National Football League - Page 188 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1871  
Old 12-05-12, 04:30
on3m@n@rmy's Avatar
on3m@n@rmy on3m@n@rmy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 3,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
Two things I recall from last night's game that stood out. First, was the return of the fans dressed as Hogs.

The problem with Sanchez is that the Jets gave him that huge contract in the off-season, and with it he's guaranteed $8.5m next season. So they have to find a team that's a sucker who will take that, have him sit for that much, or play him. At this point though if I were the Jets, I'd at least see what Greg McElroy can do. He played okay in pre-season, and last week. The season is all but over, give the kid a shot. Either that, or Tebow (who is gone next year almost for certain)..
Love the Hogs thing. Dawg Pound and Black Hole too. Sanchez's contract... that is a huge one to bite off, a real boat anchor. I can't figure how this will end up. Restructure and take a big pay cut and become attractive and affordable to a team needing a backup? But if not playing, why would he restructure... just sit and take the money. Certainly a team needing a starter would not take him. Time will tell I guess.

Thanks for the draft tidbits.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pazuzu View Post
If I were the Jets' general manager I'd do everything in my power to get Matt Flynn from Seattle. And if that didn't happen I'd try to get Alex Smith. Either one of these guys would be vastly superior to Sanchez.

Regarding Sanchez guaranteed contract, perhaps someone would be willing to take him (Pete Carroll's Seattle perhaps) if the Jets agreed to pay half his salary.
Seattle might be willing to give up Flynn, but maybe not just yet. You know how some rookie QBs (e.g. Mirer) come out and take rookie of the year award and then bomb the next year. Mirer never did recover. So Seattle would be smart to keep Flynn as insurance in case Wilson bombs... although I think the odds of Wilson bombing into a sophomore slump is really low. But Schnieder and Carroll are shrewd enough that if they are confident Wilson won't bomb, then they could deal Flynn away to a pretty sweet deal. Plus, while Seattle only has 2 active QBs on their roster, Seattle still has QB Josh Portis on the practice squad. And Portis is a promising prospect and could be a descent backup. So at worst, Seattle would just need to shore up the backup QB postion if they dealt Flynn.

Alex Smith to the Jets is more likely, since the relationship between Flynn and Seattle coaches is better than Smith to Harbaugh. It's almost like the skids are already greased for Smith to go.

But because of the nasty big contract Sanchez has, as Alpe pointed out, Sanch may not be going anywhere. Then can Jets afford to go out and grab a Flynn? I dunno.
Reply With Quote
  #1872  
Old 12-05-12, 17:01
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pazuzu View Post
Regarding Sanchez guaranteed contract, perhaps someone would be willing to take him (Pete Carroll's Seattle perhaps) if the Jets agreed to pay half his salary.
That's unlikely, without the contract being restructured completely. The reason why is because of the salary cap and way the CBA is structured in the NFL. This kind of deal works better in MLB and the NBA, where there are various match clauses that allow the cap to be topped, (and no cap in MLB). But they could spread the guarantee out over 3-4 years, and send him off to be a backup somewhere else. Meanwhile, Rex says Mark is the starter this weekend, not McElroy.

Unless Kaepernick tanks, Smith is definitely somewhere else next season, no question. Very likely one of the teams I listed above. Could Smith end up a Jet, and Sanchez the backup to Kaepernick?

Agree the Seahawks may not give up Matt Flynn easily. He's a great insurance policy, and one of the best backup QB's in the NFL (still!).

Those power rankings are I'm guessing Bleacher Report, and not the AP collective ranking? Here's that link.

1. Houston
2. New England
3. Atlanta
4. Denver
5. San Francisco
6. Baltimore
7. Green Bay
8. NY Giants
9. Chicago
10. Indianapolis

I think Baltimore, GB and Indy too high. Seattle is 12, and should be in the top 10. What may be most interesting is that the NFC is considered superior to the AFC and better head to head. And yet, 4 of the top six teams are in the AFC. I also am not completely sold on Atlanta, and maybe not SF, GB or NYG either. Next week's Houston-NE game should be very telling.
Reply With Quote
  #1873  
Old 12-05-12, 20:17
on3m@n@rmy's Avatar
on3m@n@rmy on3m@n@rmy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 3,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
...Meanwhile, Rex says Mark is the starter this weekend, not McElroy.

Those power rankings are I'm guessing Bleacher Report, and not the AP collective ranking? Here's that link.

I think Baltimore, GB and Indy too high. Seattle is 12, and should be in the top 10. What may be most interesting is that the NFC is considered superior to the AFC and better head to head. And yet, 4 of the top six teams are in the AFC. I also am not completely sold on Atlanta, and maybe not SF, GB or NYG either. Next week's Houston-NE game should be very telling.
Rankings I posted were Fox Sports... FOX, and I agree on GB, IND, SEA, and so on.

Yes, Rex says Sanch is the starter. Sal Pal (antonio) on ESPN (LINK) explained the decision came not from above by the owner, but was Rex's. Sal thinks the reason Rex is sticking with Sanch is then he only has to answer the question "who is your starter this week". IF he chose Tebow or McElroy, then he'd have to answer tougher questions like:
1. were you wrong to draft Sanch?
2. were you wrong to give Sanch $20 million garanteed? ($8.2 Mil of that in 2013)
To me, Rex's decision is nuts and is just delaying the inevitable. He's going to have to answer those 2 questions sometime anyway (IF he still has a Jets job). Why not just bite the bullet and find out what McElroy (&/or Tebow, but Mc would be my choice ATM) can do now (e.g. before the draft)? I guess NY media has a way of making ppl want to avoid those kind of questions.

Last edited by on3m@n@rmy; 12-05-12 at 20:20. Reason: add LINK
Reply With Quote
  #1874  
Old 12-05-12, 21:49
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,513
Default

Agree with all you wrote. I think this is especially true with McElroy. We don't know what he can do. But if they're going to find out, these last four games will answer it now. They play Jax, Ten, SD, and Buf. Perfect training ground for a young QB. Why have Sanchez go out there? My guess is that they are hoping to showcase him against weak competition in order to help dump him, NBA style. I can't think of any other reason. Because even if they win out, they'll be 9-7 and still miss the playoffs. So they're sacrificing a glimpse into the future, in order to potentially lighten the load, IF he plays well. But let's pretend they lose to the hapless Jaguars. Then what do they do?
Reply With Quote
  #1875  
Old 12-06-12, 01:45
on3m@n@rmy's Avatar
on3m@n@rmy on3m@n@rmy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 3,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
Why have Sanchez go out there? My guess is that they are hoping to showcase him against weak competition in order to help dump him, NBA style.
Hoho. That's too funny. That's got to be about the sanest, yet deceptive reason of all to play Sanchez. .
Reply With Quote
  #1876  
Old 12-06-12, 13:53
on3m@n@rmy's Avatar
on3m@n@rmy on3m@n@rmy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 3,836
Default

If the NFL stopped today and we could now pick rookie of the year (ROY), my pick would go to RG3, hands down. Further, I would not even put Luck in any kind of serious discussion for the ROY honor. Luck would be discussed, for sure, but not seriously. I showed Rodgers and Sanchez just for reference. Is Luck a bad QB... NO. Is he great so far... Yes. Does he have a bright future... I think so. But not ROY. Take a look at today's QB stats and decide for yourself.

RK....QB.....COMP... ATT..... PCT..... YDS.... YDS/A...LONG...TD...INT...SACK....RATE.... YDS/G
1....Rodgers... 279..... 414...... 67.4...... 3,124...... 7.55...... 72...... 29...... 8...... 39...... 105.0...... 260
3....RG III…..... 218..... 325...... 67.1...... 2,660...... 8.19...... 88...... 17...... 4...... 25...... 104.4...... 222
7....Wilson...... 201..... 317...... 63.4...... 2,344...... 7.39...... 51...... 19....... 8...... 23....... 95.2...... 195
29...Luck......... 279..... 503...... 55.5...... 3,596...... 7.15...... 60...... 17...... 16..... 28....... 76.1...... 300
32...Sanchez... 204.... 371...... 55.0...... 2,436...... 6.57...... 66...... 12...... 13..... 29....... 71.4...... 203
Reply With Quote
  #1877  
Old 12-06-12, 17:45
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,513
Default

I've got the day off, so here's one of those blog like posts for y'all.

Luck has put up some big numbers, and his team is 8-4 (against unquestionably weaker competition), but RGIII has shown better decision making, better accuracy, and the glaring stat is the TD/INT ratio. Props also to Russell Wilson, who won't win this award, but has topped all expectations. Tannehill also deserves praise as everyone said he'd fail. Trent Richardson and Alfred Morris have also changed their teams, and deserve recognition. Trent missed time early and was hurt, but is making a difference now.

I want to give a shout out to Brady Quinn for his gutsy win last week for KC, and putting up the best numbers of his entire career. Gone are the shaggy hair and arrogant smirk on his face. He didn't play well in the preseason, but when forced to step-up, he's played better than Matt Cassell on a very misguided KC team with a lot of talent. Chapeau. Let's see if he can keep it up against the team that drafted him (and he busted on) this week: Cleveland.

With four games to go, I'm wondering if Adrien Peterson can top 2,000 yards. He's at 1,446 and averaging a whopping 6.2 per carry. Those are Jim Brown/Walter Peyton/Eric Dickerson type numbers. He also dispelled any concerns about his knee.

At the start of the season I said Calvin Johnson may top Jerry Rice impossible single season receiving record of 1,848. He's currently at 1,428. Can he do it?

I also thought Tom Brady may throw for 50 TDs. At 25, he's not going to get close. Doesn't even lead the league (Brees with 31). Brady does only have 4 picks though, which is a very impressive stat.

With four weeks go to, looking to teams depth chart, and potential, the teams to watch are:

AFC

• New England, #1 in yards and points on offense. They can put up huge points, and will likely have Gronkoski back on offense, and rookie Chandler Jones back on defense by season's end. They are still 26th on defense in yardage, but 14th in points allowed. If they can heal, and gel, come playoff team they could steamroll some teams. And if in tight games, the defense may hold well in the red zone where they are needed most.

• Pittsburgh. They are still #1 in defense (yards), and if Polamalu can get healthy, Harrison and other key defenders can get close to 100%, Ike Taylor can make it back, and Ben can heal, they could be a force. The only teams with maybe more key injuries are GB and Balt. The Steelers may also be the best coached team in the NFL.

• Houston. They play with a consistency not seen in other teams. They quietly win every week, sans the blowout loss to GB after Cushing was hurt. 6th in yards and 4th in points on defense. But here's the scary stat: 4th on offense in yards, and 2nd in points. Near guaranteed first round bye, and likely HFA in playoffs. But let's see how they do against NE.

• Denver. I still am on the fence about them. Manning isn't a great cold weather QB, and despite his rising to the top again, I question their ability to win the big one. But they may likely get a 1st round bye, or play at home in at least their first game. They also have a solid defense that doesn't get a lot of credit ranked 3rd, (10th in points). But if they get to the playoffs and have to play NE...

• Baltimore. Ray Lewis will return to practice this week, but no contact and won't play. He may play in two weeks against Denver at the very soonest. My guess is that he'll suit up then, and see limited action. The negative news is that Suggs was again hurt, this time with a partial biceps tear. He says he'll play this week, but limited. The other concern is that Flacco, who looked great early, has looked average of late. Team is 19th on offense, a startling 25th on defense.

NFC

• San Francisco. Despite losing to StL. I still think they have the tools and depth to win it all. They are 2nd on defense in yardage, but 1st in points, with a very stingy 14.6. Way ahead of anyone. On offense Kaepernick gives them a dynamic Smith didn't. But is he too green to win big games? The ugly loss to NYG also sticks out to me though. You can blame Smith for caving in that loss when they fell behind early. But I still need to SF as a whole come from behind in a big game before I'm sold. Be that with Kaepernick, or Smith.

• NYG. A Jeckel-Hyde team. Look like they could repeat SB wins after beating SF and GB handily. Then roll over like dogs against the Bengals, and were beaten up by the Steelers, and looked lost and tired late against the Skins. 10th on offense, but 22nd on defense. But defend the pass very well. There is only so long you can flip the switch on when you need it and have the ball bounce your way in this league. Three tough games left, so if Hyde shows up, they'll miss the playoffs...

• Atlanta. While 10-1, and will get a home field bye at the least, I question their ability to win big games. They looked to me like they peaked eary. They've already eeked some out this year already and I just see them playing the Giants again in the playoffs, and losing another one of those 24-9 games that are over at halftime. We'll get a peek at this come week 15.

• GB. Another schitzo team with a rash of injuries. Not the passing team they were two years ago at 15 on offense, but show flashes of it when they can protect Rodgers and run. Defense is still ranked 16th though, even with Clay Matthews out the last three weeks, Charles Woodson and Mike Neal out the last six, CJ Wilson and Sam Shields out the last four. Think about that for a moment. They have also missed Lang, Saturday, Nelson and Starks on offense who have been either out, or playing hurt. They are still however 8-4 and in first. Matthews back likely in two weeks against Chicago, maybe Woodson this week. If the rest of these wounded guys can heal, they could be very good playoff time. Picture the team that demolished the Texans...

• Seattle. Yes, Seattle. That win at Chicago was a breakthrough. Excellent coaching staff, Wilson is coming into his own though they are still 22nd in passing, and they are very tough at home with 3 home games left there (one against SF. Road game is at Buf). Can they win on the road with Wilson's arm come playoff time? DB Browner will miss the last four games on a suspension, but (so far) Sherman will appeal. How much will losing these two star DB's hurt? Team is 4th on defense, but 24th on offense.

• Chicago. The loss to Seattle showed weaknesses beyond Cutler. And with Urlacher out maybe the rest of the regular season they are vulnerable. I also don't favor teams that win on takeaways or turnover percentage, even though the media loves to exploit this stat. While it shows an aggressive defense, it also often comes with other teams are tired, or desperate late in games and is not something a team can rely on to win.
Reply With Quote
  #1878  
Old 12-06-12, 19:57
Amsterhammer's Avatar
Amsterhammer Amsterhammer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 3,177
Default

Thanks to both of you for the analysis and blogging, much appreciated as always. Those QB stats are pretty damn impressive for my boy!

My last three weeks are 37-9, which is way better than any of the ESPN picksters. I'm still waiting for a call.

Eyes down for week 14.

DEN @ OAK -- Cannot imagine Peyton having much trouble with these Raiders
STL @ BUF -- Home advantage will probably tell, but the Rams are improving
ATL @ CAR -- Falcons should continue their roll without too much fuss
DAL @ CIN -- I think the Bengals are a better team right now
KC @ CLE -- A KC miracle two weeks running seems unlikely
TEN @ IND -- Should be a lock if Luck can avoid too many picks
NYJ @ JAC -- Pff, a toss up, going with Jets only because Sanchez is playing for his future (according to some blog)
CHI @ MIN -- Have to go with Da Bears again despite AP running amok.
SD @ PIT -- Should be another lock with Ben back
PHI @ TB -- The Eagles might win a game somewhere, but I'm not picking them
BAL @ WAS -- We're on a roll, the hogs are back, and the Ravens have disappointed on the road. Oh, and there's RG3!
MIA @ SF -- Niners at home, looks like another lock
NO @ NYG -- The Giants will hit back after their embarrassment on MNF, though I would love to see Brees turn them over.
ARI @ SEA -- Should be a stroll, another lock
DET @ GB -- Anything's possible, but I expect the Packers to prevail
HOU @ NE -- Another quality MNF game - I expect Brady to step up and take care of business despite the Texans (maybe) having the better team
__________________
The LOTE has won, all hail the LOTE.
Reply With Quote
  #1879  
Old 12-07-12, 02:19
Pazuzu Pazuzu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 229
Default

Anyone have an opinion on the idea being floated to do away with kickoffs?
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...g-nfl-kickoffs

"After a touchdown or field goal, instead of kicking off, a team would get the ball on its own 30-yard line, where it's fourth-and-15," TIME's Sean Gregory writes. "The options are either to go for it and try to retain possession or punt. If you go for it and fall short, of course, the opposing team would take over with good field position. In essence, a punt replaces the kickoffs."

My initial reaction to this proposal was negative. Mainly because it's such a radical change. But upon further reflection, it might be worth trying for a year. Perhaps it wouldn't seem so radical after it's been in place for a while and adding another decision might add some intrigue. And if it it helped cut down on injuries, all the better.
__________________
"if anybody is the deserving winner of those seven tours, it's Ferrari." - Neal Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #1880  
Old 12-07-12, 04:53
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,513
Default

I had not heard of that, but it may be worth trying. It would definitely change the game. One the problems with changing the kickoff is that it's sometimes one of the most exciting plays in the game. But it does lead to injuries. So this "4th and 15" could lead to some exciting plays, depending on the decisions the teams make.

Back at the start of the season we talked about kickoffs and potential changes to the rules. There was talk of simply making the kicker (or punter) punt the ball instead of kicking it off. And/or forcing the kicking team to have all players, and the defense have 8 players within 5 yards of the 35 yard line when the ball is kicked (sort of like they do on a onsides kick). This would prevent some of the players getting up a huge amount of speed before smashing into one another.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.