 11:14:05 PM
Only the 2nd SB in history to go to overtime, and it was a "good game" by all counts, but it somehow it just didn't feel that exciting.
Speak for yourself. I'd put it in the top five of this century.
I have to say, I've been impressed by how little complaning about the referees I've heard during this postseason. Twitter put up career high numbers last year, maybe career low numbers this year.
Ugh. No more football until September. Not sure what the dead horse drama will be this year. Justin Fields is getting traded, period, so it won't be that.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on February 11, 2024, 11:23:52 PM
And the Chiefs win because of the overtime rule that was brought into existence because of themselves.... fireworks are being shot off near me.
This is exactly how it would have played out under the old rules. A field goal did not end the game then.
Missing the extra block via block is what ultimate lost the game for the 49ers.
THE DYNASTY HAS BEGUN! I've seen the Patriots with Brady, and now, I get to see Mahomes with the Chiefs win another Super Bowl!
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 11, 2024, 11:16:26 PM
Ugh. Can't wait for more Taylor Swift spam.
Don't be the baby elephant.
Quote from: thspfc on February 11, 2024, 10:59:04 PM
To come back from 10 points down and pull off multiple incredibly clutch drives in the 4th quarter/OT of the Super Bowl three times? The man is ridiculous.
Of course I am not disagreeing with this, but 10 point leads aren't what they used to be. In this era of the NFL it feels like unless you have a three score lead or more (and sometimes even then), anything can happen in the second half. It was so early in the game when the 49ers were up 10 that it felt more like a coin flip than the 49ers being heavy favorites to win.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 11:04:00 PM
Purdy pretty much silenced (in my view) any controversy regarding whether he should be the starter.
Wait a minute, there was controversy regarding whether he should be the starter?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 11:27:35 PM
Missing the extra block via block is what ultimate lost the game for the 49ers.
The defense becoming swiss cheese in the second half and overtime is mostly what did it. And if you want to put it on one play, the mistake on the punt that led to KC's first touchdown was more critical.
Quote from: thspfc on February 11, 2024, 11:24:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 11, 2024, 11:14:05 PM
Only the 2nd SB in history to go to overtime, and it was a "good game" by all counts, but it somehow it just didn't feel that exciting.
Speak for yourself. I'd put it in the top five of this century.
Sort of an unimpressive ranking given how many were played last century.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on February 11, 2024, 11:27:44 PM
THE DYNASTY HAS BEGUN! I've seen the Patriots with Brady, and now, I get to see Mahomes with the Chiefs win another Super Bowl!
As someone who lives in Missouri, I guess I ought to enjoy it while it lasts. Being in the AFC we were under Brady's thumb for years, now we're the bad guys.
Quote from: thspfc on February 11, 2024, 10:59:04 PM
Yes, Mahomes has now surpassed Manning and Montana, and I don't even think it's up for debate. To come back from 10 points down and pull off multiple incredibly clutch drives in the 4th quarter/OT of the Super Bowl three times? The man is ridiculous.
I had a feeling Mr. 13 seconds would pull something off.
Quote from: thspfc on February 11, 2024, 11:24:33 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 11, 2024, 11:14:05 PM
Only the 2nd SB in history to go to overtime, and it was a "good game" by all counts, but it somehow it just didn't feel that exciting.
Speak for yourself. I'd put it in the top five of this century.
I guess it probably is, and I may remember it more favorably in hindsight, but it just felt
so predictable even despite being a close, back and forth game. I think Chiefs fatigue has already set in for me. After they beat the Bills I just could not see them losing to any of the remaining three teams so I basically just accepted them as SB champs right then and there.
But the good thing is that they got the 3 titles in 5 years out of the way now, so there should be a nice 6-8 year run of some different teams getting their shot... :sombrero:
I thought they were going to run out of time. They had a time out and was like they weren't even watching the clock.
Congrats to the Chiefs!
A crazy thing is, there hasn't been a Super Bowl champion with this much room for improvement entering the next season in a long time. Last year they had a mediocre WR room and a younger Kelce. This year their WR room went from medicore to one of the worst in the league, and Kelce started to show age for the first time, suggesting he's now past his prime. But, of course, the defense became one of the league's best. Last year's offense with this year's defense is a team that could contend for 17-0.
After a strong finish to his rookie season, Rice will be expected to perform as a true WR1. They're undoubtebly going to bring in somebody good to complement him - who wouldn't want to play with Mahomes. Kelce probably has a couple years of Pro Bowl production left. KC really should be better next year. That's not to say they're absolutely going to threepeat, because with 32 teams in the league, chances are, they won't. But in theory, they will have a better squad than the one that just won it all.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2024, 11:42:26 PM
I thought they were going to run out of time. They had a time out and was like they weren't even watching the clock.
They didn't have to given the OT setup. It was just like the end of a quarter.
Quote from: webny99 on February 11, 2024, 11:14:05 PM
Only the 2nd SB in history to go to overtime, and it was a "good game" by all counts, but it somehow it just didn't feel that exciting. It just felt over as soon as the 49ers settled for a FG on their opening possession of OT. For the 49ers to get that close again and fall short is just brutal. It felt like it was happening in slow motion all night.
Also, the new playoff OT rules have been weirdly under-discussed. Like what happens if there's a defensive score or a safety on the first possession? Is it game over or does the team that just scored still get an offensive possession? And what happens if (as came very close to happening tonight) each team has not completed their initial "guaranteed" possession by the end of the first overtime period? Do they have to score before 0:00 just like in regulation or does the clock keep rolling into a second overtime? Definitely questions to find answers to this offseason.
A defensive score ends the game...
There is no expiring clock in playoff OT for the second team's initial position. This site - operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-overtime-rules/ - suggests there is a "halftime" at the end of the 2nd OT period. Should the game still be tied after a 4th OT period, there would be another coin toss.
For everybody who was torching Dan Campbell for not taking field goals two weeks ago:
49ers had opportunities to go for it on 4th down in both of their last two possessions and took the field goals. In the 4th quarter, all the 49ers had to do was convert that 4th down, run the clock down and then kick the FG with no time left. Game over.
In OT, they could have gone for it on 4th down to try to get the TD which gives them the opportunity to win in sudden death on their next possession if the Chiefs get the tying touchdown.
Patrick Mahomes might be the most inevitable force of nature I've seen in football.
I might not even bother watching games next fall because I have this feeling the Chiefs will be the first team to three-peat as champions.
I would have wanted McCaffrey or Jennings from the 49ers as SBMVP IF they held on.
There was a slow build to this game. Defensive battle early on; turnovers with zero points off. Lot of punting in the 3rd. When it got late, though, you could just feel like it would end with Mahomes driving 'em down the field again. SF's D wore down. They were solid for most of the game, but damn if they didn't get outlasted.
I feel bad for that dude who jacked his Achilles running onto the field. That's gotta be the suckiest way to get hurt in the SB. Not even during a play. Just one wrong step and some old injury comes smashing back.
I guess the offseason gets dominated by "Chiefs dynasty" or complaining about "Chiefs dynasty".
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2024, 11:23:00 PM
QuoteAlso, the new playoff OT rules have been weirdly under-discussed. Like what happens if there's a defensive score or a safety on the first possession? Is it game over or does the team that just scored still get an offensive possession? And what happens if (as came very close to happening tonight) each team has not completed their initial "guaranteed" possession by the end of the first overtime period? Do they have to score before 0:00 just like in regulation or does the clock keep rolling into a second overtime? Definitely questions to find answers to this offseason.
I thought this was resolved in the Hail Flacco game when Peyton Manning did not throw the INT until the 2nd OT.
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mile_High_Miracle
QuoteAfter the first three drives of overtime ended in punts, Corey Graham made his second interception of a pass from Manning intended for Stokley on the Broncos 45-yard line. On the last play of the first overtime period, Rice's 11-yard run moved the Ravens into field goal range. Four plays later, rookie kicker Justin Tucker kicked a 47-yard field goal to win the game.
Whoops, missed this earlier. Yes, if the score was tied it would go to a second OT, but in this case what if the score was
not tied (49ers lead 22-19) and the Chiefs had not ended their first possession by the time the first OT period was over? Turns out the game would still continue into a 2nd OT period, as noted by Mapmikey upthread.
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2024, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 11, 2024, 11:23:00 PM
QuoteAlso, the new playoff OT rules have been weirdly under-discussed. Like what happens if there's a defensive score or a safety on the first possession? Is it game over or does the team that just scored still get an offensive possession? And what happens if (as came very close to happening tonight) each team has not completed their initial "guaranteed" possession by the end of the first overtime period? Do they have to score before 0:00 just like in regulation or does the clock keep rolling into a second overtime? Definitely questions to find answers to this offseason.
I thought this was resolved in the Hail Flacco game when Peyton Manning did not throw the INT until the 2nd OT.
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mile_High_Miracle
QuoteAfter the first three drives of overtime ended in punts, Corey Graham made his second interception of a pass from Manning intended for Stokley on the Broncos 45-yard line. On the last play of the first overtime period, Rice's 11-yard run moved the Ravens into field goal range. Four plays later, rookie kicker Justin Tucker kicked a 47-yard field goal to win the game.
Whoops, missed this earlier. Yes, if the score was tied it would go to a second OT, but in this case what if the score was not tied (49ers lead 22-19) and the Chiefs had not ended their first possession by the time the first OT period was over? Turns out the game would still continue into a 2nd OT period, as noted by Mapmikey upthread.
Although it is probably physically impossible, an interesting hypothetical is if both teams' first possession has not ended by the end of the 2nd quarter of OT. By definition, a possession ends at the end of the 2nd quarter.
I "thought" I heard the referee say at the beginning of the overtime that both teams would get a possession unless there was a defensive score on the first possession (so going to last night, if the Chiefs had gotten a pick six on the 49ers first OT drive, the game would have been immediately over). I was watching the game alone and could hear what the referee was saying.
The thing I am somewhat unclear on is the following - if the first two possessions occur and the game is still tied --- then it becomes sudden death? I suspect that it does.
Romo indicated just before the last play that the end of the first OT period was like the end of the first quarter, so if that is the case, they would have just continued at the other end of the field (like they would have in any regular season second quarter) had that first OT ended before the game did. This is different than the regular season, where you can never play more than one OT period.
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 12, 2024, 11:22:45 AM
I "thought" I heard the referee say at the beginning of the overtime that both teams would get a possession unless there was a defensive score on the first possession (so going to last night, if the Chiefs had gotten a pick six on the 49ers first OT drive, the game would have been immediately over). I was watching the game alone and could hear what the referee was saying.
The thing I am somewhat unclear on is the following - if the first two possessions occur and the game is still tied --- then it becomes sudden death? I suspect that it does.
Romo indicated just before the last play that the end of the first OT period was like the end of a quarter, so if that is the case, they would have just continued at the other end of the field had that first OT ended before the game did.
Yes, a defensive score on the first possession ends the game because the offense failed to score on the first possession and the defense has scored.
If a playoff game is tied after each team has had one possession, the game then becomes sudden death.
The timing rules run exactly like a game starting from the first quarter. After a 15 minute quarter (which we almost reached), the teams switch sides and the possession resumes. After the second quarter, there is a halftime (no idea if Usher has to perform again) and a second half kickoff. If you reach the end of the 4th quarter, there is another coin toss to start the 5th quarter, though this time the game is sudden death immediately.
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 12:06:22 AM
A crazy thing is, there hasn't been a Super Bowl champion with this much room for improvement entering the next season in a long time. Last year they had a mediocre WR room and a younger Kelce. This year their WR room went from medicore to one of the worst in the league, and Kelce started to show age for the first time, suggesting he's now past his prime. But, of course, the defense became one of the league's best. Last year's offense with this year's defense is a team that could contend for 17-0.
...
Except for last year's Chiefs? That team had a lot more room for improvement than this year's team. Last years defense gave up 35 points in the Super Bowl so the offense had to be perfect all game. This year's team was much more balanced and has very little to improve on defense and the playoffs showed that the offense has plenty of talent too, even though it took until January to put it all together.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 12, 2024, 07:22:16 AM
For everybody who was torching Dan Campbell for not taking field goals two weeks ago:
49ers had opportunities to go for it on 4th down in both of their last two possessions and took the field goals. In the 4th quarter, all the 49ers had to do was convert that 4th down, run the clock down and then kick the FG with no time left. Game over.
In OT, they could have gone for it on 4th down to try to get the TD which gives them the opportunity to win in sudden death on their next possession if the Chiefs get the tying touchdown.
All true, especially the 4th down at the end of regulation, but still a few ironies here:
1) the blocked XP arguably mattered more than any of those decisions (Chiefs probably still win it with a TD, but you'd put a lot more pressure on with an expiring game clock and no falling back on a FG)
2) if they failed to convert in OT, the Chiefs have Mahomes and Butker and only need a FG so you'd have to accept that if you fail, you lose
3) knowing the 49ers play so conservatively under Shanahan is actually part of the reason Campbell should have taken the field goals!
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 11, 2024, 11:16:26 PM
Ugh. Can't wait for more Taylor Swift spam.
It's the Superbowl (Taylor's Version).
Quote from: vdeane on February 12, 2024, 12:56:35 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 11, 2024, 11:16:26 PM
Ugh. Can't wait for more Taylor Swift spam.
It's the Superbowl (Taylor's Version).
It's her world. Her boyfriend only plays football in it.
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2024, 11:32:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 12:06:22 AM
A crazy thing is, there hasn't been a Super Bowl champion with this much room for improvement entering the next season in a long time. Last year they had a mediocre WR room and a younger Kelce. This year their WR room went from medicore to one of the worst in the league, and Kelce started to show age for the first time, suggesting he's now past his prime. But, of course, the defense became one of the league's best. Last year's offense with this year's defense is a team that could contend for 17-0.
...
Except for last year's Chiefs? That team had a lot more room for improvement than this year's team. Last years defense gave up 35 points in the Super Bowl so the offense had to be perfect all game. This year's team was much more balanced and has very little to improve on defense and the playoffs showed that the offense has plenty of talent too, even though it took until January to put it all together.
Strongly disagree. Their offense nosedived from last year to this year. Went from being statistically one of the best ever to being a little above league average, in a year full of major QB injuries that left teams reeling. If you just look at all the results from those respective seasons, it's very obvious that the team regressed. Perhaps their ceiling entering next year is the same as it was entering this year (as I said, if they get back to where they were on offense and maintain this level on defense, they could go 17-0). But the point they're starting from is clearly lower this time. That equals more room for improvement.
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 01:28:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2024, 11:32:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 12:06:22 AM
A crazy thing is, there hasn't been a Super Bowl champion with this much room for improvement entering the next season in a long time. Last year they had a mediocre WR room and a younger Kelce. This year their WR room went from medicore to one of the worst in the league, and Kelce started to show age for the first time, suggesting he's now past his prime. But, of course, the defense became one of the league's best. Last year's offense with this year's defense is a team that could contend for 17-0.
...
Except for last year's Chiefs? That team had a lot more room for improvement than this year's team. Last years defense gave up 35 points in the Super Bowl so the offense had to be perfect all game. This year's team was much more balanced and has very little to improve on defense and the playoffs showed that the offense has plenty of talent too, even though it took until January to put it all together.
Strongly disagree. Their offense nosedived from last year to this year. Went from being statistically one of the best ever to being a little above league average, in a year full of major QB injuries that left teams reeling. If you just look at all the results from those respective seasons, it's very obvious that the team regressed. Perhaps their ceiling entering next year is the same as it was entering this year (as I said, if they get back to where they were on offense and maintain this level on defense, they could go 17-0). But the point they're starting from is clearly lower this time. That equals more room for improvement.
Sure, if you're only looking at one side of the ball. The defense was mediocre last season but started at a much higher level this season and stayed there all season.
But considering how well the offense played in the playoffs, the point they're starting from is only lower if you look at the regular season offense without the playoff offense, which doesn't make sense to me. They've
already cashed in on some of that improvement potential based on their playoff run, so you can't really back up to where they were at the end of the regular season and say they still have that much room for improvement. The starting point is that they will be as good as they are
now when they return to the field in September, not as good as they were in the regular season.
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2024, 02:40:52 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 01:28:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 12, 2024, 11:32:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on February 12, 2024, 12:06:22 AM
A crazy thing is, there hasn't been a Super Bowl champion with this much room for improvement entering the next season in a long time. Last year they had a mediocre WR room and a younger Kelce. This year their WR room went from medicore to one of the worst in the league, and Kelce started to show age for the first time, suggesting he's now past his prime. But, of course, the defense became one of the league's best. Last year's offense with this year's defense is a team that could contend for 17-0.
...
Except for last year's Chiefs? That team had a lot more room for improvement than this year's team. Last years defense gave up 35 points in the Super Bowl so the offense had to be perfect all game. This year's team was much more balanced and has very little to improve on defense and the playoffs showed that the offense has plenty of talent too, even though it took until January to put it all together.
Strongly disagree. Their offense nosedived from last year to this year. Went from being statistically one of the best ever to being a little above league average, in a year full of major QB injuries that left teams reeling. If you just look at all the results from those respective seasons, it's very obvious that the team regressed. Perhaps their ceiling entering next year is the same as it was entering this year (as I said, if they get back to where they were on offense and maintain this level on defense, they could go 17-0). But the point they're starting from is clearly lower this time. That equals more room for improvement.
Sure, if you're only looking at one side of the ball. The defense was mediocre last season but started at a much higher level this season and stayed there all season.
I didn't say anything that contradicts that.
Quote
But considering how well the offense played in the playoffs, the point they're starting from is only lower if you look at the regular season offense without the playoff offense, which doesn't make sense to me. They've already cashed in on some of that improvement potential based on their playoff run, so you can't really back up to where they were at the end of the regular season and say they still have that much room for improvement. The starting point is that they will be as good as they are now when they return to the field in September, not as good as they were in the regular season.
They scored 3 points in the first 2.5 quarters and one touchdown in regulation, which was off a gift-wrapped turnover. They scored 0 points in the second half against the Ravens. Throughout the playoffs, they scored more field goals than touchdowns.
The best thing you can say is that they came up with the big drives when they needed them, which they obviously did. But it's clear that the defense was the better unit, and that's unexpected from a team that has Mahomes.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
Katy Perry has been the best over the past ten years for me. Of course, nothing beats Prince in '07.
Quote from: jlam on February 12, 2024, 03:27:47 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
Katy Perry has been the best over the past ten years for me. Of course, nothing beats Prince in '07.
My top ten:
XXVII: Michael Jackson
XLVI: Madonna
XLII: Tom Petty
XLVIII: Bruno Mars
LI: Lady Gaga
LIII: Maroon 5
LVII: Rhianna
LVI: Dr Dre/Snoop Dog/Eminem/Mary J Blige/Kendrick Lamar
LV: The Weeknd
LII: Justin Timberlake
Quote from: epzik8 on February 12, 2024, 09:11:38 AM
I would have wanted McCaffrey or Jennings from the 49ers as SBMVP IF they held on.
Jennings would have deserved it. He was the first non-QB to both throw and catch a TD pass in the Super Bowl, and only the second player ever to do it. He was having a career night.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
Nothing beats Prince, but last night's halftime show was absolutely top tier. The past few years have really hit it out of the park (to use an analogy from the wrong sport).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
I joked that people already had their social media posts ready to go to show their hatred for the halftime show. And while a few voiced their opinion the moment the show was done, it actually was a limited few that did. Overall, people did seem fairly ok with this year's show.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 12, 2024, 03:50:14 PM
Quote from: jlam on February 12, 2024, 03:27:47 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
Katy Perry has been the best over the past ten years for me. Of course, nothing beats Prince in '07.
My top ten:
XXVII: Michael Jackson
XLVI: Madonna
XLII: Tom Petty
XLVIII: Bruno Mars
LI: Lady Gaga
LIII: Maroon 5
LVII: Rhianna
LVI: Dr Dre/Snoop Dog/Eminem/Mary J Blige/Kendrick Lamar
LV: The Weeknd
LII: Justin Timberlake
Best was U2 with their tribute for 9/11.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 12, 2024, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 12, 2024, 01:14:34 PM
Didn't see anyone comment on it, but I thought the halftime show was right up there with my favorites. Usher probably tied Gaga for best performance in the last 10 years for me.
I joked that people already had their social media posts ready to go to show their hatred for the halftime show. And while a few voiced their opinion the moment the show was done, it actually was a limited few that did. Overall, people did seem fairly ok with this year's show.
I feel like Usher is pretty inoffensive to fans of a bunch of different genres. Even if you don't listen to his music, his talent (singing and dancing, both) is pretty evident right away.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 12, 2024, 03:57:21 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 12, 2024, 09:11:38 AM
I would have wanted McCaffrey or Jennings from the 49ers as SBMVP IF they held on.
Jennings would have deserved it. He was the first non-QB to both throw and catch a TD pass in the Super Bowl, and only the second player ever to do it. He was having a career night.
In a game where two of the game's top offenses were tied at 19 after regulation, the defenses were clearly more valuable, but the fatal flaw of the MVP award is that it's much harder to pick a single person from a defense. I'd have voted for Chris Jones.
There is a very strong bias to give the MVP award to the QB of the winning team.
I called out to the others at the SB party how the game was going to go right after the blocked PAT made a tie at the end of regulation possible. Right down to the score after the 2nd coin flip. And that's with watching virtually no football this season, even though the Chiefs have been my favorite team since Montana came over to them from the 49ers, which was my favorite team before that, mainly due to him. So, I wouldn't have been heartbroken either way this turned out, but this plays out the same too much for it to have gone any other way.
Any else's party have a drink every time they cut over to Taylor?
Anyone else think that the whole Kelse/Swift thing is inevitably going to result in fodder for 1-2 more songs for her?
Quote from: MikieTimT on February 12, 2024, 05:15:23 PM
Anyone else think that the whole Kelse/Swift thing is inevitably going to result in fodder for 1-2 more songs for her?
Quote from: "4th Down", by Taylor Swift
(lead-in to chorus) you didn't go for it on
(D major) 4th down; like this relationship is
(A major) not important to you, how can I
(b minor) love you as much as I'm able, when you're
(G major) leaving points on the table? Go for it on
("4th down" ... repeat chorus one more time)
Best halftime show: Carol Channing, Super Bowl IV
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 12, 2024, 04:49:43 PM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 12, 2024, 03:57:21 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on February 12, 2024, 09:11:38 AM
I would have wanted McCaffrey or Jennings from the 49ers as SBMVP IF they held on.
Jennings would have deserved it. He was the first non-QB to both throw and catch a TD pass in the Super Bowl, and only the second player ever to do it. He was having a career night.
In a game where two of the game's top offenses were tied at 19 after regulation, the defenses were clearly more valuable, but the fatal flaw of the MVP award is that it's much harder to pick a single person from a defense. I'd have voted for Chris Jones.
Mahomes was the 100% unquestioned MVP of that game. We don't need to get cute with it. Take him out and the 49ers win by double digits.
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2024, 06:04:52 PM
Best halftime show: Carol Channing, Super Bowl IV
She was in Super Bowl VI.
First time since the 2003-04 Patriots that a team has repeated as the Super Bowl champion. Also, the second one to go to OT, after the infamous 28-3 debacle from Super Bowl LI. Let's admit it now, Patrick Mahomes is the second coming of Tom Brady, with Travis Kelce in Rob Gronkowski's role and Andy Reid in Bill Belichick's. Daresay a three-peat for next year? Of course, no team has ever done it (not even those Patriots of the era recently gone by), but the Chiefs are more than capable of it, so never say never.
Congrats to the champs. The Niners did almost everything they had to do to win, but it wasn't enough to overcome Mahomes.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 13, 2024, 05:24:48 AM
Congrats to the champs. The Niners did almost everything they had to do to win, but it wasn't enough to overcome Mahomes.
They also kept missing opportunities time after time that you just knew would cost them in the end.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 11, 2024, 11:16:26 PM
Ugh. Can't wait for more Taylor Swift spam.
Quote from: Rothman on February 11, 2024, 11:21:39 PM
Happy for her and her boyfriend.
All has now become clear!
(https://virginia.sportswar.com/uploads/2024/2/30138655189.jpg)
49ers fired their DC.
There's been a deadly shooting at the victory parade in downtown Kansas City. Apparently, some fans don't know how to celebrate responsibly...
Quote from: Henry on February 14, 2024, 10:53:23 PM
There's been a deadly shooting at the victory parade in downtown Kansas City. Apparently, some fans don't know how to celebrate responsibly...
One dead, identified as a Kansas City radio personality. 21 injured including several children, and three people detained, although not yet identified as suspects. One of the detainees was shown on TV being led away by cops wearing either orange long-johns or a prison/jail uniform (hard to tell from a distance).
The investigation is still ongoing, likely for several more days, and little info other than what I mentioned has been released by the cops or the city.
Apparently one of the gunmen got tackled and thumped by fans.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 15, 2024, 06:50:03 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 14, 2024, 08:48:20 PM
49ers fired their DC.
Steve Wilks became the fall guy.
In the Super Bowl, they allowed only one TD in regulation to the defending champs, and that TD came after a muffed punt gave them the ball inside the 20.
Should have fired the Special Teams coach instead.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 15, 2024, 07:15:50 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 15, 2024, 06:50:03 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 14, 2024, 08:48:20 PM
49ers fired their DC.
Steve Wilks became the fall guy.
In the Super Bowl, they allowed only one TD in regulation to the defending champs, and that TD came after a muffed punt gave them the ball inside the 20.
Should have fired the Special Teams coach instead.
They also could not stop anything in the final two drives, although the impact of the defense being gassed at that point is probably underrated.
To me the 49ers and Bills losses to the Chiefs felt very similar. Both teams needed someone to step up and make a game winning play and no one did, so ultimately all three units and the coaching staff each deserve about 25% of the blame.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 15, 2024, 07:15:50 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on February 15, 2024, 06:50:03 AM
Quote from: tmoore952 on February 14, 2024, 08:48:20 PM
49ers fired their DC.
Steve Wilks became the fall guy.
In the Super Bowl, they allowed only one TD in regulation to the defending champs, and that TD came after a muffed punt gave them the ball inside the 20.
Should have fired the Special Teams coach instead.
I'm not sure why/how it is the 49ers Special Teams coach fault that the Chiefs kick glanced off the leg of one of the 49ers players covering the play, thus making the ball live for everyone. That seems to me to be a lot more uncontrollable than say, if the 49ers receiver fumbled the ball. Is that even coachable? I assume the 49ers player would look at the Chiefs receiver to have some idea where the ball may be headed (you certainly wouldn't look up). But you still have to assume that the person you are running to is actually going to attempt to catch the ball, which isn't always the case.
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2024, 06:04:52 PM
Best halftime show: Carol Channing, Super Bowl IV
Objectively an interesting choice...she doesn't typically appear on the "best of" lists for Super Bowl performances. But then I just bought an Anne Murray vinyl a couple weeks ago, if that provides any indication of the importance of subjectivity when deciding the "best". Some of us, regardless of age, just have older preferences.
In my lifetime, I remember quite liking the Prince halftime show. But then I'm also a fan of Prince.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2024, 11:34:21 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2024, 06:04:52 PM
Best halftime show: Carol Channing, Super Bowl IV
Objectively an interesting choice.
I met her at a Philadelphia-area department store in 1976. She was giving a public performance, but it was mostly talking. Very interesting woman.
In looking this up SB VI halftime show on Wikipedia, it mentioned that Ella Fitzgerald and Al Hirt also performed, as well as others.
SB IV halftime also had other performers besides Channing.
The earlier posts, as well as those discussing them, mply (at least to me) that Channing was the only performer at these two shows. Not the case either time.
What is everyone going to be keeping an eye on this offseason as we barrel towards another season?
I am sensing a certain degree of lethargy with the NFL right now as it feels a bit like the Brady years when the Patriots were so inevitable that it became boring and predictable. Hopefully that will change next season, but at least for right now, the Chiefs own the NFL.
Most of the AFC has a locked in QB, but I will be interested to see what happens with the rest of the AFC West, and a bunch of NFC teams including the Bears, Vikings, Giants, Commanders, and the entire NFC South.
And of course, how do the Bills find their way to an inevitable 4th straight divisional round playoff loss.
Currently, uniforms. And hoping that (Travis) Kelce gets traded to the Bears.
Quote from: webny99 on February 20, 2024, 03:47:25 PM
What is everyone going to be keeping an eye on this offseason as we barrel towards another season?
I am sensing a certain degree of lethargy with the NFL right now as it feels a bit like the Brady years when the Patriots were so inevitable that it became boring and predictable. Hopefully that will change next season, but at least for right now, the Chiefs own the NFL.
Most of the AFC has a locked in QB, but I will be interested to see what happens with the rest of the AFC West, and a bunch of NFC teams including the Bears, Vikings, Giants, Commanders, and the entire NFC South.
And of course, how do the Bills find their way to an inevitable 4th straight divisional round playoff loss.
The Bears will have an impact on just about every team in the draft with their decision to either trade Justin Fields and draft Caleb Williams with the #1 overall pick, or keep Fields and trade the pick.
I'm hoping the Bears trade the pick, not because I prefer Fields over Williams, but because they desperately need the help they would get with the haul of picks that would come with trading out of #1. Specifically, I'm hoping they can land left tackle Joe Alt after trading down.
Quote from: jlam on February 21, 2024, 12:07:14 AM
Currently, uniforms. And hoping that (Travis) Kelce gets traded to the Bears.
Out of curiosity, why would he?
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 21, 2024, 07:02:46 AM
The Bears will have an impact on just about every team in the draft with their decision to either trade Justin Fields and draft Caleb Williams with the #1 overall pick, or keep Fields and trade the pick.
I'm hoping the Bears trade the pick, not because I prefer Fields over Williams, but because they desperately need the help they would get with the haul of picks that would come with trading out of #1. Specifically, I'm hoping they can land left tackle Joe Alt after trading down.
There seems to be growing consensus that they will draft a QB and move on from Fields. I am not so sure that's what they should do
or what they will do. I would feel differently if it was a full reset with a new head coach and GM, but now it just seems like an odd dynamic to try to upgrade on Fields. They kind of already committed to him by trading down last year. Why would you not do the same this year after he improved significantly last season? They could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams
has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields. If he isn't, the whole regime is essentially a failure and probably gets fired, and Stroud led the Texans to the divisional playoffs, so that's a really high bar to clear. The Bears are typically a conservative operation, and the safe option here is to keep Fields and get a haul for the #1 pick, so I could still see it happening even if the consensus disagrees.
This is the Bears you're talking about. They'll botch the decision no matter what they do.
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2024, 08:53:32 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 21, 2024, 07:02:46 AM
The Bears will have an impact on just about every team in the draft with their decision to either trade Justin Fields and draft Caleb Williams with the #1 overall pick, or keep Fields and trade the pick.
I'm hoping the Bears trade the pick, not because I prefer Fields over Williams, but because they desperately need the help they would get with the haul of picks that would come with trading out of #1. Specifically, I'm hoping they can land left tackle Joe Alt after trading down.
There seems to be growing consensus that they will draft a QB and move on from Fields. I am not so sure that's what they should do or what they will do. I would feel differently if it was a full reset with a new head coach and GM, but now it just seems like an odd dynamic to try to upgrade on Fields. They kind of already committed to him by trading down last year. Why would you not do the same this year after he improved significantly last season? They could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields. If he isn't, the whole regime is essentially a failure and probably gets fired, and Stroud led the Texans to the divisional playoffs, so that's a really high bar to clear. The Bears are typically a conservative operation, and the safe option here is to keep Fields and get a haul for the #1 pick, so I could still see it happening even if the consensus disagrees.
No, as I've said many times here and elsewhere the question is very simple and none of the baggage matters.
Who is more likely to be a franchise quarterback: Fields or Williams?
"Odd dynamic", "already kinda committed", "why not do the same", "he improved", "safe option", "could have had Stroud", whatever. Just noise. The goal is to have a good quarterback. If you think Fields is more likely to become a franchise QB than Williams, that's a different discussion entirely (I disagree, but I know that's not necessarily what you're saying). If you don't think Fields is more likely to become a franchise QB than Williams, then you trade Fields and draft Williams, end of story.
If Williams doesn't work out, the entire regime will be fired. If Fields doesn't work out, the entire regime will also be fired. So that point falls flat.
QuoteThey could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields.
It's hard to even articulate how bizarre this take is because it's just like elementary level common sense has failed you here.
Say I find berries growing on a bush in the woods, and they look tasty so I eat a few. After a few minutes I feel nauseous and dizzy. Hmm, seems like the berries are poisonous. I should stop eating the berries, right? By your logic, no, I should keep eating them, because in order for my initial decision to eat them to be justified, I have to become better off after eating berries than I was before. I'm not better off right now, so my only choice is to eat more.
The initial decision to eat berries was the Bears decision to pass on Stroud and keep Fields. Feeling nauseous and dizzy is the Bears watching Stroud ball out while Fields continues to sputter and not improve at a fast enough rate. Now, the decision to keep Fields again is the decision to shove a dozen more berries down your throat, a choice that by all indications will kill you. You're reasoning that this is the correct decision because you somehow can't just admit that you made a mistake by eating the berries in the first place (passing on Stroud)?
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 10:55:32 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2024, 08:53:32 AM
There seems to be growing consensus that they will draft a QB and move on from Fields. I am not so sure that's what they should do or what they will do. I would feel differently if it was a full reset with a new head coach and GM, but now it just seems like an odd dynamic to try to upgrade on Fields. They kind of already committed to him by trading down last year. Why would you not do the same this year after he improved significantly last season? They could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields. If he isn't, the whole regime is essentially a failure and probably gets fired, and Stroud led the Texans to the divisional playoffs, so that's a really high bar to clear. The Bears are typically a conservative operation, and the safe option here is to keep Fields and get a haul for the #1 pick, so I could still see it happening even if the consensus disagrees.
No, as I've said many times here and elsewhere the question is very simple and none of the baggage matters.
Who is more likely to be a franchise quarterback: Fields or Williams?
...
If Williams doesn't work out, the entire regime will be fired. If Fields doesn't work out, the entire regime will also be fired. So that point falls flat.
It's two different questions being asked.
- First, who is more likely to be a franchise QB? If you draft a franchise QB, you keep your job. (FWIW, I would give a slight edge to Williams.)
- Second, who is more likely to be a bust? If you draft a bust, you lose your job...
...but you already have 3 years of information on one of the choices, and that's a huge factor. I would give Williams a slightly higher chance of being a bust, given how much of a crapshoot the draft is, and the information we have about Fields which is that he is a good player that has improved over time. IMO, Fields is unlikely to implode with more pieces around him that you could add with the draft haul. You would
not have the draft capital to add those pieces if you draft Williams, so Williams has to be
significantly better, not just a little bit better. So, is the risk worth the reward? Those two questions have to be weighed in tandem. You can't only look at the upside without looking at the downside.
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 10:55:32 AM
QuoteThey could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields.
It's hard to even articulate how bizarre this take is because it's just like elementary level common sense has failed you here.
Say I find berries growing on a bush in the woods, and they look tasty so I eat a few. After a few minutes I feel nauseous and dizzy. Hmm, seems like the berries are poisonous. I should stop eating the berries, right? By your logic, no, I should keep eating them, because in order for my initial decision to eat them to be justified, I have to become better off after eating berries than I was before. I'm not better off right now, so my only choice is to eat more.
The initial decision to eat berries was the Bears decision to pass on Stroud and keep Fields. Feeling nauseous and dizzy is the Bears watching Stroud ball out while Fields continues to sputter and not improve at a fast enough rate. Now, the decision to keep Fields again is the decision to shove a dozen more berries down your throat, a choice that by all indications will kill you. You're reasoning that this is the correct decision because you somehow can't just admit that you made a mistake by eating the berries in the first place (passing on Stroud)?
OK, I was honestly expecting some pushback on this from a Bryce Young angle, but not from this angle.
I just don't understand why the berries are poisonous in this analogy. Fields is not a terrible QB. Stroud is better, but we didn't know that before. It's more like... I don't know, there's 100 berry bushes and you can only eat from one bush at a time. 20 of the bushes are poisonous, 60 have berries that turn mushy in various degrees before you can eat them (but are still edible), and 20 win you a Super Bowl. Do you risk switching to a new bush? If you were going to risk it, why would you waste a whole year eating from the bush you have now only to find out that (a) the berries you're eating now are getting juicier and more flavorful, while (b) the risk of picking a new bush is essentially unchanged?
That's why I emphasized that it's the
same people making the decisions. It's completely illogical to pass on a QB last year but go for one this year
unless you think it's a 100% guarantee that this year's best QB is as good or better than last year's best QB. It's great for the coach/GM to be self-aware and acknowledge they made a mistake by passing last time, but their goal is not to do the opposite thing just because they were wrong last time... in fact, that's a sure fire way to get it wrong again. Their goal to win games (and therefore keep their jobs), and that's where the risk/reward comes into play. If they're going to draft Williams, they need to be very certain that he will be a franchise QB (essentially synonymous with "as good as Stroud or better").
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 21, 2024, 07:59:13 AM
Quote from: jlam on February 21, 2024, 12:07:14 AM
Currently, uniforms. And hoping that (Travis) Kelce gets traded to the Bears.
Out of curiosity, why would he?
Indeed. If Kelce were to leave the Chiefs (and he won't), I'd expect he'd want the Chargers or Rams. <cough>LA/TS<cough>
Re: the Fields conversation, I think thspfc and webny99 are both missing another option/angle here.
If they're still not sure on Fields, but they're optimistic, they could basically stall by trading the pick to someone who they think will be bad next year no matter what they do. I know it's not an exact science, but I think most of us had Carolina (whose pick Chicago is using) in the bottom 3 in the NFL before the season started. If Chicago can get the exact same kind of deal as they did last year (very high pick this year, a first rounder next year, plus stuff), it kicks the can down the line for one more year and they'll have more time to evaluate. Obviously, if they think Caleb Williams is the second coming of Patrick Mahomes (take that, Brady lovers) then this doesn't work. But if they just think he's a, say, Herbert quality QB at worst? They could just wait until the 2025 draft and replace Fields then. It's not Williams vs. Fields; it's Williams vs. Fields for a year and then they can figure it out.
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2024, 01:32:02 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 10:55:32 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2024, 08:53:32 AM
There seems to be growing consensus that they will draft a QB and move on from Fields. I am not so sure that's what they should do or what they will do. I would feel differently if it was a full reset with a new head coach and GM, but now it just seems like an odd dynamic to try to upgrade on Fields. They kind of already committed to him by trading down last year. Why would you not do the same this year after he improved significantly last season? They could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields. If he isn't, the whole regime is essentially a failure and probably gets fired, and Stroud led the Texans to the divisional playoffs, so that's a really high bar to clear. The Bears are typically a conservative operation, and the safe option here is to keep Fields and get a haul for the #1 pick, so I could still see it happening even if the consensus disagrees.
No, as I've said many times here and elsewhere the question is very simple and none of the baggage matters.
Who is more likely to be a franchise quarterback: Fields or Williams?
...
If Williams doesn't work out, the entire regime will be fired. If Fields doesn't work out, the entire regime will also be fired. So that point falls flat.
It's two different questions being asked.
- First, who is more likely to be a franchise QB? If you draft a franchise QB, you keep your job. (FWIW, I would give a slight edge to Williams.)
- Second, who is more likely to be a bust? If you draft a bust, you lose your job...
...but you already have 3 years of information on one of the choices, and that's a huge factor. I would give Williams a slightly higher chance of being a bust, given how much of a crapshoot the draft is, and the information we have about Fields which is that he is a good player that has improved over time. IMO, Fields is unlikely to implode with more pieces around him that you could add with the draft haul. You would not have the draft capital to add those pieces if you draft Williams, so Williams has to be significantly better, not just a little bit better. So, is the risk worth the reward? Those two questions have to be weighed in tandem. You can't only look at the upside without looking at the downside.
As I said, everyone in that organization is on thin ice, and simply avoiding a monumental bust won't be enough to save them. They need to make it happen now, and they need to go with whichever QB gives them the best chance to do that. Another year of mediocre play from both Fields and the team as a whole will have them all fired.
The 3 years of information we have on Fields is that he entered the league as one of the worst passers of all starting QBs and has marginally improved each year since, to being a merely below average passer. We also know that he's essentially useless in the final five minutes of close games, and has literally not once in his career been the main reason the Bears won a game. The same cannot be said of any franchise quarterback ever.
It's been shown time and time and time and time again in this league over the past decade or so that if you don't have the guy at QB, you are not going to find sustained success. To me, the difference in outlook between Williams and Fields has to be quite small in order for the trade compensation to come into play.
I don't think it's quite small; I think Fields is not a franchise QB and never will be. Why should I believe year 4 will be different? Different as in, we're not having these conversations again a year from now. Will he continue to improve? Probably. Will year 4 actually be different, though?
The Packers know they have their guy. The Texans know it. The Chiefs and Bengals and Chargers knew it within 8 NFL starts. The Ravens knew it within two seasons. The Eagles knew it midway through Hurts' second full season as a starter. The Bills knew it with Allen, who is a good example of a late blooming QB, by the middle of his third season when he was in the MVP conversation.
And with Fields? Everyone's still arguing about it after 3 years and it's somehow the storyline of the entire offseason. That's just not where you want to be. The only precedent I can think of for a QB who played at Fields' level or lower through his first 3 seasons eventually becoming a semi-long term starter is Geno Smith, and it took him almost a decade.
All that is to say, I'll take a 50% chance over a 10% chance. If that means sacrificing draft picks, so be it. Those draft picks won't look so nice when the entire team is being held back by a subpar QB again.
Quote
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 10:55:32 AM
QuoteThey could have had CJ Stroud last year, so Caleb Williams has to be better than Stroud for it to make sense to move on from Fields.
It's hard to even articulate how bizarre this take is because it's just like elementary level common sense has failed you here.
Say I find berries growing on a bush in the woods, and they look tasty so I eat a few. After a few minutes I feel nauseous and dizzy. Hmm, seems like the berries are poisonous. I should stop eating the berries, right? By your logic, no, I should keep eating them, because in order for my initial decision to eat them to be justified, I have to become better off after eating berries than I was before. I'm not better off right now, so my only choice is to eat more.
The initial decision to eat berries was the Bears decision to pass on Stroud and keep Fields. Feeling nauseous and dizzy is the Bears watching Stroud ball out while Fields continues to sputter and not improve at a fast enough rate. Now, the decision to keep Fields again is the decision to shove a dozen more berries down your throat, a choice that by all indications will kill you. You're reasoning that this is the correct decision because you somehow can't just admit that you made a mistake by eating the berries in the first place (passing on Stroud)?
OK, I was honestly expecting some pushback on this from a Bryce Young angle, but not from this angle.
I just don't understand why the berries are poisonous in this analogy. Fields is not a terrible QB. Stroud is better, but we didn't know that before. It's more like... I don't know, there's 100 berry bushes and you can only eat from one bush at a time. 20 of the bushes are poisonous, 60 have berries that turn mushy in various degrees before you can eat them (but are still edible), and 20 win you a Super Bowl. Do you risk switching to a new bush? If you were going to risk it, why would you waste a whole year eating from the bush you have now only to find out that (a) the berries you're eating now are getting juicier and more flavorful, while (b) the risk of picking a new bush is essentially unchanged?
The analogy wasn't supposed to be that deep. It was just supposed to highlight the sunk cost fallacy in the statement. To simplify it further and remove the nuance:
1. I make a bad decision
2. I am faced with another decision: double down on my first decision or change plans
My rationale for making the second decision needs to be based on what I think the best choice is for me in that moment.
Which raises the question: what is the best choice? I explained above that I think the best choice is to draft Williams and trade Fields. Whether or not that's true is a different question entirely, and highly subjective. But what's not subjective is that making a decision that you believe is bad, just because that's the way you did it before, is stupid.
Quote
It's completely illogical to pass on a QB last year but go for one this year unless you think it's a 100% guarantee that this year's best QB is as good or better than last year's best QB.
No it's not. Additional information comes to light over time. This year is not last year.
Also, whenever the NFL draft is involved the value "100%" should never be brought up because it does not exist.
If you think Fields showed enough this year to make it the right choice at this moment, all things considered including draft capital, to stick with him over Williams? Be my guest. None of us have a crystal ball. But if you don't think so - if you agree that moving on is optimal - then I just don't understand how you bring yourself to these conclusions.
Quote
It's great for the coach/GM to be self-aware and acknowledge they made a mistake by passing last time, but their goal is not to do the opposite thing just because they were wrong last time... in fact, that's a sure fire way to get it wrong again.
I never said anything along the lines of "they got it wrong last time so they should do the opposite". That's not my reasoning at all.
QuoteTheir goal is to win games (and therefore keep their jobs)
Yep
Quoteand that's where the risk/reward comes into play.
And my position is that in this risk/reward situation, they should trade Fields and draft Williams. I think that will help them win games and keep their jobs.
Quote
If they're going to draft Williams, they need to be very certain that he will be a franchise QB (essentially synonymous with "as good as Stroud or better").
If you think that Fields will be a franchise QB, I understand this position. If you don't - which it appears is the case - then no, you don't need to be certain, you just need to recognize that Williams has a very fair shot at becoming one, and Fields does not. I'll take 50% over 10%.
Every additional word I read regarding Justin Fields makes me more confident in my opinion, because the fact that these discussions are still happening screams loud and clear to me about what the Bears should do.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 21, 2024, 02:20:51 PM
Re: the Fields conversation, I think thspfc and webny99 are both missing another option/angle here.
If they're still not sure on Fields, but they're optimistic, they could basically stall by trading the pick to someone who they think will be bad next year no matter what they do. I know it's not an exact science, but I think most of us had Carolina (whose pick Chicago is using) in the bottom 3 in the NFL before the season started. If Chicago can get the exact same kind of deal as they did last year (very high pick this year, a first rounder next year, plus stuff), it kicks the can down the line for one more year and they'll have more time to evaluate. Obviously, if they think Caleb Williams is the second coming of Patrick Mahomes (take that, Brady lovers) then this doesn't work. But if they just think he's a, say, Herbert quality QB at worst? They could just wait until the 2025 draft and replace Fields then. It's not Williams vs. Fields; it's Williams vs. Fields for a year and then they can figure it out.
That makes sense to me, and I would certainly expect them to be selective about who they trade the pick to if they do trade it.
But... your last sentence gives me pause because on the off chance Fields regresses, his trade value (which I think would be pretty high right now) could go down significantly, and there's no guarantee there will be any top QB prospects in 2025. If it's a repeat of 2022 with no potential franchise altering QB talents while Williams balls out somewhere else, that's a big yikes too.
Quote from: webny99 on February 21, 2024, 03:46:35 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on February 21, 2024, 02:20:51 PM
Re: the Fields conversation, I think thspfc and webny99 are both missing another option/angle here.
If they're still not sure on Fields, but they're optimistic, they could basically stall by trading the pick to someone who they think will be bad next year no matter what they do. I know it's not an exact science, but I think most of us had Carolina (whose pick Chicago is using) in the bottom 3 in the NFL before the season started. If Chicago can get the exact same kind of deal as they did last year (very high pick this year, a first rounder next year, plus stuff), it kicks the can down the line for one more year and they'll have more time to evaluate. Obviously, if they think Caleb Williams is the second coming of Patrick Mahomes (take that, Brady lovers) then this doesn't work. But if they just think he's a, say, Herbert quality QB at worst? They could just wait until the 2025 draft and replace Fields then. It's not Williams vs. Fields; it's Williams vs. Fields for a year and then they can figure it out.
That makes sense to me, and I would certainly expect them to be selective about who they trade the pick to if they do trade it.
But... your last sentence gives me pause because on the off chance Fields regresses, his trade value (which I think would be pretty high right now) could go down significantly, and there's no guarantee there will be any top QB prospects in 2025. If it's a repeat of 2022 with no potential franchise altering QB talents while Williams balls out somewhere else, that's a big yikes too.
That's why you have to get a haul in this trade. I would argue that the QBs in this class are graded higher than they were last year. So, the Bears should be able to get even more this year. That helps offset any possible losses from a drastic Fields regression.
Da Bears should sign Mitch Trubisky in free agency. They should then trade Fields to the Steelers or something along with their 1st pick to get Najee and/or Pickens.
Quote from: jlam on February 21, 2024, 04:01:58 PM
Da Bears should sign Mitch Trubisky in free agency. They should then trade Fields to the Steelers or something along with their 1st pick to get Najee and/or Pickens.
So bring back the QB they were already done with??
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 03:40:58 PM
As I said, everyone in that organization is on thin ice, and simply avoiding a monumental bust won't be enough to save them. They need to make it happen now, and they need to go with whichever QB gives them the best chance to do that. Another year of mediocre play from both Fields and the team as a whole will have them all fired.
The picks they could get from trading down should significantly improve the roster, and that plus further improvement from Fields should be enough to make the playoffs. If it's not, it's a failure by both the coach and GM and they should be fired regardless.
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 03:40:58 PM
All that is to say, I'll take a 50% chance over a 10% chance. If that means sacrificing draft picks, so be it. Those draft picks won't look so nice when the entire team is being held back by a subpar QB again.
We just disagree on those percentages. Of becoming a locked-in franchise starter, I'd say 50% is the upper end of fair for Williams, but I'd say more like 30-35% for Fields factoring in the dual threat potential. Honestly, Fields' inability to win close games is more concerning to me than the pure talent. But some of that blame falls on the coaching, too (remember when he essentially blamed the coaches for overloading him with information, slowing down his processing). I think if they draft better protection and he can develop his passing game a bit, they should be good enough to not be playing from behind all the time and for the close game thing not to matter as much - sort of like Ravens-lite. That always seemed to be the vision of this coach/GM, but drafting Williams feels like a pretty big departure from that.
Quote from: thspfc on February 21, 2024, 03:40:58 PM
If you think Fields showed enough this year to make it the right choice at this moment, all things considered including draft capital, to stick with him over Williams? Be my guest. None of us have a crystal ball. But if you don't think so - if you agree that moving on is optimal - then I just don't understand how you bring yourself to these conclusions.
Of course I don't know what the right choice is. I just see a lot of risk both ways and think having the #1 pick is a huge opportunity but also a huge responsibility. From an organizational perspective, I'm not sure I would trust Poles and Eberflus to be the ones to make that decision - which is probably a sign they shouldn't have kept them! - but that ship has sailed.
Thanks to a lousy NBA All-Star Game in which the winning team broke 200 points for the first time ever, the Pro Bowl wins the TV ratings war this year.
Quote from: Henry on February 21, 2024, 10:14:44 PM
Thanks to a lousy NBA All-Star Game in which the winning team broke 200 points for the first time ever, the Pro Bowl wins the TV ratings war this year.
There was a pro bowl this year? </s>
I'm just seriously looking forward to this upcoming NFL season here in NE Wisconsin, The Packers have a VERY young team that is gelling and a highly competent front office that can hire and retain excellent coaches and draft similarly good players. Life is good! :cool:
Mike
Yeah, the Packers were looking very good at the end of the season. I wouldn't be surprised if they won the division next year, but the NFC North may be among the toughest divisions this season. Hopefully they have a good draft.
I think the Giants potentially being in the running for Drake Maye says a lot about Daniel Jones.
If I were the Patriots, I'd keep Mac Jones for at least one more year to see how well he works with Jerod Mayo, rather than go for a quarterback third overall.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 01, 2024, 04:29:26 PM
If I were the Patriots, I'd keep Mac Jones for at least one more year to see how well he works with Jerod Mayo, rather than go for a quarterback third overall.
15 AFC teams want this for the Patriots. ;-)
Russell Wilson being released by the Broncos. All of my takes proved correct. Now, as comeuppance, he'll sign with the Vikings. Then my fandom can be over.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 04, 2024, 04:29:24 PM
Russell Wilson being released by the Broncos. All of my takes proved correct. Now, as comeuppance, he'll sign with the Vikings. Then my fandom can be over.
Even with guaranteed money for the upcoming season, huh...
https://apnews.com/article/jason-kelce-retires-philadelphia-eagles-a05268e22b31c1aba750ba52df85618e
Jason Kelce to retire from the Eagles.
The cap hit that the Broncos will be taking with cutting Wilson will be making the next few NFL seasons bleak for fans in the Front Range area.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on March 05, 2024, 02:01:06 PM
The cap hit that the Broncos will be taking with cutting Wilson will be making the next few NFL seasons bleak for fans in the Front Range area.
Mike
And keeping Wilson's horrible, mediocre play would make the next few NFL seasons bleak for fans. So, it's slightly, marginally better to cut him loose and work off the penalty.
I find it ironic that Wilson's done very well in my neck of the woods (leading the Seahawks to two Super Bowls and winning the first time around), but not that good in my brother Jeff's (no playoffs for the Broncos). Maybe he can come to Chicago and mentor Fields; I know it's highly unlikely that it happens, but it's something I would like to see.
So I guess Saquon Barkley is finally gone from the Giants???
Quote from: epzik8 on March 06, 2024, 10:53:34 AM
So I guess Saquon Barkley is finally gone from the Giants???
As always, it'll be interesting to see what the market is for RBs. I wouldn't mind my Vikings taking a stab at him since we released Mattison (and likely aren't re-signing Cousins) if the price is right, but I'm guessing someone like the Raiders will overpay.
Quote from: mgk920 on March 05, 2024, 02:01:06 PM
The cap hit that the Broncos will be taking with cutting Wilson will be making the next few NFL seasons bleak for fans in the Front Range area.
Mike
Typical Broncos fashion. Very typical. Yet another handful of playoff bids potentially wasted. They'll probably rotate through 20 different QB's and receivers, and maybe a handful less on defense, all the while the fandom ruses an idea to send the coach and ownership group their last thank you note ending with "please excuse yourself to the doorway on your left and don't let the door hit you in the ass as you depart" that may take a while to cop up.
Mitch Trubisky ending up in Buffalo further fuels my desire to see Mason Rudolph as the starter in Pittsburgh.
Breaking: Mac Jones is being traded from the Patriots to his hometown Jacksonville Jaguars.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 10, 2024, 11:32:46 AM
Breaking: Mac Jones is being traded from the Patriots to his hometown Jacksonville Jaguars.
Makes me wonder what the Jags are planning with Trevor Lawrence.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 10, 2024, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on March 10, 2024, 11:32:46 AM
Breaking: Mac Jones is being traded from the Patriots to his hometown Jacksonville Jaguars.
Makes me wonder what the Jags are planning with Trevor Lawrence.
Nothing different. Jones is the backup.
In more significant news, the Chiefs are bringing back both Chris Jones and L'Jarius Sneed. Jones' new contract is an overpay for a DT that will be 35 by the time it expires, but I still think it's a good move. Reid and Kelce have limited years left. The team is going to need a reboot in a few seasons anyway, so for now, hold onto the guys that have won you Super Bowls as long as they're still productive. Mahomes will be 29 next season - he's likely at least halfway through his prime already. No time to waste. As for Sneed, by tagging him they buy themselves an extra year to find a more permanent option at starting corner opposite McDuffie, since they're obviously taking a WR in the first round this upcoming draft.
The Bucs also brought back two key players in Baker Mayfield and Mike Evans. They get Mayfield on a relatively cheap deal, which was pretty much the best case scenario. Evans' $26m/year deal is expensive, but it only being two years is favorable, considering Evans is 30.
Of course, the gamble is that if Evans continues to play at a near-elite level over the next two years, they'll be facing the dilemma of either a) giving a 32-year-old WR a record contract, or b) letting an elite WR walk in free agency, getting nothing in return.
I have a bold trade prediction: Justin Fields goes to the Ravens. With each day that passes, it becomes more clear that teams do not view him as a starter. Tyler Huntley is a free agent. Fields is a perfect scheme fit, better than Huntley, and Lamar has an injury history. Baltimore might also think they can flip him for a profit (in terms of draft capital) if he sits behind Lamar for a year and they trade him away in 2025 for more than what they paid in 2024.
Russell Wilson will sign with the Steelers.
Quote from: thspfc on March 11, 2024, 12:05:22 AM
In more significant news, the Chiefs are bringing back both Chris Jones and L'Jarius Sneed. Jones' new contract is an overpay for a DT that will be 35 by the time it expires, but I still think it's a good move. Reid and Kelce have limited years left. The team is going to need a reboot in a few seasons anyway, so for now, hold onto the guys that have won you Super Bowls as long as they're still productive. Mahomes will be 29 next season - he's likely at least halfway through his prime already. No time to waste. As for Sneed, by tagging him they buy themselves an extra year to find a more permanent option at starting corner opposite McDuffie, since they're obviously taking a WR in the first round this upcoming draft.
The Chiefs probably aren't bringing back Sneed. Highly likely he gets traded.
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
At least former Washingtonians Cousins and Heinicke will presumably be teammates in Atlanta.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
For the amount of money and years Atlanta handed Cousins, they can have him. I won't lose any sleep over not matching that even if it may have been better in the short term to keep him.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 11, 2024, 06:19:57 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
For the amount of money and years Atlanta handed Cousins, they can have him. I won't lose any sleep over not matching that even if it may have been better in the short term to keep him.
And now the Vikes signed Darnold which screams "half to one year solution while we try to draft Jayden Daniels and give him some time to develop".
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 12, 2024, 10:19:46 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 11, 2024, 06:19:57 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
For the amount of money and years Atlanta handed Cousins, they can have him. I won't lose any sleep over not matching that even if it may have been better in the short term to keep him.
And now the Vikes signed Darnold which screams "half to one year solution while we try to draft Jayden Daniels and give him some time to develop".
Jayden will be in Washington.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 12, 2024, 10:20:27 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 12, 2024, 10:19:46 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 11, 2024, 06:19:57 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
For the amount of money and years Atlanta handed Cousins, they can have him. I won't lose any sleep over not matching that even if it may have been better in the short term to keep him.
And now the Vikes signed Darnold which screams "half to one year solution while we try to draft Jayden Daniels and give him some time to develop".
Jayden will be in Washington.
Washington has a lot more holes than just a QB would fix. I would not be surprised at all to see them gobble up a bunch of another team's picks to move down.
The Packers just released both Aaron Jones and David Bakhtiari, also signed Josh Jacobs. The former wanted too much money and the latter was too injury prone.
:-/
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on March 12, 2024, 01:22:39 PM
The Packers just released both Aaron Jones and David Bakhtiari, also signed Josh Jacobs. The former wanted too much money and the latter was too injury prone.
:-/
Mike
And Aaron Jones is signing with the Vikings.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 12, 2024, 01:25:06 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 12, 2024, 01:22:39 PM
The Packers just released both Aaron Jones and David Bakhtiari, also signed Josh Jacobs. The former wanted too much money and the latter was too injury prone.
:-/
Mike
And Aaron Jones is signing with the Vikings.
The "Home for retired Packers".
Mike
I wasn't surprised that David Bakhtiari was released, since he has barely played the last few seasons. Maybe he can make more Ehlenbach's Cheese commercials. The release of Aaron Jones was a bit harder to swallow. Hopefully, Josh Jacobs will pick up where Jones left off, or Jones' release might come back to haunt the Packers (especially if he does well for the Minnesota Vikings).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 06, 2024, 11:13:03 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on March 06, 2024, 10:53:34 AM
So I guess Saquon Barkley is finally gone from the Giants???
As always, it'll be interesting to see what the market is for RBs. I wouldn't mind my Vikings taking a stab at him since we released Mattison (and likely aren't re-signing Cousins) if the price is right, but I'm guessing someone like the Raiders will overpay.
He ended up with their hated rivals in Philly. And former Giant Tiki Barber said that "he's dead to me". Speaking of Philly, a Barkley will be playing for a sports team based there since Matt left the Eagles in 2014. And IIRC, Saquon will be the third overall with that surname, with the other being Sir Charles himself, who starred on the 76ers from 1984 until 1992.
Quote from: mgk920 on March 12, 2024, 01:33:44 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 12, 2024, 01:25:06 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 12, 2024, 01:22:39 PM
The Packers just released both Aaron Jones and David Bakhtiari, also signed Josh Jacobs. The former wanted too much money and the latter was too injury prone.
:-/
Mike
And Aaron Jones is signing with the Vikings.
The "Home for retired Packers".
Mike
Former Packers deciding where to play, a flow chart.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNJF5SQc/GIg-W9-Ah-W4-AAYCd9.png)
Sorry about Jimmy Garoppolo
LOL Joe Flacco...dude just doesn't wanna quit.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 14, 2024, 03:17:55 PM
LOL Joe Flacco...dude just doesn't wanna quit.
Why should he? He played pretty damn well for the Browns last year.
Sam Howell and two draft picks traded to Seattle for two draft picks.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 14, 2024, 06:18:34 PM
Sam Howell and two draft picks traded to Seattle for two draft picks.
Smart business for Seattle. Howell showed some serious potential in a tough situation in Washington last year.
I'm just confused by what's going on in Washington. Trading a late round QB on a rookie contract that looked almost certain to outperform his draft status seems like a move you only make if you're extremely desperate to rebuild the roster. But they forced themselves into that situation by trading two of their best defensive players last season. They could been a playoff team with Howell but now they're committed to being mediocre to bad for at least another year.
I declare Quinn and Peters among the biggest winners of free agency 2024.
Apparently the Jets QB may be running for Vice President.
The league won't be the same without Aaron Donald...
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
And now they've made a trade to acquire another first rounder. Another trade no doubt incoming (whether for a top 3 pick or maybe Herbert).
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 15, 2024, 04:21:30 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
And now they've made a trade to acquire another first rounder. Another trade no doubt incoming (whether for a top 3 pick or maybe Herbert).
Hopefully with the Bears for the #1 pick.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 15, 2024, 04:34:01 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 15, 2024, 04:21:30 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
And now they've made a trade to acquire another first rounder. Another trade no doubt incoming (whether for a top 3 pick or maybe Herbert).
Hopefully with the Bears for the #1 pick.
I highly doubt the Bears would trade in the division. I think the Patriots are most likely to be willing trade partners.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 15, 2024, 04:41:06 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 15, 2024, 04:34:01 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 15, 2024, 04:21:30 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 11, 2024, 04:40:28 PM
With the Vikings making three early defensive moves and letting Cousins walk, I would not be surprised at all to see them package picks to trade up into the top 3 and get a QB.
And now they've made a trade to acquire another first rounder. Another trade no doubt incoming (whether for a top 3 pick or maybe Herbert).
Hopefully with the Bears for the #1 pick.
I highly doubt the Bears would trade in the division. I think the Patriots are most likely to be willing trade partners.
The Pats trading Mac Jones makes me think they're taking a QB.
Also, Kenny Pickett to the Eagles. That's a surprise, I figured he'd get a chance to start in Pittsburgh, though sharing a QB room with Russell Wilson doesn't sound appealing.
I think the Vikings could have some issues with finding a trade partner in their desired range. Obviously there's always a price, but to get the Cardinals/Chargers to sacrifice Marvin Harrison Jr./Malik Nabers will not be cheap, especially after both those teams have lost their top receiver in the last day or two. Chargers lost their top two. I would think it's going to take 11, 23, and next year's first at minimum. It also doesn't help that those two teams (AZ LAC) essentially have a duopoly on the trading-up-for-QB market, as there are four guys that are seen as elite prospects and three of them are likely to go 1-2-3. (Whether the fourth guy, JJ McCarthy, is an elite prospect depends on who you ask, but that's a different discussion that will be run into the ground on social media over the next six weeks.)
Speaking of the Chargers losing their receivers . . . the Keenan Allen "trade". Wow. Of the four guys that were plauging their cap (Allen, Williams, Mack, Bosa), he's the last one I would've given up. That offense would have been nothing without him last year. As of now Herbert will be throwing to nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. Mack had a great year but is aging, Bosa is not an elite pass rusher by any stretch right now. If they held on to Allen they could more easily afford to trade back in the draft and stockpile defense and o-line, without the dire need for a WR.
From the Bears side, the trade is a robbery and Caleb Williams is coming into an absolute dream situation.
The Vikings are also a very good spot for a rookie QB to begin his career, with the three -sons catching passes and now Aaron Jones providing consistent RB play. Ty Chandler also has star potential. The issue is that they're in a division with two Super Bowl contenders and another team that is clearly better than them, so they're unlikely to be a playoff team next year.
Quote from: thspfc on March 15, 2024, 10:31:50 PM
I think the Vikings could have some issues with finding a trade partner in their desired range. Obviously there's always a price, but to get the Cardinals/Chargers to sacrifice Marvin Harrison Jr./Malik Nabers will not be cheap, especially after both those teams have lost their top receiver in the last day or two. Chargers lost their top two. I would think it's going to take 11, 23, and next year's first at minimum. It also doesn't help that those two teams (AZ LAC) essentially have a duopoly on the trading-up-for-QB market, as there are four guys that are seen as elite prospects and three of them are likely to go 1-2-3. (Whether the fourth guy, JJ McCarthy, is an elite prospect depends on who you ask, but that's a different discussion that will be run into the ground on social media over the next six weeks.)
I don't think this means the Vikings are planning to trade up, but it does give them some flexibility to draft a QB. If they're fine with McCarthy, it could actually help them that the Chargers and Cardinals will be fine drafting non-QB's at 4 and 5 since the teams drafting 6-10 don't urgently need to draft a QB. They could then move up a bit to get McCarthy, or hope he falls to them
and pick another solid player at 23. In light of this, I don't think there's any chance McCarthy makes it past the Vikings unless one of the top 3 QB's somehow falls within their reach.
Fields got traded for less than Trey Lance did.
Quote from: thspfc on March 16, 2024, 06:58:54 PM
Fields got traded for less than Trey Lance did.
Bears should have kept him for a backup if that's all they got for him.
Wow. Hiring Arthur Smith, signing Wilson, trading Pickett away and now trading for Fields is as un-Steelers like a set of moves as anything we've seen this century. Is it just a bunch of shots at the dartboard, or an real plan to make a playoff run this season?
Quote from: epzik8 on March 07, 2024, 03:19:25 PM
Mitch Trubisky ending up in Buffalo further fuels my desire to see Mason Rudolph as the starter in Pittsburgh.
So of course they made him their third-stringer going into the season...
Why do I get the feeling that, post-trade, the Steelers won't screw up as badly as the Bears?
Chicago putting all their chips on a high draft pick for QB. I'm sure that'll work this time.
:popcorn:
No one makes that pick more poorly than Da Bears.
... Maybe Cleveland...
I don't know if I like Green Bay letting Jones go free and bringing in Josh Jacobs. The way he acted with the Raiders last off season gives me tremendous pause. Tells me he's probably a head case. Jones was great when he was healthy; or at least good enough for the Packers to play complimentary football. I know that generation of backs is getting "old" but I feel like Jones has more in the tank mentally than Jacobs does. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I'm pessimistic about Jacobs.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 18, 2024, 12:10:40 PM
Chicago putting all their chips on a high draft pick for QB. I'm sure that'll work this time.
:popcorn:
No one makes that pick more poorly than Da Bears.
... Maybe Cleveland...
I don't know if I like Green Bay letting Jones go free and bringing in Josh Jacobs. The way he acted with the Raiders last off season gives me tremendous pause. Tells me he's probably a head case. Jones was great when he was healthy; or at least good enough for the Packers to play complimentary football. I know that generation of backs is getting "old" but I feel like Jones has more in the tank mentally than Jacobs does. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I'm pessimistic about Jacobs.
Just for fun, here are the QBs the Bears have drafted in the 1st Rd since 1950...
1950 Bob Williams (2)
1982 Jim McMahon (5)
1987 Jim Harbaugh (26)
1999 Cade McNown (12)
2003 Rex Grossman (22)
2017 Mitch Trubisky (2)
2021 Justin Fields (11)
Where did J.J. McCarthy come from all of a sudden?
Quote from: epzik8 on March 22, 2024, 06:26:33 PM
Where did J.J. McCarthy come from all of a sudden?
The National Champs?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 22, 2024, 09:00:44 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on March 22, 2024, 06:26:33 PM
Where did J.J. McCarthy come from all of a sudden?
The National Champs?
Somehow, that already slipped out of my mind.
I caught some of Jayden Daniels' LSU Pro Day appearance today. He's going to be our QB1 in Landover come September. Mel Kiper is seldom wrong.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 27, 2024, 04:00:16 PMI caught some of Jayden Daniels' LSU Pro Day appearance today. He's going to be our QB1 in Landover come September. Mel Kiper is seldom wrong.
Like when he said it was a huge mistake for the Colts to draft Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf?
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 27, 2024, 04:13:18 PMQuote from: epzik8 on March 27, 2024, 04:00:16 PMI caught some of Jayden Daniels' LSU Pro Day appearance today. He's going to be our QB1 in Landover come September. Mel Kiper is seldom wrong.
Like when he said it was a huge mistake for the Colts to draft Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf?
Kiper was wrong on that one. Ryan Leaf is a dick.
Quote from: Henry on March 27, 2024, 11:12:13 PMQuote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 27, 2024, 04:13:18 PMQuote from: epzik8 on March 27, 2024, 04:00:16 PMI caught some of Jayden Daniels' LSU Pro Day appearance today. He's going to be our QB1 in Landover come September. Mel Kiper is seldom wrong.
Like when he said it was a huge mistake for the Colts to draft Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf?
Kiper was wrong on that one. Ryan Leaf is a dick.
Ryan Leaf is an alcoholic in recovery. I'm sure that contributed to his dick-ness.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 27, 2024, 04:00:16 PMI caught some of Jayden Daniels' LSU Pro Day appearance today. He's going to be our QB1 in Landover come September. Mel Kiper is seldom wrong.
I sure hope you were being sarcastic. For your viewing pleasure, here is "Every NFL Team's Draft Pick that Mel Kiper was HORRIBLY Wrong About".
https://youtu.be/uGYeW-lFDFY?si=Jtw3qRSnpRoa_3Qw
I agree with Mike Tannenbaum that the Cowboys should pursue Michael Penix Jr., just because I'm tired of hearing about Dak Prescott.
Well, my fellow Washingtonians on socials can't decide whether Daniels or Maye will be better than us.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 02, 2024, 04:00:41 PMWell, my fellow Washingtonians on socials can't decide whether Daniels or Maye will be better than us.
My QB rankings:
1 Williams
2 Penix
3 May
4 Daniels
5 Nix
6 McCarthy
Stefon Diggs has been traded to the Texans for a 2025 second round draft pick. Didn't think this would really happen, but history has a way of repeating itself.
https://www.nfl.com/news/bills-trade-wr-stefon-diggs-to-texans-for-2025-second-round-draft-pick
Quote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 12:41:37 PMStefon Diggs has been traded to the Texans for a 2025 second round draft pick. Didn't think this would really happen, but history has a way of repeating itself.
https://www.nfl.com/news/bills-trade-wr-stefon-diggs-to-texans-for-2025-second-round-draft-pick
Vikings definitely won the trade when they got rid of him. He's a diva even by WR standards.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 03, 2024, 01:20:42 PMQuote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 12:41:37 PMStefon Diggs has been traded to the Texans for a 2025 second round draft pick. Didn't think this would really happen, but history has a way of repeating itself.
https://www.nfl.com/news/bills-trade-wr-stefon-diggs-to-texans-for-2025-second-round-draft-pick
Vikings definitely won the trade when they got rid of him. He's a diva even by WR standards.
That seems like hindsight bias to me and I don't think it would be talked about that way if they hadn't replaced him with Jefferson. The Bills got 3.5 years of a true #1 WR, plus arguably the trade opened a Super Bowl window for them which is worth something too. It was the rare trade that worked out for both sides, we knew that already and whatever happens in 2024 and beyond doesn't change that.
Quote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 02:17:22 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on April 03, 2024, 01:20:42 PMQuote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 12:41:37 PMStefon Diggs has been traded to the Texans for a 2025 second round draft pick. Didn't think this would really happen, but history has a way of repeating itself.
https://www.nfl.com/news/bills-trade-wr-stefon-diggs-to-texans-for-2025-second-round-draft-pick
Vikings definitely won the trade when they got rid of him. He's a diva even by WR standards.
That seems like hindsight bias to me and I don't think it would be talked about that way if they hadn't replaced him with Jefferson. The Bills got 3.5 years of a true #1 WR, plus arguably the trade opened a Super Bowl window for them which is worth something too. It was the rare trade that worked out for both sides, we knew that already and whatever happens in 2024 and beyond doesn't change that.
Sure, there's some hindsight, but Diggs has always pissed and moaned if he felt like he wasn't getting the ball enough. He's a hell of a receiver, but he's not too far away from Antonio Brown as far as mentality. I think the Vikings were happy to offload him and didn't need a lot of convincing. Now he's worn out his welcome in Buffalo, too. I would guess Houston might get two years of him being happy before he becomes a locker room cancer again.
The only thing I know about Diggs is what he did in this clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJzpoj_NxqQ
Have the Texans officially had the fastest rebuild in NFL history?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 03, 2024, 02:25:32 PMQuote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 02:17:22 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on April 03, 2024, 01:20:42 PMQuote from: webny99 on April 03, 2024, 12:41:37 PMStefon Diggs has been traded to the Texans for a 2025 second round draft pick. Didn't think this would really happen, but history has a way of repeating itself.
https://www.nfl.com/news/bills-trade-wr-stefon-diggs-to-texans-for-2025-second-round-draft-pick
Vikings definitely won the trade when they got rid of him. He's a diva even by WR standards.
That seems like hindsight bias to me and I don't think it would be talked about that way if they hadn't replaced him with Jefferson. The Bills got 3.5 years of a true #1 WR, plus arguably the trade opened a Super Bowl window for them which is worth something too. It was the rare trade that worked out for both sides, we knew that already and whatever happens in 2024 and beyond doesn't change that.
Sure, there's some hindsight, but Diggs has always pissed and moaned if he felt like he wasn't getting the ball enough. He's a hell of a receiver, but he's not too far away from Antonio Brown as far as mentality. I think the Vikings were happy to offload him and didn't need a lot of convincing. Now he's worn out his welcome in Buffalo, too. I would guess Houston might get two years of him being happy before he becomes a locker room cancer again.
And now the Texans just axed the last three years of his contract, making him a free agent after this year. Bizarre.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 04, 2024, 03:46:01 PMHave the Texans officially had the fastest rebuild in NFL history?
No, they were terrible for 3 years.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 04, 2024, 03:46:01 PMHave the Texans officially had the fastest rebuild in NFL history?
Green Bay post-Rodgers.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 05, 2024, 09:12:12 AMQuote from: epzik8 on April 04, 2024, 03:46:01 PMHave the Texans officially had the fastest rebuild in NFL history?
Green Bay post-Rodgers.
For either of these, I'm going to need to see more than one year of being good before I'm okay saying that they're "rebuilt".
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 05, 2024, 10:30:58 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 05, 2024, 09:12:12 AMQuote from: epzik8 on April 04, 2024, 03:46:01 PMHave the Texans officially had the fastest rebuild in NFL history?
Green Bay post-Rodgers.
For either of these, I'm going to need to see more than one year of being good before I'm okay saying that they're "rebuilt".
Also, Texans and Packers are somewhat apples and oranges. Texans went from NFL laughingstock for multiple seasons running to pretty good in one season. Packers went from great with Rodgers to pretty good with Love in a season and a half, but I'm not sure that qualifies as a "rebuild" from a roster perspective.
All of a sudden, Jayden Daniels doesn't appear headed to Landover after whatever that quarterback visit was.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:09 PMAll of a sudden, Jayden Daniels doesn't appear headed to Landover after whatever that quarterback visit was.
I think this might end up benefiting the Vikings efforts to trade up. I have a hunch Daniels might fall a bit, perhaps into an easier range for the Vikings to trade into.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on April 20, 2024, 08:33:59 AMQuote from: epzik8 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:09 PMAll of a sudden, Jayden Daniels doesn't appear headed to Landover after whatever that quarterback visit was.
I think this might end up benefiting the Vikings efforts to trade up. I have a hunch Daniels might fall a bit, perhaps into an easier range for the Vikings to trade into.
I feel it would be a coup for the Vikings. I'm really uninterested in any of the QBs below Drake Maye, so that would have me feeling a lot better.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan3561 on April 20, 2024, 12:26:17 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on April 20, 2024, 08:33:59 AMQuote from: epzik8 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:09 PMAll of a sudden, Jayden Daniels doesn't appear headed to Landover after whatever that quarterback visit was.
I think this might end up benefiting the Vikings efforts to trade up. I have a hunch Daniels might fall a bit, perhaps into an easier range for the Vikings to trade into.
I feel it would be a coup for the Vikings. I'm really uninterested in any of the QBs below Drake Maye, so that would have me feeling a lot better.
I just don't want us (Commanders) to trade the second pick to the Raiders as some are suggesting, if it means we have to wait another year for a top prospect who may not be as capable as any of this year's.