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

Thursday, November 17, 2011

[OT] Q4 NFL Thread

So as what not to annoy the people in the “no, no, the fact that we exploit our players and refuse to cut them in on the cash except for dirty booster money makes us amateur and pristine!” thread.

Mike Vick was injured in the posting of this thread.

Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 17, 2011 at 01:08 PM | 2939 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: community

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 3 of 30 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >  Last ›
   201. booond Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:15 AM (#3998077)
Norv is a horrible head coach but Lovie's fake punt call was insane.
   202. Martin Hemner Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:23 AM (#3998080)
Cowboys were lined up to attempt a 39 yard FG. The play clock was at 3 seconds and they weren't fully set, so Tony Romo got up to call timeout, but the Cowboys had no timeouts left. So they should have been penalized for delay of game, except... Shanahan called timeout. No penalty, FG was good.

In case anyone hasn't seen the highlight, the field goal was only good by a few inches. 5 more yards and it's definitely a miss.
   203. DA Baracus Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:43 AM (#3998087)
In case anyone hasn't seen the highlight, the field goal was only good by a few inches. 5 more yards and it's definitely a miss.


Yes, but I intentionally left that part out because the outcome of the kick is irrelevant in regards to the process. If he had missed it still would have been a stupid decision. The ball could have been on the 3 yard line and it is still a stupid decision. Let them get the penalty, then call timeout if icing the kicker is so important to you.
   204. Squash Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:00 AM (#3998119)
I pretty much see Tebow as Vince Young reborn. Like Young we're getting the "He just knows how to win!" - like Vince Young it will end unless he improves his ability as a passer. He'll get a longer leash because he's a White Christian Savior, although Young got a pretty long leash.

Norv is a horrible head coach but Lovie's fake punt call was insane.

Lovie is dumb, but Norv Turner goes to IQ 0 the second he puts on the head coach's headset. He's a good offensive coordinator - why can't the NFL just leave it at that? I kind of feel bad for Chargers fans going from Schottenheimer (another guy whose brain went on freeze the moment the playoffs began) to Turner.

And Shanahan, to me, is pretty much the Tony La Russa of the NFL. They even look a little alike.
   205. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:12 AM (#3998131)
McNabb tried to become a pocket passer because he was so un-untouchable that his body couldn't take the pounding.


Not quite. McNabb is famously lazy and if you noticed, he ballooned up, consistently, during his career, he quickly became lead footed and slow. Steve Young set the NFL rushing mark for a QB at age 37 or 39. Too lazy to check.
   206. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:22 AM (#3998140)
Um, okay.
   207. JJ1986 Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:36 AM (#3998150)
Why is taunting not a dead ball foul? It was after the play.
   208. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:39 AM (#3998156)
Yeah, that was absolutely ridiculous.
   209. stanmvp48 Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:04 AM (#3998193)
I had the same question about the taunting call. Naturally not discussed by the commentators
   210. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:17 AM (#3998208)
Or it could have been the major injuries mcnabb suffered that. Slowed him down, ACL's are a little tough to come back from and be as fast and agile as before
   211. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:36 AM (#3998319)
Reports have Cutler out for the rest of the regular season.
   212. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:41 AM (#3998321)
I saw those sosh, reports seem to differ i have heard a week or 2 and read 6-8 weeks and possibly the whole season. Either way its not good but on the bright side todd collins is not taking the field in his place
   213. robinred Posted: November 21, 2011 at 07:07 AM (#3998326)
Only a very casual NFL fan, but:

People here in SD are 100% enraged at/fed up with Turner.

I assume the obvious parallels between the famous 1962 Thanksgiving game (the first ever, I believe) between undefeated Green Bay and a tough Detroit Lions team led by Alex Karras and Roger Brown and this Thursday's game have been noted. Pretty cool set of circumstances.
   214. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:26 PM (#3998428)
Norv Turner also trying to lose. Calls a timeout and then throws a challenge flag a few seconds later. Loses and ends up losing two timeouts.

I am constantly surprised at the clock mis-management I see in the NFL.

Clock management strikes me as pretty simple and straightforward; how is it these head coaches don't understand it?

EDIT: I count "time out management" as part of clock management.
   215. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:04 PM (#3998462)
Reports have Cutler out for the rest of the regular season.


#### fuck #### fuck me this ############# sucks ############# cocks.

EDIT: the nanny is weird!
   216. clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:11 PM (#3998466)
Why is taunting not a dead ball foul? It was after the play.
i had the same thought. i thought the NFL put in a rule about it, regarding touchdowns, but i'd never actually seen it impact a play in the manner it did last night. i was dumbfounded.


anyway, it's always good to beat the giants, even when it's masked by the giant sucking sound of a season going down the drain.
   217. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:12 PM (#3998468)
I think Caleb will do fine. Would have liked for the Redskins to have won yesterday but I still think the Bears will make the playoffs.
   218. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:13 PM (#3998469)
There were two penalties on the play so the penalties offset.
   219. Chicago Joe Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:15 PM (#3998471)
I think Caleb will do fine.


I dunno. He's attempted a total of 14 regular-season passes in his career. Didn't the Bears scramble to sign Kerry Collins rather than have him as the primary backup at one point? That's not a good sign.
   220. Bourbon Samurai in Asia Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:18 PM (#3998475)
At this point, the Redskins need to focus on losing as much as possible. They are in decent position to get a QB now, but they could easily #### it up by winning some meaningless games.
   221. SoSH U at work Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:22 PM (#3998480)
There were two penalties on the play so the penalties offset.


Yes, but if it were a deadball foul, then the Eagles would have gotten the completion, then had the taunting yards subtracted (but still a net positive).

Either way, Jackson's an idiot.

I dunno. He's attempted a total of 14 regular-season passes in his career. Didn't the Bears scramble to sign Kerry Collins rather than have him as the primary backup at one point? That's not a good sign.


No, they signed Todd Collins last year, which proved to be an unmitigated disaster. Hanie played pretty decently in the NFC Championship game after the club foolishly gave Collins a couple of more series to confirm that whatever meager skills he once possessed had long since evaporated.
   222. clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:23 PM (#3998484)
There were two penalties on the play so the penalties offset.
yes, but one was a defensive holding call that happened during the play, and the other was a dead-ball foul that occurred after it. it's basically the same situation as where a guy catches a ball for a first down, and then takes a swing at the defender who tackled him at the end of the play. it's a 15 yard personal foul from the end of the play, but the next series starts brand new, 1st and 10.


that was how the call should go in my mind. it might have been the right call, but i've never seen it, and logically, it seems wrong.
   223. JJ1986 Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:35 PM (#3998502)
If the rule was applied correctly, then what about this: The Giants don't commit holding on the play and then Jackson taunts. Isn't it then in their best interest to take a swing at a guy, get offsetting penalties and cancel the play?
   224. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:43 PM (#3998509)
No, they signed Todd Collins last year, which proved to be an unmitigated disaster. Hanie played pretty decently in the NFC Championship game after the club foolishly gave Collins a couple of more series to confirm that whatever meager skills he once possessed had long since evaporated.

Bingo. The fact that they thought Collins was a better option -- even after seeing him play -- speaks volumes about their judgement regarding Hanie.

That said, I'm still upset by all of this.
   225. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:51 PM (#3998520)
Per Wikipedia (so make of it what you will), emphasis mine:

When a "double foul" occurs, when both teams commit a foul during a play, regardless of severity, the fouls are usually offset and the down is replayed. However the two fouls must be committed in the same time frame. For instance, two fouls during the active play can offset, but a foul during the play and a personal foul after the whistle may not. Two personal fouls after the play can offset, although this is not often called. In the NFL, a major (15 yard) penalty by one team may not offset a minor (5 yard) penalty by the other team.
   226. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:52 PM (#3998521)
Smith has never been the best judge of QB or in making risky decisions. If given a choice between a totally safe and likely losing choice and taking a risky choice that might not turn out but could work out he'll take the safe choice every time. As we saw in the last handful of games he'll only take risks on special teams when it means nothing to the game.

Caleb looked pretty good last year in a very stressful situation. Hopefully the Bears have recognized his potential and the need for a decent backup and have worked with him a lot. If so I can see 4-2 being there likely result. I'd say over the next 6 games the Bears will something between 2-4 and 4-2.

Hopefully the Packers show up for the Lions at the end of the season. If they do I can see the Lions going 2-4 or 3-3 from here on out.
   227. SoSH U at work Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:54 PM (#3998525)
If the rule was applied correctly, then what about this: The Giants don't commit holding on the play and then Jackson taunts. Isn't it then in their best interest to take a swing at a guy, get offsetting penalties and cancel the play?


Presumably, it's no longer a deadball foul in any instance. If the Giants don't hold and Jackson taunts, the Eagles are assessed the penalty from the LOS (half the distance, in this case).
   228. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:55 PM (#3998527)
At some point the Falcons offense will have to start scoring touchdowns, right?

For the group: are Atlanta's current problems with completing drives for 7 points more schematic or personnel related?
   229. JJ1986 Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:00 PM (#3998534)
The Bears did beat the Falcons so they effectively have a two game lead over them. Even if they go 3-3, Atlanta will need to go 5-1.
   230. JJ1986 Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:04 PM (#3998542)
Does the flex thing start next week? I've got tickets to the Eagles game, but I assume it will get flexed if they can.
   231. zenbitz Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:08 PM (#3998551)
Unsportsmanlike conduct (taunting) is not a personal foul. I think 2 non personal fouls always offset.
   232. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:08 PM (#3998552)
The Bears did beat the Falcons so they effectively have a two game lead over them. Even if they go 3-3, Atlanta will need to go 5-1.


Right. The Bears got the Falcons during the "Sam Baker blocks like a three year old girl" portion of the season.
   233. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:09 PM (#3998554)
Sunday night moves have to be announced 12 days before the game. They don't switch games for Monday, Thursday, or Saturday. And the Christmas game will not change either.
   234. SoSH U at work Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:10 PM (#3998555)
The Bears did beat the Falcons so they effectively have a two game lead over them. Even if they go 3-3, Atlanta will need to go 5-1.


I prefer to call it a game and a half lead.
   235. Tom Nawrocki Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:18 PM (#3998567)
The Colts-Pats game for December 4th has already been flexed off the Sunday night schedule, in favor of Lions-Saints.
   236. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#3998570)
Smith has never been the best judge of QB or in making risky decisions. If given a choice between a totally safe and likely losing choice and taking a risky choice that might not turn out but could work out he'll take the safe choice every time. As we saw in the last handful of games he'll only take risks on special teams when it means nothing to the game.


Agreed. In the already-way-too-risk-averse land of the NFL, Lovie Smith is the King.
   237. DA Baracus Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#3998576)
At some point the Falcons offense will have to start scoring touchdowns, right?


In order to win, yes. In order to exist, no.

Right. The Bears got the Falcons during the "Sam Baker blocks like a three year old girl" portion of the season.


But that's the entire season.
   238. SoSH U at work Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:27 PM (#3998584)
The Colts-Pats game for December 4th has already been flexed off the Sunday night schedule, in favor of Lions-Saints.


As a Colts fan, I'm hoping it can be flexed off the Sunday schedule entirely.
   239. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 06:28 PM (#3998585)
Well, to be fair the Falcon got the Bears during the "Martz pretends the offensive line isn't a problem and we have no RB" portion of the season.
   240. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 08:23 PM (#3998714)
Just to contribute to the question of whether run-heavy offenses like the option would work in the NFL, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1978 Chiefs. Marv Levy was the coach. The Chiefs had a bad defense and the cromulent Mike Livingston at QB. Given his poor defense, Levy decided to institute the Wing-T offense. They ran for nearly 3000 yards that season on 663 rushing attempts, against 370 passing attempts.

They ended up 4-12, and the offense never scored more than 24 points a game, 24th out of 28 teams, after being 17th in 1977. If anyone has more info on that team, it would be useful.
   241. booond Posted: November 21, 2011 at 08:48 PM (#3998747)
They ended up 4-12, and the offense never scored more than 24 points a game, 24th out of 28 teams, after being 17th in 1977. If anyone has more info on that team, it would be useful.


They were 2-12 the year before. Their pts differential was reduced, too. None of that means anything as Mike Livingston probably last ran a Wing T in high school, maybe college, if at all.
   242. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: November 22, 2011 at 05:38 AM (#3999236)
They were 2-12 the year before.


And 7-9 the year after.
   243. DA Baracus Posted: November 22, 2011 at 05:55 AM (#3999252)
They were 2-12 the year before. Their pts differential was reduced, too.


They went defense, defense and more defense in the draft. They moved from 27th to 22nd in defense in '78, Simple Rating System says that their defense improved dramatically, then to 5th in '79.

And 7-9 the year after.


Funny thing is they scored even less.

And somewhere along the way Marv Levy gave us the classic "you over officious jerk!" sound bite.
   244. booond Posted: November 22, 2011 at 06:11 AM (#3999256)
With the team they had tonight the Wing T might've worked.
   245. Howie Menckel Posted: November 22, 2011 at 06:34 AM (#3999263)
re the silly but accurate Giants-Eagles taunting ruling:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/21/week-11-monday-10-pack-2/

"The prevailing thought was that Eagles should have been able to decline the penalty against the Giants, and then to have the 15 yards walked off after the play, giving Philly a 35-yard gain.

But the outcome reflected the proper application of a strange donut hole in the rule book.

The process gets started at Rule 14, Section 1, Article 9: “If there has been a foul by either team during a down and there is a dead ball foul by the other team in the action immediately after the end of the down, it is a double foul, and all rules for enforcement of double fouls apply (see 14-3-1).”

Regarding double fouls, Article 14, Section 3, Rule 1 provides as follows: “If there is a double foul . . . without a change of possession, the penalties are offset and the down is replayed at the previous spot.”

In this case, a key exception almost applied, but ultimately didn’t. “If one of the fouls is of a nature that incurs a 15-yard penalty and the other foul of a double foul normally would result in a loss of 5 yards only (15 yards versus 5 yards),” the rule book states, “the major penalty yardage is to be assessed from the previous spot.” Since the penalty on the Giants entailed a five-yard penalty AND an automatic first down, the exception didn’t apply in Jackson’s case. Even if it had (for example, if the Giants had simply been offside), the Eagles would have had the 15 yards walked off (or, in this case, half the distance to the goal) from the previous spot.

Either way, the penalty on the Giants ultimately penalized the Eagles. Though the officials sorted it all out properly in real time, the rule book definitely needs to be tweaked to prevent such unfair outcomes."
   246. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: November 22, 2011 at 06:47 AM (#3999268)
Either way, the penalty on the Giants ultimately penalized the Eagles. Though the officials sorted it all out properly in real time, the rule book definitely needs to be tweaked to prevent such unfair outcomes."


They can get to that after they get that so-very-complicated "definition of a catch" thing worked out.
   247. Howie Menckel Posted: November 22, 2011 at 06:59 AM (#3999273)
Well, I have seen a lot of progress in the "what is a catch" scenario in the last couple of years.

It was lousy, and then it got a LOT worse, and now I think it's a bit better than the original.

The middle ground was the weirdest - especially the part about needing to hire a notary public to sign off on the catch before the receiver hit the ground. That seemed a bit onerous, especially with no pre-qualifying of notaries. Even with a good hang time in mid-air.......
   248. Bitter Mouse Posted: November 23, 2011 at 03:11 PM (#4000044)
Tomorrow's NFL games are the best/most interesting Thanksgiving games I can remember. Should be fun.
   249. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 23, 2011 at 03:25 PM (#4000049)
I'm not all that hyped up for MIA/DAL, but the other two look terrific.
   250. SoSH U at work Posted: November 23, 2011 at 03:47 PM (#4000063)
Well, I have seen a lot of progress in the "what is a catch" scenario in the last couple of years.


The last couple? It was only last year where Calvin Johnson was practically up the tunnel with the ball and it was waved off.

You don't need a definition. Every person who has ever played a sport knows exactly when a ball is caught and when it isn't. Only the NFL could turn that into an argument worthy of the Supreme Court.
   251. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: November 23, 2011 at 04:16 PM (#4000081)
Every person who has ever played a sport knows exactly when a ball is caught and when it isn't. Only the NFL could turn that into an argument worthy of the Supreme Court.


Agreed. The current mess of "did he control it through the ground" is absurd. A receiver goes up and grabs a ball in the air, comes down, gets both feet in, steps out of bounds, falls to the ground and the ball comes loose. Only in the NFL would that not be a catch. Every rational person on the planet saw him control the ball; saw the two feet hit in bounds. Saw his next step go out of bounds. At that point the play is dead. The ball was caught and the play is dead. But the NFL has to watch the fall to the ground to see if the ground - which can't cause a fumble on a dead play - knocks the ball lose.

Absurd.
   252. Tom Nawrocki Posted: November 23, 2011 at 04:34 PM (#4000096)

Regarding double fouls, Article 14, Section 3, Rule 1 provides as follows: “If there is a double foul . . . without a change of possession, the penalties are offset and the down is replayed at the previous spot.”


My first thought after that play is that we most often see taunting called after a touchdown, and I've never seen a touchdown called back for taunting. But I suppose a touchdown is considered a change of possession.
   253. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 23, 2011 at 04:42 PM (#4000106)
So, a lot of the media buzz seems to be around the Bears making a waiver claim on Orton. I'm guessing this would be to serve as Hanie's backup, as opposed to...whoever his backup is now.

Alas, poor Orton. I knew him, Horatio. A Purdue quarterback of infinite jest.
   254. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: November 23, 2011 at 04:45 PM (#4000110)
Remarkably, the 49ers can potentially clinch the division this week. Man, what a joke the NFC West is.
   255. Tom Nawrocki Posted: November 23, 2011 at 04:52 PM (#4000120)
The rest of the NFC West is hapless, but the 49ers look to be pretty good. They've only played two games in-division so far (and are 2-0, of course); they're 7-1 against the rest of the league, with the lone loss coming in OT.
   256. booond Posted: November 23, 2011 at 05:14 PM (#4000136)
Seattle has taken a small step forward and, if they can get decent play from the QB spot, they might be a playoff contender 2012. Rams are a mess, which may be fixable over the off-season but they have to give Bradford time and play better defense. Cardinals, ugh, Kolb turned into a pumpkin fast and their defense struggles. They need to take a harder look into the mirror and understand they aren't an RB away from contending.

49ers are playing the Ravens - Dilfer era - game of good defense, good running game and no mistakes. It's worked against a light schedule but come playoff time it will be imperative to keep games close or be ahead as I don't see this team as built for the big comeback. Thursday night's game will be fun.
   257. Kurt Posted: November 23, 2011 at 05:30 PM (#4000150)
But I suppose a touchdown is considered a change of possession.

I wouldn't think so, the scoring team still has "posession" for the extra point and kickoff.
   258. zenbitz Posted: November 23, 2011 at 10:01 PM (#4000375)
This deadspin post reminded me of Lion of The Senate:
   259. zenbitz Posted: November 23, 2011 at 10:03 PM (#4000376)
Niners also have great special teams - this is probably the difference between them and the (2011) Ravens.
The Niners schedule to date has been fairly easy, but not as easy as that of Green Bay, Houston, or the Giants.
   260. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: November 24, 2011 at 07:32 PM (#4000679)
Throwing deep on third-and-one makes sense if you're planning on going for it on fourth down. If you have no balls and plan to punt, less so.

Not that I have any particular coach who just did this in mind...
   261. Bourbon Samurai in Asia Posted: November 24, 2011 at 08:30 PM (#4000686)
Oh yeah, he deserves to get kicked out
   262. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: November 24, 2011 at 08:46 PM (#4000691)
He wouldn't be James Jones if he didn't almost drop a long touchdown pass.
   263. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: November 25, 2011 at 04:15 PM (#4000833)
Suh's response to the issue has been, well, amazing. Does he really think he can get people to believe him? Well, I don't suppose you have to be bright to be a defensive tackle.

What's the over/under on number of games suspended?
   264. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 25, 2011 at 05:50 PM (#4000878)
2 games, i would love to see the lions miss the playoffs
   265. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: November 25, 2011 at 06:13 PM (#4000889)
i would love to see the lions miss the playoffs


The rest of their Schedule is pretty brutal. I think they go at best 2-3 from here, and 9 wins probably doesn't cut it. And I wouldn't be shocked if they went 1-4 either.
   266. Tripon Posted: November 25, 2011 at 06:25 PM (#4000896)
Suh should have his children taken away.
   267. DA Baracus Posted: November 25, 2011 at 06:27 PM (#4000901)
I'm not really surprised that Suh snapped, Detroit's composure has been an issue all year long. It'll hurt them in the playoffs... if they get there.
   268. Dan The Mediocre Posted: November 25, 2011 at 06:32 PM (#4000906)
The rest of their Schedule is pretty brutal. I think they go at best 2-3 from here, and 9 wins probably doesn't cut it. And I wouldn't be shocked if they went 1-4 either.


The Bears may go 4-2 or even 5-1 without Cutler. Green Bay is a loss, but the next toughest game is Oakland. After that they have Kansas City, Denver, Seattle, and Minnesota (not necessarily in that order). I think Detroit is going to be fighting for the 6th seed, and they lose the tiebreaker to Atlanta.
   269. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 25, 2011 at 08:37 PM (#4000956)
The Bears will be fine. Lovie has been coaching his team to minimize the importance of the qb position since Day 1. Anything they get out of the qb is a plus. If Hanie can avoid handing the ball to the opposition and makes a few plays a half Chicago will win more than its share of games.
   270. McCoy Posted: November 25, 2011 at 08:56 PM (#4000963)
Smith's old Bears team were designed sort of like a Trent Dilfer-Baltimore team in that they have a great defense and the QB doesn't turn the ball over. That really hasn't been a Bears team in a long time. The defense hasn't been as great as they once were and the offense has to be better than the Orton days to win games.* I think Hanie is better than Orton by a mile and his athleticsim is going to help a ton because the Bears still can't pass block worth a shvt.

It will be interesting to see how the defenses setup against the Bears. You'd think the Bears are going to come out run heavy in that first game and I don't really know if the Bears offensive line and Forte are good enough to get through it. Plus I think the last successful screen the Bears ever pulled off was done sometime in 1943 so it will be really interesting to see what Martz does. Does he go to the old run, draw, slant of the Orton days? Or does he just let Hanie scramble around until somebody rings his bell?

I think the Bears will muddle through it and get to the playoffs but I don't really hold out hope for much in the playoffs. Bears offensive line sucks and the defense isn't what it once was. Unless something weird happens the Bears would play the Packers in the second game of the playoffs should they win the first.



*Except win special teams goes nuts.
   271. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 25, 2011 at 09:51 PM (#4000982)
Mccoy the bears are one of the best teams in the league at running the screen play hell forte socerd from 40 yards out on atlanta this year on one
   272. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: November 25, 2011 at 10:55 PM (#4000992)
Well, every football stats analyst worth his salt has the Bears defense and special teams this year in the top five while the offense is average at best.

This years Bears defense is better than last year's for example. Sure the Super Bowl season was better but that was a special season.
   273. jobu Posted: November 25, 2011 at 11:09 PM (#4000994)
The Bears' chances will get a bounce with Suh's immaturity and/or insanity.
   274. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 12:40 AM (#4001028)
Suh's response to the issue has been, well, amazing. Does he really think he can get people to believe him? Well, I don't suppose you have to be bright to be a defensive tackle.


This response has been baffling to me. Suh has always (through college) been very well spoken, not at all press shy or cliche driven, all around a bright guy. Did he not know what he was doing? I've seen worse, Charles Martin slamming McMahon, etc., but come on dude.
   275. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 01:30 AM (#4001048)
This response has been baffling to me. Suh has always (through college) been very well spoken, not at all press shy or cliche driven, all around a bright guy. Did he not know what he was doing? I've seen worse, Charles Martin slamming McMahon, etc., but come on dude.


He didn't know what he was doing when he stepped on the guy. He was blind to his actions. Whether, after he sees it a few times he admits his irresponsible behavior, who knows.
   276. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 01:33 AM (#4001049)
Whatever shot Tony Sparano had at saving his job died when he decided to go conservative with 4 minutes to go. He was ahead, everyone expected a run, he had to throw... even if it was a safe swing pass or a quick toss to Fasano, he had to be aggressive.
   277. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:17 AM (#4001059)
I am constantly surprised at the clock mis-management I see in the NFL.

Clock management strikes me as pretty simple and straightforward; how is it these head coaches don't understand it?


A few weeks ago one of the teams (I forget which) was in one of those lame end-of-game situations where it was trying to stop the other team on three downs so that it could get the ball back and have a chance. (Why people find this exciting I'll never know.) Anyway, the team used one of its timeouts with 2:07 remaining.

What am I missing here? The timeout only saves you 7 seconds there. But on the other side of the two-minute warning, you can save basically the entire play clock.

EDIT: I count "time out management" as part of clock management.


If I were in charge, I'd tell my QB to just take the delay-of-game rather than burn a timeout, especially in the second half. The timeouts are worth so much at the end of the game, and yet coaches just throw them away on nonsense.
   278. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:25 AM (#4001064)
Yes, but if it were a deadball foul, then the Eagles would have gotten the completion, then had the taunting yards subtracted (but still a net positive).

Either way, Jackson's an idiot.


I don't really see why people get all riled up about this stuff. He's a good player. He made a dumb play. You live with it and move on. I'd applaud Reid for doing that, but he may have cost himself a game the week before when he sat Jackson down. If I were the owner and Reid kept Jackson out of a game for missing a meeting, I'd fire Reid on the spot. You're trying to win games, not boyscout merit badges.

Besides, half the players in the league engage in silly celebrations and taunting efforts. If people can't stomach that, they should probably find a different sport to watch.
   279. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:29 AM (#4001068)
Whatever shot Tony Sparano had at saving his job died when he decided to go conservative with 4 minutes to go. He was ahead, everyone expected a run, he had to throw... even if it was a safe swing pass or a quick toss to Fasano, he had to be aggressive.


I though his bigger error, by far, was failing to go for 2 when everyone knew he needed 2. He went up 15-10 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and settled for the extra point. Why.
   280. DA Baracus Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:30 AM (#4001070)
Whatever shot Tony Sparano had at saving his job


Sparano was going to be fired at the end of the season anyway.

I don't really see why people get all riled up about this stuff. He's a good player. He made a dumb play.


Jackson's idiocy goes beyond merely celebrations. He dumbassed his way off the team that weekend. He was already on thin ice, he hasn't done #### this year except hold out, drop balls and be an idiot.
   281. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:33 AM (#4001071)
This response has been baffling to me. Suh has always (through college) been very well spoken, not at all press shy or cliche driven, all around a bright guy. Did he not know what he was doing? I've seen worse, Charles Martin slamming McMahon, etc., but come on dude.


I guess I'll have to also yawn at Suh's actions here. We see defensive players put unnecessarily brutal hits on runners, receivers, and QBs all the time. And we're supposed to get excited because some guy lost his cool and stomped on a player's side? What? Suh's actions couldn't possibly have hurt the player as much as concussions and violent hits to the upper body from defensive players have the potential to.

People are just all out of whack as far as what gets them all worked up. Suh is the Devil, but Polamalu is celebrated. Uh huh.
   282. DA Baracus Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:54 AM (#4001079)
Whoa whoa whoa, Polamalu? What has he ever done? Other guys on the Steelers yes, they are dirty too, but what has Polamalu done to make you lump him with Suh?
   283. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 02:57 AM (#4001080)
Whatever shot Tony Sparano had at saving his job


Sparano was going to be fired at the end of the season anyway.


Probably. But they were on a roll and a win against the Cowboys would make it harder. They'd obviously have to keep the run going to save him but they look like a better team right now.
   284. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 03:00 AM (#4001081)
I though his bigger error, by far, was failing to go for 2 when everyone knew he needed 2. He went up 15-10 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and settled for the extra point. Why.


An error, yes. But, at that point, it wasn't life or death to go for 2. My guess is he didn't go because he didn't want to be second-guessed if it failed. The same reason he didn't throw the ball with 4 minutes to go. Can't be chickensh@@ when your life's on the line.
   285. Tom Nawrocki Posted: November 26, 2011 at 03:33 AM (#4001091)
Suh has always (through college) been very well spoken, not at all press shy or cliche driven, all around a bright guy.


Yeah, he's something else, isn't he? On the field, Suh plays like he just escaped from a home for the criminally insane. Off the field, he could pass for Michigan's attorney general.

Not that it excuses what Suh did, but the Packer offensive lineman was clearly holding onto Suh's jersey, trying to prevent him from getting up. It should have been flagged, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was half-intended to get Suh to do something ejectable.
   286. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 26, 2011 at 04:01 AM (#4001099)
The head pounding i dont care about but the intentional stomp is the issue. And there is a big difference between a hit on a player making a tackle and intentionally stomping on a guys arm, ray you are just nuts
   287. DA Baracus Posted: November 26, 2011 at 04:15 AM (#4001107)
Probably. But they were on a roll and a win against the Cowboys would make it harder.


His fate was already sealed unless he won the division or made it far in the playoffs. Stephen Ross tried to interview Jim Harbaugh for the head coaching job.
   288. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:14 AM (#4001139)
His fate was already sealed unless he won the division or made it far in the playoffs. Stephen Ross tried to interview Jim Harbaugh for the head coaching job.


I understand that but a long run, even if it didn't net them the playoffs might've saved his position. His cowardice Thanksgiving Day was the final nail.
   289. booond Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:16 AM (#4001141)
The head pounding i dont care about but the intentional stomp is the issue.


I agree. And the stomp wasn't an accident, he looked right at the guy.
   290. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:18 AM (#4001142)
The head pounding i dont care about but the intentional stomp is the issue. And there is a big difference between a hit on a player making a tackle and intentionally stomping on a guys arm, ray you are just nuts


The "big difference" is that one is considered legal, one illegal; one is considered "dirty," one isn't.

Putting a hit on a player that could lead to a concussion or worse -- and then pounding your chest over it -- is far worse than anything Suh did on Thursday. A thousand times over.

And I think Suh is a thug; it's not my intent to defend him. But people have their list of outrages incorrect and out of order.
   291. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:22 AM (#4001144)
#289, of course his stomp wasn't an accident. He deserved to be thrown out.

But so do the defensive players aiming to put other players in the hospital -- which is pretty much 99% of the league. Against that backdrop, spending more than 5 seconds worrying about what Suh did, painting him as evil, calling him names, strikes me as ludicrous.
   292. Dan The Mediocre Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:25 AM (#4001145)
one is considered "dirty," one isn't.


No, they're both dirty.
   293. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:33 AM (#4001146)
I was in the car today. The WFAN host spent an entire segment yelling about what Suh did, the host's words dripping with venom. Are you kidding me? Suh stomped once on a guy's pads out of frustration. People need a bit of perspective.

At least Suh's actions were spur of the moment, unlike the hits defensive players plan.
   294. DA Baracus Posted: November 26, 2011 at 05:33 AM (#4001147)
I understand that but a long run, even if it didn't net them the playoffs might've saved his position.


I disagree. He has a bad owner who has already tried to replace him. There is no reason to think that after his 0-7 start there was anything Sparano could do to save his job.
   295. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 06:46 AM (#4001166)
I was in the car today. The WFAN host spent an entire segment yelling about what Suh did, the host's words dripping with venom. Are you kidding me? Suh stomped once on a guy's pads out of frustration. People need a bit of perspective.

At least Suh's actions were spur of the moment, unlike the hits defensive players plan.


I agree that rage is more rage is something I see a lot of these days. Maybe it's because of our media era where every event gets amplified that causes some people to try and scream louder than everyone else. But come on. Two weeks or three weeks ago a Packers OL was kicked in the balls and that got almost no mention, the offender was merely fined.

This is football. Suh was tossed and the player he kicked wasn't kicked that hard and was unhurt. The NFL and NFL media is partly to blame, they have turned Suh into this monster that breaks all the rules of decency in the game, which is an exaggeration, a huge exaggeration.

Making a larger point, it seems in the last decade, I've seen so many people take an odd position or attitude on rule breakers, (it could be slapping your wife or stealing gas or kicking a football player for example) that they basically should be banned for life, locked up forever, killed, etc.....as if the person should be eliminated from history due to a single event because the idea this person is eternally flawed. The concept of a finite punishment escapes these people.
   296. Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad! Posted: November 26, 2011 at 09:34 AM (#4001176)
he didnt stomp on the pads he stomped on his unprotected arm with clear intent to hurt him. trying to tackle a guy and make him feel it is way ####### different, its an actual football play, is the defender supposed to just touch him and hope he goes down? of course not. do you not understand the game of football? stomping on a players arm after the play and completely unrelated to the play its self has no place in the game. and LOS were not calling for him to banned just a game or 2 suspension for the very very dirty and very visible play
   297. Ray (RDP) Posted: November 26, 2011 at 01:41 PM (#4001188)
#296, Meatwad, I just can't get all worked up about it, and I DO think it's not nearly as bad as trying to knock offensive players into next week or next year. You're drawing a distinction -- while time is in vs. while time is out -- that doesn't move me.

And from what I recall, he stomped on his pads on his side, not on his arm. Not that stomping on his arm would rise to the level of some these vicious hits to the upper body.
   298. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: November 26, 2011 at 03:35 PM (#4001202)
What am I missing here? The timeout only saves you 7 seconds there. But on the other side of the two-minute warning, you can save basically the entire play clock.

The timeout forces an additional play to be run before the two-minute warning.

Scenario one: Timeout at 2:07. Second down runs to the two-minute warning. Third down takes maybe six seconds, 39 more run off before the punt at 1:15.
Scenario two: Let the clock run to the two-minute warning after first down. Call timeout after second down at 1:54. 45 more seconds for third down and the punt: 1:09.


I though his bigger error, by far, was failing to go for 2 when everyone knew he needed 2. He went up 15-10 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and settled for the extra point. Why.

Because only you knew with that much time left that he needed two. For all everyone else knew, they'd miss the two-point conversion and give up two fourth-quarter field goals to lose by a point. Or they'd give up a touchdown and a two-point conversion, then only be able to tie the game with a field goal instead of winning it. There are too many scenarios with that much time left, which is why they wait until the end game becomes clearer to go for two.
   299. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: November 26, 2011 at 03:56 PM (#4001211)
What am I missing here? The timeout only saves you 7 seconds there. But on the other side of the two-minute warning, you can save basically the entire play clock.


Scenario one: Timeout at 2:07. Second down runs to the two-minute warning. Third down takes maybe six seconds, 39 more run off before the punt at 1:15.
Scenario two: Let the clock run to the two-minute warning after first down. Call timeout after second down at 1:54. 45 more seconds for third down and the punt: 1:09.


This particular instance doesn't sound like it*, but there are examples of misusing TOs around the two-minute warning that can cost a team a considerable amount of time (last year's AFC title game was one).

* Impossible to say for certain absent more information.
   300. stanmvp48 Posted: November 26, 2011 at 03:56 PM (#4001212)
He went for 2 in a similar situation against Denver and didn't make it and it arguably cost him the game. Gun shy and risk averse as somebody pointed out. But he should have
Page 3 of 30 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCardinals Acquire John Lackey
(92 - 1:45am, Aug 01)
Last: Jim Kaat on a hot Gene Roof

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(3992 - 1:28am, Aug 01)
Last: Joe Kehoskie

NewsblogMinnesota Twins sign Kurt Suzuki to two-year contract extension
(7 - 1:19am, Aug 01)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

NewsblogJULY 31 2014 OMNICHATTER/TRADE DEADLINE CHATTER
(362 - 1:08am, Aug 01)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogYankees land infielders Stephen Drew, Martin Prado at Deadline
(20 - 1:07am, Aug 01)
Last: shoewizard

NewsblogMariners acquire outfielder Chris Denorfia from Padres
(4 - 1:04am, Aug 01)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(1074 - 1:02am, Aug 01)
Last: Squash

NewsblogCliff Lee Re-Injures Elbow
(18 - 12:55am, Aug 01)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogTigers To Acquire David Price
(70 - 12:54am, Aug 01)
Last: Select Storage Device

NewsblogCubs deal Emilio Bonifacio, James Russell to Braves
(10 - 12:38am, Aug 01)
Last: Jacob

NewsblogMarlins acquire Jarred Cosart from Astros in six-player deal
(6 - 12:37am, Aug 01)
Last: SteveM.

NewsblogBrewers acquire outfielder Gerardo Parra from D-backs
(5 - 12:27am, Aug 01)
Last: KT's Pot Arb

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-31-2014
(20 - 12:20am, Aug 01)
Last: jwb

NewsblogJim Bowden Caught Stealing From Fake Twitter Account, Deletes Everything
(24 - 12:06am, Aug 01)
Last: if nature called, ladodger34 would listen

NewsblogOrioles acquire left-handed reliever Andrew Miller from Red Sox
(1 - 11:59pm, Jul 31)
Last: donlock

Page rendered in 1.0128 seconds
53 querie(s) executed