Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, September 02, 2018

OT - 2018 NFL thread

Quarantine procedure in effect.

The Raiders and Bears have finalized a deal that will send pass-rusher Khalil Mack and a second-round pick to Chicago in exchange for four draft picks—including two first-rounders—a source told ESPN’s Adam Schefter on Saturday.

The Bears gave up first-round picks in 2019 and 2020, a third-round pick in 2020 and a sixth-round pick in 2019, the source said. In addition to Mack, Chicago also gets a second-round pick in 2020 and a conditional fifth-round pick in 2020.

Lance Reddick! Lance him! Posted: September 02, 2018 at 08:07 AM | 562 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nfl, off-topic

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 6 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›
   101. McCoy Posted: December 01, 2018 at 06:22 PM (#5792954)
Flip
   102. there isn't anything to do in buffalo but 57i66135 Posted: December 01, 2018 at 07:45 PM (#5793018)
is it a good to remind people about this:
Oklahoma State has dismissed junior wide receiver Tyreek Hill from the team after he was arrested and accused of punching and choking his pregnant girlfriend.
The woman said she was eight weeks pregnant with Hill's child, and was concerned about the fetus because she was in pain after he punched her in the stomach. She said she also was punched in the face, had a busted lip and was choked by Hill.
whoever wrote this article clearly went to the jay mariotti school of sportswriting:
She said he had been physical with her before, but it had been mostly manhandling and had never been this bad.

Hill had a thrilling 92-yard punt return for a touchdown against Oklahoma to tie last Saturday's game
   103. AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther Posted: December 09, 2018 at 04:13 PM (#5795558)
Miami beat NE on a 69 yd hook and lateral. Clean too. Took a little bit of improvised running.
   104. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 09, 2018 at 04:54 PM (#5795564)
The Ravens keep finding ways to give away 4th quarter leads. Had the Chiefs by the nuts today, leading by 7 with the Chiefs facing 4th & 9 on their own 25 with under 2 minutes to go. And they still managed to lose in overtime. The only consolation was that the Trumpskins got slaughtered by the Giants.
   105. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 12, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5797093)
Somehow missed it until my son mentioned it to me yesterday, but the Seahawks over the 49ers back on Dec 2 was yet another scorigami, 43-16.

Monday Night's game was nearly the 60th 3-0 game in history, but after a flurry of activity in the last few minutes ended up being the 82nd 21-7 matchup.

82 seemed like a lot, so I played with the site a bit. Turns out it's less common than 7-0 or 21-14. Here's the top 10 most common scores in history....If you haven't already looked it up, see if you can stack rank:

13-10
17-10
16-13
17-14
24-14
20-17
24-17
23-20
24-21
27-24



   106. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: December 12, 2018 at 12:28 PM (#5797095)
From reading Easterbrook years ago (God help me), I recall 20-17 as being the most common score. Don't know (i) if that was correct then, or (ii) if it's correct now, but that's what I'm going with for #1.
   107. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 12, 2018 at 12:46 PM (#5797105)
From reading Easterbrook years ago
It takes years to *read* Easterbrook. What were you thinking?

Yes, 20-17 is #1 with a bullet, with 264 occurrences. Only one other score has more than 200 (actually, 205). Since the first quiz took all of five minutes, I'll take guesses for #2.
   108. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 12, 2018 at 01:06 PM (#5797114)
Everyone read Easterbrook at some point. His stuff seemed really interesting the first time you saw it; it's just that he literally and proudly wrote the exact same column every week for years.

The Ravens keep finding ways to give away 4th quarter leads. Had the Chiefs by the nuts today, leading by 7 with the Chiefs facing 4th & 9 on their own 25 with under 2 minutes to go. And they still managed to lose in overtime. The only consolation was that the Trumpskins got slaughtered by the Giants.


And yet Baltimore still will have no one to blame but themselves if they don't win their division.

Pittsburgh just puked all over themselves in Oakland and their next two games are New England and at New Orleans. They'll be 7-7-1 and riding a five game losing streak into Week 17 against Cincinnati; Baltimore's next two games are against Tampa and the Chargers, so they'll likely be 8-7 heading into a Week 17 home matchup against Cleveland.

I don't think Mike Tomlin will be fired if/when Pittsburgh misses the playoffs. But Pittsburgh isn't good anymore, and it's probably time to press the big red button there once Roethlisberger breaks down for good. (And Pittsburgh's awesome offensive line has gone a long way to mask the fact Roethlisberger is already on his last legs. His numbers look pretty good, but you have to consider he's the least pressured and least hit quarterback in the league, and he badly misses several throws a game.)

Had New England held on against Miami last week (and thus had an effective two game lead over Houston for the 2 seed and first round bye), they might have been inclined to lay down for Pittsburgh next week, far preferring to play the Steelers (who have a terrible pass rush) than the Ravens (who have an excellent pass rush) in January. Actually scratch that, because had New England won they would have still been in the hunt for the 1 seed, having beaten Kansas City. But suffice to say that if I were a New England fan, I would also be a Pittsburgh fan for the final two weeks; I wouldn't want any part of Baltimore in the playoffs.
   109. SoSH U at work Posted: December 12, 2018 at 01:30 PM (#5797127)
I'll take guesses for I'll take guesses for #2.


24-17?
   110. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 12, 2018 at 02:08 PM (#5797135)
The AFC will finally be interesting again, once Tomlin/Big Ben/Belichick/Brady are all gone. NE may very well enter a decade of relative irrelevancy - 8-8 could then win that division for the foreseeable future... Same with the Central, until the Browns become ascendant :D
   111. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 12, 2018 at 03:38 PM (#5797184)
24-17 is tied for #5, with 162 occurrences.
   112. McCoy Posted: December 12, 2018 at 05:25 PM (#5797235)
21-17
   113. McCoy Posted: December 12, 2018 at 05:26 PM (#5797236)
Oh shut. Never mind
   114. McCoy Posted: December 12, 2018 at 05:26 PM (#5797237)
24-14
   115. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 12, 2018 at 07:12 PM (#5797260)
The Ravens keep finding ways to give away 4th quarter leads. Had the Chiefs by the nuts today, leading by 7 with the Chiefs facing 4th & 9 on their own 25 with under 2 minutes to go. And they still managed to lose in overtime. The only consolation was that the Trumpskins got slaughtered by the Giants.

And yet Baltimore still will have no one to blame but themselves if they don't win their division.


No ####. They should be 10-3, not 7-6. Besides that latest fiasco, they somehow lost to the Browns, and missed a shot at OT vs the Saints when Justin Tucker missed his first extra point ever at the final gun. PFB-Ref. has them 5th in the NFL in their SRS rankings, they've outscored their opponents by 80 points (6th best in the NFL), they've got the best defense, and yet they're no better than 50-50 even to make the playoffs.

----------------------------------------------------------

Same with the Central, until the Browns become ascendant :D

You mean the North. There hasn't been a Central Division since 2001.
   116. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 12, 2018 at 07:22 PM (#5797263)
A propos of nothing in particular, here's something impressive: Benjamin Hoffman of the NY Times has been picking every NFL game against the spread from Week 1 on, and at this point he's now 116-87-4. Try to beat that sometime.
   117. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 12, 2018 at 08:00 PM (#5797273)
That's also an instructive example of the foolishness of hoping to actually make money betting against the spread: If he'd actually bet ten bucks on his pick in every game, he would be just barely ahead on the season. (It varies somewhat depending on the juice on each game, but you generally have to win 55% of your picks to come out ahead after accounting for the vigorish. Hoffman's at 57%.

As for the Ravens, it was widely expected that Joe Flacco's megacontract, signed after his mind-boggling Joe Montana impression in January of 2013, would be a boat anchor dragging down the franchise for years to come. It has if anything exceeded expectations in that regard. The Ravens made the playoffs five straight years, and six out of seven, before it was signed; since, only once in five years. They'll probably stumble into the postseason this year, but just barely.

I think I differ from just about every Ravens fan on this, but I still think John Harbaugh is a very good coach who will likely be successful in his next job. It's really difficult to be successful when you're devoting one-sixth of your salary cap to a below-average quarterback.
   118. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 13, 2018 at 08:16 AM (#5797325)
That's also an instructive example of the foolishness of hoping to actually make money betting against the spread: If he'd actually bet ten bucks on his pick in every game, he would be just barely ahead on the season. (It varies somewhat depending on the juice on each game, but you generally have to win 55% of your picks to come out ahead after accounting for the vigorish. Hoffman's at 57%.

Actually when you're putting up $110 to win $100, winning 53% of your bets will put you ahead, but I won't argue that it's smart to bet on the NFL, or on sports in general. Hoffman's been impressive this year, but how likely is he to repeat that percentage going forward? I also notice that this is the first year that the Times has published a running total of its prognosticator's record, which suggests it might not have been so good in previous years.

As for the Ravens, it was widely expected that Joe Flacco's megacontract, signed after his mind-boggling Joe Montana impression in January of 2013, would be a boat anchor dragging down the franchise for years to come. It has if anything exceeded expectations in that regard. The Ravens made the playoffs five straight years, and six out of seven, before it was signed; since, only once in five years. They'll probably stumble into the postseason this year, but just barely.

I think I differ from just about every Ravens fan on this, but I still think John Harbaugh is a very good coach who will likely be successful in his next job. It's really difficult to be successful when you're devoting one-sixth of your salary cap to a below-average quarterback.


I agree about Harbaugh, but WRT Flacco he's suffered from a lack of OL protection. OTOH that lack of protection hurts him more than it does Jackson because of the latter's mobility, and I'm certainly not saying that Flacco should be brought back now.
   119. McCoy Posted: December 13, 2018 at 09:24 AM (#5797336)
The 55% was the old shorthand back in the days before everybody was carrying a calculator but the real break even odds is something like 52.4% The NYT picker would have to shell out $20,700 to make profit of about $2,000. Despite all those hundreds of bets Hoffman was just 10 wrong picks away from losing money. I'm pretty sure that difference is well within the margin of luck.
   120. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 13, 2018 at 09:39 AM (#5797350)
A significant reason why Flacco lacks protection is that his own contract takes up cap space that might otherwise have been invested in two good linemen. The Ravens have invested heavily in their defense, neglecting their offensive line, and you see the results. Contrast with the Steelers, who now also have a huge chunk of cap space devoted to a quarterback who is no longer worth it. They have invested heavily in their offensive line, and it has paid off beautifully; they have probably the best offensive line in the NFL. Their defense, however, is weak and thin, and their special teams are a catastrophe.

Either way, though the teams look and play far differently, it works out to mediocrity.

Seattle, too, has struggled to be better than merely decent since giving a cap-squeezing megacontract to a quarterback who isn't quite good enough to merit one. Russell Wilson is better than Flacco has been, better than Roethlisberger is now, but he's not at a level that makes you happy to give him 15% of your cap space, and Seattle, like Baltimore, has struggled for several years with a good defense but a very bad offensive line. (Again, getting better results because Wilson is significantly better than Flacco, especially as concerns staying alive behind a bad o-line.)

The Giants, too; Eli wasn't worth a megacontract on the best day of his life, and the Giants haven't done a superb job of stocking the rest of the team with the rest of their cap space, and they've been in the playoffs twice in the past nine years. (It is amazing to me that a quarterback who reached the playoffs 6 times in 15 years, and who only managed to win a playoff game in 2 out of 15 years, is going to go into the Hall of Fame.)

And the hell of it is--I'm not saying those teams made a mistake giving those contracts to their quarterbacks! Finding even a competent NFL quarterback is really hard, and your team is stillborn without one (unless it enjoys the spectacular defense and extremely good injury luck of the 2015 Broncos or the 2000 Ravens). When a Flacco or an Eli or a Wilson comes along and wins you a championship, and he's still young besides, you pay the man. You can't just let him walk and try to explain to your season ticket holders why you have no quarterback.

But the teams that win championships, in modern football, almost invariably fall into one (or two) of three categories:

1) Teams with a Hall of Fame quarterback who is good enough to be worth 15% of the team's total cap space
2) Teams with a decent quarterback who is young and not yet making megabucks
3) Teams with an all-time great defense (which is even harder to come by, and more fleeting, even than a HOF quarterback)
   121. McCoy Posted: December 13, 2018 at 10:02 AM (#5797364)
Well, special teams being a catastrophe is not an issue of cap space.
   122. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 13, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5797380)
The 55% was the old shorthand back in the days before everybody was carrying a calculator but the real break even odds is something like 52.4% The NYT picker would have to shell out $20,700 to make profit of about $2,000. Despite all those hundreds of bets Hoffman was just 10 wrong picks away from losing money. I'm pretty sure that difference is well within the margin of luck.

BITD a good friend of mine was a bookie who put his 4 children through college and bought a large house in Silver Spring by being on the better end of many tens of thousands of those 11-to-10 bets. AFAIK he never stiffed a winner, but in the long run there were very few of those.
   123. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 13, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5797397)
McCoy, 24-14 is #8, with only 137 instances.

Apparently field goals are more prevalent than you'd think. Top five, with a tie:

20-17 (264 times)
27-24 (205)
17-14 (195)
23-20 (181)
24-17 (162)
13-10 (162)
   124. McCoy Posted: December 13, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5797401)
No reason to stiff a winner if you're doing it right and if you're doing it for years then most likely you're doing it right. I had some buddies that tried to start a bookie business. I think it lasted a season before they gave up. I recall they took a bath on the first Eagles game of the season as they didn't layoff enough of the bets. Living in Philly at the time so of course everyone picked the Eagles and I believe it was the Cowboys at Eagles game in 2000 in which the Eagles won 41 to 14. The Eagles were coming off a 5-11 record but had McNabb starting the season as the starter and the Cowboys were coming off a 8-8 record and it would be Aikman's last season.

It was either that game or the 20-17 OT loss to start the season in 2001 against the Rams. I'm sure the line was much more than 3 points for the Rams since they were the highest scoring team in the league back then. But I feel it was the 2000 season they started and ended their bookie business.
   125. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 18, 2018 at 06:01 PM (#5798864)
Playoff Clinching Scenarios can be pretty simple, but not this year, not for the Seahawks. After saying last week "win and you're in", the word is that they could, conceivably, beat the Chiefs and still miss out on a tiebreaker to the Redskins. It's pretty unlikely the Redskins win their next two, and the Hawks will clinch anyway if they beat Arizona (even if they lose to the Chiefs... conference record tiebreak), but it's pretty entertaining to look at this page. Here's #16 of the 25 different scenarios by which the Hawks clinch *this* weekend:
Case 16
Seahawks beats the Chiefs, and
Eagles loses to the Texans, and
Forty-Niners beats the Bears, and
Dolphins ties the Jaguars
I suspect it has something to do with opponent strength of schedule, but the idea of a Miami-Jacksonville tie clinching it for Seattle cracks me up.

   126. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 18, 2018 at 06:10 PM (#5798868)
The Patriots looked very bad Sunday. Pittsburgh tried and tried and tried to give that game away, but New England was just having none of it.

They might still eke out a first round bye, with a tiebreaker over Houston and two cupcakes (Buffalo and the Jets) to finish out 11-5. But man, I can't wait to see just what ultra-creative way Andy Reid's team invents to fail to reach the Super Bowl this year.

New England's path to the Super Bowl will likely be either
(as the 3 seed) [Baltimore/Pittsburgh/Indianapolis/Tennessee], then @Houston, then @[Kansas City/Chargers], or
(as the 2 seed) Houston, then [@][Kansas City/Chargers]

I dunno. My default assumption is still that the Patriots will of course win the AFC because they are coached by Belichick and the AFC sucks. But they have real issues, and they're looking at a pretty tricky road through the playoffs. I don't think I'd take them to win the AFC over the field at even money, the way I generally have been happy to in years past. Their defense is weak and their offense isn't as dominant as it's been.

(But the AFC is weak and it won't surprise me at all if New England wins it anyway. Whoever the AFC champion is, I will probably be loading up against them in the Super Bowl.)
   127. Greg K Posted: December 18, 2018 at 06:30 PM (#5798871)
(But the AFC is weak and it won't surprise me at all if New England wins it anyway. Whoever the AFC champion is, I will probably be loading up against them in the Super Bowl.)

Even if it's the Browns?
   128. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 18, 2018 at 07:13 PM (#5798875)
It's true: though DVOA gives them a 0.0% chance, the Browns have not yet been mathematically eliminated.
   129. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 18, 2018 at 07:39 PM (#5798881)
(But the AFC is weak and it won't surprise me at all if New England wins it anyway. Whoever the AFC champion is, I will probably be loading up against them in the Super Bowl.)

In truth I don't see any dominant team in either conference. All the previously thought of Super Teams---the Rams, Saints, Chiefs, and Patriots---have been looking a lot more vulnerable lately than they did a few weeks ago. It wouldn't really shock me if none of them wound up with the Lombardi trophy, and it wouldn't particularly surprise me if we wound up with the Chargers vs. the Bears.

Of course what would really be funny would be if we had Nick Foles leading the Eagles up against Lamar Jackson and the Ravens. And that might not even be that bad a game.
   130. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: December 18, 2018 at 08:32 PM (#5798899)
No ####. They should be 10-3, not 7-6. Besides that latest fiasco, they somehow lost to the Browns, and missed a shot at OT vs the Saints when Justin Tucker missed his first extra point ever at the final gun. PFB-Ref. has them 5th in the NFL in their SRS rankings, they've outscored their opponents by 80 points (6th best in the NFL), they've got the best defense, and yet they're no better than 50-50 even to make the playoffs.

Nah.
   131. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 18, 2018 at 10:21 PM (#5798926)
Nah.

Well, unless the Ravens manage to beat the Chargers in LA on Saturday night, they'll likely wind up 9-7, assuming they can beat the Browns in Baltimore.

The Chargers or the Chiefs will be the #5 seed, and the Ravens are now tied with Indy and the Titans at 8-6 for the second WC berth.

If they all finish at 9-7, then the Ravens are in via the tiebreakers against both of those other teams.

But the Colts are at home on Sunday against the Giants, and the Titans are hosting the Deadskins. That means that it's likely that they'll both enter the final week at 9-6 each, while the Ravens will probably be 8-7.

And since the Colts and the Titans play each other in that final week, that means that barring a tie, one of them is likely to wind up at 10-6.

Which means that the Ravens have to win in LA on Saturday to keep the inside track for the playoffs. They're certainly capable of doing it, but of the 3 remaining teams they've got by far the toughest road to January.

OTOH if the Ravens do manage to beat LA and the Browns, they can hold their own against any of the teams they're likely to play in the WC round. But by gifting those earlier games against the Browns, Saints and Chiefs they've probably blown their chance to make it that far.
   132. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 18, 2018 at 10:29 PM (#5798927)
None of that is responsive to the "Nah", Andy. Which was about the bolded part claiming that the Ravens have the best defense. Which is the Bears by hilariously comical margins.
   133. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 18, 2018 at 10:40 PM (#5798931)
I think he just meant the Ravens have allowed the fewest points. Of course DVOA and its ilk have the Bears far ahead, because the Bears don't get to play the Bengals and Browns twice each, but certainly we can comfortably observe the Ravens have a top 5 defense.

The AFC has two good teams. One is the Chargers and the other is coached by Andy Reid, so who the hell knows what is going to happen in January in that conference. The Patriots still have a not-quite-done-yet Belichick and Brady but little else; the Steelers have talent but continually beat themselves; the Ravens have a great defense that's going to be worn out by January thanks to its poor offense; the Texans are basically the same team as the Ravens (but 5% worse across the board, if you believe the advanced stats); the 6 seed, if it's not the Steelers or Ravens, is irrelevant.
   134. Howie Menckel Posted: December 18, 2018 at 10:56 PM (#5798933)
The 55% was the old shorthand back in the days before everybody was carrying a calculator but the real break even odds is something like 52.4%

yes.

the good news is the bad news: if you stick to straight-up point spread bets, your rough expected result on betting $10,000 for the year is losing $500. if that is your lone hobby of much expense, and you enjoy it, and you can even afford to lose $1,000 (about the worst likely outcome), then you are also giving yourself a chance to lose even less, break even, or - possibly in a good year - make a modest profit.

once you get into teaser and parlay land, you usually wind up in a world of hurt (with some exceptions, which is why people play the lottery, too).

there ARE a few people who make a living betting on the NFL, but it takes a ton of time, analysis, and discipline.
   135. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 19, 2018 at 08:38 AM (#5798961)
I think he just meant the Ravens have allowed the fewest points. Of course DVOA and its ilk have the Bears far ahead, because the Bears don't get to play the Bengals and Browns twice each, but certainly we can comfortably observe the Ravens have a top 5 defense.

