National Football League - Page 196 - 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
  #1951  
Old 12-18-12, 16:30
woodenswan woodenswan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: combination pizza hut and taco bell
Posts: 407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
MNF was ugly, ugly, ugly.
****-poor quality
i suffered through it, because i picked the titans, and could tie up scores in our prediction game with the win. just imagine my anguish..
a laughable ending too..

i actually feel sorry for Sanchez at this point.. just embarassing..
and putting tebow in the game for a five-play stretch when Sanchez is playing well, and finally has a good rhythm? what was that all about?
Reply With Quote
  #1952  
Old 12-18-12, 16:49
FoxxyBrown1111's Avatar
FoxxyBrown1111 FoxxyBrown1111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,024
Default

This week...

Alpe 9-6
Amster 9-7
Me 9-6 (should have not changed my WAS-Pick. If i only started my Starter/Backup research earlier, i´d have gone 10-5)

We might should pick exact results? To get more differences. Just an idea.

A little old, but still true:
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2007...d-coaches.html

Look where Norv the Smurf is. How on this earth does he get a new job in the NFL everytime is beyond me...

Last edited by FoxxyBrown1111; 12-18-12 at 16:53.
Reply With Quote
  #1953  
Old 12-18-12, 17:04
Amsterhammer's Avatar
Amsterhammer Amsterhammer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 3,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxxyBrown1111 View Post
This week...

Alpe 9-6
Amster 9-7
Me 9-6 (should have not changed my WAS-Pick. If i only started my Starter/Backup research earlier, i´d have gone 10-5)
So what's your opinion - keep Captain Kirk in for the Philly game, on the assumption that we can't lose that one and make double sure that RG3 is completely fit for the Cowgirls, OR should RG3 go back in this week on the assumption that he's almost 100%?

Jeez, 9-7 is my worst result in ages. The only one I'm kicking myself about is the Ravens, where I deliberately let my heart rule my head. Backing against Peyton when he's on this kind of a roll was just stupid. They're going to win out (the regular season anyway) with him.


Quote:
We might should pick exact results? To get more differences. Just an idea.
Bit late for that this season. Maybe next season. Besides, I suck at scores.
__________________
The LOTE has won, all hail the LOTE.
Reply With Quote
  #1954  
Old 12-18-12, 17:21
FoxxyBrown1111's Avatar
FoxxyBrown1111 FoxxyBrown1111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amsterhammer View Post
So what's your opinion - keep Captain Kirk in for the Philly game, on the assumption that we can't lose that one and make double sure that RG3 is completely fit for the Cowgirls, OR should RG3 go back in this week on the assumption that he's almost 100%?
My reasearch is halfway so i don´t know. OTOH, i think RG3 is soo good that he maybe indeed is worth an extra win per season (where i doubt now that any other NFL-Starter has that talent outside of Newton maybe).
Captain Kirk has now a good chunk of reps, but more practise makes more perfect, so i think start RG3.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amsterhammer View Post
Jeez, 9-7 is my worst result in ages. The only one I'm kicking myself about is the Ravens, where I deliberately let my heart rule my head. Backing against Peyton when he's on this kind of a roll was just stupid. They're going to win out (the regular season anyway) with him.
I still stand by my words. Peyton is a great RS-QB (as was Favre). But be patient, he will falter in the playoffs... He won´t disappoint me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amsterhammer View Post
Bit late for that this season. Maybe next season. Besides, I suck at scores.
I´ll do my picks with results. Just for the fun of it...
Reply With Quote
  #1955  
Old 12-18-12, 17:52
FoxxyBrown1111's Avatar
FoxxyBrown1111 FoxxyBrown1111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,024
Default

My picks:

ATL 24, DET 23
OAK 13, CAR 24
BUF 20, MIA 24
CIN 17, PIT 23
NE 27, JAX 20
IND 20, KC 17
NO 24, DAL 28
WAS 24, PHI 20
SL 16, TB 17
SD 17, NYJ 21
TEN 17, GB 24
MIN 17, HOU 27
CLE 13, DEN 30
CHI 17, ARZ 13
NYG 24, BAL 27
SF 20, SEA 24

Last edited by FoxxyBrown1111; 12-18-12 at 17:56.
Reply With Quote
  #1956  
Old 12-18-12, 18:54
Alpe d'Huez's Avatar
Alpe d'Huez Alpe d'Huez is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 7,614
Default

I'm not picking scores, but will pick games later. Need to look at the injury reports first.

AP Power Rankings aren't out yet (later today). But BR has theirs out. They have SF on top, followed by Denver, NE, GB, Hou, ATL and Sea.

I like their article on teams peaking at the right time better. They like Washington, Seattle and Dallas as teams on the real up. They also say that Russell Wilson, not RGIII or Andrew Luck looks like the ROY. If he can keep up his level of play, I have to agree. This week's Seattle-SF game, and the following week's Wash-Dallas games will be epic.

I'm guessing Cousins will start against Philly, but RG3 will suit up and be ready if they fall into trouble. But Shanehan isn't stupid like Rex Ryan, he's a much more savvy planner, so who knows?

As I said a dozen posts ago, I also like GB's chances if they can heal. Clay Matthews played limited this week, and should be back to full strength soon, and if they can get Nelson and Woodson back, and some other injured players to heal, they could be very dangerous. But those "if's" may not come in time to gel.

I actually think NE's losing to SF may have actually helped them. Despite starting like a blowout, the game was close and it was turnovers that were the real difference. In Decembers past NE steamrolled opponents and then ran out of steam in the playoffs, or SB. This may help them focus more so they don't peak in December, but in January/Feb. Gronkowski back likely in week 17. What, you forgot about him?

Despite the blowout loss to Atl, I still would not write the NYG off. They like to look at it like if they can get into the "tournament" they can win the SB, and they've done that twice now. But I've been involved and watching sports for nearly a half century and can tell you rarely can a team just turn a switch on like that. Both of their playoff runs and SB wins involved elements of luck, and that you can't count on. But the Giants usually have good pass protection, receivers, and can defend the pass, and play well late in games, all keys to winning big games. Pittsburgh is the same way, but they may just be too banged up at this point.

I too won't be surprised if Denver loses in the playoffs and PM had a mediocre game in the process. He's a great player, will end up in the HOF, but not a great playoff player. I question Denver's ability to defend the pass against a top QB (Brady anyone?), and come from behind late.

The Cowboys have thankfully barred Brent from the sidelines for the rest of the season.
Reply With Quote
  #1957  
Old 12-18-12, 19:29
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,687
Default

What a season.

I can't wait till the carpetbagger gets off the plane in the Crescent City! They are waiting to give him a great big welcome.
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #1958  
Old 12-19-12, 00:33
FoxxyBrown1111's Avatar
FoxxyBrown1111 FoxxyBrown1111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
Despite the blowout loss to Atl, I still would not write the NYG off. They like to look at it like if they can get into the "tournament" they can win the SB, and they've done that four times now. But I've been involved and watching sports for nearly a half century and can tell you rarely can a team just turn a switch on like that. Both of their playoff runs and SB wins involved elements of luck, and that you can't count on.
Bo knows football, and Alpe too.
As we learned, and posted many times, the NYG are the most incredible lucky pro sports team ever. Now the fear is around the corner all the time that they might repeat it again. Oh no....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpe d'Huez View Post
I too won't be surprised if Denver loses in the playoffs and PM had a mediocre game in the process. He's a great player, will end up in the HOF, but not a great playoff player.
Again, Alpe knows football...
As said, that´s the reason (great RS-QB, but not in the PO) i don´t have PManning in my T-5, never will...
Reply With Quote
  #1959  
Old 12-19-12, 01:47
Merckx index's Avatar
Merckx index Merckx index is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,000
Default

Quote:
They like to look at it like if they can get into the "tournament" they can win the SB, and they've done that four times now.
When the Giants won in 1986, it wasn’t luck, they were the dominant team in the regular season that year. In 1990 they upset the 49ers in the title game, and had some good luck (Craig fumbles when all the Niners had to do was run down the clock to two minutes and punt into the EZ), but also bad luck (WR drops a pass in the EZ). The 49ers were the dominant regular season team that year but the Giants were very good (when they met in the regular season, the 49ers eked out a 7-3 win; again, a Giants receiver dropped a sure TD pass, and in the final minutes the Giants were deep in 49er territory). They had some luck in winning the SB that year, but were a solid team, no fluke, no comparison to 2007 and last year.

Quote:
As we learned, and posted many times, the NYG are the most incredible lucky pro sports team ever.
Maybe. But the baseball Cardinals give them a good run in that department.

Quote:
actually think NE's losing to SF may have actually helped them. Despite starting like a blowout, the game was close and it was turnovers that were the real difference.
Agree. NE has to feel good that they put up 34 points and more than 500 yards against what was supposed to be one of the best defensive teams in the NFL. The 49ers had not allowed more than 27 points in a string of nearly 30 regular season games, going back to the beginning of 2011. I still don’t know what happened, four TDs in eighteen minutes by a passing team in cold, wet weather seems impossible to believe, except the 49ers seem to have a tendency to relax if not challenged. It's encouraging that they generally play their best against good teams, but drop their guard against (perceived) lesser teams (Vikings, Rams, even the NYG were not considered that good when they played the 49ers earlier in the season).

And the 49ers left a lot of points on the table early in the game, with the missed FG, turnover, failed 4th down conversion, ran out of time on 3d and goal. Could easily have scored 50. One big concern of the team now has to be Akers, who clearly is not the kicker he was last year. For a team that has had problems getting into the EZ when in the red zone, that could really hurt them in the playoffs. It seems he is no longer reliable at distances over 30-35 yds.

Quote:
I too won't be surprised if Denver loses in the playoffs and PM had a mediocre game in the process. He's a great player, will end up in the HOF, but not a great playoff player.
We all agree on that. Can’t call him a big game choke, because he has played very well in some playoff games—for the most part in their SB run, and in the two playoff games leading up to the SB loss vs. NO. But he has been poor in many others. Indy lost many playoff games in which they were favorites, and it was almost always because of the offense.

Quote:
This week's Seattle-SF game, and the following week's Wash-Dallas games will be epic.
Has anyone else noticed how similar the Niners and Seahawks are? Take a look at these numbers:

OFFENSE

Pts/G Rank Yds/G Rank Pass Rank Rush Rank
SF 25.5 8 361.6 11 198.9 26 162.9 2
SE 25.1 11 350.1 16 189.4 27 160.7 3

DEFENSE

Pts/G Rank Yds/G Rank Pass Rank Rush Rank
SF 15.6 1 293.0 2 201.9 5 91.1 3
SE 15.6 2 303.9 3 197.6 3 106.3 10

Both teams have excellent defenses, a strong running game, and young, highly mobile QBs in their first year as starters. SF has the better record, and is slightly better in most stats, largely because Seattle struggled offensively early in the season, as Russell Wilson gradually found his way. But at this moment in time, it’s hard to see much of a difference between the two teams. I think SF’s defense is a little better, particularly with the key injuries in the secondary for Seattle, and Kaepernick may have better long term potential than Wilson. But it looks like the NFC West in future years is going to be a real war, with maybe one of the best teams in the NFL having to settle for wild card. Seattle will almost certainly have to settle for WC this year, and I would have to call them the best WC in the playoffs, without even being certain who the others are.
Reply With Quote
  #1960  
Old 12-19-12, 01:59
Pazuzu Pazuzu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodenswan View Post
i actually feel sorry for Sanchez at this point.. just embarassing..
Just brutal. Sanchez actually had a lower QB rating for the game than Tebow. But in fairness to Sanchez, Tebow only had five plays in which to muck things up. Mercifullly the Jets have announced Greg McElroy as the starting QB next week, which should spare Sanchez further humiliation. Not that being benched isn't humiliating, but... it's all relative.

As Alpe pointed out, Seattle v. San Francisco will be the game to watch. I'm picking the 49's, but only just.
__________________
"if anybody is the deserving winner of those seven tours, it's Ferrari." - Neal Rogers
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 05:22.


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.