So is Joe Flacco the Jack Morris of the NFL?

Yes.

If he wins another Super Bowl, he'll be elite like Eli!

I have nothing against Flacco at all, but I'm not going to cement my opinion of him mostly based on whether a Broncos defensive player soils himself on the key play at the end of last week's game.

I think Flacco is quite good, and still would even if he had lost last week.

I'm shocked that the NFL has somehow managed to arrange their "Harbaugh on Harbaugh" SB narrative. It's almost like they planned it that way.

I guess it helps that the Falcons could be relied upon to falter in the playoffs, so the evil NFL conspiracy didn't have as much work to do on the NFC side

I'm shocked that the NFL has somehow managed to arrange their "Harbaugh on Harbaugh" SB narrative. It's almost like they planned it that way.

It helps when the other teams don't score in the 2nd half.

There could have been a "Harbaugh Bowl" last year. Why wasn't there?

The NFL pulled off the Harbaugh Conspiracy by having both home teams shutout in the second half. They really need to work on making their devious schemes less obvious.

Hey, Andy? I think you're awesome and wise. But go #### yourself.

17th in DVOA and DYAR, his lowest since his rookie year. Never top 10 in any of them. He's a good average QB.

I'm sure that's a great consolation for Patriots fans after he outplayed Superman for the 3rd straight game.

I am a huge Patriots fan, love Belichick, love Brady, am very sad about the loss tonight...

...but the NFL today is pretty much this:

If you have a franchise quarterback who can throw with surgical precision, you're probably going to win a lot of games.

If you do not, the rules that protect the QB, disallow much contact with receivers, etc., make it tough to build a defense-first franchise.

I don't think Belichick is incapable of building an excellent defense. I think he is a pragmatist. You can build the best defense possible, you're still going to have trouble preventing most decent teams from scoring 20 a game.

Belichick also knows he has one of the five greatest QBs ever to play football, and he knows that a guy like Brady, in a league with rules like currently exist, rewards lots of players with good hands, quick feet, and the ability to think quick.

Welker. Hernandez. Gronk. Woodhead. Faulk, back in the day. Branch. Vereen is a really good fit for this offense. Edelman.

Belichick has identified the market inefficiency in the current NFL game, and is getting very good players for this offense without using high draft picks.

Mark Ingram was a 1st round pick, and a lot of Pats fans wanted them to take Ingram. They thought Ridley was just as good, perhaps better, for this offense - and they got him in the 3rd round. Hell, they got Vereen in the same round, too! Edelman was a 7th round pick. Woodhead, a FA pickup. Hernandez and Grok? 2nd round picks?

Finally, if I am going to ding Belichick for one thing, it is that he undervalues the utility of blue chip pass rushers. Chandler Jones could be very good next year, but the consistent lack of blue chip pass rushers is probably the single-biggest reason why the Pats have fallen a little short the last several years. A lack of a JJ Watt-type guy has left some questionable defensive backfields exposed...

Couldn't be happier about tonight's games. My Baltimore collegetown pride has re-emerged (and yeah, the fact that RGIII and the Skins got knocked out didn't hurt as far as rooting interests go), and you have to love a team that has been the overwhelming underdog for each of their last three games coming on strong like the Ravens have.

Also: brother vs. brother!

a team that has been the overwhelming underdog for each of their last three games coming on strong like the Ravens have.

Their last two games have been hugely impressive, but they were a large favorite against the Colts.

Their last two games have been hugely impressive, but they were a large favorite against the Colts.

Point taken.

Ravens were -6.5, which is large, but not as much as they were dogs the last two weeks.

Haven't had a chance to read the thread yet but: I felt Belichicken was too timid in on the Raven's side of the field. At least a couple of times he passed up a 4th down chance at the 40-ish for a punt. The end of the first half screwup hurt.

If you have a franchise quarterback who can throw with surgical precision, you're probably going to win a lot of games.

If you do not, the rules that protect the QB, disallow much contact with receivers, etc., make it tough to build a defense-first franchise.

Yeah, the rules no longer allow for this. You can do two things on defense to gain an edge:

1. Try to strip the ball. We've seen a vast increase in this over the past 5-10 years.

2. ... ... .. Well, maybe just the one.

Hmm, I seem to have forgotten the second one... Oh, rush the quarterback.

But you can't gain an edge on defense by hitting people anymore, on balance, given the way the quarterbacks and WRs are protected by the penalty calls.

Haven't had a chance to read the thread yet but: I felt Belichicken was too timid in on the Raven's side of the field. At least a couple of times he passed up a 4th down chance at the 40-ish for a punt. The end of the first half screwup hurt.

That was pretty dumb, but then the Ravens were as timid as a titmouse in their first half play selection on first down, so it wasn't just the Patriots who were making questionable decisions. The Ravens wound up winning the game for the simplest of reasons: Once they got warmed up, they dominated the line of scrimmage.

Is Talib that big of a player?

When you need somebody to fire their mother's gun at somebody he can't be beat.

neck stabber

But you can't gain an edge on defense by hitting people anymore, on balance, given the way the quarterbacks and WRs are protected by the penalty calls.

IMO most of those rules changes are for the better, but some of them suffer from what I'd call overly literal enforcement, like one of those face mask calls in the Niners game where one of the defenders' fingers seemed to just brush against the face mask and the QB's helmet barely moved an inch, and yet he still got flagged.

Cowher made a good point at the end of the postgame show when he said that the Ravens should be studying the tapes from their game against the Redskins, because Kaepernick is going to present them with a challenge that's far closer to what they faced in Griffin than what they were up against in Manning and Brady. And screw the seedings going into the postseason, this is going to be one hell of a Super Bowl.

Flacco was fine, but are we really giving him particular credit for this one (e.g. "Flacco is just a winner")? He played well and didn't turn the ball over. But 28 points doesn't usually beat the Patriots. There was also the Ravens defense, Belichick not going for it when he should, and two flukish turnovers from the Patriots.

As someone who hates sportswriter narrative, Harbaugh vs Harbaugh is going to drive me insane.

I'm hoping at the media session, somebody is a big enough troll to ask one of the Harbaugh's how long they're been brothers.

I'm hoping at the media session, somebody is a big enough troll to ask one of the Harbaugh's how long they're been brothers.

Or ask Kaepernick how long he's been a black quarterback.

As someone who hates sportswriter narrative, Harbaugh vs Harbaugh is going to drive me insane.

Yeah. As if we didn't already have enough to deal with with this Ray Lewis nonsense.

2809 is probably right on the money.

I am the only one I know that thinks the entire NFL rule book should be reviewable. Therefore I think it is near criminal the head to head shot to Ridley wasn't reviewed and the turnover reversed. The only way he fumbles is if he is knocked dead, which he was by a full speed direct shot to the head. This play, penalty, should have been reviewable and the Pats should have been awarded a 15 yard penalty and the ball.

This coming from a guy that thinks 90% of the "head to head" hits are BS and the NFL is leading the way in outlawing football from football.

Flacco was fine, but are we really giving him particular credit for this one (e.g. "Flacco is just a winner")? He played well and didn't turn the ball over. But 28 points doesn't usually beat the Patriots. There was also the Ravens defense, Belichick not going for it when he should, and two flukish turnovers from the Patriots.

Of course you're right about all of the above, but after Flacco's generally excellent performances in all but one playoff game he's ever been in, it gets a little tiresome to keep hearing about how weak he is, with the undertone that's his postseason performances are little more than a fluke. When he's played as well as he has against the consensus "best team in football" for the past three times he's faced them, I think he's shown us by now that he's more than an "average" quarterback. Going into today's game, his QB ratings for the past 3 postseasons (2 games each year against some of the top teams in the AFC) have been 90.0, 96.1 and 120.0, with 12 TDs and 2 interceptions. Doesn't mean he's an elite QB overall, but it does show what he's capable of when the chips are down.

Oh, now we should all talk about clutch performance!

So much of the coverage is silliness. Including the "play by play" broadcasting.

"Muhammad Ali sent John Harbaugh a text before the game."

I really don't care, Jim.

And the pre-game, halftime, and postgame shows are beyond execrable. Who is watching these?

Joe Flacco's playoff passer rating (coming into today) is 79.7.

Mark Sanchez's is 94.3.

That's an interesting take on things, #2809. Thanks.

As someone who hates sportswriter narrative, Harbaugh vs Harbaugh is going to drive me insane.

Yeah. As if we didn't already have enough to deal with with this Ray Lewis nonsense.

I think the last NFL championship game without some sort of schmaltzy "narrative" was probably the 1952 Lions-Browns game. It's one of those things that's more or less inevitable when you're straining to reach the sort of "casual fan" whose idea of a great football "story" is that Teo farce that's dominated the talk shows all week. The only way to deal with it and remain semi-sane is to mute the sound whenever the camera is focused on anything but the actual game on the field. Personally, I'm looking forward to seeing my DVD of today's games without a single second of commercials or Grammy Award singers.

So much of the coverage is silliness. Including the "play by play" broadcasting.

I'm glad that Ray Lewis has been largely invisible in the playoffs so that we have been spared non stop "Ray Lewis is willing his team to victory" BS.

I'm hoping at the media session, somebody is a big enough troll to ask one of the Harbaugh's how long they're been brothers.

Or, do you have the same Dad?

Would it be some sort of major Primer 'party foul' for me to admit that I'm actually something of a fan of Ray Lewis? I actually chanced to run into him (completely at random) when I was in college in Baltimore -- this would have been back in 2002 or so, just after the Ravens Superbowl victory, and he was an almost bizarrely humble and friendly guy. His past is obviously what it is, but it also seems to me to be pretty hard to deny that he's done everything humanly possible to turn his life around since then.

I'll tell you this: I find it far, far easier to forgive Ray Lewis his sins than Ben Roethlisberger.

Joe Flacco's playoff passer rating (coming into today) is 79.7.

Mark Sanchez's is 94.3.

In that case I'm sure that the Patriots might have been better off today with Sanchez taking the snaps.

Ray Lewis was unable to defend the option vs Nebraska in the 1995 Orange Bowl, he will probably be equally useless vs the zone read in the Super Bowl.

Would it be some sort of major Primer 'party foul' for me to admit that I'm actually something of a fan of Ray Lewis?

Not by me. The Ray Lewis hate here seems largely driven by Patriots fans and others who don't like the Ravens, and can be taken for what it's worth, though I do agree that the current narrative about him is overkill to the Nth degree, no pun intended.

In that case I'm sure that the Patriots might have been better off today with Sanchez taking the snaps.

Now you're just trolling.

I'm glad that Ray Lewis has been largely invisible in the playoffs

I don't have today's total, but Lewis had 13 tackles against the Colts and 17 against the Broncos. I guess you must have been taking an extended nacho break or something.

Joe Flacco's playoff passer rating (coming into today) is 79.7.

Mark Sanchez's is 94.3.

In that case I'm sure that the Patriots might have been better off today with Sanchez taking the snaps.

Now you're just trolling.

I love it, and here's a tip: Wait Till Next Year.

Raw tackle stats are worthless.

I love it, and here's a tip: Wait Till Next Year.

What does this even mean?

We'll do lunch someday and I'll explain it to you.

Sam H, you still out there? Wanna go stab some people in the neck?

not kidding.
Falcons Fan Stabbed In Throat outside stadium.

Looking forward to that AAFC reunion matchup in the Super Bowl. Maybe the Patriots and the Falcons can have a Pythagorean Bowl or something in someone's mother's basement.

The Colts also claim to be an AAFC team. They could trace their history back to the AAFC, sort of, but not through the team they are claiming to be descended from.

The Colts did that for similar reasons as the Browns. We had a team named the same, it fell apart/left but not the fans' fault, we got a new team of the same name as soon as we could. So let's remember the old team as part of our history, okay? Makes enough sense unless you move the new version of the team, which the Colts did. The Colts history is by far the more convoluted.

doesn't get much better than steagles dropping flyers analysis in the middle of an nfl conference championship chatter

in case noone knew this, i really don't at all care about the NFL and the NHL past my local rooting interests.


i'm a fan of basketball and i'm a fan of baseball, but when it comes to football and the NHL, i'm really only a fan of the eagles and the flyers. the labor strife and the wanton disregard for player safety in both sports has completely sapped my ability to just sit down and enjoy a football (or a hockey) game with no rooting interests.

also, i'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but this is the first time in the last 10 years that the AFC has not been represented by brady (2003, 2004, 2007, 2011), roethlisberger (2005, 2008, 2010), or manning (2006, 2010).

Looking forward to that AAFC reunion matchup in the Super Bowl. Maybe the Patriots and the Falcons can have a Pythagorean Bowl or something in someone's mother's basement.

The Colts also claim to be an AAFC team. They could trace their history back to the AAFC, sort of, but not through the team they are claiming to be descended from.

That Baltimore Colts team, featuring ugly green jerseys and no horseshoe on the helmet, was was born in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, moved to Baltimore in 1947, went to the NFL along with the Browns and the 49ers in 1950, but then was disbanded after only a year. The team that's now the Indy Colts originated as the Brooklyn Dodgers, and began life in Baltimore in 1953 via Boston, New York and Dallas.

BTW the very first AAFC game matched the two "Colts" franchises: The one that became the Ravens (the original Cleveland Browns) and the one described above (the Miami Seahawks). And the first game the 49ers ever played was against another short-lived team known as....the New York Yankees. Glad I could clear that up.

That Baltimore Colts team, featuring ugly green jerseys and no horseshoe on the helmet, was was born in 1946 as the Miami Seahawks, moved to Baltimore in 1947, went to the NFL along with the Browns and the 49ers in 1950, but then was disbanded after only a year. The team that's now the Indy Colts originated as the Brooklyn Dodgers, and began life in Baltimore in 1953 via Boston, New York and Dallas.

I know. But the Colts never claimed the Texans et al as part of their history. 1953 Colts were a new franchise, that happened to be stocked with the players from the 1952 Texans. It really was a different case than other franchise moves. I can't think of another case where the ownership collapsed and the move was accompanied by a new ownership group. Usually the owners stay the same in a move.

Then the Colts "adopted" the history of the other 1947-50 Colts franchise. At least the records are listed in their media guide with the other Colts teams. Not the 1946 Seahawks, just the Baltimore Colts teams. I suppose back in the day Baltimore Colts fans looked back on the 1947-50 Colts with some degree of fondness as their first team, and wanted to remember them. Point being the Colts' official history in 2013 makes less sense than what the Browns have done.

Would it be some sort of major Primer 'party foul' for me to admit that I'm actually something of a fan of Ray Lewis?

Despite being a Bostonian I'm not a Pats fan. I find Lewis reprehensible for the reasons most others do but I think you bring up some interesting points. It's a bit like the Lance Armstrong stuff. At what point do a bad act or acts invalidate lots of good work. Now in my opinion Lewis' involvement in a double homicide outweighs pretty much everything else but the fact remains Lewis, like so many others, is not a black and white answer.

The over the top coverage and sanctifying of the guy is pretty ridiculous particularly against the "won't people think of the children" B.S. of steroids but the media does that with people all the time. It's hardly unique to Lewis. At the end of the day its why I find myself watching virtually no sports coverage other than live events.

Jay, every time a city loses one franchise and gets another, especially within a very short time frame, things can get complicated. This isn't true only with the Browns/Ravens or Seahawks/Colts/Cowboys, but with the original Senators/Twins/expansion Senators/Rangers/Expos/Nationals, or the Pilots/Brewers/Mariners. Franchises have traceable historical lineages that are linked by ownership, rosters, etc., but cities have memories that have nothing to do with that sort of thing. Your point about the NFL taking over the Dallas Texans is somewhat like what happened to the Expos in their last years in Montreal, only in the NFL's case the league takeover was only for a few months. But in both cases there was roster continuity.

I can totally see the logic of a Cleveland fan wanting to connect the original Browns team to the current one, even though all those two had in common were the city and the uniforms. Same with Baltimore fans who see both Colts franchises and the Ravens as part of their memories. As a fan of both the Baltimore Colts and the Ravens, I do the same thing myself, and if I ever began to waver, the marching song would remind me that those two teams are joined at the hip in memory, if not in the continuity of the rosters.

The part about the record books, though, is kind of silly, especially when (for instance) you get a city like Washington with connections to six distinct teams. You can have one set of records for the city, and another set for the franchise(s), but there's absolutely no way ever to reconcile them in a way that's going to please everyone. As in so many other areas, we just have to admit that "logic" can sometimes steer us in more than one direction.