To be fair, they actually haven't played the Browns for a second time yet! And they allowed 55 points in their 2 games against the Bengals.

They have however played the Bills, the Broncos, the Titans, the Raiders, the Bucs, and a decimated Falcons team that had given up by that point...

The Ravens D are also 2nd last in forced turnovers with 11 (24 fewer than the the Bears). Only the miserable 49ers have fewer.

Their offense is middle of the pack in average starting field position, despite being 2nd in the league on punt returns, and 3rd in special teams overall by Football Outsiders.
   136. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 19, 2018 at 10:34 AM (#5799002)
None of that is responsive to the "Nah", Andy. Which was about the bolded part claiming that the Ravens have the best defense. Which is the Bears by hilariously comical margins.

Okay, my bad. I thought you were addressing my conclusion that "and yet they're no better than 50-50 even to make the playoffs", since that was the final point of my comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the Ravens have a great defense that's going to be worn out by January thanks to its poor offense;

Maybe so, but since Jackson's taken over at QB and the Ravens have re-emphasized their running game, their possession time has been lopsidedly in their favor. If they can get an early lead, it's more likely that their opponents' defense is the one that's likely to be run down by the 4th quarter. In spite of their terrible turnover ratio, over the past 5 games their average possession time is close to 36 minutes, allowing for the OT in KC where they trailed by 6 minutes in that category.

   137. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 19, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5799014)
One is the Chargers and the other is coached by Andy Reid, so who the hell knows what is going to happen in January in that conference.


It's funny cuz it's true. Andy Reid is really an outstanding coach overall, but his primary weakness is game management, especially down the stretch. It's not a coincidence that the Chiefs' three losses this year have all been very narrow defeats by good teams. You get Andy Reid in a tight game in the last two minutes, and more likely than not, he's going to get pantsed.

But the Chiefs are good enough to win a couple of playoff games by 20 points, and leave The Misadventures of Andy Reid out of the equation completely.
   138. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 19, 2018 at 11:24 AM (#5799035)
As a football fanatic friend of mine has been putting it for years, Andy Reid may be the best coach that ever lived on Monday through Saturday. Sunday, though...
   139. McCoy Posted: December 19, 2018 at 11:30 AM (#5799041)
For all the grief that Andy Reid gets he seems to be able to build a good team. Generally not a great team but at least the Philly Reid liked to take risks in a game. I would say he is a slightly above average NFL coach.
   140. Nasty Nate Posted: December 19, 2018 at 11:40 AM (#5799048)
(But the AFC is weak and it won't surprise me at all if New England wins it anyway. Whoever the AFC champion is, I will probably be loading up against them in the Super Bowl.)
It's likely that the NFC team will be the favorite. But by the time it's the Super Bowl, there is a good chance that the AFC representative will be either a 15-3 team or a 14-5 team on a 5-game-or-longer winning streak.
   141. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 19, 2018 at 11:45 AM (#5799055)
For all the grief that Andy Reid gets he seems to be able to build a good team. Generally not a great team but at least the Philly Reid liked to take risks in a game. I would say he is a slightly above average NFL coach.


This way undersells him. He took over a Chiefs team that had gone 2-14, and has won 11, 9, 11, 12, 10 and 11 games with them. This after winning double figures with the Eagles eight times. He's a great coach, until the last two minutes of a game.
   142. McCoy Posted: December 19, 2018 at 01:54 PM (#5799124)
He's also the coach that took a successful Eagles team and spiked them into the ground. His team win totals basically put him at above average. An 11-5 record or a 10-6 record is a couple of bad bounces/calls away from 7-9, 8-8, and 9-7.
   143. AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther Posted: December 19, 2018 at 02:09 PM (#5799129)
Over Reid's entire NFL career (regular season only) he has a .612 record over 20 years. That's an average of 10 wins over 20 years. I leave it to others to give context on whether that is good or bad, considering his circumstances. What it most certainly is not is a couple bad calls or bounces from 7-9, 8-8 and 9-7. To average 9-7 you'd have to turn 20 wins into losses. To make it 7-9, it's 60. Statistically speaking these are extremely unlikely to occur.
   144. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 19, 2018 at 02:57 PM (#5799151)
He's also the coach that took a successful Eagles team and spiked them into the ground.


He's the coach who took over a terrible Eagles team, got them into the playoffs nine times in 11 years, then had one bad season at the end of his tenure after his son died of a heroin overdose in the preseason.
   145. SoSH U at work Posted: December 19, 2018 at 03:00 PM (#5799153)
An 11-5 record or a 10-6 record is a couple of bad bounces/calls away from 7-9, 8-8, and 9-7.


Also, from 13-3 or 12-4.

   146. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 19, 2018 at 03:05 PM (#5799157)
I mean, let's face it, just because you went 6-10, that doesn't mean you weren't a couple of bad DPI calls away from winning the Super Bowl.
   147. McCoy Posted: December 19, 2018 at 03:26 PM (#5799168)
The 2001 Chicago Bears are proof of that!
   148. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 19, 2018 at 03:33 PM (#5799175)
For context, Reid's career winning percentage is 31st all time, just behind Marty Schottenheimer (another good coach who developed a reputation for choking) and just ahead of Bill Walsh. His record of 71 games over .500 is tied for 8th with John Madden.
   149. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 19, 2018 at 03:52 PM (#5799186)
Of the 30 coaches with a better winning percentage than Andy Reid, 21 have coached more than 100 fewer games than Reid has. Of the remaining nine, three (George Halas, Curly Lambeau, and Paul Brown) were owner/coaches from before the Super Bowl era. (Technically, of course, Lambeau didn't own the Packers, but he certainly was Supreme Dictator For Life of all football operations there.)

That leaves Bill Belichick, Don Shula, Bill Cowher, Bud Grant, Joe Gibbs, and Marty Schottenheimer as the modern or semi-modern coaches with better records than Reid in anywhere near the career length.

It's interesting that all of them except Belichick and Gibbs had reputations as playoff underachievers. Winning the Super Bowl is hard. The first step to a reputation as a playoff underachiever is to coach a lot of teams that make the playoffs.
   150. Howie Menckel Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:00 PM (#5799191)
what's so vexing about Reid is that in spite of his coaching excellence, he failed in the exact way that successor Doug Pederson did not - knowing what you know, and knowing what you don't know.

I don't even think Pederson necessarily grasped exactly WHY you improve your team's odds of winning by often going for it on 4th and short near midfield. but he listened to smarter guys than him, and it paid off.

Reid, like most NFL coaches, doesn't appear to have the slightest grasp of the precious nature of second-half timeouts. he also doesn't understand how to time them. he could have won Super Bowls anyway, but it seems the football gods won't throw him a crumb until he learns where he is so deficient.

it's a shame, because Reid is an offensive genius/quarterback whisperer and a tremendous motivator of men.
   151. Red Voodooin Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:09 PM (#5799195)
what's so vexing about Reid is that in spite of his coaching excellence, he failed in the exact way that successor Doug Pederson did not - knowing what you know, and knowing what you don't know.


The counterargument here is that while Pederson may have rightly adopted some tactical moves that Reid never bothered to grasp that slightly improved his team's win expectancy, last year's Super Bowl run is looking more and more like a fluke even by NFL standards, and Pederson was extremely fortunate last year where Andy Reid has been very unlucky in the postseason, and only a small percentage of that bad luck is due to his suboptimal clock/down management.
   152. Howie Menckel Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:16 PM (#5799198)
there is some truth to that re Pederson, but the only bad luck for Reid that I can think of is when you lost multiple All-Pros in the same game in KC. and even there, he had a big early lead and was at home, and I think a different coach finds a way to survive that game (though presumably not the next one, with so many casualties).

Schottenheimer, a very similar coach in many ways, had iirc a 14-2 Chargers team intercept Tom Brady in the final minute or two to win a game - except that the idiot who got the INT fumbled on the superfluous return.

is that an unlucky coach? maybe. but man, karma seems to bite the same coaches over and over.
   153. Greg K Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:23 PM (#5799201)
It's weird to think of a team that lost its star QB on the eve of the playoffs as "lucky" but I think I know what you mean.

One way of thinking about Andy Reid: if the NFL held a draft every year to determine who the Head Coach of every team would be, where would Reid usually get taken over the past 10-15 years? I have no idea, but it would be easily in the top 10 every year, right?

   154. Howie Menckel Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:26 PM (#5799204)
for sure. I'd know as a GM I might get my heart broken, but I also know my team will be good.
   155. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:40 PM (#5799209)
If you threw all coaches who have worked in the 21st century into a draft and I get his whole career, I would probably take Andy Reid at #4. (I originally said #3, but then I remembered Joe Gibbs worked a few years in the 2000s.) He was and is a great coach. (I'm probably forgetting someone, this is off the top of my head; I have it 1. Belichick 2. Parcells 3. Gibbs 4. Reid.)

Schottenheimer and Cowher were great coaches, too (and Cowher was much less incorrigibly conservative on play calling and in-game decisions than his sensei, actually) but their active dislike for having a good quarterback on the team would make them obsolete in modern football.
   156. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:45 PM (#5799211)
It's interesting that all of them except Belichick and Gibbs had reputations as playoff underachievers. Winning the Super Bowl is hard.


Madden too, whom Sdeb points out has a very similar record to Reid. He lost five conference championship games before finally winning a Super Bowl.
   157. Howie Menckel Posted: December 19, 2018 at 04:45 PM (#5799212)
Parcells No. 2? I believe the number of playoff games his teams won after no longer having No. 1 working for him is zero.
   158. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 19, 2018 at 10:38 PM (#5799351)
If you threw all coaches who have worked in the 21st century into a draft and I get his whole career, I would probably take Andy Reid at #4. (I originally said #3, but then I remembered Joe Gibbs worked a few years in the 2000s.) He was and is a great coach. (I'm probably forgetting someone, this is off the top of my head; I have it 1. Belichick 2. Parcells 3. Gibbs 4. Reid.)

Glad you got Gibbs in there, even if his 21st century run was a dud. Has any other coach won 3 Super Bowls with 3 different quarterbacks, none of them close to being Hall of Famers and two of them essentially one year wonders?
   159. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 19, 2018 at 11:39 PM (#5799360)
I believe there are three coaches who have won Super Bowls with different quarterbacks:
Joe Gibbs (with Theismann, Williams, and Rypien)
Bill Parcells (with Simms and Hostetler)
George Seifert (with Montana and Young)

Conversely, four quarterbacks have won Super Bowls with different coaches:
Joe Montana (with Walsh and Seifert)
Troy Aikman (with Johnson and Switzer)
Ben Roethlisberger (with Cowher and Tomlin)
Peyton Manning (with Dungy and Kubiak)

Only Montana and Seifert appear on both lists, and Gibbs is the only coach who's won with three different quarterbacks. There's a kind of asterisk there, that Doug Williams and Jeff Hostetler were backups forced into the lineup by injury. But especially in Gibbs' case it doesn't matter much, because Theismann and Rypien were both full-season starters, and also because the Redskins' starter for most of 1987 was yet another different quarterback (Jay Schroeder).

On the quarterbacks list, Peyton Manning is the only one that's ever won Super Bowls with different teams, or nine years apart. The other three guys were still basically playing with the same team under the same system with a brand new coach who hadn't changed anything. (This comes with the giant caveat that Manning was finished in 2015, and was actually benched in favor of Brock Osweiler for a few weeks; 2015 Peyton Manning was probably the worst quarterback ever to win the Super Bowl besides 2000 Trent Dilfer and the guys who were backups. But nevertheless, it happened.)
   160. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 12:24 AM (#5799364)
also I believe Hostetler won the Super Bowl the year that Phil Simms was named the NFL MVP based on what he did before he got hurt. The Redskins never had anyone nearly that good at QB (since what, Sammy Baugh?).
   161. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 20, 2018 at 12:33 AM (#5799366)
Simms had one of his best years in 1990, but he wasn't even in the Pro Bowl, much less MVP. I'm sure some group somewhere must have voted Simms an MVP (Giants team MVP, maybe?) but the official MVP that year was Randall Cunningham.

Simms was named to the Pro Bowl (only his second) in his final season, 1993, in which he played all 16 games.

I think the claim that the Redskins never had anyone nearly as good as Phil Simms may be an oversell. Simms was good but not great, and Joe Theismann was pretty good.
   162. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 01:58 AM (#5799372)
to clarify: Simms led the NFL in QB rating through 14 games in 1990-91 and I think was in the hunt to be named MVP. but he missed the last two games due to injury, so no dice.

AP gave it to Joe Montana; Pro Football Writers picked Cunningham. Sporting News chose Jerry Rice. Newspaper Enterprise Association took Warren Moon.

so Simms would have had a shot, but he did not in fact win any of those.

I think Simms 1990 was better than any of the modern Redskins QBs, but yes for a career Theismann might be in the same zip code at least.
   163. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 20, 2018 at 02:56 AM (#5799374)
The Redskins never had anyone nearly that good at QB (since what, Sammy Baugh?).

Christian Adolph "Sonny" Jurgensen III says hi. From Canton.
   164. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 20, 2018 at 08:38 AM (#5799395)
I think Simms 1990 was better than any of the modern Redskins QBs, but yes for a career Theismann might be in the same zip code at least.


Theismann did actually win an MVP, and wasn't just "in the hunt" in some vaguely remembered year. Simms' career was a bit longer, because Theismann went to Canada for a few years early on and then was introduced to LT at the end of his career, but they were very similar players.
   165. Greg K Posted: December 20, 2018 at 08:42 AM (#5799396)
Speaking of Canada, Bo Levi Mitchell (the winning QB in the Grey Cup a few weeks back) has been working out with some NFL teams (Jaguars, Bills, Vikings, Broncos, Bears).

It took me a couple years of hearing his name to realize he wasn't named "Bovine" Mitchell.
   166. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 20, 2018 at 08:56 AM (#5799402)
also I believe Hostetler won the Super Bowl the year that Phil Simms was named the NFL MVP based on what he did before he got hurt. The Redskins never had anyone nearly that good at QB (since what, Sammy Baugh?).

With the possible exception of the few years that they had Y.A. Tittle, I doubt if the Giants have ever had a QB in their entire 90+ year history as good as either Baugh or Sonny Jurgensen.
   167. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 20, 2018 at 09:19 AM (#5799414)
With the possible exception of the few years that they had Y.A. Tittle, I doubt if the Giants have ever had a QB in their entire 90+ year history as good as either Baugh or Sonny Jurgensen.


They had Fran Tarkenton in his prime. The team still sucked, but Tarkenton joined a Giants team that had gone 1-12-1 and bumped them all the way up to .500 for a few years.
   168. there isn't anything to do in buffalo but 57i66135 Posted: December 20, 2018 at 09:22 AM (#5799418)
He's the coach who took over a terrible Eagles team, got them into the playoffs nine times in 11 years, then had one bad season at the end of his tenure after his son died of a heroin overdose in the preseason.
his kid died 5 years before he was fired. that may have been a factor, but it was the reason.

anyway, both reid and the eagles have been significantly better off without each other. and considering that reid recommended pederson, and the eagles hired him without seriously considering anyone else, i doubt there's still any bad blood.
I don't even think Pederson necessarily grasped exactly WHY you improve your team's odds of winning by often going for it on 4th and short near midfield. but he listened to smarter guys than him, and it paid off.
he is not a very deep thinker.
last year's Super Bowl run is looking more and more like a fluke even by NFL standards
if the eagles defense was able to get stops on 4th and 15, they'd literally be 10-4 right now.
   169. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5799425)
that is amazing. Jurgensen was only a regular QB in 9 seasons, with a 69-71-7 career record.

he did lead the league in yards passing 5 times (twice with the Eagles), TDs twice, and INT twice. by far his best team was the 1961 Eagles, who went 10-4 and lost the consolation round "Playoff Bowl" to Detroit, 38-10.

he went 11-2 as a part-time starter, 1971-74, with Billy Kilmer. he appeared in one playoff game - as a backup, in his final season of 1974. so his "11 years" with the Redskins consisted of 8 years worth of starts.

there must be a modern analog who will never see Canton without buying a ticket. he did have a good beer belly in those later years, which may have charmed the voters.

   170. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 20, 2018 at 09:48 AM (#5799429)
With the possible exception of the few years that they had Y.A. Tittle, I doubt if the Giants have ever had a QB in their entire 90+ year history as good as either Baugh or Sonny Jurgensen.

They had Fran Tarkenton in his prime. The team still sucked, but Tarkenton joined a Giants team that had gone 1-12-1 and bumped them all the way up to .500 for a few years.


Going by the PFB-Reference's Advanced Passing Rate+ metric, even Tarkenton's prime years with the Giants (age 27-31) weren't quite as good as Sonny's 11 years (age 30-40) with the Redskins. Of course Tarkenton made up for it with his scrambling, but Jurgensen was one of the best pure passers in NFL history.

   171. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 20, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5799433)
Want to check out Joe Namath's career stats and W-L record, Howie?
   172. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 10:03 AM (#5799439)
wow. I guess you are hoping that most posters are too young to be aware of the impact that Joe Namath had on the history of the NFL - which is 1000x Jurgensen's. but let's bury our head in the stats so we can pump up your boy.

Namath had an eerily similar 62-63-4 W-L record, but hint, there's a bit more to his case.
   173. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 20, 2018 at 10:12 AM (#5799444)
Namath and Eli Manning have a lot of similarities.
   174. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 10:18 AM (#5799449)
well, both are bipeds - though Namath only has partly qualified for the last 50 years
   175. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 20, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5799469)
Sonny Jurgensen was one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history. Jurgensen didn't just lead the league in yardage five times, he set the all-time record for passing yards twice. Brad Oremland, who knows a lot more about this stuff than I do (and I suspect a lot more than anyone else here does), ranks him 11th all-time. His essay on Jurgensen is very much worth reading.
   176. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 20, 2018 at 11:39 AM (#5799504)
that is amazing. Jurgensen was only a regular QB in 9 seasons, with a 69-71-7 career record.

he did lead the league in yards passing 5 times (twice with the Eagles), TDs twice, and INT twice. by far his best team was the 1961 Eagles, who went 10-4 and lost the consolation round "Playoff Bowl" to Detroit, 38-10.

he went 11-2 as a part-time starter, 1971-74, with Billy Kilmer. he appeared in one playoff game - as a backup, in his final season of 1974. so his "11 years" with the Redskins consisted of 8 years worth of starts.

there must be a modern analog who will never see Canton without buying a ticket. he did have a good beer belly in those later years, which may have charmed the voters.

Want to check out Joe Namath's career stats and W-L record, Howie?

wow. I guess you are hoping that most posters are too young to be aware of the impact that Joe Namath had on the history of the NFL - which is 1000x Jurgensen's. but let's bury our head in the stats so we can pump up your boy.

Namath had an eerily similar 62-63-4 W-L record, but hint, there's a bit more to his case.


I'll never argue against Namath's HoF election, for all the obvious reasons. His impact on the game was enormous. But you began this by relying solely on statistics to make a case against Jurgensen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sonny Jurgensen was one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history. Jurgensen didn't just lead the league in yardage five times, he set the all-time record for passing yards twice. Brad Oremland, who knows a lot more about this stuff than I do (and I suspect a lot more than anyone else here does), ranks him 11th all-time. His essay on Jurgensen is very much worth reading.

Thanks for the reminder, Tom. Howie might want to read that essay, but if he's afraid of clicking on links, here are the first three paragraphs:
Vince Lombardi coached Hall of Fame quarterback Bart Starr, and together they won five NFL Championships. Lombardi coached against Johnny Unitas every year. Yet it was of Sonny Jurgensen that Lombardi said, “He may be the best the league has ever seen. He is the best I have seen.”

People were in awe of Sonny Jurgensen. Jurgensen was universally hailed as the best pure passer of his generation. In the literature of the sport, that is the phrase you find, over and over again: “best pure passer.” No one really talks about “greatest pure passer” any more, and if they did, I suppose most people would look for someone more recent, maybe Peyton Manning or Dan Marino. But the brilliance of Jurgensen’s arm is cited everywhere.

Jurgensen led the NFL in passing yards five times, twice setting the single-season record. He led in touchdowns twice, and his career passer rating (82.62) is the highest of his generation, fractions ahead of the AFL’s Len Dawson (82.58), but comfortably in front of Starr (80.5), Fran Tarkenton (80.4), Unitas (78.2), Bob Griese (77.1), Joe Namath (65.5), and George Blanda (60.6). Jurgensen (1957-74) and Unitas (1956-73) were contemporaries, but Jurgensen’s TD/INT differential (+66) is substantially better than Johnny U’s (+37). Unitas himself said, “If I threw as much as Jurgensen, my arm would fall off. And if I could throw as well, my head would swell up too big to get into a helmet.”
   177. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 20, 2018 at 02:06 PM (#5799586)
Most overrated athlete of all time: Joe Namath or Derek Jeter? Discuss.
   178. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2018 at 02:13 PM (#5799589)
I'm going to wager that Fancy is under 50.

There can't be 10 names on a history of the NFL list more important than Namath.
   179. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 20, 2018 at 05:05 PM (#5799659)
There can't be 10 names on a history of the NFL list more important than Namath.

I'd never argue against his historic importance,** but that's got little or nothing to do with his standing among history's quarterbacks. Oremland rates Namath at #22, which probably seems high to most casual fans, but he makes a pretty good case for putting him above others like Jim Kelly. But he wasn't as good as Jurgensen.

** But even that's largely a product of the AFL-NFL war, the huge (for the time) Namath contract, and the fact that the Jets were a young team loaded with other stars. If he'd signed with the St. Louis Cardinals instead of the Jets, he'd be but a colorful footnote in football history. "Gateway Arch Joe" doesn't quite have the ring of "Broadway Joe", and guaranteeing a win in the Runnerup Bowl wouldn't have gotten him that much attention.

   180. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: December 20, 2018 at 05:15 PM (#5799664)
"Effective today, Josh Gordon has been returned to the Reserve/Commissioner Suspended list indefinitely for violating the terms of his conditional reinstatement under the Policy and Program for Substances of Abuse," the league said in a statement.
ESPN
   181. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: December 22, 2018 at 11:25 PM (#5800195)
Baltimore beating the Chargers means that if Houston beats Philadelphia tomorrow, that will pretty much settle the AFC field. First round matchups will very likely be Steelers at Patriots and Chargers at Ravens. (That's making the reasonably safe assumptions that New England will beat Buffalo at home, Pittsburgh will lose in New Orleans, and Kansas City will win either in Seattle tomorrow or at home against Oakland next week.)

If Houston loses to Philly, however, they will probably drop to the 3 seed (New England holds the tiebreaker) and host Pittsburgh in the first round. I think Houston just might have a chance of sneaking into the Super Bowl from the 2 seed (if J.J. Watt manages to stay on the field, that is), but I don't love their matchup with Pittsburgh, even at home. Pittsburgh -> at New England -> at KC is a near-impossible gauntlet for them to run.
   182. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 12:39 AM (#5800205)
Once again the Ravens kept their opponent's offense off the field. I haven't seen the final number, but in the first half the Ravens' offense was out there for over 20 minutes total, and for the game as a whole it had to be over 35 minutes. This game wasn't as close as the 22-10 score would seem to indicate.

Of course the other great thing about Saturdays games is that, Big Surprise, the Titans stuck a fork in the Deadskins, leaving them having to beat the Eagles next week while the Cowboys lose to the Bucs and the Giants. Another great year for the worst owner in pro sports history, or at least the most loathsome one.
   183. Tony S Posted: December 23, 2018 at 10:10 AM (#5800221)
Another great year for the worst owner in pro sports history, or at least the most loathsome one.


I can't tell if you mean Jerry Jones or Daniel Snyder. Both of them are definitely candidates, though I'd still vote for Jeffrey Loria.
   184. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 10:44 AM (#5800223)
Jones can't be the worst, since his teams regularly beat the worst owner's team, often twice a year. But I can see where a Canadian or a Floridian would disagree that Snyder is worse than Loria.
   185. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 23, 2018 at 11:03 AM (#5800225)
Another great year for the worst owner in pro sports history, or at least the most loathsome one.

I can't tell if you mean Jerry Jones or Daniel Snyder. Both of them are definitely candidates, though I'd still vote for Jeffrey Loria.

I didn't read the original statement that closely, and thought this was only talking about NFL owners... which made the response that much more funny.

Still, if we are talking about actual history, I ton't think any of Snider, Jones, or Loria will match up to some of the scumbags of yesteryear. Just as greedy, just as incompetent, but even worse human beings. There is no shortage of guys who were outright racist and or sexist for example. The Marge Schott's and Tom Yawkey's. Donald Sterling. Et cetera.

That's before even getting into guys that cost cities their teams, or guys like Comiskey who was so bad that he caused the single biggest scandal in MLB history...
   186. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 12:03 PM (#5800235)
Let's just say that Dan Snyder is in the discussion, especially when you take historical context into consideration, plus his relatively young age. Yawkey was a racist, but he was but 1 of 15 owners who tried to kibosh Rickey's signing of Jackie Robinson. Sterling's racism was even worse given the present day context, but he's what, about 100 years old?

Comiskey was a dirtball, but he was far from the only owner in the reserve clause era who way underpaid his stars.

Snyder has completely ruined what was once one of the great NFL franchises. He's gorged fans and alienated his fan base. His teams suck. He contributes money to Donald Trump** and Koch Industries is among his main radio sponsors. He's constantly at war with the neighbors of his $49 million house. He's working with Trump and congressional Republicans in trying to ram through a sweetheart deal that'll enable him to return to the RFK site, after he's made FedEx into the worst stadium for fans in the NFL.*** He's loathsome as a human being, and other than having an ability to make multi-millions for himself, he's the least successful owner in the NFL, and possibly in all of the 3 major American team sports. Is there a single redeeming virtue to him that I've forgotten, other than a few PR-driven charities that he's established along the lines that every team owner has done?

** And like Trump, his appointees seem to be chosen on the basis of cronyism rather than demonstrated talent. See Allen, Bruce.

*** Fortunately word of this has gotten out, and his chances of succeeding here are fast dwindling, in spite of the fact that he's got DC's Mayor Bowser in his hip pocket.
   187. puck Posted: December 23, 2018 at 12:28 PM (#5800240)
Factoring in the stuff from outside the sports team complicates matters a lot.

If we're sticking to the teams themselves, Ted Stepien (Cavs owner) has to be up there. He has a rule named after him.
   188. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 12:40 PM (#5800241)
Stepien was indeed a disaster, but aside from one brief and spectacular playoff series against the Bullets in 1976, the Cavs were never much before he came along. If you want to talk about a Snyder counterpart in the NBA, you might want to focus more on the no-names who owned the Celtics at a time when they went from best to worst in the late 70's, acquiring one overpriced clubhouse cancer after another and leaving them in tatters until Larry Bird came along.

But even those owners only screwed things up for about two years, while Snyder's just wrapping up 20 years worth of disasters with no end in sight. And worse, he's only 54, hasn't learned a thing, refuses to sell the team, and probably has a good 20 or 30 years more to live.
   189. Greg K Posted: December 23, 2018 at 01:44 PM (#5800248)
I recall people disliking that Art Modell guy when I was a kid.
   190. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 02:12 PM (#5800249)
Modell was a reasonably good owner for more than a few years before turning into the ogre he became. Robert Irsay was much worse.
   191. Quaker Posted: December 23, 2018 at 02:13 PM (#5800250)
Oh look. Yet another thread where Andy interjects his politics.
   192. SoSH U at work Posted: December 23, 2018 at 02:41 PM (#5800253)
But even those owners only screwed things up for about two years, while Snyder's just wrapping up 20 years worth of disasters with no end in sight


So he's halfway to being as bad as Dollar Bill Wirtz, a man booed during his moment of silence.

Snyder is indeed rancid, but you've always been troubled by a bit of proximity bias on this particular question.

   193. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 02:42 PM (#5800254)
Oh look. Yet another thread where Andy interjects his politics.

CMAR. I notice you didn't join in when we were discussing nothing but football.
   194. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 02:48 PM (#5800255)
But even those owners only screwed things up for about two years, while Snyder's just wrapping up 20 years worth of disasters with no end in sight

So he's halfway to being as bad as Dollar Bill Wirtz, a man booed during his moment of silence.

Snyder is indeed rancid, but you've always been troubled by a bit of proximity bias on this particular question.


I can't completely deny that, since during the JKC era I was a diehard Redskins fan who's been disgusted by the way Snyder's ruined the team's quality and reputation. But it's more like I don't know anything about hockey.

But having refreshed my memory, what about this? Let's have Snyder and Wirtz's ghost go one-on-one, with Wirtz equipped with a Chicago tommy gun and Snyder armed with a subpoena.
   195. Greg K Posted: December 23, 2018 at 03:47 PM (#5800258)
If we're including hockey, Harold Ballard has to be considered one the top owners.

Took a franchise in perhaps the biggest hockey town in the world, and ruined it. Alienated his best players, convicted of fraud for diverting team funds, let the Maple Leaf Gardens fall apart...perhaps I should just summarize some of the highlights from his wikipedia page:

As a guest on Barbara Frum's CBC Radio program As It Happens in March 1979, Ballard, speaking over the telephone, implied that "Women are best in one position – on their backs." When Frum attempted to ask him questions, he told her to keep quiet and stop interrupting him, and eventually hung up.

In August 1979, to make room for private boxes, he had Foster Hewitt's historic broadcast gondola dumped into an incinerator. This was in spite of protests from the Hockey Hall of Fame, who wished to acquire it.

Angered by (or maybe jealous of) Conn Smythe's success with the club and his inability to bring a Stanley Cup to Toronto under his sole ownership, Ballard sold all of the Cup banners that had hung from the rafters of Maple Leafs Gardens for years.


I don't think it's substantiated that he turned a blind eye to the sexual abuse scandals at the Gardens in the 1970s and 1980s, but I know he's been accused of that too.
   196. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 04:43 PM (#5800266)
Maybe hockey just deserves a separate category on a planet of its own.
   197. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 23, 2018 at 07:55 PM (#5800280)
Meanwhile we've just had 3 ####### surreal games in a row,** all on national TV. The league may be a moral abomination, but it can sure as hell put on a great show on the field.

** Baltimore-Chargers, Philly-Houston and New Orleans-Pittsburgh
   198. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: December 23, 2018 at 07:59 PM (#5800281)
Backup Nick Foles set 2 franchise records today for the Eagles:
471 yards passing
4 400 yard passing games in his career, besting Sonny Jurgenson's 3 400 yard games.

When Foles is good, he is very, very good. He seems to have some magic juju that rubs off on his teammates.
   199. Howie Menckel Posted: December 23, 2018 at 08:05 PM (#5800283)
Patriots clinched division
Cowboys clinched division
Texans clinched playoffs
Saints clinched No. 1 seed

Chiefs would clinch division, bye, No. 1 seed with W

Steelers need to beat the Bengals next week AND have the Ravens lose at home to the hapless Browns. wait, the Browns aren't hapless anymore. Baker Mayfield will be so stoked, he may need a sedative next week. what a great pick that was

Titans-Colts winner next week - if there is one - makes playoffs
   200. puck Posted: December 23, 2018 at 09:03 PM (#5800288)
Flip
Page 2 of 6 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
cardsfanboy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 1-17-2019
(6 - 10:46am, Jan 17)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogThibs' Hall of Fame Tracker
(1106 - 10:44am, Jan 17)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogThe Best Ever to Never Claim an MVP Award
(32 - 10:38am, Jan 17)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogTexas Rangers Hall of Fame pitcher John Wetteland arrested on child sex abuse charge
(83 - 10:31am, Jan 17)
Last: Greg Pope

NewsblogTwo Mets ranked on MLB Network's Top 10 Second Basemen list
(19 - 10:14am, Jan 17)
Last: formerly dp

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(4943 - 10:14am, Jan 17)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogMLB Trade Rumors: Phillies Frontrunners To Sign Bryce Harper
(23 - 10:00am, Jan 17)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogBob Costas Says He’s Done With NBC After 40 Years
(22 - 9:41am, Jan 17)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(408 - 9:26am, Jan 17)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogSource: White Sox offer to Manny Machado 'was for less than 8 years'
(5 - 8:56am, Jan 17)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (January 2019)
(221 - 8:46am, Jan 17)
Last: manchestermets

NewsblogHow Giants' park dimensions, location can help free agent recruiting
(1 - 7:39am, Jan 17)
Last: bfan

NewsblogPirates great Steve Blass to stop broadcasting after 2019 season
(16 - 12:18am, Jan 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogWhite Sox announce minor league managers and staffs for 2019 season
(2 - 11:08pm, Jan 16)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1912 Discussion
(13 - 10:32pm, Jan 16)
Last: progrockfan

Page rendered in 0.6908 seconds
46 querie(s) executed