National Football League

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 17, 2009
4,316
1
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
I kind of agree. RB's don't matter as much as the other skill positions. It helps to have a decent RB, but the thing that makes the run game go is the OL. The big concern with Hass in Ten should be his health. I don't know a lot about the Ten OL but they must have been pretty good for Johnson to tear things up last year. That will really help Hass's health, not to mention performance. He can really make the 'D' pay if given time. He just never had time in Seattle.
the problem whit RB's is that there arent those with the skill set to run the short rout and catch and carry like a Faulk did.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
So in the end it´d be a smart move by TEN not to sign Johnson, instead improve in other areas with the saved money...
Not cave into his demands, or not sign at all? The former I agree with, the latter I do not. I think after missing a game he's going to realize the offer they put on the table looks pretty good, and a deal just above that will be made.

But if one wants to look back, the Colts were wise to let James leave and sign Addai. The Seahawks were foolish to re-sign Alexander and let (guard) Hutchinson go (as on3m@n@rmy surely remembers). As great as Walter Payton, Barry Sanders or Eric Dickerson were, they couldn't carry their team to the big game (though Peyton did get a ring, on a great overall team).

I agree the game is now in the air, OL, and a solid defense. RB is an important position, especially if they can catch and block (Faulk, Payton, etc.) but so is a great WR or TE.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
I kind of agree. RB's don't matter as much as the other skill positions. It helps to have a decent RB, but the thing that makes the run game go is the OL. The big concern with Hass in Ten should be his health. I don't know a lot about the Ten OL but they must have been pretty good for Johnson to tear things up last year. That will really help Hass's health, not to mention performance. He can really make the 'D' pay if given time. He just never had time in Seattle.
Absolutely. The year 2008 when Johnson was great, in reality it was the OL. 6 sacks during the regular season. With a good accurate QB, TEN would have blown out every opponent right into the SB.
Or look at the Hogs (with Timmy Smith, Bryant, Riggs and even a white RB ;)). Or the 1.200 Yard-Rushers in DEN since the late 90s. No matter who was there (Anderson, Gary, Portis, Droughns, Bell), they all posted the same numbers as overrated Davis. All the credit should go to the (dirty) OL.

Boeing said:
the problem whit RB's is that there arent those with the skill set to run the short rout and catch and carry like a Faulk did.
Somehow agree. Keep in mind, it´s not as tough to catch swing passes as it is for WR´s to catch 20 yarders between defenders. This let me to say that even other RB´s than Faulk would have posted the same numbers in the years of the greatest show on turf. But i won´t take anything away from Faulk. Surely some of his YAC belonged to his skills.

on3m@n@rmy said:
That for sure is one skill a featured RB needs: be able to catch the ball. And they don't have to be marquee backs to do that.
100% sure.

Alpe d'Huez said:
Not cave into his demands, or not sign at all? The former I agree with, the latter I do not. I think after missing a game he's going to realize the offer they put on the table looks pretty good, and a deal just above that will be made.

But if one wants to look back, the Colts were wise to let James leave and sign Addai. The Seahawks were foolish to re-sign Alexander and let (guard) Hutchinson go (as on3m@n@rmy surely remembers). As great as Walter Payton, Barry Sanders or Eric Dickerson were, they couldn't carry their team to the big game (though Peyton did get a ring, on a great overall team).

I agree the game is now in the air, OL, and a solid defense. RB is an important position, especially if they can catch and block (Faulk, Payton, etc.) but so is a great WR or TE.
Not to sign him at all. You know RB´s that carry the ball too much "die young". Look at the washed out RB-List. It´s endless. We only remember the exceptions (Payton, Smith, Dorsett). But for every "long living" Dickerson, there are three washed up guys like Shaun Alexander, Larry Johnson, Jamaal Lewis, T. Davis, Jamal Anderson... You name them.

Absolutely agree. All of us can´t remember a game winning drive in the NFL, where it´s said RB XY carried the team to the winning TD. It´s always like "QB XY led the team to the last minute TD". So RB don´t carry a team, no matter how big they are. If Sanders, Payton and Sayers couldn´t do it, nobody can. It just really doesn´t matter who runs straight forward into a wall banging heads and knees. ;)

Yeah. I think the myth about the importance of the running game carried over from a decade 40 years ago. The little kids back then are now the commentators.... But even back then, when a ground eating runing game was important, in the end the most effiecient pasing teams (and/or those with overwhelming Pass-D´s) prevailed. Miami had Griese and Warfield, who caught a TD every 5th time he touched the ball during his career, together with his 20 Y/C. That´s effieciency at it´s best. PIT depended on Stallworth´s and Swann´s big plays from Bradshaw. Without them, there is no famous Steelers of the 70´s.

All other decades where truly air years. Starting with the 40s Bears and Sid Luckman all the way to last years champs, the Packers.

Pay your QB and make sure he´s protected.
 
Oct 29, 2009
1,095
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
I will say thought that it wouldn't shock me if any of those three teams won the division. Atlanta overachieved last year, but they should still be good. I think NO's big value is both experience, and having Mark Ingram there. They may not look great now, but I could see them peaking at the end of the season when it matters most (see: Pittsburgh Steelers).
Agreed. I'm so nervous with every NFC South game, and never let prior records influence my thinking. If Julio has a good year, Atlanta will only be better. Yes they overachieved, but they could match their record. NO might be on the decline, but Mark Ingram (yet another Bama player I didn't want my team playing against twice a year :rolleyes:) might give them a dynamic that makes them tough to beat. I think of NO like the Boston Celtics: at this point they're getting to the wrong side of experienced. Carolina is a non issue at this point and hardly woth mentioning. My Baby Bucs are again the youngest team in the NFL and probably the most stubborn. For that reason, they could go far.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
But if one wants to look back, the Colts were wise to let James leave and sign Addai. The Seahawks were foolish to re-sign Alexander and let (guard) Hutchinson go (as on3m@n@rmy surely remembers). As great as Walter Payton, Barry Sanders or Eric Dickerson were, they couldn't carry their team to the big game (though Peyton did get a ring, on a great overall team).
Oh do I remember on both counts (Alexander and Hutch). Should have taken the money from Alexander and given it to Hutch.

Well, the news on Johnson and Ten is out. Johnson is smiling with his new 4 year extension worth $53 mil ($30 guaranteed). And I'll bet Hass is smiling too as defenses won't be able to tee off on him so often.
 
Meanwhile, Tennessee just signed Johnson. So that ends that. Three years, $53m. That's closer to what he was asking than what the team was offering, so I would agree with Foxy in that it's probably a bad deal at this point.

Look at another way, this money would buy you a decent RB, and a great guard or tackle, which would turn the decent RB into an above average RB, and help the QB as well.
 
Apr 15, 2010
330
0
0
i don't disagree with the RBs don't matter that much idea but.........
having a big run game helps protect your QB, and creates space for receivers as defences commit bodies, fewer double teams for WRs etc.
teams that can't contain a run game (from the opposition) lose. usually heavily.

running the ball well allows you to eat up the clock, tire defences and put points up.

but still RBs are overvalued. plenty of systems with RB by committee are good enough to compete.
i'm just saying Hasselbeck will look better with CJ2K than without him.

the following is not data, but off the top of my head.
the season that the seahawks were good, Shaun Alexander was a beast, and was critical to it (i'd go as far as to say carried the team)
last season, peyton hillis pwned the pats, pretty much single handed. (i know, only one game, but not a game people thought the Pats would lose)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Though i dont watch many games i love it.I think its very interesting that they have to learn alot of plays. And madden nfl is enjoyable :D
 
lancaster said:
i don't disagree with the RBs don't matter that much idea but.... having a big run game helps protect your QB
Run game, yes. Running back who can run for a lot of yards? That would be quite a bit down my list. You mention Shaun Alexander. For a while he was damned good. He ran hard, and had speed. But half of his success, maybe more, was that he had the best left side OL in the NFL behind Jones and Hutchinson for his best years. When Hutchinson left he was average, then got hurt, granted. When he came back he was still average. There are more stories than this out there, and exceptions of course, but I'd put more money in the OL than RB.

Here is how I would roughly list position importance in the NFL:
1. QB
2. Left (blind) offensive tackle
3. Defensive tackle (or end) - specifically a pass rusher
4. Cornerback - specifically a cover expert
5. Wide receiver
6. Running back - especially if an all rounder (run, catch, block)
7. Middle/inside linebacker - especially if a team leader

Tight end, Center, Free Safety and Guard come next.

You could move a few up or down a notch, but not a whole lot. As I said before, I think it will help the Titans having Johnson, absolutely. But if I were starting from scratch I'd rather have a great Tackle and a decent RB, than the other way around.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Run game, yes. Running back who can run for a lot of yards? That would be quite a bit down my list. You mention Shaun Alexander. For a while he was damned good. He ran hard, and had speed. But half of his success, maybe more, was that he had the best left side OL in the NFL behind Jones and Hutchinson for his best years. When Hutchinson left he was average, then got hurt, granted. When he came back he was still average. There are more stories than this out there, and exceptions of course, but I'd put more money in the OL than RB.

Here is how I would roughly list position importance in the NFL:
1. QB
2. Left (blind) offensive tackle
3. Defensive tackle (or end) - specifically a pass rusher
4. Cornerback - specifically a cover expert
5. Wide receiver
6. Running back - especially if an all rounder (run, catch, block)
7. Middle/inside linebacker - especially if a team leader

Tight end, Center, Free Safety and Guard come next.

You could move a few up or down a notch, but not a whole lot. As I said before, I think it will help the Titans having Johnson, absolutely. But if I were starting from scratch I'd rather have a great Tackle and a decent RB, than the other way around.
Roughly good. :)

I´d just put RB dead last and move the Center wayy up, and Guards are important too. It´s true: "Your OL is only as good as your weakest Lineman". Good studies were made about OL-Success. Continuity is more important than high priced free agent pick ups. The great success of the (one of many examples) Saints-Passing-Game can be contributed to a OL in sync and luck in injury prevention. My friend is big Saints-Fan and always worried if Brees goes down. I always tell him, don´t worry, highly talented Chase Daniel can do the same job behind that OL ... I just remind him then of how for example Bushrod shut down high priced "Superstar" Allen in the 2009 Play-Offs.

Anyway all in all looks acceptable. :D
 
Big NCAA game today. Oregon vs. LSU, played in Dallas. Both teams have had distractions and problem players in the last couple of months, but LSU has lost I think two key players. But I think if LSU's defense can hold Oregon's offense under 3 TD's or so, they can win. If Oregon gets out to a lead of more than about 8 in the 3Q, they should win.

Boise State at Georgia should be good as well.

Looking at NCAA schedules, I have to like Florida State's chances for if not the BCS championship, another major bowl. They are good, have a lot of returning seniors and have one tough game, week three they play Alabama, at home. This is after Alabama has a bye week only two weeks into the season. The rest of their games are mostly average opponents, with their toughest games at home. They could easily finish either 11-1 or 12-0.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Alpe d'Huez said:
Big NCAA game today. Oregon vs. LSU, played in Dallas. Both teams have had distractions and problem players in the last couple of months, but LSU has lost I think two key players. But I think if LSU's defense can hold Oregon's offense under 3 TD's or so, they can win. If Oregon gets out to a lead of more than about 8 in the 3Q, they should win.

Boise State at Georgia should be good as well.

Looking at NCAA schedules, I have to like Florida State's chances for if not the BCS championship, another major bowl. They are good, have a lot of returning seniors and have one tough game, week three they play Alabama, at home. This is after Alabama has a bye week only two weeks into the season. The rest of their games are mostly average opponents, with their toughest games at home. They could easily finish either 11-1 or 12-0.
How are the badgers doing and will they be good this season?
 
Ack! I didn't know Steve Smith had left the Giants and joined the Eagles. I get most of my info from this guy who is a bit of a legend in the UK NFL scene to put it mildly. His claim to fame is having played with Belichick at college and he is a smart (and amusing) cookie.

His dark horse picks for the season are the Rams, Lions and Browns. So I do wonder if he has been hitting the sauce over the summer. :D
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Fergoose said:
Ack! I didn't know Steve Smith had left the Giants and joined the Eagles. I get most of my info from this guy who is a bit of a legend in the UK NFL scene to put it mildly. His claim to fame is having played with Belichick at college and he is a smart (and amusing) cookie.

His dark horse picks for the season are the Rams, Lions and Browns. So I do wonder if he has been hitting the sauce over the summer. :D
So what means dark horse picks? Just rolling a dice... and here we have a pick??

Then i go with... wait i am rolling the dice... these 3 teams: Vikings, Jaguars, Titans... :eek:
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Better bring up something real.

A NFL-Game is not going 98 minutes or 67 or whatever that picture want to say.

:p

And the rest was discussed endlessly, like that "standing around" includes pre snap action like substitutions, men in motion, QB-Reads, huddling etc....

Or do you talk of cycling is 2% because 4 hrs. nothing happens, but the peloton rides in a bunch of 180 ?

EPIC FAIL

:):):)
 
If you want to bash the NFL do it in another thread, please.

As to dark horse teams, I'm going to say Dallas, Tennessee, and Kansas City (granted, they did win the division last year, but everyone forgets them). The Rams should battle AZ for the NFC west as well.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
So what means dark horse picks? Just rolling a dice... and here we have a pick??
It generally means teams that are fairly average and overlooked, but could surprise folk and do well (e.g. get to the second round of the playoffs).

I suppose the Rams have 6 wins in the bag already being in the NFC West! But the Browns (super tough division) and Lions (historically zero running game, decent division) seem like the darkest of horses.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Predictions are hard to make, b/c there´s so much influence of luck, injuries and moral during a crueling season.
(I think) Easterbrook, some "Vegasinsider" and advanced stats make an every year joke about all those pre season predictions going real wrong.
I already made a bold prediction with the Falcons winning no more than 8 games. I should keep it by that. ;)

But if i´d try to pick a dark horse i´d go with those teams which showed good pass efficiency last year. SL, CLE and Detroit weren´t one of those teams. By that, the Bucs (good on both sides of the ball) could surprise and battle it out with the Saints for 1st ...
 
I like Alpe's dark horse threats of Dallas, Tenn, KC, and even StL or AZ.

I also like Foxy's pick of the Bucs as a dark horse. They're a good team. To me, what makes them a dark horse is they are in the same division as two other really good teams: Saints and Falcons. Too bad for them they are not in the NFC West (good thing for NFC West teams they are not).

But I'll stick my neck out (and no more avatar bets Foxy, as I already have one wit you) and throw the Lions out there IF they can improve their passing game.

Then I'll also tip the Texans as dark horse. Same division with Tenn (one of Alpe's pick) and the Colts. But will also have to deal with the obvious (other than the Colts) if they are to get anywhere... the Pats, Pitt, Jets, and/or Ravens in a playoff situation.
 
Have we chosen divisional doormats (sorry I did not look, but do not recall any other than little shots here and there... like the D-Hawks... no, I really meant "D").

AFC East: Bills
AFC North: Bengals
AFC South: Jags
AFC West: Broncos

NFC East: Skins
NFC North: Viks
NFC South: Carolina
NFC West: Seahawks (my team :( )... sorry bruh
 
Meanwhile, reports are saying Peyton Manning is possibly going to have a second surgery on his neck and could be out for some time. As a result Colts management is again talking to...you guessed it, Brett Favre! While I really, really think Brett should retire and stay retired, I also think he would be a better fit for the Colts to step in behind Manning than Collins, simply because of playing styles. Favre is a gunslinger, a risk taker, bold and aggressive. Similar to Manning. Collins on the other hand is a low-risk QB. He doesn't make many mistakes, but he also isn't very aggressive at all.

Won't matter though, either way. If Manning doesn't come back by about game 6, the Colts are probably going to miss the playoffs and finish about 9-7 regardless of who the QB is.The "weak" AFC South division they play in starts to look pretty good for the resurgent Titans about now me thinks.

But this could all be much ado about nothing. However, keep in mind that after the 1st surgery Manning said it was minor and he'd be back plenty of time for training camp. I guess we'll know in a matter of days.
 
Foxy - I went back and watched the last play of Superbowl 43, and absolutely agree the tuck rule should have come into play. Actually, it was more true on this play than what happened with Brady when the rule was called (I watched that one as well, to compare). At the time, the Cardinals had the ball at the Steelers 44, with 15 seconds on the clock. Had the call been overruled and the tuck play called, there would have been 8 seconds left, but there was also a 15 yard penalty on the Steelers after the play for unsportsmanlike conduct. Could Warner have led them to victory on one or maybe two plays from the 29 yard line? Who knows? But it's a shame he didn't even get to try.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Yes we don´t know. All we know is Warner was on a magical night. PIT´s No. 1 Defense by far that season had no idea how to stop Warner/Fitz. I the 4th Qtr. alone, Warner passed for 200 yards something.

But the true shame is that (as someone mentioned before) the commentators & writers* afterwards completely ignored the "Tuck-Play". All was said and done about how great PIT was. In my eyes, they just came away with favourable "officiating" (not only the last play) as vs. the Seahawks. That team only can be hated. Led by a criminal QB, who´s good but still overrated, handed 2 SB-Victories...

It´s the same as with Rasmussen. We don´t know if he´d won the TdF in 2007, when he was the scapegoat for the other cheaters. Too bad that popular sports have too much influence from shady outside people. In cycling it´s the docs; in Football it´s Vegas and their companions.

* It´s worse in your country than in ours. The connection of "journalists" is too close (corupted) to the teams. I mean they re-voted the Rookie-Defense-MVP who got caught doping (Cushing). They really consider McGwire for HoF, etc., etc. It´s disgusting.

P.S.: That´s why i like cycnews. Nothing is thrown under the carpet, even tough it hurts the sport. Keep on going.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY