NFL Picks - Week 5

[Omniscient]

Cincinnati Bengals @ Indianapolis Colts 1:00 p.m. ET (Colts by 13½)
This could be a dangerous game. The Benglas finally get a weak defense to play against, remember a time when this happened last year and Dillon set and NFL record? Indy’s defense however is improved, especially against the run. But its still bottom half in the league. On the flip side, the Bengals are a little more banged up than Indy, and Cincy doesn’t look like they’ll stop Indy much either. I’m gonna guess that the Colts will get their act together offensively and continue the trend by blowing out the Cincinatti Bearcats. Indy wins and covers.

Arizona Cardinals @ Carolina Panthers 1:00 p.m. ET (Panthers by 3½)
An overrated team playing and underrated team. You’d think they’d meet in the middle, but I’m not wagering on a tie. Carolina will really stifle the Cards running game this week, and Plummer just hasn’t show that he’s capable of winning games consistently on his own, it won’t get easier with guys like Rucker and Peppers on his back. Then again the Cards have found ways to keep games close, and the Panthers have been depending on a lot of big defensive plays to win. This could go either way and it might boil down to one play making the difference, for that reason I’m probably not going to make it a OMNI pick, but for the record I say the Pussycats win and cover

Tampa Bay Buccaneers @ Atlanta Falcons 1:00 p.m. ET (Bucs by 1½)
Warren Sapp is gonna get really annoyed playing against Vick. He doesn’t like to have to chase guys out into the flats, not that he won’t. Wonder if the whole Dunn situation will benefit him or the defense. They should know each others moves pretty well. I’m gonna guess it leans towards the defense. Tampa Bay beat Cincy 35-7, Atlanta beat them 30-3. Doesn’t get much more square than that. Pittman won’t be able to run much, but Johnson will probably pass fairly well. Vick won’t have much success against the speed Tampa brings, and they don’t have the receivers to scare and loosen up the Bucs secondary. I’m gonna go with the road team to win and cover.

Oakland Raiders @ Buffalo Bills 1:00 p.m. ET (Oaktown by 3)
Tough game for me here, I’ve got Bledsoe and Brown on my fantasy team, and my opponent has Gannon and Garner. I’ve got a hunch that the Bills won’t blow them out, so I’m gonna have to hope that I’m lucky and Brown catches all of Gannons TDs. What a stressful situation, I hope they show this game since the Bears are on Monday night. Anyways, I think that both offenses will sizzle, and I think there’s a lot to be said for home field advantage in Buffalo. Bledsoe just keeps getting better each week too, but then again so has Gannon and the Raiders O. Could combine for a 100 points this week. Wild guess, Bills win and cover.

Washington Redskins @ Tennessee Titans 1:00 p.m. ET (Titans by 5½)
The Titans will probably get clicking again here. Nothing’s gone well for Spurrier so far, though I don’t think Tennessee will cause the same problems other teams have. With that loose zone Tennessee is playing, Matthews/Weurffel might actually be able to move the ball. I expect this to be a surprisingly high scoring game, with both RBs having solid performances. Titans win, ‘Skins cover.

New England Patriots @ Miami Dolphins 1:00 p.m. ET (Phins by 3)
This is looking like one of those weeks, no games that I really feel good about. It seems like teams are finding ways to run on the Pats, and at the moment Ricky Williams might be the scariest of them all, though there are quite a few who look nasty. I can’t see the Pats being able to get as pass happy on the Miami secondary either. Could be a long day for the Pats. ‘Phins win and cover this week at home.

New York Giants @ Dallas Cowboys 1:00 p.m. ET (Pick 'Em)
I can’t understand how the Cowboys have turned things around. Granted they haven’t exactly dominated in these wins against teams who were more bark than bite. I haven’t had a chance to sit and watch them since the first week, but they certainly haven’t done anything spectacular. They won’t be able to beat the Giants at this methodical cautious game plan, the Giants have epitomized that MO the last few years. Giants win going away.

Pittsburgh Steelers @ New Orleans Saints 1:00 p.m. ET (Saints by 3)
I think the Saints play into Pittsburgh’s strength here, Brooks doesn’t have the experience or skills to pick them apart passing like Brady or Gannon did. However, they’ve got plenty of weapons and shouldn’t have too much trouble scoring. Maddox is starting, but he’s doing it on the road against a decent defense. New Orleans will win and cover this week after being embarrassed last week.

San Diego Chargers @ Denver Broncos 4:05 p.m. ET (Broncos by 5)
I think this spread is ridiculous. Granted the Broncos are at home, and they are better than they showed Monday night, but the Chargers are not pretenders. I’d have placed this game as a Pick ’Em. The Chargers will give the Broncos a little trouble on offense, and Griese still seems to be playing like a guy who almost got benched. Luckily for him he’s gotten a lot of breaks in those wins. The Broncos D was looking solid, but somehow they got eaten up on third down by the Ravens of all teams. Bad karma continues and SD wins the upset.

Kansas City Chiefs @ New York Jets 4:05 p.m. ET (Chefs by 3)
Why is this only a 3 point spread? What have the Jets done to make people think they can slow down the Chiefs offense? Pennington starting. I’m not even going to talk about this. Chiefs win in another blowout.

St. Louis Rams @ San Francisco 49Ers 4:15 p.m. ET (49ers by 7)
Hmm, I’m gonna avoid this game. Two words, Ewing Theory. Anything could happen here. The 49ers have been unimpressive, but they are always tough at home. The Rams should be pissed off, and could possibly find some life here. Nothing objectively points to a Rams upset, but something in my gut tells me this would be a dangerous game to pick. I’m gonna hedge my bets and say the 49ers win, but the Rams cover and show some signs of life.

Philadelphia Eagles @ Jacksonville Jaguars 4:15 p.m. ET (Iggles by 3)
For some reason I’m just not sold on the Eagles. They have been dominating for the most part, but I just am not convinced McNabb can win every game on his own offensively. If the Eagles defense lets down against a good Jax offense, they could be in trouble. Plus the fact that it’s a road game makes it even less juicy. But, if everyone plays their best game, the Eagles run away with it. Jax doesn’t have the talent on defense to control McNabb, and the Eagles should be able to control Jax’s big three. Eagles win and cover, but its a lot of “ifs”.

Baltimore Ravens @ Cleveland Browns 8:30 p.m. ET (Brownies by 7)
I guess the odds makers weren’t convinced by the Ravens performance either. Too many fluke plays to take much from that win. Why are they in primetime again? Everyone knew they were gonna be ugly this season due to salary cap. Just goes to show how retarded the NFL brass can be, they’ll never learn. Even Madden can’t save uninteresting bad games in the ratings. Nevertheless, 7 points is a lot against a team like Baltimore, and a similar defense in Pittsburgh stifled the Browns offense. The Browns will find a way at home, but the Ravens cover.

Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears 9:00 p.m. ET (Bears by 1½)
Only one thing is important about this game. I’ll be there! Right on the 50 yard line, in the upper deck. Great seats, trust me. The added thrill is that its my alma maters stadium, double bonus! Now, who do I think is gonna win? Well, I could never ever ever pick the Pack in this match up, but it could be ugly. Both defenses have problems, but at last the Bears are injury related, not just plain sucking. The Farve/Miller match up seems awfully lopsided, and the A-Train/Green match up is basically a push. I’m going to guess that Shoop finally sees the writing on the wall, and opens up the offense. Last season they won in spite of the offense, not because of the “ball-control” theory. Most of the close games they’ve had the last 20 weeks, shouldn’t have been. I expect the Bears wide outs to have big games, and Miller airs it out. Favre will try too, but the GB WRs aren’t good enough to take advantage of our dinged up secondary. The Bears will exorcize a few demons, and win and cover in a squeaker.

Omni picks will be coming in the next day or two.

[ShibbOleth]

Good luck against the Pack! That should he a very fun game. I just hope your trip back to Chicago is a happy one.

[Jaystercom]

The Ravens WILL NOT win in the Browns house !!!!!!!!!!!

[Rysdad]

Ten bucks says the Vikings won't lose this weekend.

[ShibbOleth]

I'm guessing Minnesota has a bye this week for Rysdad to be so confident. Do Minnesota and Cincinnati play each other this year?

Fantasy Football Question: We have two mediocre QBs on a really bad fantasy team. Should we start Rodney Peete against Arizona at home or Jamie Martin against San Francisco on the road? All razzing and responses welcome.

[DKW]

All right, here goes.

Two unbeaten teams. Three winless teams.

Detroit, Minnesota, Seattle, and Houston have byes.

ABC finally has the marquee Monday Night game a lot of people have been whining about for ages.

I'm ready. :D

Bandwagon picks. (This weeks' theme: Please Let There Be Some Justice In This World)

1. Chargers
As promised last week, knocking off the suddenly overhyped Patriots (god, it feels weird just writing that...) puts them on top. And nothing against the Broncos, but I still think they deserve a little karmic payback for leaving John Elway for dead for so many years.

2. Browns
Oh, man, who could not root for the Browns in THIS matchup? As if dealing with a seemingly endless string of bizarre unlucky flukes wasn't bad enough...and yes, I remember that poor guard who now has permanent eye damage because of a ref's astonishing carelessness...they've had to watch the team Art Modell stole from Cleveland win the Super Bowl because no one figured out how to go deep on their "crushing" defense. Good lord, does the scum really rise to the top? Here's hoping this game turns out differently.

3. 49ers
That razzafrakkin furshlugginer fargbarging Ewing Theory again. It never ends. If the still-capable 49ers can't beat a depleted, dispirited, shell-of-their-Super-Bowl-incarnation Rams unit, I will be sick (and I'd gladly bet my entire checking account on that).

4. Steelers
Is there anything more depressing than watching the franchise player completely go into the tank for absolutely no reason? First Ryan Leaf somehow develops the maturity, social grace, and, oh yeah, quarterbacking skills of a 5-year-old, then Randy Moss goes from unstoppable defense-terrifying megastar to self-centered useless lump of flesh and an endless nightmare for his team in what seems like nanoseconds, and now Kordell Stewart has forgotten the important principle of throwing to the guys with the same uniforms as the one he's wearing. To think that Emmitt Smith's getting so much heat for still playing...at least he's still putting up decent numbers, and at least his greatness lasted for several seasons, not a few games, and at least it's a slow burn, not a Mach 30 nosedive. I'd have to lose my soul to not root for a big win for Tommy Maddox. Just because he's not Kordell Stewart.

As for the Saints: Okay, fun's fun, but let's see how you do against the meat of the schedule.

5. Bears
Hey, I'm backing up a fellow Doper! Yep, that's me, always the team player. Actually, I just want them to make an example of the Packers and show them that, as good as Brett Favre is, they can't just ride him game after game. And yes, I know I got on the Bears' case for their fluky wins before, but that's definitely a thing of the past. Now I'm rooting for a solid, unquestionable win. (Bandwagons are a beautiful thing, aren't they?)

I was leaning toward either the Bengals (really), but they're beyond hope at this point. I also considered the Cardinals and Panthers, but just couldn't decide on one. And while Chris Berman comparing Joey Harrington to Padraig Harrington was, I admit, pretty cool, I'm nowhere near sold on the Lions.

Bandwagon standings:
Chargers - 10
49ers, Eagles - 7
Saints - 5
Browns, Rams, Vikings - 4
Cardinals, Dolphins, Panthers - 3
Patriots, Raiders, Steelers - 2
Bills, Packers, Buccaneers, Bears - 1

Okay, that's all from me. Anyone who wishes to blast me for my ripping of Leaf, Moss, or Stewart may do so now. Don't everyone get up at once. :)

[NurseCarmen]

Woohoo!!!! The Vikings won't lose this week!

[Happy Lendervedder]

I'm not entirely convinced the Lions won't somehow bank a loss.




Happy

[Biggirl]

Why, oh why do I continue to hope and pray that the Jets will return some of the love I pour out to them? They're like a fundamentalist in a bikini, they look real good, but they never it give up. And just like a woman, I hate to bet against my favorite team. But they really suck. Oh well.

Why, oh why can't the Giants score? They don't need to score that much. 1 touchdown in 7 trips into the red zone. Com'on guys-- is 20% too much to hope for?

I've got no love for the Pats, but sheesh-- what do these guys have to do to get a little respect? Win 12 straight while losing only one? Win the Superbowl? I hope the beat the crap out of Miami-- would it make a difference if they did?

I like the Rams. I like the Rams mostly because of Wamer. Warner has not played well-- the Rams have not played well. He won't be playing Sunday-- well or otherwise. I guess I'll see if I like the Rams without Warner.



You guys are scary in your dedication. I don't know enough about all the other teams 'cause I just don't have the dedication; I hope you don't mind me crashing your party here. Especially since the real bet in my house will be how long I can stand to watch the Jets before I put the Yanks on.

[ShibbOleth]

It's nice to see you in here, Biggirl. It's not a closed party and we could definitely use a fresh perspective every now and then. That said, I think your best bet will be the Yankees game. But who knows, maybe Pennington will be all that and a bag of chips. I've been really killed by NY teams in Fantasy Football this year (they're not producing for me) so I don't have any love for them right now.

[ShibbOleth]

My picks for this week:

Cincinnati at Indianapolis (Colts by 13.5)
I just can't see the Bengals winning, they looked pathetic in person last week, their team is in disarray, third starting QB in three weeks. But I just don't like big spreads, especially when Tony Dungy is the favored coach.
Colts 24-13

San Diego at Denver (Broncos by 4.5)
The Broncos have to be embarassed. I didn't see the whole game, but I did see that one series that was started by a Ray Lewis interception, then there was a deep pass to Todd Heap that was reviewed and then Heap caught a TD in the endzone. A couple of points on this (I am NOT a Broncos fan): 1) Lewis knocked the receiver to the ground before he intercepted the ball. It should have been a penalty on the Ravens. 2) Heap's catch was not a catch, the ball bounced off the ground. They had the correct angle on this but only showed it once, but Madden and Michaels were both so busy putting Todd Heap in their mouth that they didn't pay attention to the replays. A different angle showed that the ball wasn't secure on the play, as well. 3) Heap's TD catches were sweet. Ok, those points have almost nothing to do with this game, just wanted to bring them up. If the Broncos are as good as everyone thought they were, they will bring it on this weekend to show everyone. Plus the Chargers are due for a letdown. Ray Rhodes will figure out a way to corral Tomlinson.
Broncos 21-17

Oakland at Buffalo (Raiders by 3)
Oakland has problems when they play at Buffalo. I just have a feeling that the Bills are going to win this, if Travis Henry can hold onto the ball.
Bills 31-28

Pittsburgh at New Orleans (Saints by 3)
Isn't Tommy Maddux closing for the Braves? The only reason the Steelers will stay in this game, and they will, is that the Saints receivers are beset by injuries.
Saints 21-14

Baltimore at Cleveland (Browns by 7)
Browns by 7? They could barely beat a sloppy Pittsburgh team last week. I really don't like Tim Couch, he just seems nervous in the pocket. If Couch struggles and Davis brings in Holcomb then they could win. Or if the Ravens are just overconfident after slamming the Broncos. Otherwise look for Lewis to shut down Cleveland's RBs and Couch to make too many mistakes.
Ravens 14-10

Tampa Bay at Atlanta (Bucs by 1.5)
I'm always nervous when my Bucs play against double threats. McNabb kills them everytime. So did Culpepper when he used to run. Heck, even Charlie Batch had their number. Vick will be just enough to drive them crazy, and Warrick Dunn will put the icing on the cake.
Falcons 27 - 21

New York Giants at Dallas (Pick'em)
I don't even want to pick this game. Don't like either team, their Fantasy players are giving me fits, etc. Dallas should win by all rights, but I have an itchy feeling about the Giants in this one. Gotta stick with the first instinct.
Boys 14 - 7

Kansas City at New York Jets (Chiefs by 3)
Just three? One of the highest scoring teams in the league against one of the most moribund offenses? And the Jets defense has been abyssmal. The Bookies outside of New York are going to take a bath on this one if "Hanging" Chad Pennington doesn't mature awfully quickly.

New England at Miami (Fins by 3)
I think New England's pride brings them back in this one. They've struggled against the run, but R. Williams doesn't have the slashing cutback style that Tomlinson and Holmes do. Don't get me wrong, he'll still have some success but I think the Pats D will score at least one TD on a pick.
Patriots 28-24

Arizona at Carolina (Panthers by 3.5)
Okay, so the Panthers still haven't beaten anybody tough, but they should have won or tied at the end last week in Green Bay. They are missing Muhsin Muhammed again, while the Cardinals don't have any RBs that are healthy and D. Boston is still a bit banged up.
Panthers 20-17

Washington at Tennessee (Oilers by 5.5)
The Titans secondary is reeling. If Mr. Wuerffel or Mr. Ramsey or Mr. Matthews or Mr. Ed or whoever is Spurrier's QB this week can do something, it will probably be too much. I also have a hunch that Stephen Davis will have a big day.
Redskins 27-14

St. Louis at San Francisco (49ers by 7)
Can Jamie Martin be Kurt Warner? Even without anyone to block for him? Can Marshall Faulk be Marshall Faulk? I think the Rams woes will continue, especially with San Fran coming off the bye. Plus this is the REAL grudge match, Terrell.
49ers 30 - 21

Philadelphia at Jacksonville (Eagles by 3)
Every logical bit of me says the Eagles win this. So why I am I picking the Jags? Well, Fred Taylor and crew are still healthy. And even though the Eagles look invincible don't forget that they lost to the Titans. Remember the Titans.
Jaguars 25-18

Green Bay at Chicago (Bears by 1.5)
The pack has been winning with smoke n mirrors. Terry Glenn is still hurting. Javon Walker is hurting. Ahman Green is hurting. Bubba Franks is hurting. The Chicago defense is hurting. But Anthony Thomas gets his fullback back.
Bears 21-20

[imthjckaz]

I know it's highly unlikely, virtually impossible, but, the way things have been going, I have feeling the Vikings will find a way to lose this week.

[DKW]

biggirl - Hey, nice to meet you. Don't worry about catching any flack from me for crashing...I'm just glad to have somone else here who isn't going to bother actually predicting the final scores of NFL games. :)

Re. the Patriots, I think the whole respect thing has gotten totally overblown. Personally, I think they're pretty good most years (they probably were the 2nd best team in the league in the '86-87 season...you know, the one where William freaking Perry punched one in on them in the Super Bowl), they just never were world champion caliber. For most champs, you can point to one or more factors that clearly made them stood out. The Patriots benefitted from a lot of lucky breaks and, overall, never really gave the bookies a reason to favor them. Nonetheless, a championship is a championship, and they deserve props for that. The beef I have now is that the whining about how they don't any respect is now drowning out any and all actual disrespect for the team...all without them actually gaining any respect.

That said, this isn't a new thing, and the Patriots are hardly the worse case. Let's not forget that a scant three seasons ago, the Giants were endlessly blasted hither and yon for being the worst divison champ, the worst 12-4 team, the worst this, the worst that, blah blah blah. What made this especially puzzling was that they absolutely owned the NFC. In fact, in the conference championships, they utterly demolished the Vikings, unquestionably the second best team in the conference. If the real problem was a weak conference (and in retrospect, it probably was), the Giants may have been a tad underserving, but it was still ridiculous to single them out.

Personally, I'm just plain tired of the whole issue, and I think NFL fans, as a whole, would be a whole lot better off just watching the damn games rather than qualifying every damn snap and play and fluke and break and turn to death. But that's just me.

Re. the Ewing Theory...my big, BIG beef with this (which, I'll admit, is sometimes spot-on) is the idea that a team can lose a star player and just shrug it off like nothing. Anyone who's actually managed the personnel for a team can tell you that this is not the case. Sure, the Lions BRIEFLY improved after losing Barry Sanders...that's because the whole Lions staff didn't have a freaking clue on how to use him or build an offense around him (if someone like Jimmy Johnson or Bill Parcells was in charge, Sanders DESTROYS the career rushing record), and losing one of the best running backs in the history of the sport actually put them on more familiar territory. It's come back to haunt them, as any reasonably informed fan could've predicted. Now, as for Kurt Warner, he's struggled through an injury, so sitting him for a while may actually benefit the Rams...in the short run. But there's no way that they remain a playoff contender, let alone a Super Bowl one, if he goes for good. I'm just praying for a big loss sometime to really drive that point home.

And dedication? Heck, it's only the national sport (yes, yes, baseball's the national pastime, but football is definitely the national sport). This is nothing, really...you oughta hear some of the stuff on those call-in radio shows.

Anyway, thanks for jumping in. And rest assured that, in many cases, your guess is as good as hours. (You think I'm kidding, right? I wish I were kidding.)

[Stuffy]

Sorry for the lateness of my picks guys. Hey Biggirl welcome ot the party! Sorry your New Jersey teams suck...oops I meant New York :D.

Cincinnati Bengals @ Indianapolis Colts
This is the one time, I’d have figured on a 20 point spread. Trust me on this…the Bungles will be blown out. Indy’s coming off a bye; the Bengals are looking to start their third QB of the season. All in all in smells like a good day for Manning and crew. Indy wins and covers…easily.

Arizona Cardinals @ Carolina Panthers
I still haven’t seen the Cards play the game I know they’re capable of playing. I still can’t figure out how the Panthers are doing what they’re doing. I’ve heard good things about their defense, but still, I don’t trust the Panthers yet. That spread seems reasonable, but I don’t like reasonable. Cards upset.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers @ Atlanta Falcons 1:00 p.m. ET (Bucs by 1½)
I really hope I get to see this game. I have yet to see Atlanta this season to see if Vick lives up to his reputation. Still my heart says Bucs all the way in this one. Bucs to win and cover.

Oakland Raiders @ Buffalo Bills 1:00 p.m. ET (Oaktown by 3)
I’m wondering if my paper has a misprint, because the Bills show as favored by three. At home I’d probably pick the Raiders to go 4-0, but against the Bill in Buffalo, well I’m taking the home team. I predict a high scoring game on this one may 31-27, and I think the weakness will be the rookie at corner for the Raiders. Bills win.

Redskins @ Tennessee Titans 1:00 p.m. ET (Titans by 5½)

I’ll take that Fun’N Gun offense against these Titans. The only way I see Tennessee having a chance is if Eddie George has a good game; and even then I don’t see much of one. Redskins upset.

New England Patriots @ Miami Dolphins 1:00 p.m. ET (Phins by 3)

I think this’ll be a snorer. Miami should run all over the Pats. Dolphins win and over.

New York Giants @ Dallas Cowboys 1:00 p.m. ET (Pick 'Em)

The Cowboys have to be feeling great after that victory over the Rams. The Giants by contrast look lost. Still I don’t see the Boys pulling this one off. Giants win.

Pittsburgh Steelers @ New Orleans Saints 1:00 p.m. ET (Saints by 3)
I guess we won’t have Kordell Stewart to kick around anymore unless Cower decides at the last moment to start him. Maybe he’ll get his ass in gear after Maddox saved the game last week. Or maybe Cower won’t take the chance. I doubt it matters either way. Brooks and crew win and cover.

San Diego Chargers @ Denver Broncos 4:05 p.m. ET (Broncos by 5)
I saw the Chargers game last week, and I still don’t know what to make of this team. They played competently but not spectacularly. I’ll take the Broncos to win, but the Chargers will cover.

Kansas City Chiefs @ New York Jets 4:05 p.m. ET (Chiefs by 3)

I have to agree that spread is a laugher. Chiefs win and cover.

St. Louis Rams @ San Francisco 49Ers 4:15 p.m. ET (49ers by 7)

The Niners are viewing this as if the Rams were 4-0, not 0-4. If for no other reason, I’d take the Niners here. Second issue: Terrell Owens. The man wants to win, and I’m getting a little tired of everyone taking him to task for it. Rice used to blow-up too, and the Niners kept going. Oh one last thing, don’t be too surprised to see Barlow taking more of the carries and Hearst lining up as a receiver more. If I can see the advantages surely the coaching staff has been thinking it too. Niners win and cover.

Philadelphia Eagles @ Jacksonville Jaguars 4:15 p.m. ET (Iggles by 3)
I was really tempted to pick this as one of my upset specials, but I just can’t see the Jaguars containing McNabb. Eagles win and cover.

Baltimore Ravens @ Cleveland Browns 8:30 p.m. ET (Brownies by 7)
I’m not gonna waist bandwidth on this one. Browns win, Browns cover.

Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears 9:00 p.m. ET (Bears by 1½)

Green Bay is looking really beatable these days, but you just can’t count out the Favre factor. Couple it with it being a Monday night game and the smells Green Bay all the way. Packers upset the Bears. Push.

[RTFirefly]

So far, I've got one 11-3 week, and three .500 weeks (8-8, 8-8, 7-7). But I'm still game to embarrass myself further.

Straight up: Bears, Broncs, Browns, Chiefs, Colts, Cowboys, Eagles, Falcs, 49ers, Panthers, Pats, Raiders, Redskins, Saints.

Omni: Chargers, Chiefs, Eagles, Redskins, Saints.

[Omniscient]

Sorry for my absence of late, its been a busy extended weekend in my little world. I'll be back with my official revised spreads and any needed alteration, plus OMNI picks in a moment. First a few comments in response to you guys' posts.

We have two mediocre QBs on a really bad fantasy team. Should we start Rodney Peete against Arizona at home or Jamie Martin against San Francisco on the road?
Shibbs, if those are your two choices "really bad" might be the understatement of the year. Lets try "utterly putreid" on for size.

DKW, I'm a little baffled by your "Bandwagon standings" tally, what's the methodology for this again? Maybe I missed it in past weeks, just curious how you're scoring these.

Biggirl, welcome aboard! Glad to have you, hope you stick along for the ride and really learn how to develop an unhealthy obsession about a non-sexual ritual. That of course saying that sexual obsessions are routine amonst us here.....Anna Kournikova anyone? And can I say how refreshing it is to hear a woman using both the frustration of a hottie in a bikini not putting out as well as meaningful football statistics in a post?

Ohh, and I suppose that whole Yankees line of discussion is moot, huh? struggles to contain the giggles

Shibbs, I really like your analysis this week. Not that I so much agree with ya, just that its a good read, kinda like Maxim.

1) Lewis knocked the receiver to the ground before he intercepted the ball. It should have been a penalty on the Ravens. 2) Heap's catch was not a catch, the ball bounced off the ground. They had the correct angle on this but only showed it once, but Madden and Michaels were both so busy putting Todd Heap in their mouth that they didn't pay attention to the replays.
I completely agree with you on both these points. I've been getting annoyed with the announcers lately this year. They've had alot of instances in games I've seen where they basically decided their "proper result" of a replay on the first angle shown, which I've found completely inconclusive either way. Then they babble endlessly about how obvious it is, when it clearly isn't. Just my little bitch.

I also noticed you only picked 3 favorites to cover and 6 outright upsets, quite bold I must say.

DKW, I figured I might as well dig this column up. Ewing Theory (http://espn.go.com/page2/s/simmons/010509.html) I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation of the Ewing Theory. I don't there's any implication that a team just "shrugs off the loss of the star". Its somewhat more subtle than that, and I think that opinion has been reinforced in subsequent SG coulmns. Basically its important to say that the definaition says it must be a player who recieved a "inordinate" amount of attention and praise, perhaps he's over-rated or simply a poor fit for the team talentwise or personality wise. And then the defination says that the team then "inexplicably" pulls it together and catches lightning in a bottle in cinderella fashion. Your assertion that the Rams won't be successful in the long-term, and that the Lions weren't, I think overlooks the essense of th Ewing Theory in that its a short term logic and statistic defying power.

Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears 9:00 p.m. ET (Bears by 1½)

Green Bay is looking really beatable these days, but you just can’t count out the Favre factor. Couple it with it being a Monday night game and the smells Green Bay all the way. Packers upset the Bears. Push.

Stuffy, I'm curious just how you predict the game will be a push with a 1½ point spread, sounds like one of the great-old SNL Super Fans skits........"Ditka'll find a way"

Be back soon for more.

[Omniscient]

Damnit......."utterly putrid"

[Omniscient]

Current Thursday spreads for my Pick 5:

Sunday Games
Arizona at Carolina 12:00pm, Carolina -3.5
Cincinnati at Indianapolis 12:00pm, Indianapolis -13.5
New England at Miami 12:00pm, Miami -3.0
N.Y. Giants at Dallas 12:00pm, Dallas -0.0
Oakland at Buffalo 12:00pm, Oakland -3.0
Pittsburgh at New Orleans 12:00pm, New Orleans -3.0
Tampa Bay at Atlanta 12:00pm, Tampa Bay -1.5
Washington at Tennessee 12:00pm, Tennessee -5.5
Kansas City at N.Y. Jets 3:05pm, Kansas City -3.0
San Diego at Denver 3:05pm, Denver -5.0
Philadelphia at Jacksonville 3:15pm, Philadelphia -3.0
St. Louis at San Francisco 3:15pm, San Francisco -7.0
Baltimore at Cleveland 7:30pm, Cleveland -7.0

Monday Night Football
Green Bay at Chicago 8:00pm, Chicago -1.5

No changes to be made. Still mulling my OMNI picks.

So far I've decided on Kansas City, New Orleans and San Diego, need to muster up 2 more.

[RTFirefly]

Originally posted by Biggirl
They're like a fundamentalist in a bikini, they look real good, but they never it give up. Man, is that ever a sig line waiting to be claimed! You guys are scary in your dedication. I don't know enough about all the other teams 'cause I just don't have the dedication; I hope you don't mind me crashing your party here.I don't know a whole lot about most of the teams either; I play because it's fun, even if I suck. Welcome to the party. :)
Especially since the real bet in my house will be how long I can stand to watch the Jets before I put the Yanks on. Unless you've taped the Yanks, I'm guessing it may be awhile. :D

[ShibbOleth]

Omni: We're just really bad so far. We're working on utterly putrid. BTW, I forgot to thank you for switching back to Eastern timezones. And thanks for the back-handed compliment on the analysis. I need to think up something like that for your 1040 Dip moves last round. (If Biggirl thinks were dedicated about football she should see the Diplomacy thread and how big my e-mail outbox was before I cleaned it up recently!)

RTFirefly are the Yankees eliminated already or is this just prognostication? I saw that the D'backs are out. Now I have to go check a sports site somewhere. Who am I supposed to root against in the post-season now? Are the Braves still in?

[Biggirl]

Sooooo. When the Jets start making my head hurt I'll have no choice but to watch the Eagles.

I do have other picks (I'm 4th in my office pool, which really gets my next door cubicle-mate's goat seeing as how the only reason I have for some of those picks is 'cause I like a team-- as opposed to the detailed analysis that you guys do.)

Giants at Dallas
No spread to worry about here. I like the Giants and hate the Cowboys. See? That's what passes for deep analysis with me. Giants.

Kansas City at New York
Second to last in defense (right ahead of the last place Cheifs), but the Cheifs can score and the Jets can't. I hope there was lots of tackling practice over the week. Maybe if the didn't tackle like they were ballroom dancing it wouldn't be so bad.
KC

New England at [/b]Miami[/b]
Like I said before, I hope the Pats crush the Dolphins. I'm a Jet fan, so I'm forced to pick against Miami.

New Orleans at Pittsburg
Saints got beat by the Lions last week, if I remember correctly. They should be hoppin' mad about that. The Steelers are coming off their first win so they should be all pump. When I don't know enough about the teams playing I go for the guys who've got a few points spotted.
Steelers.

Washington at Tennessee
Wow. Who cares?

I'm kidding! I care about all the games! I'm dedicated I tell ya! NO is my pick because they have the most underdoggest of knicknames and I like to root for the underdogs.


Atlanta at Tampa Bay
Tampa Bay should win this and cover the spread easily. My analysis? They're the better team here.


Buffalo at Oakland
I don't think a less than a touchdown spread means much when both teams score a lot of points, so my "go with the team with the headstart" doesn't apply. I wanted to show solidarity with our northern neighbors and went with the Canadian team.


Arizona at Carolina
I have an irrational like of the Panthers so I picked them.


Cincinatti at Indianapolis
I have an irrational like of the Bengals. No I did't pick them, I'm not stupid.


San Diego at Denver
No help here with the spread. Don't know either of these teams too well. The Broncos have pretty horses.


San Francisco at St. Louis
I really should have picked SF since they'll probably win by more than 2 touchdowns, but I'm a sentimental fool, so I went with the Rams.

Philadelphia at Jacksonville
If I turn to this game after being disgusted by the Jets and the Eagles are losing, I'm gonna cry. Crying?! There's no crying in football!!!

Baltimore at Cleveland
I care about this game. I really do. I keep repeating to myself over and over: All the games are equally important. I am dedicated. I am dedicated. . .
Baltimore.

Green Bay at Chicago
I picked Green Bay on the off chance that Jarbaby will read about it and want to come down to New York and kick my ass-- then I'd get to meet her.

[Stuffy]

Breakfast and Football.

I just finished eating a real mans breakfast. Bacon, Eggs and Hash Browns. Would've had a beer but the wife was looking at me funny so I decided on OJ. I'm watching the Raiders/Bills contest and I have a question. Do any of these teams play defense? Hello? The object being to disrupt that team wearing the other uniform. :smack:

Omni I feel that bears Game is just too close to call. So I took the wimp way out.

Shibb The A's!;)

[Omniscient]

Shibbs, how much room do you think you have to talk in Dip 1040? And in my own defense I made my moves drunk about an hour after the deadline, not that it affected me too much, but had I been sober I could have saved Marseilles. However, smack talk is welcome even if it's deluded and wrong. ;)

Here's the rest of my OMNI picks: Indianapolis, New York Giants, Kansas City, New Orleans and San Diego

[DKW]

[Belated reply owing to incredibly frequent gum-ups on these boards. Is this internet bandwidth problem I hear about all the time really that serious?]

Omniscient - You may have missed it the first time (just before week 2, as I need at least one week's worth of games which actually count), so here's what I'm doing again. I've completely given up trying to predict the outcomes of these games, having been burned waaaay too many times (damn that last Super Bowl!), and I've realized that a lot of my picks were just who I liked that week. So I figured, heck, why not just make it official. My bandwagon picks are the five teams I most want to win that particular week. The #1 pick gets 5 points, the #2 4, and so on. Fortunes change very quickly in the NFL, and have been especially volatile this season, so don't expect a whole lot of consistency from week to week.

I understand that there isn't any real point to this...but when you think about it, is this really any different from how the college championship gets decided every year? :)

Thanks for finding the column that started it all. I feel obliged to point out, though, that very few of these teams had any lasting improvment...never more obvious in the case of the "miracle" Mariners, who went on to get blasted out of the playoffs by the Yankees in 5 (in the deciding game, they lost by, what, 12 runs?), and then completely fail to make the playoffs the next year. The two most obvious cases are the Patriots and the Volunteers, but Bledsoe could have played in the Super Bowl were he absolutely needed, and how anyone see a championship decided by two sets of non-athletes with ballots and a bunch of computers as anything other than a complete joke is beyond my cognition. I also resent the idea that losing a legitimate superstar like Dan Marino or Barry Sanders is somehow a good thing...as if the extremely short-term gain somehow justifies not building a complete offense. All things said, I think this phenomenon is just a tad overblown, and I definitely don't expect the Rams to benefit from it.

Oh, and for the last time, Colby didn't care which one of them won! They were a unit! They made a deal and stuck with it! You scrach my back, I scratch yours! He practically confessed to it the instant the last vote was read! Why is this so hard to understand? (Okay, guaranteed no more Survivor hijacks for the remainder of the season.)

[Biggirl]

So I'm watching FOX and crying. . ..

[Stuffy]

F%@king Twins!!! Forget I said anything Shibb.

In other news...I've only lost two so far.

Biggirl, I'm in the west whose playing?

[Biggirl]

The Eagles were playing and losing. This week outta drop me down a place or ten in the office pool.

[Myrr21]

Washington at Tennessee
Wow. Who cares?
Hail to the Redskins...!

Score! Gave me a 1 game lead in my pool, too. Whoohoo!

[Omniscient]

A few thoughts having just watched the second half of the Sunday night game betwen Baltimore and Cleveland.

First, I must confess I watched Soprano's during the first half, so I missed some of it, mainly the 21 points the Ravens scored.

Why do the Ravens always seem to get every call? I've watched them the last two weeks and every critical call seems to go their way, does Ray Lewis and his murderig friends call the refs before the games and threaten their families?

Against Denver, his INT was blatant pass interference, including several horseshit calls down the stretch and the call that Deltha O'Neal ended up getting ejected over. This week, the offensive pass interference call on the 2 point try was crap, and the contact was initiated by the defender anyways. On the final drive Holcomb didn't false start and that slant across the middle was definately pass interference. Complete and utter bullshit. And I hate both the Browns and Broncos, but at least gimme fair football to watch!

Also, while Theisman and McGuire (who is a fucking moron) were giving Kelly Holcomb a blowjob on air, they completely overlooked the fact that about every third pass he threw should (not could, should) have been intercepted. A few even hit Ravens right in the chest. Yes Holcomb played well in the first couple weeks, and yes he got the Browns in the game. I'll admit that I missed the bulk of Couch's performance, so I can't say how he played, but Holcomb will look decent in the stat book tonite, and public sentment will probably say that if he'd started they'd have won. Nevertheless, he got very very lucky, while he made a handful of flat out great throws against the infamous prevent defense, he also could have thrown away the game at least 8 different times. The guy is decent, and I'm not sure if he does or doesn't deserve to start in place of Couch, he wasn't great tonite and the boys in the booth were delusional.

[Philosophocles]

The main thing that gets overlooked in the Couch-Holcomb debate is that the Browns desperately need to get a running game. I'm not a Browns fan, but I would say that if the Browns just had a halfway decent running back, they would be a lock to make the playoffs. And if they had a top notch running back, they would be very formidable.

The stats don't lie--there is virtually no statistical correllation between passing yardage and winning percentage in the NFL. There is a strong correllation between running yardage (both earned and allowed) and winning percentage. Being able to establish the run and to stop the other team's running game are two of the most important factors in winning NFL games. The only other factor of similar importance is plus/minus on turnovers.

[DKW]

Omniscient - Wasn't watching too closely (I was busy putting back up the world's most ill-fitting window screens after cleaning them), but one thing I can definitely agree with you with is the relentless Kelly Holcomb praise. I think they were just caught up in the excitement of the Browns comeback, but this was a tad much. Personally, I found the entire 4th quarter of that game flat-out surreal. Stupid penalty after stupid penalty by the Ravens defense to keep the other side in in, giving up a huge gainer on 4th and 15 (how does that prevent defense work again?), dropping about 5,000 creampuff interceptions...and then there was that great stop on the 2-point conversion, and an interception in the endzone on the last play that was nearly run back for a touchdown. Some games are just beyond the scope of analysis, and I think this qualifies as one.

In any event, it looks like Baltimore or Cleveand is going to be the inaugural winner of the NFC North...and it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out like the recent NFC East battles. (To quote the ever-quotable Chris Berman on one recent NFC East struggle, "It's like they're racing the Indy 500 with the parking brakes on!")

everyone - Well, it had to happen sometime...I finally got totally burned on a pick. Not really a shocker, though; if anyone was going to trip me up, it was going to be the always-dangerous Broncos.

Just a few closing comments for this week -
* I bet the that a lot of bookies are really, really regretting making the Chiefs a measly 3 point favorite. Really. I mean, putting yourself in a situation where the game's lot tighter than most people expect it to be, and you still take a bath? What were they thinking?

* Rams in serious trouble, yeah, no question about that. Loss of Kurt Warner really hurting them, no question (49ers send Ewing Rule fleeing with its tail between its legs).

10 game losing streak...

Hold the phone there, pard'ner! You're counting meaningless, unofficial, not-the-real-thing, phony practice games which not only don't count, but have no bearing on the official standings? Hey, I hear Isaac Bruce lost a flag football game during the summer, so it's actually an 11 loss streak!

I mean, good effin' lord, a little COMMON SENSE here, people!

Just wanted to defuse this right away, because there's a real possibility of the Rams being the first ever team to finish a season 0-16 and if it happens, the last thing I want is to get caught in some silly debate about whether their losing streak is 17 or 21 when what should really command our attention is how the Rams became the first ever team to finish a season 0-16.

* NFL Primetime, at the start of the Miami/New England recap, showed a photograph four Patriots made of them holding up their Super Bowl rings...on their middle fingers. Apparently, they showed it to the Dolphins right before the game to rile them up.

All I have to say is that this is one of the most DISGUSTING actions I've ever seen from an NFL team; this nearly tops the unspeakable treatment Lisa Olson got at the hands of...well, the Patriots. An insult to the league (you know, the entity which issued those rings and probably expects them to be treated with a certain level of respect) and fellow Patriots both.

What makes this even more unforgivable is that not only was the Patriots Super Bowl a complete FLUKE (let's not kid ourselves, all right?), but they've now equalled the Dolphins in number of titles won. As far as I'm concerned, if you're only equal, shut the frag up.

Man, I've got some tough choices for next week. With the Eagles getting hammered by the Jaguars, I'm not even sure who the favorites are anymore.

[Omniscient]

Originally posted by DKW
An insult to the league (you know, the entity which issued those rings and probably expects them to be treated with a certain level of respect) and fellow Patriots both.

Actually the rings are bought, designed and presented by the team owner to the members of the organization. Has absolutely nothing to do with the league. Just a ritual that's become popular, not sure when it started.

Also, the Pats were one of the few teams that actually had a reason to bitch about "respect". They caught alot of flack saying they were the worst championship team ever in any sport. This was a bit much, and they should have been favored in the first two games of the season, I know I would have bet them. So to a degree their beef was warranted. Now, I believe they would have lost to the '99 Rams, the '85 Bears, any of the 49'er and Cowboy Super Bowl teams, and maybe every previous winner, but there wasn't a better team last year or they would have beaten them. For a guy who just a few posts above bitches about the ridiculousness of the BCS, I'd think you're respect the process and feat of actually playing a full regular season and playoff and then beating the concensus best team.

No, I don't think the Pats are great, and I do think the media went overboard in critisizing them in the offseason. I do agree that is time to let the stupid "respect" angle die, they proved it going 3-0 to start the season. But for all the times that a athlete or team has whined and moaned about being disrespected, this was probably the most valid case.

[TelcontarStorm]

OK, OK I want to do a mild rant on programming and this ssems to be the best place for ot.
Here goes
I live in NW Ohio, Where this week I got treated to the likeness of not 1, but 2 games from Pensylvania! And the other game? Washington. WTF?!?!?!

Yes, Detroit had a by. Yes Chicago plays tonight w/GB. Yes, the Vicking game got booted by the Twins. Yes Cleveland played at night.

But where the FUCK was the program director on this one? Could we not have been treated to a decent freekin' game of ball? Do you think you could have spared us the Steelers for the Bengals?(*OK Not decent but at least local) Why in the name of all that is holy did we have to watch the Philly game? Could they have at least put on a decent west coast game???
I'd have rather watched the Jets for godsssake! What's the matter with a Raider game for a change? Can a lonely Ohioan get a 49er game that's not on MNF or ESPN?(Damn it's tough being a fan of a west coast team in the Great Lakes) Why is it when the networks love cramming the Rams down our throat we have to miss them this week huh? Could it be the Rams suck this season? (wow,something to be happy about)
Granted, I was just ranting about getting stuck watching consistantly sucky games (Bite me Lion fans, you don't live here) but lawsy could it get any freekin' worse?!?
Note to the NFL: For future reference. May the fleas of a herd of buffalo infest your arm pits!

I feel better now

[ShibbOleth]

Don't worry, TelcontarStorm, you should get to watch the Bucs game next week. Which is sort of a west coast game.

[annieclaus]

Originally posted by Jaystercom
The Ravens WILL NOT win in the Browns house !!!!!!!!!!!

Ummmm, with the benefit of hindsight, would you like to reconsider?

[annieclaus]

Originally posted by TelcontarStorm
OK, OK I want to do a mild rant on programming and this ssems to be the best place for ot.
Here goes
I live in NW Ohio, Where this week I got treated to the likeness of not 1, but 2 games from Pensylvania! And the other game? Washington. WTF?!?!?! . . .

But where the FUCK was the program director on this one? Could we not have been treated to a decent freekin' game of ball? Do you think you could have spared us the Steelers for the Bengals?(*OK Not decent but at least local) Why in the name of all that is holy did we have to watch the Philly game? Could they have at least put on a decent west coast game???


As a former FOX affiliate program director, I think I can answer your questions. FOX assigns games regionally for the most part. Since you live in NW Ohio, your home market is probably Detroit. Because there was no Detroit game yesterday, FOX would assign your local affiliate the "best possible" game for the region. You got the Steelers rather than the Bengals because Pittsburgh is a) a little closer to NW Ohio, I think, and b) the Pittsburgh team doesn't stink quite as much. You got the Philly game because that was the primary "national" game in the doubleheader time period. It went to the largest percentage of the country.

You may have preferred a West Coast team's game, but FOX can't accommodate every viewer's preference. If you really want to thwart FOX's choices, your only choice, as I see it is Sunday Ticket on DirecTV.

[Stuffy]

Not too bad so far. Now if the Pack will just beat the Bears...

[pepperlandgirl]

I really, really don't understand why I was forced to watch the boring, predictable, boring, stupid, and boring 49ers/Rams game. I mean, I would understand if I actually lived in the Bay Area, but I don't. I live in the LA area. And the Rams no longer play in LA (though no one in LA seems to realize this.) We should have been watching the Chargers/Broncos game. 1) Because the Chargers are closer to LA. 2) Because this was a very important game in the AFC West division, probably one of the most important games of the year for both teams.

Stupid FOX.

[TelcontarStorm]

Annie Thanks for the info. Next time I'll direct my rant to the proper idjuts. FOX: May the fleas from a thousand buffalos infest you as well.

Pepper Oh boy can I sympathize! Here's a six pack, wish I could trade places with you girl!

A toast and a hope for a bit better scheduling in the future!

*ahem * GO NINERS!

[Stuffy]

Hey pepperlandgirl they play twice, you'll probably get the next one. That one will be more inmportant, being closer to the pllayoffs and all. Besides, Denver's gonna lose out to the Raiders anyway..... D & R

[Rysdad]

Originally posted by Stuffy
F%@king Twins!!!

:p

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by Jaystercom
The Ravens WILL NOT win in the Browns house !!!!!!!!!!!

*snort* Great house. Thanks for making your team play a road game at home. Cheering an injured QB? Bunch of clueless, classless, drunk motherfuckers.


BTW, the decorators will be around Thursday with the new purple drapes and carpets, is, say, 1:00 a convienent time?

[Myrr21]

BTW, the decorators will be around Thursday with the new purple drapes and carpets, is, say, 1:00 a convienent time?
Wait, so you mean we're giving the effing worthless Ravens back to Cleveland? Excellent! They can have two teams, and we can get a real one. Or just poison Irsay and take the Colts back...

:p

[annieclaus]

Originally posted by pepperlandgirl
I really, really don't understand why I was forced to watch the boring, predictable, boring, stupid, and boring 49ers/Rams game. I mean, I would understand if I actually lived in the Bay Area, but I don't. I live in the LA area. And the Rams no longer play in LA (though no one in LA seems to realize this.) We should have been watching the Chargers/Broncos game. 1) Because the Chargers are closer to LA. 2) Because this was a very important game in the AFC West division, probably one of the most important games of the year for both teams.

Stupid FOX.

Chargers/Broncos is an AFC game; it was on CBS. You certainly should have had it. Maybe you did!

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by Myrr21

Wait, so you mean we're giving the effing worthless Ravens back to Cleveland? Excellent! They can have two teams, and we can get a real one. Or just poison Irsay and take the Colts back...

:p

Ravens are 2 years out from a Super Bowl championship, how long's it been in Foreskin land, hmmm?

[Myrr21]

Well, 3 times during my lifetime.

Besides, they have a winnng tradition. The Ravens have a winning fluke.

[Weirddave]

Besides, they have a winnng tradition

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 1 Season in the 70s and a couple under Gibbs does not a "Winning tradition" make. 'Skins were the doormats of the league for 40 years. "Winning tradition" indeed. Thanks for the laugh, I needed it!

[nightshadea]

Annie can you explain why they sometimes switch games that look to be wipe outs in the third quarter?

I mean CBS killed what looked to be an actual game when the titans started to come back week before last and Jerry rice broke an another record but we didn't get to see any of it cause they switched to a game that well no one around me cared about .....

Who makes a decision that a game is too dull to watch? I mean I guess ya have to be interested in the winning team and watching two teams ya don't care about would be dull
but if ya watched a game for almost an hour in a half they might as well watch ya finish it

[nightshadea]

erm that was supposed to be let ya finish it ........

[chelle1959]

ok, i know the rams haven't won a game yet (the # of losses- what difference does it really make?), but aren't there any loyal fans left? just because they're having a slump doesn't mean they can't still be the greatest show on turf. i think st. louis's losing streak can be traced to last year's 9/11 tragedy. think about it...the only team in the league that has a patriotic sounding name, (and where did they come from anyway?) beat the best team in the league (not going to mention a couple of bad calls). remember the world series? i would never make light of the tragedy, but i think it did a lot for new york area sports teams.

[annieclaus]

Originally posted by nightshadea
Annie can you explain why they sometimes switch games that look to be wipe outs in the third quarter?

I mean CBS killed what looked to be an actual game when the titans started to come back week before last and Jerry rice broke an another record but we didn't get to see any of it cause they switched to a game that well no one around me cared about .....

Who makes a decision that a game is too dull to watch? I mean I guess ya have to be interested in the winning team and watching two teams ya don't care about would be dull
but if ya watched a game for almost an hour in a half they might as well watch ya finish it

The networks, with the blessing of the NFL have what's called a "flex" policy. That means that if, in the second half of a game, one team is leading the other by 18 points or more, the network can "flex" affiliates to a more competitive game. (The network -- FOX/CBS -- makes the decision, not the local affiliate. ) There are some exceptions to the rule, however. The home markets for the teams that are playing in the lop-sided game cannot be flexed. They have to stay with that game until the bitter end. Once flexed, however, the network cannot return to the original game, no matter how exciting it may be getting.

A sort of variation on this rule is the "mandatory kickoff rule." It goes something like this: If your home market team is playing in the second half of a double header, no matter what is happening in the first game, your affiliate station will be switched by the network to the start of the second game. . . including the local station break that precedes the game. Start time for second games is 4:15pm (eastern time), so the network will actually break away from game #1 at about 4:12pm. Viewers cannot fight this; it is an NFL rule!

[RTFirefly]

Originally posted by Weirddave
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 1 Season in the 70s and a couple under Gibbs does not a "Winning tradition" make. 'Skins were the doormats of the league for 40 years. "Winning tradition" indeed. Thanks for the laugh, I needed it!Ummm, Dave, those 40 years were almost all before you were born. I'm barely old enough to remember the tail end of that era. :)

Feel free to count the losing seasons the Redskins had under Allen, Pardee, and Gibbs (that is, between 1971 and 1992). I'd say that's a long enough period of consistent success to constitute a "winning tradition". And that period includes three Super Bowl victories and two other Super Bowl appearances, plus a bunch of other seasons where they played in the NFC championship, won their division, or had a wild-card berth in the playoffs.

[SenorBeef]

Originally posted by Weirddave


*snort* Great house. Thanks for making your team play a road game at home. Cheering an injured QB? Bunch of clueless, classless, drunk motherfuckers.


BTW, the decorators will be around Thursday with the new purple drapes and carpets, is, say, 1:00 a convienent time?

What was up with that? I had to work sunday, so I missed it. Were they just unhappy with his performance, or was there something more to it?

[ShibbOleth]

The first pro football game I ever attended was the last game of the regular season when the Redskins finally returned to the playoffs after lo those many years. They lost 20-14 to the Browns in that game, IIRC, but still made the playoffs. Seems that Juergensen was the QB, maybe in a dual QB situation with Billy Kilmer, although that may have been later. Thanks for the memories.

SenorBeef, I watched the whole game and it seemed the issue was more that the Browns weren't winning than Couch's performance, per se. Ray Lewis was a one man wrecking crew again.

[Weirddave]

It seems that many Cleveland fans think Kelly Holcomb is Jesus in a helmet. They don't like Tim Couch for some reason, and were cheering that Couch was injured so Davis would have to put Holcomb in. Check out Couch's post game interview, he was nearly in tears. Looks like we got a fan/QB feud in the mistake by the lake, and I couldn't be happier. Nobody wins in a situation like that, and teams usually wind up 5-11, 6-10, something like that. 'Bout what Cleveland deserves.

[Myrr21]

So I went and checked up on it: only four other teams have ever won 3 Super Bowls in 10 years:

Oakland
San Francisco
Pittsburgh
Dallas


Good company (or evil company, where Dallas is concerned).


Moreover, the Redskins won some championships pre-Super Bowl era. They've been winning semi-consistently for 25 years. Enough so that they overall club record is well over .500. And I can think of some other great teams with extended periods of suckitude...

The Ravens, on the other hand, won the big one in a year where they went 5 straight games without a touchdown, changed starting QB halfway through the season, cut him after it, had their vaunted D ripped for 500 passing yards in the last game of the regular season, and made it through the playoffs based on the failure of their opponent (Titans) to finish off a game they dominated. I call that a fluke. And the Skins beat em that year :p


Now, the Ravens had a chance to at least win my indifference, if not loyalty. I went to a few games. They played sissy football. Not just bad football; sissy football. I stopped going to games. We'll see if they manage to remain respectable (as players, if not people). I doubt it, but there's a faint chance...

I with the CFL (Colts) hadn't left town. I've still got the hat somewhere...

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

Originally posted by Omniscient
Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears 9:00 p.m. ET (Bears by 1½)
Ah! Favre is now 17-4 lifetime vs. da Bears! How were the seats?
Qadgop the Packerfan

[Omniscient]

I'm not talking about it yet.

There'll be some contrition in this coming weeks thread.

[RTFirefly]

Originally posted by Myrr21
Moreover, the Redskins won some championships pre-Super Bowl era. They've been winning semi-consistently for 25 years. Enough so that they overall club record is well over .500. If I've correctly added up the numbers at football-reference.com (http://www.football-reference.com/teams/wasindex.htm), the Redskins are 62 wins over .500, since their origin as the 1932 Boston Braves.

There are really four distinct eras in Redskins history, and in two of 'em, they've been awfully good.

From 1932-48, they went 107-70-11, with 11 winning seasons and only 2 losing seasons, played in 6 NFL championship games, and won 2 of them. Not shabby at all.

The 1949-68 era is the period to which Weirddave refers (and it's only half as long as he claimed). The Redskins really, truly sucked during this spell, going 90-147-11, with only 2 winning seasons against 16 losing seasons. Needless to say, they didn't play in the postseason during this stretch.

Then Vince Lombardi came to town in 1969, setting the foundation that George Allen (and Pardee and Gibbs after him) would be able to build on. From 1969-92, the Redskins went 228-127-3, with 19 winning seasons and only 3 losing seasons. They were in 5 Super Bowls, winning 3, and were in the playoffs 13 of those 24 seasons, with an 18-10 record in postseason games. Moreover, they had three playoff-caliber teams (1979, 1985, 1989) that were excluded from the postseason on tiebreak, despite going 10-6 in the regular season.

Finally, there's been the post-Gibbs era, in which the Redskins, through the end of 2001, are 62-81-1, with 3 winning seasons and 4 losing seasons. They've been in the postseason once, with a 1-1 postseason record, and haven't been back to the Super Bowl. Most of the damage to the W-L record happened in 1993-94; since then, they're right around .500. It's an interregnum, really. In another season or two, we'll know whether Spurrier is starting a new Redskins era, or just continuing the Redskins' stay in .500 limbo. It's way too soon to tell.

[Biggirl]

Originally posted by Omniscient
I'm not talking about it yet.

There'll be some contrition in this coming weeks thread.

Well? Where is it?










Slacker

[Biggirl]

Originally posted by Omniscient
I'm not talking about it yet.

There'll be some contrition in this coming weeks thread.

Well? Where is it?










Slacker