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 | 8370 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 77 of 84 pages ‹ First  < 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 >  Last ›
   7601. Howling John Shade Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:38 PM (#4650515)
Fox's slow burn buildup for the 24 ads really backfired on them thanks to the blowout.
   7602. Dale Sams Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:38 PM (#4650516)
the commercials this evening have been subpar


The pace has just been horrendous on them. They all have the same formula:

Celebrity
Slow pace
Dumb joke

Even that 24 commercial looked like a horrible parody.
   7603. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:39 PM (#4650517)
the commercials this evening have been subpar


I think that while there hasn't been many great commercials we'll remember for years there's been a lot fewer truly bad commercials. No straight up sexist commercials I can remember, and other than the Axe commercial nothing that offended my personal sensibilities. Some of them were dumb, and some of them were bad, but they were bad in the generic unimaginative sense.
   7604. dlf Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:40 PM (#4650518)
Best commercial? None have really impressed me.
   7605. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:41 PM (#4650519)
given all the money spent the Budweiser commercials were routinely terrible

they need to fire their ad firm
   7606. Dale Sams Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:41 PM (#4650520)
Best commercial? None have really impressed me.


The Doberhuahua one made me laugh.
   7607. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:41 PM (#4650521)
The starting 5 of the 78-79 Sonics(without looking):

PG- Dennis Johnson
SG- Gus Williams
SF- John Johnson
PF- Lonnie Shelton
C- Jack Sikma
   7608. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:44 PM (#4650522)
Good lord. John Johnson was still playing in '79? I liked the guy -- for some reason, I have a soft spot for all the original Cavs -- but again, good lord.
   7609. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:45 PM (#4650523)
green bay was young in 2010 and folks were predicting a mini dynasty

the team let Cullen Jenkins leave via free agency and the team's pass rush immediately cratered with nobody to help clay Mathews

nick Collins hurt his neck and had to retire

bj raji has gone steadily downhill since his outstanding 2010 season

desmond bishop got hurt and then released and his fierce hitting and cover ability against tight ends was lost

the team has had to use several left tackles after chad Clifton retired

ya' never know.
   7610. Monty Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:46 PM (#4650524)
I can still hear the crowd!
   7611. Lassus Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:47 PM (#4650525)
Best commercial? None have really impressed me.

That dog one already mentioned, and Radio Shack, for doing a great job making fun of themselves.
   7612. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:48 PM (#4650526)
I am glad for Russell Wilson. feel bad for monte ball. onwisconsin
   7613. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:48 PM (#4650527)
so...MVP? Percy Harvin?
   7614. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:49 PM (#4650528)
Goose, he was only around 29 or 30 in '79. That's not that old.
   7615. Monty Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:49 PM (#4650529)
If the Seahawks get to fourth down, do they kick a field goal or just run it? Which one feels less like they're running up the score?
   7616. dlf Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:49 PM (#4650530)
Night all. Thanks BTF posters for being the best part of the game.
   7617. stanmvp48 Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:50 PM (#4650532)
Does Denver let Osweiler play?
   7618. Random Transaction Generator Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:51 PM (#4650533)
CFL connection!

The Seattle backup QB used to QB for the B.C. Lions.
   7619. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:52 PM (#4650534)
Best commercial? None have really impressed me.

Best feature: The mute and pause buttons.
   7620. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:53 PM (#4650535)
the doritos cowboy commercial was pretty good
   7621. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:54 PM (#4650536)
C'mon, can we retire the Gatorade bath, please?
   7622. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:55 PM (#4650537)
The bench for that Sonics team was Paul Silas, Freddie Brown and Wally Walker

DJ was the key. He was their point and their defensive stopper. Very odd combo there. You never, ever see those together.

Second thought. I guess Jason Kidd was that type of player too.
   7623. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:55 PM (#4650539)
Goose, he was only around 29 or 30 in '79. That's not that old.


True. I didn't realize till looking it up just now that that first Cavs season was his rookie year.
   7624. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:57 PM (#4650540)
Congrats to the Seahawks, that was a whipping they just administered.
   7625. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:57 PM (#4650541)
DJ was the key. He was their point and their defensive stopper.


Heckuva player. I've whined before about the Suns trading him (I was in grad school out there at the time) for Rick ####### Robey. In retrospect, I'm not sure that team ever really recovered.
   7626. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 10:58 PM (#4650542)
that camera view and hat makes Russell Wilson looking bizarre
   7627. Bad Doctor Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:03 PM (#4650543)
ya' never know.

Wilson has to start making more than barely league minimum soon. That'll put some stress on their cap, and their depth.

Not that Sherman isn't terrific, but if I were Seattle I'd think long and hard about the type of deal he'll command too. The way they develop CBs it might be better to spread Sherman's money around to maintain that overall defensive core.
   7628. SteveF Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:04 PM (#4650545)
Just 95 days until the NFL draft.
   7629. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:05 PM (#4650546)
Yeh, never understood that trade.

Bob Cousy interviewed John McLeod after that trade, asking him their thinking on that. He said they needed a center, which was sort of true, but also paired with Walter Davis, they had to play two big guards together. So, during the game telecast, as DJ was locking down Davis, Cousy asked "What's wrong with having two big guards?".

Indeed. It's like getting rid of your power hitting SS for a relief pitcher because you already have a power hitting second baseman.
   7630. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:05 PM (#4650547)
The guy they showed guarding the trophy looked like Luca Brasi's son.
   7631. Monty Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:06 PM (#4650548)
Yay!

Okay, bye everybody. Don't be too mean to Ray.
   7632. Roger McDowell spit on me! Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:08 PM (#4650549)
Oakland Raiders??
   7633. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:10 PM (#4650550)
Okay, bye everybody. Don't be too mean to Ray.

I always just let Ray speak for himself:

5190. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 30, 2013 at 01:49 PM (#4626515)

Ok, my predictions, revised to correct my matchup error re Seattle and Carolina:

Round 1:
Green Bay (H) over 49ers (A)
Philly (H) over New Orleans (A)
San Diego (A) over Cincy (H)
Chiefs (A) over Indy (H)

Round 2:
Philly (A) over Carolina (H)
Packers (A) over Seattle (H)
Broncos (H) over Chargers (A)
Pats (H) over Chiefs (A)

Round 3:
Pats (A) over Broncos (H)
Eagles (H) over Packers (A)

Super Bowl:
Eagles over Pats 38-31



   7634. JJ1986 Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:14 PM (#4650551)
Who was the last defensive player to win the Super Bowl MVP?
   7635. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:14 PM (#4650552)
Wow, that truck is ####### ugly.
   7636. AuntBea Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:15 PM (#4650553)
I'm extremely disappointed in this game, and still think, on another day,that Denver could have made it close or even won. Still, the fact that they were favorites makes no sense from a purely football perspective. I would have given Seattle a 70-75% chance to win this game from the start.
   7637. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:21 PM (#4650556)
So points
                     Much Seahawk
    wow
   7638. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:23 PM (#4650558)
I should have Ray handle my stock portfolio, except short everything he recommends a buy, and buy everything he wants to sell. I'd be filthy rich.
   7639. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:26 PM (#4650560)
I'm extremely disappointed in this game, and still think, on another day,that Denver could have made it close or even won.

I picked Seattle to go all the way and thought Denver was overrated because of their relatively soft schedule, but you're right about that. These are just a few examples where championship game routs seem kind of flukish:

November 17, 1940, at Washington: Redskins, 7; Bears, 3
December 8, 1940, at Washington (NFL title game): Bears, 73; Redskins, 0.

December 19, 1954, at Cleveland: Lions, 14; Browns, 10
December 26, 1954, at Cleveland (NFL title game): Browns, 56; Lions, 10

November 25, 1956, at New York: Bears, 17; Giants, 17
December 30, 1956, at New York (NFL title game): Giants, 47; Bears, 7

   7640. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:32 PM (#4650562)
December 19, 1954, at Cleveland: Lions, 14; Browns, 10
December 26, 1954, at Cleveland (NFL title game): Browns, 56; Lions, 10

that is the ONLY game Paul Brown ever won against the Lions (1-7 overall). They had his number big time. As Andy knows, Paul Brown wouldn't allow thugs on his (= my) team and the Lions were full of them. And the Browns had no answer for that kind of football
   7641. Lassus Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:34 PM (#4650563)
Pitchers and catchers start reporting in four days.
   7642. Publius Publicola Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:39 PM (#4650565)
Is "thugs" code for blacks? Didn't he have Marion Mötley?
   7643. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:49 PM (#4650567)
December 19, 1954, at Cleveland: Lions, 14; Browns, 10
December 26, 1954, at Cleveland (NFL title game): Browns, 56; Lions, 10


that is the ONLY game Paul Brown ever won against the Lions (1-7 overall). They had his number big time. As Andy knows, Paul Brown wouldn't allow thugs on his (= my) team and the Lions were full of them. And the Browns had no answer for that kind of football


Hey, you're confusing the Lions of those years with the Bears, with Ed "The Claw" Sprinkle, and Ed Meadows, who cold-cocked Bobby Layne in the last game of the 1956 season and got the Bears into the title game. And then there was the 49ers with Hardy Brown and Bob St. Clair. But then pretty much every teams had players like that in those days. We think the NFL is brutal now, but that's more due to mass x velocity than it is dirty play. Some of those guys back then were truly thugs, and the refs simply looked the other way.

The Browns in those years were a bit like the Yankees of the late 50's: They were a very good team, but they were in the much weaker conference and weren't quite as good as their regular season records would indicate. The Western Conference had several teams, especially the Lions, that could hold their own against the Browns, but they spent the regular season beating up on each other, and hence no one team could stay on top for more than 2 or 3 years in a row. From 1951 through 1955 the rest of the Eastern Conference was extremely weak, and the Browns pretty much had a free pass to the title game, with only two non-conference games a year on their schedule.
   7644. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:51 PM (#4650568)
Who was the last defensive player to win the Super Bowl MVP?


Dexter Jackson in 2003.

There really was no MVP of this game, but that was probably the most preposterous Super Bowl MVP ever handed out.
   7645. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:55 PM (#4650569)
Is "thugs" code for blacks? Didn't he have Marion Mötley?

The Browns were one of the first two "modern" (post-1933) integrated pro teams, beginning in 1946 in the AAFC with Motley and Bill Willis. In the same year, the LA Rams in the NFL had Kenny Washington and Woody Strode, Jackie Robinson's teammates at UCLA. Strode later went on to have a fairly successful acting career.

And pasta's right, in that the Browns were one of the very few teams back then that DIDN'T have a rep for dirty play. He's wrong, however, in thinking that the Lions were any more dirty than most every other team. They were more in the middle of the pack in that regard.
   7646. greenback calls it soccer Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:57 PM (#4650570)
Fernando Tatis ?@FTatis23

8 points in the superbowl...i had 8 rbi in one inning

Twitter really is incredible.
   7647. Dr. Vaux Posted: February 02, 2014 at 11:59 PM (#4650571)
Now watching the kitten bowl, with John Sterling.
   7648. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:04 AM (#4650572)
Well that didn't exactly go the way that I expected.
   7649. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:17 AM (#4650573)

And pasta's right, in that the Browns were one of the very few teams back then that DIDN'T have a rep for dirty play. He's wrong, however, in thinking that the Lions were any more dirty than most every other team. They were more in the middle of the pack in that regard.

1950s Browns:1950s Lions :: 2013 Denvers: 2013 Seattles
   7650. Kurt Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:21 AM (#4650574)
Yup. Brady's better.


Eli too.
   7651. Dr. Vaux Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:33 AM (#4650576)
And Pettitte's better than Maddux?
   7652. Every Inge Counts Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:42 AM (#4650578)
Wilson has to start making more than barely league minimum soon. That'll put some stress on their cap, and their depth.

Not that Sherman isn't terrific, but if I were Seattle I'd think long and hard about the type of deal he'll command too. The way they develop CBs it might be better to spread Sherman's money around to maintain that overall defensive core.


I think this is the biggest thing that is going to be interesting to watch, they have lots of young guys locked into great contracts right now. Next couple of seasons with Wilson, Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, etc. hitting the market (or being kept by Seattle). Those contracts allowed them to go get a Percy Harvin this off-season, and they got good deals with Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril too.
   7653. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:54 AM (#4650579)
1950s Browns:1950s Lions :: 2013 Denvers: 2013 Seattles

Maybe, but off this year's record I'd say there's more of a gap between the 2013 Seahawks and the Broncos. The Lions dominated the Browns in W-L records, but aside from trading a pair of lopsided title games**, nearly all of their games were close. But Seattle not only crushed Denver today, they also beat them 40 to 10 in the preseason. Ordinarily I'd dismiss the preseason, but then there's also the fact that the Broncos faced a much easier road to the Super Bowl than the Seahawks. Obviously those two Seattle-Denver games don't reflect the true talent differential, but based on everything I've seen all year, I'd rate the Seahawks 5 to 6 points better on a neutral field like today's. Denver was a very good team in spite of how they performed today, but I think this year's Seahawks are among the very best teams in the past 30+ years. Where are their weaknesses? And what didn't they prove in terms of facing stiff competition all the way? And as a one year team, what more could they have done to prove their greatness?

Whereas between 1952 and 1954, when the Lions and Browns had their best teams of the 50's, they were pretty much in a dead heat, with the Lions at most a point or two better.


**And when the Lions won by 59-14 in 1957, the Browns didn't have Graham or many other veterans of the 1946-55 teams. They won the East that year almost by pure default.
   7654. Knock on any Iorg Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:11 AM (#4650581)
So when is the NFL draft and training camps? Can we just skip over all this baseball stuff and get back to football?
   7655. bunyon Posted: February 03, 2014 at 10:22 AM (#4650608)
I just want to publicly acknowledge that, during the NFC title game, I questioned whether either of them should still be the favorite and several posters (I only specifically recall Harvey, but there were others) pointed out that great defense can make for ugly games.

I'd say that was relevant and wanted to say so publicly.
   7656. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 10:43 AM (#4650616)
bunyon

thanks

   7657. jmurph Posted: February 03, 2014 at 10:49 AM (#4650624)
I certainly underrated Seattle's offense, Wilson in particular. He made a lot of great throws while rolling out last night. I think watching them against SF probably clouded my judgement, too.
   7658. Greg K Posted: February 03, 2014 at 10:55 AM (#4650629)
My take away from watching the last couple weeks of football is that San Francisco was a really good team. (And Seattle too obviously).
   7659. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:05 AM (#4650639)
greg

the loser of the nfc championship game would have won yesterday's game as well.

the gap between seattle and their divisional opponent is all but nonexistent

yesterday would have been more competitive with either Carolina or new Orleans as the nfc representative
   7660. hokieneer Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:08 AM (#4650642)
I certainly underrated Seattle's offense, Wilson in particular. He made a lot of great throws while rolling out last night. I think watching them against SF probably clouded my judgement, too.


I did as well.

I picked Seattle to win, but only by one score. I didn't trust Wilson enough to think they could pull too far ahead.
   7661. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:27 AM (#4650655)
I think the 2013 Seahawks were pretty near perfectly constructed to beat the 2013 Broncos and we all overlooked that fact or felt it as merely a suspicion. But boy howdy did the Broncos quit early in the game. Peyton Manning didn't, but the rest of the team sleepwalked through the entire second half. It doesn't speak well to Fox or Manning's skills as motivators.

The best historical comp I can come up with for Russell Wilson is Phil Simms--I expect him to have a long career as a good quarterback, play in a few Pro Bowls, maybe even make the Hall of Fame if he can win three titles. He's not going to be an all-time great.

For all his merely pretty good talent as a passer/runner, Wilson appears to be the real deal when it comes to being an all-timer of a field general, though; when Seattle drafted him and glowing report after glowing report about his leadership and work ethic kept pouring out during the summer and training camp, I, like many others, figured it was just smoke being blown up our asses.
   7662. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:27 AM (#4650656)
the loser of the nfc championship game would have won yesterday's game as well.

the gap between seattle and their divisional opponent is all but nonexistent

yesterday would have been more competitive with either Carolina or new Orleans as the nfc representative


What I think many people didn't account for enough is the big difference between Seattle's and Denver's regular season schedules. This was literally the first great defense that Denver had had to face all year, and Manning looked like a deer lost in the headlights. Manning's a great pocket quarterback as long as he's got protection, but he's basically got the mobility of a man on stilts, and when he's going up against the best defensive backfield the NFL has seen in many years, what he did against Dallas or Kansas City or New England wasn't really all that relevant. To make a crude baseball analogy, the 2013 regular season Broncos were much like the 1954 Cleveland Indians, big fish in a very small pond that got exposed once they stepped outside of their cocoon.
   7663. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:37 AM (#4650666)
we all overlooked that fact or felt it as merely a suspicion

??

predicted in this thread seattle would win by a td or more
   7664. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:39 AM (#4650668)
and not to brag but to help zeth understand i am not flimflamming him

7282. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 02, 2014 at 05:09 PM (#4650164)


seattle by a td or more

better team

and nobody is mentioning the huge gap in special teams play. seattle is lights out on special teams
   7665. jmurph Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4650673)
I'm moderately close to Andy in 7662, but I'm going to disagree with any analysis (not saying this is your opinion Andy, just pivoting from your post) that says that Denver didn't play poorly yesterday. Seattle was great and Denver fell apart. Both of those things can be true. Sure, Denver was probably not as good as many thought, but they didn't put up those regular seasons numbers against the CFL. Hundreds of teams have played equally mediocre schedules throughout the league's history and no one has put up those numbers before.
   7666. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:49 AM (#4650679)


seattle by a td or more


I think that counts as a missed prediction when Seattle won by five TDs. Now, if you had said Seattle would win by more than 20 points...
   7667. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:52 AM (#4650683)
I'm generalizing with "we all", Harveys. I know you and one or two others predicted a Seattle blowout.
   7668. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:53 AM (#4650684)
Hundreds of teams have played equally mediocre schedules throughout the league's history and no one has put up those numbers before.


This is true, but there is probably some truth also to the notion that it meant Denver was very ill-prepared to take on a twice-a-decade level of powerhouse.

The only way in which I can toot my horn is that I've been saying all year the NFC is vastly superior to the AFC. I think Denver versus Arizona or Green Bay (with a healthy Rodgers, of course) would be a pretty even matchup on a neutral field. I would expect San Francisco, New Orleans or Carolina to beat Denver pretty easily. Denver was a good team made by its very weak schedule to look like a great team. The NFC is absolutely stacked.
   7669. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:56 AM (#4650688)
I think that counts as a missed prediction when Seattle won by five TDs. Now, if you had said Seattle would win by more than 20 points

is that a serious comment?

zeth:

not claiming i predicted a blowout because predicting such a thing in a pro game is foolhardy. these are professionals. they are really good and they have pride.

of course, i have read football bettors claim that anything more than a td difference in a championship game is a 'blowout'.

anyway, the best team won the championship and that is good for the league and for fans
   7670. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:57 AM (#4650690)
the loser of the nfc championship game would have won yesterday's game as well.


The future looks really good in the NFC. Wilson is young. Kapernick is young. Cam Newton is young. Aaron Rodgers is still in his prime. Matt Ryan is decent. RGIII is talented if they ever put a team around him. Nick Foles is young and Chip Kelly is just getting started. Drew Brees probably has a few more years. Cardinals have a good young team if they can find a young QB. Lions have Stafford and Megatron if they can find a decent coach.

In the AFC? Old Man Brady. Old Man Manning. Old Man Roetlisberger. Overrated Flacco. Phillip Rivers is already 32. The good young QBs in the conference are Andrew Luck and Andy Dalton.

We may see a 1980s run of NFC dominance for awhile.
   7671. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:00 PM (#4650694)
The best historical comp I can come up with for Russell Wilson is Phil Simms--I expect him to have a long career as a good quarterback, play in a few Pro Bowls, maybe even make the Hall of Fame if he can win three titles. He's not going to be an all-time great


Steve Young.
   7672. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:02 PM (#4650695)
Steve Young was an all-time great, or at least his numbers say he was. I don't expect Wilson to produce at anywhere near that level (Granting that Wilson won't be playing with Jerry Rice).

In the AFC? Old Man Brady. Old Man Manning. Old Man Roetlisberger. Overrated Flacco. Phillip Rivers is already 32. The good young QBs in the conference are Andrew Luck and Andy Dalton.


Andy Dalton is thoroughly mediocre. Even that is being kind to him. The AFC's only good young quarterback is Andrew Luck, and he's saddled with a profoundly untalented team that given its ownership is probably going to stay that way for the foreseeable future. The Steelers have bowed out, and Brady and Manning continue to dominate the conference as old men surrounded by mediocre talent just by default.

not claiming i predicted a blowout because predicting such a thing in a pro game is foolhardy. these are professionals. they are really good and they have pride.


The Broncos didn't show very much pride last night.
   7673. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:04 PM (#4650697)
I'm moderately close to Andy in 7662, but I'm going to disagree with any analysis (not saying this is your opinion Andy, just pivoting from your post) that says that Denver didn't play poorly yesterday. Seattle was great and Denver fell apart. Both of those things can be true. Sure, Denver was probably not as good as many thought, but they didn't put up those regular seasons numbers against the CFL. Hundreds of teams have played equally mediocre schedules throughout the league's history and no one has put up those numbers before.

Denver played poorly because Seattle made them play poorly. Seattle should be in the discussion of best all-time defenses, and also in the discussion for best overall team of the past 30+ years. Great teams with no marquee offensive players can sneak up on us without all that much advance warning, and I think that's what we're seeing now. A lot of this was disguised by the fact that the Saints and 49ers were very good teams themselves, both of them probably better than Denver.

And while other teams have put up gaudy numbers against weak schedules before, Denver's was unusually weak. Break it down by division:

---6 games against division rivals Oakland (weak), Kansas City (exposed as weak after a 9-0 start against teams with losing records), and San Diego (a good team that played them tough and beat them at home)

---4 games against the pitiful NFC East. Philadelphia came on strong at the end, but Denver got to play them early.

---4 games against the equally pitiful AFC South, and they lost to the one exception (Indy).

---2 other conference games against Baltimore (a season opening revenge match at home against a team staggered with injuries) and New England (where they blew an enormous lead and lost)

Truth be told, there wasn't a single win against a really strong opponent in the entire year. They did expose New England's defense in the playoffs, but other teams had already done that earlier.

Of course you can say that Denver didn't make the schedule, and that they did go 15-3 prior to yesterday, but I think it's always a good idea to be wary of gaudy stats put up against a nearly unbroken series of questionable opponents.

And yeah, this is hindsight, since I picked Seattle to win a close game, not a blowout. But just because it's hindsight doesn't mean it's not valid.

   7674. jmurph Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:04 PM (#4650698)
The other thing about all of those NFC quarterbacks, as many have pointed out, is that a number of them are really cheap. In a couple years when the good but not spectacular Wilson and Kapernick are making 15-20 million a year like the less good and less spectacular Flacco et al, we'll see if those teams are able to maintain their well-rounded excellence.
   7675. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:08 PM (#4650703)
Denver played poorly because Seattle made them play poorly. Seattle should be in the discussion of best all-time defenses, and also in the discussion for best overall team of the past 30+ years.


No, sorry. You could argue for them as an upgraded 2.0 version of the '85 Bears if you make a strong timeline adjustment, but they don't have the offense of the really dominant teams of the past 30 years like the '91 Redskins, '92-'95 Cowboys (pick one) and '96 Packers.

They're probably the strongest team since the '04 Patriots. They're a pretty similar team to the '05 Steelers: Dominant defense, good enough offense, good skill talent around a shaky o-line, good-not-great very young quarterback (though I'd take '05 Roethlisberger over '13 Wilson every day of the week), champion of the superior conference. The '05 Steelers were a great team, which is obscured by the stinkbomb Roethlisberger laid in the Super Bowl, and also they're remembered as a 6 seed that got hot, whereas they were the best team in the league all year but their quarterback missed four games. If Seattle had played four games with Tarvaris Jackson they'd have been a 6 seed too, if they'd have made the playoffs at all.
   7676. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:13 PM (#4650705)
I once dropped my iPod in the Whole Foods in Palo Alto. Steve Young picked it up for me and handed it back.

And that's my Steve Young story.
   7677. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:14 PM (#4650706)
The other thing about all of those NFC quarterbacks, as many have pointed out, is that a number of them are really cheap. In a couple years when the good but not spectacular Wilson and Kapernick are making 15-20 million a year like the less good and less spectacular Flacco et al, we'll see if those teams are able to maintain their well-rounded excellence.

In further hindsight, it's possible that we've just seen the end of the only period in NFL history where the conferences were roughly equal in strength. The AFC began to dominate from the beginning of the merger, and kept it up through 1980. Then when the 49ers, the Redskins, the Bears and the Giants ramped it up, the NFC completely dominated the league for the next 15 years, winning 15 straight Super Bowls and mostly in blowouts. The AFC then bounced back with the first Denver SB win, and was the clearly better conference up through the mid-2000's, until everything leveled off through 2012.
   7678. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:16 PM (#4650710)
Seattle was great and Denver fell apart. Both of those things can be true.


Well, Denver fell apart *because* Seattle was great, and specifically because of *how* Seattle is great. I don't know that anyone saw that level of curb stomping coming, but when you take a team built specifically to exploit last decade's precision timing offensive game planning and put them up against one of three teams in the NFL that have specifically designed their defenses to destroy that sort of precision timing game plan, you get something akin to last night's results. The NFC West destroys passing offenses. The Seahawks, Niners and Cardinals all built their teams around blowing up precision timing routes (a LOT of contact on the receivers in the five-yard zone, and a good deal past that zone as well; strong and athletic D-lines and linebackers who cover ground.) There are two plays that typifies the NFC West style defense, as more or less perfected last night by Seattle.

First, there's the pick six, which seems obvious. But it's so categorically "what Seattle does" that it bears mentioning. Massive pressure on the pocket. A d-line rush that doesn't have to worry about Kaepernick or Newton rolling out and can just collapse on the old immobile Peyton. The line generated the pick there, and then the linebacker took it out of the air and outran the o-line to the end zone. The other play that stood out to me was a little bubble screen to Bebe Thomas in the second half. Denver more or less ran that the way they drew it up on the board; the other receivers cleared their defenders and blocked out. The tight end and tackle sealed reasonably well on the outside of the d-line. Thomas took the pass quickly and made the wheel back into the zone that is generally open on that play. And was promptly destroyed by the *nose tackle* coming across to cover him up. Bebe Thomas was taken down by the damned NOSE TACKLE.

It will be harder to keep a team-based defensive dynasty together, but I sure as hell didn't have Pete Carroll on the list of people likely to solve the NFL's pass-happy offensives, personally. (It helps that in the last few years the league seems to be happy to let the clutch and grab defense go around the five-yard zone. Not sure if that's intentional in trying to help defenses get back into the game or not.)
   7679. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:20 PM (#4650713)

I once dropped my iPod in the Whole Foods in Palo Alto. Steve Young picked it up for me and handed it back.


I read that as "Steve Jobs" at first. Which would be very cool. You should change your story.
   7680. bunyon Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:21 PM (#4650715)
Not sure if it was discussed here but on one of Manning's interceptions, I feel it was totally on the receiver. What wasn't on the receiver was on the line. Manning took three steps back, started to pass and by then there were two guys in range and one got an arm on the passing arm. It was almost like a BBTFer was blocking. Once the ball was limping through the air, the receiver clearly sees it and then, I couldn't believe it, SETS HIMSELF to receive the ball like it's a 1000 pound brick. The DB came from behind the receiver and made a play on the ball. I actually think the receiver should have caught the ball. He certainly should have played it well enough to bat it down or be on the DB as soon as he caught it.

Manning played a bad game. The guys around him played like they were on the take.

I haven't seen a story on the snap for the safety - any word from the players what caused that?
   7681. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:23 PM (#4650717)
I haven't seen a story on the snap for the safety - any word from the players what caused that?


Seems dead obvious that what caused it was the center being nervous as hell.
   7682. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:25 PM (#4650720)
Denver played poorly because Seattle made them play poorly. Seattle should be in the discussion of best all-time defenses, and also in the discussion for best overall team of the past 30+ years.

No, sorry. You could argue for them as an upgraded 2.0 version of the '85 Bears if you make a strong timeline adjustment, but they don't have the offense of the really dominant teams of the past 30 years like the '91 Redskins, '92-'95 Cowboys (pick one) and '96 Packers.


Timelining in the NFL is really tough, but I said they belonged in the discussion, not that they were necessarily beyond that. The other teams I'd put there would be the 84 and 89 49ers, the 85 Bears, the 86 Giants, the 91 Redskins, the early 90's Cowboys, and perhaps the 99 Rams. How Seattle would stack up against those teams (or the 96 Packers, which you include) would depend on how much you'd adjust for era. All I'd say is that I'd love to put them all in a time machine and let them sort it out on the field.

But what impresses me most about this year's Seahawks were the defensive numbers they managed to put up in an era that was so totally dominated by offense, and against a very tough schedule. Based on all of that, I think the Seahawks would have a very good shot at holding down some of those other great offenses of the past, just as they held down Denver this year, and letting turnovers help them supplement their offense.

   7683. Bad Doctor Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:26 PM (#4650724)
This is true, but there is probably some truth also to the notion that it meant Denver was very ill-prepared to take on a twice-a-decade level of powerhouse.

This would seem to be Manning's epitaph, no? For me, I think he's still the greatest QB ever. He's like a chess grandmaster playing against children. When he sizes up the line of scrimmage, it seems like he can visualize what the play is going to look like 1 or 2 seconds in. He knows who's going to be open, and how much time to spend on each receiver in his progression. He's peerless in finding the right man, and delivers an accurate ball to him.

Against 95 percent of defenses, that's going to put up huge points. Against the occasional worldbeater, it doesn't, and he doesn't have any other otherworldly skills to fall back on at that point. Pre-game analysis said that Seattle could get beat in the deep middle, on deep seam routes ... catching them when they trust their DBs a little beyond the point where any human DBs can be trusted, no matter how talented. That's not Manning's game. Get a little additional time in the pocket to let the receivers eventually get untangled from Seattle's physical corners. That's not Manning's game. (And it sure ain't his O line.) Kaepernick is like the anti-Manning in many ways. He's not better than Manning, and he's not clutchier than Manning. But what he is is a guy who can put stress on Seattle's D in a way Manning just cannot.

So when the occasional great defense can limit him, and he doesn't have enough tools to respond, is he still the greatest QB ever? Kinda reminds me of Bill James talking about Biggio, but writ larger. (Ted Williams, maybe? Don't know if there was anything to his poor postseason record other than small sample size.)
   7684. SoSH U at work Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:27 PM (#4650725)
Not sure if it was discussed here but on one of Manning's interceptions, I feel it was totally on the receiver. What wasn't on the receiver was on the line. Manning took three steps back, started to pass and by then there were two guys in range and one got an arm on the passing arm. It was almost like a BBTFer was blocking. Once the ball was limping through the air, the receiver clearly sees it and then, I couldn't believe it, SETS HIMSELF to receive the ball like it's a 1000 pound brick. The DB came from behind the receiver and made a play on the ball. I actually think the receiver should have caught the ball. He certainly should have played it well enough to bat it down or be on the DB as soon as he caught it.


That was Moreno. And yes, he played that extremely poorly.

the NFC completely dominated the league for the next 15 years, winning 15 straight Super Bowls and mostly in blowouts.


13.

And I'll defend my Colts again. The 05 Steelers may well have been the second-best team in the league that year, but the 14-2 (again both losses after they clinched everything they could) Colts walloped them the first time they met, with Mr. Roethlisberger under center. One shitty first quarter in the playoff game didn't entirely rewrite what came before.


   7685. Kurt Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:28 PM (#4650727)
I haven't seen a story on the snap for the safety - any word from the players what caused that?


Apparently Peyton was changing the play and the snap count at the line, and the center couldn't hear him.
   7686. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:30 PM (#4650729)
Not sure if it was discussed here but on one of Manning's interceptions, I feel it was totally on the receiver. What wasn't on the receiver was on the line. Manning took three steps back, started to pass and by then there were two guys in range and one got an arm on the passing arm. It was almost like a BBTFer was blocking. Once the ball was limping through the air, the receiver clearly sees it and then, I couldn't believe it, SETS HIMSELF to receive the ball like it's a 1000 pound brick. The DB came from behind the receiver and made a play on the ball. I actually think the receiver should have caught the ball. He certainly should have played it well enough to bat it down or be on the DB as soon as he caught it.


We all noticed that at our party. The receiver didn't even try to tackle the guy or defend the ball. You see a dead duck like that, and you tackle the defender ready to catch the ball.

haven't seen a story on the snap for the safety - any word from the players what caused that?


The center thought they were running Omaha?
   7687. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:31 PM (#4650731)
the NFC completely dominated the league for the next 15 years, winning 15 straight Super Bowls and mostly in blowouts.

13.


Of course you're right, and the irony is that that one loss was a 38-9 blowout suffered by a Redskins team that many thought was the best they'd ever had until the 1991 monster came along.
   7688. bunyon Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:32 PM (#4650734)
I haven't seen a story on the snap for the safety - any word from the players what caused that?



Seems dead obvious that what caused it was the center being nervous as hell.


To me, too. But it just seems such a lame explanation. I mean, that was just bizarre, even for a really nervous guy.
   7689. bunyon Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:35 PM (#4650736)
Here is a quote from the Broncos center I found (Holy Cow, the center is named Manny Ramirez - I thought the NFL had PED testing):



It was real loud. We were trying to go on the cadence. I thought I heard him. I didn't. He was actually walking up to me because he had already said the cadence, and I snapped it. But again, I take full responsibility for that. It's just something that we should have been able to overcome. and we weren't able to ... It's not an excuse. It shouldn't have happened.

I went into the game focused. That wasn't the issue at all. We were backed up into the end zone and they were loud.


   7690. SoSH U at work Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:36 PM (#4650740)
To me, too. But it just seems such a lame explanation. I mean, that was just bizarre, even for a really nervous guy.


It was just Manny being Manny.
   7691. bunyon Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:38 PM (#4650742)
Nice.
   7692. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:45 PM (#4650756)
Pre-game analysis said that Seattle could get beat in the deep middle, on deep seam routes ... catching them when they trust their DBs a little beyond the point where any human DBs can be trusted, no matter how talented. That's not Manning's game. Get a little additional time in the pocket to let the receivers eventually get untangled from Seattle's physical corners. That's not Manning's game. (And it sure ain't his O line.)


The most shocking thing about last night was how utterly over matched Denver's o-line was. Having grown accustomed to seeing them play against QBs with at least a modicum of mobility (Kaepernick, Newton, even Brees can scramble) I don't know that anyone expected the quality of pass rush generated by the front four. But apparently, when they don't have to worry about the QB scrambling even to buy a little time downfield, they can pin their ears back and blow up the pocket in seconds flat. This does not bode well for the Matt Ryan led Falcons in the NFC scrum going forward.
   7693. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:55 PM (#4650769)
The fact that Matt Ryan is leading them doesn't bode well for the Falcons in any scrum.
   7694. puck Posted: February 03, 2014 at 12:56 PM (#4650773)
7690. SoSH U at work Posted: February 03, 2014 at 11:36 AM (#4650740)

To me, too. But it just seems such a lame explanation. I mean, that was just bizarre, even for a really nervous guy.


It was just Manny being Manny.


From upthread, Gamingboy had it covered:

7318. Gamingboy Posted: February 02, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4650212)
Manny being Manny.
   7695. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:00 PM (#4650781)
The fact that Matt Ryan is leading them doesn't bode well for the Falcons in any scrum.


False. If you saw anything last night, it was that even the HOF model that Matt Ryan is a knock-off of gets creamed when his line collapses entirely.
   7696. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:09 PM (#4650788)
Yes, but that doesn't make my assertion that Matt Ryan is a mediocre quarterback false.
   7697. SoSH U at work Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:14 PM (#4650794)
From upthread, Gamingboy had it covered:


7318. Gamingboy Posted: February 02, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4650212)
Manny being Manny.


I wasn't following the thread during the game, so I'll cop to being unoriginal, but not a thief.

   7698. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:15 PM (#4650795)
Yes, but that doesn't make my assertion that Matt Ryan is a mediocre quarterback false.


Matt Ryan is a second tier quarterback at worst. He's Eli Manning without the Strahan led defenses. He's not Brady or Peyton, but then again, not many are.
   7699. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:28 PM (#4650806)
i like matt ryan more than andy Dalton as a qb.

i don't know if my disdain runs as deep and wide as zeth's but Dalton to my eyes is wildly overrated. he is surrounded by b plus/a minus talent and he is generating c minus results.

   7700. jmurph Posted: February 03, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4650813)
Flip
Page 77 of 84 pages ‹ First  < 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Harry Balsagne, anti-Centaur hate crime division
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 4 OMNICHATTER
(743 - 11:39pm, Oct 25)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(475 - 11:37pm, Oct 25)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(88 - 11:32pm, Oct 25)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3807 - 11:17pm, Oct 25)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(521 - 10:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogDave Dombrowski: Injury worse than expected, Miguel Cabrera 'is as tough as you can possibly be' | MLive.com
(30 - 10:52pm, Oct 25)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogPhils' philospophy beginning to evolve | phillies.com
(14 - 9:05pm, Oct 25)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(396 - 8:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: Tom Cervo, backup catcher

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prospect Deven Marrero enjoying turnaround in Arizona Fall League | MiLB.com
(14 - 7:58pm, Oct 25)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogYost's managerial decisions make for extra-entertaining World Series | FOX Sports
(16 - 7:30pm, Oct 25)
Last: BDC

NewsblogGambling Bochy creature of habit when it comes to pitchers | CSN Bay Area
(5 - 6:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Bug Selig

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1959 Ballot
(8 - 6:29pm, Oct 25)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogMLB - Royals' Ned Yost keeps managing to win - ESPN
(12 - 6:15pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cat8

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(872 - 6:02pm, Oct 25)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(20 - 4:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: Baldrick

Page rendered in 1.0793 seconds
53 querie(s) executed