National Football League

Page 150 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Alpe d'Huez said:
Nice post Hitch, I agree with all you wrote.

Since Seattle is an "easy" pick, I'll then use my alternate Superbowl prediction:

New Orleans over Indianapolis.

Glenn - Elimination Football is easy and works like this: After each week you pick two teams who you think will not get to the Superbowl and they are "eliminated" from your pool of teams that might win. In weeks 16 and 17 you only have to eliminate 1 team. Thus, at the end of the regular season you are left with the two teams you think will make it to the Superbowl.
Jags and Raiders then.

FoxxyBrown1111 said:
So you got the money back :eek: :confused:
No. I consider it a lost bet so the money is no longer mine so its had;)
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Can you sell the bet to me then? ;) I have/had never faith in Bradford. And backup QBs don´t fare worse than (slightly above average/average/below average) starting QBs once given enough reps and continuity.

So I feel free for another bold prediction; Since we don´t know how Bradford would have gone, I give the benefit of doubt to him: He´d have fared better this year than last year.
Shaun Hill will not play worse than Bradford, thus (to fulfil my prediction) he must do better than 5.74 Y/PP, better than 22.3 PPG, better than -1 game below .500 ball.
It´s a team game, so Hill could fail (as Bradford might have). OTOH, the standards set by Bradford last year are low (as usual), so it evens out...
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Pricey_sky said:
So from what I've gathered 'Elimination' game doesn't start until after week 1, 'Survival' starts with us choosing a loser from week 1?

If that's the case in my survival I will choose Buffalo losing to Chicago.
I didn´t listen early, so I missed the point. Once you pick a team to lose, you can´t pick that team again...
Basically that means which team in the first week is a sure loser than in their other 15 games. If I had known that before... well, from now on it´s easy: Every week go with the opponent of SEA (unless it´s a division game. There you go with the opponent of SEA when the Seahawks play at home).

Now that I got it, OFC I have to change my pick. This week I´ll go with Indy...
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
I didn´t listen early, so I missed the point. Once you pick a team to lose, you can´t pick that team again...
Basically that means which team in the first week is a sure loser than in their other 15 games. If I had known that before... well, from now on it´s easy: Every week go with the opponent of SEA (unless it´s a division game. There you go with the opponent of SEA when the Seahawks play at home).

Now that I got it, OFC I have to change my pick. This week I´ll go with Indy...
I've not been a fan of NFL for long, but there aren't many teams that go 16-0 are there?
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Pricey_sky said:
I've not been a fan of NFL for long, but there aren't many teams that go 16-0 are there?
LOLZ... OFC not. But you don´t know which 3/4 games the best teams lose. So pick the most likely outcomes. That means going for a win by SEA every week can´t be wrong.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
Seattle look good.

Packers have O-line trouble. They can't run the ball.

I doubt any network will want to televise the Seahawks for a prime time game now. I wish they were coming to the Crescent city this year.

Anyhow does anyone think the Texans have a chance to win more than 5 games? I would consider that to be out kicking their coverage if that happens.

Thanks Alpe for the explanation regarding the elimination game.
 
Generally true on back-ups performing nearly as well as the starter once they settle in. It is a team game. The QB may be the most important position, but is still 1 of 11 players on offense. And that doesn't include the fact half the team is defense.

There are rules, and exceptions though. Matt Cassell going 11-5 with Tom Brady out, Matt Flynn's excellent back-up work behind Aaron Rodgers. The exception being Curtis Painter and the other QBs for the Colts going 2-14 without Peyton Manning.

A good study is the 49ers. Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick are different QBs. One could argue the team is more dynamic with Kaep, who has a stronger arm, but Smith a more accurate passer and better at reading defenses. Earlier 49er teams were average, and with that, Smith was average, but as the team improved, so did he. The knock on Kaep may now be that even though he has offensive weapons, he's struggling (for now), but had they kept Smith, their passing game may have been better. (I agree with this theory, for what that's worth).

Pricey_sky said:
I've not been a fan of NFL for long, but there aren't many teams that go 16-0 are there?
Only one, the 2007 New England Patriots. They were 16-0 and poised to win the Superbowl, but played a NY Giant team that had an excellent defense, and some key, and lucky, plays went the Giants way. And in the end, the Patriots lost. And here's a point Foxxy would emphasize. Nearly every expert says if these teams played 10 times, the Patriots would have won 9 of those games (they beat the Giants, in NY, in the regular season), but in that one Superbowl game, it wasn't to be.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick are different QBs.
And even then, the results were the same. 49ers winning with Smith and Kaep. Smith was about to break the Cmp.-Pct.-Season record when he was benched. Kaep shone as a multi threat with a monster arm when he was called into starting duties. Even after his struggles, I still like Kaep much more... since I think in a league where the best should play, there shall be no place for butter armed QBs who can´t top 50 mph ball speed.
After 30 years I still don´t get how all those weak armed QBs can prevail sometimes.... Crowd the line, pressure them into bad throws, play tight coverage. Those QBs would have no chance. But what do DCs do? Play zone no matter of the opposing QB... That was no in depth analysis, just to paint the picture in a whole. OFC there are exceptions.

OTOH, running QBs with a great arm can be "healed". Once they stop running, saw all defense schemes they could ever face (speak expierience), they can convert into efficient passers. See Cunningham and Vick.

But in the end, it´s a team game. Your QB is as good as your team. Like one scout said back in the 80s: Give a random NFL vet enough time to throw and he will pick the defense apart. The opposite is, no matter how great your QB is, he´ll get "killed" in a bad team.

After all the most BS QB stat is W-L record (even though I like the legend of McMahon, winning 22 straight games when starting for the Bears, while his back-ups doomed the Bears seasons year in year out :D).
Y/PP is still the lone stat that tells some of the story. Especially when you get stark contrasts within the team (like Warner vs the Siz in 2004 with the NYG. If the book of Eli wasn´t drafted Round 1 and forced to play by the employer, we´d haver never had to see this babyface in two SBs. What a disgrace to football fans).

Alpe d'Huez said:
but played a NY Giant team that had an excellent defense
Now that´s a bold statement. They gave up 351 points during the RS. Back then it was the most ever by a SB winning team D. And in the playoffs they won 3 in a row by 4-3-3. Every game could have gone the other way. Speak of streaks. That´s the one...
I credit every single bit of that NYG SB win to pure luck. The most undeserving NFL champ ever (NE 2001 being a close 2nd, NYG-2011 3rd, and then you have to go back in time to the sneakers game... the NYG again, at 4th). I am still not over it. I may never will. And EM still lives of this "SB winner reputation" :rolleyes: That gains him 20 Mio $ per year, yet he is the worst starting QB. Maybe the most over-rated NFL player ever.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Only one, the 2007 New England Patriots. They were 16-0 and poised to win the Superbowl, but played a NY Giant team that had an excellent defense, and some key, and lucky, plays went the Giants way. And in the end, the Patriots lost. And here's a point Foxxy would emphasize. Nearly every expert says if these teams played 10 times, the Patriots would have won 9 of those games (they beat the Giants, in NY, in the regular season), but in that one Superbowl game, it wasn't to be.
Ah yes I do remember that, my first game I watched was 2004 Super Bowl when Carolina just lost to NE. I watched on and off for a few years but only really started watching regularly for the past 3 seasons. I'm still a Panthers fan now!
Didn't expect them to have such a good season last year, not sure whether they can repeat it. The defence looks solid again and will be key to any success.
 
I think Carolina is going to have some offensive problems this year. They are not likely to overcome New Orleans, but could.

Good call Foxxy. I should have said the Giants played an excellent defensive game, and were solid in the playoffs. You may recall the Giants had two games in the NFC playoffs they barely won, but it was mostly behind their defense. First beating the Cowboys (who had beaten them twice in the regular season) when Romo was picked off in the end zone at the end of the game. Then by beating Green Bay in OT when Favre threw an int just after they won the coin toss.

Of course if Eli's last name were not Manning we wouldn't have seen much more of him than, say, JP Loseman (taken the same round in that draft) or Byron Leftwich, Josh Freeman, etc. And he would not have been able to refuse to play for San Diego. The whole "two Superbowl MVP" thing is almost laughable when you look at what he actually did, versus what the rest of his team (especially the defense) did.

As to arm strength, we'll, it's not everything or Jamarcus Russell, Kyle Boller, Jim Druckenmiller etc. would have won endless games.

But while I do like accurate QB's, accuracy isn't everything either. Remember Colt Brennan? He could throw perfect screens and slant and side routes - set all kinds of NCAA records - but couldn't put it more than about 40 yards in the air. Timmy Chang, who was on that same Hawaii offense before him, was even "worse". A million yards off endless 1-5 yard passes. That won't work in the NFL.

As to stopping PM, or "noodle" armed QB's, I think part of the reason we're seeing so many short-medium passes is that defenses have fallen in love with the Tampa 2 and Cover 3 defenses and don't want to take the risk of getting burned on long plays. It's the same ultra conservative logic coaches use in rarely going for it on 4th down for example, no matter how many Stanford/MIT etc. number crunchers show it's a good idea. But I'm no expert, so...
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Good call Foxxy. I should have said the Giants played an excellent defensive game, and were solid in the playoffs.
That one I like. It describes it the best.

Alpe d'Huez said:
Of course if Eli's last name were not Manning we wouldn't have seen much more of him than, say, JP Loseman
I like that even more. You are on a roll now. :)
Same with Schumacher in the F-1. If there wasn´t Michael, the talent free Ralf never had made it. Yet he got rich out of the surname. It´s embarassing.
He couldn´t beat crash cowboy Montoya (whom I liked, because he had good racing once he kept his car on the track trou-out the race).

Alpe d'Huez said:
The whole "two Superbowl MVP" thing is almost laughable when you look at what he actually did, versus what the rest of his team (especially the defense) did.
Not almost. It is. Like Bradys MVP in 2001 behind a whopping 144 yards and 13 points scored. That tropphy became a joke that very year...
Back to pure luck: If your SB depended on a catch from a WR who wasn´t good enough for the NFL, that says it all.

Alpe d'Huez said:
As to arm strength, we'll, it's not everything or Jamarcus Russell, Kyle Boller, Jim Druckenmiller etc. would have won endless games.
Don´t know if Druckenmiller was that strong. Only heard about, but never saw. Anyway: Wrong system for such a QB.
Russell: I still wonder. Must have been work ethics. The talent was/is there. He shall get a 2nd chance, maybe...
And OFC, arm strength isn´t everything. But I just wonder how scouts keep picking butter arms... No one can convince me that there aren´t at least 50 QBs leaving college per year (or unemployed FA-QBs stocking supermarkets) with the same good mechanics and reading skills like let´s say Mike Glennon, but at least possesing the arm/meachanics to make the 3/4 difficult throws per game Phil Simms talked about. Those butter arms can´t. Nature and genes stopped them short, yet they get million dollar offers. Pure lottery winners in the right place at the right time...

Alpe d'Huez said:
Remember Colt Brennan?
Yeah. What a joke. Enough said. Like Frye or McNown (couldn´t even give the ball a spiral). I wouldn´t even invite them to camp.

As I said before: Scouts know nothing more than you or I. They can´t subtract team from individual performance, get excited about college stats... and then boom ... 50% first round busts, and the same time misses on the other side (undrafted/low drafted but talented QBs who just get spotted by chance. Like it happened with Brady, Warner, Romo and much more).

Go by hard numbers, and trust them. All you have is ball speed from the combine. Then test them throwing (like they do), but heck forget about college stats, wonderlic and 40 yard dashes. This BS missleads in spotting talent. If you have Korrodi at 63 mph, a guy that can make all the throws... heck give him a chance or two or three... same how you keep on playing high drafted busts.
Give Davey a 2nd and 3rd chance. He was soo much above the rest, all opponents of the Berlin Thunder took their LBs into deep DB-like coverage.

I don´t know much about spotting defensive talent (never got interest in it as ya all know :D), but if they fail the same way as they do in QBs (and sometimes WRs/OLers), one thing is for sure: We do not see the maximum best talent on NFL fields. But given the contracts, that´s the way it should be.

Alpe d'Huez said:
A million yards off endless 1-5 yard passes. That won't work in the NFL.
It did. Remember the 80s/90s 49ers? ;)
Just kidding. Couldn´t resist. Just waiting for MerckxIndex now. :D

Alpe d'Huez said:
As to stopping PM, or "noodle" armed QB's, I think part of the reason we're seeing so many short-medium passes is that defenses have fallen in love with the Tampa 2 and Cover 3 defenses and don't want to take the risk of getting burned on long plays. It's the same ultra conservative logic coaches use in rarely going for it on 4th down for example, no matter how many Stanford/MIT etc. number crunchers show it's a good idea. But I'm no expert, so...
Besides PM (quick release, thus hard to stop even with a weak arm, unless OFC it´s playoff crunch time and he throws real hardcore ducks), I think those QBs could easily be stopped (as I wrote in my last post).

But you are right (and I also said it); Coaches are too conservative. How in the world can DCs be afraid of being burned deep, when the opp QB can´t throw? It´s beyond me. How can they advise their CBs to give cushion to the WRs when they know they face the Glennons of this world.

And even if you get beat once or twice a la 5-95 Rice/Taylor-like, the next series you "kill" the talent-free QB with an Int or 3-out...

May SEA is the blueprint now. I don´t like them. But if teams copy them, at least we get rid of the pretenders at the QB position...
 
Despite your excellent english Foxxy, I think there was something a little lost in what you wrote and I had to read it twice.

What you were saying (I'm sure of this now) is that the way Seattle plays aggressive defense, will expose other team's pretenders at the QB position.

Put another way still, if your quarterback looks good on paper, or puts up good stats one week against a team sitting in deep zone coverage all day, they may play Seattle the next week and that same QB will look very average, at best.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Despite your excellent english Foxxy, I think there was something a little lost in what you wrote and I had to read it twice.

What you were saying (I'm sure of this now) is that the way Seattle plays aggressive defense, will expose other team's pretenders at the QB position.

Put another way still, if your quarterback looks good on paper, or puts up good stats one week against a team sitting in deep zone coverage all day, they may play Seattle the next week and that same QB will look very average, at best.
Yeah, sometimes my english is a little confusing.
But you got it right...
Like with the Bears 80s defense; they exposed the posers (like Pagel), but couldn´t stop the real great ones (Marino).

Fast forward today: While Brees and Kaep looked ok in the playoffs (given the strong SEA defense), PMs weak arm was fully exposed. We just have to watch every SEA game this year to see which QB is a pretender and which is not. In a SEA game you don´t need 3/4 strong throws Simms mentioned, but at least a dozen (how it should be)...
Don´t know what happened to Rodgers. But he is a great QB, no matter how bad he looked (didn´t see the game). We know McCarthy is a coward, thus playing the conservative not-to-lose short passing game (which then OFC loses you games (playing conservative, no matter what); just ask Norv the Smurf) vs SEA is much likely.

I said last year before the playoffs: The only chance vs SEA is to attack deep in the 50/50 one-one situations (high variance; you either lose big, or win big). OFC you can´t do this if you have a QB on your team that can´t make all the throws.

So my hope is: Many teams copy SEA defense, thus once we will have the best QBs on the field (good in all aspects; accuracy, reading defenses, and having a good arm. Not only 2/3 of it)

Hope this post clarifies it all. :)
 
Seems to me to beat Seattle you need a great defense. 2 of the 3 teams that beat Seattle last year did so on defense (San Fran and Arizona when Palmer threw 4 ints). Indy have an ok defense, didn't watch that game so didn't see what happened. Aditionally teams that run them close were Rams (defense team) Texans (defense team) Bucs (defense team) and Panthers (defense team)

You look at the quarterbacks in these games its Cam, Kaep, Luck which are 3 quarterbacks who are sitll developing (future top tier, atm mid pack ) and then Palmer, Schaub:eek:, Glennon, and Clemmens:cool: all bottom tier quarterbacks last year.

The ideal team to beat them is probably something like the New York Jets:cool:
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
The Hitch said:
Seems to me to beat Seattle you need a great defense. 2 of the 3 teams that beat Seattle last year did so on defense (San Fran and Arizona when Palmer threw 4 ints). Indy have an ok defense, didn't watch that game so didn't see what happened. Aditionally teams that run them close were Rams (defense team) Texans (defense team) Bucs (defense team) and Panthers (defense team)

You look at the quarterbacks in these games its Cam, Kaep, Luck which are 3 quarterbacks who are sitll developing (future top tier, atm mid pack ) and then Palmer, Schaub:eek:, Glennon, and Clemmens:cool: all bottom tier quarterbacks last year.

The ideal team to beat them is probably something like the New York Jets:cool:
Generally I would agree. But... the Rams got beat pretty bad in the 2nd game. And Schaub had the best game of them all: 31/49, 355 (mostly while leading the game!). Problem is; people/media give to much attention to a pick-6. If that didn´t happen (the lone mistake), Schaub would have been praised. If we look at Schaub in the long run, he is a pretty good QB.

And no mention of EM? 5 ints, zero points? An all world defense could not have helped him out.
EM has three kinds of games (1) lucky ones (2) bad ones (3) ugly ones. And a steroid neck in a baby body. Just disgusting. A freak...
 
Thanks all u gents for the translations n clarifications. Makes sense now.

Not only will teams need good D to beat Seattle, but also good O. Seattle's offense is vastly improved over last year for a number of reasons. Naming 3; Wilson's growth, Harvin makes everyone better, and O line is much better at 3 positions. I will tell more later on that.
 
Well, I should name a 4th: Darrel Bevel (OC) for his creativeness using the threats presented by Harvin, Wilson, and Lynch to create opportunities for less known options (like WR Lockette and FB Coleman vs. the Packers).

But back to the 3... most know about Russell, and everyone gets the picture with Harvin. What many don't know is the OL improvements at LG, RG, and RT:
LG: Carpenter replaced... himself. The Carp who is starting now is not the same Carp who played last year. Coming to camp 20 to 30 pounds lighter and fitter... and he was already the most powerful OL guy they have... he has transformed into a devastating blocker, a mauler, who vs. the Packers cleared out the entire side of the line from left to right creating huge cutback lanes.
RG: it is still Sweezy starting. But this is his 3rd year to ever play the OLine. He was a DLine guy in college. He's been an active guy who can block well in space, but pass blocking has been his weakness. Now in his 3rd year, he is getting it.
Carp at LG and Sweezy at RG are stars in the making. This is making life easier for C Max Unger, and less stressful knowing he can trust the guys on either side of him and not have to help out as much. This showed vs. the Packers as he'd often take off downfield on his own, leaving the other 2 to their assignments. In the zone blocking scheme, he's prolly hearing more "off off off" from Carp and Sweezy, meaning I got it man, go get someone else.
RT: rookie Britt has replaced nasty man Breno Giacomini, who departed to become the Jets RT. In the run game, Breno put a fair number of guys on their backsides, but he struggled terribly vs. edge rushers. Britt still has a lot to learn but is handling things well so far and has more upside potential.
 
Interesting game of the week: Niners at Cowboys. Niners are decimated on defense, but so are the Cowboys including offseason departures of Ware and Hatcher, and loss of MLB star Lee to a knee injury. Niners strength up front on the OL and Gore spells trouble for Dallas. And then sprinkle in a little Kaep. I think Niners win this one.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
I'll go first - I won't be around for game time as I'll be out at a concert. I realize that my Skins are not favorites today, but I'm going to punt on a fit 3Bob surprising everyone by doing his thing.

NO @ ATL
MIN @ STL
CLE @ PIT
JAX @ PHI
OAK @ NYJ
CIN @ BAL
BUF @ CHI
WSH @ HOU
TEN @ KC
NE @ MIA
CAR @ TB
SF @ DAL
IND @ DEN
NYG @ DET
SD @ ARI
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY