- Jul 12, 2012
- 8,975
- 591
- 19,080
I am looking forward to the Denver D vs. the Carolina O!
Cam is a stud!
I'm still taking the Broncos for the win.
Cam is a stud!
I'm still taking the Broncos for the win.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
Yesireee. Cam definitely deserves the MVP.
Congrats to the Panthers and Broncos. I think if the Panthers take care of the Broncos edge rushers well enough that Carolina will destroy Denver. Either way, I don't see Denver winning.
Sucks for NE though. Missing the PAT early in the game meant they had to go for 2 at the end of regulation. If NE made the PAT they missed, they only have to kick a PAT at the end of the game to force OT. Had it gone to OT I think NE would have won.
Congrats to the Panthers and Broncos. I think if the Panthers take care of the Broncos edge rushers well enough that Carolina will destroy Denver. Either way, I don't see Denver winning.
Sucks for NE though. Missing the PAT early in the game meant they had to go for 2 at the end of regulation. If NE made the PAT they missed, they only have to kick a PAT at the end of the game to force OT. Had it gone to OT I think NE would have won.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,576
- 28,180
Agree with everything on3m@rmy just wrote. Took the words right out if my mouth.
Panthers getting Jared Allen back for the SB cements it. Having said all that, wouldn't it be something if Manning has a great game, against this Carolina team, and leads Denver to victory? Could anyone write a better script?
Panthers getting Jared Allen back for the SB cements it. Having said all that, wouldn't it be something if Manning has a great game, against this Carolina team, and leads Denver to victory? Could anyone write a better script?
- Dec 7, 2010
- 8,770
- 3
- 0
Re:
You guys will go after a drug cheat but yet a real thief and criminal no problem. What a crock of shat.
That is not totally at you pricey sky but more or less at the so called real NFL fans here. I hope Scam gets the clap and whatever STD he will come in contact with.
You guys go up on your high horse about drugs in sport but let someone just thieve like a MF'r no big deal. Hey it is just morals and all. hypocritical jerk faces.
Yeah it is always great to reward a thief and a criminal. What a great day for the laptop thief.Pricey_sky said:
You guys will go after a drug cheat but yet a real thief and criminal no problem. What a crock of shat.
That is not totally at you pricey sky but more or less at the so called real NFL fans here. I hope Scam gets the clap and whatever STD he will come in contact with.
You guys go up on your high horse about drugs in sport but let someone just thieve like a MF'r no big deal. Hey it is just morals and all. hypocritical jerk faces.
Re:
One game doesn't mean everything, but it sure is hard to consider Palmer after that game. Six turnovers! I think we should have seen this coming. He was never that great with Cincy or Oakland. He had a great year for AZ, but there probably should have been questions about sustainable it was.
Vegas has CAR as 4 point favorites, and they were initially 5.5. Initially, as in bettors were already lined up at the end of the 3d quarter. I'm serious, the freaking game wasn't even over, and they were putting odds on the Pussy Cats to win the SB, and bettors were putting money down on those odds.
But is it possible they would have gone for two, anyway? As I pointed out after the GB-AZ game (and you can be sure that in hindsight the Packers wish they had gone for two), the odds of making two are about the same as the odds of winning in OT. And that's not even taking into account that Denver would have had time for one offensive play if NE had tied the game. Not likely to score, but it does tilt the odds a little.
Gosto had made more than 500 extra points in a row, dating back to 2006, though to be fair, up till this year, they were at the closer distance. But don't forget NE had two chances for FGs late in the fourth quarter, and Beli went for it on 4th down both times. Also don't forget that the only reason NE had an extra point attempt to try was because of a dropped lateral that was initially ruled as an incomplete pass, and only after a lot of scrutiny was it seen to be backwards, barely, and therefore a fumble and turnover by Denver.
And if you thought the finish was wild, consider this. When they changed the rules last year, to make the extra point from further out, they also changed the rules so that a turnover on a two point conversion could be run back for two points. So when that Denver player intercepted Brady, if he'd run it back all the way, Denver would have had a four point lead. It didn't matter much, even if NE had recovered the onside kick, it would have taken a Hail Mary to win. But the Denver player fumbled the ball when he was tackled. I'm not sure what the rules say, but if he's allowed to run it back for two points, then couldn't a NE player pick up the fumble and run it back the other way for the two point conversion? If that were allowed, and it happened, how wild would that be?
I'm not a big fan of Newton, and won't defend what he did back then. But any pro athlete who uses PEDs is in effect stealing far more money than any laptop is worth.
on3m@n@rmy said:
One game doesn't mean everything, but it sure is hard to consider Palmer after that game. Six turnovers! I think we should have seen this coming. He was never that great with Cincy or Oakland. He had a great year for AZ, but there probably should have been questions about sustainable it was.
Vegas has CAR as 4 point favorites, and they were initially 5.5. Initially, as in bettors were already lined up at the end of the 3d quarter. I'm serious, the freaking game wasn't even over, and they were putting odds on the Pussy Cats to win the SB, and bettors were putting money down on those odds.
But is it possible they would have gone for two, anyway? As I pointed out after the GB-AZ game (and you can be sure that in hindsight the Packers wish they had gone for two), the odds of making two are about the same as the odds of winning in OT. And that's not even taking into account that Denver would have had time for one offensive play if NE had tied the game. Not likely to score, but it does tilt the odds a little.
Gosto had made more than 500 extra points in a row, dating back to 2006, though to be fair, up till this year, they were at the closer distance. But don't forget NE had two chances for FGs late in the fourth quarter, and Beli went for it on 4th down both times. Also don't forget that the only reason NE had an extra point attempt to try was because of a dropped lateral that was initially ruled as an incomplete pass, and only after a lot of scrutiny was it seen to be backwards, barely, and therefore a fumble and turnover by Denver.
And if you thought the finish was wild, consider this. When they changed the rules last year, to make the extra point from further out, they also changed the rules so that a turnover on a two point conversion could be run back for two points. So when that Denver player intercepted Brady, if he'd run it back all the way, Denver would have had a four point lead. It didn't matter much, even if NE had recovered the onside kick, it would have taken a Hail Mary to win. But the Denver player fumbled the ball when he was tackled. I'm not sure what the rules say, but if he's allowed to run it back for two points, then couldn't a NE player pick up the fumble and run it back the other way for the two point conversion? If that were allowed, and it happened, how wild would that be?
Glenn_Wilson said:
I'm not a big fan of Newton, and won't defend what he did back then. But any pro athlete who uses PEDs is in effect stealing far more money than any laptop is worth.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Very disappointing game by Palmer especially after such a good season beforehand. Put Rodgers in the Cardinals team and I think you would have seen much better today. Palmer had a bad case of the Kaep's 2015. No vision and poor decisions.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,576
- 28,180
I'm not sure what you're saying there Catwhoorg? When should the Pats have attempted the FG?
If Carolina is only a 4pt favorite, I'd be happy to put down a large sum of money and eat those points. There are so many things that make me think they will win big, I don't know where to start. And this includes if Manning has a mistake-free, choke-free game. Denver's biggest hope is that they somehow can rush Cam and disrupt him early, and they really establish a run game that wears down the Panthers. If you go back to their loss to Atlanta, the Falcons stopped their short passing game, especially on 3rd down, and Julio Jones burned them for nearly 200 yards receiving, many against Josh Norman even. Denver has no receiver like that, and don't throw the ball down the field like that either.
I can't condone what Cam did in college, but he was fairly young, and by all counts seems to have made amends for it and turned his life completely around. If someone finds him arrogant or cocky, then that's an opinion I can see. Still, just an opinion.
As to what would have happened if Arizona had Aaron Rodgers at QB, I'm sure there are a lot of teams who could ask that same question! Imagine if heading into the playoffs, Cincinnati had him?!
If Carolina is only a 4pt favorite, I'd be happy to put down a large sum of money and eat those points. There are so many things that make me think they will win big, I don't know where to start. And this includes if Manning has a mistake-free, choke-free game. Denver's biggest hope is that they somehow can rush Cam and disrupt him early, and they really establish a run game that wears down the Panthers. If you go back to their loss to Atlanta, the Falcons stopped their short passing game, especially on 3rd down, and Julio Jones burned them for nearly 200 yards receiving, many against Josh Norman even. Denver has no receiver like that, and don't throw the ball down the field like that either.
I can't condone what Cam did in college, but he was fairly young, and by all counts seems to have made amends for it and turned his life completely around. If someone finds him arrogant or cocky, then that's an opinion I can see. Still, just an opinion.
As to what would have happened if Arizona had Aaron Rodgers at QB, I'm sure there are a lot of teams who could ask that same question! Imagine if heading into the playoffs, Cincinnati had him?!
- Jul 12, 2012
- 8,975
- 591
- 19,080
Nearly everyone deserves a second chance. If someone wants to remember what someone did as a naive college person then that's thier problem. However I've no problem with Cam's behaviour since representing the team I support.
Comparing stealing computers to guys who have spent thier lives on PED's cheating thier way to success at others expense is laughable to be honest, especially in this example.
Comparing stealing computers to guys who have spent thier lives on PED's cheating thier way to success at others expense is laughable to be honest, especially in this example.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 4,349
- 0
- 13,480
I didn't watch the full game but twice in the 4th quarter they were in FG range with a decent chunk of time on the clock (and a defense which had stopped Denver most of the game).
I'm particularly thinking about the drive that ended with ~6 mins to go. Take the points on offer and come back the next time to win it.
I'm particularly thinking about the drive that ended with ~6 mins to go. Take the points on offer and come back the next time to win it.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
Re:
Had I been Belichick, I would have kicked the FG with 2:25 on the clock and 4th and 6 to go. Then the PATS defense would need to get a 3-and-out, as they did above. It is then quite possible the PATS offense would have had about the same time remaining (1:52) with which to get the game winning TD. The PATS post-FG kick off might have burned some clock, but not if the kicker put it out of the end zone, which is reasonably easy to do in Denver's high altitude.
So why did Belichick go for it on 4th and 6 instead of kicking the FG? I'd guess the most important thing is he had confidence in the offense. He has Brady, Gronk, Edelmann, and their collective competitive nature. Maybe equally important that day was the Broncos defense getting in Brady's face and hitting him a LOT. Because of that maybe Bill thought that since they were down that close that going for it on 4th and 6 was their best shot (as if confidence in the offense was not as high that day). OR (jokingly), maybe Belichick decided to try a little bit of Riverboat Ron's Kool-Aid: "No risk it, no bisquit". I dunno. I'm sure the press will want to ask Bill the WHY question. But we may not find out for another 5 years on NFL Film's Sound FX, or some documentary like that.
On Cam's history of off-field mistakes: I agree completely with Alpe on that. Consequences have been served and he's learned from his mistake.
I think what Catwhoorg means is the PATS could have kicked a FG with 4th and 6 at Denver 14 and 2:25 to go in the 4th quarter. Instead the PATS chose to go for either a 1st down or TD. (Brady pass incomplete to Gronkowski). Denver took over on downs with 2:18 left on the clock. The PATS defense got a 3-and-out (while spending 2 defensive time outs), forcing Denver to punt. The PATS offense took over with 1:52 left in regulation, and then scored what would have been the go-ahead TD (8 plays, 50 yards, 1:40 time of possession) had they kicked the FG earlier. But since the PATS did not kick that FG, they had to try the 2-point conversion.Alpe d'Huez said:
Had I been Belichick, I would have kicked the FG with 2:25 on the clock and 4th and 6 to go. Then the PATS defense would need to get a 3-and-out, as they did above. It is then quite possible the PATS offense would have had about the same time remaining (1:52) with which to get the game winning TD. The PATS post-FG kick off might have burned some clock, but not if the kicker put it out of the end zone, which is reasonably easy to do in Denver's high altitude.
So why did Belichick go for it on 4th and 6 instead of kicking the FG? I'd guess the most important thing is he had confidence in the offense. He has Brady, Gronk, Edelmann, and their collective competitive nature. Maybe equally important that day was the Broncos defense getting in Brady's face and hitting him a LOT. Because of that maybe Bill thought that since they were down that close that going for it on 4th and 6 was their best shot (as if confidence in the offense was not as high that day). OR (jokingly), maybe Belichick decided to try a little bit of Riverboat Ron's Kool-Aid: "No risk it, no bisquit". I dunno. I'm sure the press will want to ask Bill the WHY question. But we may not find out for another 5 years on NFL Film's Sound FX, or some documentary like that.
On Cam's history of off-field mistakes: I agree completely with Alpe on that. Consequences have been served and he's learned from his mistake.
And I agree with Cam on that too. He made it clear he understands 1) that he made a mistake, and 2) what it would mean to blow a second chance.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
Re: Re:
SEA will have 17 unrestricted free agents to decide on, plus another 7 restricted FAs. Here's the full list of Seattle's free agents, courtesy of OverTheCap.com.
Seattle UFAs: * = Starter
Michael Morgan (LB)
*Russell Okung (LT)
Tarvaris Jackson (QB)
*Jon Ryan (P)
*J.R. Sweezy (RG)
*Jeremy Lane (CB nickle)
*Jermaine Kearse (WR)
*Ahtyba Rubin (DT)
Anthony McCoY (TE)
*Brandon Mebane (DT)
Bryce Brown (RB)
Chase Coffman (TE)
Lem Jeanpierre (C)
*Will Tukuafu (FB)
Demarcus Dobbs (DT)
Fred Jackson (RB)
*Bruce Irvin (LB)
Seattle RFAs:
Alvin Bailey (OL)
Ricardo Lockette (WR)
Nick Moody (LB)
Christine Michael (RB)
Jesse Williams (DT)
*Patrick Lewis (C)
Derrick Coleman (FB)
Throwing monkey wrenches into this are non-contract year starters who want more money. They include DT Michael Bennett, and S Kam Chancellor.
And then there is the Marshawn Lynch situation. Lynch may be leaning toward retirement, a statement made by GM John Schneider. IMO if I was the GM I would not have volunteered that information about Lynch. Why? To not ruffle Lynch's feathers. The GM must be hoping Lynch makes a decision that helps the team. If Lynch plays out next year the team will own him ~$11M, if cut the team saves $6.5M in cap, but if he retires the team saves the full cap amount of about $11M.
What about Jimmy Graham and Kam Chancellor?
- Kam Chancellor Cap Savings if cut: $4.1M
- Jimmy Graham Cap Savings if cut: a whopping $9M
[- Lynch Cap Savings if cut: $6.5M, or $11M if retires]
SEA knew what cap hits they were getting into when they inked Graham. So, I think SEA keeps Graham. Not so sure about Kam.
Whether SEA will really be fine or not will depend a large part on the offensive line (names in bold above). I have some other eye-popping evidence that suggests what needs to be done there. But I'll have to post a bit later.
I will say, Seattle will be fine, but say it with some hesitation. Hesitation because of all the UFAs they must decide on.BullsFan22 said:
SEA will have 17 unrestricted free agents to decide on, plus another 7 restricted FAs. Here's the full list of Seattle's free agents, courtesy of OverTheCap.com.
Seattle UFAs: * = Starter
Michael Morgan (LB)
*Russell Okung (LT)
Tarvaris Jackson (QB)
*Jon Ryan (P)
*J.R. Sweezy (RG)
*Jeremy Lane (CB nickle)
*Jermaine Kearse (WR)
*Ahtyba Rubin (DT)
Anthony McCoY (TE)
*Brandon Mebane (DT)
Bryce Brown (RB)
Chase Coffman (TE)
Lem Jeanpierre (C)
*Will Tukuafu (FB)
Demarcus Dobbs (DT)
Fred Jackson (RB)
*Bruce Irvin (LB)
Seattle RFAs:
Alvin Bailey (OL)
Ricardo Lockette (WR)
Nick Moody (LB)
Christine Michael (RB)
Jesse Williams (DT)
*Patrick Lewis (C)
Derrick Coleman (FB)
Throwing monkey wrenches into this are non-contract year starters who want more money. They include DT Michael Bennett, and S Kam Chancellor.
And then there is the Marshawn Lynch situation. Lynch may be leaning toward retirement, a statement made by GM John Schneider. IMO if I was the GM I would not have volunteered that information about Lynch. Why? To not ruffle Lynch's feathers. The GM must be hoping Lynch makes a decision that helps the team. If Lynch plays out next year the team will own him ~$11M, if cut the team saves $6.5M in cap, but if he retires the team saves the full cap amount of about $11M.
What about Jimmy Graham and Kam Chancellor?
- Kam Chancellor Cap Savings if cut: $4.1M
- Jimmy Graham Cap Savings if cut: a whopping $9M
[- Lynch Cap Savings if cut: $6.5M, or $11M if retires]
SEA knew what cap hits they were getting into when they inked Graham. So, I think SEA keeps Graham. Not so sure about Kam.
Whether SEA will really be fine or not will depend a large part on the offensive line (names in bold above). I have some other eye-popping evidence that suggests what needs to be done there. But I'll have to post a bit later.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,576
- 28,180
I see now what you mean about the Pats kicking the FG on 4th, instead of going. In retrospect, maybe it was the wrong call. But I never got the feeling the Pats had the Bronco defense on their back heels. The one coaching call I was surprised to not see, and this may be McDaniels or Belicheck, is that the Pats didn't seem to change much offense at the half. They were a little more efficient, but no hurry up, no planned plays with Brady moving. At least one of the pundits commented on it, as well. Of course, it's easy to be a monday morning quarterback.
Interestingly enough, the team who may lose the most to free agency, and have cap issues, is Denver. They really are at a win now moment. There was talk that Manning may play another year, but to me, this is it.
I'm not even from Seattle, but I'm more optimistic than you are onm3@my. The Seahawks are deep, and an extremely well run organization. Great coach and staff. Great GM who works with them, and a great owner who supports them, but doesn't meddle and stays out of the way. Wilson was playing his very best late in the season, they will be able to attain a lot of key players as well. I think the holes to fill: OL, and probably the pass rush, are fairly minimal. They may have the best core DB unit in the NFL now, but losing one isn't unsurmountable. In fact, this article by USA Today lists teams with the best shot at 2016, and they have Seattle up top, and I am one to agree (I like Cincy, Pittsburgh, and Indianapolis to bounce back too in the AFC, and Green Bay in the NFC as well battling Minnesota again).
One conclusion I did come to this year, and we can talk about it in the off season, I can't think of another NFL season when attrition from injuries made such an impact. It's survival out there for many teams, with so many key injuries playing such a big impact. And it's not just being able to suit up, you have to stay healthy. Look at Pittsburgh, look at New England.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/01/05/2016-rebuild-rankings-eliminated-teams/78292302/
Interestingly enough, the team who may lose the most to free agency, and have cap issues, is Denver. They really are at a win now moment. There was talk that Manning may play another year, but to me, this is it.
I'm not even from Seattle, but I'm more optimistic than you are onm3@my. The Seahawks are deep, and an extremely well run organization. Great coach and staff. Great GM who works with them, and a great owner who supports them, but doesn't meddle and stays out of the way. Wilson was playing his very best late in the season, they will be able to attain a lot of key players as well. I think the holes to fill: OL, and probably the pass rush, are fairly minimal. They may have the best core DB unit in the NFL now, but losing one isn't unsurmountable. In fact, this article by USA Today lists teams with the best shot at 2016, and they have Seattle up top, and I am one to agree (I like Cincy, Pittsburgh, and Indianapolis to bounce back too in the AFC, and Green Bay in the NFC as well battling Minnesota again).
One conclusion I did come to this year, and we can talk about it in the off season, I can't think of another NFL season when attrition from injuries made such an impact. It's survival out there for many teams, with so many key injuries playing such a big impact. And it's not just being able to suit up, you have to stay healthy. Look at Pittsburgh, look at New England.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/01/05/2016-rebuild-rankings-eliminated-teams/78292302/
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
This is a continuation of my previous post of Seattle will be fine. Or will they? I left off with the O-Line. SEA OL starters includes only one potential Pro Bowler assuming that guy stays healthy (LT Okung). But injuries have plagued him most of his career. Of the other 4 starters, only one would I consider a keeper for the long term (RT Gilliam, who is a keeper not based on production so much as potential. Dude is still raw.) The others are just serviceable. Enter SEA OL coach Tom Cable. Now, I respect Cable's ability to coach run blocking. Not so much pass blocking, as evidenced by the frequency QB Wilson has had to run for his life. Also, NOT so much his ability to select and draft talent. Below is a chart of Cable's O-Line stats over his NFL career:
Note: rankings are from 1 (league best) to 32 (league worst)
Over his career through 2013 his offensive lines have given up an average 43 sacks per season, ranking about 24th in the league. Adding to that:
- 2014 OL gave up 42 sacks (20th rank)
- 2015 OL gave up 46 sacks (26th rank)
His lines have been one of the leagues best in the run game over his career.
The point: SEA is going to have to do a better job of selecting players who can block if they want to have success. We all know a team has got to have talent at the skill positions to be successful, and that the line is the foundation where it all starts. Sometimes I blame play the calling, but with a really good OL it won't matter what play is called. That's why I say OL is the foundation of the offense.
Note: rankings are from 1 (league best) to 32 (league worst)
Over his career through 2013 his offensive lines have given up an average 43 sacks per season, ranking about 24th in the league. Adding to that:
- 2014 OL gave up 42 sacks (20th rank)
- 2015 OL gave up 46 sacks (26th rank)
His lines have been one of the leagues best in the run game over his career.
The point: SEA is going to have to do a better job of selecting players who can block if they want to have success. We all know a team has got to have talent at the skill positions to be successful, and that the line is the foundation where it all starts. Sometimes I blame play the calling, but with a really good OL it won't matter what play is called. That's why I say OL is the foundation of the offense.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
It may not have sounded like it but I am optimistic with the organization's ability, especially with the draft. But I think this is the largest number of UFAs Seattle has had. Adding to that some unknowns, like what sort of buckaroo the UFAs are in contract talks (e.g. willing to take less $$$ to stay). For example, couple years ago Golden Tate said he'd take a hometown discount to stay with Seattle but Michael Bennett said he would not. Tate left for more money in Detroit and Bennett is still in Seattle. Now, LB Bruce Irvin says he'd take a hometown discount, but WR Jermaine Kearse says he would not. Any bets Kearse stays with Seattle and Irvin departs?
However, I'm not too optimistic about OL personnel selections and emphasis on the OL skillsets being sought after. For sure.
Accurate observation on attrition due to injury. I think the league and owners should make that a point of emphasis in the offseason. Maybe a causal analysis with plans to mitigate. And the greedy mothers want an 18 game regular season. One causal factor they should address: inconsistent to outright dangerous field conditions that lead to injury; mitigate by replacing grass with field turf (I think RGIII would agree). Besides Washington potato skins field, Carolina's field is pretty crappy. #2, relax preseason hitting restrictions if restrictions prevent players from getting into game shape, which has been discussed before around the league.
FWIW, Madden for Xbox has all the current rosters and player rankings. According to the Madden game Carolina's DL is three (yes 3) players deep. They are deep thought the whole defense. On the OL, Carolina has pretty good C in Kalil, decent left side including LT Oher, a ProBowl RG, and RT Remmers, who is probably their worst lineman. Carolina may have to give Remmers some help dealing with Denver's Ware and Miller. See, Madden's good for something.
However, I'm not too optimistic about OL personnel selections and emphasis on the OL skillsets being sought after. For sure.
Accurate observation on attrition due to injury. I think the league and owners should make that a point of emphasis in the offseason. Maybe a causal analysis with plans to mitigate. And the greedy mothers want an 18 game regular season. One causal factor they should address: inconsistent to outright dangerous field conditions that lead to injury; mitigate by replacing grass with field turf (I think RGIII would agree). Besides Washington potato skins field, Carolina's field is pretty crappy. #2, relax preseason hitting restrictions if restrictions prevent players from getting into game shape, which has been discussed before around the league.
FWIW, Madden for Xbox has all the current rosters and player rankings. According to the Madden game Carolina's DL is three (yes 3) players deep. They are deep thought the whole defense. On the OL, Carolina has pretty good C in Kalil, decent left side including LT Oher, a ProBowl RG, and RT Remmers, who is probably their worst lineman. Carolina may have to give Remmers some help dealing with Denver's Ware and Miller. See, Madden's good for something.
One of the biggest winners in Denver: Roger Goodell. Think he's not overjoyed he doesn't have to look Brady, Bellichick and Kraft in the eye while giving them a trophy?
A lot on the line in the SB. This game will determine if Manning is over .500 or under .500 in the postseason, and whether he's .500 or worse in SBs. If Denver somehow wins, the Manning vs. Brady discussion, which recently seems to have been settled by Brady, will also be reinvigorated. Manning is 3-1 vs. Brady in AFC championship games, and their overall postseason numbers are actually fairly similar. They both have passer ratings of about 88. Brady has 56 TD and 28 interceptions in 31 games, Manning has 40/24 in 26 games. Brady has played in an incredible ten AFC championship games, but his numbers are actually worse in those than in other postseason games--even in TD and interceptions, and about a 76 rating. The Pats have not won a postseason road game in nine years, though they only played three, all against Manning.
If Carolina wins, they might be considered one of the greatest teams of all time--remarkable considering that entering the season they were a real long-shot, pretty much overlooked by everyone except our Chewy. Only three other teams have gone 18-1, and only two of them, the 49ers and Bears, won the SB. The Panthers also have a shot at the 49ers record 126 points in the postseason, though they'll have to pull off a Seattle-like blow-out vs. a much improved Denver defense to do that. Their defense alone would keep them very much in the game vs. Denver, and when you add Cam and a very solid running game, look out.
A lot on the line in the SB. This game will determine if Manning is over .500 or under .500 in the postseason, and whether he's .500 or worse in SBs. If Denver somehow wins, the Manning vs. Brady discussion, which recently seems to have been settled by Brady, will also be reinvigorated. Manning is 3-1 vs. Brady in AFC championship games, and their overall postseason numbers are actually fairly similar. They both have passer ratings of about 88. Brady has 56 TD and 28 interceptions in 31 games, Manning has 40/24 in 26 games. Brady has played in an incredible ten AFC championship games, but his numbers are actually worse in those than in other postseason games--even in TD and interceptions, and about a 76 rating. The Pats have not won a postseason road game in nine years, though they only played three, all against Manning.
If Carolina wins, they might be considered one of the greatest teams of all time--remarkable considering that entering the season they were a real long-shot, pretty much overlooked by everyone except our Chewy. Only three other teams have gone 18-1, and only two of them, the 49ers and Bears, won the SB. The Panthers also have a shot at the 49ers record 126 points in the postseason, though they'll have to pull off a Seattle-like blow-out vs. a much improved Denver defense to do that. Their defense alone would keep them very much in the game vs. Denver, and when you add Cam and a very solid running game, look out.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
- Aug 24, 2011
- 4,349
- 0
- 13,480
The 2 point conversion is "about a 50:50 play", I think its a little better than that actually but still.
Challenging your defence to get a 3 and out, when the opponents haven't moved the ball especially well the whole game (what 9 punts ?) is a better than a 50:50 bet.(their 3rd down conversion was 30-35% ish. So the odds really were in favour of a stop)
And then you get the chance to score the TD for the win, not flip a coin/2pt conversion to get the chance to flip a coin in OT.
Challenging your defence to get a 3 and out, when the opponents haven't moved the ball especially well the whole game (what 9 punts ?) is a better than a 50:50 bet.(their 3rd down conversion was 30-35% ish. So the odds really were in favour of a stop)
And then you get the chance to score the TD for the win, not flip a coin/2pt conversion to get the chance to flip a coin in OT.
Good interview with Greg Olsen on ESPN radio this AM. They matched him up with Jason Witten when he did his visit to Ten., and he has tried to match Witten's work ethic ever since, even though he chose to go to the U instead of Ten.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,576
- 28,180
Too bad Foxxy isn't around, we could remind him the Bears gave up on Olson.
Regarding the Pats 4th down plays. I had to go back and look it up. It appears this is what happened. Denver was up by 8. There was 6:46 left, and the Pats were faced with 3rd and 11 at the Denver 26. Amendola got the ball, and appeared to gain about 6 yards, but then spun out of it, and turned it into a 10 yard gain down to the Denver 16. This left the Patriots, who were moving the ball okay, a 4th and 1. They chose to go for it, instead of kicking the 25 chip shot yard field goal, which Goskowski would have likely made. The play they chose was a quick screen to Edelman, who lost 1 yard.
Had the Pats kicked the field goal, they would have kicked to the Broncos with about 6 minutes left. At this point the Broncos were not moving the ball at all, but they were arguably draining the clock, they ran the ball, had a short pass that was dropped, then they had a false start, followed by another short pass that was complete, and punted. The plays Kubiak were choosing here were fairly conservative, as he was relying on his defense to keep his team in the game, knowing they were up by 8. Making a 3 and out acceptable. But had they only been up by 5, it stands to reason his play calling would have been more aggressive. What are the odds they would have gotten a first down, getting the clock down to 3 minutes? Two first downs getting it down to a minute? 50/50? That's what Belicheck was gambling. In hindsight he was wrong, but as I said before, it's easy to be a Monday morning QB (or coach). His team was able to move the ball okay that series, and he felt they could convert a 4th and 1, plus they were as close to the end zone as they had been all night after fighting for inches on many downs. Had he been right, and they won the game, he'd be heralded a genius for the call.
I still say what really did the Patriots in was the injuries, and great credit to the Broncos pass rush. They bothered Brady all night. Having Vollmer playing at probably half strength, former all pro LT Nate Solder out for the season, Gronk worn out, Edleman and Amendola banged up. This simply wasn't the same Patriots team that was surgically destroying teams at the start of the season, even if many of the same uniforms were filled by the same bodies. The Patriots issues were exploited by an excellent defense. That's why the lost the game.
Regarding the Pats 4th down plays. I had to go back and look it up. It appears this is what happened. Denver was up by 8. There was 6:46 left, and the Pats were faced with 3rd and 11 at the Denver 26. Amendola got the ball, and appeared to gain about 6 yards, but then spun out of it, and turned it into a 10 yard gain down to the Denver 16. This left the Patriots, who were moving the ball okay, a 4th and 1. They chose to go for it, instead of kicking the 25 chip shot yard field goal, which Goskowski would have likely made. The play they chose was a quick screen to Edelman, who lost 1 yard.
Had the Pats kicked the field goal, they would have kicked to the Broncos with about 6 minutes left. At this point the Broncos were not moving the ball at all, but they were arguably draining the clock, they ran the ball, had a short pass that was dropped, then they had a false start, followed by another short pass that was complete, and punted. The plays Kubiak were choosing here were fairly conservative, as he was relying on his defense to keep his team in the game, knowing they were up by 8. Making a 3 and out acceptable. But had they only been up by 5, it stands to reason his play calling would have been more aggressive. What are the odds they would have gotten a first down, getting the clock down to 3 minutes? Two first downs getting it down to a minute? 50/50? That's what Belicheck was gambling. In hindsight he was wrong, but as I said before, it's easy to be a Monday morning QB (or coach). His team was able to move the ball okay that series, and he felt they could convert a 4th and 1, plus they were as close to the end zone as they had been all night after fighting for inches on many downs. Had he been right, and they won the game, he'd be heralded a genius for the call.
I still say what really did the Patriots in was the injuries, and great credit to the Broncos pass rush. They bothered Brady all night. Having Vollmer playing at probably half strength, former all pro LT Nate Solder out for the season, Gronk worn out, Edleman and Amendola banged up. This simply wasn't the same Patriots team that was surgically destroying teams at the start of the season, even if many of the same uniforms were filled by the same bodies. The Patriots issues were exploited by an excellent defense. That's why the lost the game.
Re:
It was 48% in the NFL this past season. Which makes sense, because the place at which the ball is spotted was originally determined as a point from which teams would score about half the time. I mean, if a kick is virtually automatic, you want a play that scores twice as many points to be about twice as difficult to make. If it were much more difficult than that to make, teams would never try except when they had no choice (like the Pats), and if if were much easier than that to make, teams would not kick very often.
Interestingly, the Pats were one of five teams that never attempted any this year, maybe because they were rarely in a position when it might be advantageous.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-two-point-conversion-statistics/2015/
Are you aware that the Pats' third down efficiency was even worse, like 13%? The Pats weren't moving the ball much, either, until that final drive. Brady had thrown two picks under pressure, he does that in OT and probably hands the game to the Broncos.
I think what you mean is that if the Pats get the ball first in OT, and score a TD, DE doesn't even get a chance. But of course the same holds for the Broncos. The stats I've seen show that the odds of a particular team winning in OT are exactly 50/50. AFAIK, one team has always won an OT game, and one team has always lost the same game.
I don't think you can look at the regulation and conclude one team is more likely than another to win in OT. DE played better than NE in the first half, NE played a little better than DE in the second half, but that doesn't provide any indication of who would play better in OT. This is the recency bias, thinking a team will win its next game because it played so well in its previous game, or that it will win in OT because it played better in the second half.
I don't think it was a bad decision, but it wasn't necessarily the best one, either, even without the benefit of hindsight. Even if they had made the first down, they weren't assured of getting the TD. And of course, as we saw later, even if they got the TD, they weren't assured of tying the game. If we say the odds of getting the first down were 50/50, and the odds of getting into the EZ after that were 50/50, which were probably very generous, then the odds of tying the game were only 1/8. Now maybe the odds of scoring a TD after making the FG were worse--they had scored only one TD up to then, and that required a gift turnover--but it's not an obvious call to me. It's one thing to go for it on 4th when success means a TD. It's quite another to go for it when all success does is buy you a new set of downs.
Also, there was another opportunity later. With about two and half minutes to play, NE had fourth and six on the DE 14, and went for it. You can argue that at that point in the game, they had no reason to believe they were going to get another chance to score a TD, but you also have to take into account that fourth and six is pretty low probability--and again, making the first down doesn't assure that you score the TD, and scoring the TD doesn't assure that you tie the game.
Remember that SE was in a similar situation the week before vs. CAR, and took the FG. Of course, SE definitely needed two scores, not one like the Pats, so that was an easier decision, but again, you have to balance one shot to make first down at low probability with the possibility of getting a new set of downs.
Speaking of Seattle, seriously? A petition among Hawk fans to ban Newton?
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/01/seahawks-fans-create-petition-to-ban-cam-newton-from-playing-in-seattle
Catwhoorg said:
It was 48% in the NFL this past season. Which makes sense, because the place at which the ball is spotted was originally determined as a point from which teams would score about half the time. I mean, if a kick is virtually automatic, you want a play that scores twice as many points to be about twice as difficult to make. If it were much more difficult than that to make, teams would never try except when they had no choice (like the Pats), and if if were much easier than that to make, teams would not kick very often.
Interestingly, the Pats were one of five teams that never attempted any this year, maybe because they were rarely in a position when it might be advantageous.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-two-point-conversion-statistics/2015/
Are you aware that the Pats' third down efficiency was even worse, like 13%? The Pats weren't moving the ball much, either, until that final drive. Brady had thrown two picks under pressure, he does that in OT and probably hands the game to the Broncos.
I think what you mean is that if the Pats get the ball first in OT, and score a TD, DE doesn't even get a chance. But of course the same holds for the Broncos. The stats I've seen show that the odds of a particular team winning in OT are exactly 50/50. AFAIK, one team has always won an OT game, and one team has always lost the same game.
I don't think you can look at the regulation and conclude one team is more likely than another to win in OT. DE played better than NE in the first half, NE played a little better than DE in the second half, but that doesn't provide any indication of who would play better in OT. This is the recency bias, thinking a team will win its next game because it played so well in its previous game, or that it will win in OT because it played better in the second half.
Alpe d'Huez said:
I don't think it was a bad decision, but it wasn't necessarily the best one, either, even without the benefit of hindsight. Even if they had made the first down, they weren't assured of getting the TD. And of course, as we saw later, even if they got the TD, they weren't assured of tying the game. If we say the odds of getting the first down were 50/50, and the odds of getting into the EZ after that were 50/50, which were probably very generous, then the odds of tying the game were only 1/8. Now maybe the odds of scoring a TD after making the FG were worse--they had scored only one TD up to then, and that required a gift turnover--but it's not an obvious call to me. It's one thing to go for it on 4th when success means a TD. It's quite another to go for it when all success does is buy you a new set of downs.
Also, there was another opportunity later. With about two and half minutes to play, NE had fourth and six on the DE 14, and went for it. You can argue that at that point in the game, they had no reason to believe they were going to get another chance to score a TD, but you also have to take into account that fourth and six is pretty low probability--and again, making the first down doesn't assure that you score the TD, and scoring the TD doesn't assure that you tie the game.
Remember that SE was in a similar situation the week before vs. CAR, and took the FG. Of course, SE definitely needed two scores, not one like the Pats, so that was an easier decision, but again, you have to balance one shot to make first down at low probability with the possibility of getting a new set of downs.
Speaking of Seattle, seriously? A petition among Hawk fans to ban Newton?
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/01/seahawks-fans-create-petition-to-ban-cam-newton-from-playing-in-seattle
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,576
- 28,180
In my previous post I left Dion Lewis and Lagarrot Blount off my quick list of starting Pats hurt. Again, a different team played on Sunday from the one who started the season so hot.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram