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, January 05, 2016

OT: 2016 NFL Playoffs Thread

To allow those of us without the moral fiber to quit following the NFL the space to talk about it for one month per year.

jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 12:49 PM | 2295 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nfl

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 1 of 23 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Lance Reddick! Lance him! Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:27 PM (#5126151)
*waves middle finger in Andy's general direction*
   2. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:30 PM (#5126159)
Andy: the playoff predictions you posted in the other thread were wrong. Pitt would play Denver in the 2nd round, and Seattle would play Carolina. They reseed for that round.
   3. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:43 PM (#5126183)
Let's talk gambling!

I like the Vikings getting 6 at home versus Seattle, and also (call me crazy) the Bengals if I can get +3.
   4. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:47 PM (#5126194)
So all it took was a little threadjacking and we get an NFL thread. Hurrah!
   5. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:48 PM (#5126195)
Chargers, Rams, and Raiders all file to relocate to L.A. Our first three-team city?
   6. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:51 PM (#5126203)
Jim Nantz says shipments of HGH to Peyton Manning's home is not news.
   7. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2016 at 01:52 PM (#5126206)
*waves middle finger in Andy's general direction*

Hey, it worked, thanks to jmurph. You can now return to your amateurs.
   8. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:00 PM (#5126220)
Andy: the playoff predictions you posted in the other thread were wrong. Pitt would play Denver in the 2nd round, and Seattle would play Carolina. They reseed for that round.

Thanks, I'd forgotten about reseeds. In that case:

Wild Card Round
Kansas City > Houston
Pittsburgh > Cincinnati

Seattle > Minnesota
Washington > Green Bay

Conference Semi-Finals
Denver > Pittsburgh
Seattle > Carolina

Arizona > Washington
Kansas City > New England

Conference Championships
Kansas City > Denver
Seattle > Arizona

Super Bowl
Seattle > Kansas City

No super teams this year. The only game I'm 100% sure of is Washington over Green Bay.

   9. Boxkutter Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:11 PM (#5126237)
I am having the hardest time picking the Cinci/Pit game. Cinci may be without Dalton still, but Pittsburgh may be without D'Angelo Williams. I think both teams could go to the Superbowl if healthy, but without those key pieces, I think they could both lose in the first round (although, obviously can't since they play each other). I think Denver may be one of the most flawed #1 seeds in recent memory. 8 days ago at halftime it was likely they wouldn't even make the playoffs. Now they're the #1 seed and we don't even know who's going to start for them? An aging QB who almost led the league in interceptions despite missing almost half the year, or a 3rd year guy who has less than half a season worth of starts.

As a Seattle fan, I'm really excited about a trip to Carolina in 12 days, but I am trying not to look past the Vikings. Seattle struggles (like many NFL teams do) when having to travel east and play the 1pm EST game. Sorta annoyed that the NFL continues to let that happen. Seattle is the only west coast team in the playoffs, but have to play the only 1pm game this weekend? They did this to us three years ago to when we had to play in DC one week and follow that up in Atlanta the next. Both were 1pm games. Puts the team in an obvious disadvantage. And if we do win, we'll likely be rewarded by having to do the same the following week in Carolina. Ridiculous. </rant>

I think it's going to be the Patriots against either the Cardinals or Seahawks in the Superbowl. I don't trust Denver or Andy Reid in the AFC, and I still think Carolina isn't as good as either of the NFC West teams.
   10. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:16 PM (#5126248)
I find this year nearly impossible to predict. I see no clear favorite. My tiers:

Most likely to win Super Bowl:
Arizona, Seattle, Carolina (in that order, I think, but no real separation)

Totally reasonable Super Bowl picks:
New England, Pittsburgh, Denver, Kansas City, Cincinatti (based entirely on the health of NE and Cinci; if either team continues to miss key players, one of Pitt/Den/KC will go to the Super Bowl)

Unlikely, but wouldn't completely shock me:
Green Bay (it's possible they belong in the "no chance" category, but they still employ Rodgers)

No chance:
Washington, Minnesota, Houston
   11. AuntBea Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:20 PM (#5126256)
Agree with Boxkutter on pretty much everything written above.

Wild Card Round
Kansas City over Houston
Pittsburgh over Cincinnati

Seattle over Minnesota
Green Bay over Washington

Conference Semi-Finals
Denver over Pittsburgh
New England over Kansas City

Seattle over Carolina
Arizona over Green Bay


Conference Championships
New England over Denver
Seattle over Arizona

Super Bowl
Seattle over New England
   12. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:36 PM (#5126278)
My predictions:

Wild Card Round
Kansas City > Houston
Pittsburgh > Cincinnati

Seattle > Minnesota
Green Bay > Washington

Do we know now based on the above outcomes what the next round's matchups would be?
   13. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:38 PM (#5126282)
Do we know now based on the above outcomes what the next round's matchups would be?


You'd have Seattle vs Carolina, GB vs Arizona, KC vs NE, and Pitt vs Denver.

(They reseed, lowest seeds play the #1s, Denver and Carolina.)
   14. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:53 PM (#5126300)
Some interesting questions/observations/comments I have from this year:

1. Is Andy Dalton really this good?

2. Brady can win with any offensive unit around him but it does seem that playing together for 2-3 games first helps to get everyone on the same page. But beyond that... I see little difference in non-QB offensive players other than perhaps the truly elite such as Gronkowski.

3. Is Oliver Luck expected to be healthy next year?

4. Did Johnny Manziel show one way or the other whether he can be successful in this league?

5. Is Peyton shot? How good is R.O.?

6. How would we grade Jameson Winston?

7. How would we grade Kirk Cousins?

8. As I predicted three years ago, it's three years later and Robert Griffin III has basically washed out of the league.

9. Much to discuss with Chip Kelly. Seems he was doing fine (10-6 in each of his first two years) but his offseason moves last year were bizarre. Still, 7-9 and -53 isn't a total flop.

10. Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning are probably the most overrated coach/QB duo in history, either separately or together. They failed to make the playoffs - in the NFL - in six of the last seven years. Yes, I'm choosing my endpoints (they made it the four years before that) but any way you slice it it's a terrible performance. If we include the previous four seasons - as obviously we should - then, still, missing the playoff more than 50% of the time (6 of 11 times in Eli's tenure) is not good. Yes, they have the two super bowls, but if not for those -- and they obviously deserve credit for them but there is something of a fluke to all super bowls and clearly if you're not good enough to consistently make the playoffs you're not doing enough right -- they would be thought of as mediocre to bad. As it is, they will get a complete pass due to the super bowls, and even mistakenly be thought of as great, but the entire package to me is above average at best, not even good. You can't miss the playoffs that consistently and be thought of as good, IMO.

11. WTF happened to the Packers this year? They weren't as dominating as usual. Is Rodgers slipping? Did they have more drops than their fair share?

12. Is Drew Brees on his last legs?

13. Bruce Arians appears to be a really good coach. He's underrated.

14. Jeff Fisher continues to be overrated.

15. Jim Harbaugh seems to have been missed in SF. Is Kaepernick's run over?

16. How much longer can Brady play? Five years?
   15. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:54 PM (#5126302)
Thanks, JMurph. So my predictions are:

Wild Card Round
Kansas City > Houston
Pittsburgh > Cincinnati

Seattle > Minnesota
Green Bay > Washington

Round 2:
CAR over SEA
GB over AZ
NE over KC
Pitt over DEN
   16. JJ1986 Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:56 PM (#5126305)
I really like the Bengals. Pittsburgh is a fun offensive team and look great when everything's working, but Cincinnati is a better team and they're really good everywhere but at QB. Houston isn't very good. Seattle looks like the best team in the world. I'm most torn about Green Bay/Washington, but I think I'm overrating the Packers because of the names and because they're usually better.

Kansas City > Houston
Cincinnati > Pittsburgh
Seattle > Minnesota
Washington > Green Bay

I think Denver gets an easy draw either way if Cincy wins. The Patriots are banged up all over and even when healthy have trouble covering teams with really good receivers. I'd take New England if Dalton's not ready. Carolina's had an easy schedule and not looked dominant, but I think it's a toss-up considering homefield and the travel schedule for Seattle. Arizona's way better than Washington.

Denver > Kansas City
Cincinnati > New England
Seattle > Carolina
Arizona > Washington

If it plays out that way, I'd take Arizona over Denver in the SB. I think it'd be hard for Seattle to win 3 in a row on the road. I think the next most likely results are Carolina over Denver and then Seattle over Denver.
   17. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:58 PM (#5126308)
Houston 24 - KC 15
Cin 31 - Pitt 23
Seattle 20 - Minn 17
GB 24 - Wash 20
   18. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:58 PM (#5126309)
9. Much to discuss with Chip Kelly. Seems he was doing fine (10-6 in each of his first two years) but his offseason moves last year were bizarre. Still, 7-9 and -53 isn't a total flop.


In one of the worst divisions in league history. Worth noting.
   19. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 02:59 PM (#5126310)
Why does ESPN have a line for the SEA-MIN game that has Seattle favored by 6.0 points over the Vikings.

Shouldn't each line end in a .5 to ensure that either one side or the other gets paid out?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/scoreboard/_/year/2015/seasontype/3/week/1
   20. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:01 PM (#5126314)
102-90, .531 for Coughlin with the Giants. That's not really the marker of a great coach. Of course, 8-3 in the playoffs.

Failed to win 10 games eight times in twelve seasons.
   21. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:03 PM (#5126318)
2. Brady can win with any offensive unit around him but it does seem that playing together for 2-3 games first helps to get everyone on the same page. But beyond that... I see little difference in non-QB offensive players other than perhaps the truly elite such as Gronkowski.


I think what we're seeing is that the line has been decimated by injury. They can't block thus Brady has no time to work. Combine that with worse than normal receivers and you get a very beatable offense. Combine the bad line with his normal crop of receivers and I think they at least have a chance.

A healthy Patriots team is by far the best team in the AFC- it's not even close. I still think they're probably worse than at least Arizona and Seattle (which isn't to say they still couldn't win the game, as we saw last year).
   22. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:06 PM (#5126320)
Why does ESPN have a line for the SEA-MIN game that has Seattle favored by 6.0 points over the Vikings.

Shouldn't each line end in a .5 to ensure that either one side or the other gets paid out?
No, lines are frequently whole numbers. If it hits that, it's a push.
   23. Boxkutter Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:13 PM (#5126326)
Actual predictions:
Seattle 31 Minnesota 10 (Assuming Lynch starts and plays at least half the game.)
Washington 24 Green Bay 17
Kansas City 22 Houston 20 (Assuming Houston plays for KC against HOU. If HOU had a decent QB, I'd pick them. KC gets to 22 points due to some weird Reid decision.)
Pittsburgh 30 Cincinnati 24 (Assuming Williams and Dalton are both out. If one plays, while the other doesn't, that team then gets my pick. If both play, I pick Cinci.)
   24. Howie Menckel Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:14 PM (#5126328)

I think a "true" playoff record adds an 0-1 for every season that a coach doesn't make it. Otherwise a coach benefits more from failing to make the playoffs than he does for making it but losing in the first round (and for a good coach, even losing in the second round only nets you a 1-1). A 1-0 should also be added for each time the coach's squad lands a bye into the second round.

By this method, Coughlin goes from 8-3 to 9-10, which is obviously a more accurate way of looking at him.

Meanwhile, the Redskins haven't beaten any winning teams this year (0-3) after doing so twice in a 4-12 season in 2014 (beat 12-4 Cowboys and 10-6 Eagles). They also beat the 9-7 Chargers in 2013 during a 3-13 campaign (and the Bears, who were 8-7 besides a loss to the Redskins).



   25. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:20 PM (#5126331)

I think a "true" playoff record adds an 0-1 for every season that a coach doesn't make it. Otherwise a coach benefits more from failing to make the playoffs than he does for making it but losing in the first round (and for a good coach, even losing in the second round only nets you a 1-1). A 1-0 should also be added for each time the coach's squad lands a bye into the second round.
Then you are double-penalizing for regular season losses. And you are bringing in lots of outside factors, e.g. Marvin Lewis and Belichik both went 12-4 this year. Why should the seeding tiebreakers give one of them an extra coaches win?
   26. SandyRiver Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:30 PM (#5126342)
I think what we're seeing is that the line has been decimated by injury. They can't block thus Brady has no time to work. Combine that with worse than normal receivers and you get a very beatable offense. Combine the bad line with his normal crop of receivers and I think they at least have a chance.


Some interesting data seen at Football Outsiders:

Before Edelman got hurt, Brady's average release time was 2.1 seconds. Since then it's about 3 seconds, and that plus the O-line scramble explains a lot of the Pats' recent offensive woes. (Note: In SB 49 his release time was right about 2 seconds, and his only 3+ resulted in a sack.) If Edelman is back for the Div. round, even at 80%, and Amendola is closer to full speed, then defenses can't pay such close attention to Gronk and all 3 receivers become more dangerous. A reasonably healthy Vollmer would be a huge help as well. (Plus guys like Hightower and C. Jones on the D.)

Many, many ifs.
   27. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:31 PM (#5126343)
I think Ray's simple method of laying out Coughlin/Eli's record gets to the point. You simply can't miss the playoffs that many times in the 8 division era, particularly given that the NFC East has rarely fielded more than one good team per season throughout their tenure.

And in the interests of full disclosure, as a Patriots fan I acknowledge that their regular season dominance of the last decade and a half has been greatly aided by getting to play Buffalo, Miami, and the Jets 6 times per year. To their credit, of course, they haven't exactly squeaked in most years.
   28. dlf Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:36 PM (#5126349)
Is Oliver Luck expected to be healthy next year?

I don't see why not. Being an attorney working at the NCAA on regulatory matters isn't tremendously physically taxing. On the other hand, he is about to turn 56 and hasn't played QB since 1986 so I'm not expecting much strength on the down field throws. His son, Andrew Luck, on the other hand, is expected to make a full recovery, but having suffered a non-standard injury (torn kidney) may not be as projectable as someone coming back from an ACL or a broken collar bone.

WTF happened to the Packers this year? They weren't as dominating as usual. Is Rodgers slipping? Did they have more drops than their fair share?


A decimated offensive line and a fat Eddie Lacy resulted in zero time for Rodgers who was throwing to receivers who didn't do enough to get open and Jones had dropitis.

   29. zack Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:43 PM (#5126354)
As a Buffalo fan, 5 playoff appearances in 12 years sounds like an unbeatable super-team to me. I didn't know being that amazing was possible.
   30. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 03:59 PM (#5126373)

And in the interests of full disclosure, as a Patriots fan I acknowledge that their regular season dominance of the last decade and a half has been greatly aided by getting to play Buffalo, Miami, and the Jets 6 times per year. To their credit, of course, they haven't exactly squeaked in most years.


It's certainly a factor to be considered but it must be done in light of:

1. Part of the reason the teams in the division have been mediocre is because of the Patriots;
2. I thought the Dolphins and maybe even the Jets had done ok against the Patriots over the years.

We'd have to look at the Patriots' non-division record and compare. My guess is that it's probably about the same. (May be even worse vs the division, if my recollection that Miami beats Brady is accurate.) The Patriots do well against just about everyone.
   31. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: January 05, 2016 at 04:35 PM (#5126414)
Brady has the following AFC East records (regular season only):

Bills: 25-3
Dolphins: 19-9
Jets: 21-7

That's a .774 winning percentage.

Against everyone else he's 107-34, or .759. Not a meaningful difference. Really, the Bills suck and Miami playing them closer than you'd expect balances out.

If you looked at out of division records I think that may paint a picture that shows the Pats benefiting from the division more. But just a guess. And if so, that'd suggest the Patriots actually underperformed in their division, which is pretty hilarious*.

*Except that, don't all NFL teams underperform in their division given familiarity? Or is that just one of those gambling rules that is bunk?
   32. Nasty Nate Posted: January 05, 2016 at 04:46 PM (#5126424)
*Except that, don't all NFL teams underperform in their division given familiarity? Or is that just one of those gambling rules that is bunk?
They can't all underperform...

I think the gambling rule (whether superstition or valid) is that favorites underperform in those in-division games.
   33. stanmvp48 Posted: January 05, 2016 at 04:47 PM (#5126425)
Since they win the East every year; they have to play the other three division winners from the previous season.
   34. PASTE Transcends Almost All Generations (Zeth) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 04:59 PM (#5126447)
Picks:

WILD CARD ROUND
Cincinnati 23, Pittsburgh 20
Kansas City 23, Houston 6
Seattle 27, Minnesota 10
Green Bay 21, Washington 20

DIVISIONAL ROUND
Kansas City 21, Denver 17
New England 35, Cincinnati 9
Seattle 34, Carolina 31
Arizona 28, Green Bay 23

CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS
New England 28, Kansas City 26
Arizona 34, Seattle 13

SUPER BOWL
Arizona 38, New England 21
   35. Kurt Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:09 PM (#5126460)
Needless to say, this year didn't do much to change my opinion that Coughlin is a good (not great) coach, Eli is a good (not great) QB and the rest of the team outside of Odell is terrible and has been for a few years. I am extremely skeptical that the Giants would have won the division if you had swapped those two for Gruden and Cousins.
   36. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:21 PM (#5126476)
As to the Odell situation, I find it comical that people just now woke up to the fact that he's a showboating fool. It's sort of a neat trick to stand out as a showboating fool in a league full of showboating fools, but there he is.
   37. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:24 PM (#5126478)
Also, I don't deny Odell's talent, but it seems that the Giants' style of offense makes these players, as opposed to the other way around. Victor Cruz was nearly as good.
   38. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:26 PM (#5126479)
That's a .774 winning percentage.

Against everyone else he's 107-34, or .759. Not a meaningful difference. Really, the Bills suck and Miami playing them closer than you'd expect balances out.


First of all, that's amazing and thanks for running the numbers. I'm happy to be proven wrong (basically). I was also trying to get at the idea that, in most years, they're winning the division by 2 or 3 games. It's seemingly locked up by Week 15, sometimes earlier. The Jets had a couple of good years... Miami maybe, early on? It's been a while since they've actually had a rival to worry about.
   39. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:27 PM (#5126480)
Yeah, I don't see any appreciable difference between .774 vs .759.
   40. jmurph Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:32 PM (#5126483)
Needless to say, this year didn't do much to change my opinion that Coughlin is a good (not great) coach, Eli is a good (not great) QB and the rest of the team outside of Odell is terrible and has been for a few years. I am extremely skeptical that the Giants would have won the division if you had swapped those two for Gruden and Cousins.


I'm basically on the overrated but mostly fine level with Eli (though he was better than that this year and last, I think); he's never been as good as ESPN pretended he was for a long time, but he's also likely better than you're going to get in the draft/free agent market in most years. But I wouldn't dismiss the idea that Coughlin couldn't be improved on so easily. If clock management is any indication of overall coaching quality (and it may not be), he's been a mess for a while now.
   41. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:40 PM (#5126487)
On Eli, a 97-86 regular season record and 8-3 playoff record basically sums him up. His QB rating has been 93 the past two years.... but since the passing game has changed in the NFL, that's only good enough for 13th in the league.

He's in the range of mediocre to above average, as ever. So in his good years he's good and in his bad years he's below average.
   42. MHS Posted: January 05, 2016 at 05:50 PM (#5126492)
My thoughts on the NFC tomorrow.

The way I like to think about the playoffs is three factors. Quality wins, clear wins (open to a better term - but basically: a win where a team wins or conversely losses in convincing fashion) and health - if its close coaching comes into play.


New England
10 clear wins and only 2 clear losses.
Played a soft schedule with only 4 quality opponents.
Health a huge question mark.

Houston
6 clear wins and 7 clear losses.
Also played a soft schedule with only 4 quality opponents, and no clear wins versus them but 3 clear losses.
Reasonably healthy

Cinn
9 clear wins and only clear loss.
Played 7 quality opponents and was 3 and 4.
Dalton's injury may have cost them a some too. They have a better chance of beating Denver in week 16, which was a pick'em and maybe Pitt in week 14.
Health - a question mark.

Denver
Weird 6 clear wins, no clear losses... but 10 pick'ems.
Played 7 quality opponents and was a strong 5 and 2.
Health - Neutral

KC
Really surprised to see 11 clear wins and only 2 clear losses.
7 quality opponents, but like Cinn only 3 wins in those 7 games.
Health - Good

Pitt
Conversely, really surprised to see only 5 clear wins and 2 clear losses.
7 quality opponents, but like Cinn and KC only 3 wins in those 7 games.
Big Ben's lost time does matter here - 2 quality losses happened during his injury and maybe 1 or 2 clear wins.
Health - Neutral, maybe mild negative.

If you look at just the quantitative - Denver, NE, and KC are best in the Conference. With health having a big negative impact on the metrics of NE and Pitt and a smaller impact on Cinn. If healthier Pitt's metrics might be inline with Denver and KC's, as it is now its a bunch behind. Cinn with better health is in the picture with NE, Denver and KC... and NE is the best team in the conference with better health.

Houston has little chance.
KC is better than I thought, and probably has the best chance to goto the Super bowl than any AFC team playing this week.
Denver, isn't a typically number 1 seed.
Cinn and NE have significant positive variance.
KC, only real negative is Andy Reid.
Denver, is most likely of contenders to get blown up by poor QB play.

I like Cinn to beat Pitt. I would like this a lot more with Dalton @ 100%.
I like KC to beat Houston.

I like New England to beat Cinn
KC versus Denver is an implosion game... who screws it up worse - Andy Reid or Denver's QB. I like Denver, but not high conviction.

I like NE to beat Denver.

If Cinn beats NE I like them to beat Denver or KC.
If KC beats Denver I like KC to beat NE.


   43. smileyy Posted: January 05, 2016 at 06:47 PM (#5126529)

I think a "true" playoff record adds an 0-1 for every season that a coach doesn't make it. Otherwise a coach benefits more from failing to make the playoffs than he does for making it but losing in the first round (and for a good coach, even losing in the second round only nets you a 1-1). A 1-0 should also be added for each time the coach's squad lands a bye into the second round.


Are there coaches (like, perhaps, Coughlin) who perform better in the playoffs if they can get there, but may not do well in getting there? Your stat would obscure those details. I'm trying to think of slash lines for a coach. The things I'd want to know at a glance are:

Regular season wins and losses, # of seasons, # of seasons making playoffs, # of playoff wins, # of titles.

Maybe something like: .600/.500/1.3/2 (Regular season winning %age / Making playoffs %age / Avg. wins per playoff appearance, # of titles)

Frankly, I don't give 2 shits if you get a bye if you never win a playoff game.

   44. billyshears Posted: January 05, 2016 at 06:57 PM (#5126537)
Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning are probably the most overrated coach/QB duo in history, either separately or together.


I agree that it was time for Coughlin to go, but describing him as overrated is meaningless without a discussion as to where he should be rated (obviously). Coughlin is clearly not among the all-time greats, but I don't really think anybody regards him as such. But is he on par with Shanahan, Cowher, Carroll, Tomlin, Vermeil, Ditka, Dungy? I think probably, and I think that is how he is perceived.
   45. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:11 PM (#5126543)
So forgetting your actual rooting preferences (based on home town or whatever), would you rather have been a Giants fan over the past 12 years, or a fan of any other teams besides the Patriots or the Steelers or the Packers? IOW how much weight as a fan do you give to two glorious Super Bowl wins over two terrific Patriots teams, with all but one previous playoff win on the road, as opposed to making the playoffs the majority of times but almost never having much to show for it?
   46. Kurt Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:17 PM (#5126546)
"How much enjoyment did you get as a fan" is a different question than "how successful was the team". Speaking for myself they could have gone 1-15 for the other 11 years, and beating Undefeated Darth Vader in the Super Bowl on a helmet catch would have more than compensated.

   47. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:28 PM (#5126555)
So forgetting your actual rooting preferences (based on home town or whatever), would you rather have been a Giants fan over the past 12 years, or a fan of any other teams besides the Patriots or the Steelers or the Packers? IOW how much weight as a fan do you give to two glorious Super Bowl wins over two terrific Patriots teams, with all but one previous playoff win on the road, as opposed to making the playoffs the majority of times but almost never having much to show for it?


