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 Posted: November 06, 2012 at 12:03 AM | 7987 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 47 of 80 pages ‹ First  < 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 >  Last ›
   4601. stanmvp48 Posted: December 15, 2013 at 08:42 PM (#4618569)
I am almost certain that Dallas let GB score. Did anyone else see it that way?
   4602. AuntBea Posted: December 15, 2013 at 08:50 PM (#4618570)
I thought so too.
   4603. Howie Menckel Posted: December 15, 2013 at 08:56 PM (#4618575)

That would be one of the least dumb things the Cowboys did all day.

What Shakespeare play most resembles the Cowboys, I wonder?

The vainglorious, crude, reptilian ruler. The highly-educated, but moronic, day-to-day manager of events. The handsome, but empty-headed and psychologically-scarred, field general.

   4604. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 15, 2013 at 08:59 PM (#4618577)
Regarding the end of the WAS/ATL game:

What's the normal success rate on 2-PT conversions?


The Redskins were 2 for 4 in 2-pt attempts prior to today, which matches the NFL's overall 27/54, 50%. The way they'd advanced so easily down the field in that last TD drive, it's hard to fault their attempt.

That said, the fact that this was a meaningless game between two of the worst teams in the league might have also been a factor in just wanting to get the ####### game over with and go home. It was one of the first times the Redskins have ever done anything under Shanahan to earn my gratitude, even if I'm still glad they lost.

   4605. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 15, 2013 at 10:19 PM (#4618605)
EDIT: I won't even comment on your previously expressed thoughts on the relative strengths of the Seahawks and the Saints. I'll just direct your attention to the Rams-Saints game in progress: Rams, 24; Saints, 3.


As I observed last week and now this week, the extent of your analysis is "What I saw last is what will come next."
   4606. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:25 PM (#4618621)
EDIT: I won't even comment on your previously expressed thoughts on the relative strengths of the Seahawks and the Saints. I'll just direct your attention to the Rams-Saints game in progress: Rams, 24; Saints, 3.

As I observed last week and now this week, the extent of your analysis is "What I saw last is what will come next."


So the Saints getting wasted by an opponent (Seattle) they'd have to get by in the playoffs (on the road once again) doesn't mean anything, and the Saints getting trounced by a 5-8 team just two weeks before the end of the season means nothing as well. I don't know what sort of newsletter you're writing, but I doubt you'll have many subscribers left by the end of the year.

BUT HOW 'BOUT THEM EAGLES!
   4607. Howie Menckel Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:25 PM (#4618622)

If the Cowboys win their last two games, they will win their division at 9-7 while being 3-7 against "real" opponents and 6-0 in their awful division.

They won't deserve a home game to start the playoffs against a better team, but they would get one.

Last team to pull this off was the hapless 2008 Cardinals, who - ok, they came within about a half of a toe from winning the Super Bowl.

But they only outscored their regular-season opponents by 1 pt, which would have been the worst-ever by a Super Bowl champ - ok, until the 2011 Super Bowl champion Giants got outscored by 6 pts that season.

So yes, I'm saying there's a chance.

   4608. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:35 PM (#4618625)
So the Saints getting wasted by an opponent (Seattle) they'd have to get by in the playoffs (on the road once again) doesn't mean anything, and the Saints getting trounced by a 5-8 team just two weeks before the end of the season means nothing as well. I don't know what sort of newsletter you're writing, but I doubt you'll have many subscribers left by the end of the year.


It means something, as does every game that a team plays with a healthy quarterback; but it doesn't mean everything, as you seem to think it does.

-----------

Bengals' punter leaves with a fractured jaw. Can something be done about these blindsided hits by blockers on players who have their heads turned looking at the ball carrier? You can stop a player without sending him to the hospital.

The mentality of NFL players is to cream the other guy, which is just ridiculous.
   4609. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:37 PM (#4618627)
As a NE fan I'm happy that the Bengals look like they'll lose tonight (as DEN lost Thursday). Could still get the 1 or 2 seed.
   4610. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:44 PM (#4618633)
If the Cowboys win their last two games, they will win their division at 9-7 while being 3-7 against "real" opponents and 6-0 in their awful division.

They won't deserve a home game to start the playoffs against a better team, but they would get one.


That's a huge flaw in the playoff system, which consistently rewards mediocre teams in weak divisions.

There are four legitimate teams in the NFC: Seattle, San Francisco, Carolina/New Orleans. At this point Carolina should break the tie and win the HFA and a first round bye, but it's almost a certainty that both wild card teams (the Niners and the Carolina/NO loser) will dump the Eagles (or Cowboys) and the Bears in the first round, and give us a pretty good final four to look forward to. I just hope that the Super Bowl gets played in sub-arctic temperatures so we can see what Peyton Manning is made of, even though it's also true that none of the legit NFC contenders are exactly from cold weather cities themselves. I only wish that the Ravens could somehow pull another one out of their ###, but that's probably too much to hope for.
   4611. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:55 PM (#4618638)
So the Saints getting wasted by an opponent (Seattle) they'd have to get by in the playoffs (on the road once again) doesn't mean anything, and the Saints getting trounced by a 5-8 team just two weeks before the end of the season means nothing as well. I don't know what sort of newsletter you're writing, but I doubt you'll have many subscribers left by the end of the year.

It means something, as does every game that a team plays with a healthy quarterback; but it doesn't mean everything, as you seem to think it does.


Nobody's saying that it means everything, but you've shown little evidence that you even take multiple late season blowout losses into any kind of account. Instead, you seem enamored of a quarterback with nine full games under his belt, exactly one of which (Arizona) has been against a legitimately good team. I'm sure there's some sort of system you've got that puts a team that loses to the Vikings and has beaten one quality team all season over a team which has come within one touchdown and one field goal of being 14 and 0, but so far you haven't exactly explained it beyond your crush on that Eagles quarterback.
   4612. Greg K Posted: December 15, 2013 at 11:57 PM (#4618640)
Miami - Dallas would be a hilarious Super Bowl!

Though it always seems like only one mediocre team at a time scams its way into these championship games.
   4613. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:01 AM (#4618643)
Okay, Ray, if you want a precedent for your fantasy, last year's Ravens might serve you. They also got blown out several times towards the end of the season, but then got healthy by the playoffs and showed that they were the class of the league when it was all over. And in truth, if the Eagles did pull off a miracle, it'd be a great story, and I'd sure be pulling for them in the Super Bowl against any team but Baltimore. I like Foles, too, but beating up on losing teams (until today, anyway) isn't much preparation for January.
   4614. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:03 AM (#4618644)
Miami - Dallas would be a hilarious Super Bowl!

The first time they met in a Super Bowl it was such a turnoff that it was the only Super Bowl I couldn't even watch. I was mostly rooting for a meteor to drop onto the 50 yard line just before the kickoff.
   4615. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:06 AM (#4618647)
Okay, Ray, if you want a precedent for your fantasy, last year's Ravens might serve you. They also got blown out several times towards the end of the season

actually, Andy, they only got blown out once (by Denver). They lost several close games and rested their starters in the last game against Cincy, since it had no bearing on their playoff standing
   4616. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:12 AM (#4618651)
Nobody's saying that it means everything, but you've shown little evidence that you even take multiple late season blowout losses into any kind of account. Instead, you seem enamored of a quarterback with nine full games under his belt, exactly one of which (Arizona) has been against a legitimately good team.


My pick amongst the NFC field is the Eagles to make the Super Bowl. I don't know why that seems to bother you so much, but I'm afraid you'll just have to live with it.
   4617. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:17 AM (#4618654)
actually, Andy, they only got blown out once (by Denver). They lost several close games and rested their starters in the last game against Cincy, since it had no bearing on their playoff standing

Yeah, you're right, I was thinking that their blowout loss in Houston was later in the year. I knew the Cincy finale was meaningless. This year's team has followed much of the same pattern, losing only one blowout (Denver in the season opener) but stumbling against teams they should have beaten. With Pitta back they might be good enough to squeak into the playoffs, but they're going to need more protection for Flacco and a tighter defense to even think about going back the first round or two.
   4618. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:20 AM (#4618656)
My pick amongst the NFC field is the Eagles to make the Super Bowl. I don't know why that seems to bother you so much, but I'm afraid you'll just have to live with it.

It doesn't "bother" me in the slightest, and as I said, as a lover of narrative (in some cases, anyway) I'd love to see it happen. It merely makes me question your sanity in yet another field of human endeavor.
   4619. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:33 AM (#4618660)
With Pitta back they might be good enough to squeak into the playoffs, but they're going to need more protection for Flacco and a tighter defense to even think about going back the first round or two.

their Oline has been a disaster this year
   4620. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:36 AM (#4618663)
With the New England's injuries and Denver's porous defense, I really think that the best two teams in football are the Seahawks and the Niners. The Saints and Panthers both beat the Niners but the Niners were without Crabtree in those games and without Vernon Davis for most of the Panther game. I don't fear either of those team, even if San Francisco had to play them on the road.

If the Niners win out, they will get the 5th seed in the NFC.
   4621. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:43 AM (#4618666)
their Oline has been a disaster this year

Yeah, Pitta's return gives them more options, but it's a minor miracle that Flacco's still alive.

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

With the New England's injuries and Denver's porous defense, I really think that the best two teams in football are the Seahawks and the Niners.

Totally agree. Too bad Seattle isn't still in the AFC, so we could have the best possible Super Bowl.
   4622. McCoy Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:52 AM (#4618668)
Apparently the Eagles changed their cleats out to smaller spikes at halftime, Lions did not have any replacement cleats. And the Lions had 2 red zone turnovers.

Possibly or it could have been because the blizzard broke up during halftime.
   4623. Howie Menckel Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:06 AM (#4618670)

"it's almost a certainty that both wild card teams (the Niners and the Carolina/NO loser) will dump the Eagles (or Cowboys) and the Bears in the first round"

really? off the recent playoff results?
   4624. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 08:54 AM (#4618700)
There's nothing certain about anything in the playoffs, the playoffs are mostly random. Just bet on whoever's healthiest going in.
   4625. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 09:00 AM (#4618704)
"it's almost a certainty that both wild card teams (the Niners and the Carolina/NO loser) will dump the Eagles (or Cowboys) and the Bears in the first round"

really? off the recent playoff results?


I said "almost a certainty", not "It's over. It's always been over." But as long as the Niners and Panthers/Saints maintain their current state of health at key positions, I can't see them losing to any team coming out of the NFC East or NFC Central. The closest call might be the Saints having to weather sub-arctic conditions in Chicago or Philadelphia, but even there you'd have to see everything fall in place for the home team to win.
   4626. Kurt Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:14 AM (#4618721)
If there is a top QB prospect available to the Giants in the draft they should take him, scrap Coughlin and Eli, and start over.


I guess it depends on how top the prospect is, but I still think they have about 40 guys to replace before they get to Eli.
   4627. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:31 AM (#4618731)
Yeah, Pitta's return gives them more options, but it's a minor miracle that Flacco's still alive.


There's a chance that gutting their roster in order to give the very average Joe Flacco the biggest contract in league history was a mistake.
   4628. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:33 AM (#4618733)
I guess it depends on how top the prospect is, but I still think they have about 40 guys to replace before they get to Eli.


I'm not convinced that Eli is really this bad, but man, you could get 20 picks for a lot less than he's set to make next year.
   4629. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:35 AM (#4618735)
Coughlin will be gone but Eli isn't going anywhere. You can't just dump a guy that famous out on the street in his early thirties, period. That goes a hundredfold when your team is in New York.

Honestly I think the wheels just fell off this season for whatever weird reason, and even if they brought Coughlin back next year they'll probably rebound.

