Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Prestor Jon wrote: An important factor with the Eagles last year was cost. Wentz is on his rookie deal so he's an underpaid starting QB which allowed the Eagles to spend more money on Foles than a typical backup would be paid. If Wentz was making $16 million a year Foles would have been a luxury the Eagles couldn't afford unless he was willing to take below market value to be in Philly.
Good point! Wentz is currently #6 in "salary efficiency" among starting QBs (basically, how good of a deal he is) right behind Rodgers, Brady and Matt Ryan, according to this article. There are quite a few QBs still on their rookie contract high on the list:
Flacco is #27 of 32 on that list and the article even calls his recent production "borderline unstartable" compared to what he's being paid. I am sooooo ready for us to move on in 2019
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2018/09/07 23:21:39
This is partly true, but the on-field product had the same flaws before ratings started to drop. IMO the bigger issue is just people ditching cable and having to get their football through alternative methods: online streaming, catching the summary/highlights the next day, etc. It's the position I'm in. I'm not going to pay for cable just to get an occasional NFL game, especially when most of my team's games aren't even available in my area. I'm still watching as much football as my work hours permit, but because I'm streaming the game online I don't count towards those ratings numbers.
Not entirely true any more. . . Ratings people like Nielson now account for streaming in addition to OTA, satellite and cable.
Ork-en Man wrote: I doubt the ratings account for unofficial streams.
The way it was explained to me. . . I think that would honestly depend on the originator of the "unofficial" stream. So, various companies are using technological means to gauge viewership. . . to do so, they are using signals on parts of the broadcast waves (think about this, if you have an FM radio in your car, and it displays the song title and artist of the station you're listening to, this is an embedded signal that can be collected and gauge consumption). Even Television has something very similar within its broadcast signals. So, it stands to reason that someone recording and streaming an unofficial broadcast may be inadvertently broadcasting the original "information" signal.
Cleveland Browns essentially just won their version of the Super Bowl.
And Aaron Rodgers adds to his legend to close out the first Sunday of NFL.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/10 03:40:31
"Sometimes the only victory possible is to keep your opponent from winning." - The Emperor, from The Outcast Dead.
"Tell your gods we are coming for them, and that their realms will burn as ours did." -Thostos Bladestorm
Tomlin probably eat into his team Like never before in history. Perhaps the most humiliating "defeat" (A tie is basically a loss) the steelers have suffered in decades. The weather appeared pretty bad though - I am sure that had a lot to do with it.
Anyways - Proud of my Jags even though they played not so great. A win is a win. Tied for first in the league! Anyone who watched Jags giants? How the heck was that not a safety in the 1st quarter...RB tackled in endzone with the ball - while trying to advance the ball. Seems pretty textbook to me.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Since the Browns returned to the league, teams that were +5 in turnovers have been 132-4-1. The Browns were responsible for two of those losses and the tie.
Worst defeat (which this wasn't) that I can remember is @Texans in 2002, their inaugural season. Outgained them 422-47(!) and lost 24-6 on three Tommy Maddox turnovers returned for TDs. That's historic-type stuff. This game wasn't anything close to that...was just an 'any given day' game in week 1 in weather.
Myles Garrett was a one-man wrecking crew for the Browns though, and I think the rest of the league will be taking notice soon enough.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/10 16:16:20
Chute82 wrote: Browns 0-0-1 is their best start to a season since 2004
I'm most happy that it was against the Steelers.
"Sometimes the only victory possible is to keep your opponent from winning." - The Emperor, from The Outcast Dead.
"Tell your gods we are coming for them, and that their realms will burn as ours did." -Thostos Bladestorm
I'm somewhat annoyed that my team(SF) lost mainly due to a goal line fumble, and a few badly dropped passes. However I'm glad we were able to stay competitive against a strong defense
are you going to keep talking about it, or do something already?
soundwave591 wrote: I'm somewhat annoyed that my team(SF) lost mainly due to a goal line fumble, and a few badly dropped passes. However I'm glad we were able to stay competitive against a strong defense
Jimmy G came back down to reality pretty quickly here.
His pre and post porn star splits are pretty telling!
IMHO, not many teams looked very good yesterday. . . It looked to me more like a 5th preseason game, most highlights (for games I didn't watch) looked just as sloppy as the games I did watch.
And, I personally wouldn't blame bad weather for the Steelers' performance. . . They are a "bad weather team" due to their location, they should've done better.
In all of that, my Seahawks had some glimmers of good stuff popping up here and there, its just Denver had just enough glimmer to pull the game their way. (I wouldn't characterize either team as having played all that well)
I wouldn't blame the weather for most of the Steelers' TOs...but playing in steady rain does make an impact on the game. Again, I'm not too worried about it, and I expected a close game anyway. Vegas had the Browns as a 4 pt dog, not a 14 dog.
Teams barely play their starters now, and the rust is very noticeable every week 1. Fans shouldn't put much stock in week 1 results.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: IMHO, not many teams looked very good yesterday. . . It looked to me more like a 5th preseason game, most highlights (for games I didn't watch) looked just as sloppy as the games I did watch.
Agreed!
It really did feel like extended pre-season vs. regular season for most of the games.
I suspect we'll see an uptick by week 3 or 4 at the latest.
gorgon wrote: Since the Browns returned to the league, teams that were +5 in turnovers have been 132-4-1. The Browns were responsible for two of those losses and the tie.
Worst defeat (which this wasn't) that I can remember is @Texans in 2002, their inaugural season. Outgained them 422-47(!) and lost 24-6 on three Tommy Maddox turnovers returned for TDs. That's historic-type stuff. This game wasn't anything close to that...was just an 'any given day' game in week 1 in weather.
Myles Garrett was a one-man wrecking crew for the Browns though, and I think the rest of the league will be taking notice soon enough.
It's certainly not their worst defeat. Steelers have been outright mauled in the past. It is just humiliating to lose to the browns as the steelers - who are unanimously always in the top 10 and considered a super team. The browns are more akin to a bad college football team atm.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
soundwave591 wrote: I'm somewhat annoyed that my team(SF) lost mainly due to a goal line fumble, and a few badly dropped passes. However I'm glad we were able to stay competitive against a strong defense
Jimmy G came back down to reality pretty quickly here.
His pre and post porn star splits are pretty telling!
To be fair, his receivers gave him no help.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
gorgon wrote: Since the Browns returned to the league, teams that were +5 in turnovers have been 132-4-1. The Browns were responsible for two of those losses and the tie.
Worst defeat (which this wasn't) that I can remember is @Texans in 2002, their inaugural season. Outgained them 422-47(!) and lost 24-6 on three Tommy Maddox turnovers returned for TDs. That's historic-type stuff. This game wasn't anything close to that...was just an 'any given day' game in week 1 in weather.
Myles Garrett was a one-man wrecking crew for the Browns though, and I think the rest of the league will be taking notice soon enough.
It's certainly not their worst defeat. Steelers have been outright mauled in the past. It is just humiliating to lose to the browns as the steelers - who are unanimously always in the top 10 and considered a super team. The browns are more akin to a bad college football team atm.
It's just a matter of watching enough games and having some perspective. Even most Super Bowl winners have a real clunker or two of a game along the way. The Browns are still a team of professionals, and the unofficial motto of the NFL (any given Sunday) is what it is for a reason. That's what makes it a better game (IMO) than college football, where teams are grossly overmatched pretty regularly and point spreads get obscene.
I don't think the Browns are going to be good this year...Tyrod Taylor is a caretaker more than a playmaker, and I'm not sold on Hue Jackson at all. But they are collecting some talent there. And their defense was decent last year and should be better this year. If Baker Mayfield is for real and they continue to add in the draft and FA, they might surprise some people in a year or two.
Rams won pretty decisively at the end of the game last night.
Anyone notice the increase calls on Roughing the Passer? The one called on Aaron Donald was a joke as the dude was falling over a lineman AND into the QB while the ball was being held. So, via momentum he essentially crashed into the QB's legs/knees area. Anyone see that?
I didn't, but they tend to frown upon any contact with QB knees.
Apparently one point of emphasis this year is with d-lineman landing on QBs with their full weight and/or driving them into the ground. Think I saw it called twice during Steelers-Browns. That seems less frustrating to me than some of the head/helmet rules. I don't know how defensive players can completely avoid helmet-to-helmet contact when playing at NFL speeds and attempting to tackle a moving target that might also duck its head.
Apparently one point of emphasis this year is with d-lineman landing on QBs with their full weight and/or driving them into the ground. Think I saw it called twice during Steelers-Browns. That seems less frustrating to me than some of the head/helmet rules. I don't know how defensive players can completely avoid helmet-to-helmet contact when playing at NFL speeds and attempting to tackle a moving target that might also duck its head.
The "nice" thing with the point of emphasis this year is that avoiding helmet to helmet is also put on the offensive player's shoulders as well. . . I had issues with it in years past because the ball carrier was still allowed to just put his head down and use the helmet to try and clear his own way.
Apparently one point of emphasis this year is with d-lineman landing on QBs with their full weight and/or driving them into the ground. Think I saw it called twice during Steelers-Browns. That seems less frustrating to me than some of the head/helmet rules. I don't know how defensive players can completely avoid helmet-to-helmet contact when playing at NFL speeds and attempting to tackle a moving target that might also duck its head.
The "nice" thing with the point of emphasis this year is that avoiding helmet to helmet is also put on the offensive player's shoulders as well. . . I had issues with it in years past because the ball carrier was still allowed to just put his head down and use the helmet to try and clear his own way.
That is a good change but we know it's always going to be called on the defender because the offiensive player is the one that is going to get knocked out. Like the Church Gronkowski collision in last years playoffs which ultimately cost the jags their first super bowl. This should be a no foul play. Gronk is flying through the air head down...the only play Church has is to try to knock the ball out or make him drop the ball - it's literally impossible for helmet to helmet to not take place in this situation because technically the offensive player is initiating it by flying headfirst.
So his options are - don't hit him - or risk killing him. The games rules need to change here. The offensive player should be required to protect themselves and keep their head up. This will have to be a judgement call - which I hate - but the offensive player should be attempting to avoid contact just as much as the defender is required to.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/11 17:14:59
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Ya, Mike Mitchell of the Steelers had a damn good rant about how QBs put the opposing defenders in no win situations(from last year I believe):
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/11 17:41:06
"Sometimes the only victory possible is to keep your opponent from winning." - The Emperor, from The Outcast Dead.
"Tell your gods we are coming for them, and that their realms will burn as ours did." -Thostos Bladestorm
So his options are - don't hit him - or risk killing him. The games rules need to change here. The offensive player should be required to protect themselves and keep their head up. This will have to be a judgement call - which I hate - but the offensive player should be attempting to avoid contact just as much as the defender is required to.
That;s what I was saying. . . part of the rules emphasis this year, is that offensive players are supposed to be held just as accountable for "targeting" as defensive. Which, sadly means (most likely) that we'll NEVER see hard nosed runners like Mike Alstott or Christian Okoye, Jerome Bettis, those big bodied backs to would lower their head and just plow through defenses.
Of course, this line of discussion is why I have increasingly become a big fan of rugby over the past few years. . . See, Rugby is dealing with similar issues: concussion/injury problems among players. Where the NFL and football at large is all about "quick!!!! we NEED to change this rule yesterday!" rugby has been more moderated saying, "how can we improve player safety while still maintaining the ethos and traditions of our game?" And I think it really shows just even looking at scorelines. Teams like the Ravens are the oddball clubs right now. Low-scoring games/defensive struggles are seemingly bygone aspects of football. Now its all about putting as much up on the scoreboard as you can, and hope you get more than the other team. . . and that's quite simply basketball, and I hate it. Nearly all of the rules changes of the past what. . . 10-15 years now, have benefited offensive players. It is very much not a level playing field right now, and I think ratings will continue their downward trend until that changes.
nels1031 wrote: Ya, Mike Mitchell of the Steelers had a damn good rant about how QBs put the opposing defenders in no win situations(from last year I believe):
Yep - truth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In any case - Jags get their chance to set things straight from last year. This Sunday. Houston gave them a good game. I am only hoping the Jags can give them an even better one. It will also be interesting to see if they send Gronk up the middle this game. I am thinking they will not do that again.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/11 19:11:23
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
and the article even calls his recent production "borderline unstartable" compared to what he's being paid. I am sooooo ready for us to move on in 2019 
