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

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

OT: NFL/NHL thread

i estimate that absolutely noone gives a damn about the NHL, so by folding that thread into this one, we won’t distract from what this thread is really about: boner pills, blood doping (is it low t?), and…jesus christ did mike vick just throw another ####### interception?

STEAGLES is all out of bubblegum Posted: November 06, 2012 at 12:03 AM | 7937 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nfl, nhl

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 42 of 80 pages ‹ First  < 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 >  Last ›
   4101. Kurt Posted: September 30, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4554786)
Giants are now 21-23 in their last 44 regular season games since mid-2010. Seems like that would be hard to do with a Hall of Fame coach and Hall of Fame quarterback in his prime. I can't imagine it has come close to happening before, has it?


Marino/Shula went 29-31 from 1986-1989, Marino's age 25-28 seasons. Needless to say, Marino occupies a higher tier of the HOF than Manning would.
   4102. Crosseyed and Painless Posted: September 30, 2013 at 02:33 PM (#4554795)
James is, but I was referring to positions--there's no one position on a basketball team that's nearly as important as quarterback to a football team. A superstar is more valuable in basketball than in football or any other sport; in the NBA having one of the four or five best players in the league on your team is practically a prerequisite if you want to win a championship. In the NFL having one of the five best quarterbacks in the league on your team is not quite so vital but pretty close. It's rare for a non-top-five quarterback to win a Super Bowl and usually requires an extremely dominant defense to be involved. (This has been the case since about 1990.)


Yeah, sorry, I did get your point about position but thought the Manning vs. James thing was a good question.

On second thought, I think the answer is clearly James. Most valuable NBA player is more valuable than most valuable quarterback.

Maybe a good poll would be how far down the line you'd have to get to get to the first NFL player. Is Dwyane Wade more valuable to the Heat than Manning to the Broncos? Or Dwight Howard to the Rockets? Or Durant to the Thunder?

Someone should do the trade value list thing and combine the 3 (4?) major North American sports. Where would Trout be if you could factor in his cheap-o salary?
   4103. Kurt Posted: September 30, 2013 at 03:05 PM (#4554839)
On second thought, I think the answer is clearly James. Most valuable NBA player is more valuable than most valuable quarterback.


I think it's pretty close depending on how low you set replacement level. Replacing James with a nobody had about the same effect on the Cavs as replacing Manning with a nobody had on the Colts.
   4104. smileyy Posted: September 30, 2013 at 03:49 PM (#4554899)
Houston fans were so angry after the [OT loss to Seattle] and Schaub's third pick-six in three weeks that they went to the parking lot and started burning Schaub's jersey. That's the third-most destructive act you can execute as a Houston sports fan after denouncing advanced basketball statistics and attending an Astros game, so these are pretty brutal times.


I figured no place would appreciate that line more than this site.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9747321/bill-barnwell-denver-broncos-week-4
   4105. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: September 30, 2013 at 05:30 PM (#4555002)
DA Baracus: Again, you're talking about the 1990s. In recent years such average-at-best goalies as Nikolai Khabibulin, Jean-Sebastien Giguere, Chris Osgood (2008 edition, well below average), Mark-Andre Fleury and Antti Niemi have won Cups.

Put another way, there is very little correlation since the lockout between having a Vezina-nominated goaltender and winning the Cup. And that's even before making any adjustment for the fact that often goaltenders get credit (and thus, Vezina nominations) for what team defense does.
   4106. Howie Menckel Posted: September 30, 2013 at 06:03 PM (#4555029)
"Marino/Shula went 29-31 from 1986-1989, Marino's age 25-28 seasons. Needless to say, Marino occupies a higher tier of the HOF than Manning would."

thanks! great catch on that one. more amazing because yeah, Marino was obviously MVP quality for much of his career. what a dismal personnel effort overall by the Dolphins back then

re LeBron vs QB, the Knicks didn't do much of a job getting help for Ewing, but they got to the title round twice and always got into the 2nd rd at least. Marino, also with not a lot of help, couldn't do that. the stud NBA guy is even more critical, imo
   4107. smileyy Posted: September 30, 2013 at 06:08 PM (#4555035)
arino was obviously MVP quality for much of his career. what a dismal personnel effort overall by the Dolphins back then


I'm reminded of Barry Sanders as well. Though running backs are different than quarterbacks. Is the NFL a "talent rises to the top" league now? Or is it the other way around -- "Its only talent if it rises to the top"?
   4108. zenbitz Posted: September 30, 2013 at 06:08 PM (#4555036)
Hey take the hockey talk to the ... . Ahem. Carry on.

   4109. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: September 30, 2013 at 06:11 PM (#4555038)
Put another way, there is very little correlation since the lockout between having a Vezina-nominated goaltender and winning the Cup. And that's even before making any adjustment for the fact that often goaltenders get credit (and thus, Vezina nominations) for what team defense does.


Fair enough. I think the term you are looking for is "since the salary was implemented." Man I hate the salary cap.
   4110. zenbitz Posted: September 30, 2013 at 06:24 PM (#4555051)
Regarding Welker, apparently what Brady & Belichek make, The Elder Manning can use.

But I think defense matters in the NFL too, and QBs don't play defense. The best QBs ever have all been shut down by dominant pass rushing.
   4111. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 09:01 AM (#4555603)
I wonder if this has ever occurred before. The second worst team in the league is the biggest favorite of the week.
   4112. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 09:38 AM (#4555629)
I wonder if this has ever occurred before. The second worst team in the league is the biggest favorite of the week.


Come again? The Steelers are only -4.5 against OPEN DATE.
   4113. Kurt Posted: October 01, 2013 at 09:55 AM (#4555642)
I wonder if this has ever occurred before. The second worst team in the league is the biggest favorite of the week.


Jacksonville goes from St. Louis to Denver next week. If the Rams are favored by 11, what's the spread going to be for Denver? 30?
   4114. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:05 AM (#4555659)
If Jacksonville gets blown out by St. Louis and Denver blows out Dallas, the spread will be in the mid-20s, about 26.5 or so.

Probably one or both of those things won't happen, though, and it'll be your standard Denver -22.
   4115. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:07 AM (#4555662)
I can never remember a spread greater than about 24. It could be 30 however. Suffice it to say I already have my survivor pick for that week. This week is tough however. 4 of the 8 shittiest teams are playing each other.
   4116. Kurt Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:11 AM (#4555669)
Honestly, Seattle/Jacksonville two weeks ago is the first spread I ever remember hitting 20 (though I don't pay that much attention to point spreads).

Denver will definitely be higher than 22. Seattle was 20 or 21, and they don't have a quarterback going for a record.
   4117. Conor Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:24 AM (#4555685)
I believe in 07 the Pats were getting lines of 25 or 26.
   4118. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:26 AM (#4555687)
Submitted for consideration: Is Blaine Gabbert the worst quarterback in NFL history, at least among guys that have held a job for three years?
   4119. zempf Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:41 AM (#4555708)
We have vegas lines back to 1978 on pro-football-reference; here's all lines >= 20:
                                    
Tm          Date  Opp  Result Spread
SEA   2013-09-22  JAX W 45-17  -20.0
NWE   2011-12-04  IND W 31-24  -20.5
NWE   2007-12-23  MIA  W 28-7  -22.5
NWE   2007-12-16  NYJ W 20-10  -20.5
NWE   2007-11-25  PHI W 31-28  -24.5
SFO   1993-12-05  CIN  W 21-8  -24.0
SFO   1992-12-19  TAM W 21-14  -20.0
BUF   1991-10-13  IND  W 42-6  -20.0
DAL   1987-10-11  PHI W 41-22  -21.5
SFO   1987-10-11  ATL W 25-17  -23.0


Only 2 of the 10 managed to cover, though they all won straight up.
   4120. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:42 AM (#4555710)
I think bad quarterbacks used to get a lot more chances than they do now, actually. In addition to veterans who kept popping up in different places to inevitably disappoint, Dave Brown was halfway through his fourth season as the Giants starter before Jim Fassel finally decided he'd seen enough. It seemed like Bobby Hebert was on the Saints forever. And what about the quite recent David Carr?
   4121. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:44 AM (#4555713)
I certainly didn't think Bobby Hebert was a bad quaterback.
   4122. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:46 AM (#4555715)
Certainly not as bad as Blaine Gabbert. But whoever the Blaine Gabbert of 1995 was, didn't come quickly to mind.

Actually Browning Nagle did come to mind. But he lost his job after a year.
   4123. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:49 AM (#4555719)
I just glanced at the football reference page for Hebert. 59% completion rate with an interception rate that seemed fairly high. Not sure what the normals were for his era.
   4124. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:49 AM (#4555720)
It was David Klingler, but he lost his job in 1995. And I think Gabbert is well worse than Carr or Brown was. Alex Smith would have been a competitor had Jim Harbaugh not magically turned him into an average-or-better quarterback overnight.

edit: Better answer: The Blaine Gabbert of the mid-1990s was Heath Shuler. But even Shuler didn't get to play as long as Gabbert has, and wasn't quite as bad as Gabbert's been relative to league norms.

There's no describing how godawful the Jaguars' front office is. Even the Raiders--the RAIDERS!!--knew well enough to cut bait on a hideous quarterback mistake when they saw one.
   4125. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:53 AM (#4555725)
As little as I know about football; I can watch Gabbert throw the ball and see that he doesn't have NFL ability. How long did Bobby Douglas start?
   4126. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:55 AM (#4555730)
JaMarcus Russell made 25 starts for the Raiders. Gabbert has now made 26. You're right!

Although Gabbert started from Day 1, whereas Russell was on the bench his rookie year. So actually they didn't give up on him until late November of his third season. (the dawn of the Bruce Gradkowski era)
   4127. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4555731)
True, but Gabbert has never not been the starter; he just does the Jaguars a favor by getting injured on a regular basis.
   4128. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 01, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4555732)
I miss the days when there were veteran quarterbacks who would go from town to town being anointed as the starter and doing a marginally good job for a temporary period. Where have you gone, Gus Frerotte? Were Jon Kitna and Jeff Garcia the last of the breed?
   4129. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 01, 2013 at 11:04 AM (#4555743)
That really feels like it should be Kyle Orton's true destiny.
   4130. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4555775)
Who is going to QB for Tennessee now?
   4131. Ron J2 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 12:13 PM (#4555818)
#4125 Douglas first got the starting job in week 5 of the 1969 season. Held it for 7 weeks (team went 1-6). Mostly a backup for the next year and a half.

He got the starting job in week 6 of the 1971 after Kent Nix went 13-38 for 148 yards and 3 interceptions. He held the job for 7 weeks and won in 3 of his first 4 starts. Then came 3 straight losses where they scored a single field goal in each game. He was a combined 21-78 with 229 yards and 9 interceptions (102 yards rushing) and lost the job for the final 2 weeks of the season.

He started all 14 games in 1972 and the first 13 of 1973 (injured early in a 40-7 loss to the Lions) and would only start sporadically after that.
   4132. stanmvp48 Posted: October 01, 2013 at 12:28 PM (#4555831)
Thanks.
   4133. Fancy Pants Handle doesn't need no water Posted: October 01, 2013 at 01:07 PM (#4555861)
Only 2 of the 10 managed to cover, though they all won straight up.

Both covers on exactly 20. 0 for 7 on anything above 20.
   4134. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 02, 2013 at 11:10 AM (#4557061)
The officer asked Kosar if he had any problems that would prevent him from standing on one leg or walking and turning, and Kosar said he's had several surgeries on his knees and ankles because his line couldn't block, the report said.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/bernie-kosar-tells-police-t-sobriety-test-because-133910166--nfl.html


Lol.
   4135. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 11:20 AM (#4557069)
Still stuck for a survivor pick. What a week. Rams are arguably the most logical, but that is hard to do. Green Bay, Atlanta, San Diego?
   4136. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 02, 2013 at 11:23 AM (#4557076)
#4135 I took a look and thought something would jump out at me, but nothing did. I'd probably go with either Peyton over the Cowboys or the Falcons over the Jets.
   4137. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: October 02, 2013 at 11:33 AM (#4557082)
Friends don't let friends have anything to do with any game involving the Cowboys in survival pools.

San Fran over Houston looks like the best bet this week to me, but it's up to you if you want to use San Fran up this early. I also think Green Bay at home over Detroit is fairly safe.
   4138. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 11:55 AM (#4557111)
Not sure Houston should be written off. Maybe they are a team which always find a way to lose, but they did outgain Seattle by 200 yards and Seattle beat SF fairly convincingly. GB off a bye is tempting.
   4139. Kurt Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:12 PM (#4557128)
Denver has about 13 games on their schedule that are more appealing than this one for survivor. I went with Atlanta; the Rams worry me.
   4140. zenbitz Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:42 PM (#4557157)
I would NOT take Sf over the texans; both teams have under performed but sf has trouble with any team with 2 live CBS who can stop the run. My survivor pick would probably be Carolina over Arizona.
   4141. zenbitz Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:48 PM (#4557164)
I guess its suicide to take a road team, so I would take green bay or Atlanta. Probably green bay over the lions.
   4142. Every Inge Counts Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:50 PM (#4557169)
Detroit is ending all of their losing streaks this season, first Washington, next will be Green Bay.


Also we have seen 3 trades already this season, which I am going to assume is some of the most ever at this time.

Trent Richardson to the Colts

Levi Brown to the Steelers

and Eugene Monroe to the Ravens

With draft picks having some good value it makes sense to sell when you can.
   4143. Doris from Rego Park Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:50 PM (#4557170)
I try (but don't always follow this) to avoid average (or worse) teams on the road, and crappy teams in general. The latter means I'm not comfortable with St. Louis. Yes, Jacksonville is historically terrible and is playing on the road, but...St. Louis? I don't want to rely on them. Atlanta is at home against a bad team and although their week 7 game against Tampa is very appealing, I think I'm going with them.

Just in case you're not familiar - survivor grid
   4144. Doris from Rego Park Posted: October 02, 2013 at 12:54 PM (#4557178)
I also like vegas watch's thoughts (I believe he was a poster here at one time). Doesn't care for Atlanta this week given their popularity, which I expected.
   4145. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 01:00 PM (#4557183)
I do look at survivor grid and vegas watch. Leaning to Atlanta but hate to sweat out the extra day. Did that last week with NO. Not a good reason I realize.
   4146. Kurt Posted: October 02, 2013 at 01:09 PM (#4557199)
"Too popular" is a terrible reason to not pick a team in survivor. Make the best pick every time and let everyone else get too cute.
   4147. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 01:13 PM (#4557202)
Just an aside. I noticed GB kicked a field goal from the one yard line in the second quarter against Cincy and ended up losing by four.
   4148. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: October 02, 2013 at 03:26 PM (#4557369)
"Too popular" is a terrible reason to not pick a team in survivor. Make the best pick every time and let everyone else get too cute.


This. First couple survivors I was ever in, I tried to play it cute and would always wash out. Took that for me to figure out, "It's not about getting to the end; it's about not being stupid right now." One particular pool (NCAA tourney) I was in was mine to command for a few years after that.
   4149. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 03:53 PM (#4557405)
I think I am going with Atlanta. 1-3 but last minute losses to better teams.
   4150. jmurph Posted: October 02, 2013 at 03:58 PM (#4557414)
I think I am going with Atlanta. 1-3 but last minute losses to better teams.


They actually outplayed New England for big stretches, too. I think they're probably much better than that record indicates. If I'm remembering right, they had 4 trips inside of the 10 that produced a total of 3 points.
   4151. stanmvp48 Posted: October 02, 2013 at 04:02 PM (#4557420)
Lost to Miami at the very end. Played NO fairly even and got stopped on about the three. Still it is more an anti Jets play than anything else.
   4152. Every Inge Counts Posted: October 03, 2013 at 10:28 PM (#4559170)
Both the Browns QB (Hoyer) and Bills QB (Manuel) go down with knee injuries it looks like while running outside the pocket.

Though Manuel might not be a bad knee injury...
   4153. Doris from Rego Park Posted: October 03, 2013 at 10:34 PM (#4559177)
went with cleveland because i hate myself. also going against both jackson AND spiller in fantasy. disaster.
   4154. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 03, 2013 at 10:44 PM (#4559190)
Does anyone want to comment on both of tonight's starting quarterbacks getting blown up on running plays? Both are out of the game.
   4155. stanmvp48 Posted: October 04, 2013 at 10:17 AM (#4559454)
Buffalo looks like an absolute "go against" for the rest of the season. I would say they have a significant QB problem.
   4156. Crosseyed and Painless Posted: October 04, 2013 at 11:14 AM (#4559518)
This. First couple survivors I was ever in, I tried to play it cute and would always wash out. Took that for me to figure out, "It's not about getting to the end; it's about not being stupid right now." One particular pool (NCAA tourney) I was in was mine to command for a few years after that.


I think it depends on the size of the pool. If you are in an NCAA pool with 20 people, you might not want to "get cute." If you are in with 200, you might want to do something that might decrease your chance of being in top 10, but increases your chance of winning it outright if just one or two things break right.

I'd think it's be the same with Survivor. Say Team X is 80% to win and most of the pool picked them; Team Y is 75% to win and far fewer people picked them. You'd rather be on Team Y. If the pool is pretty small, you can probably take the safer team and just wait it out. If the pool is bigger I think you want to go with something that separates you from the pack.

I think. I'm sure I've explained my thought process poorly here.
   4157. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: October 04, 2013 at 11:46 AM (#4559553)
Nono, I get exactly what you're saying, and it makes a lot of sense.
   4158. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: October 05, 2013 at 01:49 PM (#4560815)
Oh dear, Jacksonville's mascot Jaxson de Ville, made an unfortunate bet with Indianapolis' mascot prior to last week's game: Loser had to suck it up and take paintballs in spandex and a Speedo.

Ouch.
   4159. stanmvp48 Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4562762)
I saw a Denver Jacksonville line of 27 1/2.

Incidentally, I have already seen three articles suggesting that yesterday's game confirmed that Romo is a choker.
   4160. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:14 AM (#4562766)
Incidentally, I have already seen three articles suggesting that yesterday's game confirmed that Romo is a choker.


He made a bad throw there at the end (not being physically in position to make a throw yet trying to force one in anyway) which does seem to happen to him a hell of a lot.
   4161. jmurph Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:15 AM (#4562767)
I don't have time to think about Romo's performance because I'm still trying to figure out who the better Manning is. It's so difficult!
   4162. STEAGLES is all out of bubblegum Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:36 AM (#4562804)
and chip kelly is now philadelphia's longest tenured head coach.
   4163. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: October 07, 2013 at 03:07 PM (#4563178)
He made a bad throw there at the end (not being physically in position to make a throw yet trying to force one in anyway) which does seem to happen to him a hell of a lot.


I don't disagree, but normally -- yes, even against Manning -- when you rack up that many points, you expect to win. I didn't see the game; were both defenses that bad, or both offenses just that good, or...?
   4164. stanmvp48 Posted: October 07, 2013 at 03:51 PM (#4563265)
I have to point out that Manning also made a bad throw-off of his back foot and resulting in an interception. I am not particularly a Romo fan; but 35 good passes and one bad one should not get you raked over the coals for the bad one.

   4165. zenbitz Posted: October 07, 2013 at 10:40 PM (#4564355)
@4145 ruh-roh.
   4166. Kurt Posted: October 07, 2013 at 10:44 PM (#4564372)
I have Atlanta too. Turns out they might stink.
   4167. KronicFatigue Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:16 PM (#4564450)
Can someone explain the rule when it comes to catches out of bounds. I know they've made it harder for a catch to be a catch, and you have to maintain possession while you go down. But what happens if you get two feet in bounds, catch the balls (in the sense that your hands are firmly on the ball) and as you go out of bounds and your legs and backside are hitting the ground (again, out of bounds) the ball moves around in your hands. Is that still a catch?
   4168. KronicFatigue Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:20 PM (#4564459)
"Too popular" is a terrible reason to not pick a team in survivor. Make the best pick every time and let everyone else get too cute.


I don't think this is true. If 40% are expected to pick Atlanta today, and they have a 69% chance of winning the game, and you can go with a team that only 12% are picking, but has a 68% chance winning, you go with the latter. To win a big survivor pool you need to get lucky with a big blow to a lot of entries. This is how you get it.

EDIT: Whoops, I missed [4156] saying the same thing
   4169. Der-K: Hipster doofus Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:35 PM (#4564493)
arrrgh
   4170. stanmvp48 Posted: October 07, 2013 at 11:41 PM (#4564513)
Arrrgh indeed. How you can let a team go down the field like that. It was as though they were defending a touchdown not a field goal.
   4171. Kurt Posted: October 08, 2013 at 07:22 AM (#4564878)
I don't think this is true. If 40% are expected to pick Atlanta today, and they have a 69% chance of winning the game, and you can go with a team that only 12% are picking, but has a 68% chance winning, you go with the latter. To win a big survivor pool you need to get lucky with a big blow to a lot of entries. This is how you get it.


I'm skeptical that these sorts of numbers exist, or even if they do that they're very useful. A 12/68 team would be something like Denver against Dallas, where Denver has maybe 1 or 2 games all season that are worse to use them for than at Dallas.

Now, as it turns out there were very good reasons not to take Atlanta, but popularity was not one of them. And the most popular pick this week was St. Louis, which was a terrific pick. Now they're out of the way.
   4172. Kurt Posted: October 08, 2013 at 07:34 AM (#4564880)
On the other hand if "too popular" is shorthand for "this team isn't as good as people think they are"* then I'm completely on board.

* or "the opponent isn't as bad as as everyone thinks". Probably a factor with the Jets - every year the Jets win 6-8 games and people treat them like they just went negative-four and twenty. There are worse reasons to take a game than "too popular", such as "the opponent's head coach is a loudmouth and was in a foot fetish video a few years ago", or "butt fumble".
   4173. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 08, 2013 at 10:22 AM (#4564979)
In response to Donte Hitner, ex-Indians/Phillies/Cardinals outfielder "Hard Hittin'" Mark Whiten has retroactively changed his name to "Hard Hiten".
   4174. zenbitz Posted: October 08, 2013 at 02:42 PM (#4565341)
As for Whitner, I saw both of the plays he was penalized and fined for. I don't have a problem with the 15 yrd. penalty - in real time they looked bad, and officials aren't perfect and are erroring on the side of caution. I don't get why he was fined for clearly NOT hitting guys in the head on purpose or with his head at all.
   4175. Fancy Pants Handle doesn't need no water Posted: October 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM (#4567861)
On the other hand if "too popular" is shorthand for "this team isn't as good as people think they are"* then I'm completely on board.

"Too popular" is shorthand for "that team has games they are just as likely to win later down the road, when 80% of the pool have blown that team already".
   4176. STEAGLES is all out of bubblegum Posted: October 18, 2013 at 06:59 PM (#4577278)
so, with the eagles being out of the teddy bridgewater sweepstakes (on account of having more wins than jacksonville has in the last 2 calendar years), i don't think it matters a whole lot where they wind up drafting. it matters, of course, but i don't think it's worth considering until after the eagles are mathematically eliminated from playoff contention.

looking forward, i think CB has to be their #1 target. i've already penciled in jairus byrd to the starting secondary considering his pending free agency and oregon connections, so with that hole filled, whether the eagles pick 8 or 18 or 28 or they'll have a shot at purifoy or roberson or ekpre-olomu or roby (and FWIW, right now i have all 4 of those guys equal or ahead of milliner last year) and the secondary is set by the end of the 1st round. byrd/wolff/chung/anderson at safety and purifoy/fletcher/williams/boykin/poyer at corner.

then on day 2, you can continue to build the front 7 and the Oline. (and FWIW there, i don't have any of the OLBs ahead of dion jordan. i really, really wanted dion jordan).
   4177. The District Attorney Posted: October 18, 2013 at 10:06 PM (#4577563)
Joe Posnanski did a best quarterbacks ever survey (10 points for 1st place, 9 for 2nd, etc.)

Results:

1. Joe Montana (10,004 points) - more 1st place votes than Manning and Brady combined
2. Peyton Manning (8,971)
3. Tom Brady (5,025)
4. Johnny Unitas (4,411) - 8% of 1st place votes
5. John Elway (4,405)
6. Dan Marino (3,293)
7. Otto Graham (1,559)
8. Brett Favre (1,475)
9. Steve Young (1,042)
10. Sammy Baugh (547)
11. Terry Bradshaw
12. Bart Starr
13. Roger Staubach
   4178. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 20, 2013 at 04:35 PM (#4578996)
Re the Patriots-Jets, that was the most retarded end to a football game I've ever seen. To call that bizarre foul on NE on the Jets' failed 56 yard field goal try in OT, and to have it cost 15 yards, is the kind of thing that eliminates a sense of fairness in the outcome.
   4179. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 20, 2013 at 04:41 PM (#4578999)
At least the ref threw the flag well before the results of the kick were known.
He was staring right at the line and the moment the Patriot put his hands on his teammate and started pushing, he threw that flag.
   4180. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 20, 2013 at 04:44 PM (#4579003)
15 yards for that? Why?
   4181. VoodooR Posted: October 20, 2013 at 04:49 PM (#4579007)
Seriously. I hear that this is the first time that particular penalty has EVER been called. I guess I'm willing to grant that there might be some function to a rule prohibiting a player from pushing a teammate, but why in the holy hell would that be a 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty, automatic first down?
   4182. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 20, 2013 at 05:04 PM (#4579021)
It's the same sort of call that the "leaping" penalty was under.
My guess is that player safety is the issue, and that pushing another teammate from behind might be dangerous.
Maybe it's a way to ensure you properly outlaw the flying wedge formation (or variations of it).
   4183. Howie Menckel Posted: October 20, 2013 at 05:10 PM (#4579025)
"Re the Patriots-Jets, that was the most retarded end to a football game I've ever seen."

If you guys are older than 12 years old, you should know about the "tuck rule" bailout of the .. well, Patriots... that saved their bacon vs Oakland IN THE PLAYOFFS and without which they could not have won their first Super Bowl.

in spite of what Raiders fans understandably won't admit, both that one and this one were correct calls. it's not the refs' fault when the NFL has a stupid rule.

and that one was about 1000 times more important, not only for the time of year but also because the Patriots literally could not stop the clock without it. this one made a Jets win likely, but it was not a certainty. on the other hand, the Pats had more work yet to do with their bailout - and got the job done, that week and beyond.

