National Football League

Page 180 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Merckx index said:
Here’s a very interesting stat for Russell Wilson.
Really good post there Merckx. It reinforces a few things to me.

1: Russell Wilson = MVP.
2: Tom Brady = Chris Horner.

Seriously, I do think Wilson should be considered for MVP. Look at the big picture and it shows why I would vote for him over Rodgers. I think he's almost a lock to win the Walter Payton award this year at the least.

As to the claptrap about athletes like Brady staying young, Foxxy said it very well. It's amazing how regurgitated all this same talk gets, isn't it? We cycling fans have heard it about Horner, Sky, Wiggins, Armstrong, USPS, Indurain. Heck, go back to Moser and his hour record training. You can go back further, as you know. NFL fans don't have our insight (jaded or not) to know what that article says is probably true...but only tells part of the story, and conveniently leaves any speculation out. Is Brady doped to the gills? Who knows? But this article smells a very familiar stench.
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
BTW: I plan to watch one or more playoff games. That means the Broncos game(s) only. History will be made with the final PM disaster. That one I can´t miss.
Watching him play the last few weeks, you can almost see it coming, can't you?! Many of his throws lately are relying heavily on quick reads and finding open receivers. Many other throws have you holding your breath. I don't know if he's hurting, or what. But it appears his arm strength is fading quicker, and there's something with that affecting his ability to fit the ball into tight spaces with any accuracy.

I'm also with you Foxxy on his refusal to retire. I would have quit after the last neck surgery and been proud of my lone SB win. I don't know that it's entirely money though with PM. I think it's a desire to stand on top. We see this in many sports with many athletes. They don't quit until they are shown the door and no one wants them. Everyone wants to retire like John Elway or Ray Lewis, on top with 98% of your health in tact. But it rarely happens. The same in soccer, baseball, basketball, hockey, boxing, tennis, etc. Can you name an athlete that lost their last big game while reasonably young, and then retired when they could have kept going for another couple years? Kurt Warner, maybe. Barry Sanders comes to mind. Jim Brown perhaps. Bjorn Borg in tennis. Marvin Hagler in boxing maybe. That's about all I can think of.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Seriously, I do think Wilson should be considered for MVP. Look at the big picture and it shows why I would vote for him over Rodgers. I think he's almost a lock to win the Walter Payton award this year at the least.
He didn't even make the Pro Bowl, though granted, none of the choices was undeserved: Brady, Manning, Luck, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Romo. I think Romo should get a lot of MVP consideration, too.

What impresses me most about Wilson is that he's been very consistent for three years. RGIII had a great rookie season, then had some injuries, maybe defenses figured him out, now his future is in doubt. Same with Kaepernick, he took the NFL by storm a couple of years ago, now he's fading. Cam Newton had a sophomore slump, he seems to be recovering, but he's not the all-world player he was once promoted to be (though he's still young, and to be fair, he doesn't have a lot to work with). All mobile QBs whose running skills might have masked other deficits temporarily. But Wilson has continued to pass well, and yet continues to run a lot.

Of Wilson's contemporaries, only Luck has lived up to his expectations, and he's a classic pocket passer who was probably as NFL-ready as any QB ever has been. Scouts say the same about Winston, except, of course, he has a ton of personal baggage.

As to the claptrap about athletes like Brady staying young, Foxxy said it very well. It's amazing how regurgitated all this same talk gets, isn't it?
Foxxy also noted that a lot of a QB’s success is mental/experience, and the article I linked also mentioned that, pointing out that many of the top NFL QBs are well into their 30s, e.g., Manning, Brady, Brees. I can accept that as a QB gets older, his experience can for a while compensate for his declining athleticism. I think great QBs are a little like Grand Masters in chess. Over time they have seen, and memorized, an enormous number of different patterns/positions presented by the opposition, so whatever the defense puts out there, they don’t have to stop and think what to do, they know what to do. This helps overcome slower reflexes.

But obviously, age catches up eventually. Montana, Elway, Marino, Young, etc., all retired in their late 30s. Even Favre retired for the final time at 41. I really can’t see Brady playing till he’s 45, certainly not as a starter let alone as an elite QB. Even if he's willing to play at a lower level, when he starts hindering the team, Belichick will dump him.

I'm also with you Foxxy on [Manning's] refusal to retire. I would have quit after the last neck surgery and been proud of my lone SB win.
He just announced that he plans to play next year. My guess is that it will be his last. I agree that it's hard for athletes to quit, but it's also hard for them to compete at a level well below what they're accustomed to. They're also more aware of concussions than older generations were; in fact, that supposedly played a major role in Favre's decision not to come back one more time. I think players are willing to risk their health when they're playing at an elite level and have the chance to win a championship. When the stakes are lower, it becomes harder for them to justify to themselves the risk.

Can you name an athlete that lost their last big game while reasonably young, and then retired when they could have kept going for another couple years? Kurt Warner, maybe. Barry Sanders comes to mind. Jim Brown perhaps. Bjorn Borg in tennis. Marvin Hagler in boxing maybe. That's about all I can think of.
Sandy Koufax would be another example, though no one knows how much longer he could have gone on before his arm went dead. But regardless, very intelligent decision.

Floyd Mayweather has spent much of the past few years either temporarily retired or on a very light schedule, and probably will retire for good next year. I think he's very aware of the long-term health risks, but in his case, there's also the risk to his undefeated record. No way will he continue to box when there's doubt, let alone high probability, that he might lose. He could probably fight for several more years at a very high level, and if he picked his opponents carefully, continue to win, but there wouldn't be nearly as much money in it. In fact, the big paydays are beginning to dry up now, which is maybe the most significant factor pushing a fight with Pacquiao to be made. No one wants to see either of these guys fight anyone else.

I think a lot depends on health risks, though. They're high for boxing and the NFL, not so much for baseball, and pretty negligible for tennis. So Federer hangs on, unquestionably not the player he was a few years ago. Jeter had a very forgettable final year. ARod, of course, is mostly about money.
 
Well, halfway through the season I said they looked like a team for the 2015 season, and now that seems obvious. While I generally agree that injuries are a wash when comparing teams, the Cardinals were hit especially hard at several key positions. QB being the most obvious. I have to feel bad for their fans. But there's a bright future there.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
Elimination Football:

Amsterhammer - Washington, Dallas, N.Y. Giants, Sandy Eggo, Oakland, Jax, Tampa Bay, Houston, Atlanta, Minnesoda, Titans, Rams, Miami, NYJ, Bears, Browns, Niners, Panthers, Bengals, Saints, Seattle!, Iggles, Colts, Lions, Steelers, KC, Bills, Ravens,

That leaves me with - Cards, Packers, Pats. edit - Broncos and Bills (God knows how I missed ditching them).

Bills, and also the Ravens sadly added to the eliminated. It seems that I should have only dropped one last week, and should have three teams left now. I now have Cards, Packers and Pats left.

Dropping Cards, leaving me with Packers and Pats.

For Survival Football, you must pick a team you think will lose this weekend. You cannot select them again for the rest of the season. Here are last week's picks. Please help fill in the blank if you picked and I missed it.

Amsterhammer - (missed pick) Sandy Eggo, (one strike), Oakland, Tampa Bay, Cowgirls (strike 2) Rams (and that was strike 3) Titans, NYJ, JAX, BUF, DET, WSH, ATL, MIA, KC, CIN

CLE @ BAL - Flacco can't be that bad again.
DAL @ WSH - I can't see last week's surprise being repeated.
IND @ TEN - Away banker.
JAX @ HOU - Texans should win.
SD @ KC - Who knows? I'll pick the Bolts for the hell of it.
NYJ @ MIA - Fins should be too good.
CHI @ MIN - Should be a home win. Bears suck.
BUF @ NE - How many will the Pats rest? Could be close agaisnt their B team.
PHI @ NYG - Again, just for the hell of it, I'll pick the Giants for once.
NO @ TB - Surely the Saints can't lose this too?
CAR @ ATL - Game of the day, title on the line, could be very close, should be fun, I'll take the Panthers.
DET @ GB - Division on the line here too, Packers should be too good.
OAK @ DEN - Easy last game for Peyton.
ARI @ SF - Who knows what kind of team the Cards can put out?
STL @ SEA - Hawks to keep rolling.
CIN & PIT - Steelers too good.
 
purcell said:
It's official. Cards season is over before the last game ...

http://arizonasports.com/40/1794253/OUT-FOR-GOOD

Stanton out for rest of season with infection.

Team relying on Logan and Lindley.

Oh well, it was a good run. What could have been I guess.
I wouldn’t give up hope yet. Anything can happen in the postseason, look at the NY Giants. And with Michigan officials apparently already in the Bay Area ready to talk to Harbaugh just as soon as the game is over, don’t expect the 49ers to put out much of an effort in the final RS game. Must suck to play a game when your coach is just waiting for it to be over so he can start preparing to leave. You’d think Michigan could wait till next week.

That said, even if the Cards had Palmer, let alone Stanton, they would not be favored over SE, which is likely next for AZ if they get past the WC game. I don't see the Cardinals at full strength beating SE.

More on Wilson:

Wilson, in a career that spans 52 regular-season and playoff games, has never lost a game by double digits. And in each of the 13 losses he’s taken, the game has come down to the final quarter:
▪ In nine of the Seahawks’ 13 losses under Wilson, Seattle led at some point in the fourth quarter.
▪ In three of the other four losses, Wilson had potential game-winning or game-tying drives in the fourth quarter.
▪ The only exception is Seattle’s 28-26 loss in St. Louis earlier this year. The Seahawks were mathematical favorites to win the game with 2:59 to play in the fourth quarter before the Rams’ Johnny Hekker converted a fake punt from his own 18-yard line.

So Wilson has basically never been out of a game in 208 quarters of NFL football.
That is remarkable. Every team has a bad game. The Patriots got blown out earlier in this season by KC. The Packers lost badly to NO. Denver in the SB last year. When the 49ers went to the SB two years ago, they got blown out by SE during the RS, and they got blown out by SE again during the RS last year.

But the Seahawks under Wilson have always been close. They’ve played some poor games, losing to some weak opponents, but those games were close. No one has embarrassed them.

How bad is the NFC South? If the Falcons win the division, they will be the first division winner to start the season 2-6 and 5-9, and to win only one game outside of their division (they’re 1-9). But if Carolina wins, they would be the only division winner to go two whole months during the RS without a win.

How good has Harbaugh been?

But even five straight losses can't screw up Harbaugh's record too badly. Win or lose this week, Harbaugh will be let go with the best winning percentage of any coach who spent only four years in the NFL. That record may stand if rumors (LOTS of rumors) that he is headed to the University of Michigan prove true. If the 49ers lose to the Cardinals and Harbaugh never spends another day as an NFL head coach, his .680 winning percentage would rank 10th all time in NFL history. If the 49ers win, Harbaugh's percentage would jump to fifth, behind only Guy Chamberlin, John Madden, Vince Lombardi and George Allen.
Only three coaches have ever left a head coaching position with a run of four years (or longer) better than Harbaugh's:
▪ Tony Dungy, Colts, 2003-2008 -- .7946 winning percentage
▪ Chuck Knox, Rams, 1973-1977 -- .7785
▪ George Seifert, 49ers, 1992-1996 -- .750
Seifert was the first in successive examples of the 49ers' petulance since the end of the Bill Walsh era. San Francisco is the only team to fire or urge out* two coaches coming off of double digit-win seasons since 1990 (Seifert and Mariucci), and will soon become the only franchise to shove out two coaches that had more than 40 wins over the course of their of their final four seasons with the team (Seifert and Harbaugh).
 
Elimination Football®. I am now down to Green Bay and New England.

For Survival Football™.

Indy, KC, Minn, Tenn, NYJ, Dal*, NYG, Wash*, St.L, Chi, Cin*, Det, Phi*, Buf, SF, TB. This week: Kansas City.

No picks right now. Too busy with family stuff. Hoping Oakland beats Denver, but not likely.
 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
Elimination Football.
Torebear - Oak, Jax, Tenn, KC, Hou, TB, Stl, Wash, NYJ, Min, Cle, Chi, Atl, NYG, Car, SF, Cin, SD, BUF, SEA, NO, MIA, IND, PIT, DAL, Bal, Ari, Phi, GB New pick: Den

Lions and Pats left.


For Survival Football™.
Torebear - NY Giants, Chicago*, Pitt*, Tenn, Ari, Dal*, NYJ, SD, Stl*, SF*, Cin*, JAX, WAS, BUF, Hou, TB New pick: Oak


Go Lions!!!!!
 
Lots of great games today. I really like the way the league scheduled all the in-conference games to occur in the last half of the season, making the last of the season meaningful and reducing the incentive for teams to “sandbag” season ending games.

J.J. Watt would get my vote for MVP. He has earned it. Here’s a little sample of his attitude and his dedication that has helped him become a great player in the NFL:

When Texans Defensive Lineman J.J. Watt was asked if it bothered him that his teammates made fun of him because he was “too busy to have a personal life”, this is how Watt responded:

“I have a limited amount of time to build a career out of football and be the best that I can be at this job. When this job is over, I have the rest of my life to do what I want to do with my time.

Right now my job is to watch film, workout, and treat my body right. When I get done with football, then I can relax and drink as many beers as I want and hang out and be a regular guy. Right now, I am a football player and I will sacrifice whatever is necessary to be the best.”
(jj watt explains no girlfriend-social-life letter/)

That quote was originally tweeted by Ben Leber, who added this comment:
Every #NFL Rookie needs to read this and learn. Well said JJ Watt.
(https://twitter.com/nacholeber/status/486512181442519040/photo/1)
I could not agree more.

After hearing that Johnny Manziel threw a party last Friday that in part caused both Josh Gordon and him to miss team-related events because they were both hung over, I would say Manziel ought to take Leber’s advice and dedicate himself much more to his livelihood.

Manziel’s party/no-show faux pas last Friday/Saturday is not the only indicator he’s not putting in the effort to be a better player. Besides the Las Vegas detour last summer, another indicator of his lack of effort is his recent hamstring injury that caused him to be put on IR, and that after playing just 1-1/2 games. One of the major causes of hamstring injuries: not putting in adequate effort in offseason workouts, especially squats, which when done properly helps reduce hamstring injury. It’s as though Manziel is an iceberg of problems. That might be a bit harsh. But the dude definitely needs to refocus, a lot.


Ndamukong Suh… he’s still a moron. Stepping on Aaron Roger’s leg was deliberate IMO. Any player knows the difference between grass underfoot and body parts. Fine him. Better yet, suspend him one game.
 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
Lots of great games today. I really like the way the league scheduled all the in-conference games to occur in the last half of the season, making the last of the season meaningful and reducing the incentive for teams to “sandbag” season ending games.

J.J. Watt would get my vote for MVP. He has earned it. Here’s a little sample of his attitude and his dedication that has helped him become a great player in the NFL:


(jj watt explains no girlfriend-social-life letter/)

That quote was originally tweeted by Ben Leber, who added this comment:

(https://twitter.com/nacholeber/status/486512181442519040/photo/1)
I could not agree more.

After hearing that Johnny Manziel threw a party last Friday that in part caused both Josh Gordon and him to miss team-related events because they were both hung over, I would say Manziel ought to take Leber’s advice and dedicate himself much more to his livelihood.

Manziel’s party/no-show faux pas last Friday/Saturday is not the only indicator he’s not putting in the effort to be a better player. Besides the Las Vegas detour last summer, another indicator of his lack of effort is his recent hamstring injury that caused him to be put on IR, and that after playing just 1-1/2 games. One of the major causes of hamstring injuries: not putting in adequate effort in offseason workouts, especially squats, which when done properly helps reduce hamstring injury. It’s as though Manziel is an iceberg of problems. That might be a bit harsh. But the dude definitely needs to refocus, a lot.


Ndamukong Suh… he’s still a moron. Stepping on Aaron Roger’s leg was deliberate IMO. Any player knows the difference between grass underfoot and body parts. Fine him. Better yet, suspend him one game.
You have to watch the whole scene with Suh, and not in slowmo. He is engaged with Lang and is stepping backwards. The slow mo gives the impression that this takes a longer time. Also he is continuing the motion that was part of the play. If he is guilty of anything it is being slow to react and/or not being careful enough. But since It's the 4th quarter, this doesn't seem strange to me.

If he is suspended I will be ****ed. Though the Lions are facing the big market Cowboys next, so that might influence the league to give them a little help. I hope I'm wrong.

Then again I'm biased.
 
I too would pick JJ Watt for MVP. I know I said Russell Wilson would get my vote, and his ability to win is astounding. But what Watt accomplished on that team, with Clowny out for virtually the entire season, was amazing.

The two teams I like for next week are Dallas, and Pittsburgh. But that's only if they can get past next week (make sense?). Dallas could falter against Detroit at home, and Pittsburgh always has a tough time with Baltimore. Plus both the Ravens and Steelers are so jeckel/hyde. I do however see Dallas and Pittsburgh as the teams with the best chances to knock off the top seeded teams.

Still amazed at how badly the 49ers handled the entire issue with Harbaugh. There must be some huge, huge egos at play there. I can't even imagine who they are going to get as coach, but that team looks like they are headed for a mess, and last place in that tough division.

Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslem says he's had it with unprepared players on his team. Well, after Connor Shaw (who?) outplayed Johnny Manziel, it wouldn't even shock me if Manziel is on a such a short off-season leash that if he doesn't show up to TC with 100% preparation, he'll be trade bait. Even with Bryan Hoyer almost certain to leave to to FA. I would actually have to characterize Manziel as the bust of the draft at this point (counting Clowney's injuries as happenstance, not bust). He's certainly one of the most overhyped players in history, so far anyway.

Love to see Derek Carr selected as ROY. We shall see...
 
ToreBear said:
You have to watch the whole scene with Suh, and not in slowmo. ...

If he is suspended I will be ****ed. Though the Lions are facing the big market Cowboys next, so that might influence the league to give them a little help. I hope I'm wrong.

Then again I'm biased.
I once stepped on my cat's tail while backing up, but I was still able to avoid putting all my weight on the tail. Scared the cat so well his whole tail puffed up as fat as a corn cob. That was funny, but I think you know what I mean.

I saw it normal speed and slow motion. But by now you have heard the ruling. Suh will likely appeal.

I was listening to Bill Pollian (former exec with several teams) and Chris Carter (former NFL player) today on NFL Radio, both of whom talked about this. Not sure how this ended up on NFL Radio b/c I thought both were with ESPN. Anyway, both Chris and Bill took exact opposite positions on this; Chris agreed with the suspension (for the same reasons I did, including players knowing the difference in feel between grass vs body parts underfoot), but Bill did not. The reasons for the suspension are pretty obvious, and Suh's history plays into this, which means the league has probably been watching him pretty closely and likely will not be as tolerant. The bottom line of Bill's position was this: a) it is not in the best interests of (anyone really) to suspend a player of Suh's abilities in this situation... Situation meaning his suspension would come in an important playoff game against the Cowboys, which could have an impact on the outcome of the game; and b) it would be unfair for teammates, Lion's staff members, and fans to be unfairly punished for Suh's action.

For fans and teammates (etc) I sympathize with them as victims of collateral damage, to a point. But there is a solution: if the league is bent on suspending Suh one game, why not suspend him for one game in the 2015 regular season, and have that suspension come in a game against the Packers? To me, that would be reasonable. The only problem with that is Suh probably does not care about income lost from a one game suspension, and he would probably welcome a one week rest period. Probably the most effective deterrent is for some collateral damage to be inflicted that affects teammates at an important time such as the playoffs.

Anyway, this can be debated up and down, but IMO if he's going to be suspended I would actually like to see it be enforced next season.


Alpe d'Huez said:
I too would pick JJ Watt for MVP. I know I said Russell Wilson would get my vote, and his ability to win is astounding. But what Watt accomplished on that team, with Clowny out for virtually the entire season, was amazing.

Still amazed at how badly the 49ers handled the entire issue with Harbaugh. There must be some huge, huge egos at play there. I can't even imagine who they are going to get as coach, but that team looks like they are headed for a mess, and last place in that tough division.

Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslem says he's had it with unprepared players on his team. Well, after Connor Shaw (who?) outplayed Johnny Manziel, it wouldn't even shock me if Manziel is on a such a short off-season leash that if he doesn't show up to TC with 100% preparation, he'll be trade bait. Even with Bryan Hoyer almost certain to leave to to FA. I would actually have to characterize Manziel as the bust of the draft at this point (counting Clowney's injuries as happenstance, not bust). He's certainly one of the most overhyped players in history, so far anyway.
Wilson just not have the numbers to get MVP, and other players are deserving, or more deserving. But he's probably almost singlehandedly taken over more games to pull out wins this year than anyone. Still, I would love to see Watt get the MVP.

9ers front office decision to axe Jim is just messed up because of those apparent egos. I'm actually sad to see Harbaugh go because his teams have always made for a good ol' dogfight when they play SEA. NFL Radio commentator today (forgot who) said 9ers will have to bring in a HC who can work with Kaepernick and bring him along. What happens if they bring in a guy who's not sold on Kaep?

Speaking of tough NFC West division, I think for the record the Rams are about a QB away from seriously contending for the division, conference, and the SB.

I will say this for Manziel, he has not gone full genius like #2 overall pick of the Chargers, Ryan Leaf. If coaches cannot get him to refocus and get serious about the offseason, working out HARD, and putting in the time studying film the RIGHT way (he may need mentoring on this b/c you can look at a lot of film but if not done properly, you won't get much out of it), and start showing improvement daily, then he will be trade bait or just cut loose. But if he can close his performance gaps, start to improve, and keep improving (not plateauing) then he could be something special. But is going to take some patience and some mentoring on attitude and how to's.
(p.s. - not many ppl like weight lifting HARD. He may have to get over mental blocks like that.)
 
gobuck said:
Suh was suspended today. Couldn't have happened to bigger jerk. Hurts his team with poor behavior.
The guy is immensely talented but also a selfish ****ing idiot. Here in Detroit we are also so tired of his antics and will be glad to see him go.

Raiola hopefully gone also.
 
Of course, it's more than weights. We've just been talking about two of the most dedicated players in the NFL. Guys who work tirelessly studying films, playbooks, learning, and working out, and don't let distractions in. JJ Watt and Russell Wilson. Does Manziel need to go to that level to succeed in the NFL? Maybe not. But to win and win big, he probably does. Can he do that? I honestly don't know.

I have to agree with you on the Rams. But who are they going to get at QB? They better hope Brandford heals. They're not getting Mariota or Winston in the draft. Free agency is going to be a crap shoot with QB. They also could use a replacement for Jake Long, who was hurt again and may be done. And their QB needs a bigger play-maker receiver. Their DB's also got burned by the Giants of all teams. So they're not there yet. But they are deep, and growing.

Regarding Suh, this is the last year of his contract with the Lions. So punishing him one game in 2015 doesn't make sense. I think what did him in was the second step in that video. He appears to put all his weight on it. By then, it no longer looked like an accident, and more like he didn't care who he was stepping on, and wasn't going to stop. I personally believe the suspension should be upheld.

I've been thinking about the 49ers. Who can they actually get to handle the mix of needing to develop Kaep, working with a few headcases, deal with some aging players, while still having a deep roster, and what appears to be ownership that likely has a sense of entitlement, and impatience. Who would that coach be?

 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
Suhs suspension is media driven. The perception of his actions both now and in the past is driven by the media.

Here is someone explaining some of the problems I see:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/29/ndamukong-suh-has-a-chance-of-winning-appeal-of-suspension/

My concern over this action by the NFL is that it was totally driven by television media. A foul was not called on the play. In fact it was reported that the referee saw Suh’s “moonstep” as a result of being pushed backward by Lang.

Did other non calls get as much attention by the media or by the NFL?

On the 55 yard punt return for touchdown by Packer returner Micah Hyde, Sam Shields blatantly blocks Cassius Vaughn in the back and Vaughn is pushed to the ground. The obvious foul is not called or replayed by the media coverage. Isn’t blocking in the back a safety foul? Vaughn was taken out of play and the Packers were awarded a touchdown on the play. No media frenzy there.

Why does the media focus on one and not the other. Suh has become demonized by the media and of course Aaron Rogers is the media darling. While Suh’s action may have been opportunistic and devilish, as a result of the shove by Lang, Rodgers fully intentional swing at Suh gets no recognition and is “justified”. We all saw it.

Was it Lang and Rogers really setting up Suh? The old Ill push him you trip him? Should Lang and Rogers be suspended for Suh’s player safety? Was this really a setup?

Here is my issue with the NFL. Much worse acts have gone unpunished every game in the NFL. In every game there is a near fight, shove or slap that goes un called by the refs or not featured in the media. There is no suspension or foul called. When something gets featured on media, the NFL reacts, and of course, the film doesn’t lie. Ask Ray Rice. Ask any politician that gets quoted by partial snippets, how something can be twisted.

Does the NFL review every game tape and give equal review to all non calls or just the highly publicized by media? So who is now calling the games and controlling the game day rosters? The announcers, the television camera crew, the ESPN Sports Center crew?

The NFL should reverse this decision and let the teams play. Oh did Dallas losing its DL come into the decision.

If Suh gets suspended for next week, then so should Lang for the push, Rogers for the near trip or his swing at Suh and Shields for the block in the back.

When the step happened,( If you are into clickbait you might try using the word stomp), the focus by fox was on showing what happened in a narrow angle in slow motion.
You do not see any context, and you are led to believe that it lasted longer.
Watch this video, from the fox highlights:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgBzQP4JAZU

Notice the commentary also setting the stage for this obviously being by intent, and Suh is dirty etc.

Try to mentally estimate for how long his foot was down. Now watch the video from a different angle in something I think is real time, or close to it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0sp2C1z49o

Did it feel like the step lasted longer in the first video? The natural human reaction is to answer yes, since your perception has already been primed by the broadcaster when you watched the game.

The second video also reveals something missing from the first video: Context allowing for a situational understanding.

Here is what I see:
- Suh is finishing the rushing of the QB.
- His inert motion is going towards Rogers.
- Notice he is held by Lang (Shouldn't Lang have been called for a hold?)
- Suh is trying to get out of Langs hold.
- He is using his force to pull away from lang.
- Lang lets go.
- Suh comes off balance, like any human and recoils in the opposite direction of Lang(where Rodgers is)
- Notice Suhs arms when Lang lets go. That is a cue to the force Suh is applying to disengage from Lang, as well as a loss of balance ocuring.
- The force pulls him back and he regains equilibrium while standing on Rodgers leg(this is the infamous second step).
- Notice Rodgers moved his foot to where Suhs foot was coming down.
- Notice Suhs focus is where the action is: The result of Rodgers pass. This is what I would focus on if I were him as well.
- Suh then walks away. Notice the way he walks. He is tired(not strange since it's in the 4th qtr with the packers owning the time of possession).


on3m@n@rmy: My sympathies are with your poor cat:D. But, stepping on a cats tail is not like stepping on Rodgers leg(I would hope:eek:). Stepping on a leg would be more like stepping on a log. If you are unaware of where it is and stepping backwards, you will likely either fall backward and perhaps even suffer a sprained ankle. Unless you are careful and not put your entire weight on it(being balanced on one leg). Believe it or not, I think Suh was careful. Not to protect those he stepped on, but to protect himself from injury.

- Now about lack of reaction from Suh. This is something quite normal for the lions d-line. I suspect it's to avoid possible conflict, but also to hurry up and get ready for the next play. If you start looking around and apologizing reacting to small stuff etc, it would not surprise me if you get a show(spelling?) from an overprotecting O lineman(and conflict might be the result).


So why am I going into so much detail. The purpose is to guide you into what you should focus on to see what I see. I'm framing your perception. The problem is of course that the original imprint might be too strong so that this new information is not assimilated due to the workings of your memory or perhaps personality. This is quite normal. (I have probably done it myself a few times:eek:).

But that also means I'm saying: If you don't agree with me it's because you are unwilling/unable to modify your original understanding to the "correct one". That really means I'm putting my understanding of the events above those who might not agree with me after having read my explanation. And that is unfortunate.


Here is Mike Pereiras take:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za6QuSeiGE8
one quote: "If it wasn't Suh, and it wasn't Rodgers but a no name QB it would not lead to any fine at all." He also says that the referee who saw the hole thing, did not read any intent. Hence no flag was thrown.

Bill Polian:
https://soundcloud.com/siriusxmnfl/bill-polian-suh-should-not-be-suspended

There is also an interview with a Jim Daopoulos also saying something along those lines somewhere.(I think he is a former NFL official or something). I think I could find it if it's wanted.


My concern: Is the league metering out punishment based on a fox broadcast and commentary? If so, that is insane. That means on field discipline is metered out by a media that is looking for ratings and clickbait.


My contention is that this was called correctly by the official on the field. There was nothing there, no flag, nothing, and he was the only "independent" observer present.

If the suspension is not reversed, I'm considering going foxy on the NFL. If something like this is allowed to influence a playoff game it means the sport has no integrity. The rules are not the same for all. They are not predictable and the game is in essence meaningless. It becomes an act like the wrestling in the US. And it is unfair.:mad:


As for who Suh is. Remember Suh and dirty is clickbait. I don't think he had that reputation in College. I think this came with the thanksgiving stomp in Suhs second year, when Suh whent ballistic because the packers Oline was constantly tying his shoes together. This also means the media are looking for more scandals that can give them ratings and clickbait.

From that moment on Suh and Dirty have gone together. I suspect NFL officials of not being aware of headlines and media effecting their judgment. For Suh it's become a vicious circle. And the Lions and their fans are in this case suffering the consequences.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
That is a very long post with regards to Suh's suspension. :D (me as captain obvious)


I think he should be allowed to play. Just my 2 cents.
 
Nice post there Torebear. No really. Even though you admittedly are biased, always nice to see what other takes are. I especially liked your chuckle over my cat.

Well, here is one point we should all agree on: we should know sometime this week before gametime if Suh will win his appeal. So we do not have long to wait.

Since I'm celling this I will keep it short. Glen, & perhaps others, should like that. So in the words of the real Tigger, TTFN (Ta Ta For Now)
 
Alpe - I forgot that point about Suh's contract being up. Agree. It would not make sense.

Remember the famous Mora playoffs quote? Adapted to this:
Norv? Norv? You talkin' about Norv? Don't talk about Norv! We want to win more than one game!

Edit: oops. My bad. Didn't realize the pic was that big.
go here to see it
Norv would be worse than a bad hair day.
 
Aug 9, 2012
1,719
0
0
Suh won his appeal. But still got a 70k fine. I don't believe it was a fineable offense either. But he can afford it.

It was just because the media was whipped into a frenzy, and it was Suh on Arod.

Meanwhile Staffords fiancee had a reaction with an image of Stafford during the game.

It certainly looks like somebody did something to his leg, and there was no flag or fine or even mention in the media. Had those legs been Arods legs, we wouldn't hear the end of it.

http://www.tmz.com/2014/12/30/matthew-staffords-wife-kelly-hall-aaron-rodgers-cleated-ndamukong-suh-nfl/

Some teams and players seem to get preferential treatment. That is something that disgusts me.
 
Dallas absolutely screwed. They beat Seattle in Seattle and they never played Green Bay (or Detroit).

If head to head is the main tiebreaker for 2 team ties, it should be the main tiebreaker for 3 team ties. To use some bizzare nonsensical tiebreaker like division record or conference record for 3 team tiebreakers is ridiculous. Why should your division record be a tiebreaker for cross division ties? That's about as random as flipping a coin or picking the team who's name comes first in the alphabet.

It should be

1 Dallas
2 Seattle
3 Green Bay

Dallas actually earned the number 1 seed. But for some reason Dallas has to play Detroit then Green Bay in Green Bay then Seattle in Seattle. Even Carolina and Arizona have easier roots to the Superbowl. Even the AFC wildcards have it easier:eek: Only Detroit has a harder route to the superbowl than Dallas.

Especially unfair because in the AFC head to head does actually get New England full HFA throughout the playoffs because they beat Denver. This despite the fact that unlike Dallas they managed this feat purely because they got to play Denver at home, and whatsmore have been allowed to play Denver at home for 3 straight years ( i have no idea how the NFL can allow such a biased series of schedules for 1 team) which has given them a massive advantage over Denver for the duration of Peyton Manning's tenure there, seeing as how that matchup is each year worth 3 games (win for you, loss for them, tiebreaker for you)

Not saying NFL did it on purpose, but there's some serious slacking going on in NFL head quarters to allow that. The 3 years Denver are relevant (becuase they have peyton) they have to start with a 3 game deficit to their main rivals the New England Patriots. Then when Denver is no longer relevant because Peyton is retired, and maybe New England is no longer relevant, then Denver will get those home games back :eek:
 
The Hitch said:
Dallas absolutely screwed. They beat Seattle in Seattle and they never played Green Bay (or Detroit).

If head to head is the main tiebreaker for 2 team ties, it should be the main tiebreaker for 3 team ties. To use some bizzare nonsensical tiebreaker like division record or conference record for 3 team tiebreakers is ridiculous. Why should your division record be a tiebreaker for cross division ties? That's about as random as flipping a coin or picking the team who's name comes first in the alphabet.
Head-to-head only applies to three way ties if a team beat both of the other teams. Since Dallas, as you note, did not play GB, that tie-breaker rule doesn’t apply. That seems reasonable to me, because doing it your way, GB is third, though it didn’t play Dallas and might have won that game. You’re penalizing GB (and SE, which beat GB) because they didn’t happen to play Dallas. The fact that Dallas beat Seattle and Seattle beat GB doesn’t imply that GB would have lost to Dallas. There are numerous examples every year of team A beating team B which beats team C which beats team A (E.g., SF and AZ both beat DAL, which beat SE, which beat both SF and AZ twice; KC beat NE which beat Denver which beat KC 2x). Because of different styles, because they play at different times of the season when relative strengths are different, or just because of chance. And of course if GB had beaten Dallas, then Seattle’s victory over GB would have made it look much better vs. Dallas despite having lost to Dallas.

When the head-to-head doesn’t apply, it goes to conference (not division) record, which I think is reasonable. We’re trying to determine seeding just within the conference, so it’s logical to compare records against just conference opponents. Calling it like a coin flip is ironic; actually head-to-head is worse in that respect, because it’s just one game. Having a superior conference record is something established over many games. For this reason, I think conference record (or division record, as a tie-breaker for teams in the same division) is much fairer than head-to-head. If I were making the rules, I would begin with that.

Especially unfair because in the AFC head to head does actually get New England full HFA throughout the playoffs because they beat Denver. This despite the fact that unlike Dallas they managed this feat purely because they got to play Denver at home, and whatsmore have been allowed to play Denver at home for 3 straight years ( i have no idea how the NFL can allow such a biased series of schedules for 1 team) which has given them a massive advantage over Denver for the duration of Peyton Manning's tenure there, seeing as how that matchup is each year worth 3 games (win for you, loss for them, tiebreaker for you)
Denver has played NE in Mass. several years in a row probably because of the way the schedule works. I don’t think a human being could create the NFL schedule without the help of a computer, there are so many factors that have to be balanced. For various reasons, it probably just hasn’t worked out that Denver could play NE at home without creating a problem elsewhere.

E.g., if you did that this year, then one of Denver’s other home games would have had to be moved to the road, and one of NE’s other road games moved to home. But then each of the opponents in those two games would have to have their schedule altered, necessitating home-road switches for them…You see the problem? Sometimes a series of consecutive matches between two teams has to be in the same city for several years in a row. It might happen that if Denver had played NE at home this year, one of its other opponents would have had to play them on the road for the 4th or 5th consecutive time. The complexity of the schedule just does not permit balancing to the degree that you want to see happen. It's particularly a problem with perennial division winners like Denver and NE because they play each other nearly every year (see below), which makes it harder to balance home and road.

Anyway, the game is worth two games, not three, and only one of the games is because of the tie-breaker. If Denver and NE come into the game tied, and NE wins at home, NE goes one up on Denver, and two up considering the tie-breaker. So it's worth two in the standings. But not really; because NE played Denver at home, they play some other game on the road when Denver plays at home. So Denver has a chance to make up the game by playing at home when NE is on the road. Unless you think NE is a heavy favorite on the road against any team but Denver, this is a significant advantage.

E.g., NE had to play KC and SD on the road, and got blown out by KC. If they had played Denver in Denver, they would have played either KC or SD at home, and though the outcome probably would not have been different, they would have been more favored there. Conversely, Denver played Miami and Buffalo at home, winning both games but narrowly. Had they played NE at home, they would have played one of those games on the road, and might easily have lost.

All this is because the AFC E and W played each other this year. In other years, they don't, and NE and Denver meet if/because they are division winners from the previous year. In this case, the home/road juggling can have more far-reaching consequences, e.g., Denver playing at NE means it might play, say, Indy or Pittsburgh, at home instead of on the road, and vice-versa for NE.

**********************

If you want to talk unfair, why did three teams in the AFC North make the playoffs this year? A big reason is because they got to play all four teams in the atrocious NFC South, and if that weren't enough, also got to play the AFC South, another very weak division. The NFC North also benefitted from playing the NFC South teams. Three of the four WCs--the Bengals, Ravens and Lions--had a combined record of 10-1-1 vs. NFC South teams, and 21-15 against all other teams. AZ was the only WC team that did not play all four NFC South teams.

Consider two teams that were fighting for a WC up to the last weekend of the season, BAL and KC. BAL, which ended up with the WC, got to play all four NFC South teams, and beat them all. Take away those games, and the Ravens were 6-6. KC had to play the far better NFC West teams, three of which finished with a better record than the best team in the NFC South, and went 2-2 against them. Take away those games, and the Chiefs were 7-5. BAL and KC played four common opponents, PIT, TE, SD and MIA. BAL was 3-2 vs. these teams, KC was 4-1.

**********************

Wilson fumbled two more times in his last game, bringing his total to 11. And still no lost fumbles. The second best QB in that respect is Flacco, with 5 fumbles and no lost ones. Tannehill fumbled ten times and lost two.

Based on an approximately 40% chance of a QB fumble being lost, the odds of eleven recovered fumbles in a row are about three in a thousand.

********************

Are the 49ers screwed next year? We might consider what happened at Stanford after Harbaugh left. His assistant David Shaw took over, and has done very well. His first year he took Stanford to another BCS Bowl, but that was with Luck and many other players Harbaugh recruited. The next two years he beat Oregon and won the first two Pac 12 conference championship games, going to the Rose Bowl each time. This year, Stanford disappointed a little, going just 7-5 in the RS, but just winning a minor bowl game to finish 8-5. Overall, though, I'd say Shaw has managed to maintain Stanford's excellence, mostly now with his own recruits.

So far, you can see the same pattern in Oregon. Chip Kelly built the Ducks into a national powerhouse. Two years after he left, his replacement Mark Helfrich has the team in the new playoffs, with a shot at their first national championship. If they win the semifinal game, he will have taken them as far as Kelly ever did.

Of course it's not quite the same situation in the NFL, but there are certainly similar precedents. After John Madden's success with the Raiders, Tom Flores took over and won two SBs. When Bill Walsh retired, George Seifert replaced him and won 2 SBs. Great coaches are defined by great players in a system that optimizes their talent, and that doesn't disappear immediately after a coach leaves. But over time the difference may be evident, as the coaches have to continue to get the best players, and in the NFL, stay abreast of evolving systems. If I had to project, I'd guess that Harbaugh's loss will be felt more a few years down the road than next year (and for just that reason, won't be recognized as such).

If the HC is one of Harbaugh's assistants, he will probably coach much the same way Harbaugh did, and will probably be given a little slack by the fanbase. But if they go outside to get a HC, that HC will be on a very short leash as far as the fans are concerned.
 
Good description of seeding Merckxx.

Since D1 FBS schools typically have 5 recruiting classes under a HC (due to redshirting), in the 4th year after a HC change the roster will include senniors and juniors recruited by the former coach. A school with a good program that recruited well should be able to continue winning for another 2 to 4 years after the HC change. I think that is the case with The Cardinal and Ducks. WAZZU OTOH has typically lacked both of thtose qualities.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts