National Football League

Page 250 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
As I said before, if it looks like a catch is should be a catch. Simple as that. Now just rewrite the rules to make that happen.

And if they redo the catch rules, I'd like to see the rule requiring two feet to be inbounds for a completion be rewritten like it is in college, with WRs just needing one foot in bounds for a pass to be called complete. Why should a completion be any different from other situations, like when keeping the ball out of the end zone on punt coverage? If you're in you're in. Simple.

Finally, Ken Stabler is again a finalist for the HOF. The 2016 HOF class will be announced this Saturday. He should be in the HOF. Hopefully he will make it this time. And not just because people may feel sorry he suffered from CTE, which was recently determined (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/14703416/outside-lines-nfl-great-ken-stabler-diagnosed-cte-death).
 
Here are my suggestions for 2016 rule changes.

• Change the catch definition to what I stated before. Control of the ball, both feet on the ground, it's a catch. It was that way for years and years.

• Take all play reviews out of the hands of on-field officials, and have them reviewed entirely by the "booth".

• Limit reviews to 90 seconds. If they can't decide that quickly, the play stands, and the play clock starts for the next play.

• Expand the types of plays that can be challenged. The first thing added: personal fouls, especially head hits.

• Change OT rules in the playoffs, where both teams get the ball at least once (twice the Packers have been burned on this).

• Change OT to where teams must go for 2 points on every TD.

• Change the seeding of playoffs by record. Or at least stop granting home games to teams with inferior records, even if they win their division.

• Change kickoff rules to where a player cannot return the ball out of the end zone, unless the ball bounces before the goal line first (and goes into the end zone). This will cut down on more concussions. I also would be up for considering Greg Schiano's proposal of getting rid of kickoffs entirely (aside from maybe the opening kick?) Instead, teams will get a 4th and 15 from the spot of the kickoff, and they can opt to either punt or “go for it” in lieu of an onside kick.

• Change pass interference rules to where it's a 15 yard penalty (like college) or the spot of the foul, whichever is greater. Considering adding a flagrant PI rule, which would be wherever the foul takes place. These types of PI are rare though.

• Illegal contact and defensive holding should not be automatic first downs. Either strip this, or consider instead making them 10 yard penalties.

• Stop the clock on 1st downs in the final two minutes, until the ball is set and the referee signals to start it. College does this every first down, which drags. But having it happen in the last two minutes of the game would avoid some chaos, and add at most two extra plays.

• Don't allow punts past the 50 yard line. If you're at the 49 yard line or closer, you have to go for it. Or see if the other team will accept a delay penalty.

• Remove the flags from the goal posts. Make the kickers calculate the wind on their own.

• Move the extra point from the 15 yard line, to the 20 yard line, and make the kicker kick it from one hash mark or the other, not dead on.

Ban domes. I'm okay with stadiums like they have in Dallas, and maybe retractable roofs in some climates, but domes, or even retractable roofs, in temperate or warm cities is stupid. If the Packers can play in Lambeau, and the fans love it, and Buffalo played through some brutal snow games in the past, other teams can handle it as well.

I will think of others, but for one I don't like the 2014 illegal contact change, where if a QB is in the pocket, illegal contact extends beyond 5 yards. It was made in reference to the 2013 Seahawks, and has helped increase the short passing game in the NFL. However, I worry that by cutting the pass interference rule, it will make it worse, while making illegal contact not an automatic first down. One thought is to allow receivers to bump beyond 5 yards off the line of scrimmage. But that's not going to make teams run the ball more. This is the most challenging idea I can't completely grasp a solution for.

I'd also like to find a way to more accurately evaluate, and penalize, offensive picks by recievers. Offenses have become masterful of "rubbing" man-to-man defenders just off the line, or flooding zone areas less than 10 yards off the line using subtle picks to create small openings.
 
I agree about pass interference penalty being 15 yards like in college. Also like the flagrant PI which should be something similar like the clear path foul in the NBA. If the reciever is past the defender (so the defender is trailing the reciever) and gets interfered with than only should it be a spot foul.
 
Well, I'm biased, and have said it before, there are more than a few Raiders that belong in the Hall, and several more that took way too long to get there (Casper, Guy, etc.). These five are no-brainers, and I can't for the life of me figure out why they aren't in other than anti-Raider/anti-Al Davis sentiment.

Ken Stabler - Iconic QB in NFL history. Should have been in when alive. But there's hope he'll make it anyway.
Tom Flores - Four rings! One as a player, one as an assistant, two as a HC. First and only Hispanic coach to win a SB.
Cliff Branch - Outstanding, quiet receiver, forgotten for some reason. Three SB rings!
Todd Christenson - Excellent TE with great hands, and a few 1,000 yard seasons. Good blocker. Good human being.
Greg Townsend - The least known here, but he's the team's all time sack leader, and 16th all time in NFL history.

These belong in my opinion, but will show arguments against them :

Jim Plunkett - Two SB wins, great player, but a few off seasons.
Lester Hayes - One of the best CB's ever, (18 INT's in 1980, including playoffs!) career too short? Associated with Stickum rule.
Jim Otto - For 14 seasons was the anchor of the offense. But not their best offensive lineman.
Dave Dalby - Replaced Otto, for another 14 years. Same situation.

These might belong to an ardent Raider fan, but I can see why they're not:

Jack Tatum - Great player from a different era. Nearly killing Daryl Stingly will keep him out (and maybe should?)
Rich Gannon - HOF career on the Raiders, two-time MVP. But average in Minn and KC, even sat on the bench.
Mark Van Eeghen - Grinding, tough RB, with a long, solid career. But the numbers don't quite add up to all time great.
Dayrle Lamonica - Good leader with decent numbers. But behind both Stabler and Plunkett on the waiting list.

There are others, but these are the big names and I'll stop here.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Here are my suggestions for 2016 rule changes.

• Change the catch definition to what I stated before. Control of the ball, both feet on the ground, it's a catch. It was that way for years and years.

• Take all play reviews out of the hands of on-field officials, and have them reviewed entirely by the "booth".

• Limit reviews to 90 seconds. If they can't decide that quickly, the play stands, and the play clock starts for the next play.

• Expand the types of plays that can be challenged. The first thing added: personal fouls, especially head hits.

• Change OT rules in the playoffs, where both teams get the ball at least once (twice the Packers have been burned on this).

• Change OT to where teams must go for 2 points on every TD.

• Change the seeding of playoffs by record. Or at least stop granting home games to teams with inferior records, even if they win their division.

• Change kickoff rules to where a player cannot return the ball out of the end zone, unless the ball bounces before the goal line first (and goes into the end zone). This will cut down on more concussions. I also would be up for considering Greg Schiano's proposal of getting rid of kickoffs entirely (aside from maybe the opening kick?) Instead, teams will get a 4th and 15 from the spot of the kickoff, and they can opt to either punt or “go for it” in lieu of an onside kick.

• Change pass interference rules to where it's a 15 yard penalty (like college) or the spot of the foul, whichever is greater. Considering adding a flagrant PI rule, which would be wherever the foul takes place. These types of PI are rare though.

• Illegal contact and defensive holding should not be automatic first downs. Either strip this, or consider instead making them 10 yard penalties.

• Stop the clock on 1st downs in the final two minutes, until the ball is set and the referee signals to start it. College does this every first down, which drags. But having it happen in the last two minutes of the game would avoid some chaos, and add at most two extra plays.

• Don't allow punts past the 50 yard line. If you're at the 49 yard line or closer, you have to go for it. Or see if the other team will accept a delay penalty.

• Remove the flags from the goal posts. Make the kickers calculate the wind on their own.

• Move the extra point from the 15 yard line, to the 20 yard line, and make the kicker kick it from one hash mark or the other, not dead on.

Ban domes. I'm okay with stadiums like they have in Dallas, and maybe retractable roofs in some climates, but domes, or even retractable roofs, in temperate or warm cities is stupid. If the Packers can play in Lambeau, and the fans love it, and Buffalo played through some brutal snow games in the past, other teams can handle it as well.

I will think of others, but for one I don't like the 2014 illegal contact change, where if a QB is in the pocket, illegal contact extends beyond 5 yards. It was made in reference to the 2013 Seahawks, and has helped increase the short passing game in the NFL. However, I worry that by cutting the pass interference rule, it will make it worse, while making illegal contact not an automatic first down. One thought is to allow receivers to bump beyond 5 yards off the line of scrimmage. But that's not going to make teams run the ball more. This is the most challenging idea I can't completely grasp a solution for.

I'd also like to find a way to more accurately evaluate, and penalize, offensive picks by recievers. Offenses have become masterful of "rubbing" man-to-man defenders just off the line, or flooding zone areas less than 10 yards off the line using subtle picks to create small openings.
Yes to all of your ideas except the kick/punt ones...those are some of the most exciting plays of the season. Also, as we have discussed, I am for ALL domes because weather shouldn't dictate the play of the game.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Meh on domes. I don't need to say more.

As to kickoff and punts, those are the plays that have the highest impact injuries, which is why the NFL is trying to curb them. And I honestly can't blame them.
Trouble is that good kickoff returns and punt returns are an exciting part of the game, provide the longest runs and can give their teams good field position. Any changes to help with injuries would be good but it would be a big change to the game. Even if they changed the amount of players on the field on both sides for kicks it still does not stop the returner running at top speed and eventually running into a defender or by creating more gaps with less players it could just mean more touchdowns. I have to admit that I think kick offs are just about useless these days as there are hardly any returns on kick offs anymore. So most of the injuries must be coming from punt returns or receivers who have had time to be lined up by a defender especially when they have to leave the ground to catch the ball and are basically sitting ducks.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
I agree. If officials have trouble applying the rules consistently then what hope for the layman watching the game ?
Even the commentators who call and watch the games every week, some of them experienced players themselves seem as confused about it as well after watching countless replays and all agree that it has to be simplified or the interpretation has to be simplified. It's not the only grey area of the game but probably the most contentious and discussed.
 
Here's the problem with that, you have two parts to the rule that require split-second decision and analysis by the referees.

First you have: "secures control of the ball in his hands or arms". This is somewhat tough to accurately analyze, as we've seen in multiple replays through the years. However, the referees have done a very good job.

The second aspect to the rule, that the player has to get both feet in bounds, is the easiest to determine, and validate.

Now, the third part, "until he has clearly become a runner." This is such a widely interpreted and easily disputed assertion, and the cause of all the confusion and frustration to players, and fans, and referees. This is the section that was essentially added after the referees somehow determined that Calvin Johnson didn't make that catch. I'll say as I did before, in an effort to clarify a tough call, the NFL rules committee went the wrong direction, in making this definition, and this aspect of the rule should be rescinded, essentially returning the call to the way it had been for years, before the Calvin Johnson play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq2ohfX_AzI
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Here's the problem with that, you have two parts to the rule that require split-second decision and analysis by the referees.

First you have: "secures control of the ball in his hands or arms". This is somewhat tough to accurately analyze, as we've seen in multiple replays through the years. However, the referees have done a very good job.

The second aspect to the rule, that the player has to get both feet in bounds, is the easiest to determine, and validate.

Now, the third part, "until he has clearly become a runner." This is such a widely interpreted and easily disputed assertion, and the cause of all the confusion and frustration to players, and fans, and referees. This is the section that was essentially added after the referees somehow determined that Calvin Johnson didn't make that catch. I'll say as I did before, in an effort to clarify a tough call, the NFL rules committee went the wrong direction, in making this definition, and this aspect of the rule should be rescinded, essentially returning the call to the way it had been for years, before the Calvin Johnson play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq2ohfX_AzI
"LIKE". I wish we had a like button on this board.
 
In further sad news Dallas police are opening an investigation into Johnny Manziel abusing his girlfriend. Manzeil's agent also announced he will no longer represent Manziel.

So, here's the $64 question. Will he play for a team next year? Even as the third string on the bench, or practice squad? The NFL is big on talent and short on memory. So if he stays out of the limelight, even if he's an alcoholic who abuses women, if it's not reported, I imagine some desperate team may give him a shot in camp at least.
 
It is sad. Manziel is on a collision course to become the next Ryan Leaf, or dead at age 26 like his dad fears. So many people have tried to reach out to help him (his agent, Browns owner, teammates, and even Charlie Sheen (who knows something about recoveries). But obviously Manziel does not want to help himself. So, the best for him would be for him to hit absolute rock bottom. As long as an NFL team is willing to take a gamble on him that will not happen. The entire NFL just needs to stand clear of Manziel. Then if he can get it turned around there could be the possibility of a second shot at the NFL. Until he can turn it around, it would be despicable for any team to sign him up because they obviously would not have Manziel's best interest in mind.

On domed stadiums, I prefer the outdoor venues. Even if the weather gets inhospitable, it can't compare to a really good duck hunt, where "good" means really bad weather.

When it comes to stadiums, this will sound almost blasphemous to an old player who was a good mudder, but I am starting to think the league should make it mandatory to replace grass turf with field turf. There are a few good grass field around the league, but enough of them have become such poor turf that they have increased risk of injury. Or there should at least be some standards set for grass turf to be acceptable. Teams whose fields do not meet standards could be fined each game played.

Roger Goodell says he was very disappointed in the player's competitiveness displayed at the NFL Pro Bowl last week (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/05/goodell-disappointed-in-last-weeks-pro-bowl-hints-at-changes/). I understand the players not wanting to risk injury, but Goodell has a point. I have a suggestion that might work. By their nature, players at the NFL level love to compete. The suggestion is instead of playing the traditional Pro Bowl, the league should create a different kind of competitive event or set of events that are skills-based. Maybe a Pro Bowl combine that requires NFL skills, or even non-NFL activities like swimming, bowling, hoops, volleyball, etc. It would be funny watching someone like JJ Watt bowl. The possibilities are limitless when it comes to non-football events.

Is anyone upset Manning used HGH? I'm pretty convinced it is common practice around the league to use HGH to recover from really serious injury and get back to where the player was previously and do it faster than a speeding bullet. So many players try on their own and just can't get back. I'm not so much upset Manning used HGH, I'm more upset he's hiding the fact. Sound familiar?
 
on3m@n@rmy said:
It is sad. Manziel is on a collision course to become the next Ryan Leaf, or dead at age 26 like his dad fears. So many people have tried to reach out to help him (his agent, Browns owner, teammates, and even Charlie Sheen (who knows something about recoveries). But obviously Manziel does not want to help himself. So, the best for him would be for him to hit absolute rock bottom. As long as an NFL team is willing to take a gamble on him that will not happen. The entire NFL just needs to stand clear of Manziel. Then if he can get it turned around there could be the possibility of a second shot at the NFL. Until he can turn it around, it would be despicable for any team to sign him up because they obviously would not have Manziel's best interest in mind.

On domed stadiums, I prefer the outdoor venues. Even if the weather gets inhospitable, it can't compare to a really good duck hunt, where "good" means really bad weather.

When it comes to stadiums, this will sound almost blasphemous to an old player who was a good mudder, but I am starting to think the league should make it mandatory to replace grass turf with field turf. There are a few good grass field around the league, but enough of them have become such poor turf that they have increased risk of injury. Or there should at least be some standards set for grass turf to be acceptable. Teams whose fields do not meet standards could be fined each game played.

Roger Goodell says he was very disappointed in the player's competitiveness displayed at the NFL Pro Bowl last week (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/05/goodell-disappointed-in-last-weeks-pro-bowl-hints-at-changes/). I understand the players not wanting to risk injury, but Goodell has a point. I have a suggestion that might work. By their nature, players at the NFL level love to compete. The suggestion is instead of playing the traditional Pro Bowl, the league should create a different kind of competitive event or set of events that are skills-based. Maybe a Pro Bowl combine that requires NFL skills, or even non-NFL activities like swimming, bowling, hoops, volleyball, etc. It would be funny watching someone like JJ Watt bowl. The possibilities are limitless when it comes to non-football events.

Is anyone upset Manning used HGH? I'm pretty convinced it is common practice around the league to use HGH to recover from really serious injury and get back to where the player was previously and do it faster than a speeding bullet. So many players try on their own and just can't get back. I'm not so much upset Manning used HGH, I'm more upset he's hiding the fact. Sound familiar?
As stated before, I'm prefer closed venues because weather should not determine the play of the game.
I like your pro bowl ideas.
I don't think HGH is the med of choice, but I'm sure that they use a lot of helpful things.
 
on3m@n@rmy said:
But obviously Manziel does not want to help himself. So, the best for him would be for him to hit absolute rock bottom. As long as an NFL team is willing to take a gamble on him that will not happen. The entire NFL just needs to stand clear of Manziel. Then if he can get it turned around there could be the possibility of a second shot at the NFL. Until he can turn it around, it would be despicable for any team to sign him up because they obviously would not have Manziel's best interest in mind.
Great post, I really agree.

Meanwhile, when questioned about concussions, Goodell said there is risk even sitting on the couch. Well, he has a point, sitting is the silent killer, better to participate in some kind of physical exercise than be a couch potato. But he and the NFL still seem to be in some denial. Kenny Stabler ((who may be going into the HOF posthumously) had his brain analyzed post-mortem, and was found to have a significant degree of CTE. And another young man in his 20s died from apparently the symptoms. His death had been explained as a result of an overdose of pain pills, but his brain, too, showed advanced signs of the disease.

I'm beginning to wish I were home in the Bay Area, I could rent my house for $1000 or more per night. The short-term rental market for SB weekend has gone beyond crazy, with hotels charging thousands of dollars per night, one offering a $1 million (are you kidding me?) weekend package.

But San Franciscans are not happy about being on the hook for $5 million for hosting the SB. Graffiti artists have had a field day rearranging the letters in the Super Bowl 50 statues erected around town. My favorite: UP R BOWEL.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/2/5/10920110/super-bowl-50-statues-nfl-san-francisco-residents-vandalism-uproar
 
Aug 21, 2015
380
0
0
Believe there used to be a pro bowl skills competition, would be pretty happy to see that come back. Feel like it would be a lot more fun than the actual game.
 
jmdirt said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
It is sad. Manziel is on a collision course to become the next Ryan Leaf, or dead at age 26 like his dad fears. So many people have tried to reach out to help him (his agent, Browns owner, teammates, and even Charlie Sheen (who knows something about recoveries). But obviously Manziel does not want to help himself. So, the best for him would be for him to hit absolute rock bottom. As long as an NFL team is willing to take a gamble on him that will not happen. The entire NFL just needs to stand clear of Manziel. Then if he can get it turned around there could be the possibility of a second shot at the NFL. Until he can turn it around, it would be despicable for any team to sign him up because they obviously would not have Manziel's best interest in mind.

On domed stadiums, I prefer the outdoor venues. Even if the weather gets inhospitable, it can't compare to a really good duck hunt, where "good" means really bad weather.

When it comes to stadiums, this will sound almost blasphemous to an old player who was a good mudder, but I am starting to think the league should make it mandatory to replace grass turf with field turf. There are a few good grass field around the league, but enough of them have become such poor turf that they have increased risk of injury. Or there should at least be some standards set for grass turf to be acceptable. Teams whose fields do not meet standards could be fined each game played.

Roger Goodell says he was very disappointed in the player's competitiveness displayed at the NFL Pro Bowl last week (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/05/goodell-disappointed-in-last-weeks-pro-bowl-hints-at-changes/). I understand the players not wanting to risk injury, but Goodell has a point. I have a suggestion that might work. By their nature, players at the NFL level love to compete. The suggestion is instead of playing the traditional Pro Bowl, the league should create a different kind of competitive event or set of events that are skills-based. Maybe a Pro Bowl combine that requires NFL skills, or even non-NFL activities like swimming, bowling, hoops, volleyball, etc. It would be funny watching someone like JJ Watt bowl. The possibilities are limitless when it comes to non-football events.

Is anyone upset Manning used HGH? I'm pretty convinced it is common practice around the league to use HGH to recover from really serious injury and get back to where the player was previously and do it faster than a speeding bullet. So many players try on their own and just can't get back. I'm not so much upset Manning used HGH, I'm more upset he's hiding the fact. Sound familiar?
As stated before, I'm prefer closed venues because weather should not determine the play of the game.
I like your pro bowl ideas.
I don't think HGH is the med of choice, but I'm sure that they use a lot of helpful things.
Just name the Pro Bowl players and leave it at that. Phase out the game, what is the point and having team mates playing against each other what do they expect ? Manziel was a train wreck waiting to happen but it seems like the girlfriend may have some issues as well but that is for the police to sort out. I am sure the NFL did not want this before the Super Bowl. As for people living in SF, gentrification is happening in many cities world wide, the poorer people get priced out of their local communities and of course the only people that like it are the people who are not affected by it ! It also removes the character of the cities which become cleaner, stacked with new rules, generic and bland and expensive and only then the non complainers start complaining as prices keep rising. Pushing people into certain areas based on income is usually a recipe for disaster. Diverse communities seem to thrive best. Not everyone in SF is happy to be hosting the Super Bowl of course.
 
I like y'alls Pro Bowl options. Heck, anything is better than the current venue, right? The one thing I DO (or DID) like about the Pro Bowl if it is a good weather location, is that fans get to go down on the field before the game and mingle with players and get autographs. I have not experienced that, but known those who have. I do not know if they are still doing that today, but they did offer that opportunity somewhere around 10 years ago. But tickets did cost extra for a fan to participate. I'm know it generally means more to kids, but there are some adult fans who'd love that too. And I think the players like the idea, especially if kids are involved.

Super Bowl, game-wise, I'm really interested to see how this plays out. Bleacher Report put out their list of key matchups they must exploit to win. Here's the summary (full report - http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2614221-key-matchups-the-denver-broncos-must-exploit-to-win-super-bowl-50/page/6):
- OLB D. Ware vs LOT Oher (and I'd add, don't forget Von Miller)
- CB Roby vs WR T. Ginn Jr.
- WR D. Thomas vs CB C. Finnegan
- WR E. Sanders vs CB McCain
- LG E. Mathis vs DG K. Short

I think B/R left one out. That would be Denver O-Line vs Carolina pass rush. Denver runs a spread offense (stating the obvious). Some college teams are using what's called an 8-3 defensive scheme that is a variation of the 3-4. Against spreads, defensive players have to be able to do more, contrasted against 30-year old traditional defensive specialists. Now, middle backers are no longer the big stout run stuffers. They are becoming smaller and faster because they also have to cover well. Well, the 8-3 expands on that by using a bit of the spread offensive mentality, which makes it hard for defenses to know where the ball will go, and turns the table on the offense by making it hard for QBs to know where there coverage will be. Some colleges are actually using the 8-3 vs spread, air-raid style offenses. BUT, Carolina runs a traditional 4-3. They don't run an 8-3. Although they MIGHT at times (so I will be watching for that). But generally speaking, if I was Carolina, I'd look at teams who had success at stopping the Denver offense. I'd probably run a lot of blitz packages and drop a safety down to cover the area vacated by the blitzer. Peyton has not done so well vs pressure. So much so, I might not disguise too much what I'm doing defensively, with the intent of scaring Manning into making mistakes. If Manning gets hit a few times, that could become important.

Merckx index said:
I'm beginning to wish I were home in the Bay Area, I could rent my house for $1000 or more per night. The short-term rental market for SB weekend has gone beyond crazy, with hotels charging thousands of dollars per night, one offering a $1 million (are you kidding me?) weekend package.
In summer, we will be renting a house down there for about $350/night. And it's a really nice place. So, for the SB I can sure see a rate of $1G/night.
 
i can't see anything but a Panthers win but I have noticed some people are giving Denver a chance but don't sound too confident. I think the Panthers are a level above the Patriots at the moment and made a mess of the Cardinals. Not sure if Denver have the offense to hurt the Panthers and their defense will have their hands full. Panthers by 14 plus.
 
I like your ideas there on the Pro Bowl.

I'd also like to see some sort of exhibition, where players on the field break down plays, even historic plays, and recreated them, and analyze them and explain the game. Picture Tony Dungee on the sidelines, setting up plays for players like Aaron Rodgers and Odell Beckam, explaining how to an attack a Cover-2 defense where the Legion Of Doom is defending, for example? They could even run some touch football type plays, where you know at home what plays the defense is calling, versus the offense, and see how they play it out. Things like that.

As one who lived in the Bay Area, and actually in Santa Clara, I have to say I too wish I had a house there about now to rent out!
 
Final post before the Super Bowl, as I'm headed to a party. I'll be cheering for Carolina, but would be okay to see the Sheriff get the monkey off his back once and for all, and ride off into the sunset.

If Carolina gets out to a big lead early, like they did against Sea and Ari, the game is over. So the Broncos have to stop them early. If they can hold them to under 7 points in their first few drives, they're in business. Though I still don't know they'll win. I think Carolina will struggle some on offense, and Denver has to look for turnovers, but Cam is so explosive, and even if they spy him, that leaves Greg Olson 1 on 1, and Cam can throw from the pocket, and move in the pocket. He's the MVP for good reason.

The Broncos cannot give up on the run, no matter what. And Peyton has to have a near perfect game, he has the receivers, but Carolina also has the defense, plus with Jared Allen back, the Panthers can just press them all day long, knowing they can't throw deep (with any consistency). So Denver's going to have a heck of a time scoring, but if they can establish any run, and PM has any tricks up his sleeve that throw Carolina off, then we have a ball game.

I have been thinking all along it will be a near blowout, but I now only believe that will happen if Carolina gets out to a double digit lead in the 1st quarter. If they don't, they still win, they're just too good and on a roll. But I still see a game along the lines of 30-16, Carolina.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
I am totally not invested. I will be happy if the new MVP shines and wins, which is what I expect. But, I wouldn't begrudge the old man having one final great day. I just hear that Carolina are playing in black, and that they're 0-2 in playoffs in that color. fwiw
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS