National Football League

Page 19 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sweet new acronym the SFL is, Amsterhammer.

First, the question on Peyton is a no brainer. I don't believe for one second Peyton is ready to retire.

So then, what Indy does with him and the first overall draft pick is a good question. The other question is does Indy have a first round pick in 2012 or was that traded off? (I am assuming they own it). Indy has some time to decide on what to do about Curt Painter who is a 3-year vet, or 7-year vet Orlovsky. They can afford to let Painter work and then evaluate after the season. My guess is neither of these QBs is their long term solution. If they feel confident in Painter or Orlovsky, they could trade down. OR Indy could trade down to pick up extra picks and THEN use the first round pick obtained in the trade to draft another QB (NOT Luck, but maybe Barkley). That avoids issues with Luck vs Peyton, and they still get another top QB (plus picks for trading down).

The other question about what Luck would be willing to do is a good one too. Do you think he would pull a stunt like John Elway (who actually had baseball as leverage) or one like Eli Manning did (with help from dad)? Elway's and Eli's reasons were understandable, even if one does not agree with them. Elway wanted to avoid working under then Baltimore Colts head coach Frank Kush, who had a rep as being abusive to players (I actually believed Kush was over the top). Then SD was, well, the SD organization we all know. But the present Colts organization seems to be a good one, and to give them the rub might not go over as positively in the court of public opinion as the Elway-Eli maneurvers did. I lean toward saying Luck would not refuse to go to the Colts, but that's just a hunch.

Another question is what's best for Luck? From what I saw last weekend, I am not so sure Luck is really ready to take a starting QB role in the NFL and be able to lead them to the playoffs. It might be best for him to learn from the best of the best before taking on that role. On the other hand, there are a handful of teams who'd love to have him and will be in a position to get him by trading up. Plus sometimes the best learning is accomplished by just doing it. Either way, I think it will work out for him. The question is again, does he want to play right away or pay his dues as an understudy for maybe 5 years?
 
I'm certain he will want to, and expect to, start right away. I'm almost certain of it.

It's really going to come down to where he will play, and who feels they need him versus what they can get in return.

Washington is definitely in the SFL sweepstakes. They have a wealthy (if somewhat nuts) owner, in a big city, and a prominent coach who has worked with big names in the past (Elway anyone?). But next year is going to be a bonanza for QB's entering the NFL. Luck, Barkley, Jones, RG3 will all very likely go in the first round. There's a half dozen other guys likely to go in the top three rounds.

Teams likely to draft high that need a fresh QB next year: Washington, Seattle, Arizona (probably), Miami (probably).

Teams likely to draft high that don't need a fresh QB: Carolina, St. Louis, Minnesota (probably), Indianapolis (probably), Jacksonville (probably).

I actually believe Seattle is going to try to get Matt Barkley. He's very good. He's been touted as a future NFL QB for years, he was recruited to USC by Seattle coach Pete Carroll whom he played for in his freshman year, and he'll slip far enough in the draft for a 5-11 or even 6-10 Seahawks to get him.
 
Who can beat the Packers? They are steamrolling everyone at 9-0. And their defense looked better tonight than it has all season, now up to 13th best in the league in points allowed. Aaron Rogers has a QB rating of 130.7! That's a full thirty points higher than the next guy, Tom Brady! After the game Steve Young asked Rogers point blank about going 16-0 and if they would rest guys in the meaningless games if they had everything locked up, and Rogers said flatly there were no meaningless games, and didn't blink when Young and Dilfer were wow'd by that. It's obvious he has no intention of slowing down for anything and would like to run the table and blow everyone out along the way. But can they?

The Packers play: TB, @Det, @NYG, OAK, @KC, Chi, and Det. None of those games are gimmies, though TB and KC (especially if Cassel is out) sort of are. Detroit, Chicago, the NYG and Raiders all have stout defenses. One of them is going to have to come up with some sort of scheme that can put the brakes on the Packers offense, while hoping the Packers defense doesn't improve. But so far, no one has come close.

If I were them I wouldn't be shy about trying to dominate the league in every game. If they lose one, so be it.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Who can beat the Packers?.....
If I were them I wouldn't be shy about trying to dominate the league in every game. If they lose one, so be it.
In short, no one. I'm a great believer in sports that, 'if you've got it, flaunt it baby'.:D

They look unstoppable at the moment, Rogers is SO on fire that it's not true. I wish them luck and hope they can make the 16-0 if they deserve it. So far, they certainly do.
 
On the SFL sweepstakes, all that makes sense. As for the Colts and the SFL thing, the Colts are a little old especially on offense. Definsively, Brayton as a starting DT is a sign they are weak in that position. They could probably benefit from picking up some extra draft picks. So, I would not be surprised if the Colts pass on Luck, and instead trade down (assuming Luck's draft stock does not drop).

I'm not sure yet about Seattle drafting a QB. They definately need one, and they probably cannot afford to pass up on one in the next draft. But last year Carroll said they had to address the OL needs first before they could consider drafting a QB. I wonder if that will be the case in the 2012 draft. The Seattle OL is definately getting better, but they need to address an upgrade to LG Gallery IMO.

In Chris Berman language, the Packers "c o u l d... g o... a l l... t h e... w a y"! Any of those teams except TB and KC could stop them from running the table, but it would have to be a perfect game by whoever stops them. My vote now though would be nobody stops them.
 
Mar 13, 2009
1,063
1
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Good games today.

I can't believe how flat the Ravens played. A week after beating the Steelers in a hard fought battle to move into a tie for 1st place, they fall on their faces. Seahawks show promise, especially on defense.

Bears made the Lions look like the Lions of 2009-2010, and look very good right now having won 4 in a row.

Cowboys looked like the team many thought they would in flattening the Bills. Next week they play Washington, and will thus probably lose.

Cardinals came to life as well. Backup QB John Skelton for the win. After all the hype, the Eagles are now likely out of the playoff picture at 3-6.

Tebow wins again, against the hot/cold Chiefs. Well, sort of Tebow. 2/8 69 yards. But hey, a win's a win!

Despite being swept by Baltimore, the Steelers have moved back into first. I do have to wonder how Cincy would have done against Steelers had Green not gotten hurt.

SF quietly moves to 8-1 with a gritty win over the Giants. 49ers have a very solid team.

Rams continue to improve, with a win over the Browns. Dolphins continue to improve too. Good, tough win for the Saints, in Atlanta. Texans, Titans and Jags all won like expected.
The Ravens are great at playing to the level of their competition, thus they made me dry heave for the entire 4th quarter.

It is also very possible now that half the playoff teams will be from the League's northern divisions! Has any division ever had two wildcards (in the 4 divisions per conference era?)
 
nvpacchi said:
The Ravens are great at playing to the level of their competition.
This was certainly true on Sunday. The two teams looked like they swapped jerseys. The Ravens made some terrible turnovers, and for some reason couldn't tackle.

It is also very possible now that half the playoff teams will be from the League's northern divisions! Has any division ever had two wildcards (in the 4 divisions per conference era?)
It has. In 2006-2007 the Eagles won the NFC East, and both the Cowboys and Giants made wildcards. In 2007-2008 again the NFC East, with the Cowboys winning the top seed, and Giants and Skins making wildcards. Plus, that same year the Colts won the AFC South, with the Titans and Jags making wildcards.
 
nvpacchi said:
The Ravens are great at playing to the level of their competition, thus they made me dry heave for the entire 4th quarter.
Alpe d'Huez said:
This was certainly true on Sunday. The two teams looked like they swapped jerseys. The Ravens made some terrible turnovers, and for some reason couldn't tackle.
I'm a Hawk fan, and while I was happy for my team I was in utter disbelief watching the Raves shoot themselves in the foot. I actually felt bad for the Raves because I also like that team a lot. Hopefully they will learn something from this and bounce back with a vengeance to close out the season. Maybe Ravens players need more of that nasty temperment that Ray Lewis has. I would not want to play them this week though.
 
They play Cincinnati. Should be fun to watch as the Bengals are a team on the rise and almost knocked off the Steelers last week.

Houston's Matt Schaub is out for several weeks, an stepping in will be Matt Leinart, whose career so far is known for being one of the biggest Heisman busts ever. He has a reputation of being lazy and disinterested. He visited Seattle when the lockout ended, and even Pete Carrol didn't want him.

Houston has serious talent, but is also in a real bind with several key players out. Schaub, Mario Williams. Andre Johnson, Antonio Smith, Eric Winston, etc.. The last three should be back soon, Schaub and Williams may miss the season. But if they can somehow come back, by playoff time...
 
Tebow and the Broncos win again! Not the best game, mostly a defensive struggle. But when it came time to step up Mark Sanchez tanked, and Tebow rose to the top and the Jets simply couldn't stop him. Great last drive.

I don't know how long they can do this, how many times the run option will work, how his body will hold up, how well he'll develop as a thrower, but for how he's just electric. Watching that last TD you can see his team and that entire city are behind him.

 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Tebow and the Broncos win again! Not the best game, mostly a defensive struggle. But when it came time to step up Mark Sanchez tanked, and Tebow rose to the top and the Jets simply couldn't stop him. Great last drive.

I don't know how long they can do this, how many times the run option will work, how his body will hold up, how well he'll develop as a thrower, but for how he's just electric. Watching that last TD you can see his team and that entire city are behind him.
Dang! I missed it while at another game. He will get banged up and sore, but they all do (except the kickers usually) and I'm sure he will take it in stride.

Getting behind him is kind of what I was talking about earlier. With his mentality, the way he approaches the game and pours it out on the field, he will galvanize, unite, and ignite the locker room. That can transform a team. Great stuff!

On the flip side, I know it is a little bit different because of the proven quality of this next guy, but look at the effect the absence of Peyton has had on Indy. Is Indy playing at a lower level because Manning is not there, and will they recover when he returns?
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Denver 17, NY Jets 13
SUN, NOV 20
Tampa Bay at Green Bay
Carolina at Detroit
Jacksonville at Cleveland
Oakland at Minnesota
Buffalo at Miami
Dallas at Washington
Cincinnati at Baltimore
Arizona at San Francisco
Seattle at St. Louis
Tennessee at Atlanta
San Diego at Chicago
Philadelphia at NY Giants
MON, NOV 21
Kansas City at New England

I have to be honest enough to confess that I would have gone for the Jets. Honesty also requires me to admit that several of my selections are directly influenced by my interest in the SFL stakes.:p
 
Denver 17, NY Jets 13 - I picked the Jets. Ooops!
Tampa Bay at Green Bay - Look for GB defense to make statement.
Carolina at Detroit - Lions must bounce back.
Jacksonville at Cleveland - Good matchup, went with home team.
Oakland at Minnesota - Palmer slowly better.
Buffalo at Miami - Tough call. Miami on a tiny roll, Bills making mistakes of late.
Dallas at Washington - Cowboys playing good. Skins not.
Cincinnati at Baltimore - Ray Lewis is out, but so is AJ Green.
Arizona at San Francisco - 49ers keep rolling.
Seattle at St. Louis - Both teams playing a little better. I said a little.
Tennessee at Atlanta - Close game, hard to pick. Went with home team.
San Diego at Chicago - SD on a slide, Bears on the rise.
Philadelphia at NY Giants - No Vick. Doesn't matter, Giants better.
Kansas City at New England - No Matt Cassel. Doesn't matter, Pats better.

Bye for Texans, Colts, Saints, Steelers. For both Houston and Pittsburgh - the two best teams in the AFC - it comes at the perfect time.
 
Not sure if anyone was watching NCAA today, or yesterday, but what a week of upsets. The whole BCS is turned upside down.

#2 Oklahoma State lost to Iowa State.
#4 Oregon lost to USC.
#5 Oklahoma lost to Baylor.
#7 Clemson lost to NC State.

How teams will be ranked tomorrow is anyone's guess. The big winner here was Alabama, who is one game from the national championship. They also benefit in that LSU has to play first Arkansas, then in the SEC Championship against a red hot Georgia who have rattled off 9 wins in a row.

The other team that benefits is Houston, the only other top 10 unbeaten team.

The only thing that could stir it up more is if LSU loses next week to Arkansas or to Georgia. Or if Alabama loses next week at Auburn.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
I was totally resigned to a thumping defeat by the Cowboys, but damn it, once you tie the game with seconds left and actually show some fight, don't then go and lose it in OT.:mad:

I posted predictions elsewhere too, and there I changed to Seattle and Atlanta - which meant that when I went to bed, before the Giants game, I had all yesterday's games correct. If only I'd known somehwere to place a small accumulator.:p
 
After an uber-impressive performance last week, the Packers looked beatable to me. I actually think there's a decent chance the Lions will beat them on Thursday. It's in Detroit, on Thanksgiving, and I think their coach will have them revved up to take on the Pack.

Dolphins have done a total 180, winning three in a row, and have brought back the no-name defense, giving up zero TD's in those games. Fans were holding up 9-7 signs ('Fins are 3-7 now)!

Seattle's defense is starting to look surprisingly solid, even though I can't name a single guy on them.

Impressed with the Eagles grit, and Vince Young didn't play great, but stood tall when he needed to.

Carson Palmer had his best game yet as a Raider. Defense looking sketchy though.

Rookie Jake Locker looked good playing for Tennessee, but it wasn't enough. Chris Johnson had another poor game. Foxy was right, this was a terrible signing by the Titans and they should have just let him go.

Chargers look finished at 4-6. Norv Turner should be fired.

Jay Cutler is out until January, which may really hurt the Bears in the NFL's toughest division.

49ers now 9-1. League leaders in points allowed per game, and offense is solid. Serious match-up on Thursday at Baltimore. Easy schedule after that, should go 13-3 at worst. Could go 15-1.

Cowboys should have lost. Redskins back in the SFL sweepstakes.

Speaking of...however, Luck was outshined by Matt Barkley this week, also Robert Griffin III, and maybe even Landry Jones. All four of those guys look like certain first round NFL picks next year. Any team needing a QB in the NFL had to have been very happy watching on Saturday. Could be the best draft year since 1983 for QBs. And I left Case Keenum and Brandon Weeden off that list. Kellen Moore is small, but a good leader and he'll get taken in the first few rounds too. Heck, Casey Pachall at TCU is a sophomore but has size and potential and could go pro and get picked early. Plus I left out a couple more guys. We could definitely see six QB's taken in the first round, just like in 1983 (Elway, Marino, Kelly, etc.)
 
Amsterhammer said:
I was totally resigned to a thumping defeat by the Cowboys, but damn it, once you tie the game with seconds left and actually show some fight, don't then go and lose it in OT.:mad:

I posted predictions elsewhere too, and there I changed to Seattle and Atlanta - which meant that when I went to bed, before the Giants game, I had all yesterday's games correct. If only I'd known somehwere to place a small accumulator.:p
Awwwwww, now that's cheating. ;)

I had Seattle ftw yesterday. They were slight underdogs going in but ended up winning 24-7. Their defense is winning games (4th in the NFL in run defense going into yesterday). In recent years Stephen Jackson shredded Seattle's "D" at will. Not so yesterday, where he was held to 42 yards on 15 carries (2.8 ypc). A lot of those 2 to 3 yard pickups Jackson had yesterday used to go for 20 to 30 yards.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Speaking of...however, Luck was outshined by Matt Barkley this week, also Robert Griffin III, and maybe even Landry Jones. All four of those guys look like certain first round NFL picks next year. Any team needing a QB in the NFL had to have been very happy watching on Saturday. Could be the best draft year since 1983 for QBs. And I left Case Keenum and Brandon Weeden off that list. Kellen Moore is small, but a good leader and he'll get taken in the first few rounds too. Heck, Casey Pachall at TCU is a sophomore but has size and potential and could go pro and get picked early. Plus I left out a couple more guys. We could definitely see six QB's taken in the first round, just like in 1983 (Elway, Marino, Kelly, etc.)
Nice summary of NFL there. But I wanted to comment on the SF-QBs sweepstakes. I too was underimpressed with Luck this week... and The Cardinal have a good running game. You'd think with their run game that the passing game would do better than it did last week. Is he showing some chinkds in his armor?

I really was impressed with the precision passing of Barkley. Some passes may have missed a bit, but many passes could not have been put in a better location. And on long, not just short, routes. PLUS they did it against not-too-shabby UOregon. Had that performance been against the Buffs (Colorado) or Wazzu, then there's some wiggle room in that debate. But no wiggle room in his performance versus the Ducks.
 
Amsterhammer said:
I was totally resigned to a thumping defeat by the Cowboys, but damn it, once you tie the game with seconds left and actually show some fight, don't then go and lose it in OT.:mad:
How can you be a fan of the Washington Redskins? They have a racist mascot they have refused to change; they lost one, possibly two championships because their QB hit the goal post with a pass; their current owner hires a new coach almost every year, sued the season ticket holders, charges for tailgate parties, and tried to sue a critical sportswriter for libel (remind you of a cyclist we all know?).

As if all that weren’t bad enough, the team always does much better during Republican administrations. They were an elite team under Nixon, Reagan and Bush Sr., going to the SB five times and winning three of them. They have played crap whenever a Democrat is in the White House. No one knows why that is, but why tempt fate?

So careful what you wish for, Amster. If a Republican is elected U.S. President next year, and the Redskins respond by going on a tear that takes them to the SB, I hope you will at least have the decency to feel a little guilty.
 
As long as Dan Snider is the owner, the Redskins will never get very far. I don't care who the coach is, or who the players are. No team, or business for that matter, can thrive under that type of impatience and demanding micromanaging.

As a counter, I offer the Pittsburgh Steelers. Three coaches over the last 42 years, that's it. All of them have SB rings. Owners (the Rooney family) are very patient, and nurturing of their team and entire organization. And with that comes winning. And they don't win the way the NY Yankees do, with raw money. They do it under a hard salary cap. They just hire the right people, and treat them very well. That fosters a situation where people thrive, and win.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
As long as Dan Snider is the owner, the Redskins will never get very far. I don't care who the coach is, or who the players are. No team, or business for that matter, can thrive under that type of impatience and demanding micromanaging.

As a counter, I offer the Pittsburgh Steelers. Three coaches over the last 42 years, that's it. All of them have SB rings. Owners (the Rooney family) are very patient, and nurturing of their team and entire organization. And with that comes winning. And they don't win the way the NY Yankees do, with raw money. They do it under a hard salary cap. They just hire the right people, and treat them very well. That fosters a situation where people thrive, and win.
Couldn't agree more! Sadly, times change, and the Steelers may not be able to continue such a policy. My major sporting addiction since 1968, West Ham United, a football (soccer) club from the east of London, was founded in 1901. During the first 100 years the club had eight managers, far fewer than any other English team. We have had another seven managers in the last 10 years, during which we have twice been relegated.:eek:

Merckx index said:
How can you be a fan of the Washington Redskins?
Easy. D.C. is the only place in the US I ever called home, and RFK was the only stadium I ever saw a game at. That kind of stuff tends to stick with you regardless of the owner's excesses.

Merckx index said:
As if all that weren’t bad enough, the team always does much better during Republican administrations. They were an elite team under Nixon, Reagan and Bush Sr., going to the SB five times and winning three of them. They have played crap whenever a Democrat is in the White House. No one knows why that is, but why tempt fate?

So careful what you wish for, Amster. If a Republican is elected U.S. President next year, and the Redskins respond by going on a tear that takes them to the SB, I hope you will at least have the decency to feel a little guilty.
I had actually heard about this, but had forgotten about it till you mentioned it. Just to be perfectly clear, my allegiance to the Skins is not of such a fanatical nature that I would for a moment consider selling my soul to the Republitard devil for a SB. In fact, if I could know for certain that an 0-16 season would prevent a Republitard being elected President, I'd happily say, 'bring it on'. ;)
 
The Redskins a racist mascot? My Native American friends don't seem to mind. I'm glad someone has the cojones to recognize our Native American friends instead of wussing out the way of The Cardinal. IMO Redskins = proud, and fierce when necessary.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY