National Football League

[FoxxyBrown1111]

5-8 million? What is this the 90's

Too sad not. The greed won, and the (US) sport fans don´t even see it (unbelievable). They still cheer for those as "my" teams/players, yet they get stolen their hard earned dollars once they cross the stadium gates.
Do they know they would need to work a thousand years to get as much money as those guys throwing a ball do in half a year? Just disgusting.

 

[The Hitch]

Too sad not. The greed won, and the (US) sport fans don´t even see it (unbelievable). They still cheer for those as "my" teams/players, yet they get stolen their hard earned dollars once they cross the stadium gates.
Do they know they would need to work a thousand years to get as much money as those guys throwing a ball do in half a year? Just disgusting.

They can have it. The risks and impact on the body from being an nfl player, the sacrifices, the effort they have to make throughout their life and the toll it takes on them and potential post retirement concequences, totally not worth it. Not in a million years.

The fans are the ones getting "robbed" if you only look at money. But really its the players that get robbed if anyone. Even 20 million a year, ain't worth it.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

5-8 million? What is this the 90's

I was going by this chart, which is pretty detailed.

Let's pretend Seattle continues down the path they are going now, and finish 9-7 or 10-6 and just miss the playoffs, or make them and lose in the wild card game. Should he get paid $15m a year just because Andy Dalton does?

I do agree with you on the money though. If it's there, half of it should go to the players (the owners the other half for running a successful league). The players are thus no more "greedy" than the owners. I can repeat it over and over, the only players I have a problem with are those that sign a contract, then when their play improves, complain about the contract they signed. Those that hold out during the season (or preseason) for more money. Or demand a huge contract, then don't perform. Both of which hurt the team and teammates. But if the money is there, I say give half of it to the players. It is indeed a brutal occupation, and one you can't do forever, and often shortens your life.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

DET@ATL - In London. Megatron may play. Could be high scoring.
MIN@TB - Two teams with problems, went with home.
BUF@NYJ - Percy Harvin shines? Could be low scoring game.
CHI@NE - Pats quietly keep winning.
SEA@CAR - Real tough call between two good, but struggling teams.
MIA@JAX - Miami better overall, but will be close.
BAL@CIN - I like the Ravens. Very tough schedule, keep winning.
HOU@TEN - Rookie QB+disorganized team=loss
STL@KC- Chiefs playing good right now.
PHI@ARI - Two 5-1 teams. If Eagles move ball enough...
IND@PIT - I still believe in Luck and the Colts.
OAK@CLE - Raiders better under Sporano, but Cleveland better team.
GB@NO - Saints desperate for win, and at home, but Packers better.
WAS@DAL - Skins don't have a QB, really. Dallas playing great.

Surprised how many road teams I picked. This makes for an intriguing week.

 

[Oldman]

I was going by this chart, which is pretty detailed.

Let's pretend Seattle continues down the path they are going now, and finish 9-7 or 10-6 and just miss the playoffs, or make them and lose in the wild card game. Should he get paid $15m a year just because Andy Dalton does?

I do agree with you on the money though. If it's there, half of it should go to the players (the owners the other half for running a successful league). The players are thus no more "greedy" than the owners. I can repeat it over and over, the only players I have a problem with are those that sign a contract, then when their play improves, complain about the contract they signed. Those that hold out during the season (or preseason) for more money. Or demand a huge contract, then don't perform. Both of which hurt the team and teammates. But if the money is there, I say give half of it to the players. It is indeed a brutal occupation, and one you can't do forever, and often shortens your life.

I would agree on the measure of greedy vs appropriate. That also plays to an additional factor. If a player is a durable, reliable teammate that stabilizes the overall play; what is he worth? What is he worth if he won the Owner a Superbowl helping increase team revenue exponentially over a long period. What if he was grossly underpaid for several years until the contract came around?
I'm not greedy but if I managed to dramatically increase our company's business adding huge long term value and immediate profits to the Ownership I would expect to be compensated for that contribution as well as future residual benefits. I'd be inclined to want even more it that and continued effort reduced my expected work life.
PAY ME.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I have to agree with you.

Let's just pretend I'm Russell Wilson. We won the SB last year, I played well. The defense really won us the game, and season, but I was the leader on offense, and in many ways the locker room. I am dedicated, and a tireless worker, plus I'm a nice guy, a great face for the franchise. This year, our team goes 10-6, I play above average, but we lose a tough road game to Philadelphia in the playoffs. What am I worth next year? And in the future?

Going back to that chart, I'd expect a deal at least better than Matt Schaub, only longer. $7-8m a year, $5-6m per year of that guaranteed, and a UFA after 2019. That's what I'd tell my agent to aim for. I think that's more than reasonable. I personally like the idea of guaranteed money, so I am okay with lower pay. I'm not very interested in bonuses in such a team sport.

Someone else on the other hand (Wilson?) may want something more like Andy Dalton. $16m a year, but only $3m per year guaranteed, which makes him much easier to cut or trade, and more susceptible to poor play from teammates resulting in less money (I don't know how Dalton's bonuses are paid out).

 

[Tank Engine]

According to this analysis, PM is the King of Comebacks, winning ten times in the 41 games in which his team trailed by 15 or more points. Brady is 5/25.

There's some interesting analysis in there, but the perspective that Peyton's comeback record is so much better than Brady's seems rather skewed. He says that compared to an average quarterback, Brady's record is like an average team going 6-0, but Peyton's is like and average team going 14-0. Peyton's "comeback percentage" (24.4%) is slightly higher than Brady's (20%), but because Peyton has been in a lot more comeback situations, such a sequence is much less probable than Brady's shorter sequence given the average rate of such comebacks (5.6%). The problem is that obviously Peyton and Tom are not average QBs (the blogger did honestly comment in a later post that some people had questioned his assumptions)

I would pick Peyton for the starter in my fantasy team, but there is always the eternal question of Brady having more Superbowl rings (as a Cowboys fan, it irritates me that even Peyton's objectively less talented little brother has more rings).

As for the Cowboys, I'd noticed that Murray has been very consistent in making gains of 5+ yards on 1st down, which is a very positive thing in keeping an offence's options open. The blogger's data agrees with this.

Overall, Dallas are doing a lot better on third down. Apart from being in third and long situations less often, Romo is also throwing better in such situations (the pass to Williams on 3rd and 20 against Seattle was a huge play). The offensive line is playing a major role in this, giving Romo more time, wearing down the oposing defence and controlling the ball, making the job of the Dallas defence much easier.

In the past few years, Dallas have come up with the odd big win in the regular season (e.g. NO in their 15-1 year), but have never strung wins together. There are a few big question marks though, apart from the eternal Romo questions.

1) What happens if Murray gets injured? Murray hasn't gone through a full season yet and is at present the team's work horse. Randle has had some decent runs on his few opportunities, but running 3-4 times a game is a lot different from running 25-30 times. Bryant is also key to the team.

2) Is the Dallas defence so much better this year, or are they being helped by their ball control offence? They obviously did their homework against the Seahawks, who apart from a couple of big plays were kept well under control and did not have a single long TD drive. They'll have to stop (or at least slow down) teams with more offensive power than the Seahawks.

Anyway, I've gone from wondering when the Cowboys will fail in the regular season, to thinking when will they fail in the playoffs, so it's definitely a step in the right direction.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Well, you're going to know more about the Cowboy offense in a week whey they take on the Cardinals, who lead the league against the run. On week 13 they take on Philadelphia at home. After that it's Indy, and off to Philly, so we'll see how well their defense holds up then.

To keep things in perspective here, many years we've seen teams either get off to a very hot start, or look like certain SB contenders heading into November, only to peak early or leave too much on the field, while other teams gel and get hot heading into the playoffs.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

1) What happens if Murray gets injured?

Like nothing? ... I mean the next RB in line takes his carries, like those no namers did in MIN when AP got suspended. Or those who replaced the gold-digger-beating-RB in BAL. Did the effectivness of those teams decline? Hell no OFC, as expected (actually the Ravens increased their running effectivness dramatically). Expect the same in case Murray gets lost.

 

[The Hitch]

Well, you're going to know more about the Cowboy offense in a week whey they take on the Cardinals, who lead the league against the run. On week 13 they take on Philadelphia at home. After that it's Indy, and off to Philly, so we'll see how well their defense holds up then.

To keep things in perspective here, many years we've seen teams either get off to a very hot start, or look like certain SB contenders heading into November, only to peak early or leave too much on the field, while other teams gel and get hot heading into the playoffs.

If I'm Dallas I'm thinking that now they need to get off as many wins in a row as possible before it all falters. At least up until Arizona.

Remember, Dallas have had a ridiculous ammount of home games. After Arizona they will have only 2 home games in their last 7 games.

If they can win home against Wash and the big showdown against Arizona then they have as good as a home game against Jax since its at Wembley and Jags aren't very good, so they could be 9-1. After that its a very difficult schedule and they may very well lose it all but with the 9-1 start theyd still be good enough to make the playoffs or even win the division should Philly falter.

 

[Eshnar]

det@atl
min@tb
buf@nyj
chi@ne
sea@car
mia@jax
bal@cin
hou@ten
stl@kc
phi@ari
ind@pit
oak@cle
gb@no
was@dal

 

[Amsterhammer]

SD @ DEN
DET @ ATL
STL @ KC
HOU @ TEN
MIN @ TB
SEA @ CAR
BAL @ CIN
MIA @ JAX
CHI @ NE
BUF @ NYJ
PHI @ ARI
OAK @ CLE
IND @ PIT
GB @ NO
WSH @ DAL

Can't believe how many away teams I picked this week.

 

[Tank Engine]

Well, you're going to know more about the Cowboy offense in a week whey they take on the Cardinals, who lead the league against the run. On week 13 they take on Philadelphia at home. After that it's Indy, and off to Philly, so we'll see how well their defense holds up then.

To keep things in perspective here, many years we've seen teams either get off to a very hot start, or look like certain SB contenders heading into November, only to peak early or leave too much on the field, while other teams gel and get hot heading into the playoffs.

I don't see the Cowboys as certain SB contenders, rather as outsiders. My expectations for the Cowboys are

a) they'll make the playoffs (the second half of their schedule is harder, they're soon going to play three teams that I would rank at least as highly, but with 2 games against the Skins, plus the Giants and the Jaguars to come, not getting to the playoffs seems extremely unlikely).

b) in the playoffs they'll simply lose to a better team (e.g. Green Bay or Philadelphia??). Right now I'd rate Dallas now maybe 5th or 6th. I'm not surprised that Green Bay have shorter odds. On the other hand, I'm not surprised that Philadelphia have longer odds, but ascribe that to, a) the general popularity of the Cowboys and b) hype, rather than the real likelihood of the Cowboys winning.

The present Cowboys team is very arguably better than any since Romo's first full season as QB (but since then they have been simply average). Six straight wins (against 5 mediocre teams and 1 good team that has now obviously gone into crisis) "a summer does not make", but over the last 5-6 years the Cowboys couldn't string 3 wins against mediocre teams together, so they're moving in the right direction.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

What´s going on here?
A morning game , and the others already started. Wow. Phuck those time changings. Phuck those corrupt politicans who invented it for big business.

Ok, so I only can pick the night games and the MNF.
Here we go:
Arizona, Cleveland, Pitt, NO, Dallas... all home OFC.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

5 mins and 30 yards to go... Com´on Roethlisberger

 

[The Hitch]

Arizona 6-1 with a point differential of only + 24. Tremendous finish as well with Palmer throwing that awessome td when they looked in trouble, to turn the tide.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

They can have it. The risks and impact on the body from being an nfl player, the sacrifices, the effort they have to make throughout their life and the toll it takes on them and potential post retirement concequences, totally not worth it. Not in a million years.

The fans are the ones getting "robbed" if you only look at money. But really its the players that get robbed if anyone. Even 20 million a year, ain't worth it.

I would fully disagree.

While 2/3 of ex-players suffer of permanent pain (& most of them having depressions too), the same is true for (example) construction workers who suffered trou 40 years of hard work for 1/1000 of the money.

Sure, the same overpaid ex Baseball players are better off after their careers (injury-wise), but still the majority of football players (including soccer) say it was worth it*. Sammer for example (soccer, injury-cut-short-career) earned a lot less when he said somewhat the same. Nothing comes close to the playing days, the competition, the cheers, the fame.

I understand them fully. I miss the playing days too, even though I ruined my back...

So, yes, they are overpaid, and the fans are stolen their hard worked for money, because those greedy people find always new ways to screw them.

* Those really hit hard (hip replacement, brain injuries, and what else) surely are bitter (like Pete Gent). But even them have the great memories of their days in the sun.
And for every really crippled ex player like Otto or Dobler, there is a happy Bob Parilli pain-free after 18 years of old school brutal pro Football, or Kevin Greene who made it trou his entire career with zilch knee injuries (that´s amazing for a DE, no doubt about it).

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

PITs 639 yards total offense were the 6th highest ever in a non-overtime game (including playoffs). The last time a team gained more yards in such a game was the 1982-Chargers in a 50-34 win over CIN, gaining 661 yards.

Wish the last pass of Luck wasn´t intercepted but caught for a offense touchdown. Then PIT certainly would have had to try more passes, and Roethlisberger breaking the 554 yards passing record from 63 years ago.

Also 6th best (tied for) ever in a non-overtime game: The 40 caught passes by PIT. But no team needed less attempts to complete 40 or more passes than Roethlisberger today. Welcome to future ball. I love it...

... and the defense rednecks hate it. And thus I love it even more.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I don't see the Cowboys as certain SB contenders... "a summer does not make", but over the last 5-6 years the Cowboys couldn't string 3 wins against mediocre teams together, so they're moving in the right direction.

I would agree completely. Same with what Hitch said. They may well be 9-1 heading into the bye. Even 8-2 will look impressive. But their hard games are late, and as I said just a few days ago, we tend to see hot teams in November and think they'll win the Superbowl, only to find that there are teams you weren't expecting that go 4-0 or 3-1 in December against tough competition, and peak heading into the playoffs. Is Dallas that team, to be hot on the road in December? Because that's the type of team that usually wins the Super Bowl? I personally think the Eagles are a better team and may finish ahead of them. The Eagles and Cardinals look like the best NFC teams to me right now, and able to make it into the playoffs. We'll see though.

Ok, so I only can pick the night games and the MNF. Here we go: Arizona, Cleveland, Pitt, NO, Dallas... all home OFC.

I love it! All tough games the home team pulled off! It was like after getting whipped the other week, the football gods came through for you!

That Pittsburgh-Indy game was nuts. Arena football. That is also without question the worst the Colts defense has looked in a couple years, and Luck completely struggled in between some heroic efforts. But one could also say he, and their OL lost that game too. How did the Steelers lose to the Buccaneers and Browns so badly?!

More Arena football from Tom Brady and the Patriots just thrashing the Bears, and they even let their foot off the gas and Garoppolo play. Is this the Pats starting to come together? Or are we going to see Gronk and others get hurt, and the Pats peak early (again)?

Not wanting to miss out on the action, the Bills weak offense still put up 43 points on the Jets, and it seemed easy. And Geno Smith looks done. Not that Michael Vick played well, he didn't, but I can't see Rex continuing with Smith, who looks no better than Sanchez or Tebow, which makes one wonder about the coaching staff on NY. The Jets look destined to finish 1-15 the way they played this week, and face a total coaching overhaul in the off season.

The Arizona-Philadelphia game was like a playoff game it was so intense. And what gritty playing by both teams in the 4th quarter, on both sides of the ball. That last bomb by Palmer was incredible, and while the announcers were saying the Eagles defense should not have let Brown get behind them, it was really just an amazing effort by Palmer to get free, step through the line like that, and while twisting throw a bomb on the money. Nick Foles numbers in a losing cause were eye opening as well. 62 pass attempts, and that last pass with 1 second left to almost win the game. Wow! If you only watch one game on NFL Rewind, make it this one.

Great wins for NO, and Cincy, two teams at home who needed wins against tough competition, and pulled it off, looking like the teams we expected when the season started.

For those awake, the Lions-Falcons game was well worth watching. As to that last FG and the delay of game call, I think the refs did the right thing. It was said they often let those plays go when the clock hits zero, (recall the non-call that cost the Titans the 2009 divisional game against the Ravens?), but in such a close game, with it on the line like that, it was right to call the delay of game I think. No one knew he would miss the easy kick, and make the hard one anyway.

Tough win for Seattle, and a tough loss for Carolina. Both of those teams still look like quality teams though.

And last, Alex Smith's laser arm just sliced through the Rams, and Jamal Charles legs gashed them on the ground, as the Chiefs quietly continue to win and play great. Smith was 24 for 28 passing.

As of right now, assuming Dallas beats the struggling football team from Washington, I'd say the Cowboys-Cardinals game should be a barn burner for the best (current) team in the NFC. With the Broncos game at New England showing us who's the best in the AFC (in November anyway).

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

That Pittsburgh-Indy game was nuts. Arena football. That is also without question the worst the Colts defense has looked in a couple years

Dont forget the IND defense is the one that held CIN (a division leader) to just 100+ yards a week ago!!

Then, even after adjusting for "arena" football, Roethlisbergers game comes out as one of the best ever played! (BTW, our highly appreciated Joe Namath played the best ever without a doubt)

http://www.footballperspective.com/ben-roethlisberger-and-the-best-passing-games-ever/

He played the worth of his money. Something I seldom (never?) say. He got off my $hitlist.

Otherwise great post Alpe. More to it later.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I said just a few days ago, we tend to see hot teams in November and think they'll win the Superbowl, only to find that there are teams you weren't expecting that go 4-0 or 3-1 in December against tough competition, and peak heading into the playoffs. Is Dallas that team, to be hot on the road in December? Because that's the type of team that usually wins the Super Bowl?

If I get you correct, you think "late peaking/hot-december-teams" have a better chance to win a SB than lets say one that started hot & faded (but still made the playoffs)?
I highly doubt! Think a "quick & dirty study" is up? How we go? Looking at all SB winning teams December record vs their September-November record? Is there a thinking error, or is that the correct question asked? If so, I would do it.

My expectation: There is no "hot December" teams winning the SBs more often than "normal" or even "cold" teams. I think it´s just another NFL myth. Not to be mistaken with teams that hit (lucky) streaks in the playoffs. The difference is: Streaks in January can win you a Superbowl (by the nature of it). Streaks in December not, because there is no guarantee that such a luck streak prolongs to the next week. It can even out anytime, after one game, two games, three, five, whatever.

I personally think the Eagles are a better team and may finish ahead of them.

I fear not, as much as I like the Eagles and Kelly. Foles didn´t only regress to the mean (as expected by Oldman (?) and me last season), he regressed crushing down... The Eagles are 25th in Int-Pct., after Foles being 2nd last year. Behind McCown BTW. Just underlines once more that Ints (outside of desperation mode ones) are random as I preach since years.
To really pick out QBs who might be good at preventing Ints (like McNabb), or the opposite (TheSiz), you need a great amount of sample size to see if there is a pattern or not.

But more important: The Eagles are not great on either pass offense or defense (both in the middle of the pack right now). Alarm signals on.
And what the heck happened to "my coach" (Alpe: ) Kelly? Is there a NFL clinic that has a certain etiquette, that you have to transform into a coward?
Kicking the late FG on 4&1, and OFC losing the game is ugly but maybe debattable. But what is not, is to punt with 6 seconds left in the 1st half on the opp 44 yL. Let your QB heave a HM (Foles showed his arm once more in this very game, connecting on a 70 (!!) yards ball in the air TD) and the worst outcome is a EZ-Int. Or try a short sideline pass & then kick a long FG. Or even try a draw. But punting in such a situation is pure & utter cowardice. I am shocked Kelly did it. I hope this loss told him a lesson. I´ll watch out if he transformed into any other coach saving ass, or if he is still the special one...

I love it! All tough games the home team pulled off! It was like after getting whipped the other week, the football gods came through for you!

Guess what? I loved it too. Was cheering for all of them. Good old HFA beat the well thought and computerized picks again.
But TBH, the clock changing saved me. I don´t know who the early game big away favos were, but I certainly would have picked some home teams wrong.

More Arena football from Tom Brady and the Patriots just thrashing the Bears, and they even let their foot off the gas and Garoppolo play. Is this the Pats starting to come together? Or are we going to see Gronk and others get hurt, and the Pats peak early (again)?

I love arena football played outside in the cold. Love those 50something 20something scores. It´s soo cute.
Serious now: Amazing how Belichick did conjure another competitive team out of a hat. He even improves from his high standard. As last year, it´s playing with mediocre at best WRs, and still blowing off opponents. Wow!

which makes one wonder about the coaching staff on NY

Not me. I mean it´s good old butter ball after all. The version that truly thinks you can be successful without a QB/offense.
BTW, butter ball II almost lost it for the Saints, if there was no high octance NO offense. All those Ryans... just can shake my head in disbelief that they get high paid jobs.

Tough win for Seattle, and a tough loss for Carolina. Both of those teams still look like quality teams though.

Yeah, I finally won with the Seahawks in "sure lose ball"... sarcasm.

And last, Alex Smith's laser arm just sliced through the Rams ... Smith was 24 for 28 passing.

LOL. A nice one...
I wonder, together with, mildly said, Reids conservative play calling... skip that. Better: Be sure KC won´t go anywhere deep in the playoffs with that super duper dink and dunk stuff. Even though, 24/28 looks great I have to admit.

 

[Amsterhammer]

I don't believe what I've just seen. Gobsmacked.

 

[patricknd]

I don't believe what I've just seen. Gobsmacked.

I'm in a hotel in Dallas right now, and I was wondering why it's so quiet. Just saw the score and now I know

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Wow! On so many levels.

Most alarming was Dallas inability to pick up the blitz. Giving up on running the ball after Murray coughed up two bad fumbles didn't help either. But Dallas just looked vulnerable, including, no, especially this new vaunted offensive line. A stunning loss. At home, and against a washed-up, third string QB none the less.

I heard Jeffery Gorman (former VP for the Colts) yesterday saying he expected a close game, and people underestimate inner-divisional rivalries, and overrated the Cowboys, I almost laughed. I guess that's why he worked in the NFL for years, and I'm some dolt at a computer.

Gorman also thinks the Patriots are the best they have been since their 16-0 season, and that includes their other team that made it to the SB, and the team that went 14-2 one year. Says if they stay healthy, they are on track to be very dangerous come playoff time. We'll see about that. I can't wipe that blowout loss to KC from my memory, and we will know more when they take on Denver this week.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Wow! On so many levels.

Most alarming was Dallas inability to pick up the blitz. Giving up on running the ball after Murray coughed up two bad fumbles didn't help either.

Now why couldn't SEA have had some of that WASH MoJo when SEA played DAL in SEA?

No way Dallas could pick up some of those blitzes. WASH put more guys on the line, and actually brought them all (or most of them), so someone was not going to be blocked. And as long as WASH executed their blitz properly by staying in their gaps and taking straight paths, there is no way DAL would be able to run either. If I was Dallas, I would have tried to get the ball out of the DAL QB's hand quickly, maybe use some 3-step drops, and hit a receiver for a short pass in one of the areas vacated by the blitzers. At the end of regulation when time was running down that would have been tough. But in OT when they had all the time needed, that is what I would have done, and just work the ball down the field that way or until WASH adjusted what they were doing defensively.

B/R's Freeman is a Moron. SEA does not have any hood rats any more. They just got rid of that one. Freeman's two sources (inside and outside the organization) is really (deceptively, cleverly) one hood rat named P _ _ _ _ H _ _ _ _ _. Fill in the blanks.