Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:31 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533

NFL WEEK 7: Minutes in Heaven


Here's your lineup for the week:

Thursday, Oct. 17

8:20 p.m. Kansas City Chiefs at Denver Broncos (NFLN/FOX) KC -3 49

Sunday, Oct. 20

1 p.m. Arizona Cardinals at New York Giants (FOX) NYG -3 48.5
1 p.m. Houston Texans at Indianapolis Colts (CBS) IND -1 48
1 p.m. Miami Dolphins at Buffalo Bills (CBS) BUF -17 40
1 p.m. Minnesota Vikings at Detroit Lions (FOX) MIN -1 45
1 p.m. Oakland Raiders at Green Bay Packers (CBS) GB -5.5 46.5
1 p.m. Jacksonville Jaguars at Cincinnati Bengals (CBS) JAX -3.5 43.5
1 p.m. Los Angeles Rams at Atlanta Falcons (FOX) LAR -3 54.5
1 p.m. San Francisco 49ers at Washington Redskins (FOX) SF -9.5 41.5

4:05 p.m. Los Angeles Chargers at Tennessee Titans (CBS) TEN -2 40
4:25 p.m. Baltimore Ravens at Seattle Seahawks (FOX) SEA -3.5 50
4:25 p.m. New Orleans Saints at Chicago Bears (FOX) CHI -3 38

8:20 p.m. Philadelphia Eagles at Dallas Cowboys (NBC) DAL -3 48.5

Monday, Oct. 21
8:15 p.m. New England Patriots at New York Jets (ESPN) NE -9.5 42.5

Week 7 Bye: Carolina Panthers, Cleveland Browns, Pittsburgh Steelers, Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

The big news early this week is the Jaguars trading away Jalen Ramsey to the Rams for 2 first round draft picks and a 4th rounder. Heavy price to pay, especially when he only has 2 years (one and a half really) left on his contract. Paying that much for renting him at his current contract for a season and a half is alot. But the Rams are completely in win-now mode, because with Gurley's and Goff's contracts and no high draft picks, they are officially mortgaging their future (and ignoring their O line problems) to chase a Super Bowl now. They're very top heavy now, and since I absolutely despise Stan Kroenke, here's hoping they lose spectacularly and for a long time.

I'm very much interested in tonight's game (thanks amazon prime). The Chiefs have looked vulnerable recently, and I don't know if it's Mahomes' ankle or a lack of running game that's mostly to blame (that defense also doesn't much). It will be interesting to see if the resurgent Broncos can continue to slow them down with the heavy run game/time of possession plan that has worked recently. Should be interesting.

The Texans/Colts game also looks like it could be a game of the week. Playing for the #1 spot in their division, with two pretty good defenses, and exciting players like Nuke Hopkins, Watson, and Hilton should make it a good watch.

The Saints/Bears game might be worth a peek too. These two teams have very good defenses and "just don't lose the game" offenses. Bridgewater has done just enough to win (but not much else), and the Bears, whether it is Trubisky or Daniels playing, have a lot of questions to answer about their offense. It could be a mindnumbingly boring game of WR screens, 4 yard slants, and hope someone on the other team screws up, but I hope it's worth watching.

The Packers are at home against the Raiders. The Packers defense looked horrid at the start of last week's game, but was able to recover and, thanks in large part to the refs, they were able to eke out a win. The Raiders are coming off a bye after a nice win against the Bears. Gruden's commitment to the run in that game was impressive, and they may do that again. The Packers hyper aggressive coverage can lead to giving up big plays, but that's not really how the Raiders offense has worked so far this year. I think it's a good matchup for the Packers.

Finally, the NFL has an officiating problem, but I'm not sure there's a solution. I'd hate to have games going on and on and on as every penalty is reviewed, but I also dont want to see teams get screwed by the refs. I'm also not sure if it's a me problem (I certainly remember bitching about refs back in the day, but it seemed to be more of a "shit happens. Play better" attitude by people back then. Who knows. Not I.

Thoughts. Guesses? Bets? Let's get ready for some football.
  #2  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:58 PM
Railer13 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,028
Speaking as a Chiefs fan, it's my opinion that KC hasn't been the same since left OT Eric Fisher went down with an injury. That's allowed the pass rush to get to Mahomes, and it's also hurt the running game. Still, if the defense was just average, they would probably be 5-1 or 6-0. But they cannot stop the run, and the TOP is killing them. Even Mahomes can't throw TD passes when he's not on the field.

I look for Von Miller to have a field day tonight and the Broncos to win by a FG.
  #3  
Old 10-17-2019, 05:04 PM
Omniscient is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 17,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
The Saints/Bears game might be worth a peek too. These two teams have very good defenses and "just don't lose the game" offenses. Bridgewater has done just enough to win (but not much else), and the Bears, whether it is Trubisky or Daniels playing, have a lot of questions to answer about their offense. It could be a mindnumbingly boring game of WR screens, 4 yard slants, and hope someone on the other team screws up, but I hope it's worth watching.
The Bears offense will be one to watch. They had a bye week. Looks like Mitch will be back. They sent Kyle Long to the IR which will probably be addition by subtraction. And the scrutiny will be through the roof. Nagy really, really had to have a come to Jesus moment this break and if he comes out with more of the same it could get really ugly around here.

Not sure what I expect. Conventional wisdom is that the Bears will re-dedicate themselves to the run, but that's never been in Nagy's DNA. Whomever ends up replacing Long, probably Coward, should be a huge improvement in run blocking and that alone might get things rolling, especially if the RBs spent all week being coached to actually expect to hit holes for a change.

Then again, with Mitch back they should be able to go downfield a bit more. Gabriel is back from his concussion but I hope he's not out there as the full time WR2 since I think we have a chance to be a bit more dynamic with some combination of Miller and Wims.

Whatever happens, Bears fans will nitpick every single fucking decision and that Saints defense is no push over. They team really needs a get-well game against a tomato can, but there aren't any of those on the calendar.
  #4  
Old 10-17-2019, 09:23 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Just outside of Titletown
Posts: 23,110
Mahomes goes down again. He's not going to last too many years in the NFL if he keeps up like this. And Flacco is awful.

Just as I typed that Flacco makes a downfield strike. Granted, it probably should have been intercepted but a completion is a completion.
  #5  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:56 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Shit, Mahomes' injury looked like it could be a season-ender. Hope not. That kid is special
  #6  
Old 10-18-2019, 12:20 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telemark View Post
Mahomes goes down again. He's not going to last too many years in the NFL if he keeps up like this. And Flacco is awful.

Just as I typed that Flacco makes a downfield strike. Granted, it probably should have been intercepted but a completion is a completion.
But dude, Flacco is elite! 2013 will verify!
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #7  
Old 10-18-2019, 02:36 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Shit, Mahomes' injury looked like it could be a season-ender. Hope not. That kid is special
Best case scenario Iím reading is 3 weeks out. The best case, mind you. Depending on MRI results.
  #8  
Old 10-18-2019, 08:02 AM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omniscient View Post
And the scrutiny will be through the roof. Nagy really, really had to have a come to Jesus moment this break and if he comes out with more of the same it could get really ugly around here.
The impression I get is that fans know this defense is Super Bowl worthy, and they don't want to waste it (like the Bears wasted any year not 1985) with another bad offense. I was a bit surprised at how much leeway and how many excuses have been made for Nagy (Coach of the Year!) and Trubisky, but they really need to do something these next couple weeks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Omni
Then again, with Mitch back they should be able to go downfield a bit more.
Completed Air Yards for Daniels: 6.3.
Completed Air Yards for Trubisky: 4.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Omni
Gabriel is back from his concussion but I hope he's not out there as the full time WR2 since I think we have a chance to be a bit more dynamic with some combination of Miller and Wims.
I expect Robinson to play a hefty amount in the slot to get him free from Marcus Lattimore's shadow coverage. Having a burner on the outside may help that too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Omni
Whatever happens, Bears fans will nitpick every single fucking decision and that Saints defense is no push over. They team really needs a get-well game against a tomato can, but there aren't any of those on the calendar.
Oh to be in the AFC East.
  #9  
Old 10-18-2019, 09:53 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Railer13 View Post
and the Broncos to win by a FG.
I'm sure glad you were wrong about that. Personally, it's ALWAYS a good day whenever that Colorado-based team loses.
  #10  
Old 10-18-2019, 11:43 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Seattle is 3 - 0 against the A.F.C. North this season but none of those wins has been very convincing and I think the 'hawks should be on "upset alert" this Sunday vs. Baltimore. The Ravens' QB is very slippery and it's the return of superstud Earl Thomas and after the way his time in Seattle ended I'm sure he'd love nothing better than to get a "W" against his old team.
  #11  
Old 10-18-2019, 11:58 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
I thought the Rams game would be “the test” to see if the Seahawks were legit but after losing (badly) to the Niners, the Rams have lost three in a row and have a mediocre 50% win rate overall. The Rams may just not be that good anymore, and their trade for Ramsey smells like desperation to try to reclaim this season and stay viable now (by mortgaging their future). So that win may not have been as telling as it seemed.

The Ravens look like a stout team and may be a better test. But if the Seahawks can’t do more than win by a small margin I expect the storyline to be, “The Browns aren’t great and smashed the Ravens, so if the Seahawks can barely beat them at home how good are they really?”

Which I kind of like. It seems like Seattle pushes itself when they feel like others doubt them (though Wilson seems to be the MVP front runner for the first time). If they can keep winning and still have people doubt the quality of those wins its kind of a best case scenario for them.

Or maybe they’re really not that good, and a combination of luck and unsustainable heroics from a few superstars have been all that’s kept them nursing a record that belies their overall lack of talent and experience. I hope not!
  #12  
Old 10-18-2019, 11:59 AM
Procrustus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 12,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
Seattle is 3 - 0 against the A.F.C. North this season but none of those wins has been very convincing and I think the 'hawks should be on "upset alert" this Sunday vs. Baltimore. The Ravens' QB is very slippery and it's the return of superstud Earl Thomas and after the way his time in Seattle ended I'm sure he'd love nothing better than to get a "W" against his old team.
Seattle has to be on upset alert every week. They usually find a way to win, but almost every win could have gone the other way. They don't tend to dominate games anymore.

In other words, I agree. Baltimore could take this one. My prediction, for some reason, is that Seattle will step it up a bit this week and win by 10.
  #13  
Old 10-18-2019, 02:26 PM
Railer13 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
I'm sure glad you were wrong about that. Personally, it's ALWAYS a good day whenever that Colorado-based team loses.
Yes, I am quite happy to be wrong. I chuckled last night when Troy Aikman took a couple of digs at Elway's moves as a GM.

I just saw that Mahomes will be out 4-6 weeks. Chiefs have the Pack and the Vikes in their next two games. Gonna be tough without him. Hopefully he'll be back for the Patriots game on 12/8.
  #14  
Old 10-18-2019, 03:43 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Railer13 View Post
Yes, I am quite happy to be wrong. I chuckled last night when Troy Aikman took a couple of digs at Elway's moves as a GM.

I just saw that Mahomes will be out 4-6 weeks. Chiefs have the Pack and the Vikes in their next two games. Gonna be tough without him. Hopefully he'll be back for the Patriots game on 12/8.
The Packers fan in me is elated. Matt Moore is no Patrick Mahomes.

That said, the football fan in me is very unhappy. This could have been a hell of a game to watch, and to see a star QB go down like that makes me feel for Chiefs fans. But we have the Raiders first, and that could be a good one, too.

Is it Sunday yet?
  #15  
Old 10-18-2019, 07:23 PM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
and they don't want to waste it (like the Bears wasted any year not 1985) with another bad offense.
I've done a LOT of research on N.F.L. football teams and to this day the best Bears' QB of all time last played almost 7 decades ago. Not impressive.
  #16  
Old 10-18-2019, 08:11 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
I've done a LOT of research on N.F.L. football teams and to this day the best Bears' QB of all time last played almost 7 decades ago. Not impressive.
Their most productive QB (most yards, TDs, etc.) was Jay Cutler by a wide margin.

If youíre thinking of Sid Luckman, he comes in second and he last played almost 7 decades ago. But his TD/Int rate was awful, almost 50/50.

When Cutler is the best QB in your history, thatís not great, especially given how long that teamís history is.
  #17  
Old 10-19-2019, 01:19 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Their most productive QB (most yards, TDs, etc.) was Jay Cutler by a wide margin.

If youíre thinking of Sid Luckman, he comes in second and he last played almost 7 decades ago. But his TD/Int rate was awful, almost 50/50.

When Cutler is the best QB in your history, thatís not great, especially given how long that teamís history is.
Sid Luckman's in the P.F.H.o.F. Jay Cutler's not (and never will be). And from what I checked a while ago Jay Cutler's time in Chicago left a bad taste in just about every Bear fan's mouth.
  #18  
Old 10-19-2019, 12:06 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Their most productive QB (most yards, TDs, etc.) was Jay Cutler by a wide margin.

If you’re thinking of Sid Luckman, he comes in second and he last played almost 7 decades ago. But his TD/Int rate was awful, almost 50/50.

When Cutler is the best QB in your history, that’s not great, especially given how long that team’s history is.
When Cutler broke many of the Bears' passing records, he was, indeed, often breaking Luckman's records (or Jim Harbaugh's ). The fact alone that a QB who last played in 1950 still held many of the team's passing records, given how much the passing game has opened up in the last 40 years, says a lot about the Bears' QB history, for sure.

Cutler may have wound up being the "most productive," at least from the standpoint of yards and TDs, but that's largely the result of hanging onto the starting QB job for eight seasons, for a franchise which has notoriously *not* had long-term quarterbacks throughout the modern era. His record as a starting quarterback for the Bears was exactly at .500 (51-51), he won one postseason game, and he never made the Pro Bowl, much less the All-Pro team, as a Bear. "Best Bears QB" is probably not a term I would give to him.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 10-19-2019 at 12:07 PM.
  #19  
Old 10-19-2019, 02:23 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
His record as a starting quarterback for the Bears was exactly at .500 (51-51), he won one postseason game, and he never made the Pro Bowl, much less the All-Pro team, as a Bear. "Best Bears QB" is probably not a term I would give to him.
Yet Luckman was worse. Over 11 years his TD/interception rate was 136/132. His completion percentage was 51.8%. His passing yards per game was about half Cutlerís. He wouldnít make it as a starter in todayís NFL.

Cutler is the best Bears QB because the Bears have never had a decent QB in their entire history. Thatís amazing. Statistically speaking, who do you consider better than Cutler and why?

I could see an argument for Josh McCown, who had 15 TDs to 5 interceptions and a 65.9% completion rate, but that was over 11 games and is a pretty small sample. You could call him pretty efficient for the little he did.

Jim McMahon led the Bears to their only Super Bowl victory but he wasnít that great either, slightly more efficient than Luckman.

You could make an argument that in todayís NFL, with the way the rules are and the way teams play now that Luckman might do much better but thatís impossible to know and we have to go by numbers. And Luckman was not good.
  #20  
Old 10-19-2019, 03:08 PM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
"Best Bears QB" is probably not a term I would give to him.
I have to side with you on this. Sure, Sid Luckman's numbers don't look all that great compared to the kinds of numbers starting N.F.L. QBs put up nowadays, but neither do Joe Montana's! Sid Luckman was named first team All-Pro several times, led his team to several N.F.L. titles, and is in the P.F.H.o.F. Numbers aside, to me that makes him the best QB in Bears' history, by far.
  #21  
Old 10-19-2019, 03:59 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
You could make an argument that in todayís NFL, with the way the rules are and the way teams play now that Luckman might do much better but thatís impossible to know and we have to go by numbers. And Luckman was not good.
Comparing quarterbacking in the 40's and 50's to the 2010's is ridiculously unfair. The game is completely different. Having to play both ways, pass interference rules, QB protection rules, and the sheer number of attempts, makes comparing stats from the 40's to now just silly. Hell, the league average of completion percentage never got above 50 percent until 195 fucking 4.

Luckman led the league in completion percentage once and was top 4 almost every year he played. He led the league in passing yards 3 times, touchdowns 3 times, and td percentage twice. He only led the league once in interceptions and interception percentage. His TD percentage of 7.9 is the NFL's best ever. He made 1st team All Pro 5 times and was the NFL's MVP in 1943. All the while amassing 17 intereceptions while playing defense too.

He's in the damn NFL Hall of Fame, something that Cutler and I have about the same odds of doing.
  #22  
Old 10-19-2019, 06:19 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
He's in the damn NFL Hall of Fame, something that Cutler and I have about the same odds of doing.
Compared to his contemporaries I donít doubt he earned his place in the HoF.

But comparing players from the past to players of today is complicated. Itís not even the same game if you go back far enough. How do you judge the play of quarterbacks from the era that predated the forward pass? What about QBs that doubled as kickers or defensive players?

Doing that results in so many ďwhat ifĒ considerations that itís nearly impossible. Itís like asking if Michael Jordan was a better basketball player than Babe Ruth was as a baseball player. As I said, the sport has changed so much.
  #23  
Old 10-19-2019, 06:52 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Compared to his contemporaries I donít doubt he earned his place in the HoF.

But comparing players from the past to players of today is complicated. Itís not even the same game if you go back far enough. How do you judge the play of quarterbacks from the era that predated the forward pass? What about QBs that doubled as kickers or defensive players?

Doing that results in so many ďwhat ifĒ considerations that itís nearly impossible. Itís like asking if Michael Jordan was a better basketball player than Babe Ruth was as a baseball player. As I said, the sport has changed so much.
I think we agree on this. My problem was your statement: "And Luckman was not good", and the idea that Cutler's stats advantage shows he's a "better" QB than Luckman. On those points, I think you're off base.
  #24  
Old 10-19-2019, 06:57 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Cutler is the best Bears QB because the Bears have never had a decent QB in their entire history. Thatís amazing. Statistically speaking, who do you consider better than Cutler and why?
Over the course of a career (thus, not counting Bears QBs who had good, but short, tenures, like Erik Kramer), it's still Luckman.

As has been already pointed out, the game has changed so much since Luckman's time that a direct comparison of his stats to modern stats is meaningless (and, yes, of course, you're right, if you had a modern QB with Luckman's stats, they wouldn't make in in the NFL). In Luckman's era, passing was distinctly secondary to the running game for offenses, and when they did throw the ball, it was primarily longer, downfield routes -- the high completion rates (60+%) and low interception rates of the modern game are the result of the adoption of the West Coast offense and other variations on the short passing game.

A 50% completion percentage was pretty typical, even above average -- here are the passing stats for 1947 (one of Luckman's All-Pro years, and a year that wasn't affected by WWII, as several of his other top seasons were) -- of the guys who were their teams primary starting quarterbacks, only Luckman and Sammy Baugh were over 50%.

Similarly, interception rates were far, far higher than they are now, and a rate of over 5% (even close to 10%) was perfectly normal.

Luckman (link is to his page on Pro Football Reference) led the NFL in completion percentage once, in touchdowns three times, and in 1941, he had the lowest interception rate in the league -- at 5.0%!

He was a five-time All-Pro, won four NFL championships, and along with Baugh, was one of the two best quarterbacks of his generation.
  #25  
Old 10-19-2019, 07:12 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
A 50% completion percentage was pretty typical, even above average -- here are the passing stats for 1947 (one of Luckman's All-Pro years, and a year that wasn't affected by WWII, as several of his other top seasons were) -- of the guys who were their teams primary starting quarterbacks, only Luckman and Sammy Baugh were over 50%.
Slight amendment to that -- Philadelphia's Tommy Thompson was over 50%, and, based on the team's stats for '47, was their primary passer, but I missed on him because PFR only lists him with one start in that year.
  #26  
Old 10-19-2019, 10:30 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
But comparing players from the past to players of today is complicated.
And yet you insist on doing just that. Quick, who has more passing yards, higher completion percentage and a better TD/INT ratio - Bart Starr or Andy Dalton?

Will you seriously try to say Dalton is better at literally anything other than sucking the souls of his fans from their bodies with playoff failure?
  #27  
Old 10-20-2019, 12:35 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
How do you judge the play of quarterbacks from the era that predated the forward pass? What about QBs that doubled as kickers or defensive players?
Exactly. While acknowledging the quarterbacks from the early days that excelled in their era, my fellow "football nerds" still aren't quite willing to put those guys in the same class of top QBs of the last 40 or 50 years.
  #28  
Old 10-20-2019, 01:05 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
And yet you insist on doing just that. Quick, who has more passing yards, higher completion percentage and a better TD/INT ratio - Bart Starr or Andy Dalton?
Another example: if I'm not mistaken, Jim Harbaugh's final overall QB rating as a Colt is higher than the one that "Johnny U." finished with. But nobody in their right mind is ever going to argue that Jim Harbaugh was a better N.F.L. quarterback than "Johnny U." was.
  #29  
Old 10-20-2019, 11:34 AM
racepug is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 1,161
I'm watching the rugby World Cup and it reminds me that footballs back then were shaped more like rugby balls are today (and always have been, as far as I know). I saw a show once where Boomer Esiason tried to throw one of the old footballs and he acknowledged how it could take some getting used to for a modern player. Something else to keep in mind when thinking about old time QBs vs. current ones.
  #30  
Old 10-20-2019, 11:45 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
I'm watching the rugby World Cup and it reminds me that footballs back then were shaped more like rugby balls are today (and always have been, as far as I know). I saw a show once where Boomer Esiason tried to throw one of the old footballs and he acknowledged how it could take some getting used to for a modern player. Something else to keep in mind when thinking about old time QBs vs. current ones.
True, though the NFL ball took on its current proportions in 1935. So, guys like Baugh and Luckman, in the late 1930s and 1940s, were playing with (more or less) the same ball that quarterbacks are using today.
  #31  
Old 10-20-2019, 03:21 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,048
Aaron Rodgers is having a pretty good day so far. At the moment, his stats are 24/29 passing, 355 yards, 4 touchdowns, no interceptions, plus a rushing touchdown.

On the other hand, it also looks like the Raiders have been solving the Packers' defense. Carr isn't often getting pressured, receivers are open, and Jacobs has been rushing well.
  #32  
Old 10-20-2019, 03:43 PM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,753
Just an observation, but has TV coverage actually gotten slightly better with less emphasis on fantasy? I remember a few years ago where you were bombarded with ads for the one day fantasy leagues and it seemed the entire game coverage was based on fantasy stats.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #33  
Old 10-20-2019, 04:29 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
First weekend in a while I've had a chance to just watch NFL Sunday and I'm impressed. Rainy weather along the East Coast makes for real football weather conditions. Those games in Washington and New York were beautiful, and I'm not being sarcastic.
  #34  
Old 10-20-2019, 04:33 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Seattle game is also wet. It’s a wet weekend on both coasts!
  #35  
Old 10-20-2019, 04:34 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
Seattle game is also wet. Itís a wet weekend on both coasts!
I see that.

Love it.

Not ready for snow yet, so rain's just fine.
  #36  
Old 10-20-2019, 04:53 PM
Superdude's Avatar
Superdude is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,680
Colts hold off the Texans, sit at the top of the division at 6-2.
__________________
I can't help being a gorgeous fiend. It's just the card I drew.
  #37  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:24 PM
Southern Yankee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In a country of hope...
Posts: 4,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superdude View Post
Colts hold off the Texans, sit at the top of the division at 6-2.
Does this say anything about Luck? Or did the team just a do a good job of preparing for not having him?
  #38  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:26 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Yankee View Post
Does this say anything about Luck? Or did the team just a do a good job of preparing for not having him?
My guess is that the Colts put in a lot of good pieces to build around Luck, and now Brisett is enjoying that infrastructure.
  #39  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:35 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Yankee View Post
Does this say anything about Luck? Or did the team just a do a good job of preparing for not having him?
I think the Colts were prepared to win without Luck. Brissett (sp?) has proven to be a reliable QB and a good fit in Reich's scheme.
  #40  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:36 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Anyone else notice how assistants who leave Bill Belichick are never nearly as good as Bill Belichick?
  #41  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:42 PM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 82,903
The good news is the Bills won again and are 5-1. The bad news is they were threatened by the Dolphins.
  #42  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:43 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
If you love 4 yard passes and special teams touchdowns, the Bears/Saints came is for you.
  #43  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:58 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
The good news is the Bills won again and are 5-1. The bad news is they were threatened by the Dolphins.
Not surprising, though. Miami's winless but that doesn't mean they're going to be a pushover. Bills are looking good - good to see football back in Buffalo.
  #44  
Old 10-20-2019, 05:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
I guess it might be time to get out the stopwatch to see how long Dan Quinn lasts. I think he's a good coach, but he'll probably never recover from blowing a 28-3 lead in the big one - at least not while he's in Atlanta.
  #45  
Old 10-20-2019, 06:01 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Anyone else notice how assistants who leave Bill Belichick are never nearly as good as Bill Belichick?
You can say the same about Pete Carroll. Gus Bradley was head coach of the Jaguars for a few years after being the DC for Carroll, went 14-48 and got fired.

Dan Quinn is another former DC who became head coach of the Falcons. He had more success than Bradley, even getting to a Super Bowl (which was lost in epic fashion) and has an overall winning record, but rumors are that he will be fired this year in the midst of his 5th year as head coach. (Likely in the bye week.)

The point is that having long-term success in the NFL is difficult, as the league is designed to support parity and to try to prevent a team from being too dominant for too long. The deck is stacked against every head coach. The ones that manage to do it are exceptional and you shouldn’t expect their protťgťs to have the same success.

Last edited by Atamasama; 10-20-2019 at 06:01 PM.
  #46  
Old 10-20-2019, 06:23 PM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,341
Great player quote of the day:

"It's not good enough that we haven't won a single game." - Preston Brown, linebacker, Cincinnati Bengals.
  #47  
Old 10-20-2019, 06:24 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
Holy crap! An offensive touchdown and a pass that went more than 15 yards in the air. Living large in the Bears/Saints game now.
  #48  
Old 10-20-2019, 06:50 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
I'm not a Ravens fan but I'm liking their defense. Kinda tired of seeing pretty boy Wilson get the benefit of roughing the passer calls.
  #49  
Old 10-20-2019, 06:51 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
Great player quote of the day:

"It's not good enough that we haven't won a single game." - Preston Brown, linebacker, Cincinnati Bengals.
Man, the Bengals are back to bein the Bungals.
  #50  
Old 10-20-2019, 07:21 PM
Hamlet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,533
Not sure that holdout was a good idea for Melvin.
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 06:15 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