I think beating the 18-0 Pats in 2007 counts for a hell of a lot as far as being a fan goes. But, then, this franchise had the two Parcells championships.

I wouldn't argue with someone who would take 2007 in exchange for 10-20 years of suckitude, even if it may not be the way I'd go. Even with the two Parcells championships.

But I'll ask a more interesting question. How much was the 2011 championship, the fourth one, worth? Would you rather have it, or would you rather have consistently made the playoffs in 5 or 6 of the surrounding years? I would definitely have rather made the playoffs a bunch of times. I don't think 2011 was worth missing the playoffs in every other year from 2009-2015.

It's an odd mix of top of the world vs dud. But the 2007 championship - taking down Brady and Belichick and basically denying them the chance at immortality -- was huge for the franchise. I can't blame someone for making a deal with the devil for it.

   48. Randomly Fluctuating Defensive Metric Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:43 PM (#5126564)
I don't know why people have to get negative about Eli. Eli's fun. He's had tremendous seasons, miserable seasons, and seasons in between. He has two road playoff wins in Green Bay when his team was considered an enormous underdog. He has two Super Bowl wins under similar circumstances. (though admittedly less of an underdog for the second title) In a time period where quarterbacks fattened their completion percentages with risk-free check-down football, Eli was throwing rockets downfield in the toughest media market in the country while shepherding two great receiving talents into the league. (and a shame about Cruz's career being derailed)

Speaking as a Jets fan, I've had fun watching Eli over the years. The guy's beloved in New York by basically everyone, and he should be.
   49. smileyy Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:47 PM (#5126570)
But I'll ask a more interesting question. How much was the 2011 championship, the fourth one, worth? Would you rather have it, or would you rather have consistently made the playoffs in 5 or 6 of the surrounding years? I would definitely have rather made the playoffs a bunch of times. I don't think 2011 was worth missing the playoffs in every other year from 2009-2015.


You cray. Flags fly forever.
   50. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2016 at 07:47 PM (#5126571)
"How much enjoyment did you get as a fan" is a different question than "how successful was the team".

I agree, and of course that was exactly the point of my question.

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

I think beating the 18-0 Pats in 2007 counts for a hell of a lot as far as being a fan goes. But, then, this franchise had the two Parcells championships.

That's a fair point, but someone who's under 40 probably wouldn't remember much about those.

(Me, I still savor that second "Sneaker Bowl" game.)

I wouldn't argue with someone who would take 2007 in exchange for 10-20 years of suckitude, even if it may not be the way I'd go. Even with the two Parcells championships.

But I'll ask a more interesting question. How much was the 2011 championship, the fourth one, worth? Would you rather have it, or would you rather have consistently made the playoffs in 5 or 6 of the surrounding years? I would definitely have rather made the playoffs a bunch of times. I don't think 2011 was worth missing the playoffs in every other year from 2009-2015.


I'd personally take the second Super Bowl, especially since it also came at the expense of the Patriots----more revenge for that ####### 2004 ALCS! But I can also see the other POV, especially since the other years were pretty much mired in mediocrity.

But then I'm much more of a Ravens fan, and even with only one recent Super Bowl** over the past dozen years, I wouldn't trade their much better overall record since 2004 for what the Giants have accomplished.

** Their other one came before Coughlin showed up in New Jersey.

It's an odd mix of top of the world vs dud. But the 2007 championship - taking down Brady and Belichick and basically denying them the chance at immortality -- was huge for the franchise. I can't blame someone for making a deal with the devil for it.

Yeah, I don't see either choice as being better or worse.
   51. Howie Menckel Posted: January 05, 2016 at 09:35 PM (#5126634)

"Coughlin is clearly not among the all-time greats, but I don't really think anybody regards him as such."

There were quite a few articles in the NY media the last two days that had him as an obvious and inevitable HOF selection. "Canton-bound" and all that.

One note on Coughlin/Eli: I see Eli as being a good QB for the past decade. Even if you say "average," it wouldn't invalidate my point that Coughlin likely is the only coach in NFL history who got to start a perfectly respectable QB in EVERY SINGLE GAME for 10 straight years. That is a tremendous opportunity - look at the coaches this year alone who lost their QBs for weeks at a time. Belichick went 15 games with Matt Cassel in the middle of Brady's career (and went 11-5).

It's also a feather in Eli's cap - iirc, Don Sutton has more ERA-qualifying seasons of 100 ERA+ or better than anyone in baseball history. It's a plus for your franchise.
   52. Kurt Posted: January 05, 2016 at 09:57 PM (#5126643)
[deleted]
   53. Howie Menckel Posted: January 05, 2016 at 10:10 PM (#5126647)

I know a lot of Giants fans who don't buy the hype of either Coughlin or Eli, and who don't flinch at the word "fluke" either. And they gladly take the last dozen years anyway - and I don't blame them one bit. Flags do fly forever.
   54. PASTE Transcends Almost All Generations (Zeth) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 10:22 PM (#5126650)
Eli Manning is proof positive that it's better to be lucky than good.

Most of his career Eli's been around the 10th best QB in the league. Some years as high as 6th or 7th, some years as low as 14th or 15th. It's been a pretty good career. The magical playoff runs are things that happened and can't be taken away from him, or from the team or its fans.
   55. Astroenteritis Posted: January 05, 2016 at 10:46 PM (#5126669)
When Houston was down 41-0 to Miami at halftime on the way to a 2-5 record, if you had told me they would make the playoffs....

As for the playoffs, I really like Seattle's chances.
   56. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 05, 2016 at 10:58 PM (#5126674)
When Houston was down 41-0 to Miami at halftime on the way to a 2-5 record, if you had told me they would make the playoffs....

Or when the Redskins had just been bar-b-q'd in Charlotte and were trailing a Giants team that had just come within a #### hair of kiboshing the Patriots' perfect season.
   57. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 05, 2016 at 11:01 PM (#5126677)
The lower you rate Eli the higher you have to rate Coughlin, no? On the other hand, he's 71st all time in win percentage, just behind Dan Reeves. Other coaches in the neighborhood: Dick Vermeil, Jon Gruden, Marvin Lewis, Jeff Fisher.
   58. Howie Menckel Posted: January 05, 2016 at 11:54 PM (#5126696)

"Or when the Redskins had just been bar-b-q'd in Charlotte and were trailing a Giants team that had just come within a #### hair of kiboshing the Patriots' perfect season."

Well, the Redskins collapsed in that game after a turnover for a TD and a 21-14 2nd-quarter lead for them was overturned (Mike Perieira sighed as he called it an accurate call and said something like "it's hard on the defense these days" re hitting a pass-catcher). No defense for the Redskins' response, but that game wasn't exactly a 60-minute blowout.

and the Giants didn't quite beat a decimated Patriots team that a couple of weeks later lost to the Jets and Dolphins to blow the No. 1 seed.

I do like the "sliding Eli/Coughlin" scale, though. has an element of those "Saw" movies to it - you can't get both of your guys elected, so which one do you kill?
   59. Peter Farted Again Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:28 AM (#5126707)
As of right now all four home teams are underdogs. Home dogs tend to do quite well, both straight up and against the spread.

Bold prediction: all the home teams win, except for one. I'll pick Pittsburgh to beat Cincy.

Yes, I know I'm wrong.
   60. AuntBea Posted: January 06, 2016 at 01:09 AM (#5126729)
edit: double post
   61. AuntBea Posted: January 06, 2016 at 01:10 AM (#5126730)
I still see posted odds as GB/WA as a pick'em (and that is also the hardest game to choose a winner for me), but the other 3 seem like clear road favorites. That being said, chances are one of the other three road teams will lose and the GB/WA game could go either way.
   62. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 06, 2016 at 03:20 AM (#5126744)
As of right now all four home teams are underdogs.


As they should be. We've had some awfully weak division winners this year.
   63. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 07:43 AM (#5126758)
I like three home dogs to cover if not win outright, plus KC.
   64. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 06, 2016 at 07:54 AM (#5126760)
"Or when the Redskins had just been bar-b-q'd in Charlotte and were trailing a Giants team that had just come within a #### hair of kiboshing the Patriots' perfect season."

Well, the Redskins collapsed in that game after a turnover for a TD and a 21-14 2nd-quarter lead for them was overturned (Mike Perieira sighed as he called it an accurate call and said something like "it's hard on the defense these days" re hitting a pass-catcher). No defense for the Redskins' response, but that game wasn't exactly a 60-minute blowout.


Except that that second half collapse at that point served to cement the then-existing narrative of the Redskins' season: One dashed hope after another. Virtually nobody in Washington was then even dreaming that they would then turn the season around as completely as they have since then.
   65. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 06, 2016 at 08:19 AM (#5126765)
Since it's three years to the day since I wrote that Griffin would be out of the league in three years:

1180. Ray (RDP) posted on January 06, 2013 at 11:13 PM:

RGIII just died.

Yes, say hello to mediocre quarterback Robert Griffin, who will be out of the league in three years.

He was hurt, and therefore he shouldn't have been in there, both because they were risking a serious, career-threatening injury with him and because he sucks if he doesn't have his legs.

The capper: He was hurt reaching back for the ball on a fumble. If he couldn't do that, he had no business being in the game.


Of course, he didn't play at all this season.
   66. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 08:38 AM (#5126778)
It will likely be zero degrees or colder for the Seattle - Minnesota game. Which team does that help?
   67. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 06, 2016 at 08:40 AM (#5126781)
I wouldn't be surprised if Griffin bounces around in a backup role, might even start for a time if the guy ahead of him gets hurt. This is a league where guys like Brandon Weedon, Christian Ponder, Jimmy Clausen, Luke McCown etc. have been bouncing around usually wind up starting a few games a year. Then agian, his style is more like Vince Young who didn't last very long despite some early career success.
   68. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:03 AM (#5126793)
I think RGIII is unlikely to bounce around as a backup. He will either latch on somewhere in the next year or 2 as a starter or will be out the league. He has the reputation as a player needs a playbook structured to his skill set. Teams don't do that for backups. If that reputation is false or he can or will has evolved then maybe.
   69. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:22 AM (#5126805)
It will likely be zero degrees or colder for the Seattle - Minnesota game. Which team does that help?


My guess is no one, although negative wind chill at kickoff, playing at 10am west coast time, doesn't seem like a great thing for Seattle. But I gotta think the Vikings aren't exactly in love with dangerously cold weather, either.
   70. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:23 AM (#5126806)
I think RGIII is unlikely to bounce around as a backup. He will either latch on somewhere in the next year or 2 as a starter or will be out the league. He has the reputation as a player needs a playbook structured to his skill set. Teams don't do that for backups. If that reputation is false or he can or will has evolved then maybe.


I 100% agree that someone will bring him to camp with a chance to compete for the starting spot. He might even win it. He will not, however, be able to stay healthy for 16 games, at which point he will presumably lose the starting job again.
   71. Random Transaction Generator Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:36 AM (#5126823)
Wild theory:

Chip Kelly gets the job in SF.
In the off-season, he trades for RGIII (getting him on the cheap) and trades away Kap (for draft picks).
   72. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:47 AM (#5126835)
and trades away Kap (for draft picks).


I can't imagine there's an actual trade market for Kap outside of like a 7th rounder. I assume Kelly either keeps him or releases him. And I believe RGIII's contract is only guaranteed if he's injured, so he'll likely be available for free, given that teams know he'll be released rather than paid 15+ million by Washington.
   73. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 09:51 AM (#5126839)
Agree with Jmurph on 72. Kap is unlikely to return significant value in a trade, and RGIII is likely to be released.
   74. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 10:35 AM (#5126898)
My guess is no one, although negative wind chill at kickoff, playing at 10am west coast time, doesn't seem like a great thing for Seattle. But I gotta think the Vikings aren't exactly in love with dangerously cold weather, either.
For gambling purposes, if extreme cold will likely suppress scoring, it might favor the underdog (Min). Good point about the travel thing, too.

The line seems to be bouncing around between 4 and 6.
   75. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 06, 2016 at 10:48 AM (#5126928)
It will likely be zero degrees or colder for the Seattle - Minnesota game. Which team does that help?


My guess is no one, although negative wind chill at kickoff, playing at 10am west coast time, doesn't seem like a great thing for Seattle. But I gotta think the Vikings aren't exactly in love with dangerously cold weather, either.

The only real difference would be how used to extreme weather the individual players are, and looking at the two rosters it's hard to see much difference in where their college experience came from in terms of North / South. FWIW Teddy Bridgewater went to Louisville, and Russell Wilson went to Wisconsin.

IMO the real question is the extent of the Vikings' injury recoveries from that walloping the Seahawks gave them in that same stadium just one month ago today, when they outgained the Vikings in total yardage by 433 to 125 yards.
   76. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 10:56 AM (#5126941)
real question is the extent of the Vikings' injury recoveries from that walloping the Seahawks gave them in that same stadium just one month ago today


Just because they walloped them a month ago, does not mean they will wallop them again. Teams play at different levels nearly every weeks for a variety of reasons only some of which are match-up related.


   77. Kurt Posted: January 06, 2016 at 10:59 AM (#5126948)
But I gotta think the Vikings aren't exactly in love with dangerously cold weather, either.


They did okay against the Giants, when it was in the low teens.
   78. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:06 AM (#5126961)
IMO the real question is the extent of the Vikings' injury recoveries from that walloping the Seahawks gave them in that same stadium just one month ago today, when they outgained the Vikings in total yardage by 433 to 125 yards.

Just because they walloped them a month ago, does not mean they will wallop them again. Teams play at different levels nearly every weeks for a variety of reasons only some of which are match-up related.


I realize that, and that's why I mentioned the injury recovery factor. If you watched that massacre from a month ago, you might remember all the commentary about how the Vikings' defense was shredded with injuries. I haven't kept up with the latest injury reports, but I'd think that those might have a big effect on Sunday's outcome.
   79. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:09 AM (#5126964)
Teddy Bridgewater went to Louisville, and Russell Wilson went to Wisconsin


Wilson's UW tenure was a grand total of seven home games, two of which were in November, none of those games were remotely cold. He did play at TCF stadium that November vs Minnesota, it was like 60 degrees that day. Meaningless, he's played in worse weather as a pro. FWIW, Favre, who hated the cold, was once unbeatable in the cold, until he wasn't (Vick running wild in the snow and cold, and later Favre's last game as a Packer, vs Eli Manning in the uber cold)
   80. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:12 AM (#5126969)
I'm pretty sure the only cold-weather game for the Seahawks was the prior one in Minnesota, and temps still were in the 30's I think.
   81. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:28 AM (#5126992)
They did okay against the Giants, when it was in the low teens.


They did, though Eli looked like he was dying out there, so that helped. (For which I do not blame him. I certainly don't enjoy sub-freezing weather, either, and 300+ pound men aren't typically chasing me around while I deal with it.)
   82. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:48 AM (#5127016)
mrams

favre got old. from experience i can tell you that the first thing that goes is the ability to deal with the cold. this happens to many qbs as they age. for us common folks you can hang in there until your late 50's/early 60's. but eventually the body says, 'wear a hat fool!'
   83. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 06, 2016 at 11:57 AM (#5127030)
Wilson's UW tenure was a grand total of seven home games, two of which were in November, none of those games were remotely cold. He did play at TCF stadium that November vs Minnesota, it was like 60 degrees that day.

I have to respect the research that must have gone into those two sentences. Good to know.

Meaningless, he's played in worse weather as a pro. FWIW, Favre, who hated the cold, was once unbeatable in the cold, until he wasn't (Vick running wild in the snow and cold, and later Favre's last game as a Packer, vs Eli Manning in the uber cold)

IOW we really can't tell what effect it might have on the game. No argument there.

I think a lot of this narrative originated in the 60's and 70's, when in 1967 the Packers easily beat the favored LA Rams in Lambeau in the divisional playoff and then beat Dallas at Lambeau in the title game**, and even more when the Vikings twice beat the LA Rams in Bloomington during extreme weather conditions. It's one of those things where the narrative gets driven by selected games, while the games that contradict the narrative get ignored.

** Even though the famous Ice Bowl wasn't won until the last few seconds of the game, and the Packers had been favored.
   84. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:01 PM (#5127039)
It's one of those things where the narrative gets driven by selected games, while the games that contradict the narrative get ignored.


There was also a long streak where... New Orleans(?) had never won a game played below freezing? Maybe Tampa. Atlanta? (Great story, jmurph!)
   85. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:10 PM (#5127068)
Maybe Tampa.


Tampa didn't win a game when the game-time temperature was below 40 degrees until 2002 (against Chicago, in Champaign, Ill.), covering 20 games. Of course, they weren't exactly lighting it up in warm weather during much of that quarter century either.

   86. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:12 PM (#5127071)
The early forecast has a wet night in Cincinnati on Saturday. That helps the Bengals, right?
   87. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:18 PM (#5127079)
Tampa didn't win a game when the game-time temperature was below 40 degrees until 2002 (against Chicago, in Champaign, Ill.), covering 20 games. Of course, they weren't exactly lighting it up in warm weather during much of that quarter century either.


Thanks SoSH. There was also the added element that, by virtue of playing on the road (where, presumably, all of those sub 40 degree games took place), they were likely underdogs the vast majority of the time anyway, regardless of the weather.
   88. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:21 PM (#5127084)
nate

this game is dead even. i don't see weather changing that.

by the way, anyone who thinks the animus between the two teams is contrived is dead wrong. by chance i have friends with both organizations and the ill feelings go deep and long between the players. both coaches are taxed in that they want to avoid their guys getting big penalties but also do not want to undermine them playing at fever pitch.

what may become interesting is that with this being an evening game and so many steeler fans making the drive the combination of alcohol, illwill, etc may lead to brawls in the stands. cincy fans are normally pretty reserved but when pittsburgh comes to town that reserve vanishes
   89. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:21 PM (#5127085)
   90. dlf Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:22 PM (#5127086)
Perhaps the coldest I've ever been was at this game between the Vikings and 49ers in Bloomington at the old Met when I was 10 years old. It was an open U shaped stadium and our seats were in the upper deck, right against the rail, about a half dozen rows from the top. The box score shows a 12 degree kick off with -2 wind chill, but I suspect that was at ground level and high in the stands I'm sure the wind chill was several degrees colder. I've been outside in colder weather, whether skiing, ice fishing, or just going to and from a car, but have never had to basically sit still for 3+ hours. It was also the first time I had a drink strong that a sip of wine or beer as my dad let me take more than a bit of the peppermint schnapps that was being passed back and forth in the flasks that all the men brought into the game. I guess dad thought either it would warm me from the inside or at least I'd stop the complaining as the Vikes mounted a late comeback from a big deficit and there was no way he'd leave early.
   91. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:23 PM (#5127089)

this game is dead even. i don't see weather changing that.
Thanks. I tend to agree that it is evenly matched. That's why I might gamble if I can get a few points for Cincinnati.
   92. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:27 PM (#5127093)
nate

mike tomlin has become more aggressive in his tactics this season while marvin lewis adheres to the same old approaches common to coaching

i like lewis. clearly a solid coach. but i think one of the reasons cincy struggles come playoff time is that lewis won't take any risks however calculated. with a backup qb and playing at home lewis should be thinking outside of his standard routine

but he won't. he can't. just not who he is.
   93. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:30 PM (#5127098)
Tampa didn't win a game when the game-time temperature was below 40 degrees until 2002 (against Chicago, in Champaign, Ill.), covering 20 games. Of course, they weren't exactly lighting it up in warm weather during much of that quarter century either.

The Bucs crushed the favored Eagles in Philadelphia in the 2002-03 Conference Finals on January 12th, when the high for the day was 34 and the mean temperature was 28.
   94. Nasty Nate Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:35 PM (#5127107)
i like lewis. clearly a solid coach. but i think one of the reasons cincy struggles come playoff time is that lewis won't take any risks however calculated. with a backup qb and playing at home lewis should be thinking outside of his standard routine

but he won't. he can't. just not who he is.
I wonder how many more one-and-dones it would take for him to change. I'd guess he has every Bengals franchise coaching record for the regular season, but his teams have lost every single one of their 6 playoff games.
   95. Tom Nawrocki Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:44 PM (#5127121)
i like lewis. clearly a solid coach. but i think one of the reasons cincy struggles come playoff time is that lewis won't take any risks however calculated. with a backup qb and playing at home lewis should be thinking outside of his standard routine


I'm trying to get a handle on what Dalton's status is for the game - he's apparently going to be in uniform but not starting. I suppose that he would come in if, say, the Bengals are trailing in the second half. If Lewis loses this game with Dalton on the bench, I imagine there will be calls for his head.
   96. MHS Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:45 PM (#5127123)
I think Cincinnati is just a better team, even with a back-up QB. Pittsburg defense isn't good, and Roethlisberger has been a pick machine throwing 16, behind only Bortles and Manning.

Lewis isn't a great coach - but either is Tomlin.
   97. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:53 PM (#5127137)
I'm trying to get a handle on what Dalton's status is for the game - he's apparently going to be in uniform but not starting. I suppose that he would come in if, say, the Bengals are trailing in the second half. If Lewis loses this game with Dalton on the bench, I imagine there will be calls for his head.


Doesn't that basically mean he's not healthy enough to play? If he was, he'd start.
   98. jmurph Posted: January 06, 2016 at 12:54 PM (#5127139)
Roethlisberger has been a pick machine throwing 16


Favre-disease, in the games I've seen, trying to throw the ball through defenders.
   99. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2016 at 01:24 PM (#5127178)
i have a lot of experience with broken thumbs. dalton's grip will be impacted. and if it is bad weather even more so. he could also create permanent damage by coming back so soon which will affect his ability to grip a football forever like it did with favre
   100. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2016 at 01:32 PM (#5127190)
I imagine there will be calls for his head.

won't matter. mike brown will never fire a guy who has won wihtin the constraints that the family has created.

marvin is coahc of the bengals for life as long as he wants to be and can go 9-7 every so often. that he is a regular winning coach just cements his position.

that and pretty sure marvin is the one of the lowest paid head coaches in the league at 3 odd million annually.

the browns would never get another new coach in for that kind of money. and mike brown knows it
Page 1 of 23 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Ray (RDP)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2016 August 22: Baseball has much to teach us about politics
(856 - 7:29pm, Aug 26)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-25-16
(112 - 7:29pm, Aug 26)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Sox TherapyIt Gets Easier...But Not Easy
(3 - 7:15pm, Aug 26)
Last: SY Ruined School Lunches!

NewsblogShelby Miller’s demotion likely to delay free agency
(10 - 7:12pm, Aug 26)
Last: shoewizard

NewsblogWhite Sox GM Rick Hahn says talk of trade-deadline discord 'simply untrue'
(18 - 7:09pm, Aug 26)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogThe Kansas City Royals will miss the MLB playoffs; they have too much ground to make up | The Kansas City Star
(48 - 6:43pm, Aug 26)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 8-26-2016
(6 - 6:28pm, Aug 26)
Last: Batman

NewsblogRangers pitcher Jeremy Jeffress arrested, records show
(24 - 6:14pm, Aug 26)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogDodgers land Ruiz from Phillies | dodgers.com
(40 - 5:43pm, Aug 26)
Last: Gold Star - just Gold Star

NewsblogVotto ‘reaches out’ to Mays, Musial, Jeter
(8 - 5:35pm, Aug 26)
Last: gehrig97

NewsblogBaseball’s minor leaguers pursue their dreams below the poverty line - The Washington Post
(1 - 5:29pm, Aug 26)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogFormer Cy Young winner Éric Gagné signs with the Ottawa Champions
(3 - 3:24pm, Aug 26)
Last: Batman

NewsblogOT - College Football offseason thread (February - August 2016)
(34 - 3:23pm, Aug 26)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogJeff Francoeur is Still Employed by a Major League Team
(18 - 3:03pm, Aug 26)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

Gonfalon CubsWhat the FIP?
(7 - 2:07pm, Aug 26)
Last: Moses Taylor, sex fowler

Page rendered in 0.6928 seconds
49 querie(s) executed