If you're a Football Outsider you're a TRUE player and true players don't stick to one passion only, so here's something else to excite you while you're waiting for the game to start. How about a free $30 chip to play slot machine games for as long as you want?
Here's your thread for discussing all of the Week 15 games as they happen, starting with the Thursday Night Falcons-Jaguars game, and continuing into Sunday.
Posted by: Rivers McCown on 17 Dec 2011
284 replies , Last at
22 Dec 2011, 9:21pm by
Insancipitory
1
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
by BJR :: Thu, 12/15/2011 - 9:28pm
I think you will find that we are now in week 15....
by Just Another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2011 - 9:38pm
Nice opening drive by the Falcons, capped by Julio Jones on the underneath crossing pattern for 30 and the TD. That's actually where he's been most effective this year; a bigger, faster Wes Welker?
by SFC B (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 5:49pm
I was referring more to the look of total terror and his complete lack of confidence in his O-line to keep him vertical. Maybe he can recover, but PTSD is a very real injury.
If that's not offensive pass interference on Roddy White, I don't know what is. Seriously, he got a big hand full of jersey and tackled the guy. Where's the laundry?
So, I appreciate this is somewhat off-topic, but I scanned headlines earlier and saw "Sam Hurd arrested for cocaine". Ok. I'm sure a lot of NFL players do coke, but I guess he must have done something pretty dumb to actually get arrested. Then "Sam Hurd arrested for conspiracy to distribute". What, he was planning on throwing a big party and bought for his guests too?
by Just Another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2011 - 11:01pm
Well, this homer is pretty pleased with the game, but I can understand what you are saying. 1 net passing yard at the half for Gabbert and MJD limping to the locker room = one ugly game.
by Just Another Falcons Fan (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2011 - 11:27pm
I wonder what this will do to Jacksonville's defensive DVOA. Several scores on short fields allowed, but a couple of longer drives as well. It was just a couple of weeks ago where the Jaguars were touted as having the biggest improvement in year-to-year DVOA on defense.
Indeed. Texans 41 Titans 7 was also bigger, and I believe the highest single game DVOA score of the season. So the three biggest beatings this year have seen three different AFC South teams on the receiving end.
If you are going to bring in your backup QB in relief, why not do it constructively and allow him to run the proper offence rather than just handing off or checking down every play? As preparation in case, you know, he was required to come into a game because of an actual injury at some stage?
Who the hell comes up with these outrageously terrible matchups on TNF? I don't understand why the NFL, being that they make the schedule, doesn't set itself up with better matchups on TNF. Even if Jacksonville were magically decent (and it was a pretty good bet before the season that they wouldn't be), what sort of lure is a Jaguars/Falcons game supposed to have? These two teams are quite prone to completely shitting the bed, they have no sort of storyline or significance between the two of them being an inter-conference game, and even when both are playing well, they're frequently content to just put their head down and run, even if that means running into a brick wall for 60 minutes. Who the hell thought this might be a good game?
OK, in fairness, when the schedule was made, we had no idea that David Garrard would be gone. But still, even if they hadn't released their starting QB right before the start of the season, they still wouldn't have been a very good team. Better, MAYBE, but still not very good.
And to be clear, I'm not even talking about flexing better games into TNF - that'd be a nightmare and a half to try to do. But just looking at this week's schedule, thinking about it at the time the schedule was made, I can pick several games that looked better than this game, 9 months ago:
BAL/SD, NYJ/PHI, NE/DEN, DET/OAK, WAS/NYG.
Who decides these things? Hell, it's not like you can even call it a ratings thing, with ATL and JAX involved.
by wiesengrund (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2011 - 8:13am
I think it comes down to distribution: They want to give more than the usual dominant teams national exposure in order to counteract repetitiveness.
And also, it's not like Mike Smith has no history with Jacksonville. I guess his reunion would have been a bigger storyline. If the Jaguars wouldn't have bored everyone to death this season already.
For sure, and that's why I wouldn't be keen on throwing up yet another NFC East battle in NYG/WSH. But looking at the matchups I listed:
DET/OAK would've been between two teams thought to be on the rise and likely being involved in NFC Wild Card/AFC West division crown races.
WSH/NYG would've been a decent bet for NFCE divisional lead implications.
NYJ/PHI would've been between two hype machines with very large markets, who were both good bets to be in the playoff races.
BAL/SD would've been a solid bet with two teams that are perennially involved in the playoff races.
NE/DEN isn't quite as sexy, unless you were buying on Orton and the John Fox Broncos competing this year, but it was certainly within the realm of possibility.
It's all about making bets with a decent chance of paying off.
But that begs the question, why create a TNF brand, if you're going to devalue it by only showing crappy matchups? I have a hard time seeing the NFL do that.
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2011 - 11:47am
And the other five matchups he listed were:
11.5 vs 5.5
10 vs 10.5
10 vs 10.5
6.5 vs 7.5
9.5 vs 6.5
So basically a near random distribution and that is with picking out the 5 best games. Really the main complaint I coudl see is that the NFL didn't grab 1 of the two premiere games this week (PHIvsNYJ or SDvsBAL). Except
A) That may very well piss off the networks and reduce the value fo the TV contracts MORE than it increases the value to NFL Network.
B) Neither of those matchups looks very good today anyway.
Bull - I'll go ahead and use your pre-season numbers here, since I have no idea how to find numbers for back when the schedule was actually made.
NE/DEN - 11.5 vs 5.5 - This one isn't super sexy, but it does involve the Patriots, in Denver, against a team they consistently seem to struggle with. It really depends on if you were buying into Orton and John Fox. Moreover, if you didn't, then it was certainly foreseeable that Tebow could be playing this late in the season, although his late-game heroics were obviously not predictable.
BAL/SD - 10.0 vs 10.5 - The line on this was pretty close, and when the schedule was made, this could've easily been seen as a game with huge playoff implications. Even with SD's terrible season, this could still be a pretty interesting game, and certainly would be if Rivers were playing like Rivers.
NYJ/PHI - 10.5 vs 10.0 - This looked like an interesting game when the schedule was made, and PHI's total failure wasn't really foreseeable. How does the NYJ defense handle Vick? Does a secondary-heavy defense expose Sanchez, or do the Jets just run it? You couldn't fault them for taking this bet.
DET/OAK - 7.5 vs 6.5 - DET was a sexy wild card pick, that was supposed to be a team on the rise. OAK was kind of an enigma after firing Cable, but still has a halfway decent team there, and even if they weren't doing terribly well, is a decent matchup for DET.
WSH/NYG - 6.5 vs 9.5 - The line may not look great here, but it is an NFC-E matchup involving a NYG team that could be predicted to at least be involved in the wild card, or maybe even win their division, so this game would be important.
Any one of those matchups could've easily been guessed to be more interesting than ATL/JAX, when the schedule was created. It's not hind-sight at all, it's just making high percentage bets. Lo and behold, even with a couple surprises in there (DEN, SD, PHI), every one of these games, in Week 15, actually looks more interesting than a ATL/JAX matchup.
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2011 - 4:47pm
This has got to be one of the weakest arguments I have encountered here. Why not just use the zlions form?
[The NFL schedule makers are crap! Instead of a complicated and difficult weighting of many competing interests they should simply go by "IAmJOe"'s patented gut feel for which matchups will be the most interesting.]
You are criticizing a process you clearly have almost no knowledge or understanding of, and what grounds for criticism you do manage to scrape together are incredibly weak.
Oh, well, that's a really great response, right there. "You're stupid" and then walk away.
How about you actually try putting your big kid pants on and responding to me? What is so weak about my argument?
- I don't think its at all wrong to point out the matchups that I did as being more attractive at the time the schedule was devised, but you seem to disagree.
- I have a hard time believing that the NFL intentionally gives itself weak games, because it would devalue an NFL-exclusive product.
- You're right in that stadiums may have other commitments that restrict the NFL's flexibility in scheduling games, but I don't think that's as big of a deal as you do. The schedule is released more than 6 months before TNF games start up, and the NFL, being the NFL, generally enjoys some priority in scheduling its events. In any case, somehow I doubt every possible better matchup this week was unable to be hosted on Thursday, because of scheduling issues.
- I'm not saying we should put the Patriots on prime-time every single week. I'm saying there's better matchups that could be put on, and sometimes those may involve teams that already have a sizeable primetime presence, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the Patriots or the NFC-E every week. In fact, of the games I suggested above, only 2 of them involved the Patriots or the NFC-E.
Seriously, how about you actually tell me why I'm so stupid, or explain just how complicated the process is, since clearly you know so much more about it than I do?
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2011 - 11:40am
On top of that making a schedule is frankly a lot harder than most people realize. You have teams whose facilities have different events booked, teams who share stadiums, rules about how many home or away games you can have in a row, demands for good night games et cetera. It makes for a more difficult math problem than you would suppose.
Sure you could stick NE in a night game every week, but you don't think they would complain about that? I actually think given the constraints they have to work under the NFL schedule makers do an excellent job.
Oh, so you actually thought JAX would be a somewhat decent or remotely interesting team to watch this year? Keeping in mind, this is all pre-Manning injury. I have a hard time believing that. I guess I was the only one who totally figured the Jags to not be very good this year. Captain Foresight!!!
And I don't really have as much of a problem with ATL - match up ATL with a half dozen NFC teams that were foreseeably involved in divisional or wild card races, or even the two interesting teams in the AFC South, and you've got a decent game. NO, TB, DET, PHI, CHI, GB, HOU, IND, were all better bets for an interesting game. Of those, only IND and CHI would've been hamstrung by unforeseeable injuries, and TB by underachieving. All of those would be better bets than fricking JAX, though.
No, JAX was 8-8 and deserved a couple national TV games.
There are, what, 17 Sunday night games and 16 Monday night games, right? And how many Thursday and Saturday games? Another 10-12?
OK, so how does the NFL schedule their games? Does it make sense to put the most appealing game of the week on NFL network, which reaches the smallest number of households of the major networks? No, of course not. The best game goes to NBC, and then CBS and Fox get the best AFC and NFC games, respectively. So after those games are parcelled out, ESPN and NFL Network get what the league estimate to be roughly the 4th and 5th most appealing games of the week.
So just how easy is it to pick out the 5th most interesting game of the week? Well, rather than riding the same horse every week, the NFL mixes and matches and makes sure that all of the teams that were at least .500 the previous season get some national attention.
So while _you_ may think the Jags are a terrible team, I think the fans in Jacksonville like having their team get a little national attention. Personally, I found it a lot of fun when they showed the game in Jacksonville and showed all the fans wearing fake moustaches.
And how about that Monday night game on October 24? You remember, when the Jaguars were blown out by the Ravens? Oh...but it didn't happen that way, did it? The Jags won, 12-7.
OK, so how does the NFL schedule their games? Does it make sense to put the most appealing game of the week on NFL network, which reaches the smallest number of households of the major networks? No, of course not. The best game goes to NBC, and then CBS and Fox get the best AFC and NFC games, respectively. So after those games are parcelled out, ESPN and NFL Network get what the league estimate to be roughly the 4th and 5th most appealing games of the week.
I never said that TNF should get the only good matchups each week. I said that TNF should get better matchups than the ones they do, because it's not just this ATL/JAX game - TNF habitually showcases some pretty strange or uninteresting matchups. Moreover, the same applies to MNF too - I only watch one or two MNF games a year because that's how many good games there are, that are good enough to be worth remembering that they're even on.
If, as you suggest, there's some sort of "draft" process (which I don't particularly believe, and have never heard of) by which games are handed out to the networks, they sure are doing a pretty awful job of it, with the way the high frequency of "bust" matchups on TNF/SNF/MNF.
So just how easy is it to pick out the 5th most interesting game of the week? Well, rather than riding the same horse every week, the NFL mixes and matches and makes sure that all of the teams that were at least .500 the previous season get some national attention.
So at what point are you going to actually read what I said, and respond to that, instead of responding to points no one has made? I'm not saying they should ride the same teams every week. I'm saying they could make better decisions about putting better games on, and then illustrated the point by pointing out other, more interesting, matchups that could've replaced ATL/JAX on this week's TNF.
And not every .500+ team gets represented on primetime the following year. Stop making things up, and respond to what I'm actually arguing.
So while _you_ may think the Jags are a terrible team, I think the fans in Jacksonville like having their team get a little national attention. Personally, I found it a lot of fun when they showed the game in Jacksonville and showed all the fans wearing fake moustaches.
Oh, well, the fanbase of a team that was shown liked it, and that's all the reason we need to put a team on prime-time then? So any matchup becomes instantly defensible to air on TV because a single (and extremely small) fanbase liked it?
If you want to watch Thursday Night Mustaches, that's fine. I'd rather watch Thursday Night Football. You know, on the National Football League Network, not the National Fake Mustache Network.
And how about that Monday night game on October 24? You remember, when the Jaguars were blown out by the Ravens? Oh...but it didn't happen that way, did it? The Jags won, 12-7.
Is poster drunk? You're not honestly going to sit here and point to a 12-7 cripple fight of a game that bordered on unwatchable, even for those who enjoy defensive football, as a shining example of what a good and/or interesting team the Jaguars are, are you? But I guess it's ok that such an awful game was nationally televised on MNF, because "Jaguar fans liked it". Right?
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Sat, 12/17/2011 - 3:23pm
I think the only grounds it was being criticized on there were the amount of the country those two teams have core fan-bases in. You are always going to have that problem with Jacksonville though because its core market area is really pretty tiny.
I guess you could argue the NFL shouldn't highlight its weakest franchises. Then again maybe you would argue the the NFL should disproportionate highlight its weakest franchises (especially ones which may be sold soon).
I am all for the critical attitude a lot of the posters have here towards a lot of the pap that passes for NFL journalism/analysis, but this just seems like that very same pap. Criticism for the sake of criticizing. Just to make something to talk about.
It was a perfectly sensible choice for the Thursday night game when the schedule was made, and frankly not even that bad of one today.
Expect a team that has bad coaching, in the first half I've checked off the following:
- no hustle
- giving up on plays early
- stupid mistakes
- players missing assignments
- bad time (or time out) management
Bengals at Rams or Racial Slurs at VaGiants. I understand showing the division game here in Philadelphia, but what bleeding asshole decided anyone on earth would want to see Cincinnati and St. Louis? Even the players' wives and mothers don't want to watch that game.
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:29pm
Would have liked to see that leverage penalty against Chicago. Can it possibly be true that defenders aren't allowed to land on the backs of other players on a field goal attempt, as the announcer said? It seems like that happens all the time.
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:35pm
I knew that much, and that's probably what he did---would not be at all surprising if the announcer just has no idea what he's talking about. It's a shame Fox couldn't be bothered to show a replay of a penalty that allowed the Seahawks to score a TD on the next play.
Frantic start at the Meadowlands, Rex picked off twice already, Hakeem Nicks drops a WIDE OPEN deep ball for a sure TD, Victor Cruz is tackled in the back attempting to haul in another deep ball but somehow no flag is thrown.
They may not have gotten many points, but they have burned a whole quarter without giving up any points. It's easier to outplay a superior team for 45 minutes than 60.
This just means they have to take of their own business and Philly can't do it for them. They get the only tiebreaker that matters if they beat Dallas head-to-head.
It was a brief look on the redzone channel, but it seemed like Javon Ringer after lining up to Hasselbecks left, moved right to pass protect, but in the process hit Hasselbecks arm, causing an overthrow on 3-and-goal.
He's actually moved the ball consistently and well - lots of short successes of the sort DVOA loves. I wouldn't be overly pessimistic about his chances to score well in Quick Reads.
Your QB has taken more sacks than anyone during the last 2 seasons, and your backup QB i Caleb Hanie? I don't get how that happens? Is it just a matter of horrible talent evaluation?
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:27pm
I've felt that it's a sort of way of doubling down on the offensive line. To acknowledge that a decent backup as necessary would also be to acknowledge a failure to assemble a good line. In not addressing the backup, they can claim they actually had every reason to expect the line wouldn't be a problem.
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:45pm
I'm hoping this will be the last we see of Hanie on the Bears (and probably in the NFL). Yet you never know with this team; we've already seen enough of him to have wisely made the switch to McCown, as unappealing as that would be.
The real winners so far today? Us, for no longer having to listen to fans touting how Green Bay has never trailed in the fourth quarter this year. THE CURSE IS LIFTED.
If this KC/GB score holds up -- and even if it doesn't -- I wonder What Excuse Making and Shifting of Goalposts we'll be Seeing from Certain Packer Fans in the "Audibles" post Tomorrow.
Saints with an absurd 13 minute drive in blowout of Vikings. Brees has 412 yds, which gives him 4,780 for the season. With both games remaining at home (one against 30th in pass def Carolina), Marino's record is almost certainly toast.
Mike Nolan apparently trying to throw the game for MIA. Just like the Denver game, after snuffing out Buffalo's offense all game, he switches to prevent defense, Fitz leads a touchdown drive, and he stays in it and here comes Buffalo right down the field again. LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES!
As if. Instead, we need a "rationalizations why my team really shouldn't have lost and is still transcendentally superior to all other teams and should be so reflected in the DVOA ratings even though they're no longer undefeated" template.
So would I. I think I'd favour them against every other team on the road, they're the best team in the league. What is a shame is that the Texans might have been just as good or even slightly better if they hadn't lost Schaub.
I'd say, "if Schaub, Johnson and Williams (and Foster, Cushing and Joseph) were all healthy at the same time" then maybe. Hard to say, because that was not the case for a single game all season.
Explain something to me. MIN is down 22 to the Saints with under thirty seconds left, and they're calling time outs. I understand the "keep trying to the end" mentality, but there's a point where you have to realize that the best thing that can happen to you is to get someone injured (Anquan Boldin for the Cardinals against the Jets springs to mind), isn't there?
Crazy day and I didn't get to watch any of it, only radio feeds as I just got done driving.
Can someone tell me if the Finley drops were drops or if Rodgers was off and it would have taken a great catch to come down with them? The radio guys can be a little over zealous sometimes with the calls.
The crappy defense finally failed enough and Rodgers didn't play like an 04 Manning or 07 Brady.
It also sounded like the Chiefs fairly below average O line just had it's way with the defense most of the day.
That Detroit game to end the season is getting a lot more interesting and Chicago has always made me nervous.
Oh well here's hoping for 18-1. I'll take a loss now over the very last game of the season. :)
I was watching on Red Zone, so take this for what it's worth:
Finley had a couple true drops, but Rodgers also looked off for much of the game. The Chiefs' defense did a fantastic job in both coverage and pressure.
They were drops. Rodgers wasn't super sharp but it was after he'd had 4-5 pretty bad drops early. O line injuries would worry me if I were you... Rodgers was under a lot of pressure and made a couple plays scrambling you don't want to be counting on.
Thanks to all for the clarification on Finley, I'm responding here mostly to talk a bit more about the O-line.
Yeah, I've been worried about the o-line since Bulaga first got hurt back in ... week 6 I think. The Clifton injury early in the year, well I expected that, Clifton is old and was always nursing injuries. Sitton hasn't been healthy for most the year and has missed a few games. Bulaga and Sherrod both going down this game leaves Newhouse as the only healthy tackle on the roster. It does worry me, which sucks because I felt they had finally adequately addressed the line. Stuff happens though.
I'll get to watch the game on rewind tomorrow, but it sounds like Nelson didn't step up, Finley was horrible when they tried to feature him (which doesn't surprise me, he's only had a couple of good game this year). Sounded like Cobb was doing alright though at least. Grant had some good runs and there was even a good pass play to him it sounded like, I guess game situation is why he only had 10 carries.
Still the radio call sounded like they were mostly just getting whooped and were lucky it wasn't a 31-14 game. I heard quite a few "Orton back to throw, has X in the endzone and he drops it!" So I'm not sure it would have been much better if the Packers had played up to their ability, KC might not have been as unlucky either.
Interestingly the 5 point loss is their worst loss since a 10 point loss to TB back in week 9 of 2009. But then again they have been a pretty good team since then, still are. I was hoping they would go undefeated, of course, but I've said it before this year, this is a 13 or 14 win team. Now I just keep hoping they outplay that for 15. :)
Finley was awful, I wanted him benched. Sure he made some plays, but I counted 4-5 drops from him, including 3 that he 100% should've had. The o-line also collapsed, and the defense couldn't stop the run at the end.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Could only see the Red Zone channel as I was stuck with Rams/Bengals. But the drops I saw were the receivers' faults. Even so, GB was just outplayed today. I hope it serves as a wake up call as all week in the GB and Milwaukee press they've sounded way too cocky. They should still beat Chicago as I don't think the Bears have a chance unless Cutler and Forte return.
What's for dinner that smells so good? Oh great, shadenfraude! With a side of dashed hopes of a historic unbeaten season and a sauce of bitter tears from people that slagged me off personally for daring to suggest that this team was not blessed by destiny. Fantastic. Any chance of second helpings?
We get it, you're ecstatic. You don't need to spam the boards now. I haven't posted here much, but I think you're revealing more about yourself than Packer fans right now.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
I would have hoped that you could have told that my post was intended as a joke and two posts in response to the one of the best and most significant games of the week is hardly spamming. I'd point you towards my reply to your post (numbered 143). (and I realise that replying to that makes that the third and this the fourth post on this board.)
by Paul M (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 5:40pm
I'm here, I'm pissed, I'm humbled, I was wrong. Chiefs utterly outplayed Packers-- and issues on both lines of scrimmage now imperil GB's title chances. Their run defense wasn't bad... but absolutely no pass rush on Orton... and if Bulaga's injury is at all serious, they are in big trouble on offense. Clifton may or may not come back; Sherrod is gone for year; Newhouse was horrible today. And for all the supposed depth not having Jennings turned out to matter.
Only good news-- they can either wave good bye to Finley and not be too sad about it, or resign him at a decent wage, since every one of those drops is literally costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars.
2010 Steelers made it to the Super Bowl without their starting right and left tackles. They suffered short term injuries to the backups during the year but nothing long term, and the difference between Jonathan Scott and, for example, Roseanne Bar, is not that big.
Is there a subtle difference between "The ruling on the field is confirmed" and "The ruling on the field stands", or is it just different refs saying it different?
Yes. Confirmed means that they found visual evidences to confirm the call (theoretically, if they had made the call the other way, they would have overturned it on a challenge). Stands means they couldn't find sufficient to overturn it, but if the call went the other way originally it wouldn't have changed either.
Here's what bugs me about the whole Tebow phenomenon - Kurt Warner was every bit as religious as Tebow. People admired him for it, but nobody ever ascribed anything more to it other than the fact that he is a very, very good person who happens to be a great QB. I admire Kurt Warner as a person and as a player. I remain skeptical of Tebow's future as an NFL quarterback.
I used to admire Kurt Warner more than I do now.
He spent time on the NFLN this AM explaining that Tebow wins football games because of his religious beliefs.
He might. Different people derive emotional or psychological stability from different places. Now I think it's just as fair to say that, for example, Aaron Smith wins football games because he's a family man. But to each his own. For me there's a line with the overt religiosity of these athletes. If you want to talk about being blessed or how happy your religion makes you, fine, as long as the guy isn't getting all fire and brimstone or claiming "Yeah. I gotta say, Jesus really blew that one. Uh.. I know I had a, He had a long day. A plane went down, there was an earthquake somewhere, I think, uh, but I'm trying to win a title here! I can't afford to have Jesus fall asleep at the wheel! Okay?"
Aaron Rodgers is very religious. But he follows St. Francis: Preach the Gospel every day. If necessary, use words. he had some very interesting comments about how "out there" Tebow is. He said in essence that he (Rodgers) had watched how people had handled interviews from his time in JuCo, and this is how he had decided to do it.
No, I didn't. But you missed my point. Some people shove it in your face, and some people just go about their business. The second group is more likely to be palatable to you, because you don't care who their sky daddy is.
Accept it, 3rd and 13 or something, decline it... 4th and 1. Simms said Pats should decline because Fox is so conservative you know he's going to kick the fg and best case scenario if you accept is you stop them on 3rd and 13 and they kick it anyway.
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 7:11pm
That was sharp. His insistence that Brady's and Tebow's throwing motions are virtually identical (even though you could see the hitch in Tebow's) was absurd.
Watching Tebow-Brady, sorry, Pats-Broncos and I have a couple of thoughts.
We've seen good evidence for a while now that a qb who is a running threat can boost the effectiveness of other runners and Denver seem to have embraced the scheme more fully than I've previously seen in the NFL.
Secondly, if every team is going to load the box with eight and even nine men then even a poor quarterback will be able to make plays through the air. Additionally, Timmy seems to be getting better as a passer and Thomas and Decker are good receivers that present big targets.
This offense could be more sustainable than most people thought and I would include myself among the doubters.
I thought the Bears provided a pretty good template for how to stop the Teboffense, but overall, I agree with your points. Plus, the Bears may have demonstrated more that a *good* defense can lock it down rather than that any defense can.
by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 7:13pm
But haven't several teams shut them down? It seems as you say that a good D can shut them down, it's just a question of whether they'll choose, as the Bears and others have, to go soft at the end of the game.
I feel like the Bears game was more indicative of the offense's progress; the early "Tebow" games shut themselves down because the offense hadn't really been defined yet. The more recent ones have a system that's obviously been tooled to his strengths and have allowed him to grow into it. Yes, the defense rolling over at the end of the games have been a major factor, but this new version of the team is more threatening than the early Tebow games--any defense would suffice for the early ones, whereas now that the offense has refined a bit, I think it takes a stronger D to really stop them completely.
by Kanguru (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:34pm
I am happy to see Marcus Cannon (61) getting on the field as RT when Solder plays "TE" in the big packages/unbalanced line they run fairly often.
I am also wondering whether it is good to see the Patriots rotating that many players on the OL (I count nine plus Koppen (IR)). I always thought OL needs stability.
by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 12/19/2011 - 10:00am
It's more than just a collection of athletes, though, it's also the communication and familiarity. Otherwise you have a line that wins every one-on-one matchup, but gets the QB killed because no one picks up the stunting lineman.
If familiarity and communication didn't matter, starting QBs wouldn't need 99% of the snaps in practice. After all, they play with the most talented receivers, right? How much could timing and coordination matter?
Tebow walks over and pats Andre Carter (down on the field with injury) on the helmet. I can't be the only person thinking Carter may then have miraculously sprung up healed.
Did Santonio Holmes really just get a TD taken away for taunting--in a game his team was at that point losing 28-3? WRs really do live in a different universe than the rest of us...
Laying on the ground for a full 8 seconds, getting up. Joggin around for a second or two, then spiking the ball in the endzone. That's taunting, right?
Don't be ridiculous. Brady can't be called for taunting--he just plays with a lot of emotion! Now the Holmes celebration--THAT was (obviously) taunting. Some guys are just classless.
You certainly won't see me arguing on that. Then again, I wouldn't call "pretending you're an airplane like a 5-year-old" taunting either. Stupid, sure, but not exactly taunting.
by Semigruntled Eagles fan (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:24pm
I'm pretty sure that the penalty was actually for "using the football as a prop," although the referee's announcement didn't include that clarification. If he hadn't deliberately placed the ball down and stepped on it, the rest of the celebration wouldn't have drawn a flag.
They should have been called, yes. There's no 10 second runoff, though, because the clock wasn't moving. The clock stopped automatically after the turnover.
Agreed. Someone within the last month suggested that any penalty which results in an automatic first down if committed by the defense should also be a loss-of-down foul if committed by the offense. I think I like that, though I would keep personal fouls the way they are, perhaps.
I'd also get rid of the automatic first down for DPI; if it happened past the first down marker, fine, but otherwise, just replay the down.
That was me. I actually agree with the idea that almost any penalties that have an automatic first down should not...just give them the yardage and if it results in a first down, so be it. I agree with you on personal fouls, though. Keep them having an automatic first down.
My point about loss-of-down is that it would be equivalent to giving an automatic first down, if the rules were balanced. Think about it. By giving an automatic first down for, say, defensive holding, even if the holding happens five yards down the field on 3rd-and-20, you're assuming that either (1) the receiver would have either immediately caught the ball if not held, and then somehow dodged however many tackles are necessary to make it to the first down maker, or (2) the reciever would have been able to run to the first down marker and get open, the QB would be able to buy time, and then the reciever would have caught it. This is analogous to assuming that a pass rusher that gets held would have made the sack or tackled the runner in the backfield, and so the offense should lose the down.
by Kanguru (not verified) :: Mon, 12/19/2011 - 7:48am
If it was just a spot foul, defense would hold on any passing down ... and what about possible yac after the catch? Players with a tendency for high yac would never ever catch a ball again, just because the defender would foul the crap out of them. Why bother tackling Gronk after a catch?
The point is, if you don't want to concede a first down, don't foul.
Holding is probably the most significant penalty against the offense, and even without a loss of down is basically a drive killer.
It's a matter of perspective. In the first Terminator, Arnold Schwarzenegger played the bad guy, in the second Terminator he played the good guy. In Twins he shared the lead role with Danny Devito and in Expendables, he was just a guy making a cameo appearance.
Ah. The Lord is just busy bailing out the Lions. Don't take it personal, Tim, its his way of spreading the wealth to more teams. This way both the Lions and Broncos stay in the drivers' seat of the playoff-race.
Right, that's how I saw it, too. It wasn't about Him bailing out the Lions. It was about smiting the Raiders. Denver, The Chosen Team, is never ignored.
On a related note: I know Shaun Rogers was the league leader for FG's blocked during the time he was on the Lions - I would be curious how DET has been for blocked FG's, relative to the rest of the league. Playing SD, I'm sure the rest of the AFC-W is up there too, but I feel like DET has been doing it more often over the last 10 years than a lot of other teams.
I suspect I'm going to be wrong about there being 9-7 wildcard teams in the playoffs in both conferences, but it will be close. In the NFC Detroit has a tricky schedule (San Diego, and likely Green Bay's backups) while Atlanta has the marginally easier New Orleans/Tampa Bay pair of games. To get a 9-7 wild card, Detroit or Atlanta would need to drop both of their last two.
In the AFC, a 9-7 team requires both the Jets and Cincinnati to lose at least one team: Jets has the Giants/Miami they could screw up, while Cincinnati has what should be a win against Arizona and then a difficult slog against Baltimore.
I'd still like to see FO give some distribution of wins needed to get various playoff seeds.
I'd imagine we probably end up with one 9-7 team. I don't think that's a problem, though. Do you?
The idea of a distribution of wins is harder in football, than it is in hockey, for example. In hockey, it's pretty common where everyone looks at it with the idea of "you're going to need X points to make the playoffs in this conference". With a longer season, and the divisional effects in the NHL being less pronounced on the playoffs than they are in the NFL (only 6 of 16 spots in NHL go to division winners, 8 of 12 in NFL, and a smaller schedule hinders wild card hopes when you have a tough division), I don't think such a thing is that realistic, or at least, not much more so than the standard cliche of "win 10 games and you make the playoffs", which is almost always true.
One of my favorite things from FO the last couple years, is whoever in the comments it is that makes the little playoff results map for the last week or two of the season. Basically, taking the last of the playoff-implication matchups, sticking them into a big graph, and then you can easily chart throughout the last Sunday or two what playoff implications come with each game that finishes.
I don't have a problem with a 9-7 playoff team. I just dislike the assumptions people were making a few weeks ago that 10-6 was necessary for the playoffs.
Every year people are obsessed with the notion of a 9-7 Wild Card team. PK and Bill Simmons, for instance, always speculate about them, but it rarely happens. Teams always manage to get to 10 wins for the wild card, often there are 10 win teams that don't make the playoffs.
I may be wrong (too lazy to check), but my impression is the opposite. Rare is the 10-win team that misses the playoffs. And 9-7 playoff teams are not uncommon. I think it's the rare 8-win team that makes it which gets under people's skin. Am I off-base here?
It's not exactly "rare" that a 10-win team misses the playoffs, but it's certainly not very common. It's certainly less common than 9-7 teams making the playoffs, which does happen fairly commonly. I've never heard of anyone being oddly concerned about 9-7 teams making the playoffs, in general. If you're one of the 6 best teams in your conference and you're 9-7, I don't think anyone has much problem with that. The only time it's ever generally an issue is for division winners coming in with significantly lower records than teams sitting, but that's not an issue with "9 wins", that's an issue with the playoff seeding format, and the guaranteed spots given to divisional winners. For example, last year, 10-6 TB stayed home for the 7-9 Seahawks.
I'm pretty sure Simmons usually speculates on the possibility of a 7-9 winning its division each year more than whether or not there will be a 9-7 wildcard team. There's nothing much remarkable about a 9-7 team winning the wildcard because, unlike division winners, they can't be beating out teams with a better record.
by FooBarFooFoo (not verified) :: Mon, 12/19/2011 - 7:57am
Agreed. The problem is when the NFL changed the format from three to four divisions.
Since then, one division winner always got into the playoffs undeservingly, kicking out a better team which would have gotten a wild card under the old format. And since you have only six playoff berths per conference, I think that is a significant impact.
"for every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong". I never liked the realignment into four divisions even though it looks nice. It's complete crap. Just like instant replay, it offers the impression of something positive, and is just a pile of crap once you take a closer look.
I think the 8-8 Chargers will make it this year. However, they will be tough to beat in the playoffs.
The fact that the Eagles can still win the division is incredible and makes me think all the divisions should have their games weighted towards the end of the season.
Yeah the format, but it helps that Dallas and New York have been not so much shooting themselves in the foot as blowing their limbs off over the past few weeks.
Football Night in America just showed the highlights of the Pats/Broncos game. Despite the Pats scoring 41 points they showed a single highlight of the Pats offense, a 1 yard QB sneak for a TD by Brady, with Dan Patrick saying "and Brady says, look I can run too!" The rest of the segment was all Tebow, followed by a special report about whether Tebow can get his 4th quarter magic back.
I'm not pleased with the Patriots. I've been calling for them to hang 50 on the Broncos for the last two weeks now and they only managed 41. Really need to start living up to expectations here.
/snark
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
by DEW (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 10:33pm
Did they mention why the only reason why Kyle Orton was able to beat Green Bay was that sitting on the bench for several weeks behind Tebow taught him how to be a Winner(tm)?
Not at all. I just thought it was funny because it was Tebow. If the Vikings Saints highlights had consisted of nothing but Vikings plays you wouldn't have found that odd?
by joe football (not verified) :: Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:37pm
In addition to keeping up with the open thread, join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for Sunday night IRC football chat! Point your favorite IRC client to bendenweyr.dyndns.org, channel #fo
Or for a web-based solution, just use this mibbit link: http://chat.mibbit.com/?channel=%23fo&server=bendenweyr.dyndns.org
Just looking at the schedule for next week, and Eagles @ Cowboys is scheduled to be played at 4:15 Eastern. However, if the Giants have already beaten the Jets (1:00 Eastern) I believe this becomes essentially a meaningless game for the Cowboys. Win or lose against the Eagles, winning the division would depend on beating the Giants in week 17 because this match swings all the tie-breakers. There are no wild-card or seeding implications. It doesn't matter that the Eagles are still in the hunt because, again, they can't catch Dallas if they win in week 17.
Can somebody confirm this? Will this be noticed and the schedule adjusted so that the Giants and Cowboys games are played simultaneously? Otherwise Dallas could conceivably rest their starters.
FWIW, the thing that surprised most this last weekend is finding out Tavaris Jackson led the Seahawks to their fourth straight win. They now have an fair shot at the post-season as a wild card, though they will need help - either the Lions or Falcons losing their last two games.
by 'nonymous (not verified) :: Tue, 12/20/2011 - 1:52am
Some strange calls on Monday night--
Two phantom cut block calls (called on RB's blocking low when the defender was _not_ engaged in another block), kick catch interference (which I think was the right call, but don't know the rule well enough), a bizarre "leaping" call on a field goal, and forgetting about intercepting momentum (which the announcers also had no clue about-- but that is still the rule, right? If a defender intercepts and gets carried into his own endzone by his momentum, you rule a touchback, not a spot at his forward progress.)
The Steelers are now 10-4 and are -11 in turnovers, just one year after being second in the league at +17. They were -4 in this game. If they could have kept it to just -1, I think this game would have been a toss-up. The Steelers moved the ball pretty well, but didn't get their points' worth out of it. It was an awesome special teams performance by SF-- that's quite a boost for a good defense, and helped them hold the Steelers to 3 points.
The Steelers did a lot to cost themselves this one, but the officials certainly made their contribution. The "interfering with punt" call was a tossup, but the chop blocks and leaping calls were complete tripe. And as a Baltimore fan, I (obviously) know bad officiating. The Ravens got an early christmas present out of this one.
by Viliphied (not verified) :: Tue, 12/20/2011 - 2:14am
The catch interference call was anything but borderline, the PIT defender's hands touched the ball before it got to the PR. The (not) chop block calls sucked though. Leaping was pretty borderline, but it all depends on where the defender was lined up.
I'm inclined to agree with the former; I just don't like letting my purple blinders coat my opinion too much. It looked close enough to call "borderline" to me, but, I didn't review it several times. The leaping one still looked completely false though; I saw it on the first FG, but not on the second one. However, after the commentator clarification, I can see why it was called. I just never see it called that way elsewhere, so it seemed nonsensical.
I'm a soccer official, a game where fouls occur a lot, but the inclination and culture is to let them go if they have no effect on the play. I can see calling the leaping penalty if the player was able to get up high enough to block the ball, whether or not he actually got his hands on it. But in this case, the foul had no impact on the game, and no opportunity to have an impact on the game. It seems egregious to give a team a first down under those circumstances. I'm not saying whether it was the right call, because I don't know. I'm saying it sure felt like it was NOT the right call.
Also, it was the second such infraction of the night, which makes it more likely to be called.
It makes it a bit better about the chop blocks that there was one per team. The first one really pissed me off, though...cost SF at least 3 points, and they just recently had another crappy not-a-chop-block called in the recent Ravens game, one that cost them a touchdown.
Weirdly the leaping/leverage thing I believe was called 3 seperate times this week, 2 for sure. It's a pretty rare call, mostly because players don't do it. Obviously, they've been doing it more. It's possible that the league saw that in reviewing games from the preceeding week and instructed officials to make it a point of emphasis. Again, no problem with the call, been that way for many years, and for good reason.
The chop blocks were definately tight calls, but the officials called that tight consistantly. hard to want more than that given the week to week, game to game abortion that generally constitutes officiating.
Nope. On a kick from scrimmage "a player is not considered to have touched the ball if he is blocked into it by an opponent." They were certainly engaged. Does that mean he was blocked into it? The rules doesn't say, but consider the same call except it's potentially running into the kicker. No way that gets called because the player would be ruled running into the kicker. It was at least borderline, but probably wrong.
RSS Feed
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
I think you will find that we are now in week 15....
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
Nice opening drive by the Falcons, capped by Julio Jones on the underneath crossing pattern for 30 and the TD. That's actually where he's been most effective this year; a bigger, faster Wes Welker?
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
It's not just me, right? Blaine Gabbert actually is absolutely freakin' terrible, even for a rookie?
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
It's possible his receivers are so terrible they're just not getting open at all. Still, he's not even giving them a chance to make a play.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
I mean, they're not good, obviously. But this is the third time I've seen him this year, and I think on balance he's the biggest part of the problem.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
He reminds me a lot of a young Alex Smith...
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
I think "David Carr".
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
Yes.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
He has better mechanics and arm strength than Carr, though he also has a stronger arm than Smith.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
I was referring more to the look of total terror and his complete lack of confidence in his O-line to keep him vertical. Maybe he can recover, but PTSD is a very real injury.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
If Gabbo is going to be that terrible, he really should cut his hair. He shouldn't be drawing any more attention to himself than he already is.
Re: Week 14 Open Discussion Thread
Rrrrrrrrrrriiight.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Gabbo finally makes a good throw and they drop it.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
That was Jarret Dillard, who also muffed the punt. KCW!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Jaguars can't take advantage of a long run by MJD. One wonders why they didn't keep feeding him the ball.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If that's not offensive pass interference on Roddy White, I don't know what is. Seriously, he got a big hand full of jersey and tackled the guy. Where's the laundry?
-----------
Sorry JPP!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
So, I appreciate this is somewhat off-topic, but I scanned headlines earlier and saw "Sam Hurd arrested for cocaine". Ok. I'm sure a lot of NFL players do coke, but I guess he must have done something pretty dumb to actually get arrested. Then "Sam Hurd arrested for conspiracy to distribute". What, he was planning on throwing a big party and bought for his guests too?
No. No, I guess not. Ho. Lee. Shit.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, he's going to have a lot of time on his hands.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
That's pretty much how my reaction went.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Wow. That's was the ugliest successful PAT I've ever seen. Cleared the bar by about 5 feet.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
As usual the Thursday Night game looks awful on paper, then turns out to be even worse in reality.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Well, this homer is pretty pleased with the game, but I can understand what you are saying. 1 net passing yard at the half for Gabbert and MJD limping to the locker room = one ugly game.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And as usual the road team is taking a kicking.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
One of the easiest touchdowns a DL will ever get right there for Corey Peters.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
This is the biggest rout of the season, isn't it?
What will this do to the Falcons' DVOA?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I wonder what this will do to Jacksonville's defensive DVOA. Several scores on short fields allowed, but a couple of longer drives as well. It was just a couple of weeks ago where the Jaguars were touted as having the biggest improvement in year-to-year DVOA on defense.
Also, total sackfest for Atlanta.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
They'll need Gabbert adjusted Variance Over Average
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I wish.
Saints-Colts. 62-7. Ouch.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Indeed. Texans 41 Titans 7 was also bigger, and I believe the highest single game DVOA score of the season. So the three biggest beatings this year have seen three different AFC South teams on the receiving end.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
In my defense, at the time I wrote that it was 41-0 and there was plenty of time for the Falcons to score again.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If you are going to bring in your backup QB in relief, why not do it constructively and allow him to run the proper offence rather than just handing off or checking down every play? As preparation in case, you know, he was required to come into a game because of an actual injury at some stage?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Who the hell comes up with these outrageously terrible matchups on TNF? I don't understand why the NFL, being that they make the schedule, doesn't set itself up with better matchups on TNF. Even if Jacksonville were magically decent (and it was a pretty good bet before the season that they wouldn't be), what sort of lure is a Jaguars/Falcons game supposed to have? These two teams are quite prone to completely shitting the bed, they have no sort of storyline or significance between the two of them being an inter-conference game, and even when both are playing well, they're frequently content to just put their head down and run, even if that means running into a brick wall for 60 minutes. Who the hell thought this might be a good game?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
OK, in fairness, when the schedule was made, we had no idea that David Garrard would be gone. But still, even if they hadn't released their starting QB right before the start of the season, they still wouldn't have been a very good team. Better, MAYBE, but still not very good.
Seriously, who sets these things up?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And to be clear, I'm not even talking about flexing better games into TNF - that'd be a nightmare and a half to try to do. But just looking at this week's schedule, thinking about it at the time the schedule was made, I can pick several games that looked better than this game, 9 months ago:
BAL/SD, NYJ/PHI, NE/DEN, DET/OAK, WAS/NYG.
Who decides these things? Hell, it's not like you can even call it a ratings thing, with ATL and JAX involved.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I think it comes down to distribution: They want to give more than the usual dominant teams national exposure in order to counteract repetitiveness.
And also, it's not like Mike Smith has no history with Jacksonville. I guess his reunion would have been a bigger storyline. If the Jaguars wouldn't have bored everyone to death this season already.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
For sure, and that's why I wouldn't be keen on throwing up yet another NFC East battle in NYG/WSH. But looking at the matchups I listed:
DET/OAK would've been between two teams thought to be on the rise and likely being involved in NFC Wild Card/AFC West division crown races.
WSH/NYG would've been a decent bet for NFCE divisional lead implications.
NYJ/PHI would've been between two hype machines with very large markets, who were both good bets to be in the playoff races.
BAL/SD would've been a solid bet with two teams that are perennially involved in the playoff races.
NE/DEN isn't quite as sexy, unless you were buying on Orton and the John Fox Broncos competing this year, but it was certainly within the realm of possibility.
It's all about making bets with a decent chance of paying off.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I don't get a chance to say this very often, but in the words of Adam West, some days, you can't get rid of a bomb.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Idk, they might choose bad matchups on purpose. They have guaranteed viewers due to die-hards, and don't piss of the networks.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
But that begs the question, why create a TNF brand, if you're going to devalue it by only showing crappy matchups? I have a hard time seeing the NFL do that.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hey, if I understood how network execs think, I'd probably be a lot richer than I am.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2010/
Last season the Jaguars were 8-8.
And the Falcons were 13-3.
Thanks for the advice, Captain Hindsight.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
But the preseason Vegas lines (per Scramble over/unders columns) were 6 and 10.5. Not so enticing.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And the other five matchups he listed were:
11.5 vs 5.5
10 vs 10.5
10 vs 10.5
6.5 vs 7.5
9.5 vs 6.5
So basically a near random distribution and that is with picking out the 5 best games. Really the main complaint I coudl see is that the NFL didn't grab 1 of the two premiere games this week (PHIvsNYJ or SDvsBAL). Except
A) That may very well piss off the networks and reduce the value fo the TV contracts MORE than it increases the value to NFL Network.
B) Neither of those matchups looks very good today anyway.
Yes this complaint is 100% hindsight.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Bull - I'll go ahead and use your pre-season numbers here, since I have no idea how to find numbers for back when the schedule was actually made.
NE/DEN - 11.5 vs 5.5 - This one isn't super sexy, but it does involve the Patriots, in Denver, against a team they consistently seem to struggle with. It really depends on if you were buying into Orton and John Fox. Moreover, if you didn't, then it was certainly foreseeable that Tebow could be playing this late in the season, although his late-game heroics were obviously not predictable.
BAL/SD - 10.0 vs 10.5 - The line on this was pretty close, and when the schedule was made, this could've easily been seen as a game with huge playoff implications. Even with SD's terrible season, this could still be a pretty interesting game, and certainly would be if Rivers were playing like Rivers.
NYJ/PHI - 10.5 vs 10.0 - This looked like an interesting game when the schedule was made, and PHI's total failure wasn't really foreseeable. How does the NYJ defense handle Vick? Does a secondary-heavy defense expose Sanchez, or do the Jets just run it? You couldn't fault them for taking this bet.
DET/OAK - 7.5 vs 6.5 - DET was a sexy wild card pick, that was supposed to be a team on the rise. OAK was kind of an enigma after firing Cable, but still has a halfway decent team there, and even if they weren't doing terribly well, is a decent matchup for DET.
WSH/NYG - 6.5 vs 9.5 - The line may not look great here, but it is an NFC-E matchup involving a NYG team that could be predicted to at least be involved in the wild card, or maybe even win their division, so this game would be important.
Any one of those matchups could've easily been guessed to be more interesting than ATL/JAX, when the schedule was created. It's not hind-sight at all, it's just making high percentage bets. Lo and behold, even with a couple surprises in there (DEN, SD, PHI), every one of these games, in Week 15, actually looks more interesting than a ATL/JAX matchup.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
This has got to be one of the weakest arguments I have encountered here. Why not just use the zlions form?
[The NFL schedule makers are crap! Instead of a complicated and difficult weighting of many competing interests they should simply go by "IAmJOe"'s patented gut feel for which matchups will be the most interesting.]
You are criticizing a process you clearly have almost no knowledge or understanding of, and what grounds for criticism you do manage to scrape together are incredibly weak.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Oh, well, that's a really great response, right there. "You're stupid" and then walk away.
How about you actually try putting your big kid pants on and responding to me? What is so weak about my argument?
- I don't think its at all wrong to point out the matchups that I did as being more attractive at the time the schedule was devised, but you seem to disagree.
- I have a hard time believing that the NFL intentionally gives itself weak games, because it would devalue an NFL-exclusive product.
- You're right in that stadiums may have other commitments that restrict the NFL's flexibility in scheduling games, but I don't think that's as big of a deal as you do. The schedule is released more than 6 months before TNF games start up, and the NFL, being the NFL, generally enjoys some priority in scheduling its events. In any case, somehow I doubt every possible better matchup this week was unable to be hosted on Thursday, because of scheduling issues.
- I'm not saying we should put the Patriots on prime-time every single week. I'm saying there's better matchups that could be put on, and sometimes those may involve teams that already have a sizeable primetime presence, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the Patriots or the NFC-E every week. In fact, of the games I suggested above, only 2 of them involved the Patriots or the NFC-E.
Seriously, how about you actually tell me why I'm so stupid, or explain just how complicated the process is, since clearly you know so much more about it than I do?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
On top of that making a schedule is frankly a lot harder than most people realize. You have teams whose facilities have different events booked, teams who share stadiums, rules about how many home or away games you can have in a row, demands for good night games et cetera. It makes for a more difficult math problem than you would suppose.
Sure you could stick NE in a night game every week, but you don't think they would complain about that? I actually think given the constraints they have to work under the NFL schedule makers do an excellent job.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Oh, so you actually thought JAX would be a somewhat decent or remotely interesting team to watch this year? Keeping in mind, this is all pre-Manning injury. I have a hard time believing that. I guess I was the only one who totally figured the Jags to not be very good this year. Captain Foresight!!!
And I don't really have as much of a problem with ATL - match up ATL with a half dozen NFC teams that were foreseeably involved in divisional or wild card races, or even the two interesting teams in the AFC South, and you've got a decent game. NO, TB, DET, PHI, CHI, GB, HOU, IND, were all better bets for an interesting game. Of those, only IND and CHI would've been hamstrung by unforeseeable injuries, and TB by underachieving. All of those would be better bets than fricking JAX, though.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
No, JAX was 8-8 and deserved a couple national TV games.
There are, what, 17 Sunday night games and 16 Monday night games, right? And how many Thursday and Saturday games? Another 10-12?
OK, so how does the NFL schedule their games? Does it make sense to put the most appealing game of the week on NFL network, which reaches the smallest number of households of the major networks? No, of course not. The best game goes to NBC, and then CBS and Fox get the best AFC and NFC games, respectively. So after those games are parcelled out, ESPN and NFL Network get what the league estimate to be roughly the 4th and 5th most appealing games of the week.
So just how easy is it to pick out the 5th most interesting game of the week? Well, rather than riding the same horse every week, the NFL mixes and matches and makes sure that all of the teams that were at least .500 the previous season get some national attention.
So while _you_ may think the Jags are a terrible team, I think the fans in Jacksonville like having their team get a little national attention. Personally, I found it a lot of fun when they showed the game in Jacksonville and showed all the fans wearing fake moustaches.
And how about that Monday night game on October 24? You remember, when the Jaguars were blown out by the Ravens? Oh...but it didn't happen that way, did it? The Jags won, 12-7.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The fans in jacksonville won't even go to the games, so why should they get national attention?
They put tarps over the upper seats in the stadium and say they're "unavailable" so they don't get blacked out.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
OK, so how does the NFL schedule their games? Does it make sense to put the most appealing game of the week on NFL network, which reaches the smallest number of households of the major networks? No, of course not. The best game goes to NBC, and then CBS and Fox get the best AFC and NFC games, respectively. So after those games are parcelled out, ESPN and NFL Network get what the league estimate to be roughly the 4th and 5th most appealing games of the week.
I never said that TNF should get the only good matchups each week. I said that TNF should get better matchups than the ones they do, because it's not just this ATL/JAX game - TNF habitually showcases some pretty strange or uninteresting matchups. Moreover, the same applies to MNF too - I only watch one or two MNF games a year because that's how many good games there are, that are good enough to be worth remembering that they're even on.
If, as you suggest, there's some sort of "draft" process (which I don't particularly believe, and have never heard of) by which games are handed out to the networks, they sure are doing a pretty awful job of it, with the way the high frequency of "bust" matchups on TNF/SNF/MNF.
So just how easy is it to pick out the 5th most interesting game of the week? Well, rather than riding the same horse every week, the NFL mixes and matches and makes sure that all of the teams that were at least .500 the previous season get some national attention.
So at what point are you going to actually read what I said, and respond to that, instead of responding to points no one has made? I'm not saying they should ride the same teams every week. I'm saying they could make better decisions about putting better games on, and then illustrated the point by pointing out other, more interesting, matchups that could've replaced ATL/JAX on this week's TNF.
And not every .500+ team gets represented on primetime the following year. Stop making things up, and respond to what I'm actually arguing.
So while _you_ may think the Jags are a terrible team, I think the fans in Jacksonville like having their team get a little national attention. Personally, I found it a lot of fun when they showed the game in Jacksonville and showed all the fans wearing fake moustaches.
Oh, well, the fanbase of a team that was shown liked it, and that's all the reason we need to put a team on prime-time then? So any matchup becomes instantly defensible to air on TV because a single (and extremely small) fanbase liked it?
If you want to watch Thursday Night Mustaches, that's fine. I'd rather watch Thursday Night Football. You know, on the National Football League Network, not the National Fake Mustache Network.
And how about that Monday night game on October 24? You remember, when the Jaguars were blown out by the Ravens? Oh...but it didn't happen that way, did it? The Jags won, 12-7.
Is poster drunk? You're not honestly going to sit here and point to a 12-7 cripple fight of a game that bordered on unwatchable, even for those who enjoy defensive football, as a shining example of what a good and/or interesting team the Jaguars are, are you? But I guess it's ok that such an awful game was nationally televised on MNF, because "Jaguar fans liked it". Right?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Admittedly, this was identifiably the worst nationally televised game of the season. And a bit of variety does no harm: the Jets and the NFC East are among the most shown teams, and I don't feel I've missed out on the Patriots either.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I think the only grounds it was being criticized on there were the amount of the country those two teams have core fan-bases in. You are always going to have that problem with Jacksonville though because its core market area is really pretty tiny.
http://www.commoncensus.org/sports_map.php?sport=1
I guess you could argue the NFL shouldn't highlight its weakest franchises. Then again maybe you would argue the the NFL should disproportionate highlight its weakest franchises (especially ones which may be sold soon).
I am all for the critical attitude a lot of the posters have here towards a lot of the pap that passes for NFL journalism/analysis, but this just seems like that very same pap. Criticism for the sake of criticizing. Just to make something to talk about.
It was a perfectly sensible choice for the Thursday night game when the schedule was made, and frankly not even that bad of one today.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It was a perfectly sensible choice for the Thursday night game when the schedule was made, and frankly not even that bad of one today.
If you're just gonna close your eyes and keep chanting that it wasn't a terrible matchup, looking at it from when the schedule was made, then fine.
If you're going to sit there and try to pretend that it wasn't a terrible matchup, looking at it presently, then you're just plain lying.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
well this will be my first Buccs game of the season
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And last, with any luck.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Expect a team that has bad coaching, in the first half I've checked off the following:
- no hustle
- giving up on plays early
- stupid mistakes
- players missing assignments
- bad time (or time out) management
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I gave up before half-time.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Am I missing something? Who cares how long Austin was fighting for possession if he ultimately got it?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
the point they were trying to make was that by the time he actually got possession, he wasn't over the goal line anymore.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Ah... I am watching a very pixellated online feed so such nuances are lost on me.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Wow really excellent play by Romo to Witten.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Soooooo...what the heck happened to the Bucs? From 4-2 to 4-8? Ow.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Woah. Felix Jones is fast.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Don't know if you saw that, but the Cowboys just raped Vince Lombardi's speech...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If a returner catches the ball in the end zone and steps out; is that a safety or a touchback?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Touchback. Returns follow the 2-feet-in rule like catches, generally.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
7 minutes something to go and 16 points behind for the Bucs.
