Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-06-2019, 09:24 AM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
I didn't watch the game, thankfully, though I did check stats from time to time. Any reason the Bears went for it on 4th and 10, down 7-3 at the Packer 33 in the 3rd? 50 yd FGs should be makeable, right? Even in the wind tunnel that Chicago plays in?
"Nagy’s explanation for not attempting a long field goal was that special teams coordinator Chris Tabor didn’t feel it was in the range of rookie kicker Eddy Pineiro going into the south end zone.

“I’m just putting trust into what our special teams coaches are saying, and so if they feel like at one end it's different than the other, that's just what he told me, and we have to stick by it,” Nagy said. “If we start breaking that and start reaching and we go out there and he kicks a 51-yarder and misses it and now they get the ball at that spot, it just breaks our rules.”

"“So I have trust in him making — he's made multiple kicks past,” Nagy said. “But there's certain situations, whatever it is, whether it's the wind or whatever, that Tabes gives me that number, and I go with that.” From here.

Seems 51 yards at Soldier Field is out of Pinero's range.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Congrats on the unexpectedly great defense, Hamlet.
I didn't do anything, but thanks. I'm cautiously excited, especially with the play of the secondary. Darnell Savage looked good, Amos got an easy pick, and most of the time the coverage and tackling was good. It certainly helps playing against Mitch Trubisky (I loved Tramon Williams' comments: ""We wanted to make Mitch play quarterback. We knew they had a lot of weapons, we knew they were dangerous, we knew all of those things. But we knew if we could make Mitch play quarterback, that we’d have a chance."), though. We'll see how next week goes against the Vikings. Rodgers needs to improve too.
  #52  
Old 09-06-2019, 09:45 AM
mhendo is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
The long term signing, sure. But my prediction had more to do with Dak not ever being worth elite money. He's a perfectly serviceable NFL QB, who won't win games for you, but won't necessarily lose them for you either. Give him a tremendous O Line, a stud RB, a couple good pass catchers, and a solid defense, and you'll have the chance to make the playoffs and lose in the first or second round with him. Yippee!!!!
I dunno.

In the almost 20 years I've lived in the United States, I've watched my team win two Super Bowls: one with Trent Dilfer, and one with Joe Flacco. It seems to me that, if you can put the right personnel around them and get a little bit of the luck that any winning team needs, you can, in fact, go all the way with a "serviceable" quarterback.

But I guess we also have to consider what we mean when we describe a QB as "perfectly serviceable," in the context of the game, the position, and the talent pool. See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
And I don't buy into the "you must pay an average QB a ton of money" idea. Just cause some teams do it, doesn't make it a good idea.
I might be wrong here, but it seems to me that the thing to do here is not to compare the "average QB" to the absolute stars, but to the next level of talent below them. It might seem crazy to give someone like Prescott the same sort of money that Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers makes, but there might be some logic to it given the possible alternatives.

The problem is, with such a specialized and absolutely crucial position, just having someone "serviceable," someone who's good enough to get out of his own way and not lose you games, might be worth paying all that money for, because without it, all the millions you're spending on that "tremendous O Line, a stud RB, a couple good pass catchers, and a solid defense" might well go to complete waste.

I don't claim to be a football genius. In terms of analyzing the game and its strategies and the relative value of personnel, I'm a rank amateur. I don't follow college ball at all, so I have no idea who's coming up, and I don't even really keep up with anyone who's not a regular starter. I'm far better at baseball, where I have more interest and more baseline knowledge of players and strategy.

But it's always seemed to me that the talent pool at QB is shallow enough that you can barely get one "perfectly serviceable" guy per team before you're descending into the realm of either untried rookies who just aren't ready for the speed of the NFL, or fringe guys who've been around a while but really aren't able to perform at the top level for weeks at a time.

As I said, I could be wrong. I'd be interested to know, from people who watch more football than I do, and especially from people who watch a lot of college ball, whether there might actually be a whole lot of "perfectly serviceable" QBs who never get a chance at the big time. Could a team like Dallas tell Prescott to take a hike and find a "perfectly serviceable" replacement for replacement-level money? My impression, from my limited reading and my limited understanding of the game beyond the NFL's starting roster, and from the way that alleged experts talk about quarterbacks, is that the answer is probably no.

One problem for the NFL, especially at QB, is that not only is QB an absolutely crucial position, but the season is so short. These things combine, it seems to me, to make it rather difficult for a team to experiment at the position, especially if the guy they've already got has shown that he can handle the top level in a "perfectly serviceable" way. You can run all the reps you want on the practice field, but you can't really know how good a new guy is going to be in the big time until you put him in there against a real NFL defense that's trying to kill him on every play. And if you already consider yourself to be competitive, you don't want to risk one of your 16 games trying to find out. So we're left in a situation where the teams most likely to dip into the grab-bag and take a shot on an untried QB are teams that are in some sort of rebuilding mode, or teams whose #1 starter has just torn an ACL or separated a shoulder.

Last edited by mhendo; 09-06-2019 at 09:46 AM.
  #53  
Old 09-06-2019, 11:02 AM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
I might be wrong here, but it seems to me that the thing to do here is not to compare the "average QB" to the absolute stars, but to the next level of talent below them. It might seem crazy to give someone like Prescott the same sort of money that Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers makes, but there might be some logic to it given the possible alternatives.
That seems to be the prevailing wisdom amongst fans. No way better to justify overpaying a QB than pointing to a shitty QB and saying "at least we don't have that".

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo
The problem is, with such a specialized and absolutely crucial position, just having someone "serviceable," someone who's good enough to get out of his own way and not lose you games, might be worth paying all that money for, because without it, all the millions you're spending on that "tremendous O Line, a stud RB, a couple good pass catchers, and a solid defense" might well go to complete waste.
I think Dak is better than a lot of the scrap heap of QBs, but he's not $15 million a year better. Andy Dalton. Derrick Carr. Nick Foles. Marcus Mariota, maybe. All would be comparable and none worth $30 million a year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo
I don't claim to be a football genius. In terms of analyzing the game and its strategies and the relative value of personnel, I'm a rank amateur. I don't follow college ball at all, so I have no idea who's coming up, and I don't even really keep up with anyone who's not a regular starter. I'm far better at baseball, where I have more interest and more baseline knowledge of players and strategy.

But it's always seemed to me that the talent pool at QB is shallow enough that you can barely get one "perfectly serviceable" guy per team before you're descending into the realm of either untried rookies who just aren't ready for the speed of the NFL, or fringe guys who've been around a while but really aren't able to perform at the top level for weeks at a time.
If the pool is shallow, it's because of experience, not talent. Teams draft and play rookie QB's, investing 4 or 5 years into them before finally realizing they've been average or worse the whole time. As long as you don't play like hot garbage like a Paxton Lynch or Johnny Manziel, you'll get a long leash, get excuses made, and you'll gain experience. And as you play, you (usually) get better. Even washouts like Blake Bortles, Blaine Gabbert, Ryan Tannehill, Geno Smith, Teddy Bridgewater are all cashing checks in the NFL because they have that valuable experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo
As I said, I could be wrong. I'd be interested to know, from people who watch more football than I do, and especially from people who watch a lot of college ball, whether there might actually be a whole lot of "perfectly serviceable" QBs who never get a chance at the big time. Could a team like Dallas tell Prescott to take a hike and find a "perfectly serviceable" replacement for replacement-level money? My impression, from my limited reading and my limited understanding of the game beyond the NFL's starting roster, and from the way that alleged experts talk about quarterbacks, is that the answer is probably no.
I think guys like Nick Foles, Derek Carr, Andy Dalton, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, and even Dak himself show that experience is much more important in QB play than draft capital expended. So I think, yes, teams can develop a "serviceable" QB without having to invest huge amounts of capital.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo
One problem for the NFL, especially at QB, is that not only is QB an absolutely crucial position, but the season is so short. These things combine, it seems to me, to make it rather difficult for a team to experiment at the position, especially if the guy they've already got has shown that he can handle the top level in a "perfectly serviceable" way. You can run all the reps you want on the practice field, but you can't really know how good a new guy is going to be in the big time until you put him in there against a real NFL defense that's trying to kill him on every play. And if you already consider yourself to be competitive, you don't want to risk one of your 16 games trying to find out. So we're left in a situation where the teams most likely to dip into the grab-bag and take a shot on an untried QB are teams that are in some sort of rebuilding mode, or teams whose #1 starter has just torn an ACL or separated a shoulder.
I agree.
  #54  
Old 09-06-2019, 11:39 AM
mhendo is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
If the pool is shallow, it's because of experience, not talent.
If this is true—and I have no reason to believe that you're wrong—then I wonder whether the NFL's reliance on college football might not hurt as much as it helps. Sure, the NFL gets a massive pool of talent to draw from, without paying a nickel. But it is also limited in a way that, say, AAA baseball is not.