   4184. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 20, 2013 at 05:26 PM (#4579032)
My guess is that player safety is the issue,


The typical running play is more dangerous than that.

Howie, I haven't the foggiest clue what the tuck rule in a game a dozen years ago has to do with this.
   4185. stanmvp48 Posted: October 20, 2013 at 05:52 PM (#4579052)
I am not even sure you should be trying to block a low percentage field goal; given all of the innocuous things you can be penalized for.
   4186. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 20, 2013 at 05:56 PM (#4579059)
I am not even sure you should be trying to block a low percentage field goal; given all of the innocuous things you can be penalized for.


Bingo.

The number one rule there is "don't commit a penalty."

If that penalty has been added to the rulebook this year then Belichik needed to make sure his players knew about it. You have a rookie trying to make a play and I doubt he even knew about it. Not that I could really see what he did from the replay. I guess some Pats player did seem to get ejected out of the pile.
   4187. Kurt Posted: October 20, 2013 at 08:16 PM (#4579144)
Brady now has 8 touchdowns in seven games. He might want to get cracking on turning his current group of nobody receivers into stars the same way he did previous nobodies like Welker and Gronk.
   4188. SteveF Posted: October 20, 2013 at 08:55 PM (#4579164)
in spite of what Raiders fans understandably won't admit, both that one and this one were correct calls.

I think the argument would be about selective enforcement of the rule. On how many field goal attempts this Sunday could I look at the all 22 film and see players do substantially the same thing without being penalized? I'm guessing there will be more than a few.
   4189. Doris from Rego Park Posted: October 20, 2013 at 10:45 PM (#4579210)
Survivor - had Atlanta all week, then switched to KC this morning because I can't help myself. Sweated it out, but I move on, as does everyone else in the pool (no one took Miami). Not sure when things start thinning out a bit more. NO hosting BUF next week seems like it will be the big one.
   4190. Howie Menckel Posted: October 20, 2013 at 11:13 PM (#4579229)

"On how many field goal attempts this Sunday could I look at the all 22 film and see players do substantially the same thing without being penalized?"

One of the experts today said that a potential game-tying or winning FG was even more a point of emphasis of the rule, basically. That is when this perceived danger is most likely to happen. I would be surprised if it happened at all in such a situation all year, or it would have been called as well.

And if someone is not familiar with the tuck rule play, I'm not sure an intelligent conversation on this topic is possible. Even Belichick didn't realize what it was at the time, iirc.
   4191. SoSH U at work Posted: October 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM (#4579249)
Bingo.

The number one rule there is "don't commit a penalty."

If that penalty has been added to the rulebook this year then Belichik needed to make sure his players knew about it. You have a rookie trying to make a play and I doubt he even knew about it. Not that I could really see what he did from the replay. I guess some Pats player did seem to get ejected out of the pile.


On the other hand, low-percentage field goals are much, much easier to block. And blocked field goals often turn into six on the other end.

I agree with the first commit no penalty mindset, but I don't think just standing around and giving the kicker a free shot is a terribly good idea.


And if someone is not familiar with the tuck rule play, I'm not sure an intelligent conversation on this topic is possible. Even Belichick didn't realize what it was at the time, iirc.


In his defense, it's a stupid rule (though I never felt any pity for the Raiders. Brady lost the ball at precisely the moment Woodson made helmet-to-helmet contact. If the play was called correctly from the outset, the play results in a 15-yard penalty, not an incomplete pass).
   4192. SteveF Posted: October 20, 2013 at 11:40 PM (#4579252)
And if someone is not familiar with the tuck rule play, I'm not sure an intelligent conversation on this topic is possible.

I'm quite familiar with that play. It was correctly called and was a fairly bad rule designed to remove the subjectivity of the judgment of officials. File under: Be careful what you wish for.

The tuck rule was fairly consistently called that year, as I recall, much to the chagrin of a few teams..including the Patriots. As a consequence, Belichick was well aware of the rule. That's primarily why he challenged the call (and indicated such in post game interviews).

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion about how rules should be enforced. They need to be enforced at all times, and not selectively. Otherwise you give the appearance of impropriety or bias.

Going forward, I hope to see this call made correctly more often.
   4193. SteveF Posted: October 21, 2013 at 12:22 AM (#4579267)
Just to clarify, unlike the Tuck rule, it's pretty clear Belichick did not have the correct understanding of the rule in this situation. Partly in his defense, I've seen it suggested that the tape the NFL sends around to teams to explain how the new rule would be enforced only included second level players doing the pushing, and that an early version of the rule specifically mentioned second level players.

The text of the actual rule makes clear that all players are prohibited from pushing another player. So there's no excuse for not knowing the correct rule.

Quote from Blandino (VP of Officiating): "We've seen it before and it hasn't been called," Blandino said. "This is the first time it's been called."

Also see Blandino in this video where he specifically mentions the second level.
   4194. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 21, 2013 at 12:30 AM (#4579271)
Damn, an NFL thread and nobody's talking about the terrific game that just ended? The Colts have now beaten God, Seattle and the 49ers. Who's next?
   4195. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: October 21, 2013 at 12:39 AM (#4579277)
My Mom is in town, and made us watch this game tonight, first full non-sb nfl game I've watched in some time (I live in Indy, so this game has obviously gotten obscene attention) and noticed something, Indy played man to man all game. Does anybody else do that vs Den?
   4196. SteveF Posted: October 21, 2013 at 12:45 AM (#4579280)
My Mom is in town, and made us watch this game tonight, first full non-sb nfl game I've watched in some time (I live in Indy, so this game has obviously gotten obscene attention) and noticed something, Indy played man to man all game. Does anybody else do that vs Den?


Probably. It's a fairly common strategy to play man under with a 2 deep zone -- likely even more common if you decide you aren't going to blitz.
   4197. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 21, 2013 at 01:01 AM (#4579282)
With about 58 seconds left Peyton was on the Colts' 30 trailing by 9. It didn't end up hurting, but why would they not go for the FG right then and there, considering that they needed two scores? By the time they got around to going for the FG on 4th down, they ended up with 12 seconds left after it. Even had they been successful on the onsides kick, they needed a miracle, as opposed to had they recovered with 45 seconds left or so needing a TD.

I know you'd rather have the TD first and I know a 47 yard FG is not a chip shot, but, come on. Time left trumps all.
   4198. SteveF Posted: October 21, 2013 at 01:24 AM (#4579286)
It's not a bad thought, though the downside is if you miss the game is over right then and there. You're probably right that the increased chance of making the field goal isn't worth the time you'd spend increasing that chance. You probably need to decide (in this specific circumstance) once you hit a certain spot on the field whether this is your field goal drive or your touchdown drive and go all in either way.
   4199. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 21, 2013 at 01:25 AM (#4579287)
Thinking about my 4197 more... I can't recall actually seeing a team pull up there and take the FG.
   4200. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: October 21, 2013 at 01:34 AM (#4579288)
*flip*
Page 42 of 80 pages ‹ First  < 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(71 - 2:55am, Apr 18)
Last: KT's Pot Arb

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(306 - 2:50am, Apr 18)
Last: theboyqueen

NewsblogGeorge Brett, Inspiration for the Song “Royals”, Meets Lorde
(29 - 2:25am, Apr 18)
Last: vortex of dissipation

NewsblogRobothal: What a relief! A’s could use bullpen differently than other teams
(6 - 2:21am, Apr 18)
Last: theboyqueen

NewsblogOrioles launch D.C. invasion with billboard near Nationals Park
(14 - 2:10am, Apr 18)
Last: DFA

NewsblogDesign Room: Top 10 Logos in MLB History.
(15 - 2:07am, Apr 18)
Last: DFA

NewsblogGleeman: Mets minor league team is hosting “Seinfeld night”
(139 - 2:02am, Apr 18)
Last: Alex meets the threshold for granular review

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(137 - 1:28am, Apr 18)
Last: puck

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for April 17, 2014
(131 - 1:09am, Apr 18)
Last: Davo Dozier (Mastroianni)

NewsblogChris Resop - The Most Interesting Reliever in the World
(18 - 12:41am, Apr 18)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

NewsblogEscape from Cuba: Yasiel Puig’s Untold Journey to the Dodgers
(6 - 11:58pm, Apr 17)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogMLB: Offense's performance vs. Brewers favors Matheny's interpretation of stats
(6 - 10:14pm, Apr 17)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogMinuteman News Center: Giandurco: This means WAR
(68 - 9:08pm, Apr 17)
Last: zenbitz

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1584 - 7:52pm, Apr 17)
Last: Publius Publicola

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-17-2014
(15 - 7:43pm, Apr 17)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.6097 seconds
53 querie(s) executed