National Football League

Page 58 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Like the Ravens, couple other teams who have a history of overcoming age and losses one way or another are the Pats and Steelers, and they seem to remain on top of the standings year in, year out.

Seattle's OL situation seems a bit tenuous. But I think this group has potential to perform better than many expect. A new guy to watch is Rishaw Johnson, 6'3" 313 lb long-armed OG, undrafted rookie FA from a D-II school in Pennsylvania. He's reportedly light on feet and pulls very well, so he's got some athleticism. And 11" hands for grabbing and holding on. Why D-II? He got in trouble over team rule violations. Sound familiar? Carroll does not mind giving second chances. Anyway, Rishaw was a D-I SEC guy (U Miss) until other issues surfaced. Here's his combine numbers:

40-Yard Dash: 5.24
Worst: 5.76
Best OG: Adam Gettis 5.00

3-Cone Drill: 7.87
Worst: 8.22
Best OG: David DeCastro 7.30

20-Yard Shuttle: 4.53
Worst: 5.00Best
OG: Rishaw Johnson 4.53

Bench Press: 22.0
Worst: 16.0
Best OG: David DeCastro 34.0

Vertical Jump: 31.5
Worst: 23.0
Best OG: Desmond Wynn 32.5

Broad Jump: 108.0
Worst: 85.0
Best OG: Adam Gettis 112.0

Below average 3-cone and bench, but upper tier in the other drills. Strength is just a matter of hitting the weights properly, probably something lacking at most D-II schools.
 
Best defense in the NFL?

At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, here's an article run by Pro Football Weekly where they discuss who has the better defense between the Steelers, and yeah, you guessed it, the Seahawks.

Here's what they said in a nutshell. The Steelers have a known track record. The Seahawks look good on paper and have not really proven much yet. So while the Seahawks may deserve respect, the Steelers have earned it. Both teams have upsides to improve for different reasons. Upside for the Steelers is PFWeekly thinks they will improve over their so-so 15 turnovers created last year, mainly by improved play from their already solid LB corp of Harrison, Woodley, and Timmons who are all in their prime and at a high level, plus Sylvester as the younger of the group of 4. For Seattle, PFW noted they were so young last year, and will still be among the youngest in the league this year, yet still were the 10th ranked defense in the NFL in 2011. Not to mention solid off-season acquisitions. But now (here's my 2 cents) they have to go out and do it, something the Steelers have already done, to prove they deserve to be considered with the best.

http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/06/26/best-nfl-defense-steelers-or-seahawks
 
N.F.L. top-100 players

So, let's keep it going. I'll start with the NFL.com top 10 players of 2011 from their top-100 list. This list was voted on not by fans, not by media, but by the players themselves.
1. Aaron Rodgers….2092 VOTES
2. Drew Brees……..1415 VOTES
3. Calvin Johnson…...933 VOTES
4. Tom Brady……....4354 VOTES
5. Darrelle Revis….....761 VOTES
6. DeMarcus Ware…1202 VOTES
7. Larry Fitzgerald…....557 VOTES
8. Adrian Peterson…...571 VOTES
9. Haloti Ngata……......670 VOTES
10. Patrick Willis……...952 VOTES

You can see the entire NFL.com top-100 players of 2011 at the link below. If you click on a player, a video is shown explaining the selections. The video includes comments from players around the league. Example, Jets CB Darrelle Revis, who plays against Brady twice a year, says Brady's biggest asset is his accuracy, that Brady always put the ball in a location where the DB cannot make a play on the ball.
http://www.nfl.com/top100/2012

You could easily spend 333 minutes watching all of the videos of the 100 players. Each are about 3:30 minutes long give or take a few. One that I really liked was #51 ranked Brian Urlacher. I'm not a huge fan of Brian, but I really like the way he plays the game in a fun way. Just watch his clip starting around 2:45 to the end and you'll see what I mean.

