Can someone tell me who keeps playing in a Browns uniform during the 3rd quarter of the past 4 games they've played? I'm not sure who the feth they are, and if I'll get the team that can somehow come from behind and close out a victory, or will lose it in a final seconds field goal...
Also the "Start Manziel" folks are starting to sound fething lunatics... Here's the "top dawg" in that camp:
*slinks back into the shadows, lest the Browns start to suck again*
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Ugh... if I had followed the stats, and put the Eagles D in the starting role, I would have won by one point... instead, I lost by 20
dogma wrote: The lack of a holding call on Okung against Orakpo is one of the most disgusting things I have seen in my 14 years of watching NFL football.
I've noticed that too.
The need to fething simplify the rules and let these guys play.
dogma wrote: The lack of a holding call on Okung against Orakpo is one of the most disgusting things I have seen in my 14 years of watching NFL football.
I've noticed that too.
The need to fething simplify the rules and let these guys play.
Forget that call.
How about the ridiculous number of defensive holding calls in general?
Or the "blind side blocks" that are, basically, making it so players can't actually block on a turnover....
Not really rules related... but one thing I'm getting VERY tired of, is commentators gratuitous use of the word "rugby" or other rugby related terms, like scrum.
If you're going to use terms from another sport, please at least educate yourself enough to know what you're actually saying.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Not really rules related... but one thing I'm getting VERY tired of, is commentators gratuitous use of the word "rugby" or other rugby related terms, like scrum.
If you're going to use terms from another sport, please at least educate yourself enough to know what you're actually saying.
You know I agree with that.
When some random commentator said scrum in regards to a big disorganized mess of a scuffle going on, my wife, of all people, goes, "But I thought in the scrum it had to be really organized or people could get hurt."
Couldn't have been more proud of her at that moment than I was unless she'd been grilling a steak while wearing an American flag.
dogma wrote: The lack of a holding call on Okung against Orakpo is one of the most disgusting things I have seen in my 14 years of watching NFL football.
I've noticed that too.
The need to fething simplify the rules and let these guys play.
Steelers got jobbed last week on a blatent hold right in front of the official. Then got flagged for arguing with the ref about it. *shrug*
Said it before and I'm saying it again...the officials have far too much on their plates. They're now at least as focused on playing safety patrol as they are on officiating the basic rules of the game. It's too much and they're overwhelmed.
If I was an NFL coach, I'd be coaching my players to "dive" like crazy. You never really know what you're going to get anymore with the officiating, so you might as well try to draw some penalties.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Not really rules related... but one thing I'm getting VERY tired of, is commentators gratuitous use of the word "rugby" or other rugby related terms, like scrum.
If you're going to use terms from another sport, please at least educate yourself enough to know what you're actually saying.
Eh. Only rugby fans really care, and they're probably outnumbered 250 to 1 in the U.S.
One of my announcer beefs that no one else cares about is how a ball is said to be "almost intercepted" on a simple defensed pass, or when a DB is even in the vicinity of a bad throw. Classic example of inventing some extra drama and not calling the action as you really see it.
The need to fething simplify the rules and let these guys play.
The rules aren't that complicated. The players know them, the coaches know them, and the officials know them. The problem is that the officials aren't doing their job. Granted their job is difficult as they have to contend with issues of league and franchise profits, which are both largely driven by fanbases that want to see a certain sort of game.
It was holding immediately after the snap, and also holding when Okung draped his arm over Orakpo's shoulder in order to prevent him from disrupting Russel. A disgusting no-call on a key play.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Not really rules related... but one thing I'm getting VERY tired of, is commentators gratuitous use of the word "rugby" or other rugby related terms, like scrum.
If you're going to use terms from another sport, please at least educate yourself enough to know what you're actually saying.
Eh. Only rugby fans really care, and they're probably outnumbered 250 to 1 in the U.S.
One of my announcer beefs that no one else cares about is how a ball is said to be "almost intercepted" on a simple defensed pass, or when a DB is even in the vicinity of a bad throw. Classic example of inventing some extra drama and not calling the action as you really see it.
To be fair... I actually hate the misuse of ALL terms from other sports.... "Marshawn Lynch just hit a homerun with that TD run" ... Wait what!? "I really like that coach's call, having the TE run that quick slant route was a real slam dunk"
and gak like that... In regards to your "not calling how it's seen" thing, I agree with you, but I also hate when a DB tips a pass, or hits the ball with both hands (basically dropping a sure interception) and the commentator says "well, you know that's why he's a defensive back and not a wide receiver"
Ohh, speaking of shoddy officiating how about this one:
In the second half (IIRC) when Wilson went scrambling about, his feet crossed the line of scrimmage, he went back and threw a completed pass. Now, apparently, under the rules, should he cross the LoS (completely) then it's a penalty.
IF crossing the line of scrimmage, going back and THEN throwing the ball is a penalty, why was Washington allowed to challenge the play? If Washington can challenge a play for a penalty, why can't Seattle, or by extension any other team, use a challenge on a critical play for a Pass Interference? It's been fairly clear since day one of Coaches' Challenges that you cannot challenge a penalty...... and yet it happened last night
Because there's an arbitrary list of what things can and can't be challenged, and it is only somewhat related to the list of factual things which can be decided by video review.
Peregrine wrote: Because there's an arbitrary list of what things can and can't be challenged, and it is only somewhat related to the list of factual things which can be decided by video review.
That's kind of what I'm saying though... They've said for years now that "penalties cannot be challenged for/against" .... To me, that says, "we know you don't like that holding call, it was probably bad, but you can't challenge it" and should be very easy to apply to the situation where R.W. "crossed the line" went back, and threw a pass. IMO, the referees should have said, "Washington threw a challenge flag, challenging the legality of a pass. This by rule is challenging a penalty. Washington is being charged a T.O.... 1st Down"
Peregrine wrote: Because there's an arbitrary list of what things can and can't be challenged, and it is only somewhat related to the list of factual things which can be decided by video review.
If the list of challengeable plays is arbitrary, then it would be difficult to argue that the list of reviewable plays is not.
dogma wrote: If the list of challengeable plays is arbitrary, then it would be difficult to argue that the list of reviewable plays is not.
Err, that's not what I meant. Here's an example: you can't challenge a false start penalty, even though looking at the video will clearly tell you whether or not the penalty was legitimate. So why can't you challenge it? Because the NFL said so.
dogma wrote: If the list of challengeable plays is arbitrary, then it would be difficult to argue that the list of reviewable plays is not.
Err, that's not what I meant. Here's an example: you can't challenge a false start penalty, even though looking at the video will clearly tell you whether or not the penalty was legitimate. So why can't you challenge it? Because the NFL said so.
Fact is, (and I just looked through it) there are NO published rules regarding the challenging of a ruling on the field. That's about as arbitrary as it gets... I've been looking all morning now for some kind of published, official rule put out by the NFL regarding the coaches' challenge, but thus far the only thing out there is stuff from ESPN, Bleacher Report and the like reporting what theyre told.
Given what we've been told by people like ESPN and Bleacher Report, Sports Illustrated, etc. The challenge of the Russell Wilson play should have been a penalty against Washington, and it should have cost them a Timeout.
Err, that's not what I meant. Here's an example: you can't challenge a false start penalty, even though looking at the video will clearly tell you whether or not the penalty was legitimate. So why can't you challenge it? Because the NFL said so.
In general penalties can't be reviewed, though the flag can be thrown; its a judgment call on the part of the officials.
As to false start clarity: centers, tackles, TEs, and receivers get so much leeway that there is no way tape would make the matter definitive.
As to false start clarity: centers, tackles, TEs, and receivers get so much leeway that there is no way tape would make the matter definitive.
Which is mind boggling.... Since I was a wee lad the rule has always been, for the offense, once you get to your position for that play and are "set" you cannot move a single inch, until that ball is snapped... This year, I've seen so many times linemen rocking back and forth, and generally squriming that I'd personally be throwing flags all over the damn place
What kind of idiot smokes dope before taking a drug test?!? Oh...wait...the same kind who beats his kids with tree limbs.
He's really only an idiot for not being traded to Seattle
The whole beating his kids thing, I'd honestly chalk that up more to ignorance... He's maintained throughout the whole thing that he was trying to raise his kids the same way he was raised. There is nothing wrong with that. By extension, there's nothing wrong with whoopin' your kid with a switch. There IS however, a problem with whippin' your kids with a switch to the point where there's semi-open wounds/bruises and the like a week later.
Breotan wrote: Seahawks at Dallas. What could possibly go wro...
Really??? It's what... the second home loss since Russell Wilson took over? I don't think it's time to bust out the paper bags and long wistfully for the days when we made the playoffs pretty regularly.... Sort of like Cowboys fans do
To the Jets!!! :O Seattle must really not like how they think his long term health will play out, on the other hand perhaps Geno got a receiver other than Decker who can draw attention from defences and let him make plays
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also his cap numbers are pretty big
I was just as shocked as the rest of you...but...I find that so far, many of the decisions that managment has made have worked out pretty well.
Yeah, the Seattle management have really made some outstanding personnel moves since Pete Carroll arrived. I think that they've really bought into his system. While I can't see him being the next Bill Cowher, Tom Landry or Vince Lombardi*, he's definitely going to leave his mark on that organization.
Wow.... Almost wish I had more points on Stl.... And less on a few others.
Yeah Seattle got the wrong side of that last call, but they were out of Timeouts too. No challenge.
Breotan wrote: Seahawks at Dallas. What could possibly go wro...
Really??? It's what... the second home loss since Russell Wilson took over? I don't think it's time to bust out the paper bags and long wistfully for the days when we made the playoffs pretty regularly.... Sort of like Cowboys fans do
Chancetragedy wrote: @cincy - It's still such a long season. And manning is such a choke artist. They do look scary as hell right now though.
What's funny is that the other Manning definitely seems to choke when the games dont "really" matter, but you put him in the Superbowl? Liquid Nitrogen in the veins
Also... yeah, even with Seattle at 3-3, I think they're the ones who're going to win the SB this year again.
TheMeanDM wrote: If you start the replay at 1:03, you see the Rams guy that *supposedly* recovered the ball lose it, and it goes into Sherman's possession.
The replay closes out with, in my opinion, pretty strong evidence that Sherman possessed the ball.
While the call to not review was horrendous. It was probably the right result. To reverse the fall on the field you need incontrovertible evidence. And none of the replays I've seen give that. Does it look like Sherman probably has possession with the help of Thomas, sure. Does he ABSOLUTELY have possession? No. So they should have reviewed it then confirmed the call on the field. The fact they called it Rams ball was the biggest crap show since Seattle came out with it.
Chancetragedy wrote: While the call to not review was horrendous. It was probably the right result. To reverse the fall on the field you need incontrovertible evidence. And none of the replays I've seen give that. Does it look like Sherman probably has possession with the help of Thomas, sure. Does he ABSOLUTELY have possession? No. So they should have reviewed it then confirmed the call on the field. The fact they called it Rams ball was the biggest crap show since Seattle came out with it.
The problem for me is that Sherman clearly had what the NFL deems as "possession" and was down with opposing players contacting him. That should be end of story right there.
Chancetragedy wrote: While the call to not review was horrendous. It was probably the right result. To reverse the fall on the field you need incontrovertible evidence. And none of the replays I've seen give that. Does it look like Sherman probably has possession with the help of Thomas, sure. Does he ABSOLUTELY have possession? No. So they should have reviewed it then confirmed the call on the field.
Chancetragedy wrote: While the call to not review was horrendous. It was probably the right result. To reverse the fall on the field you need incontrovertible evidence. And none of the replays I've seen give that. Does it look like Sherman probably has possession with the help of Thomas, sure. Does he ABSOLUTELY have possession? No. So they should have reviewed it then confirmed the call on the field.
Spoken like a true Rams fan
About F'n time the RAMs had a call go their way.
I mean... c'mon man... the Seachickens had their share:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Meh.... It's all a conspiracy to make sure a team from the NFC will be "gauranteed" to choke against Peyton Manning in the Superbowl.
I think it's why Dallas is actually doing halfway decent this season
That would explain Eli's crap performance. Gotta let big bro have another ring. Can't have the younger brother with more rings now can we? Fething Giants.....
The Bears did that a few years ago before Johnny Knox broke his leg and had to retire, unfortunately it was also called back for a hold
Knox broke his back, not his leg. If we're paying attention.
Also right now the Bears have less wins at Soldier field than the Blackhawks this year
I dunno what's wrong with them this year. I understand the issues on defense - playing with all backup linebackers, it's no surprise that the Dolphins kept throwing the underneath stuff. But the offense is supposed to do more than this.
I dunno what's wrong with them this year. I understand the issues on defense - playing with all backup linebackers, it's no surprise that the Dolphins kept throwing the underneath stuff. But the offense is supposed to do more than this.
Cutler got hit a ton against Miami.
He's very good when they manage to keep the poor guy upright. You stick him behind Dallas' O-Line and He'd look like Aaron Rodgers.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Meh.... It's all a conspiracy to make sure a team from the NFC will be "gauranteed" to choke against Peyton Manning in the Superbowl.
I think it's why Dallas is actually doing halfway decent this season
Halfway decent?
8-8 is halfway decent.. Last year, they managed to go 8-8 while starting their #6 DT, #6DE, #6-8 LB and #5 Safety.. Oh.. and their offense was getting done without their #2 WR playing for most of the season due to constant hamstring issues.
Dallas is a good team right now.
There is no guarantee that Seattle even makes the playoffs this year. I say that because the #2 team in the NFC east and NFC North are currently at least 1.5 games ahead of them because Seattle has 2 conference losses already. And the remaining schedule for Seattle isn't exactly easy either. Cardinals and 49ers twice, KC, and Phili. Winning only 3 of those doesn't get you into the playoffs.
There is no guarantee that Seattle even makes the playoffs this year
I know this... There's also no gaurantee that Dallas won't completely melt down and go 8-8 or worse. Or they could win out and lose the first game of the playoffs. I know that, at 3-3 Seattle's road to the playoffs is a bit tougher at this point than Dallas' road, but I have confidence that the Hawks will get things in the right direction, because coming back/rebounding from bad games is what championship teams do.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I know this... There's also no gaurantee that Dallas won't completely melt down and go 8-8 or worse. Or they could win out and lose the first game of the playoffs. I know that, at 3-3 Seattle's road to the playoffs is a bit tougher at this point than Dallas' road, but I have confidence that the Hawks will get things in the right direction, because coming back/rebounding from bad games is what championship teams do.
Oh.. Dallas hasn't done anything yet. I just think you are being incredibly biased by saying that they are playing "halfway decent" when they have the best record in football. Especially after the way they beat Seattle after spotting them 17 points.
I didn't see a bounce back this past week. I saw an implosion.
Trading your most explosive offensive player midweek and having to coax your starting running back into even getting on the team bus because of it isn't something championship teams do.
As for calling yourself "Champions".. You were last year. You don't have the same team as last year.
Although the Cowboys and Rams already force fed you a couple pieces, you might want to have another.
dereksatkinson wrote: [
As for calling yourself "Champions".. You were last year. You don't have the same team as last year.
Dude, They are the current, reigning champions... What I'm saying is that, in order to be a championship team, they will need to bounce back from adversity. Yes, I am biased. I'm a Seahawks fan, so naturally I'm going to see things a certain way. Such as, that fumble at the end of this last game that basically cost the Hawks' at a minimum, a chance for the game. In this same vein, Denver is looking a bit like a "Championship" team, because of the way they're playing, and how Peyton simply won't let them get too far down. It goes without saying that there's a good reason why it's so difficult to repeat as Super Bowl champs, and I ain't saying that "we're" there yet, but I am saying that I believe Seattle still has the pieces there to do it, and that they will eventually get there.
I'm also saying that, in all the years that I've seen Cowboys football, I KNOW it's a matter of time before Romo becomes the Romo that we all know.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I'm also saying that, in all the years that I've seen Cowboys football, I KNOW it's a matter of time before Romo becomes the Romo that we all know.
Well... you obviously haven't been watching very long or have a short term memory. Manning and Elway were talked about in the same light until they had a team around them. Romo has been ridiculously good as a QB for the Dallas Cowboys. The teams he's been a part of though, were incredibly flawed so he was having to win games for them.
The best example was the Denver game last year. Over 500 yards passing.. 5 TDs.. Dallas scored on all but 3 possessions.. Denver scored on all but 2 possessions. Dallas loses by 3 after scoring 48 points. Romo is the goat because he throws one int. It's silly. It's completely mindless to say he "chokes" when he has the highest 4th quarter passer rating of any QB in NFL history. It's just blown up more because there are so many Cowboy haters out there.
Oh.. and this is how you should remember Romo..
This is how Cowboys fans remember Russell WIlson..
I am sorry...but I nevet consideted Harvin to be the "most explosive" player on our team this year.
He has 133 receiving yards through 6 games. He barely cracks the top 140 WR's and TE's and RB's.
Wilson is probably our mist explosive player.
And so far, I think the Cowboys are showing that they're the real deal this year. Could they collapse? Of course...just as any other team with a winning record.
TheMeanDM wrote: I am sorry...but I nevet consideted Harvin to be the "most explosive" player on our team this year.
I disagree. A huge part of the Seattle offense was based around misdirection, especially with regard to the running game. The threat of Harvin being able to take it the distance made it so linebackers and safeties would have to account for where he was and would freeze guys. If the linebacker is worried about the edge, he's not as focused on attacking the middle where lynch is running.
As for Wilson being "explosive".. I don't think he's nearly as explosive as harvin. Not even close. You'd never be able to see Wilson on punt or kick off returns. He is able to run the ball and attack the edge but that is more about DE's and OLBs not staying disciplined with their outside contain and Wilson able to exploit that. Again.. Watch the Dallas game. Discipline teams don't let QBs scramble like that.
The Seahawks are world champions till someone else is. The Cowboys success seems built on demarco Murray staying healthy. Both of their positions are tenuous at best atm.
I also don't think Cowboys fans should be calling anyone out till they get a playoff win ;p. Even if seeing ensis put in his place a little bit is funny
TheMeanDM wrote: I am sorry...but I nevet consideted Harvin to be the "most explosive" player on our team this year.
I disagree. A huge part of the Seattle offense was based around misdirection, especially with regard to the running game. The threat of Harvin being able to take it the distance made it so linebackers and safeties would have to account for where he was and would freeze guys. If the linebacker is worried about the edge, he's not as focused on attacking the middle where lynch is running.
As for Wilson being "explosive".. I don't think he's nearly as explosive as harvin. Not even close. You'd never be able to see Wilson on punt or kick off returns. He is able to run the ball and attack the edge but that is more about DE's and OLBs not staying disciplined with their outside contain and Wilson able to exploit that. Again.. Watch the Dallas game. Discipline teams don't let QBs scramble like that.
Eh... Wilson put on a fething clinic against the Rams last weekend.
He's explosive enough.
I'm a big fan of his ever since I saw him shovel a pass to his reciever AND RAN DOWN FIELD TO LAY A MASSIVE BLOCK that allowed his guy to score.
The Seahawks are world champions till someone else is. The Cowboys success seems built on demarco Murray staying healthy. Both of their positions are tenuous at best atm.
I also don't think Cowboys fans should be calling anyone out till they get a playoff win ;p. Even if seeing ensis put in his place a little bit is funny
This is a complete strawman argument..
I'm not saying the Cowboys are superbowl bound. Did someone else say that? Maybe I missed something.
I said they are playing better than "halfway decent" when they are 6-1. With only 3 games left against opponents with winning records, it's highly likely that Dallas will be in the playoffs.
Seattle on the other hand is 3-3 and has 5 games against teams with winning records and two games against .500 teams KC and Carolina.. Given how they are 3rd in their division and have the hardest schedule in their division to finish up the year, I think their odds are poor. Especially when you take into account the way #2 teams in the NFC east and north are playing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As for playoff wins.. You know how many wins this Seattle Seahawks roster has won? Zero. It's not the same roster as last year just like how this isn't the same roster Dallas had in 1992-1995. If Seattle misses the playoffs, will all the teams that beat them get a trophy for beating the "defending world champions"? It's a meaningless title.
If you want to get into a history contest, Dallas had more conference championships than Seattle had playoff wins before last season. That has nothing to do with THIS season though.
whoa whoa whoa! no matter what side of the fence you are on, we can all agree that the cowboys have payed their dues over the past couple of seasons (decades?) and deserve the chance to finally earn that elusive first round playoff loss.
I disagree. A huge part of the Seattle offense was based around misdirection, especially with regard to the running game.
I disagree with this.... Also, name one team that doesn't at some level base their offense around misdirection?? EVERYONE creates plays in formations/personnel packages that are designed to force the defense to stop the play with "less than perfect" personnel on the field.
Personally, I think a "huge" part of the Seattle offense is based around Lynch's running, with play action passes coming in to play a bit later.
Also, in regards to Romo, "choking" isn't necessarily making bad plays, such as INTs or Fumbles, but rather, not making key passes, incompletes to keep drives alive, etc. And while he may have the best 4th quarter rating, he is statistically ranked 135th in all time playoff QBs. The ONLY QB below him on the list? Matt Ryan
More Romo Playoff stats:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RomoTo00/gamelog/post/ Since, ya know, it's the playoffs that really matter, and the number of super bowl rings the player has. (i still hate on Brady, but do recognize that he's been in the optimal position to win)
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Also, in regards to Romo, "choking" isn't necessarily making bad plays, such as INTs or Fumbles, but rather, not making key passes, incompletes to keep drives alive, etc. And while he may have the best 4th quarter rating, he is statistically ranked 135th in all time playoff QBs. The ONLY QB below him on the list? Matt Ryan
Yes and Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino right? Dilfer has a ring, he must be better! And Eli is better than his brother too. Ignore the fact that the Giants only scored 21 points once during their superbowl run. It was clearly the qb.. not the defense.
This is a nonsensical argument. It's a team sport and the fact of the matter is that Romo has only been on teams good enough to make the playoffs 3 times in his career. Next you are going to tell me that Seattle got the super bowl because of their offense.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So you want to argue that Russell Wilson is a better QB because his defense gave up 14, 15, 17 and 8 points in his wins?? In his loss, the defense gave up 30. The most yards Wilson had to throw during the seattle super bowl run was 215 and against NO Wilson threw for 103. Yeah.. that's elite QB skills there.
Yes and Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino right? Dilfer has a ring, he must be better!
No, because Marino suffered in Miami with no running game, and very poor defenses. Dilfer went with Tampa Bay, right? At the time, they were KNOWN for their defense (and not much else)
And Eli is better than his brother too. Ignore the fact that the Giants only scored 21 points once during their superbowl run. It was clearly the qb.. not the defense.
Well, it seems that, while he may look like a bumbling idiot, Eli has what it takes to beat "superior" teams in the biggest games
This is a nonsensical argument. It's a team sport and the fact of the matter is that Romo has only been on teams good enough to make the playoffs 3 times in his career.
Thanks, Obama!! ......Just kidding... I'd chalk this up to the seriously insane personnel moves of King Jerry. Dallas has had some terrible defenses, aside from DeMarcus Ware, and some horrible offensive lines over the years.
Next you are going to tell me that Seattle got the super bowl because of their offense.
Nope, I am VERY firmly in the camp of "Defense wins championships" To borrow a phrase from rugby: defense wins championships, the offense decides by how much (the actual phrase, for those interested is: Forwards win games, the backs decide by how much)
And last season, didn't Seattle lead the league in takeaways? I don't think they're anywhere close to the top this season, which, along with idiotic officiating, some poor bounces and the occasionally less than stellar offensive performance have led Seattle to a 3-3 record. Wasn't this past week the first week that DeMarco Murray DIDN'T fumble in the first quarter? I know that he was looking at some pretty bad records if that trend had continued, and that Dallas is lucky those fumbles haven't really hurt them more than they did.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: And last season, didn't Seattle lead the league in takeaways? I don't think they're anywhere close to the top this season, which, along with idiotic officiating, some poor bounces and the occasionally less than stellar offensive performance have led Seattle to a 3-3 record. Wasn't this past week the first week that DeMarco Murray DIDN'T fumble in the first quarter? I know that he was looking at some pretty bad records if that trend had continued, and that Dallas is lucky those fumbles haven't really hurt them more than they did.
You are proving my point. Seattle isn't the same team they were last year. WIthout a defense that's playing out of it's mind, you aren't seeing Seattle dominate opponents. Simply put, their offense isn't nearly as good as people are saying.
Your defense of Seattle seems to revolve around degrading the Cowboys (who beat Seattle while spotting them 17 points btw..) when no one is even trying to say that the Cowboys are the best team in football. Right now, they have the best record and have a very easy path to the playoffs because of their remaining schedule. They might not win their division. We wont really know until the Eagles start playing the people Dallas already played and then they finally meet on thanksgiving and then play a couple weeks after that again. I'm not projecting anything other than they are in the playoffs.
As for Murray's fumbles.. It's happened in 4 games and I believe each time they gave up points on it. So it has hurt them. Dallas fans are also very realistic about projecting anything that this team produces during the season into post season performances. There is absolutely no shortage of haters/doubters on the Cowboys. If anything, there is a shortage of people who think they even have the slightest chance to do anything in the playoffs.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: No, because Marino suffered in Miami with no running game, and very poor defenses. Dilfer went with Tampa Bay, right? At the time, they were KNOWN for their defense (and not much else).
Romo hasn't had a defense nor a running game to support him his entire career. Clearly it's his fault.
TheMeanDM wrote: I am going to say that for me, the most explosive players on any given team is going to start at the QB position, then RB, then WR.
If the QB isn't getting the ball out to the WR, then there is nothing for a WR to do.
A QB who is "on" will be making all the perfect throws, avoiding sacks, and even running to make the first.
A RB can carry the team by breaking tackles, running people over, and making game-changing runs.
A WR has to (mostly) rely on the QB to get them turn ball bfor re doing anything.
Agreed, to an extent. There are, in NFL history some players that were on "terrible" teams that were fairly unstoppable. Guys like Barry Sanders. Guys like Warren Moon, Randall Cunningham and Dan Marino stand out at their positions on offense. Lawrence Taylor played on some pretty bland/terrible Giants teams in his time, as did Howie Long with the Raiders (they also played with some SB winning ones too). We can kind of see this in Minnesota right now, with the loss of AP. I think he really was kind of the "engine" of that offense.
Also, with TODAY'S NFL, I think that, we're in a level of even greater parity than even a few years ago. The term "any given Sunday" IMO, applies more and more every single year. Just look at the first 3 weeks of the season: the Saints lose all three games at the last second, or in OT by some chance/fluke plays; But all the "experts" proclaim that all three games were ones that the Saints "should" have won. Same thing with this past week, Seattle "should" have beat the Rams, but for many reasons, didn't.
TheMeanDM wrote: I am going to say that for me, the most explosive players on any given team is going to start at the QB position, then RB, then WR.
We are comparing apples to oranges so that's where the confusion is..
I'm specifically talking about players that are able to stretch a defense. Guys like Emmitt Smith were not explosive. He could take over games and put his team on his back but he didn't stretch the field and wasn't a home run player.
Barry Sanders was an explosive player. Randy Moss was an explosive player. I don't think any QB is nearly as explosive as those guys were.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Also, with TODAY'S NFL, I think that, we're in a level of even greater parity than even a few years ago. The term "any given Sunday" IMO, applies more and more every single year. Just look at the first 3 weeks of the season: the Saints lose all three games at the last second, or in OT by some chance/fluke plays; But all the "experts" proclaim that all three games were ones that the Saints "should" have won. Same thing with this past week, Seattle "should" have beat the Rams, but for many reasons, didn't.
LOL I love the fact you are using the Saints as an example..
You know who Rob Ryan used to be the defensive coordinator for?
Ryan's trademark was to give up 14+ point leads in the 4th quarter. He had 5 in 2011..
It's amazing when you think about how this Cowboys season started -- a 27-24 loss to the New York Jets, and how it would set the tone for 2011. When the season was over, the Cowboys suffered eight total losses, but five came when they blew fourth-quarter leads.
Yes. Being able to score in a single play no matter where you are on the field. Moss and Sanders were great examples of that but there are many more. Sproles or Reggie Bush would fit that mold in today's NFL. not really guys you'd want to feed it to 20 times a game but you put them out there because defenses have to respect their speed. If they don't adjust or respect the speed of that player, they could give up 7 in a heart beat. Harvin was a HUGE part of the running game not because of what his production was, but rather the attention teams had to give them to prevent him from busting one. 3 TDs called back vs Washington... Go to the Cowboys site and look at how they adjusted their defense to make sure Harvin didn't beat them.
Yes. Being able to score in a single play no matter where you are on the field. Moss and Sanders were great examples of that but there are many more. Sproles or Reggie Bush would fit that mold in today's NFL.
Both Sproles and Bush depend on agility for their explosiveness, as neither is especially fast.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Also, with TODAY'S NFL, I think that, we're in a level of even greater parity than even a few years ago. The term "any given Sunday" IMO, applies more and more every single year. Just look at the first 3 weeks of the season: the Saints lose all three games at the last second, or in OT by some chance/fluke plays; But all the "experts" proclaim that all three games were ones that the Saints "should" have won. Same thing with this past week, Seattle "should" have beat the Rams, but for many reasons, didn't.
I think parity is about the same, and has been for a long time...a handful of elite teams, an handful of truly bad teams, and the rest of them in the middle. We just tend to forget about the week-to-week twists and turns when we think back to a given season. The volatility that we're standing in always seems worse.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Also, with TODAY'S NFL, I think that, we're in a level of even greater parity than even a few years ago. The term "any given Sunday" IMO, applies more and more every single year. Just look at the first 3 weeks of the season: the Saints lose all three games at the last second, or in OT by some chance/fluke plays; But all the "experts" proclaim that all three games were ones that the Saints "should" have won. Same thing with this past week, Seattle "should" have beat the Rams, but for many reasons, didn't.
I think parity is about the same, and has been for a long time...a handful of elite teams, an handful of truly bad teams, and the rest of them in the middle. We just tend to forget about the week-to-week twists and turns when we think back to a given season. The volatility that we're standing in always seems worse.
I agree, when we look back on a season we see who the elite, average and cupcake teams are, but as we're going through the season itself right now.... It's harder to see this, because we're still living in the middle of the twists and turns
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I agree, when we look back on a season we see who the elite, average and cupcake teams are, but as we're going through the season itself right now.... It's harder to see this, because we're still living in the middle of the twists and turns
Elite teams are usually the ones that finish the season healthy. We know who the cupcake teams are already. Tampa, Oakland, Jacksonville and NYJ are all terrible teams.
I'm watching the London NFL game at the moment and Atlanta are smashing Detroit. Which surprises me no end. Atlanta's offence is decimated, and against one of the best defences in the NFL, is a bit of a shock really.
If Atlanta win this game and get a run together they could go on and win their division. It's still possible. Any thoughts?
sarpedons-right-hand wrote: I'm watching the London NFL game at the moment and Atlanta are smashing Detroit. Which surprises me no end. Atlanta's offence is decimated, and against one of the best defences in the NFL, is a bit of a shock really.
If Atlanta win this game and get a run together they could go on and win their division. It's still possible. Any thoughts?
It is possible to be honest but that's more because of how poor the NFC South is, Panthers are first with a record of 3-3-1
as for today what I've seen is a lot more quick throws from Atlanta meaning Ryan isn't having to stand in the pocket as long against a pretty scary front seven and exploiting a relatively poor back 4 (Who've really benefited from the pressure the front 7 put on the opposing Qbs this year) The Lions on offence have also suffered from injuries, 3 TEs who started the season on the roster are all out with various injuries, Calvin Johnson and Reggie bush missing another game Stafford has basically one weapon in the passing game (Tate) and now Nick Fairley is out of the game today
Wow. Geno has to have set some kind of record for worst game ever by a QB.
Bills should have utterly destroyed the Jets, except they were being far too timid with their offense... 6 turnovers and you barely score 20pts off of 'em?! Sad... like, Toronto levels of sad!
Soo... between my two fantasy teams, there couldn't be a greater contrast... on the one team, I'm sitting at 383 points, and WAITING on DeMarco Murray's game tomorrow night, while on my Dakka league, I've managed an astounding 64 or so points, pending Aaron Rodgers performance tonight. Methinks Kronk is going to win this one
sarpedons-right-hand wrote: I'm watching the London NFL game at the moment and Atlanta are smashing Detroit. Which surprises me no end. Atlanta's offence is decimated, and against one of the best defences in the NFL, is a bit of a shock really.
If Atlanta win this game and get a run together they could go on and win their division. It's still possible. Any thoughts?
It is possible to be honest but that's more because of how poor the NFC South is, Panthers are first with a record of 3-3-1
as for today what I've seen is a lot more quick throws from Atlanta meaning Ryan isn't having to stand in the pocket as long against a pretty scary front seven and exploiting a relatively poor back 4 (Who've really benefited from the pressure the front 7 put on the opposing Qbs this year) The Lions on offence have also suffered from injuries, 3 TEs who started the season on the roster are all out with various injuries, Calvin Johnson and Reggie bush missing another game Stafford has basically one weapon in the passing game (Tate) and now Nick Fairley is out of the game today
Well.. you jinxed Atlanta.
Detroit's defense is overrated. They are good but not nearly as dominant as their statistics suggest. A big part has to do with the quality of their opponents and when they faced them. They have played... NYG (1st game in new offense).. Carolina, NYJ(lol), Buffalo (1st game for Orton) and Minnesota(rookie qb and no AP). If you want to make your defense look good, you couldn't ask for much more than getting to play those teams. Preseason I picked them to be 10-5 along with Greenbay. Playing for the division to close out the year.
My team finally gave me a game worth staying up late for, so I'm grateful!
I don't know how you soldiered through Gruden's cringe-worthy commentary, but it's nice to see Dallas lose.
It was pretty hard, do denying that. He was worse than he usually is too... I don't know if he's trying extra hard not to show favoritism to his brother, but whatever it was it wasn't working.
My team finally gave me a game worth staying up late for, so I'm grateful!
Congrats, you won your superbowl. Now enjoy your top 10 pick. Or did you trade that to St Louis for another player not on the field
Dallas gave the game away with a very costly fumble and some bad playcalls near the goalline. No idea why they threw it to dez twice from the 2 with murray running the way he was with Romo hurt. Then that fumble by murray after going 40 yards. Basically gave the game away. Oh well.. 6-2 is better than anyone expected at this point.
My team finally gave me a game worth staying up late for, so I'm grateful!
Congrats, you won your superbowl. Now enjoy your top 10 pick. Or did you trade that to St Louis for another player not on the field
Dallas gave the game away with a very costly fumble and some bad playcalls near the goalline. No idea why they threw it to dez twice from the 2 with murray running the way he was with Romo hurt. Then that fumble by murray after going 40 yards. Basically gave the game away. Oh well.. 6-2 is better than anyone expected at this point.
I wouldn't say Dallas "gave the game away," they were matched by a team that isn't as good.
Even before Romo got hurt, he couldn't see a sack coming from a mile away. On top of that, the rookie Breeland was on Bryant like white on rice; he made more than one play to stall a Cowboy's drive.
All and all, the 'Skins suck... But they played a good game against a much better team and won.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: I wouldn't say Dallas "gave the game away," they were matched by a team that isn't as good.
Even before Romo got hurt, he couldn't see a sack coming from a mile away. On top of that, the rookie Breeland was on Bryant like white on rice; he made more than one play to stall a Cowboy's drive.
All and all, the 'Skins suck... But they played a good game against a much better team and won.
Well, putting Romo in the game so he could choke could be considered "giving the game away", ESPECIALLY as Weedon had led them successfully on a TD and FG drive. The offensive team as a whole did better those few drives where the backup was in. I'm sorry, but if your "prize possession" (from Jerry's standpoint) gets hurt anywhere near his back, which was just operated on, he should sit the rest of the game out as a precaution.... don't you think that the Broncos would sit Peyton down if he got hit in the head/neck area very hard to the point where he needed a concussion test, or some other locker room tests?
Also... Garrett's post-game interviews are always hilarious, especially after a loss
I don't know how you soldiered through Gruden's cringe-worthy commentary, but it's nice to see Dallas lose.
Glad I'm not the only one who hates the current commentary lineup
You shut your mouths! Gruden is awesome, love that guy.
I don't know how his commentary can be called anything other than ridiculous. He kept talking up the Cowboy's line, talking about their perfect pass protection and Romo kept getting sacked. It might have been funny if I didn't actually have to listen to it.
I don't know how you soldiered through Gruden's cringe-worthy commentary, but it's nice to see Dallas lose.
Glad I'm not the only one who hates the current commentary lineup
You shut your mouths! Gruden is awesome, love that guy.
I don't know how his commentary can be called anything other than ridiculous. He kept talking up the Cowboy's line, talking about their perfect pass protection and Romo kept getting sacked. It might have been funny if I didn't actually have to listen to it.
1/2 serious. Gruden is one of the guys I don't mind, but I was making a reference to his commentary in my post as a joke. I can't stand aikman and buck, I am so glad that that dufus dierdorff retired. I like Collinsworth and michaels the best then gruden.
1/2 serious. Gruden is one of the guys I don't mind, but I was making a reference to his commentary in my post as a joke. I can't stand aikman and buck, I am so glad that that dufus dierdorff retired. I like Collinsworth and michaels the best then gruden.
I don't mind Aikman, but Joe Buck is annoying.
As I saw on Twitter not too long ago, "The worst part of having Joe Buck do commentary is listening to Joe Buck."
I do miss Keith Black on College football, because his silky smooth narration was just pure sex on a television screen Ohh, and I hate Lou Holtz... dude's lost his marbles a long time ago, and he needs his dentures refitted
Also, as much as people like to make fun of him now, Madden was an awesome commentator, but only when he had Pat Summerall.
Also, as much as people like to make fun of him now, Madden was an awesome commentator, but only when he had Pat Summerall.
Ahem.
LOL, merely proof that American sports, generally speaking, move too slowly Don't give commentators time to talk about off the wall, random gak like that!!
Omg..Gruden....I swear to god he used that sam stupid comment a week or two ago about "Thats the split y banana" or some such idiotic statement.
Who the feth cares what you called it...its not your team playing...they may not run it exactly the same...fans, for the majority, don't give a rip about what you called it when you coached or even what they call it now. Just shut up already.
Your talking about 66 pts from luck/TY. While I guess that's doable, definitely doesn't seem likely. I'm just hoping fleener gets the TDS and Dwayne Allen gets shut down ;p.
Chancetragedy wrote: Your talking about 66 pts from luck/TY. While I guess that's doable, definitely doesn't seem likely. I'm just hoping fleener gets the TDS and Dwayne Allen gets shut down ;p.
Top fantasy quarterback and the guy who leads the NFL in receiving yards? It's well within the realm of possibility
Yah that was tense sound waves. I was kind of assuming a loss because of what I had on a bye. Still can't believe I pulled it off. Now this week I'm about to get walrussed;p
Yah that's how it goes. I've had a few games this season I thought could be wins that turned into bad losses. And then there's the whole 2/3'rds of my starting RBS go onto IR thing and it's turned into a disappointing season. Although if I can pick up a few more wins here, I have a shot at backfiring into the playoffs.
Chancetragedy wrote: Yah that was tense sound waves. I was kind of assuming a loss because of what I had on a bye. Still can't believe I pulled it off. Now this week I'm about to get walrussed;p
You say that like it's a bad thing. Just looking to spread the love around baby.
squidhills wrote: Worst team? A toss up between Detroit, Oakland, Jacksonville, and Washington. How bad? Well, one of those teams went 0-16 in recent memory. I'm sure the others can manage to do just as badly, though not all at the same time, of course.
Really? Detroit is going to be the worst team in the NFL in 2014 because of their record in 2008? Come on bro.
Am I misunderstanding your reasoning?
No, they may turn out to be the worst team in the NFL in 2014 because of their record every season that wasn't in the 1990s is my reasoning. They just happen to be the team that went 0-16 in recent memory, which is why I mock them. And why their own fans mock them, too. And don't feel bad. As I said, the other three teams I mentioned are perfectly capable of performing just as badly as Detroit did back in 2008.
Forgot about this thread. Dakka prognostication at its finest!
squidhills wrote: Worst team? A toss up between Detroit, Oakland, Jacksonville, and Washington. How bad? Well, one of those teams went 0-16 in recent memory. I'm sure the others can manage to do just as badly, though not all at the same time, of course.
Really? Detroit is going to be the worst team in the NFL in 2014 because of their record in 2008? Come on bro.
Am I misunderstanding your reasoning?
No, they may turn out to be the worst team in the NFL in 2014 because of their record every season that wasn't in the 1990s is my reasoning. They just happen to be the team that went 0-16 in recent memory, which is why I mock them. And why their own fans mock them, too. And don't feel bad. As I said, the other three teams I mentioned are perfectly capable of performing just as badly as Detroit did back in 2008.
Forgot about this thread. Dakka prognostication at its finest!
There's still enough time left in the season for Detroit to completely choke it up just like last year
God, I'm pretty sure it's been talked about before. But I can't believe how expensive jerseys are ;p. Bought my first jersey ever today and it was 100$ for the cheapest version lol. 250$ for the authentics with the sewn on letters... Crazy.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Man cincy is getting their bottoms beat... Brownies are legit haha. Rooting for Hoyer.
I'm glad someone is rooting for Hoyer . He's not perfect, but he's getting the job done.
I'm getting a little upset at my fellow Browns fans. The prevailing "narrative" in Cleveland is, "Put Manziel in because Hoyer has looked like trash against crap teams!" "Um... We're 5-3" "It doesn't matter, we'd be 6-2 at least with Manziel!!!"
The worst part is that Chuck Booms, that moron, is screaming up a damned storm on any broadcasting outlet that will let him speak for a second.
Also this is a Browns team I can be happy to watch .
Yah I'm personally more excited about the Browns vs Texans next week than I am for any other game besides pats/colts. Can't wait to see the Brady backup bowl.
Isn't there almost no guaranteed money in his contract though? I thought it was structured like Kaepernicks? Personally I think the bengals need to get rid of Marvin Lewis. Dude is the definition of a straight up average/below average coach.
When your quarterback throws more picks(3) than his passer rating(2) you know it's gonna look bad. I thought about going with cleveland but I kind of expected the Bengal to you know, show up. My confidence(points) were low on that pick haha.
I'm not in a pick'em league, but I too thought that the Bungles would have won the game. I was pleasantly surprised at the score going into the 4th quarter
Someone over on the Browns subreddit mentioned a pattern they're seeing this year with the team, Lose one, Win one, lose one, win two, lose one, win three... If the pattern keeps up, the Browns will have another loss, 4 more wins, another loss, and then 5 wins ending up with a SB win. it ain't gonna happen, but man that would pretty much make my century
Someone over on the Browns subreddit mentioned a pattern they're seeing this year with the team, Lose one, Win one, lose one, win two, lose one, win three... If the pattern keeps up, the Browns will have another loss, 4 more wins, another loss, and then 5 wins ending up with a SB win. it ain't gonna happen, but man that would pretty much make my century
Cleveland would be a smoldering crater from the "exuberant celebrations" if that happened.
Someone over on the Browns subreddit mentioned a pattern they're seeing this year with the team, Lose one, Win one, lose one, win two, lose one, win three... If the pattern keeps up, the Browns will have another loss, 4 more wins, another loss, and then 5 wins ending up with a SB win. it ain't gonna happen, but man that would pretty much make my century
Cleveland would be a smoldering crater from the "exuberant celebrations" if that happened.
Yah I'd fear for the citizens of Cleveland If they won lol. That place would absolutely explode.
Someone over on the Browns subreddit mentioned a pattern they're seeing this year with the team, Lose one, Win one, lose one, win two, lose one, win three... If the pattern keeps up, the Browns will have another loss, 4 more wins, another loss, and then 5 wins ending up with a SB win. it ain't gonna happen, but man that would pretty much make my century
Cleveland would be a smoldering crater from the "exuberant celebrations" if that happened.
Yah I'd fear for the citizens of Cleveland If they won lol. That place would absolutely explode.
It'd be fething fantastic!
We had a taste of what a championship could be like in late August this year with the local Arena Football team and then like two Thursdays ago with the Cavaliers home opener. Downtown Cleveland was fething insane those days. I cannot wait for the day Cleveland wins a major championship. It's gonna be great
I'd probably go visit some family I have in Akron if that happened then go to Cleveland for the festivities. Having enjoyed the Red Sox stuff in 2004 there is seriously nothing like a city getting off the shnide. And I'll always have a soft spot for Cleveland/Akron/Massillon having spent a ton of time there as a kid and having most of my family being Cleveland fanatics.
Byte in the pickem you got what 6 points on the phi/car game and 12 on the GB/CHI game? I can't believe I've scratched and clawed my way back into both the pick em and the FFL...
Only 2 losers for me so far. And one I waffled on for days. Also clubbed walrus in FFL. I think I'm going to continue my steady climb. Might be in a playoff spot as of next week.
Last time Browns solo 1st in Div (9/24/95)
No. 1 film: Seven
Song: Gangsta's Paradise
TV show: ER
Gas $1.11/gal
Johnny Manziel was two years old.
Apple stock was $37.06 a share, now $109.01. (Actually would be worth around $3,000 due to stock splits.)
Neither the Carolina Panthers or the Jacksonville Jaguars had won an NFL game since becoming franchises.
The DVD was announced.
The Browns were worth an estimated $200M, now valued at $1.1B.
eBay first appears on the Internet.
World population has grown by 1.5 billion since the Browns last held the division lead.
Browns general manager Ray Farmer was a 21-year-old safety playing for Duke.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: OMG, I am such a fething genius... apparently what I need to do to win FFL games, is have/leave guys "starting" who are on their bye week
I won last week with someone in my lineup on a bye crazy feeling ;p
Chancetragedy wrote: Only 2 losers for me so far. And one I waffled on for days. Also clubbed walrus in FFL. I think I'm going to continue my steady climb. Might be in a playoff spot as of next week.
It's been a rough couple weeks for me. I was the second highest scoring team last week, and played the highest scoring team, all while having Randall Cobb, Megatron and Sammy Watkins on bye. This week I had Luck, T.Y. and the Houston defense on bye.
I was at the Bucs game today, and I guess me rooting for their awfulness rubbed off on my fantasy team. No more!
Chancetragedy wrote: Byte in the pickem you got what 6 points on the phi/car game and 12 on the GB/CHI game? I can't believe I've scratched and clawed my way back into both the pick em and the FFL...
Yeah, but they're like to the lower end of most expensive franchises. Haslam paid 700million last year, and then 100mil this year and for the next two years. Looks like he's already made 100 mil back lol
Yah I just assumed most franchises were worth around a billion dollars. Doesn't surprise me the Browns are as well. Whois the cheapest franchise? Jacksonville?
Chancetragedy wrote: Yah I just assumed most franchises were worth around a billion dollars. Doesn't surprise me the Browns are as well. Whois the cheapest franchise? Jacksonville?
Wow...bad choices in Pick em... but one hell os a showdown in Fantasy..... I won by 1.10.
Eagles sitting on a 7-2, Have GB next. Dallas on bye..... Philly could actually afford a loss and still lead based on Div record.
AFC North is looking tight, that tie may decide that race.
NFC South... gods what is going on down there? They could be sending a losing team into the play offs.
Went to the Jags Cowboys game at Wembley (London) at the weekend, had an absolute blast! Game wasn't as good as the Lions/Falcons last-second game, but still very enjoyable. The Jags just couldn't get to Romo, and a couple of mistakes at bad moments (the dropped punt really swung the momentum), although I thought there wasn't the gulf between the team that the score suggested. Jags were also lacking a little on offence, and specifically thought they needed someone like Bryant - wondered what all of the fuss was about him before, now having seen him in the flesh I can see why; what an athlete, the TV really doesn't convey how fast and powerful some of these guys are.
Will be getting a season ticket for the UK games in 2015 as soon as they go on sale, would love to see a game on US soil as well although will have to do some planning for that one!
Pacific wrote: Went to the Jags Cowboys game at Wembley (London) at the weekend, had an absolute blast! Game wasn't as good as the Lions/Falcons last-second game, but still very enjoyable. The Jags just couldn't get to Romo, and a couple of mistakes at bad moments (the dropped punt really swung the momentum), although I thought there wasn't the gulf between the team that the score suggested. Jags were also lacking a little on offence, and specifically thought they needed someone like Bryant - wondered what all of the fuss was about him before, now having seen him in the flesh I can see why; what an athlete, the TV really doesn't convey how fast and powerful some of these guys are.
On one side.. You had a team that failed to put up points in 11 consecutive drives. Normally, in an NFL game, you have 11-12 drives in a game.
On the other side, you had a single player put up over 150 yards and 2 tds in the 2nd Q alone. Setting an NFL record for receiving yards in a quarter. After that Bryant was put on the bench to make sure he left London healthy. Romo and Murray (only 19 carries) both left the game with 8 minutes to go. They started resting starters on Defense with 8 minutes to go as well. There was a very big difference in quality. Dallas didn't try to embarrass Jacksonville.
Pacific wrote: Will be getting a season ticket for the UK games in 2015 as soon as they go on sale, would love to see a game on US soil as well although will have to do some planning for that one!
If you are going for the experience of seeing a game i recommend attending a college football game instead. Texas-OU at the Cottonbowl and Ohio State vs Michigan (at the Horseshoe) are easily the most electric atmospheres. People some people argue Alabama Auburn but honestly it's overrated. http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap2000000363308
If you are looking to attend an NFL game to see the stadiums themselves, I'd recommend the Cowboys stadium because it's pretty ridiculous. You don't have to see an NFL game there either. They host lots of concerts and other events. If you are wanting to specifically see a crazy atmosphere, check out Arrowhead Stadium in KC and Lambeau Field in Green Bay Wisconsin.
If you are going for the experience of seeing a game i recommend attending a college football game instead. Texas-OU at the Cottonbowl and Ohio State vs Michigan (at the Horseshoe) are easily the most electric atmospheres. People some people argue Alabama Auburn but honestly it's overrated. http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap2000000363308
If you are looking to attend an NFL game to see the stadiums themselves, I'd recommend the Cowboys stadium because it's pretty ridiculous. You don't have to see an NFL game there either. They host lots of concerts and other events. If you are wanting to specifically see a crazy atmosphere, check out Arrowhead Stadium in KC and Lambeau Field in Green Bay Wisconsin.
1. Oregon/Oregon St. in Eugene... Actually, ANY football game at Autzen stadium is worth it. Also, bring da ear plugs I would also suggest going to a Felon St. v. Miami game as they get pretty intense. I'd probably steer clear of Michigan/ Ohio State, you don't really go on vacation (holiday) to freeze your arse off Also, regardless of your feelings on the issue, Army v. Navy is always a good one to see.
2. Skip Dallas and come up to Seattle to see the 'Hawks play at home (if you can get tickets). Also, from what I've been told, Soldier Field is another place that you really ought to see a good game at. On the plus side, Chicago is a major transportation hub, so should be easy to get to, on the negative side.... it's like Michigan/Ohio State, if you go during the wrong time of the year, it's fething cold!
If you are going for the experience of seeing a game i recommend attending a college football game instead. Texas-OU at the Cottonbowl and Ohio State vs Michigan (at the Horseshoe) are easily the most electric atmospheres. People some people argue Alabama Auburn but honestly it's overrated. http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap2000000363308
Don't sit on night games in Happy Valley (Penn State), Camp Randall (Wisconsin), or in the Bayou (LSU). I've been to night games at two of the three, and the atmosphere is ridiculous. Camp Randall literally shakes at the beginning of the 4th quarter when they play "Jump Around." It's insane.
My first choice, being a Buckeye, would still be the Shoe, however
1. Oregon/Oregon St. in Eugene... Actually, ANY football game at Autzen stadium is worth it. Also, bring da ear plugs
I hear that little stadium is quaint
I would also suggest going to a Felon St. v. Miami game as they get pretty intense.
I'd wait until Miami is any good, or make sure the game is in Tallahassee. Miami's attendance is terrible. You'd be better seeing a high school game in Texas than going to a game at Miami lately.
I'd probably steer clear of Michigan/ Ohio State, you don't really go on vacation (holiday) to freeze your arse off
Best rivalry in all of American Football. If you get a chance, go. I've never been to a better football game with a better atmosphere than The Game in 2007 when they were #1 & #2 respectively.
1. Oregon/Oregon St. in Eugene... Actually, ANY football game at Autzen stadium is worth it. Also, bring da ear plugs
I hear that little stadium is quaint
Lol, while it does "only" seat like 50,000 it's construction makes it actually the loudest college specific stadium (as in, Arrowhead and Centurylink both have records for being louder, but no colleges really call those fields home) in the country
I've only been to games at old Foxboro stadium, new Foxboro, and old Joe Robbie in Miami. None of them were that memorable unless you are into those 2 teams.
Dereksatkinson and the rest of the guys who commented, thanks very much for the tips.
Have just started watching some College football (seems to be a lot more of it on UK cable TV these days), the games definitely look a lot more random!
Have just started watching some College football (seems to be a lot more of it on UK cable TV these days), the games definitely look a lot more random!
Well, with college you have a smaller set of games per season, and each game is more important individually than in the NFL, because of the ranking system. Combine this with there being something like 120 "FCS" schools there is going to naturally be some pretty major disparity between the top and bottom schools. Plus, you also have the FBS, which used to be known as DII and DIII where smaller schools compete against each other.
I greatly prefer NFL football to major college football. College football has far too many Bambi vs. Godzilla moments. And that's *exactly* the way college football likes it -- powerhouse programs and sacrificial lambs.
And it's a stinking cesspool. It's hard to imagine organizations more hypocritical than football-playing universities. Look at all the backstabbing involved with conference realignment, etc. Look at how they acquire and retain talent -- bags of money under the table to parents and HS coaches, "hostesses" for recruits on their visits, boosters creating fake "jobs" for players or giving them cars, the involvement of street agents and various hustlers, etc.
All this even as they yammer on about their not-for-profit educational missions and ivy-covered halls. At least the NFL is actually interested in a competitive product, and keeps its greedy, money-grubbing ways above-board as a legitimate business.
Need players in the NFL? You utilize an above-board draft and free agency system. Need players in FBS football? Cheat, cheat, cheat.
gorgon wrote: I greatly prefer NFL football to major college football. College football has far too many Bambi vs. Godzilla moments. And that's *exactly* the way college football likes it -- powerhouse programs and sacrificial lambs.
And it's a stinking cesspool. It's hard to imagine organizations more hypocritical than football-playing universities. Look at all the backstabbing involved with conference realignment, etc. Look at how they acquire and retain talent -- bags of money under the table to parents and HS coaches, "hostesses" for recruits on their visits, boosters creating fake "jobs" for players or giving them cars, the involvement of street agents and various hustlers, etc.
All this even as they yammer on about their not-for-profit educational missions and ivy-covered halls. At least the NFL is actually interested in a competitive product, and keeps its greedy, money-grubbing ways above-board as a legitimate business.
Need players in the NFL? You utilize an above-board draft and free agency system. Need players in FBS football? Cheat, cheat, cheat.
Not to mention how quickly things will get brushed under the rug... Violate team, conference and NCAA rules? Keep playing while we "investigate" the incidents (Jameis Winston)
I won't say any one school is "worse" than another regarding this, it's just that some schools are terrible at keeping it under wraps.... At the same time, there's a reason why some schools "earn" their poor nicknames, like Felon State has.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: 1. Oregon/Oregon St. in Eugene... Actually, ANY football game at Autzen stadium is worth it. Also, bring da ear plugs I would also suggest going to a Felon St. v. Miami game as they get pretty intense. I'd probably steer clear of Michigan/ Ohio State, you don't really go on vacation (holiday) to freeze your arse off Also, regardless of your feelings on the issue, Army v. Navy is always a good one to see.
I think that Oregon/Oregon state is an overrated rivalry. Up until recently, neither team was playing for much. home/home rivalry games are also not nearly as fun as neutral site games.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: 2. Skip Dallas and come up to Seattle to see the 'Hawks play at home (if you can get tickets).
There is absolutely nothing special about that stadium. Seattle only sells out their stadium when they have a good team and when they don't they have to pump noise through the sound system (and sometimes they do it when they are good too).
I would avoid the PacNW simply because there really isn't any sort of sight seeing to do. Plus the weather is crappy and is one of the reasons why they have the highest suicide rate in the US. I lived up there for 8 years and wouldn't recommend putting it anywhere near the top of the list for someone to visit if they were coming to the states for the 1st time.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pacific wrote: Dereksatkinson and the rest of the guys who commented, thanks very much for the tips.
Have just started watching some College football (seems to be a lot more of it on UK cable TV these days), the games definitely look a lot more random!
The reason why I am recommending college games to ATTEND is because of the atmosphere. Real rivalry games make NFL games look like cheap imitations.
The classic Harvard-Yale game, Oklahoma-Texas "Red River Rivalry", Oklahoma-Ok State "Bedlam" Are a few I can recall that are always packed. Great atmosphere.
gorgon wrote:I greatly prefer NFL football to major college football. College football has far too many Bambi vs. Godzilla moments. And that's *exactly* the way college football likes it -- powerhouse programs and sacrificial lambs.
All this even as they yammer on about their not-for-profit educational missions and ivy-covered halls. At least the NFL is actually interested in a competitive product, and keeps its greedy, money-grubbing ways above-board as a legitimate business. .
Yeah that's pretty much how I feel about college football as well, some times a lot of teams should just not even bother travelling to games and save face by not being blown out by Bama or some other SEC team
Pacific wrote:
Will be getting a season ticket for the UK games in 2015 as soon as they go on sale, would love to see a game on US soil as well although will have to do some planning for that one!
me and a couple of mates are talking about going to one of the games next year, at the moment top of the list is Jets Dolphins as it's a divisional game and another friend is travelling over from California to watch it as well
Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote: Yeah that's pretty much how I feel about college football as well, some times a lot of teams should just not even bother travelling to games and save face by not being blown out by Bama or some other SEC team
Yeah, but if you don't take your huge paycheck to be a practice game for the big team then how are you going to get your chance at something like the greatest upset in football history?
Alfndrate wrote: I've never been to an NFL game... I've been to more NHL games than I have NFL... I just started watching hockey two years ago... :-\
Jackets or Pens?
He's Senators fan.
Indeed I am, BUT both of the NHL games were Jackets vs the Sens (and the Sens won, so uh... suck it CBJ!)
Edit: So, on the topic of the footballs... Browns v. Texans this weekend. I'm pretty concerned about JJ Watt... But I'm not sure how the Texans will play up here in Cleveland (we just got our first snows today) and so I'm hoping that the Brady Backup Bowl will turn out to go in Cleveland's favor.
I would avoid the PacNW simply because there really isn't any sort of sight seeing to do. Plus the weather is crappy and is one of the reasons why they have the highest suicide rate in the US. I lived up there for 8 years and wouldn't recommend putting it anywhere near the top of the list for someone to visit if they were coming to the states for the 1st time.
There's actually a TON to do/see, if you're so inclined. And really, while the weather is bad, it's not as bad as some people make out, I currently live here.
And about a million times better than ANYTHING you could offer from Ohio, or certain parts of Texas, California or even Chicago.
Edit: So, on the topic of the footballs... Browns v. Texans this weekend. I'm pretty concerned about JJ Watt... But I'm not sure how the Texans will play up here in Cleveland (we just got our first snows today) and so I'm hoping that the Brady Backup Bowl will turn out to go in Cleveland's favor.
IDK, Looking more at Philly in GB. Packers in the Tundra? Always tough.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: There's actually a TON to do/see, if you're so inclined. And really, while the weather is bad, it's not as bad as some people make out, I currently live here.
And about a million times better than ANYTHING you could offer from Ohio, or certain parts of Texas, California or even Chicago.
$ says otherwise.
Texas doesn't have ski resorts and still manages to more than triple the size of the state of Washington's revenue(by businesses, not tax). California's tourism is 13 times as large. Illinois is 3 times larger than Washington's. And as much as Ohio sucks, it's still tied with Washington state.
I'm not saying Washington state doesn't have anything to offer, but to suggest it has more to offer tourists is just plain wrong. Atlanta, GA generates more revenue in their downtown annually than the entire state of Washington does. And while it might be fun for people to see the 1st starbucks in Seattle, they would probably enjoy disneyland a little more.
Edit: So, on the topic of the footballs... Browns v. Texans this weekend. I'm pretty concerned about JJ Watt... But I'm not sure how the Texans will play up here in Cleveland (we just got our first snows today) and so I'm hoping that the Brady Backup Bowl will turn out to go in Cleveland's favor.
IDK, Looking more at Philly in GB. Packers in the Tundra? Always tough.
Packers Eagles will be a good game. We might actually see if Sanchez can play QB this week.
Texas doesn't have ski resorts and still manages to more than triple the size of the state of Washington's revenue(by businesses, not tax). California's tourism is 13 times as large. Illinois is 3 times larger than Washington's. And as much as Ohio sucks, it's still tied with Washington state.
I'm not saying Washington state doesn't have anything to offer, but to suggest it has more to offer tourists is just plain wrong. Atlanta, GA generates more revenue in their downtown annually than the entire state of Washington does. And while it might be fun for people to see the 1st starbucks in Seattle, they would probably enjoy disneyland a little more.
Lol, if Ohio is so awesome why have so many people gone into SPACE to get away from it? Why has the Steinbrenner family left, and basically never gone back??
Yeah, I'm being facetious here One thing we in Washington have that none of your other states have: legal weed. Sure you could go to Colorado for that too, but who really wants to see Peyton Manning, or be so high above sea level that there's no air to breathe in the first place
Ohio contains 2 of my favorite things. Cedar point and the pro football hall of fame. Cedar point is the best roller coaster park in the country and vies for world honors constantly. Outside of those 2 things it's pretty bleak.
Also ensis I now hate nfl network, they came up with a "breaking news" segment with a marshawn lynch update only to say he's playing like everyone expected him too. Got my hopes up so bad ;p
This week is gone be pretty crazy in the FFL. We have 8 teams within 2 games of each other. A lot is going to change over the next week or 2 most likely.
Chancetragedy wrote: This week is gone be pretty crazy in the FFL. We have 8 teams within 2 games of each other. A lot is going to change over the next week or 2 most likely.
Julius Thomas and Emanuel sanders out for the Broncos. Sanders got WRECKED hopefully not a concussion but probably is.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I love the Rams so much right now. If they can just ice the game here with a nice 6 minute drive that would be spectacular.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I love the Rams so much right now. If they can just ice the game here with a nice 6 minute drive that would be spectacular.
How in Elvis' Bunghole™ did my Rammies beat Manning's Broncos?
When you beat up mannings receivers he is garbage. It's not a new trend either. The Rams punched him in the mouth and he did what he always does, crumple to the ground like a baby. He is literally the worst "greatest" qb I've ever seen play.
Looks like the DEA is going to take away Seattle's real 12th man.
Nah, just because the Green is legal in the state of Washington, doesn't mean the players are allowed to flaunt the League's "Substance Abuse Policy" although they should be able to
Looks like the DEA is going to take away Seattle's real 12th man.
Nah, just because the Green is legal in the state of Washington, doesn't mean the players are allowed to flaunt the League's "Substance Abuse Policy" although they should be able to
This is about organized PED use, not pot. Given Pete Carrol's history and the ridiculous number of PED suspensions given to the Seahawks over the past few years, i'd be very concerned if I was a Seattle fan.
The commissioner is already under a lot of heat for Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson. Don't think for a second he wont be willing to make an example out of the 49ers and Seahawks if the DEA's investigation shows those teams are dirty.
This is about organized PED use, not pot. Given Pete Carrol's history and the ridiculous number of PED suspensions given to the Seahawks over the past few years, i'd be very concerned if I was a Seattle fan.
The commissioner is already under a lot of heat for Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson. Don't think for a second he wont be willing to make an example out of the 49ers and Seahawks if the DEA's investigation shows those teams are dirty.
Looks like the DEA is going to take away Seattle's real 12th man.
Nah, just because the Green is legal in the state of Washington, doesn't mean the players are allowed to flaunt the League's "Substance Abuse Policy" although they should be able to
This is about organized PED use, not pot. Given Pete Carrol's history and the ridiculous number of PED suspensions given to the Seahawks over the past few years, i'd be very concerned if I was a Seattle fan.
The commissioner is already under a lot of heat for Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson. Don't think for a second he wont be willing to make an example out of the 49ers and Seahawks if the DEA's investigation shows those teams are dirty.
I thought the DEA raids were due to the lawsuit by ex players about the misuse/dispensing of scheduled drugs. More in line with pain killers and things like that.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Woooo that was close ensis!!!!!!! Less than a point and a half!
I thought the DEA raids were due to the lawsuit by ex players about the misuse/dispensing of scheduled drugs. More in line with pain killers and things like that.
Adderall is a prescription drug. This isn't about handing out anti-inflammatory meds or strictly pain meds. These teams are practically handing out speed to players in the locker room.
helgrenze wrote: Have you seen the Jets lately? 2-8, with a crappy defense..... THEY could use the help stopping the Bills, or at least slowing them down.
The Jets are 7th in YPG, T5th in PPG. It's their offense that's the problem.
helgrenze wrote: Have you seen the Jets lately? 2-8, with a crappy defense..... THEY could use the help stopping the Bills, or at least slowing them down.
The Jets are 7th in YPG, T5th in PPG. It's their offense that's the problem.
Last time they, played Bills won 43-23. Orton went 10 of 17 for 238, 4 TDs with 12 first downs. (VS Jets QBs combined 20 of 46 for 158, 0 TDs and 22 firsts.)
No reason Bills don't win this one, the Jets have back slid since then, they are worse now than week 8.
And I have the Jets offense 7th worse in YPG at 315, and 4th worse on points, worst for passing yards per game. Their run game is 4th best, and snow would slow that down.
Their Def is allowing (T)5th worst PPG (with the Raiders). They have a good rush DEF but they are average against the pass.
Buffalo doesn't really have a running game, and showed they can pass on the Jets. Plus their DEF is in the top 10 for INT and FFum.
helgrenze wrote: Have you seen the Jets lately? 2-8, with a crappy defense..... THEY could use the help stopping the Bills, or at least slowing them down.
The Jets are 7th in YPG, T5th in PPG. It's their offense that's the problem.
Last time they, played Bills won 43-23. Orton went 10 of 17 for 238, 4 TDs with 12 first downs. (VS Jets QBs combined 20 of 46 for 158, 0 TDs and 22 firsts.)
No reason Bills don't win this one, the Jets have back slid since then, they are worse now than week 8.
And I have the Jets offense 7th worse in YPG at 315, and 4th worse on points, worst for passing yards per game. Their run game is 4th best, and snow would slow that down.
Their Def is allowing (T)5th worst PPG (with the Raiders). They have a good rush DEF but they are average against the pass.
Buffalo doesn't really have a running game, and showed they can pass on the Jets. Plus their DEF is in the top 10 for INT and FFum.
I stand corrected on the Jets' defensive PPG, my sheet got reversed on me. But their offense really is much more their issue than their defense, if you've watched them play. The Jets have issues in the secondary, but their front is solid. PPG can also rise when you keep punting the ball back to your opponent and when you turn the ball over a ton (they're -11).
Alpharius wrote: No worries - the Bills/Jets game is now taking place in Detroit!
On Monday as well.... WOOO another chance for a Monday come from behind in FFL.
OMG!!! Oakland has won ONE! So who gets the tie breaker for the #1 pick? Jax or Oak?
What a kick in the junk that is. Hey buffalo, your getting crapped on so let's send you to Detroit. That'll make it better...
Right now it looks like Buffalo is -2.5. I realize it's the Jets, but considering Bills players have been snowbound and unable to get to their facilities most of the week...the Bills seem primed to lay an egg in this one.
Yah, can't argue that. Although KC really threw everyone for a loop ;p
Automatically Appended Next Post: So byte you have a 1 on BUF/jets, and a 6 on NO/BAL? Interesting I got a 1/5 on those games. We have been "confidenting" pretty similar lately ;p
I do have hope for FFL though, Just need Ivory to log 4.3 points for another Monday win. He has only had 2 games scoring under that and racked 16.3 on Buffalo last time.
Agreed.... Alas, my other team, even with the addition of Eli didn't do so well (Eli is practically carrying the whole team in points, and I picked him up this week because Roethlisburger is on a bye week )
)
(135-131)
ing joke.
. He's not perfect, but he's getting the job done.