They should be in full hurry up right now.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Another awesome NFL Network game.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hey, I thought so. But I'm a Cowboys fan...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Bengals at Rams or Racial Slurs at VaGiants. I understand showing the division game here in Philadelphia, but what bleeding asshole decided anyone on earth would want to see Cincinnati and St. Louis? Even the players' wives and mothers don't want to watch that game.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If you told me 2 years ago that Carolina's offense would be this fun to watch I would have called you crazy.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Ah they finally got Jordy Nelson for the push off on the back shoulder throw.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
got him again!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If that second one was a foul, Irvin never had a legal catch in his career.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, I thought the first one was pretty questionable too...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Well...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Would have liked to see that leverage penalty against Chicago. Can it possibly be true that defenders aren't allowed to land on the backs of other players on a field goal attempt, as the announcer said? It seems like that happens all the time.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
They are not allowed to climb up the backs of another player. I don't know about landing on another player after jumping, though.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I knew that much, and that's probably what he did---would not be at all surprising if the announcer just has no idea what he's talking about. It's a shame Fox couldn't be bothered to show a replay of a penalty that allowed the Seahawks to score a TD on the next play.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I think Wrecks has completed more passes to the Giants than Eli has so far.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It's snowing in Buffalo today. First snow game of the year?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Frantic start at the Meadowlands, Rex picked off twice already, Hakeem Nicks drops a WIDE OPEN deep ball for a sure TD, Victor Cruz is tackled in the back attempting to haul in another deep ball but somehow no flag is thrown.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I doubt the Chiefs will beat the Packers through all these field goals.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
They may not have gotten many points, but they have burned a whole quarter without giving up any points. It's easier to outplay a superior team for 45 minutes than 60.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
A very sloppy start to this one from the Giants and they are now in a hole. Nice drive from the Skins there though.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Washington is beating 'em up so far.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Looks like a dumb challenge from Coughlin there - great catch by Atogwe. Could be 17-0 in a couple minutes.....
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The ol' "throw away a timeout out of spite" challenge. I love those when made by teams I don't like.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Finley needs to be benched or something. 4 drops and I have never screamed at my TV this much.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Also: He couldn't beat Sabby Piscatelli deep one-on-one. Horrible
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Be sure to check out the OJ Atogwe interception in the Gians game. Polamalu-esque ball skills.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And 17-0 it is. Giants chose a great day to lay an egg.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'd have preferred last week.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
This will still be a crushing loss as it will swing all the divisional tie-breakers.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
This just means they have to take of their own business and Philly can't do it for them. They get the only tiebreaker that matters if they beat Dallas head-to-head.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Carolina's setting up in shotgun 1 back and motioning a third player into the backfield for a pistol look then running the option out of it.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
crazy trick play in carolina for a TD
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Technically the game is in Houston, but the play was still good lookin'.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hah, yeah I was trying to edit it but I guess your reply made it so I couldn't...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Panthers third TD of the day features all kinds of shenanigans. Announcers calling it a NFL-version of the fumble-rooskie.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It was a brief look on the redzone channel, but it seemed like Javon Ringer after lining up to Hasselbecks left, moved right to pass protect, but in the process hit Hasselbecks arm, causing an overthrow on 3-and-goal.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Rodgers: 8/21, 102 Pass Yds, 1 Pass TD, 5 Rush yds. O_O
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The Giants stink
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Colts up 11!!
C-C-C-Combo breaker!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It appears I'm the only one watching this Bears game.
Update for the rest of you: Hanie still sucks.
Tracking Orton's competent performance against Green Bay really makes me wonder what could have been.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Not watching the game, but he's only put up 9 points on one of the worse defenses in the league - DVOA won't love it.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
He's actually moved the ball consistently and well - lots of short successes of the sort DVOA loves. I wouldn't be overly pessimistic about his chances to score well in Quick Reads.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Your QB has taken more sacks than anyone during the last 2 seasons, and your backup QB i Caleb Hanie? I don't get how that happens? Is it just a matter of horrible talent evaluation?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I've felt that it's a sort of way of doubling down on the offensive line. To acknowledge that a decent backup as necessary would also be to acknowledge a failure to assemble a good line. In not addressing the backup, they can claim they actually had every reason to expect the line wouldn't be a problem.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I see your point. In that case that's horrible evaluation of your oline.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm hoping this will be the last we see of Hanie on the Bears (and probably in the NFL). Yet you never know with this team; we've already seen enough of him to have wisely made the switch to McCown, as unappealing as that would be.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The question presents itself:
Hanie or Painter? (Or, please no, Gabbert who at least has the rookie excuse?)
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hanie is probably the best of those 3, sad as that may be.
Here's a question, John Skelton or Caleb Hanie?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I guess I'd take Skelton.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
3 INTs by the Dolphins D today! It's nice to see us actually playing well. ^_^
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
...and then Richie Incognito reverts to type. Figured he couldn't keep it up all year.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm calling it -- MIA will beat NE on Christmas Eve.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The real winners so far today? Us, for no longer having to listen to fans touting how Green Bay has never trailed in the fourth quarter this year. THE CURSE IS LIFTED.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Our long national nightmare is over.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
RUN THE BALL THIS TIME ROMEO.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Attn: whoever is calling the GB/KC game... 6 points is not a "two possession game"
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It is with the way the offenses have looked in this game.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If this KC/GB score holds up -- and even if it doesn't -- I wonder What Excuse Making and Shifting of Goalposts we'll be Seeing from Certain Packer Fans in the "Audibles" post Tomorrow.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If you want a preview, see post #116 and #134. If that game in Denver keeps going the way it is, this board could get ugly no matter who posts.
Not to mention fans in New York.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Comment 116 is commenting on a pretty gruesome injury. What's the problem with that?
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I think he's saying some Packers fans might blame injuries and drops. Anyhoo, I'm a Pats fan so I have enough to worry about at the moment.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Passing yards: Saints: 412, Vikings: 6.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Oooooooooh they just showed the replay of the GB backup right tackle getting rolled up and it looked real bad. Has to be a broken ankle.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Actually may even be higher up than ankle, looked really nasty though.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Saints with an absurd 13 minute drive in blowout of Vikings. Brees has 412 yds, which gives him 4,780 for the season. With both games remaining at home (one against 30th in pass def Carolina), Marino's record is almost certainly toast.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Packers in trouble against the Chiefs. The Colts are ahead, and the words "Chris Johnsn caught from behind" has now been uttered.
It's frosty in Hell.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Who caught Johnson from behind?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Father Time
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Tamba Hali is ridiculous!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Mike Nolan apparently trying to throw the game for MIA. Just like the Denver game, after snuffing out Buffalo's offense all game, he switches to prevent defense, Fitz leads a touchdown drive, and he stays in it and here comes Buffalo right down the field again. LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Caleb Hanie is anti-Brees
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I love the FOMBC.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
All together now:
Any.
Given.
Sunday.
Some cliches are cliche for a reason.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
But yeah, the playoff odds table is definitely way off regarding GB's chances of going undefeated.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yup. This game right here is the point Aaron has been trying to make the past two months.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Indy wins, GB loses on the same day!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Crenel gets the gatoradeshower... He really did shut down that offense - amazing.
/Mercury Morris joke.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Can I suggest an "apologies for being a troll/over-zealous fan/rabid zealot" template?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
As if. Instead, we need a "rationalizations why my team really shouldn't have lost and is still transcendentally superior to all other teams and should be so reflected in the DVOA ratings even though they're no longer undefeated" template.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I would still take this team in one game on a neutral field over anyone in the league.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
So would I. I think I'd favour them against every other team on the road, they're the best team in the league. What is a shame is that the Texans might have been just as good or even slightly better if they hadn't lost Schaub.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Ummmm, no.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'd say, "if Schaub, Johnson and Williams (and Foster, Cushing and Joseph) were all healthy at the same time" then maybe. Hard to say, because that was not the case for a single game all season.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Explain something to me. MIN is down 22 to the Saints with under thirty seconds left, and they're calling time outs. I understand the "keep trying to the end" mentality, but there's a point where you have to realize that the best thing that can happen to you is to get someone injured (Anquan Boldin for the Cardinals against the Jets springs to mind), isn't there?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Crazy day and I didn't get to watch any of it, only radio feeds as I just got done driving.
Can someone tell me if the Finley drops were drops or if Rodgers was off and it would have taken a great catch to come down with them? The radio guys can be a little over zealous sometimes with the calls.
The crappy defense finally failed enough and Rodgers didn't play like an 04 Manning or 07 Brady.
It also sounded like the Chiefs fairly below average O line just had it's way with the defense most of the day.
That Detroit game to end the season is getting a lot more interesting and Chicago has always made me nervous.
Oh well here's hoping for 18-1. I'll take a loss now over the very last game of the season. :)
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I was watching on Red Zone, so take this for what it's worth:
Finley had a couple true drops, but Rodgers also looked off for much of the game. The Chiefs' defense did a fantastic job in both coverage and pressure.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
They were drops. Rodgers wasn't super sharp but it was after he'd had 4-5 pretty bad drops early. O line injuries would worry me if I were you... Rodgers was under a lot of pressure and made a couple plays scrambling you don't want to be counting on.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Thanks to all for the clarification on Finley, I'm responding here mostly to talk a bit more about the O-line.
Yeah, I've been worried about the o-line since Bulaga first got hurt back in ... week 6 I think. The Clifton injury early in the year, well I expected that, Clifton is old and was always nursing injuries. Sitton hasn't been healthy for most the year and has missed a few games. Bulaga and Sherrod both going down this game leaves Newhouse as the only healthy tackle on the roster. It does worry me, which sucks because I felt they had finally adequately addressed the line. Stuff happens though.
I'll get to watch the game on rewind tomorrow, but it sounds like Nelson didn't step up, Finley was horrible when they tried to feature him (which doesn't surprise me, he's only had a couple of good game this year). Sounded like Cobb was doing alright though at least. Grant had some good runs and there was even a good pass play to him it sounded like, I guess game situation is why he only had 10 carries.
Still the radio call sounded like they were mostly just getting whooped and were lucky it wasn't a 31-14 game. I heard quite a few "Orton back to throw, has X in the endzone and he drops it!" So I'm not sure it would have been much better if the Packers had played up to their ability, KC might not have been as unlucky either.
Interestingly the 5 point loss is their worst loss since a 10 point loss to TB back in week 9 of 2009. But then again they have been a pretty good team since then, still are. I was hoping they would go undefeated, of course, but I've said it before this year, this is a 13 or 14 win team. Now I just keep hoping they outplay that for 15. :)
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Finley was awful, I wanted him benched. Sure he made some plays, but I counted 4-5 drops from him, including 3 that he 100% should've had. The o-line also collapsed, and the defense couldn't stop the run at the end.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Could only see the Red Zone channel as I was stuck with Rams/Bengals. But the drops I saw were the receivers' faults. Even so, GB was just outplayed today. I hope it serves as a wake up call as all week in the GB and Milwaukee press they've sounded way too cocky. They should still beat Chicago as I don't think the Bears have a chance unless Cutler and Forte return.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
What's for dinner that smells so good? Oh great, shadenfraude! With a side of dashed hopes of a historic unbeaten season and a sauce of bitter tears from people that slagged me off personally for daring to suggest that this team was not blessed by destiny. Fantastic. Any chance of second helpings?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
We get it, you're ecstatic. You don't need to spam the boards now. I haven't posted here much, but I think you're revealing more about yourself than Packer fans right now.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I would have hoped that you could have told that my post was intended as a joke and two posts in response to the one of the best and most significant games of the week is hardly spamming. I'd point you towards my reply to your post (numbered 143). (and I realise that replying to that makes that the third and this the fourth post on this board.)
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, I`m frustrated and I was out of line. Was looking for a way to delete.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
"Was looking for a way to delete." - I've been there, unfortunately as I replied I think it's here for good, wish I hadn't replied now, sorry.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Sick. Tebow bowling over Patriots. You guys are going to have a horrible week, if this keeps up.
First drive was exactly what I was hoping for: Running room for everyone who was trying. They missed the PAT though.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Paging the Patriots defense. Hoo wee.
This will be a fun shootout: One team airing it out, the other grinding it on the ground.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Has't quite been grinding but it has been on the ground...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Regretting this post yet?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
*Sob*
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm here, I'm pissed, I'm humbled, I was wrong. Chiefs utterly outplayed Packers-- and issues on both lines of scrimmage now imperil GB's title chances. Their run defense wasn't bad... but absolutely no pass rush on Orton... and if Bulaga's injury is at all serious, they are in big trouble on offense. Clifton may or may not come back; Sherrod is gone for year; Newhouse was horrible today. And for all the supposed depth not having Jennings turned out to matter.
Only good news-- they can either wave good bye to Finley and not be too sad about it, or resign him at a decent wage, since every one of those drops is literally costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If I were a Packers' fan, I would remember that they won a Super Bowl with Finley on the IR.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
You mean they skimped on the OL so they could be 12 deep at receiver?
oh, the horror!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I don't think they skimped on the OL. Show me a team that can absorb losing 3 of its top 4 tackles.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The team that kicked the defending superbowl champs to the linx last year.
/you only asked for one example.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
2010 Steelers made it to the Super Bowl without their starting right and left tackles. They suffered short term injuries to the backups during the year but nothing long term, and the difference between Jonathan Scott and, for example, Roseanne Bar, is not that big.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Is there a subtle difference between "The ruling on the field is confirmed" and "The ruling on the field stands", or is it just different refs saying it different?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yes. Confirmed means that they found visual evidences to confirm the call (theoretically, if they had made the call the other way, they would have overturned it on a challenge). Stands means they couldn't find sufficient to overturn it, but if the call went the other way originally it wouldn't have changed either.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Broncos: 133 yards rushing. 4 minutes to go in the 1st quarter.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yee-hah!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The Danish announcers speaking to a mostly atheist audience: "Tim Tebow is... ahm... unusually christian."
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
He might even be "unusually Christian" for America, much less for a European country.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Here's what bugs me about the whole Tebow phenomenon - Kurt Warner was every bit as religious as Tebow. People admired him for it, but nobody ever ascribed anything more to it other than the fact that he is a very, very good person who happens to be a great QB. I admire Kurt Warner as a person and as a player. I remain skeptical of Tebow's future as an NFL quarterback.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I used to admire Kurt Warner more than I do now.
He spent time on the NFLN this AM explaining that Tebow wins football games because of his religious beliefs.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
He might. Different people derive emotional or psychological stability from different places. Now I think it's just as fair to say that, for example, Aaron Smith wins football games because he's a family man. But to each his own. For me there's a line with the overt religiosity of these athletes. If you want to talk about being blessed or how happy your religion makes you, fine, as long as the guy isn't getting all fire and brimstone or claiming "Yeah. I gotta say, Jesus really blew that one. Uh.. I know I had a, He had a long day. A plane went down, there was an earthquake somewhere, I think, uh, but I'm trying to win a title here! I can't afford to have Jesus fall asleep at the wheel! Okay?"
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
This is what bugs me about the Tebow discussion. I don't care what the QB's supreme sky daddy is.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Aaron Rodgers is very religious. But he follows St. Francis: Preach the Gospel every day. If necessary, use words. he had some very interesting comments about how "out there" Tebow is. He said in essence that he (Rodgers) had watched how people had handled interviews from his time in JuCo, and this is how he had decided to do it.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I think you missed the last part of my comment.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
No, I didn't. But you missed my point. Some people shove it in your face, and some people just go about their business. The second group is more likely to be palatable to you, because you don't care who their sky daddy is.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Sharp observation by Simms regarding declining the penalty. Never thought I'd type those words.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
there is far worse commentators out there. I watch Red Zone each week, and most of the color commentators make me shiver.
I was happy to see Jim Mora jr take the NCAA HC job, but on NFLN he got replaced by (yikes!) Dennis Green.
So, when you think it can't get any worse, it will. Works for the Patriots defense as well.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I kind of missed it. What was the rationale behind the Pats declining it and Denver not going for it? I'm confused.....
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Accept it, 3rd and 13 or something, decline it... 4th and 1. Simms said Pats should decline because Fox is so conservative you know he's going to kick the fg and best case scenario if you accept is you stop them on 3rd and 13 and they kick it anyway.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Then Fox is an idiot
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
That was sharp. His insistence that Brady's and Tebow's throwing motions are virtually identical (even though you could see the hitch in Tebow's) was absurd.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Watching Tebow-Brady, sorry, Pats-Broncos and I have a couple of thoughts.
We've seen good evidence for a while now that a qb who is a running threat can boost the effectiveness of other runners and Denver seem to have embraced the scheme more fully than I've previously seen in the NFL.
Secondly, if every team is going to load the box with eight and even nine men then even a poor quarterback will be able to make plays through the air. Additionally, Timmy seems to be getting better as a passer and Thomas and Decker are good receivers that present big targets.
This offense could be more sustainable than most people thought and I would include myself among the doubters.
NB: The Denver pass rush helps.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I thought the Bears provided a pretty good template for how to stop the Teboffense, but overall, I agree with your points. Plus, the Bears may have demonstrated more that a *good* defense can lock it down rather than that any defense can.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
But haven't several teams shut them down? It seems as you say that a good D can shut them down, it's just a question of whether they'll choose, as the Bears and others have, to go soft at the end of the game.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I feel like the Bears game was more indicative of the offense's progress; the early "Tebow" games shut themselves down because the offense hadn't really been defined yet. The more recent ones have a system that's obviously been tooled to his strengths and have allowed him to grow into it. Yes, the defense rolling over at the end of the games have been a major factor, but this new version of the team is more threatening than the early Tebow games--any defense would suffice for the early ones, whereas now that the offense has refined a bit, I think it takes a stronger D to really stop them completely.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Belichek special: You TE breaks a boatload of records one week, build a gameplan around the OTHER TE the week after.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hold on - why was Bailey on the bench for that goalline play?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hernandez just did the Newton Superman celebration?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Good to see Dane Fletcher back for NE, he looked pretty good in the preseason.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I am happy to see Marcus Cannon (61) getting on the field as RT when Solder plays "TE" in the big packages/unbalanced line they run fairly often.
I am also wondering whether it is good to see the Patriots rotating that many players on the OL (I count nine plus Koppen (IR)). I always thought OL needs stability.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The OL needs stability thing just is plain untrue.
Good lines tend to be stable because they're good, not good because they're stable.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Or good and stable because the starters are healthy.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It's more than just a collection of athletes, though, it's also the communication and familiarity. Otherwise you have a line that wins every one-on-one matchup, but gets the QB killed because no one picks up the stunting lineman.
If familiarity and communication didn't matter, starting QBs wouldn't need 99% of the snaps in practice. After all, they play with the most talented receivers, right? How much could timing and coordination matter?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Tebow walks over and pats Andre Carter (down on the field with injury) on the helmet. I can't be the only person thinking Carter may then have miraculously sprung up healed.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Hooray. Back to back drives ends in fumbles.
Danish announcer suggests that the NE defense is playing with an extra spark because Andre Carter was carted off.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Did Santonio Holmes really just get a TD taken away for taunting--in a game his team was at that point losing 28-3? WRs really do live in a different universe than the rest of us...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Nope...guess not, just another example of ESPN's fine accurate reporting.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Why oh why isn't Fox calling timeouts!! Geez!
Brady is particularly annoying today - doing his best Ray Lewis - angriest cheerleader - impression.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Laying on the ground for a full 8 seconds, getting up. Joggin around for a second or two, then spiking the ball in the endzone. That's taunting, right?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
... No. It's actually a penalty to spike the ball near an opposing player. Brady smartly ran to an empty part of the end zone before spiking the ball.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Don't be ridiculous. Brady can't be called for taunting--he just plays with a lot of emotion! Now the Holmes celebration--THAT was (obviously) taunting. Some guys are just classless.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Spiking the ball is not taunting!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
You certainly won't see me arguing on that. Then again, I wouldn't call "pretending you're an airplane like a 5-year-old" taunting either. Stupid, sure, but not exactly taunting.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm pretty sure that the penalty was actually for "using the football as a prop," although the referee's announcement didn't include that clarification. If he hadn't deliberately placed the ball down and stepped on it, the rest of the celebration wouldn't have drawn a flag.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Clock management tour de force in Denver.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Just let i bounce, all right.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Why weren't NE called for an illegal forwards lateral just before half time? Shouldn't that have been a 10 second run off and half time?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
They should have been called, yes. There's no 10 second runoff, though, because the clock wasn't moving. The clock stopped automatically after the turnover.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
As soon as the kicking team recovers a muffed punt, the play is dead, I believe.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The whistle definitely blew before he was down, possibly before the lateral.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Illegal use of hands on the defense on 3rd and 24. Great.
Why is this an automatic first down violation? The punishment doesn't fit the crime there, I think.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, that was bad. The defense is handling NE easy on this drive, it's the yellow killin' us.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
"us"? I don't know why, but I somehow got the impression you were a cowboysfan?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
You are correct - I do like the Cowboys.
I have a hereditary team in one conference and a geographical one in the other. I root for a Super Bowl XII rematch every year.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Likewise with XL for me.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Agreed. Someone within the last month suggested that any penalty which results in an automatic first down if committed by the defense should also be a loss-of-down foul if committed by the offense. I think I like that, though I would keep personal fouls the way they are, perhaps.
I'd also get rid of the automatic first down for DPI; if it happened past the first down marker, fine, but otherwise, just replay the down.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I would just get rid of auto first downs on almost every penalty. If they yards don't give you a first, you get another shot from closer.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
That was me. I actually agree with the idea that almost any penalties that have an automatic first down should not...just give them the yardage and if it results in a first down, so be it. I agree with you on personal fouls, though. Keep them having an automatic first down.
My point about loss-of-down is that it would be equivalent to giving an automatic first down, if the rules were balanced. Think about it. By giving an automatic first down for, say, defensive holding, even if the holding happens five yards down the field on 3rd-and-20, you're assuming that either (1) the receiver would have either immediately caught the ball if not held, and then somehow dodged however many tackles are necessary to make it to the first down maker, or (2) the reciever would have been able to run to the first down marker and get open, the QB would be able to buy time, and then the reciever would have caught it. This is analogous to assuming that a pass rusher that gets held would have made the sack or tackled the runner in the backfield, and so the offense should lose the down.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If it was just a spot foul, defense would hold on any passing down ... and what about possible yac after the catch? Players with a tendency for high yac would never ever catch a ball again, just because the defender would foul the crap out of them. Why bother tackling Gronk after a catch?
The point is, if you don't want to concede a first down, don't foul.
Holding is probably the most significant penalty against the offense, and even without a loss of down is basically a drive killer.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
If teams did that, every passing down would eventually become 3rd and inches.
doesn't seem like a valid strategy
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
What is wrong with the lower half of Denver coach's face (my "ecks" key is broken)?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I've watched a fair amount of Denver this year and I don't recall seeing this many penalties...
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Mike Carey is calling this game very tight, but I wouldn't say any of the penalties are wrong.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
(after Tim Tebow picks up his own end zone fumble)
Announcer: "I thought he was just going to step out of the end zone and give up on the play".
What?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
He thought Tebow is short for Orlowsky.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
That Dumervill on Brady hit is just spectacular! Holy smokes!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Carey must have missed it. It's illegal to touch Tom Brady.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Bernard Pollard ended Brady's 2008 season and wasn't even flagged for the hit.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Wow that was a shot by Dumervil.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Patriots rushing three. Tebow converts on 3rd-and-18. I've seen this movie before. (Please, please, please, please, please)
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It's a matter of perspective. In the first Terminator, Arnold Schwarzenegger played the bad guy, in the second Terminator he played the good guy. In Twins he shared the lead role with Danny Devito and in Expendables, he was just a guy making a cameo appearance.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I've seen this movie too. This is where Cobra Kai beats up on Ralph Macchio, only for them to meet again at the end of the movie.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Ah. The Lord is just busy bailing out the Lions. Don't take it personal, Tim, its his way of spreading the wealth to more teams. This way both the Lions and Broncos stay in the drivers' seat of the playoff-race.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I thought the Lions were cursed? I guess they have done their penance and made it back in the Lord's good graces
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah, funny indeed that the week there is no ridiculous Denver comeback there is an awful 4th quarter implosion by their main rivals.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Right, that's how I saw it, too. It wasn't about Him bailing out the Lions. It was about smiting the Raiders. Denver, The Chosen Team, is never ignored.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Jesus saves, but Suh blocks the game winning FG.
I'll take Suh.
On a related note: I know Shaun Rogers was the league leader for FG's blocked during the time he was on the Lions - I would be curious how DET has been for blocked FG's, relative to the rest of the league. Playing SD, I'm sure the rest of the AFC-W is up there too, but I feel like DET has been doing it more often over the last 10 years than a lot of other teams.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Chicago has had a bunch since Peppers got there
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Sadly, I can't find any data for blocked FG's on PFR or anything else. :-(
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Before too. Idonije has several.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It took me an embarrassing amount of time to realize why the guy in the Chevy commercial doesn't want to tell Santa he hunts deer.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I suspect I'm going to be wrong about there being 9-7 wildcard teams in the playoffs in both conferences, but it will be close. In the NFC Detroit has a tricky schedule (San Diego, and likely Green Bay's backups) while Atlanta has the marginally easier New Orleans/Tampa Bay pair of games. To get a 9-7 wild card, Detroit or Atlanta would need to drop both of their last two.
In the AFC, a 9-7 team requires both the Jets and Cincinnati to lose at least one team: Jets has the Giants/Miami they could screw up, while Cincinnati has what should be a win against Arizona and then a difficult slog against Baltimore.
I'd still like to see FO give some distribution of wins needed to get various playoff seeds.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'd imagine we probably end up with one 9-7 team. I don't think that's a problem, though. Do you?
The idea of a distribution of wins is harder in football, than it is in hockey, for example. In hockey, it's pretty common where everyone looks at it with the idea of "you're going to need X points to make the playoffs in this conference". With a longer season, and the divisional effects in the NHL being less pronounced on the playoffs than they are in the NFL (only 6 of 16 spots in NHL go to division winners, 8 of 12 in NFL, and a smaller schedule hinders wild card hopes when you have a tough division), I don't think such a thing is that realistic, or at least, not much more so than the standard cliche of "win 10 games and you make the playoffs", which is almost always true.
One of my favorite things from FO the last couple years, is whoever in the comments it is that makes the little playoff results map for the last week or two of the season. Basically, taking the last of the playoff-implication matchups, sticking them into a big graph, and then you can easily chart throughout the last Sunday or two what playoff implications come with each game that finishes.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I don't have a problem with a 9-7 playoff team. I just dislike the assumptions people were making a few weeks ago that 10-6 was necessary for the playoffs.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Every year people are obsessed with the notion of a 9-7 Wild Card team. PK and Bill Simmons, for instance, always speculate about them, but it rarely happens. Teams always manage to get to 10 wins for the wild card, often there are 10 win teams that don't make the playoffs.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I may be wrong (too lazy to check), but my impression is the opposite. Rare is the 10-win team that misses the playoffs. And 9-7 playoff teams are not uncommon. I think it's the rare 8-win team that makes it which gets under people's skin. Am I off-base here?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It's not exactly "rare" that a 10-win team misses the playoffs, but it's certainly not very common. It's certainly less common than 9-7 teams making the playoffs, which does happen fairly commonly. I've never heard of anyone being oddly concerned about 9-7 teams making the playoffs, in general. If you're one of the 6 best teams in your conference and you're 9-7, I don't think anyone has much problem with that. The only time it's ever generally an issue is for division winners coming in with significantly lower records than teams sitting, but that's not an issue with "9 wins", that's an issue with the playoff seeding format, and the guaranteed spots given to divisional winners. For example, last year, 10-6 TB stayed home for the 7-9 Seahawks.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I was talking about wild card teams.
Last year the wild cards were: 12-4, 11-5, 11-5, 10-6. Two 10-6 teams missed the playoffs.
2009: Wildcards: 11-5x2, 9-7x2.
2008: Wildcards: 12-4, 11-5x2, 9-6-1. 11-5 Team misses playoffs.
2007: Wildcards: 11-5, 10-6x2, 9-7. 10-6 team misses playoffs.
SO I suppose it is all over the place, but certainly a lot of 10-6 teams have missed the playoffs in the past.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm pretty sure Simmons usually speculates on the possibility of a 7-9 winning its division each year more than whether or not there will be a 9-7 wildcard team. There's nothing much remarkable about a 9-7 team winning the wildcard because, unlike division winners, they can't be beating out teams with a better record.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Agreed. The problem is when the NFL changed the format from three to four divisions.
Since then, one division winner always got into the playoffs undeservingly, kicking out a better team which would have gotten a wild card under the old format. And since you have only six playoff berths per conference, I think that is a significant impact.
"for every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong". I never liked the realignment into four divisions even though it looks nice. It's complete crap. Just like instant replay, it offers the impression of something positive, and is just a pile of crap once you take a closer look.
I think the 8-8 Chargers will make it this year. However, they will be tough to beat in the playoffs.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The fact that the Eagles can still win the division is incredible and makes me think all the divisions should have their games weighted towards the end of the season.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Yeah the format, but it helps that Dallas and New York have been not so much shooting themselves in the foot as blowing their limbs off over the past few weeks.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Football Night in America just showed the highlights of the Pats/Broncos game. Despite the Pats scoring 41 points they showed a single highlight of the Pats offense, a 1 yard QB sneak for a TD by Brady, with Dan Patrick saying "and Brady says, look I can run too!" The rest of the segment was all Tebow, followed by a special report about whether Tebow can get his 4th quarter magic back.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm not pleased with the Patriots. I've been calling for them to hang 50 on the Broncos for the last two weeks now and they only managed 41. Really need to start living up to expectations here.
/snark
---
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I had just eaten. Thank God I missed that!
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'd imagine they didn't show either or his two fumbles, or his -30 yard sack, did they?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Did they mention why the only reason why Kyle Orton was able to beat Green Bay was that sitting on the bench for several weeks behind Tebow taught him how to be a Winner(tm)?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
As a Packers fan, that's the explanation I'm gonna stick with.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
And here we see the only person in the world who thinks the Patriots are under-exposed.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
It depends entirely on shutter speed and aperture.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Not at all. I just thought it was funny because it was Tebow. If the Vikings Saints highlights had consisted of nothing but Vikings plays you wouldn't have found that odd?
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
In addition to keeping up with the open thread, join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for Sunday night IRC football chat! Point your favorite IRC client to bendenweyr.dyndns.org, channel #fo
Or for a web-based solution, just use this mibbit link: http://chat.mibbit.com/?channel=%23fo&server=bendenweyr.dyndns.org
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Just looking at the schedule for next week, and Eagles @ Cowboys is scheduled to be played at 4:15 Eastern. However, if the Giants have already beaten the Jets (1:00 Eastern) I believe this becomes essentially a meaningless game for the Cowboys. Win or lose against the Eagles, winning the division would depend on beating the Giants in week 17 because this match swings all the tie-breakers. There are no wild-card or seeding implications. It doesn't matter that the Eagles are still in the hunt because, again, they can't catch Dallas if they win in week 17.
Can somebody confirm this? Will this be noticed and the schedule adjusted so that the Giants and Cowboys games are played simultaneously? Otherwise Dallas could conceivably rest their starters.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
FWIW, the thing that surprised most this last weekend is finding out Tavaris Jackson led the Seahawks to their fourth straight win. They now have an fair shot at the post-season as a wild card, though they will need help - either the Lions or Falcons losing their last two games.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Can someone insert the powercable into Roethlisberger please.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Some strange calls on Monday night--
Two phantom cut block calls (called on RB's blocking low when the defender was _not_ engaged in another block), kick catch interference (which I think was the right call, but don't know the rule well enough), a bizarre "leaping" call on a field goal, and forgetting about intercepting momentum (which the announcers also had no clue about-- but that is still the rule, right? If a defender intercepts and gets carried into his own endzone by his momentum, you rule a touchback, not a spot at his forward progress.)
The Steelers are now 10-4 and are -11 in turnovers, just one year after being second in the league at +17. They were -4 in this game. If they could have kept it to just -1, I think this game would have been a toss-up. The Steelers moved the ball pretty well, but didn't get their points' worth out of it. It was an awesome special teams performance by SF-- that's quite a boost for a good defense, and helped them hold the Steelers to 3 points.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The Steelers did a lot to cost themselves this one, but the officials certainly made their contribution. The "interfering with punt" call was a tossup, but the chop blocks and leaping calls were complete tripe. And as a Baltimore fan, I (obviously) know bad officiating. The Ravens got an early christmas present out of this one.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
The catch interference call was anything but borderline, the PIT defender's hands touched the ball before it got to the PR. The (not) chop block calls sucked though. Leaping was pretty borderline, but it all depends on where the defender was lined up.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
+1 that was the one major call I thought wasn't questionable.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm inclined to agree with the former; I just don't like letting my purple blinders coat my opinion too much. It looked close enough to call "borderline" to me, but, I didn't review it several times. The leaping one still looked completely false though; I saw it on the first FG, but not on the second one. However, after the commentator clarification, I can see why it was called. I just never see it called that way elsewhere, so it seemed nonsensical.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
I'm a soccer official, a game where fouls occur a lot, but the inclination and culture is to let them go if they have no effect on the play. I can see calling the leaping penalty if the player was able to get up high enough to block the ball, whether or not he actually got his hands on it. But in this case, the foul had no impact on the game, and no opportunity to have an impact on the game. It seems egregious to give a team a first down under those circumstances. I'm not saying whether it was the right call, because I don't know. I'm saying it sure felt like it was NOT the right call.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Also, it was the second such infraction of the night, which makes it more likely to be called.
It makes it a bit better about the chop blocks that there was one per team. The first one really pissed me off, though...cost SF at least 3 points, and they just recently had another crappy not-a-chop-block called in the recent Ravens game, one that cost them a touchdown.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Weirdly the leaping/leverage thing I believe was called 3 seperate times this week, 2 for sure. It's a pretty rare call, mostly because players don't do it. Obviously, they've been doing it more. It's possible that the league saw that in reviewing games from the preceeding week and instructed officials to make it a point of emphasis. Again, no problem with the call, been that way for many years, and for good reason.
The chop blocks were definately tight calls, but the officials called that tight consistantly. hard to want more than that given the week to week, game to game abortion that generally constitutes officiating.
Re: Week 15 Open Discussion Thread
Nope. On a kick from scrimmage "a player is not considered to have touched the ball if he is blocked into it by an opponent." They were certainly engaged. Does that mean he was blocked into it? The rules doesn't say, but consider the same call except it's potentially running into the kicker. No way that gets called because the player would be ruled running into the kicker. It was at least borderline, but probably wrong.
Post new comment