Bleacher report responded with their take on why certain QBs went up or down in the rankings from the previous year:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1239192-nfl-top-100-players-list-reveals-nfl-is-entering-new-qb-era

edit: TJax now has the inside track for the starting QB job in Seattle, ahead of Matt Flynn.
 
Jul 29, 2009
441
0
0
I need cheering up after the stage today :(

So I need some NFL related amusement.

I have just seen that they are offering game pass in the uk for £99.

I've thought about getting it in the past but my Internet is so slow that when I trailed it before I was either watching a screen the size of a postage stamp or if I went full screen the pixels were the size of postage stamps. I'm sure there must be a solution but not sure if I want it or if. Got it would have the time to make use of it properly.

Anyone had it in the past? Good value or designed to screw every last penny out of fans?
 
Apologies in advance for being cryptic, I don't know if it is frowned upon to link to other sites. Feedback I've read on the official UK based NFL forum basically suggests that from a technical point of view Gamepass is very good but that the problem is with Sky enforcing a Gamepass blackout of games they cover.

It sounds like Monday Night Football may be up for grabs in the UK again, so if Sky picked it up there would be potentially more blacked out games. ESPN (previously showing MNF) never enforced any blackout because they aren't swine. But you can take a wild guess if Sky would! As a Giants fan still on cloud 9 I haven't considered Gamepass yet because I figure Sky will show plenty NFC East encounters and half the games on SNF seem to feature the NFC East (i.e. I wouldn't benefit much from Gamepass). £99 does sound awfy tempting though, especially if you follow a West Coast team that doesn't get much UK coverage.

This is all second hand so hopefully somebody here is a user can advise you better but I thought I'd chip in as I thought the UK Gamepass / cycling crossover numbers might not be so strong and I'd forget if I didn't post now.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Wow, only two weeks and the thread kept front page all year long. Nice job guys. Even i didn´t have the stamina (since organizing the GGTG, shifting and Pharmstrong news).
 
Less than a week from the end of the Tour (Jul 22) to the start of camps (vets report Jul 23-29; rookies ~ the week before).

As for stamina, Foxxy, we have to credit the Saints for providing topics for discussion and volunteering as cannon fodder.
 
Okay, here's something I found interesting. Bleacher's "Ranking the NFL's 7 Worst Contracts from This Offseason". Link. This might raise some eyebrows.

1. Redskins WR Pierre Garcon Link p.2
2. Broncos QB Peyton Manning Link p.3
3. Bucs DB Eric Wright Link p.4
4. Vikes TE John Carlson Link p.5
5. Jets QB Mark Sanchez Link p.6
6. Jags WR Laurent Robinson Link p.7
7. Cards LT Levi Brown Link p.8

I agree with most of what is said. Except Peyton and Carlson. It's a win now league, and a healthy Peyton could make the difference. Even if it is a gamble. Carlson just got a bad rap. Seattle's OL was so poor they required the TE's to stay in and block more, which is part of the reason why TE Zack Miller had an off year last season. The TE's in Seattle just did not get many opportunities for receptions. With Carlson, it was also a matter of injuries. So that is one point where I agreed regarding Carlson. An injury prone player is of little use and at some point is not worth tossing more money at. The trick for team management is knowing when that point is. I hope both players can shake the injuries and be productive in 2012.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
I havn´t followed the NFL lately b/c of shifting & TdF/Pharmstrong.
So some Q´s: Did you guys read the Moldea-Book? Can you give a short summary of how the bounty scandal is going?

Thanks in advance, Cheers :)

After that i´ll make another bold prediction. If it´s really bad in Saints-Land, it doesn´t matter how many millions of dollars are thrown after Brees. He´ll have his worst season as a pro, since this is a team sport and the QB is just a bit over 1/11 of offensive output.
 
Have not read the Moldea book.

I have not followed bountygate much lately, but everything is tied up in lawsuits. The NFLPA has filed a suit, and Vilma has filed a suit, both against the NFL. I have not heard any progress. My guess is the lawsuits will not get the plaintiffs desired results, and I think the NFL penalties that were dished out will hold up.

That is a bold prediction on Brees. You could be right, or it could go the other way entirely depending on how the players respond. It will be interesting to watch. I have a hunch they will miss the playoffs.

edit: July 16 is either doomsday or heyday for the Saints. That's when they have to reach an agreement with Brees on a contract, or else he could go elsewhere. That would be the final dagger in the Saints chances to make the playoffs if they lost Brees. Word is Saints have offered to make Brees the highest paid player in NFL history. But Brees has not accepted yet. Some NO fans I have connections with are hearing Brees will stay with the Saints, but I have no links to back up that claim. Problem is (regarding the size of Brees' possible contract), I believe the Saints have salary cap issues and may have to move some other high paid players to keep Brees.
 
I thought Brees was still under contract for this year, meaning he's stuck in Carson Palmer land. Do you have a link? Having said that, I expect Brees to report to camp, new contract or not, either just before, or after the HOF game.

Didn't read the book either. Sick of Bountygate, to be honest. Ready to watch some actual playing.

That overpaid player list is interesting. But Mark Sanchez definitely has the potential this year to top all of them. If he is merely average, let alone flops, he'll stand alone. Manning and Garcon are getting old, some of the others coming off injury. But Sanchez is not. For him, and his absurdly fat contract, he's at the long end of a short plank.

The most underpaid player has to thus be Aaron Rodgers. Making less than Sanchez is an absolute travesty.
 
If any of you anywhere close to geeky as I am, here's an excellent article on Bleacher Report on the spread offense and why it's being used more in the NFL, especially the "air raid" formation. Not too long of a read, and very interesting.

I'm also very curious to see if at some point a team like SF runs the pistol offense. Especially if they are going to power run with Gore, Hunter or Jacobs, and spread the WR's across the field. Colin Kaepernick was the QB with this at Nevada with great success. He's now SF's backup in his second season. Food for thought.

This also gives you a very good idea why match-ups are something I look for in games. Team vs. team, position vs. position. Which team's strength's and weaknesses are, and how they play against other teams.

 
Alpe d'Huez said:
I thought Brees was still under contract for this year, meaning he's stuck in Carson Palmer land. Do you have a link? Having said that, I expect Brees to report to camp, new contract or not, either just before, or after the HOF game.

Didn't read the book either. Sick of Bountygate, to be honest. Ready to watch some actual playing.
My bad. There is a link suggesting he may sit out the 2012 season (Link), but he has said he would not sit out games over money. So forget what I said about not making playoffs this season b/c he will still be a Saint in 2012.

Because Saints put the franchise tag on Brees, he's under contract for the year... for one year only. But he wants a long term deal, and he has personal reasons for it. That being he wants more guaranteed money in the event he suffers a career ending injury. That almost cost him in San Diego, where he nearly suffered a career ending injury in his last year there as the Bolts franchise player. This is where the speculation has come from that he might sit out the 2012 season, but I don't see that happening. http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Drew-Brees-contract-hinges-on-guarantee-3700734.php
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
If any of you anywhere close to geeky as I am, here's an excellent article on Bleacher Report on the spread offense and why it's being used more in the NFL, especially the "air raid" formation. Not too long of a read, and very interesting.
Great article, but they did not really explain very well why it works, although they alluded to it by saying it "spreads" out the offense. What they did not say is it also spreads out the defense, making the defensive secondary cover 4 or more guys instead of 2 or 3 guys. Defensively having to cover from sideline to sideline takes away the ability to do a lot of safety & corner blitzes from a base defense, and if the defense does blitz in one of those ways it also takes on the risk that a WR is wide open. Hence the requirement for the QB to be able to recognize defenses, pick up the blitzes, and deliver the ball to the guy who is wide open. That often could be a WR running a short under route for a 5 yard pickup, which is a win in a spread formation, and (as the article pointed out) is a play that is a substitute for the run game.

So if the spread is so great, defenses must adapt to defend against it. If the offense is going to put more WRs on the field with a audible-capable QB, the defense has to counter by getting away from their base defense and go with more nickel and dime defenses. Let's face it, a well run spread offense cannot be defended alone by 4 very good DBs. So the defense needs good depth in the CB position primarily, so they can put decent cover guys on the field (Link to Pats Bilichick take). They also need a pass rush to disrupt the QB and take the heat off the DBs. The defense does not necessarily need sacks all the time. They just need QB hurries by getting in his face or getting a hand on him often. A hurried QB will often deliver an inaccurate pass, or throw too early before the WR is open because timing was disrupted.

Very interesting stuff. But now here's a question. With the trend toward a heavy does of passing in offenses, how long will it be before the pendulum swings the other way and teams start going to more of a ball control power running game and just pound away? Ground Chuck anyone?
 
Excellent analysis and link there!

This is why I wonder if at some point a team will try running the pistol/spread. If you go back and look at Kaepernick at Nevada, though they didn't spread it out all the time, when they would the defense would be stretched out to cover the 3-4 wide-outs, and it gave him a lot of quick options from power running, to quick strikes, to keepers, to deep one-on-one. Now, CB's in the NFL are faster and more adept, it's harder to run in the NFL than ever before and the straight pistol is run heavy, and the knock on Kaepernick was that he didn't look/see 2nd and 3rd receivers like QB's must in the NFL. But with the right QB/RB, against teams in a lot of nickle/dime defenses (Kaepernick and SF in 2013, 2014?), I would think this type of spread with the QB lining up in the pistol could be effective in the NFL on a lot of downs. So much so I'm a little surprised we haven't seen it.
 
Good point about the pistol. One thing about coaches, when offenses get good at one style, and defenses catch up to counter what offenses are doing. Then what? They change it up to gain an advantage because now the offense is doing something the defense is not well prepared for. (that was my point earlier when I asked how long will it be before the pendulum swings the other way to more power running) The pistol could give offenses that advantage they are looking for, at least for a time.

Here's another idea that is hitting the college ranks. Maybe it is being used in the pro ranks, but I have not payed attention enough to notice. I will be paying attention this season. Defenses have become good at disguising what they are doing. Well how about offensive line disguises? One of the primary reads for a LB is to recognize what the offensive lineman are doing. Are they pulling? What are their heads doing? Do their heads pop up as in a drop back pass? Some blocking schemes that are now being used in the college ranks on passing plays are not pass block schemes. They are pulling guards, tackles, making it look like a run play. LBs are going to initially read run, and their initial response is to fill gaps. That opens middle routes normally occupied by LBs who would otherwise have been dropping into coverage. I've talked to college players who play defense for teams that are implementing plays where the OL are being used to disguise plays. They say it is very difficult to stop because it is difficult to recognize what is really happening. And that's on a defense that is practicing against their own team's offense. They have the playbook! So watch for that in the future. Here's another link that talks a bit about that: http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2012/07/12375/strategic-trends-to-watch-for-in-the-2012-football-season and a quote from that:
But for now, chew on this: In the Orange Bowl, where Holgorsen’s West Virginia squad bombarded Clemson for 70 points with a variety of interesting tactics, and where his quarterback racked up over 400 yards passing and six touchdown passes, how many true, Air Raid-style drop back passes did they throw? And be careful, when you make your evaluation, because you must study the offensive line on each play. On many of those down field passes, the linemen did not pass block at all, but instead faked a screen or a run-play for play-action, or some other diversion.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
Have not read the Moldea book.

I have not followed bountygate much lately, but everything is tied up in lawsuits. The NFLPA has filed a suit, and Vilma has filed a suit, both against the NFL. I have not heard any progress. My guess is the lawsuits will not get the plaintiffs desired results, and I think the NFL penalties that were dished out will hold up.

That is a bold prediction on Brees. You could be right, or it could go the other way entirely depending on how the players respond. It will be interesting to watch. I have a hunch they will miss the playoffs.

edit: July 16 is either doomsday or heyday for the Saints. That's when they have to reach an agreement with Brees on a contract, or else he could go elsewhere. That would be the final dagger in the Saints chances to make the playoffs if they lost Brees. Word is Saints have offered to make Brees the highest paid player in NFL history. But Brees has not accepted yet. Some NO fans I have connections with are hearing Brees will stay with the Saints, but I have no links to back up that claim. Problem is (regarding the size of Brees' possible contract), I believe the Saints have salary cap issues and may have to move some other high paid players to keep Brees.
Seems american athlets earn too much... err, they do earn too much. Otherwise they wouldn´t file so many lawsuits to hide the truth. They take the fans for fools by doing this. Why can´t crimnals like Pharmstrong, Vilma and others not respect the truth. I am tired of such guys. I stand by my boycot of everything NFL related. Rotten to the core. If it wasn´t the most beautiful game, i´d have flushed it down the toilet a long time ago. :mad:

Again, Brees is worth just a little over 1/11 of the offense. I am pretty sure either Daniels or someone else off the bench can (almost ) do the same job.

Alpe d'Huez said:
I thought Brees was still under contract for this year, meaning he's stuck in Carson Palmer land. Do you have a link? Having said that, I expect Brees to report to camp, new contract or not, either just before, or after the HOF game.

Didn't read the book either. Sick of Bountygate, to be honest. Ready to watch some actual playing.

That overpaid player list is interesting. But Mark Sanchez definitely has the potential this year to top all of them. If he is merely average, let alone flops, he'll stand alone. Manning and Garcon are getting old, some of the others coming off injury. But Sanchez is not. For him, and his absurdly fat contract, he's at the long end of a short plank.

The most underpaid player has to thus be Aaron Rodgers. Making less than Sanchez is an absolute travesty.
They are all overpaid. Only possible b/c fans are $ucked, stadiums are built off tax payers money, and corrupted congresmen gave the NFL a monopoly. Seems the big leagues are in the cat like the banksters: "too big to fail". Disgusting. :mad:
 
But are they really overpaid? I mean, it depends on your perspective. If the players didn't get the money, the owners would just keep it all. And most of the players only last 3 seasons or so. Thus, the money they make often has to last them a long time, and as we know, many of them don't have much in the way of insurance when they get old, but have many health problems.

I guess in an ideal world the owners would have less money, the games would be inexpensive, and the players would make good money, but instead of making them super rich, the league would have a very comfortable health insurance and retirement plan for players. But that's not going to happen. So if it's an issue of the players (who do the work) getting the money, or the owners keeping it, I'll side with the players.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
They are all overpaid. Only possible b/c fans are $ucked, stadiums are built off tax payers money, and corrupted congresmen gave the NFL a monopoly. Seems the big leagues are in the cat like the banksters: "too big to fail". Disgusting. :mad:
I'll expand Alpe's rationale. What kind of money do you think big screen movie stars should make for the entertainment value they provide? I'm talking moderate to big names, like Tom Cruise, Russell Crowe, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Gene Hackman, Michael Caine, Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett, Tom Hanks, Liv Ullmann, Morgan Freeman, Daniel Day-Lewis, Emma Thompson? Okay, I guess those are mostly big names. Point is, athletes are as much screen entertainment as movie stars. PLUS their careers are much shorter. Even the lower paid, lower value players contribute substantially to the entertainment value because without them we would not have teams. So the players should get paid according to the entertainment value they provide, without breaking the owners back or wallet. So I too side with the players, even though some do get a bit extra greedy and there seems to be a one upsmanship when it comes to player contracts that is a bit over the top. But I say let the market dictate what owners can afford to pay. Eventually there is a practical limit to how much owners can pay and still survive.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY