News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

NFL (2024 Season)

Started by webny99, February 04, 2020, 02:35:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

CoreySamson

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.
Buc-ee's and QuikTrip fanboy. Clincher of FM roads. Proponent of the TX U-turn.

My Route Log
My Clinches

Now on mobrule and Travel Mapping!


jeffandnicole

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.

webny99

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?

jeffandnicole

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?

TheHighwayMan3561

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.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

webny99

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.

webny99

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.

webny99

#1982
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.

thspfc

Judge finally fired, only 372 days too late.

Big John

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.

Roadgeekteen

God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

webny99

#1986
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.

ilpt4u

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

JayhawkCO

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:



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.

jgb191

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.
We're so far south that we're not even considered "The South"

thspfc

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.

jeffandnicole

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.

snowc

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

CoreySamson

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.
Buc-ee's and QuikTrip fanboy. Clincher of FM roads. Proponent of the TX U-turn.

My Route Log
My Clinches

Now on mobrule and Travel Mapping!

gr8daynegb

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
So Lone Star now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

thspfc

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.

TheHighwayMan3561

#1996
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.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

webny99

#1997
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.

webny99

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.

Roadgeekteen

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.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.