I wonder who the NFC's third Pro Bowl quarterback is going to be, after Brees and Wilson? Probably Newton but I suppose it could be Stafford or Foles. I would not hesitate to pick Tony Romo myself, but I feel like he's not even going to be considered. In the AFC it's obviously going to be Manning/Brady/Rivers.
   4630. Kurt Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:58 AM (#4618755)
Coughlin will be gone but Eli isn't going anywhere. You can't just dump a guy that famous out on the street in his early thirties, period. That goes a hundredfold when your team is in New York.

Honestly I think the wheels just fell off this season for whatever weird reason, and even if they brought Coughlin back next year they'll probably rebound.


Yeah, Coughlin isn't the problem either. They've had a lot of injuries, and nowhere near enough talent overall to overcome them.
   4631. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 10:59 AM (#4618757)
You can't just dump a guy that famous out on the street in his early thirties, period.


Of course not. And again, I can't imagine he's really as bad as he's looked. But I have to think there will be a dramatic contract restructuring.
   4632. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:17 AM (#4618771)
Yeah, Pitta's return gives them more options, but it's a minor miracle that Flacco's still alive.

There's a chance that gutting their roster in order to give the very average Joe Flacco the biggest contract in league history was a mistake.


All teams have to make tradeoffs as long as there's a salary cap, but that very average Joe Flacco outplayed two future HoF inner circle quarterbacks (Manning and Brady) and two of the four most heralded young QBs (Luck and Kaepernick) in four successive playoff games last year, with the games against those future HoFers both coming on the road. Find me another very average quarterback who's ever pulled off anything like that.
   4633. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:24 AM (#4618779)
All teams have to make tradeoffs as long as there's a salary cap, but that very average Joe Flacco outplayed two future HoF inner circle quarterbacks (Manning and Brady) and two of the four most heralded young QBs (Luck and Kaepernick) in four successive playoff games last year, with the games against those future HoFers both coming on the road. Find me another very average quarterback who's ever pulled off anything like that.


Eli?

Flacco and the Ravens obviously had a great post-season last year, no question. But I think A. even a casual observer of the Ravens should have noted how important Boldin was to Flacco's success, and B. a smart team wouldn't have thought of that as the new normal for a guy who has been perfectly average in his career.

Seriously, surely you're not arguing that Flacco is better than average?
   4634. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:52 AM (#4618814)
Seriously, surely you're not arguing that Flacco is better than average?

What I'm saying is that the gap between Flacco and the QB Gods may be less than shows up in the QB ratings, and that given the Ravens' draft position, it's perfectly understandable that they wouldn't want to gamble on replacing Flacco with a complete unknown. The Ravens aren't the first team to have to make hard choices like the ones they faced during the offseason, and they won't be the last, and given their losses from injuries, they're actually not in that bad a position right now.

BTW in Flacco's last 8 postseason games, his QB ratings are (2010) 115.4, 61.1; (2011) 97.1, 95.4; and (2012) 125.6, 116.2, 106.2, 124.2. And through his first five seasons, his three closest QB sims are Jim Kelly, Ben Roethlisberger and Fran Tarkenton. But maybe those three are also just average.
   4635. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM (#4618818)
So the answer is "no, I'm not going to argue that he's better than average, I'll just insinuate it based on some playoff appearances over 3 seasons so I can have it both ways." Seriously?
   4636. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:59 AM (#4618819)
For the record, I think average QBs are very underrated, considering how bad the bottom 10 or so QBs are in a given year.
   4637. zenbitz Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:03 PM (#4618825)
The last qb to go on a terrific 9 game streak was.... Colin Kaoernick, 2012.
   4638. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:05 PM (#4618826)
The last qb to go on a terrific 9 game streak was....


Nick Foles, but I'm not surprised that Andy cited an 8 game sample after telling me that my 9 game sample was meaningless.
   4639. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:09 PM (#4618829)
At least Ray's 9 game sample all come from the same season.
   4640. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:20 PM (#4618841)
So the answer is "no, I'm not going to argue that he's better than average, I'll just insinuate it based on some playoff appearances over 3 seasons so I can have it both ways." Seriously?

I notice you brushed by the sims to Kelly, Roethlisberger and Tarkenton, which were based on five seasons, not 8 games.

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

The last qb to go on a terrific 9 game streak was....


Nick Foles, but I'm not surprised that Andy cited an 8 game sample after telling me that my 9 game sample was meaningless.

And I'm not surprised that whereas my 8 game sample came against the best teams in football, in the highest pressure postseason situations and mostly on the road, your 9 game sample came almost exclusively against mediocre teams with sub-.500 records. Your ability to pretend that games against Oakland, Washington and Green Bay trump road playoff wins in Denver and New England is little more than amusing. I suppose you also looked at Kansas City's 9-0 record a month ago and figured they were better than the Seahawks.
   4641. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:25 PM (#4618848)
I notice you brushed by the sims to Kelly, Roethlisberger and Tarkenton, which were based on five seasons, not 8 games.


Funny, as I'm seeing Aaron Brooks has his most similar for 2010-2012, which were of course his most recent 3 seasons.
   4642. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 12:26 PM (#4618850)
I suppose you also looked at Kansas City's 9-0 record a month ago and figured they were better than the Seahawks.


KC isn't better than Seattle but is just as good. To use your methodology (where it's critically important who they lose to), they lost to Denver twice and San Diego. Not exactly embarrassing losses there.
   4643. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:11 PM (#4618891)
I notice you brushed by the sims to Kelly, Roethlisberger and Tarkenton, which were based on five seasons, not 8 games.

Funny, as I'm seeing Aaron Brooks has his most similar for 2010-2012, which were of course his most recent 3 seasons.


Just scroll down on Flacco's pfb-reference page. That's where my sims came from.

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

KC isn't better than Seattle but is just as good.

I suppose there's something more than assertions behind your assertions, but so far you haven't revealed what it might be, other than more assertions. PFB-Reference's SRS team quality scores have the following rankings of the likeliest playoff teams:

Seattle 13.7
San Fran/Denver 10.3
Carolina 9.3
New Orleans 7.9
Kansas City 7.4
Cincinnati 4.4
New England 3.4
Indy 2.3
Miami 1.3
Lions 0.5
Eagles/Bears -0.5
Ravens -1.5

Obviously those numbers change from week to week, but that's where they stand at the moment.
   4644. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:20 PM (#4618897)
I so want the Seahawks to lose their first playoff game. It won't stop you experts from yapping but everyone will know -- even you -- whose face the egg is on.

A first-game Seattle loss at home would be better even than the Eagles winning the Super Bowl.
   4645. Every Inge Counts Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4618914)
That Flacco contract is going to be an albatross for the Ravens soon enough. You don't give Franchise QB money to a QB like Flacco, good playoff games or not.
   4646. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4618915)
It won't stop you experts from yapping but everyone will know -- even you -- whose face the egg is on.


Just curious: what exactly should we expect from you if they win the Super Bowl? Because I've seen noticeably few "My Bads" attached to your Handle over the years.

   4647. Random Transaction Generator Posted: December 16, 2013 at 01:46 PM (#4618921)
Just curious: what exactly should we expect from you if they win the Super Bowl?


He'll probably stick to his guns that their Super Bowl chances were over, weeks earlier.
   4648. Chip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 02:25 PM (#4618950)
Yeah, Coughlin isn't the problem either. They've had a lot of injuries, and nowhere near enough talent overall to overcome them.


Just once I would have liked to see a Giants receiver yesterday compete for a 50/50 ball into single coverage. Throw out the end-of-half tip drill INT and compare the picks Eli threw to the ball Flynn threw that Jordy Nelson caught in the end zone during the Packers comeback--that was at best a 25/75 chance for Nelson but he FOUGHT to get that ball. Thats the kind of play Nicks, in particular, used to make for Eli that he can't or won't do anymore.
   4649. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 02:34 PM (#4618958)
I so want the Seahawks to lose their first playoff game. It won't stop you experts from yapping but everyone will know -- even you -- whose face the egg is on.

A first-game Seattle loss at home would be better even than the Eagles winning the Super Bowl.


I will admit that you've put yourself in a position to be the RDP prior to the 2008 baseball season with your bet on the Rays. And if the Seahawks lose to anyone but the 49ers or the Broncos you'll certainly have earned the right to gloat.

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

Just curious: what exactly should we expect from you if they win the Super Bowl? Because I've seen noticeably few "My Bads" attached to your Handle over the years.

Even the dry cleaning guy in Seinfeld admitted that he shrunk Jerry's shirt after the evidence was shoved in his face. Don't ever expect anything comparable ever to come out of Ray.
   4650. Greg K Posted: December 16, 2013 at 02:37 PM (#4618960)
Even the dry cleaning guy in Seinfeld admitted that he shrunk Jerry's shirt after the evidence was shoved in his face. Don't ever expect anything comparable ever to come out of Ray.

I'd have figured the analogy would be George telling Susan's parents he had a place in the Hamptons.
   4651. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 16, 2013 at 02:49 PM (#4618970)
In football strange things happen, but any team that loses as badly as the Eagles did against the Vikings, well I will be chocked if they advance inthe playoffs. It is the only Eagles game I have seen all year, but the Vikes have a terrible defense and mediocre offense, to go with very volatile - but often good - special teams. There is a reason their record is bad.

And the Vikes totally owned the Eagles (surprised the heck out of me) in every phase.
   4652. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 03:25 PM (#4618998)
Yeah, Coughlin isn't the problem either.


Coughlin is tough to grade because on the one hand he's won 2 Super Bowls, one against an all-time great Patriots team. (Granted only by 3 points each time I think but he did win them.) But on the other hand he's failed to qualify for the tournament round 4 of the last 5 years. Yes, that's selective endpoints, because he made it the 4 times before that including the SB win. But he missed the 4 times in a row before that.

If you have streaks of missing the playoffs 4 times in a row in the NFL, and 4 out of 5 times, you're doing something very very wrong. Because the simple act of drafting/acquiring a competent quarterback and not shackling him (*) will rise a team from 2-14 to a playoff team very quickly. See for example the Colts with Luck, who hasn't even really played all that well yet.

Coughlin has shown that he and Eli can win but there are deep problems in too many years.

(*) The counter example is Rex Ryan. No quarterback will ever develop with Ryan unless he just completely cedes all aspects of the offense.
   4653. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 16, 2013 at 03:26 PM (#4618999)
The Seahawks have allowed a QB rating against this year of 65.5. That basically means that the average QB against them has played like Geno Smith. That's just crazy.

For the record, I think average QBs are very underrated, considering how bad the bottom 10 or so QBs are in a given year.

Look at how much of a difference upgrading to a quality, although not elite, QB in Alex Smith has made for the Chiefs.

You know, I would not be shocked if the Chiefs make the Super Bowl. They have a great defense, they can run the ball, and Smith is playing well for them. Seeing the Chargers run the ball all over the Broncos and the Patriots being as injured as they are makes me think both are vulnerable. The rest of the AFC doesn't scare you either.
   4654. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 03:32 PM (#4619004)
In football strange things happen, but any team that loses as badly as the Eagles did against the Vikings, well I will be chocked if they advance inthe playoffs. It is the only Eagles game I have seen all year, but the Vikes have a terrible defense and mediocre offense, to go with very volatile - but often good - special teams. There is a reason their record is bad.


What you've apparently missed is that the Vikings are starting Matt Cassell now. He's only started 4 games for them (two earlier in the year, two the last two weeks) and he's 2-2 and has shown in the past that he can be a good quarterback and has played well this year. So you can't fold the 10 non-Cassell starts into your analysis for how good a team the Vikings were yesterday. You and everyone else. It is an elementary, fundamental point that a team is very different depending on the quarterback, but people on this board still can't seem to comprehend that (as we saw above with the ridiculous grading of the Eagles based on overall stats despite the fact that Foles has only started 9 games) no matter what they do.
   4655. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 04:34 PM (#4619054)
You know, I would not be shocked if the Chiefs make the Super Bowl. They have a great defense, they can run the ball, and Smith is playing well for them. Seeing the Chargers run the ball all over the Broncos and the Patriots being as injured as they are makes me think both are vulnerable. The rest of the AFC doesn't scare you either.

If the Chiefs wind up in the Super Bowl it wouldn't shock me as much as if the Eagles were to meet them there, but those two games they played against Denver suggests to me that there's less to the Chiefs than meets the eye. Head-to-head turnarounds on that level, in that brief time, and on the road to boot, aren't exactly commonplace in the NFL.

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

In football strange things happen, but any team that loses as badly as the Eagles did against the Vikings, well I will be chocked if they advance inthe playoffs. It is the only Eagles game I have seen all year, but the Vikes have a terrible defense and mediocre offense, to go with very volatile - but often good - special teams. There is a reason their record is bad.


What you've apparently missed is that the Vikings are starting Matt Cassell now. He's only started 4 games for them (two earlier in the year, two the last two weeks) and he's 2-2 and has shown in the past that he can be a good quarterback and has played well this year. So you can't fold the 10 non-Cassell starts into your analysis for how good a team the Vikings were yesterday. You and everyone else. It is an elementary, fundamental point that a team is very different depending on the quarterback, but people on this board still can't seem to comprehend that (as we saw above with the ridiculous grading of the Eagles based on overall stats despite the fact that Foles has only started 9 games) no matter what they do.

I agree that the Eagles are rated too low by PFB-reference's benchmarks. I'd put them more around the level of New England or Cincinnati, and I'd give Foles credit for much of that. And yes, the Vikings are somewhat improved with Cassell taking the snaps.

That said, two facts remain:

1. The Eagles still got blown out by the Vikings.

2. The Eagles will be facing much better teams** than the Vikings should they make it to the playoffs.

*Their likely opponents would be (1st round) either Carolina, San Francisco or New Orleans; (2nd round) one of the two surviving teams among those three; (3rd round) either Seattle or one of those preceding three teams; (Super Bowl) either the Broncos or the Chiefs. If they can survive the first three rounds of that gantlet, the last two likely on the road, then more power to them and you'll have crowing rights here for a long time.

   4656. Kurt Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:05 PM (#4619079)
For the record, I think average QBs are very underrated, considering how bad the bottom 10 or so QBs are in a given year.


Is this really true? It seems to me like almost every team has a quarterback who's decent (Cassel for example), or who has some chance of being decent in the future (EJ Manuel). I don't think I could name five teams with completely unacceptable QB situations.
   4657. Greg K Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:13 PM (#4619088)
It seems to me like almost every team has a quarterback who's decent (Cassel for example),

Is Cassel average though? That's not a rhetorical question by the way, I actually don't know much about evaluating football players.

But it seems like since his two good years (2008 and 2010), Matt Cassel has firmly established himself as a QB that is going to need a hell of a lot of help around him to make a playoff team. We just had a comment upthread about Alex Smith being good enough to turn a poor team into a playoff contender. Unless I'm mistaken Matt Cassel was the guy QBing that awful Chiefs team the last couple years. If the upgrade of Smith (a good but not great QB) from Cassel is that dramatic, how good can Cassel be?

[edited to not be backwards]
   4658. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:13 PM (#4619089)
I don't think I could name five teams with completely unacceptable QB situations.


Hmmm, good thought exercise. Going to the stats pages...

I'd call these definitely unacceptable:
Cleveland
Jets
Oakland
Jax

And I sure as heck wouldn't want to be these teams:
Houston
STL

And then there is the big middle of teams that better have a lot of other things going well for them to win:
Washington
Buffalo
Tennessee
(Tampa, Buffalo, Cincinatti, Miami may all belong here, too, but at least those guys are young)

All totally subjective, admittedly.
   4659. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:14 PM (#4619091)
What you've apparently missed is that the Vikings are starting Matt Cassell now.


No I have seen every Vikings game this year. Have you looked at the Vikings Defensive stats for this year? Dismal and yet that handled the Eagles very easily. Unless you think Cassel is playing pro-bowl defense in his starts in addition to providing a bit better QBing than Ponder.

The team actually scored OK in the first few Ponder starts, by the way, by the defense was beyond dreadful. Basically Cassel or no Cassel they are a terrible team with some hope for the future.
   4660. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:15 PM (#4619094)
Football outsiders has Matt Cassell as a well-below-average QB for most of his career. This season his DVOA is -0.3% in a small sample.
   4661. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:17 PM (#4619095)
But it seems like since his two good years (2008 and 2010), Matt Cassel has firmly established himself as a QB that is going to need a hell of a lot of help around him to make a playoff team. We just had a comment upthread about Alex Smith being good enough to turn a poor team into a playoff contender. Unless I'm mistaken Matt Cassel was the guy QBing that awful Chiefs team the last couple years. If the upgrade from Smith (a good but not great QB) to Cassel is that dramatic, how good can Cassel be?

I think you meant to reverse the "from" and the "to" in that last sentence.
   4662. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:17 PM (#4619096)

But it seems like since his two good years (2008 and 2010), Matt Cassel has firmly established himself as a QB that is going to need a hell of a lot of help around him to make a playoff team. We just had a comment upthread about Alex Smith being good enough to turn a poor team into a playoff contender. Unless I'm mistaken Matt Cassel was the guy QBing that awful Chiefs team the last couple years. If the upgrade of Smith (a good but not great QB) from Cassel is that dramatic, how good can Cassel be?


Keep in mind, though, that the Chiefs also upgraded from Crennel to Reid, which is huge. In six tries Crennel couldn't make the playoffs. He's won 33% of his games.

Not that I think Cassel is great by any stretch, but you can win with him.
   4663. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:19 PM (#4619097)
Cassell might be the rhetorical definition of replacement level. Guys like him and Fitzpatrick are going to be on the market every offseason. Freeman will be there soon, Jason Campbell is another guy like that.
   4664. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:20 PM (#4619099)
Football outsiders has Matt Cassell as a well-below-replacement-level QB for most of his career. This season he is right at replacement level. Certainly not decent.


This. He is a capable - make that very capable - backup. Ponder is a bit worse, but is young enough something could happen I guess. And any list of hopeless QB situations going forward that does not include the Vikings is missing a team. Cassel is replacement level, his backups are worse, and Cassel can opt out and leave (and rumor has it he is unhappy).

Now all that being said Cassel played very well Sunday, but blind squirrel and all that.

EDIT: And it is by no means sure that Cassel will even continue to start. There is a 40% chance os so Ponder will start a game that is left, because that is how team Purple rolls (The GM really wants Ponder to succeed).
   4665. theboyqueen Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:20 PM (#4619100)
It is an elementary, fundamental point that a team is very different depending on the quarterback


This is certainly a THEORY espoused by the likes of Colin Cowherd and you. But what is the evidence? If Matt Cassel, of all people, is the key to making the Vikings a formidable team, then Alex Smith must be the second coming of Joe Montana given what has happened to the Chiefs since their "upgrade" from Cassel to Smith. In other words, I am not following your logic.
   4666. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:24 PM (#4619104)
This is certainly a THEORY espoused by the likes of Colin Cowherd and you. But what is the evidence? If Matt Cassel, of all people, is the key to making the Vikings a formidable team, then Alex Smith must be the second coming of Joe Montana given what has happened to the Chiefs since their "upgrade" from Cassel to Smith. In other words, I am not following your logic.


Reid, Reid, Reid.

I keep trying to tell you guys that the head coach is almost as important to a team as the QB is. A head coach with a bad offensive gameplan (or who demands his OC run a a conservative offense) will absolutely shackle a team.

Tom Brady would struggle to be .500 with Rex Ryan as his head coach. I think this factor is THAT significant.

The QB/head coach combination is in my view 90-95% of the football team.

Swap Belichick with Ryan and the Patriots with Brady/Ryan would struggle to be .500 in most years. Unless Ryan just simply allowed Brady to determine with the OC what his offense will be (I guess like Peyton's teams allow him to do, though it's not clear to me that Brady without Belichick is capable of gameplanning the way Peyton is).
   4667. Greg K Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:24 PM (#4619105)
since their "upgrade" from Cassel to Smith.

Ahh, so that's how you write that sentence...
   4668. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:30 PM (#4619113)
The QB/head coach combination is in my view 90-95% of the football team.


I think the three most important people on a football team are QB, Head Coach, and GM (in different orders depending on the time horizon used), but 90% to 95% for QB and coach is crazytown. Assuming away Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and such talents (in addition to the whole rest of the team, including defense) is nuts. Otherwise Brady and company would have won many, many more trophies than they have.
   4669. JJ1986 Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:31 PM (#4619114)
Swap Belichick with Ryan and the Patriots with Brady/Ryan would struggle to be .500 in most years.


Rex Ryan is above .500 in his career with terrible QBs and having to play against Brady twice a year.
   4670. SteveF Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:35 PM (#4619116)
Tom Brady would struggle to be .500 with Rex Ryan as his head coach. I think this factor is THAT significant.

A good quarterback creates more options for your game plan. Good quarterbacks are good quarterbacks because they can be trusted to make the right decisions (and can physically make the throws required, of course, but that's a given). If you trust your quarterback, you can rely on him to alter the play at the line of scrimmage once you have more information about what the defense is doing. That can make an offensive coordinator look much, much smarter than they actually are.

(That's not really a disagreement in principle, just in emphasis. Belichick did go 11-5 with Matt Cassel at QB, after all.)
   4671. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:39 PM (#4619119)
Rex Ryan is above .500 in his career with terrible QBs


This is chicken and egg.
   4672. JJ1986 Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:45 PM (#4619123)
This is chicken and egg.


Rex Ryan is above .500% with Mark Sanchez. Do you think Sanchez and Brady are equivalent talents or do you think QB talent doesn't matter at all under a coach like Rex Ryan?
   4673. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:47 PM (#4619127)
Bengals' punter leaves with a fractured jaw. Can something be done about these blindsided hits by blockers on players who have their heads turned looking at the ball carrier? You can stop a player without sending him to the hospital.


And he also broke his neck. It's announced as "fractured vertebrae" because that makes the NFL and football in general look slightly less bad, but Huber broke his neck. I'm not a doctor but I don't think guessing that his career is probably over would be betting a longshot.

Is this really true? It seems to me like almost every team has a quarterback who's decent (Cassel for example), or who has some chance of being decent in the future (EJ Manuel). I don't think I could name five teams with completely unacceptable QB situations.


Jets, Texans, Jaguars, Flaming Thumbtacks, Browns, Raiders, Bears (paying Cutler franchise money would be a grievous blunder), Vikings, Rams. That's over a fourth of the league, and the Steelers are probably joining them this offseason (Roethlisberger's contract needs to be renegotiated and there are signs the Steelers, who still have serious cap problems, don't want to give him another megacontract and are going to trade or release him.)
   4674. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:50 PM (#4619129)
Rex Ryan is above .500% with Mark Sanchez. Do you think Sanchez and Brady are equivalent talents or do you think QB talent doesn't matter at all under a coach like Rex Ryan?


The latter. I thought I was pretty clear about that. Ryan shackles his QBs.
   4675. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 05:58 PM (#4619134)
Ryan shackles his QBs.


When Geno Smith and Mark Sanchez are your quarterbacks, you definitely want them shackled.
   4676. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:00 PM (#4619135)
When Geno Smith and Mark Sanchez are your quarterbacks, you definitely want them shackled.


I disagree. I think your only chance as a head coach in this era of football is to turn your QBs loose and see which ones can swim, because it's often not easy to tell from their college record.

We still have no idea - we may never know - what Sanchez and Smith are capable of, because Ryan won't let them show that.
   4677. jmurph Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:02 PM (#4619137)
I think Sanchez had a chance to develop into an average-ish quarterback, and I agree with you that his coaches failed at their jobs in developing him. But Geno looks like a career 3rd stringer.
   4678. theboyqueen Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:07 PM (#4619142)
If only Andy Reid and Nick Foles could team up and...oh wait.
   4679. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:09 PM (#4619144)
But Geno looks like a career 3rd stringer.


Hard to tell. I've seen him look good on some throws. His arm strength doesn't impress me, FWIW (approximately nothing, since IANAS).

The funniest play I can recall seeing in some time was a few weeks ago when Smith fumbled the ball while backpedaling away from an oncoming defender and trying to transfer the ball from his right hand to his left behind his back.

So we see the replay and it becomes clear what Smith has done and how he lost the ball, and it was just hilarious to listen to Dierdorf as Dierdorf realized what had just happened. He was in the middle of his color on the replay and stopped mid-sentence: "Are... Are my eyes deceiving me? Did Geno Smith attempt to transfer the ball from his right hand to his left hand behind his back...? Yes, yes he did. I have never seen anyone try that before."

   4680. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:17 PM (#4619150)
Missed the Butt Fumble, did you?

I thought that guy on the Bengals panicking and fair-catching a kickoff at the 8 was pretty hilarious.
   4681. Kurt Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:23 PM (#4619153)
Football outsiders has Matt Cassell as a well-below-average QB for most of his career. This season his DVOA is -0.3% in a small sample.


Cassell might be the rhetorical definition of replacement level. Guys like him and Fitzpatrick are going to be on the market every offseason. Freeman will be there soon, Jason Campbell is another guy like that.


I think you guys are making my point for me. Obviously Cassell is a below average starter, by definition roughly half the quarterbacks in the league are. My point is there's not *that* big a difference between Cassell and and "average" starter, whoever that would be (Smith? Flacco? Pre-implosion Schaub?); not nearly as big a difference as there is between Cassell and someone like Gabbert or Geno or whoever.

Upgrading from an average QB to an elite one makes an enormous difference, and upgrading from a terrible one to even a Cassell can make an enormous difference depending on the circumstance. I suspect the difference between the 16th best QB and, say, the 27th best one is overstated (in terms of how you'd rank them preseason, not by stats).

   4682. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:28 PM (#4619154)
I didn't think the Butt Fumble was all that funny. Essentially, he ran into his own guy. It happens. And no matter what Collinsworth said, Wilfork did not push the player into Sanchez, at least not intentionally.
   4683. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 06:58 PM (#4619176)
It's Cassel, guys. One L. And he sucks.

That's not to say he's as bad as Christian Ponder, mind.

The Vikings look to me like a team that has all the pieces for a very good offense except a competent quarterback, actually.
   4684. zenbitz Posted: December 16, 2013 at 07:22 PM (#4619195)
Ray why do you insist on ignoring defense? Even under the zero-order assumption that passing is all the matters - STOPPING the passing game still matters 50%. Anecdotally, it's well known that a great pass rush can totally thwart the best QB.

Here is an example: http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/12/what-kind-of-teams-are-super-bowl.html

Your theory _would_ explain the SF-TB game where the TB defense was hopeless except when then ran the hurry-up, when they became unstoppable. I remember this sort of thing happening to the Vinnie Testaverde Jets, too.

The major usefulness of having good QB/Coaching is that it is more repeatable year-to-year, than say, defense or offensive-line play. (presumably because it depends on fewer humans).


   4685. zenbitz Posted: December 16, 2013 at 08:19 PM (#4619229)
By the way from watching SF/TB... I think it's quite possible that the difference between Colin Kaepernick and Mike Glennon is basically running ability and coaching. Or and tattoos.
   4686. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 16, 2013 at 09:59 PM (#4619272)
The Vikings look to me like a team that has all the pieces for a very good offense except a competent quarterback, actually.


The O line has been surprisingly iffy this year. Not sure why, but it has.
   4687. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:02 PM (#4619306)
I think it's quite possible that the difference between Colin Kaepernick and Mike Glennon is basically running ability and coaching. Or and tattoos.

I was pretty impressed with Glennon. He looked composed out there.

That said, I thought Kaepernick made a lot of great plays against the Bucs. His touchdown pass to Davis was thrown 62 yards and it hit him in stride. They also just missed another TD pass despite another excellent ball by Kaep because Davis looked like he gave up on the route. He had a couple really nice scrambles and made an excellent sideline throw on the run that showed some excellent arm strength. Physically, Kaep certainly has a lot of gifts.

If you're Cleveland, would you give up the pick you got for Trent Richardson for Kirk Cousins?
   4688. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:12 PM (#4619316)
If you're Cleveland, would you give up the pick you got for Trent Richardson for Kirk Cousins?


No chance in hell. Minor if any upgrade over just bringing Jason Campbell back (well, if Campbell could ever stay on the field for more than three games at a time, anyway). The Browns just need to keep improving across the board by investing their picks in Best Player Available.

Bolder move: In theory, if you're Cleveland, would you trade a first rounder for Ben Roethlisberger and give him a huge contract? This is in a fantasy world where the Steelers would be willing to trade him within their own division. To me it's at least worth considering because the Browns do have some talent, the division is weak (particularly if the Steelers opt to part with Roethlisberger and start over) and though you're probably only getting perhaps two good years out of him, good quarterbacks don't grow on trees.

(Edit: Changed 'elite' to 'good' because I definitely do not want to blunder into a slapfight over what 'elite' means and whether Roethlisberger qualifies. He's a top ten QB and we'll just leave it at that.)
   4689. Every Inge Counts Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:44 PM (#4619326)
Another week, more phantom calls against the Lions and non-calls against the Lions. Yay.
   4690. zack Posted: December 16, 2013 at 11:55 PM (#4619330)
I can't believe you guys are still arguing with Ray about his insane QB theory. He has espoused it on practically every page of this thread! And always with Tom Brady and Rex Ryan, as if he's only ever seen the Jets and Pats play.
   4691. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM (#4619353)
DID. YOU. SEE. THAT. MOTHERFRIGGING. KICK.

RAVENS!
   4692. Every Inge Counts Posted: December 17, 2013 at 12:42 AM (#4619360)
Joe Flacco's grittiness or some sort of nonsense. One day the Lions will get the calls that the Ravens and Eagles get.
   4693. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 17, 2013 at 01:27 AM (#4619386)
Francesa was all amped up today about Dez Bryant having the gall to walk off the field after the game was over. Francesa said Dallas must suspend Bryant for the rest of the season "or they don't have a team."

Meanwhile, the Steelers' player breaks the punter's neck on a blindside hit and it's not as big a deal as Dez Bryant heading to the locker room at the end of the game.

Something is effed up here.

If I were Dallas I'd loudly announce that Bryant won't be starting the next game -- and then have him sit out the first play, a running play, before sending him onto the field for the second play.
   4694. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 17, 2013 at 01:30 AM (#4619388)
Another week, more phantom calls against the Lions and non-calls against the Lions. Yay.


Yeah, some of those calls against the Lions were BS.

Why does Stafford throw into double coverage all the time? His receivers get pounded constantly.
   4695. cmd600 Posted: December 17, 2013 at 02:28 AM (#4619399)
Not even the Browns, especially current management, are dumb enough to give up a first rounder for going-on-45 Big Ben. Theyre not a mediocre QB away from anything worth giving up a first rounder + whatever that contract would have to be. That is exactly the type of team that needs to pick up a 22 year old and continue building around him as he theoretically improves toward his prime.
   4696. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: December 17, 2013 at 04:29 AM (#4619409)
Yeah, some of those calls against the Lions were BS.

Why does Stafford throw into double coverage all the time? His receivers get pounded constantly.

Cause Stafford is not actually a very good QB. He makes bad reads, and his progression is too slow. He is made to look a lot better than he is statistically, because he can lob up floaters to Megatron, and have him bring them in, because he can beat any and all DB's. I know this flies in the face of your master theory, but well...
   4697. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: December 17, 2013 at 06:51 AM (#4619412)
When a team consistently takes cheap shots and is also known as the most complaining team in the league that team's fans should not be surprised at iffy officiating

   4698. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 17, 2013 at 08:20 AM (#4619417)
Why does Stafford throw into double coverage all the time? His receivers get pounded constantly.


Because he's not very good. We had this conversation a couple days ago. Stafford is below average and Megatron and high volume make him look statistically like a star. Fancy Pants Handle is right. Stafford has a good arm but makes poor decisions, slow reads and his footwork in the pocket and feel for the rush is atrocious.

I have Stafford rated right between Andy Dalton and Matt Stafford. Dalton's a superficially good comp, actually; he doesn't get nearly the pass attempts Stafford does, but he's as good as Stafford or better, and he's similarly propped up by the second-best receiver in the NFL, A.J. Green. Granted Dalton has the opposite skill set from Stafford; his reads and pocket feel are pretty good but his arm is not very good.

Not even the Browns, especially current management, are dumb enough to give up a first rounder for going-on-45 Big Ben. Theyre not a mediocre QB away from anything worth giving up a first rounder + whatever that contract would have to be. That is exactly the type of team that needs to pick up a 22 year old and continue building around him as he theoretically improves toward his prime.


I think both the Browns and Roethlisberger are somewhat better than you do.
   4699. Kurt Posted: December 17, 2013 at 09:11 AM (#4619420)
I can't figure the Browns out. It seems like the defense should be pretty good, but give them a fourth quarter lead, against *anybody* (even Jacksonville), and forget it.
   4700. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: December 17, 2013 at 09:18 AM (#4619422)
Sorry; in #4698 that should read that I have Stafford between Andy Dalton and Ryan Tannehill. That's what I get for posting before coffee.
Page 47 of 80 pages ‹ First  < 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(6337 - 2:53pm, Sep 01)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(958 - 2:52pm, Sep 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogAstros Fire Bo Porter
(9 - 2:49pm, Sep 01)
Last: Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-1-2014
(11 - 2:47pm, Sep 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogBackman named PCL’s top manager
(19 - 2:41pm, Sep 01)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(55 - 2:34pm, Sep 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogSherman: How Reds react to second-half swoon will be major factor in offseason
(12 - 2:17pm, Sep 01)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

NewsblogRoyals Walk Off; Ned Yost Complains About Attendance
(14 - 1:50pm, Sep 01)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogBob Melvin calls Athletics 'pathetic' after Angels sweep four-game set
(16 - 1:16pm, Sep 01)
Last: Yoenis Cespedes, Baseball Savant

NewsblogExtreme Moneyball: The Houston Astros Go All In on Data Analysis
(6 - 12:54pm, Sep 01)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1957 Ballot
(9 - 12:54pm, Sep 01)
Last: toratoratora

NewsblogAthletics Acquire Adam Dunn
(34 - 12:38pm, Sep 01)
Last: Bourbon Samurai in Asia

NewsblogTigers' Miguel Cabrera appears to re-injure ankle, leaves game
(11 - 10:16am, Sep 01)
Last: Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde

NewsblogJesus Montero gets heckled by Mariners cross checker during rehab stint
(59 - 8:21am, Sep 01)
Last: BrianBrianson

NewsblogBlue Jays Acquire Mayberry Jr.
(4 - 7:45am, Sep 01)
Last: Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama

Page rendered in 1.0677 seconds
53 querie(s) executed