I wonder if the NFL would benefit from a professional "minor league" that would field not only kids fresh out of college (or even high school), but that might also give a talented player some time to develop experience in a venue that's not as tough as the big time, but that might be bigger and faster and more akin to the pros than college football is.

I know this isn't going to happen, of course, but I wonder whether it might allow for the development of more experienced players for the league to choose from.
  #55  
Old 09-06-2019, 11:59 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
If this is true—and I have no reason to believe that you're wrong—then I wonder whether the NFL's reliance on college football might not hurt as much as it helps. Sure, the NFL gets a massive pool of talent to draw from, without paying a nickel. But it is also limited in a way that, say, AAA baseball is not.

I wonder if the NFL would benefit from a professional "minor league" that would field not only kids fresh out of college (or even high school), but that might also give a talented player some time to develop experience in a venue that's not as tough as the big time, but that might be bigger and faster and more akin to the pros than college football is.

I know this isn't going to happen, of course, but I wonder whether it might allow for the development of more experienced players for the league to choose from.
I’ve long hoped that the NFL would get a minor league system like MLB, but recently my opinion has been changing. I think that it wouldn’t work. Football can’t do what baseball does, because the sports are too different. Football uses up a player’s body in ways that baseball doesn’t. If you take a player out of college, put them in a minor league, and let them play for a few years to get experience then by the time they’re “ready” their body might be used up.

Let’s look at running backs. You draft a guy who’s 23. You put him on your developmental team. He plays for 3 years, grinds it out, and shows he’s ready for the NFL. Now you have a 26-year-old who might play for a few years before he is too banged up.

A baseball player peaks around age 29, and a successful player retires between the ages of 33 and 40. NFL players peak around age 25 and retire around age 30. (Kickers and QBs who aren’t slamming into other people on a regular basis are more like MLB players in terms of peak years and retirement.) That smaller window for football players makes a developmental league less attractive. You’d rather draft a young guy with talent, give him a year maybe to play with limited snaps or in an otherwise limited role, then in his second year try playing him full time. You don’t want to use him up getting him ready.
  #56  
Old 09-06-2019, 12:33 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
If this is true—and I have no reason to believe that you're wrong—then I wonder whether the NFL's reliance on college football might not hurt as much as it helps. Sure, the NFL gets a massive pool of talent to draw from, without paying a nickel. But it is also limited in a way that, say, AAA baseball is not.

I wonder if the NFL would benefit from a professional "minor league" that would field not only kids fresh out of college (or even high school), but that might also give a talented player some time to develop experience in a venue that's not as tough as the big time, but that might be bigger and faster and more akin to the pros than college football is.

I know this isn't going to happen, of course, but I wonder whether it might allow for the development of more experienced players for the league to choose from.
The AAF agrees with you
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #57  
Old 09-06-2019, 12:33 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
If this is true—and I have no reason to believe that you're wrong—then I wonder whether the NFL's reliance on college football might not hurt as much as it helps. Sure, the NFL gets a massive pool of talent to draw from, without paying a nickel. But it is also limited in a way that, say, AAA baseball is not.

I wonder if the NFL would benefit from a professional "minor league" that would field not only kids fresh out of college (or even high school), but that might also give a talented player some time to develop experience in a venue that's not as tough as the big time, but that might be bigger and faster and more akin to the pros than college football is.

I know this isn't going to happen, of course, but I wonder whether it might allow for the development of more experienced players for the league to choose from.
The AAF, NFL Europe, and the like are attempts to do that, but they generally fail for lack of monetary interest. College Football is so ingrained in the culture that I can't see a true developmental league catching on. In addition, the CBA for the NFL tends to limit the amount of time teams have to develop players.

I think that the difference between college and pro football systems also tends to exacerbate the lack of experience, especially at the QB position. So much of what works in college football, especially in the passing game, doesn't translate that well to the NFL. Even very, very good college QB's need time to adjust (and some never do). Luckily, Mahomes had a year (and Andy Reid) to help him adjust. Other rookie QB's aren't so lucky and have to learn on the fly or have coaches who aren't good at developing QBs.

Last edited by Hamlet; 09-06-2019 at 12:35 PM.
  #58  
Old 09-06-2019, 05:32 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
"Nagy’s explanation for not attempting a long field goal was that special teams coordinator Chris Tabor didn’t feel it was in the range of rookie kicker Eddy Pineiro going into the south end zone.

“I’m just putting trust into what our special teams coaches are saying, and so if they feel like at one end it's different than the other, that's just what he told me, and we have to stick by it,” Nagy said. “If we start breaking that and start reaching and we go out there and he kicks a 51-yarder and misses it and now they get the ball at that spot, it just breaks our rules.”

"“So I have trust in him making — he's made multiple kicks past,” Nagy said. “But there's certain situations, whatever it is, whether it's the wind or whatever, that Tabes gives me that number, and I go with that.” From here.

Seems 51 yards at Soldier Field is out of Pinero's range...
Obviously they're cool with it, or he wouldn't have a job, but that strikes me as completely unacceptable for an NFL kicker. 50 yards is not 60. An NFL kicker, IMHO, should be expected to have a greater than 50 percent chance to score a 50 yarder, and certainly a far higher percentage of scoring than the chance of converting a 4th and 10. I can't find the wind at the time: was it really howling?

And the whining about 'well now they get the ball closer to our end zone,' it's a 7-8 yard difference between where they'd likely turn it over on downs from a failed pass play versus the spot of the missed kick. Even in that part of the field, the change to scoring probability for 7 yards can't be that significant.

If it is, and they know they can't punt where they are, and will have to go for it if they don't convert on 3rd down, then change the play call on 3rd down to make the inevitable 4th down attempt easier to make. Call a run or check down on 3rd and 10 if you know you have to go for it anyway on 4th down. Who knows, maybe they get enough yards on 3rd down that it's a ~46 yarder instead of a 50 yarder, and they feel comfortable letting him make the kick? The only thing I can think of is they may have been relying on a greater incidence of pass interference or other defensive penalties that could bail them out of their situation.

Just a shitty, dare I say, Bill O'Brien-esque job of game management.
  #59  
Old 09-07-2019, 07:24 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,293
Heads up: the Pick em and survival leagues/thread got started late so you may not have noticed. And if you're a new player and interested in making picks with us, by all means sign up.
  #60  
Old 09-08-2019, 01:14 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
Strong opening drive by the Browns. O-line looking very good. Maybe there is something to the hype.
  #61  
Old 09-08-2019, 01:27 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,293
Browns were beating the Titans D in any way they wanted very easily. Looked very good.
  #62  
Old 09-08-2019, 01:39 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
Can’t see the ravens’ game. Are they that good, or is Miami that bad?
  #63  
Old 09-08-2019, 02:03 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,293
The NFL told Tony Romo to dumb it down last year, didn't they? I didn't watch that many of his games, but I remember early on he was calling on very interesting football stuff - how formations were tipping off the play, tendencies and predictions that were pretty savvy, really good football talk. And then mid-season, he started being a much more generic commentator. He's doing the Browns game today and he definitely feels pretty generic.

I think the NFL thought at some point that the quality of his commentary was making the rest of the broadcasters look bad and told him to dumb it down. Either that or somehow actual interesting football commentary was scary to people.

It's a shame, since his style of actual knowledge was really interesting to listen to. The Browns used to bring in ex QB Bernie Kosar for preseason game commentary, and while he was not at all a broadcaster (slurred speech, general awkwardness) he actually gave a ton of insight about what was actually going on in the game. I really enjoyed it. Now they replaced him with a generic commentator and it's just boring.

Last edited by SenorBeef; 09-08-2019 at 02:05 PM.
  #64  
Old 09-08-2019, 02:41 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,293
What a shit show. First, the Browns are undisciplined as fuck. Dirty play from a few players, and just generally sloppy and undisciplined. So I'm not saying they're blameless. But holy shit the refs are calling some bullshit too. 4 or 5 significant game-changing bad calls.

What a weird game. It feels like the Browns could just easily beat the Titans if they just got their shit together and the weird ass calls stopped, but then it also feels like, given that those things happened, the Titans should be up 20, and not 6.

Not promising so far. The O-line play has been very poor, which is strange because the O-line play with mostly the same group became really improved when Kitchens took over as OC. And the general lack of team discipline and borderline dirty play reflects really badly on the coach, the Browns have never been like that.
  #65  
Old 09-08-2019, 03:11 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
Losing the LT doesn’t help the o-line. Especially if you then also lose his backup. QB holding on the the ball too long. But it’s the penalties - Cleveland finding a way to be Cleveland. And they’re pretty much all legit.
  #66  
Old 09-08-2019, 03:42 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
My local channel just changed my game from Chiefs/Jags (Gardner Minshew!!!) to the Browns/Titans. Just in time to see Titans score. Ouch
  #67  
Old 09-08-2019, 03:52 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,026
For those who may be unaware of Gardner Minshew II and his amazing pornstache:

https://static.clubs.nfl.com/image/p...usj173tlyo.jpg
  #68  
Old 09-08-2019, 03:57 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
For those who may be unaware of Gardner Minshew II and his amazing pornstache:

https://static.clubs.nfl.com/image/p...usj173tlyo.jpg
My wife is a Coug so I saw lots of him and his mustache on TV last year. It should have had its own number.
  #69  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:06 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
Losing the LT doesn’t help the o-line. Especially if you then also lose his backup. QB holding on the the ball too long. But it’s the penalties - Cleveland finding a way to be Cleveland. And they’re pretty much all legit.
Also interceptions. Like, a lot.
  #70  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:29 PM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,296
Are the Browns still Super Bowl favorites?
  #71  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:39 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
Lots of stupid penalties in lots of games.
  #72  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:57 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
Lots of stupid penalties in lots of games.
Seahawks rookie Cody Barton runs into the punter in his first NFL game, turning a 4th and 5 into a first down and leading eventually to the only points so far (a Cincinnati FG). It wasn’t a stupid penalty because it was bad (it was clearly warranted), just a stupid rookie move. Week 1 tends to have stuff like that.
  #73  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:19 PM
wolfman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 10,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
Lots of stupid penalties in lots of games.
Just wait for the first week of games once they get rid of preseason.
  #74  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:51 PM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,510
My big takeaway from the Dallas/Giants first half is that Pat Shurmer is a whiny little bitch.

Last edited by Hamlet; 09-08-2019 at 05:54 PM.
  #75  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:52 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,623
Cowboys trashing NYG, as they should
  #76  
Old 09-08-2019, 06:07 PM
Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,602
This week is proof yet again that coaches dont know how to use the preseason to get their team ready.
__________________
When I was a boy, a mere lad, A FAERIE APPEARED UNTO ME AND TOLD ME I WOULD BE BOTH POPE AND KING! But … I am a bastard. And a pretender.

-Richard Hariss
  #77  
Old 09-08-2019, 07:19 PM
Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,602
Whether or not it was really a fumble, that call in Seattle is ALWAYS called an incomplete call. I'll take the mascara call for not calling the roughing the kicker that would have ended the game.
__________________
When I was a boy, a mere lad, A FAERIE APPEARED UNTO ME AND TOLD ME I WOULD BE BOTH POPE AND KING! But … I am a bastard. And a pretender.

-Richard Hariss
  #78  
Old 09-08-2019, 07:19 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
The Seahawks/Bengals game is a crazy roller coaster of a game, and ends on a call that I personally think was called wrong even though it meant an automatic win for Seattle. To me Dalton threw that ball, it wasn’t a fumble.
  #79  
Old 09-08-2019, 07:22 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
And Baltimore sits atop the AFC North. This will require rectifying in the next few weeks
  #80  
Old 09-08-2019, 07:31 PM
Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
The Seahawks/Bengals game is a crazy roller coaster of a game, and ends on a call that I personally think was called wrong even though it meant an automatic win for Seattle. To me Dalton threw that ball, it wasn’t a fumble.
Like I said before, call that roughing the kicker correctly and the game is already over.
__________________
When I was a boy, a mere lad, A FAERIE APPEARED UNTO ME AND TOLD ME I WOULD BE BOTH POPE AND KING! But … I am a bastard. And a pretender.

-Richard Hariss
  #81  
Old 09-08-2019, 07:57 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Like I said before, call that roughing the kicker correctly and the game is already over.
Eh, he got knocked over by another Seahawk, I don’t think any of the Bengals made serious contact with him.

That BS pass interference call against Tre Flowers that Pete challenged was what really ticked me off. There was practically no contact, he was making a play on the ball. The defense stayed stout and forced them to kick a FG, so they finished well after that. But they should have won by 4 points, not 1.
  #82  
Old 09-08-2019, 08:25 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,887
Detroit can’t even snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but tie the game they had already won.
  #83  
Old 09-08-2019, 08:26 PM
wolfman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 10,983
Will the announcers please drop the company man propaganda bull shit that a team coming back in the fourth quarter to make up/nearly make up a ~20ish point deficit is a miracle? For Fucks sake every rule in the game is designed to make that happen, and it happens multiple times a week.

This is about the the Lions game. "Did anybody think the Cardinals had a chance at the start of the fourth " Yes, Every fucking body knew they did.

Last edited by wolfman; 09-08-2019 at 08:28 PM.
  #84  
Old 09-08-2019, 08:51 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,563
Geez, how bad is Dak Prescott that they had to bench him?

LALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!
  #85  
Old 09-08-2019, 10:57 PM
ShadowFacts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,249
How old is Brady again?
  #86  
Old 09-09-2019, 12:50 AM
Locrian is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFacts View Post
How old is Brady again?
“He’s two-hundred and six!” - Someone In Monty Python, in reference to Mr. Neutron

Last edited by Locrian; 09-09-2019 at 12:51 AM.
  #87  
Old 09-09-2019, 08:18 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFacts View Post
How old is Brady again?
42, we’re a month apart in age. He continues to shame me.
  #88  
Old 09-09-2019, 11:03 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
That was fun. The Pats usually struggle a bit in the early season, as the new guys get assimilated, and only then start to pull away. A 2-2 start, with questions about how Brady is finally losing it, is just normal on the way to a 12-4 record. But they're playing the Fins, Jets, and Bills next, so no worries.
  #89  
Old 09-09-2019, 01:45 PM
DCnDC's Avatar
DCnDC is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Dueling Grounds
Posts: 12,880
So... the Dolphins are clearly tanking, yes?

Is there anybody on their roster worth trading for?
  #90  
Old 09-09-2019, 01:50 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
All the Dolphins demanding to be traded need to remember they're more tradable if they play well.
  #91  
Old 09-09-2019, 02:03 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
All the Dolphins demanding to be traded need to remember they're more tradable if they play well.
I like the comment where someone blames the Dolphins’ long-term mediocrity on changing the logo.

“u have cursed yourselfs by destroying Miami’s original logo”

Who knew it was that simple?
  #92  
Old 09-09-2019, 03:57 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
It's more like cursing Flipper to CTE now that he isn't wearing a helmet anymore.
  #93  
Old 09-09-2019, 04:15 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
It's more like cursing Flipper to CTE now that he isn't wearing a helmet anymore.
Cetacean Traumatic Encephalopathy?
  #94  
Old 09-09-2019, 10:36 PM
Hampshire is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 11,132
Pretty epic ending to the MNF Saints/Texans game. For those who caught the ending I have a question on the last play of the game before the game winning kick.
Brees had to get them in field goal range so he hit a receiver who was around the 40 yard line. The receiver caught the ball and sat down with it. A defender then touched him to end the play and the Saints took an immediate time out with :02 on the clock.
Question is, if the defender never touched the receiver but instead let the clock run out to :00 then touched him or tackled him if he got up to run wouldn’t it have been game over?
  #95  
Old 09-09-2019, 10:38 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,563
No, the play is whistled dead as soon as the ball carrier gives himself up regardless if he's touched or not. Same deal with a QB slide.

EDIT: I believe, but can't confirm, that if you give yourself up but then get up and start running, it's a penalty. Similar to calling for a fair catch and then running.

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 09-09-2019 at 10:40 PM.
  #96  
Old 09-09-2019, 10:40 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 82,783
Week One and we may have already had the game of the year.
  #97  
Old 09-10-2019, 12:18 PM
Omniscient is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 17,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
No, the play is whistled dead as soon as the ball carrier gives himself up regardless if he's touched or not. Same deal with a QB slide.

EDIT: I believe, but can't confirm, that if you give yourself up but then get up and start running, it's a penalty. Similar to calling for a fair catch and then running.
Both are correct, but it falls in the realm of referee's judgement. On that specific play, if in the chaos, the ref didn't identify the runner as "giving himself up" immediately the clock could have expired. Would probably have been smart of the defender to not touch him and push the choice into the hands of the ref. I also wouldn't have been surprised if the runner got confused and got back up if he weren't touched causing the clock to run.
  #98  
Old 09-10-2019, 12:29 PM
Omniscient is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 17,623
As a footnote, that Raiders game was pretty entertaining too. Shocking to most that the Raiders weren't a garbage fire, though maybe the Broncos will be...
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017