CPFC BBS

CPFC BBS (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/index.php)
-   World of Sport (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   The NFL thread (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/showthread.php?t=137231)

One Step Down 05-02-2007 12:16 PM

The comment about Grossman is a little unfair. As Phil Simms pointed out in the colour, the second INT it looked like the weather simply caused the ball to slip in his hand as he released it. I'm not saying he had a great game -- he obviously didn't -- but he played sensibly in the first half (i.e. he didn't beat his own team) and threw a good TD pass to boot. Once the Bears started to lose control of the game, in that kind of rain it was always going to be very tough for a QB that was under constant pressure from the opposing DL to really throw effectively. With that said, as usual Rex did try to force it before he needed to. Just saying I don't think he was awful; more "not good enough." But come on, the Colts played superbly and if Rex played poorly as the game went on, that's because they put him in a corner.

Strathclyde Eagle 05-02-2007 12:53 PM

I thought the Bears defence was more disappointing than Grossman. Lots of missed tackles and they began the second half very passively. It didn't give the Bears much of a chance to get their running game going.

saxoneagle 05-02-2007 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
Addai should have been MVP

Rhodes had a bigger game IMO than Addai. Although, between the two of them they WERE the game, really.

Strathclyde Eagle 05-02-2007 01:40 PM

If Addai and Rhodes had been joint MVPs that would have been very fair.

However overall the Colts won it as a team. No-one was other-worldly, it is just a shame that the default seems to be to take the QB. Reminded me a little of the first Patriots win when Brady won the MVP with very mediocre stats (albeit with a great final drive) when Ty Law was possibly a better candidate.

One Step Down 05-02-2007 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
I thought the Bears defence was more disappointing than Grossman. Lots of missed tackles and they began the second half very passively. It didn't give the Bears much of a chance to get their running game going.
There's some truth in that, but I pointed out before the game (see previous page) that they were going to play an out and out cover defense and that the key would be whether the front four, on their own, could generate any kind of rush. Once -- by half time, even when the score was still close -- it was obvious that Anderson, Ogunleye, and the other DEs had been taken out of the game the Bears were in a no-win situation because really, fundamentally changing their defensive alignment wasn't an option at that point, halfway through the Super Bowl.

This is why the real MVPs were the Colts OL. The Steel Curtain/Tampa 2/whatever you want to call it defense has worked so well for the Bears this year because the front four have consistently managed to generate pressure on their own -- especially Mark Anderson. That's freed up the backers and corners to be very, very aggressive in coverage (have you noticed how physical Peanut and Nate Vasher are off the line?) and it allows the Bears to make a lot of interceptions because the safeties are free to sit deep and read the throws. But if you handle the front four, which the Colts did perfectly, everything else falls apart because the QB and flankers have time to adjust, and you can't cover aggressively for the longer periods that come into play on each snap. That's why Urlacher was getting so frustrated halfway through the third quarter; not because they couldn't be aggressive but because they couldn't sustain the aggression for long enough due to the fact that there was no pressure and therefore each play had so long to evolve. When that happens, sooner or later receivers are going to get free.

I don't think there was a big problem with the Bears running game; if anything there were suggestions that if they'd had more of the ball and been able to control the clock more effectively, Thomas Jones might have had a field day. I don't think their offense really came into play enough to have a significant impact on the game in some ways. What will be interesting, next year, is if Lovie decides he's going to try to make a flanker out of Devin Hester (there have been suggestions that they are going to try and find a way to incorporate him into the offense.) They really need more speed threats than just B2 (a lot of good possession receivers but not enough pace.) One other thing was that, in the second half and certainly later in the game, the Bears OL also came somewhat unstuck at times. That, however, did not change the course of the game as much as some other things.

Andrews69 05-02-2007 02:24 PM

Last night was the first time I've ever watched American football.

I thought the pre-match show was very weak and not very entertaining at all. I was suprised that something like that would happen at an event where I would assume the majority of fans are males drinking beer.

The half time show, was quite good, although I'm not a fan of Prince and didn't think it really suited that sort of event. As I say, first time watching so maybe it's tradition to put something like this in the middle in order to keep the people who may not be football fans entertained. Prince was very good though, considering it was p*ssing it down.

The game itself, I was supporting the Chicago Bears as I put a fiver on them to win, wasn't really sure what I was doing so I went for the team that I recognised... bad move in the end really.

The game itself, although long winded, it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, I quite enjoyed it. Loved the return from the kick off, that number 23 was amazing, unfortunately the colts didn't let him near the ball for the rest of the game.

Bears were under the kosh all game and it was only a matter of time until the Colts were going to run away with it, they should have been miles in front by half time really.

Grossman started ok I thought, but when they really needed him to make the passes he showed nerves and failed quite miserably.

First time I've ever watched it as I say, so this is really a rookie's point of view. On the whole I enjoyed the game (despite losing a fiver), but it didn't seem like a very good superbowl in comparision to others, or that's the impression I got from the proffesionals, although they said it was a good game.

Chicago were too defensive, despite having a relatively weak defence in the second half, Grossman and the lack of involvment for 23 were their downfall really I though.

Would be interested to see how "far of the mark" I was in my analysis from some of you that have seen previous games. Please be gentle though!

Latvian Eagle 05-02-2007 02:28 PM

As my mate pointed out last night, Bears have the best defence in the NFL, yet last night they didn't turn up. Their tackles were weak, and they lost the game by not playing to their strengths. That and the fact they turnedover the Colts 3 times on fumbles only to fumble it straight back the very next play! :eek:

nookiebear 05-02-2007 03:32 PM

I think the Bears showed a lack of faith in Rex early on by running it all the time on 3rd down. The Colts just kept stopping them, the Bears went 3 and out too many times, and the poor old Bears' defense had to spend another seven minutes chasing shadows

I don't think it matters how good your defense is, the only way to beat the Colts is to keep Manning off the pitch - and you do that with good offense, long drives that eat up the clock.

Grossman was asked to manage the game, instead of win, it for three quarters, then step up and pull a rabbit out of the bag in the 4th when the Colts were already out of sight. it was so obvious he'd make mistakes by then.

One Step Down 05-02-2007 07:51 PM

I don' think the problem was running it on 3rd down (that's a good strategy when it works, and there were reasons for going with it) but otherwise I agree your analysis, Nookie. Much of it is true.

FFS the Bears defense DID what they did all year. They played exactly the same system exactly the same way. In so doing, they played to the same strengths that got them to the Super Bowl. They also "showed up." Do you think Anderson, Tank, et al were drinking bloody pina coladas on the beach last night? The fact is the Colts OL downright beat the Bears DL. They were exceptional, and their ability to stop the rush (which virtually no one else the Bears had faced this season had been able to do) meant that the system fell apart. But being outplayed by a better team is NOT the same thing as not showing up.

The 47 only works if you get pressure on the QB (what I said countless times before the game; read this thread. EXACTLY what I wrote in my keys to the game on page 24 of this thread before the game two pages ago: "The Bears will effectively play a 47 defense (they'll rush the front four and the rest will drop back into out and out coverage.) The key will be Ogunleye, Anderson, Tank, etc....they have to generate a pass rush to give the DBs a chance.")

The Bears' failure to generate pressure doesn't mean the system didn't work; it means the players couldn't execute it properly because they ran up against a better side. The Colts won far and square. Respect them. But try to understand the defensive system (which I have explained at great length here) and you will grasp why that's the case.

saxoneagle 05-02-2007 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by One Step Down
I don' think the problem was running it on 3rd down (that's a good strategy when it works, and there were reasons for going with it) but otherwise I agree your analysis, Nookie. Much of it is true.

FFS the Bears defense DID what they did all year. They played exactly the same system exactly the same way. In so doing, they played to the same strengths that got them to the Super Bowl. They also "showed up." Do you think Anderson, Tank, et al were drinking bloody pina coladas on the beach last night? The fact is the Colts OL downright beat the Bears DL. They were exceptional, and their ability to stop the rush (which virtually no one else the Bears had faced this season had been able to do) meant that the system fell apart. But being outplayed by a better team is NOT the same thing as not showing up.

The 47 only works if you get pressure on the QB (what I said countless times before the game; read this thread. EXACTLY what I wrote in my keys to the game on page 24 of this thread before the game two pages ago: "The Bears will effectively play a 47 defense (they'll rush the front four and the rest will drop back into out and out coverage.) The key will be Ogunleye, Anderson, Tank, etc....they have to generate a pass rush to give the DBs a chance.")

The Bears' failure to generate pressure doesn't mean the system didn't work; it means the players couldn't execute it properly because they ran up against a better side. The Colts won far and square. Respect them. But try to understand the defensive system (which I have explained at great length here) and you will grasp why that's the case.

They just came up against a QB who can make the big plays but hits the 7/8 yarders just as comfortably. The number of screen passes and short dumps off to Addai in space showed how intelligent Manning is, not how bad the Bears D is.

Watching Urlacher was quite funny. He just didn't know whether to push forward or drop back for almost the entire game yet still came up with ELEVEN tackles. What a great player he is.

Although, he was a particularly moody b*gger in the interview straight after the match but I don't blame him for that. As you say, they played their game but were prevented from executing something they've done pretty regularly for at least two years now. You can see why he was frustrated.

Strathclyde Eagle 05-02-2007 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by saxoneagle
Watching Urlacher was quite funny. He just didn't know whether to push forward or drop back for almost the entire game yet still came up with ELEVEN tackles. What a great player he is.
Urlacher had several tackles where he was covering for other guys who had missed.

When I said about the Bears defence being disappointing I meant in regard to their tackling, their plan certainly wasn't necessarily poor (especially in the first half). As One Step Down correctly pointed out though the Indy OL was fantastic.

I'm trying to think of when the last time was that a team won the Super Bowl with a poor OL. It's where it all starts, you can't do anything without it.

One Step Down 05-02-2007 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle



I'm trying to think of when the last time was that a team won the Super Bowl with a poor OL. It's where it all starts, you can't do anything without it.

That is so true. If the OL controls the game, the other team doesn't have the ball. If they don't have the ball, and if you add to that a smart QB who doesn't make mistakes (i.e. doesn't turn the ball over) then the rest is gravy because the opposition won't be able to score and you therefore almost can't lose. Take out the first 14 seconds and, as I said, the Bears got gubbed. It was a 30-7 Super Bowl to all intents and purposes. I'm dissappointed, sure, but credit where it's due: the Colts offense was simply superb (and their defense wasn't bad, either.) No excuses, the best team won it.

One Step Down 05-02-2007 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hedgehog
I find it distasteful that someone credits being a Christian for the fact they won (The Colts owner also mentioned it!). This should not have been an issue on a World stage.

I'm sorry... it's a personal pet peeve of mine.

While the point is taken when abstracted from any sort of context (and my personal knee-jerk reaction is not dissimiliar to yours -- smug as he is, I tend to be a Dawkinist in such matters, too) the reality is that fundamentalism is part of the culture of America and this speaks to the comparitive youth of the nation, the lack of maturity of much of its thinking, and the way it has developed socio-historically. You cannot react to Dungy's comments simply on the basis of a considered European's understanding of the world. To us, they border on almost being outrageous but they are entirely rational and altogether commonplace in the States, far beyond simply the fundamentalist deep south. Remember, religious persecution was the bedrock on which the country was founded and Dungy's thinking remains the way many people view the forces that shape their lives. It's easy to make fun of (something I often do myself) but there is something more important going on that that.

nookiebear 05-02-2007 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by One Step Down
I don' think the problem was running it on 3rd down (that's a good strategy when it works, and there were reasons for going with it) but otherwise I agree your analysis, Nookie. Much of it is true.

FFS the Bears defense DID what they did all year. They played exactly the same system exactly the same way. In so doing, they played to the same strengths that got them to the Super Bowl. They also "showed up." Do you think Anderson, Tank, et al were drinking bloody pina coladas on the beach last night? The fact is the Colts OL downright beat the Bears DL. They were exceptional, and their ability to stop the rush (which virtually no one else the Bears had faced this season had been able to do) meant that the system fell apart. But being outplayed by a better team is NOT the same thing as not showing up.

The 47 only works if you get pressure on the QB (what I said countless times before the game; read this thread. EXACTLY what I wrote in my keys to the game on page 24 of this thread before the game two pages ago: "The Bears will effectively play a 47 defense (they'll rush the front four and the rest will drop back into out and out coverage.) The key will be Ogunleye, Anderson, Tank, etc....they have to generate a pass rush to give the DBs a chance.")

The Bears' failure to generate pressure doesn't mean the system didn't work; it means the players couldn't execute it properly because they ran up against a better side. The Colts won far and square. Respect them. But try to understand the defensive system (which I have explained at great length here) and you will grasp why that's the case.

Not many defense can cope with Manning though. he'll either murder you deep or with the screen, a joy to watch

Totally agree about the Colts Offensive Line. They give an awesome QB all day to throw

Personally, i think the Colts defense knew from the word go the Bears would run it on third down, which put extra pressure on Rex as soon as it stopped working

The Bears just didn't seem to have much faith in him, apart from his early TD throw and in the 4th when it was too late and the Colts just had to sit back and wait for the picks.

I think Grossman will get better though - the bears are a young team with plenty of room for improvement

More worried about the state of the Redskins, to be honest :( :)

One Step Down 06-02-2007 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear


I think Grossman will get better though - the bears are a young team with plenty of room for improvement


I think you're right, and it's nice to finally see some sanguine analysis of this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Rex is the second coming but a lot of people forget that, to all intents and purposes, this was his rookie season and furthermore, while he made mistakes he also did some very good things and he has shown that he has the physical tools. Most of his shortcomings relate to the mental side of the game (judgement -- or lack of it -- foremost amongst them) and in theory, it should be able to coach these out of him. But if a guy lacks the basic tools (which Rex has) only then is there nothing you can do. What's killed Rex's reputation is that his mistakes are like buses; when he makes one, he makes three of four just for good measure. So when he has a bad game, it tends to plumb new depths of badness and people remember this to the exclusion of all else. That's a mistake.

A lot of people better informed than me, including almost all of the media QBs (Simms, Marino, Boomer, etc.) think Rex can be the real deal. I think he can play in this league and I think he will learn and be a far better player next year.

The Skins are suffering, aren't they? I'm not sure where they go from here but I know we're playing them in DC and I am already trying to engage a consultant down there whom I will need to visit in the autumn :-)

jlmatthews 06-02-2007 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
I think the Bears showed a lack of faith in Rex
Exactly. They were trying to hide him and not let him make mistakes. The goal for the Bears was to make him play ball control and not turn the ball over.

Also, I don't think the colts have a poor OL. Most of these guys blocked for Edge when he won rushing titles. Plus, having Peyton back there helps, too. But they are a seasoned veteran group.

Bears tackling was horrendous. IMO one of the most surprising aspects the game had to offer.

One Step Down 06-02-2007 01:32 AM

Did anyone say the Colts had a poor OL? This thread has been the Colts OL fan club unless I'm missing something. Where did that come from?

I don't think it was exactly a lack of faith in Rex but no one is going to let a first season starter run an offense uncontained, let alone one who makes as many mistakes as Rex. Remember, Manning (and Brady and all the greats at present) have about half a dozen years more experience than Rex so they can be trusted to a degree that he can't. The Bears gameplan was simply a realistic reflection of the balance of the offensive weaponsat their disposal; B2 aside the Bears have no deep/speed threats and only if you can run the ball effectively are you going to be able to exploit posession receivers. The Bears thus took the approach they had to.

By the way, no one here (myself included) has noted Cedric Benson's injury as being pivotal. I don't think it was, but you could argue that losing half their ying/yang running tandem also didn't help the Bears cause.

jlmatthews 06-02-2007 02:45 AM

I misread about the Colts OL.

Also, the Benson injury didn't matter. TJ has been the workhorse all season. CG wold spell him, and got more carries when a playoff position was more or less wrapped up.

One Step Down 06-02-2007 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jlmatthews
I misread about the Colts OL.

Also, the Benson injury didn't matter. TJ has been the workhorse all season. CG wold spell him, and got more carries when a playoff position was more or less wrapped up.

The second part is inaccurate. While TJ is indeed 1 and Benson 1a, Benson got few carries in September and October because he was first hurt and then coming off the injury and out of shape. Things picked up not because the Bears were in a playoff position (they were in a playoff position from week 1 :-) ) but because he was finally fit and, moreover, running very effectively. This continued in the playoffs and he played a significant role against NO. In fact, because they're very different runners (TJ is more lateral and creative, CB more a crash baller) each makes the other more effective.

With all that said, as I said earlier, I agree with you. Benson's absence almost certainly didn't make a difference. However, that is just our opinion and you could construct an argument to the contrary. What is encouraging for Chicago, if there is a light in this weekend, is that they are an incredibly young side. Truth is, Chicago--Indianapolis is a Super Bowl that may be repeated more than once in the next few years.

One other thing: whoever it was earlier who said that they'd (correctly) realised that great Super Bowl teams all begin with great offensive lines: this is precisely why one team that is going to win a Super Bowl in the next few years is the New York Jets. You can put your money on it.

LLCOOLSTEVE 06-02-2007 10:54 AM

Titans are a team who will go close in the coming years, as of course are the Saints....

One Step Down 06-02-2007 12:13 PM

The truth is, the NFL is just a great league. It's an object lesson in how a professional sport should be run on almost every level. It's competitive, exciting, and dramatic on the field; there is in general an equitable player distribution system (via the draft) which ensures that in the main, everyone's time comes unless they shoot themselves in the foot or they are called Detroit, and most of all, it's a league that understands it's own product so they don't play too many games and every match is an event. Sure, NFL gets far more right than wrong. Now, I can't wait for the draft and season 2007.

(Of course, the one silver lining to Sunday is that I ought to be able to come home on Thursday with loads of cheap Bears gear which I suspect will now be heavily discounted. Memo to self: hit shops tonight.)

nookiebear 06-02-2007 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by One Step Down
The truth is, the NFL is just a great league. It's an object lesson in how a professional sport should be run on almost every level. It's competitive, exciting, and dramatic on the field; there is in general an equitable player distribution system (via the draft) which ensures that in the main, everyone's time comes unless they shoot themselves in the foot or they are called Detroit, and most of all, it's a league that understands it's own product so they don't play too many games and every match is an event. Sure, NFL gets far more right than wrong. Now, I can't wait for the draft and season 2007.

(Of course, the one silver lining to Sunday is that I ought to be able to come home on Thursday with loads of cheap Bears gear which I suspect will now be heavily discounted. Memo to self: hit shops tonight.)

I always tell mates who don't like it how the Cowboys, in the 90s, went from a 1&15 season to Superbowl winners about three seasons later.

Every team has a chance, you can't say that about the Premiership

And I find every weekend exciting with NFL - no matter what teams I watch. It doesn't matter if the Skins aren't on, I'll still watch and enjoy the games, and they're all exciting

Sorry, Bolton v Wigan don't have the same effect on me

nookiebear 06-02-2007 05:58 PM

Colts had the ball 38 minutes. It's amazing they only scored 29 points

If the Bears could have got one or two drives that lasted a several minutes and kept Manning of the field, they might have stood a chance

Strathclyde Eagle 06-02-2007 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
Every team has a chance, you can't say that about the Premiership
Watch this thread return to talking about the Detroit Lions again. ;)

One Step Down 06-02-2007 08:49 PM

I'm not sure this is relevant, but on noticing the news of the Liverpool takeover today (and not because the buyers were American, either) it got me to thinking about the strength of the NFL and how that league zealously protects ownership and, indeed, litmus tests anyone who wants to buy a franchise (which is next to impossible.) Is it accidental that -- although it's run like an old boys club -- the game is wildly healthy, ever more successful, and simultaneously run by people who really understand and love the game?

I have nothing against the new owners of Liverpool personally, but it seems to me that the Premiership (the organisation itself) has simply destroyed football. Teams are bought and sold to the highest bidder with no regard to intent, there is no discipline whatsoever in the game via a strong office of the commissioner and no desire whatsoever to do anything to further the common good of the sport; only to make sure the richest remain in their present, elevated position.

Watching the Super Bowl and the England--Scotland rugby game this weekend, I realise more and more that I care about Palace because that's what I've done for 39 years but, in reality, I am barely even interested in football anymore. It's a rubbish sport, badly run, played by self-obsessed prima donnas and owned by tasteless dilletantes (at best.) The fact that Sepp Blatter sits at the games pinnacle says it all. What a tragedy that we (collectively) have allowed the national sport to become a third rate joke.

nookiebear 06-02-2007 09:30 PM

I agree. Not much football outside of Palace really interests me anymore, basically for those reasons you've stated

saxoneagle 06-02-2007 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
I agree. Not much football outside of Palace really interests me anymore, basically for those reasons you've stated
If Palace, the England rugby team and a regular season NFL game were on at the same time, watching Palace would be my third choice without hesitation.

One Step Down 06-02-2007 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by saxoneagle
If Palace, the England rugby team and a regular season NFL game were on at the same time, watching Palace would be my third choice without hesitation.
I'm afraid to say that I'm in total agreement with you.

Strathclyde Eagle 06-02-2007 11:09 PM

This endorsement of Peter Taylor has been bought to you by the letters, N, F and L, and the number XLI.

One Step Down 06-02-2007 11:30 PM

That's definitely one part of it. But the game of football in England has become so impoverished, tacky, run down. I know there were some comments about Christianity a page or two ago but really, when I look at Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith they both have a stature, a bearing, a demeanour, I don't know, that suggests real pride and class (in the true sense of the word.) I mean, these are guys you could follow into battle and who you could look up to. Peter Taylor I wouldn't follow into the gents.

Both came from disadvantaged backgrounds yet both are calm, professional, they present themselves well, they know how to express things. Compare that to Simon Jordan, a complete yob who is little more than an embarassment whether he saved CPFC or not. Or Peter Taylor, who can barely construct a sentence in his native tongue.

It amazes me that we English act as if we're superior to Americans when the truth is anything but. To watch the Super Bowl was, on so many levels, simply embarassing. I know I've gone off on a tangent again but, increasingly, I am just utterly fed up with the fact that both football, and England, have gone down the tube.

nookiebear 07-02-2007 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by saxoneagle
If Palace, the England rugby team and a regular season NFL game were on at the same time, watching Palace would be my third choice without hesitation.
Palace are still my first choice by a country mile, but I have little interest in watching other matches

The only Premiership football I've seen this season was the second half of Spurs v man Utd on Sunday

LLCOOLSTEVE 08-02-2007 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by One Step Down
The second part is inaccurate. While TJ is indeed 1 and Benson 1a, Benson got few carries in September and October because he was first hurt and then coming off the injury and out of shape. Things picked up not because the Bears were in a playoff position (they were in a playoff position from week 1 :-) ) but because he was finally fit and, moreover, running very effectively. This continued in the playoffs and he played a significant role against NO. In fact, because they're very different runners (TJ is more lateral and creative, CB more a crash baller) each makes the other more effective.

With all that said, as I said earlier, I agree with you. Benson's absence almost certainly didn't make a difference. However, that is just our opinion and you could construct an argument to the contrary. What is encouraging for Chicago, if there is a light in this weekend, is that they are an incredibly young side. Truth is, Chicago--Indianapolis is a Super Bowl that may be repeated more than once in the next few years.

One other thing: whoever it was earlier who said that they'd (correctly) realised that great Super Bowl teams all begin with great offensive lines: this is precisely why one team that is going to win a Super Bowl in the next few years is the New York Jets. You can put your money on it.

I know ou are a big fan, But so is Jason :D Im sure he was amused by your post, you seem very knowledgable, but Jason is an old dog, living in the States and working in the media as a sports Journo means teaching that old dog new tricks wouldnt be possible :D

Its amusing though, he normally puts us all to shame so having someone counter him quite alot is enjoyable, keep up the technical talk everyone.... its v v interesting and this thread is one of my Fav's on here, looking forward to next season :)

jlmatthews 08-02-2007 01:10 AM

I'm not old... or a dog for that matter. ;)

I love the chat, analysis and banter. But when it comes to the Bears, I'm right, you're wrong. Deal with it :D

TJ1 CB2

Nuff said. Next season may be a differnt story though...

;)

LLCOOLSTEVE 08-02-2007 01:16 AM

woof

jlmatthews 08-02-2007 01:19 AM

Giants fans are really excited about the Colts win. Now at dinner, Peyton can tell Eli how to win the big one. Or even a meaningful one.

saxoneagle 08-02-2007 02:13 PM

Didn't Eli have the 3rd highest QB rating this year? Funny how the stats never show it all...

Benzhiyi 08-02-2007 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
Palace are still my first choice by a country mile, but I have little interest in watching other matches

The only Premiership football I've seen this season was the second half of Spurs v man Utd on Sunday

I'm with you.

Thanks to Sky Plus, I've only missed a couple of all the televised NFL games all season and watching them over the course of Sunday and Monday evenings has been a fixture of my weekly routine over the last five months. As Nookie says, every match is interesting, and something spectacular can happen on every play. So I'm going to be lost without it for the next six months. I'll have to rely on Madden, NCAA and Front Office Football to keep me going.

One Step Down 08-02-2007 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzhiyi
So I'm going to be lost without it for the next six months.
So true! I'm already looking forward to the draft; at least we can have a couple of months of speculation and analysis related to that.

nookiebear 08-02-2007 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by saxoneagle
Didn't Eli have the 3rd highest QB rating this year? Funny how the stats never show it all...
Brunell for the Redskins was summat like No6 QB until he was benched :eek:

jlmatthews 08-02-2007 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzhiyi
So I'm going to be lost without it for the next six months.
Don't forget that for football you get to be really excited about the combine and draft!!

And the combine is just months away!!!! ;)

Strathclyde Eagle 08-02-2007 07:54 PM

Yikes, is no-one watching the Pro Bowl?
















;)

Strathclyde Eagle 09-02-2007 12:49 AM

Now I'll be Sky+ing the Pro Bowl - Tony Romo is holding for the NFC field goals. :clown:

jlmatthews 09-02-2007 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Tony Romo is holding for the NFC field goals. :clown:
:o

Get practising before next year.

Latvian Eagle 09-02-2007 10:21 AM

I might watch the Pro Bowl, especially as there are 3 Panthers players in the NFC team! :)

saxoneagle 09-02-2007 03:33 PM

Patriots are the 4th best team in the league (according to the draft rankings) and only have one pro-bowler.

Shows what a great TEAM they are rather than a bunch of individuals. (T.O. take note...)

Latvian Eagle 09-02-2007 04:05 PM

Serious question...

Why is it called football when the only time they kick the ball is to punt, kick off or try for a field goal!? :confused:

saxoneagle 09-02-2007 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Latvian Eagle
Serious question...

Why is it called football when the only time they kick the ball is to punt, kick off or try for a field goal!? :confused:

You could say the same about Palace.

Game lasts 90 minutes.
The ball is in play about 60 of those.
And about 57 of those the ball is up in the air... HOOF!
:D

But, seriously, I have no idea!

Strathclyde Eagle 11-02-2007 06:53 PM

Sean Taylor might now be my favourite non-Dolphin in the NFL, just for using the Pro Bowl as a means to needlessly flatten the Bills' punter. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r94rmkbFMyU

jlmatthews 11-02-2007 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Sean Taylor might now be my favourite non-Dolphin in the NFL, just for using the Pro Bowl as a means to needlessly flatten the Bills' punter. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r94rmkbFMyU

:D

Just hilarious. There were a few ooo's in the newsroom when it happened!

nookiebear 11-02-2007 10:18 PM

ha I sky plussed it and haven't watched the second half yet

if only all the Redskins secondary had hit that hard during the regular season

On another note, apparently 500,000 people have registered for tix for the Dolphins/Giants game at Wembley

Strathclyde Eagle 12-02-2007 12:11 AM

I think it is going to work out like the play-off final, whereby people will try and get a tickets a number of different ways and have back-up plans if need be.

One Step Down 15-02-2007 08:48 AM

Three weeks later, Marty Schottenheimer fired. Interesting timing. Short list for the job: Singletary, Rex Ryan, Rivera, Norv Turner.

Strathclyde Eagle 15-02-2007 09:48 AM

BTW the Miami Herald thinks that a lottery will take place to determine who gets tickets for the Wembley game. Not sure I like my chances in that regard. :(

Benzhiyi 16-02-2007 09:35 AM

Ah, that's balls.

Already saving in case it has to be an Ebay job...

(My missus, bless her, bought us both Dolphins tops for Valentine's Day as she's so excited about it.)

Strathclyde Eagle 16-02-2007 10:20 AM

Which players Ben? I've got a Chambers (home) and Brown (road) jersey, just want a Taylor alternate to complete the set.

Benzhiyi 16-02-2007 11:22 AM

They're not actual uniforms - mine's an aqua green shirt with the logo on it, her's is a white and aqua off the shoulders jumper with 'Dolphins' and the number 39 on.

Strathclyde Eagle 16-02-2007 12:11 PM

Ah, I see. Where did you get the ladies' top from? My Mrs wanted one of those a while back, and it might appease her for me buying a Ronnie Brown jersey.

elliott 16-02-2007 12:35 PM

I got my housemate a Marshall Faulk pink and white one with glitter on the numbers.

Looks classy!

Just try ebay.

I have some sexual shirts. Me and my friends buy them.

White Chambers (stitched)
Orange Culpepper (stitched)
Aqua ZT
Navy Ricky Williams

Black Howie Long Raiders (stitched)
Powder Blue Dan Fouts San D jersey (stitched)

elliott 16-02-2007 07:57 PM

I'd hold your horses.

Miami are about to change their uniforms (very slightly).

Jonboy 16-02-2007 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Latvian Eagle
Serious question...

Why is it called football when the only time they kick the ball is to punt, kick off or try for a field goal!? :confused:

At a guess, it is just the historical name for this genre of games. Rugby is short for Rugby Football.

One Step Down 16-02-2007 09:41 PM

American Football originated from a game called "Old Division Football" played by a number of Ivy League universities in the late 1800s. This, according to Wiki, "was an indigenous soccer-like game. The game was first played before modern soccer and rugby were invented in England, and it continued to rely on its own local rules for some time after students learned of the newer imports. Dartmouth students published the rules of what is now called Old Division Football in 1871." The game then evolved towards rugby (handling superceding kicking) before shifting to become American Football as we now know it.

Benzhiyi 06-03-2007 03:11 PM

Strange times in Miami right now. Harrington and McMichael cut, Welker off to the Saints, talk of us signing Joey Porter... at the moment I'm not feeling too hot about next season. Or the one after that...

Strathclyde Eagle 06-03-2007 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzhiyi
Strange times in Miami right now. Harrington and McMichael cut, Welker off to the Saints, talk of us signing Joey Porter... at the moment I'm not feeling too hot about next season. Or the one after that...
It's worse than that Ben, Welker's gone to New England, not New Orleans.

Doesn't look as if McMichael is a cut & restructure either. :(

Benzhiyi 06-03-2007 11:37 PM

Sorry - Meant to type Pats - Saints wouldn't have been so much of a big deal as they're not a divisional rival!!

Weird happenings indeed.

elliott 06-03-2007 11:47 PM

What the is going on? You don't just cut Randy Mac. He's surely got some value.

Wes is probably a big loss too, although for the money, I wouldn't have matched the Pats.

What's the deal with Porter? What's the point?

We need some young signings fast. There's a lot of gaps which need filling. 10-15 players are realistically needed.

Strathclyde Eagle 07-03-2007 12:52 AM

What I don't understand is when you cut a QB and a TE and lose a WR/KR do you spend the money you've saved on defence? It doesn't make sense.

nookiebear 09-03-2007 01:43 PM

Fred Smoot's come back to the Skins - he should never have left - and we've got rid of our crap kicker Hall, so I'm pleased :)

Chief Brody 09-03-2007 06:43 PM

Very pleased with getting Nate Clements. First shutdown corner SF have had since Deion Sanders........ SB that year! :)

Michael Lewis adds some oomph to the secondary also. That's two big hitters in there at 209 and 225 lbs respectively. I think (hope) Philly will regret losing him, an intriguing acquisition.

Next up some depth to the nose tackle in Aubrayio Franklin and a prospective pass rusher from OLB in Tully Banta-Cain (great name

:p ). Looks like we can finally implement that 3-4 after two years of trying.

Finally Ashlie Lelie at WR. Another intriguing signing, adding real speed but also inconsistency.

Still, at least we have another 8 picks in the first four rounds of the draft. :D

Perhaps we can trade Kwame Harris to Washington as they take all our cast offs now........... Andre Carter, Mike Rumph and Brandon Lloyd. You never know we may get their one remaining pick....... No.1. :D

Strathclyde Eagle 09-03-2007 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
Fred Smoot's come back to the Skins - he should never have left - and we've got rid of our crap kicker Hall, so I'm pleased :)
Guess the Vikes are getting rid of everyone involved in the loveboat incident. At least they'll be the best behaved team with a losing record.

Chief Brody 13-03-2007 11:30 AM

With the draft being about five weeks away, what are the areas that need to be addressed in your teams? In addition, what players would you (realistically) like to draft?

With regards to San Fran, we have addresses a few needs through FA, which makes the draft process a little easier. We do need to address the defensive line though, acquiring a DE/NT to enable a firm transition to a 3-4. Here I would like Carriker or Okoye (DE) or Branch (DT). Furthermore a MLB would be useful as we are a little thin there. Willis if it is with our first pick.

On the offense, a decent physical possession receiver is paramount to add depth and competition and a useful back up to Frank Gore at RB. Finally, another tackle for the OL is needed for depth. These would be addressed in 2nd/3rd and 4th rounds.

Strathclyde Eagle 13-03-2007 12:39 PM

OFFENSE

nookiebear 16-03-2007 04:15 PM

Offense and defense for the Redskins - but a fit Clinton Portis will help the offense at least and hopefully last season's playbook chaos will calm down. Just need to throw the ball to Lloyd and Randle El more.

Smoot's return on defense will help but the Skins didn't force many turnovers last season (only six interceptions, I think, all season) so the secondary needs to be sorted out. Signing London Fletcher at MLB is good as well.

I'd like the Skins to draft a 1st round QB to give Campbell some proper competition but doubt they will which is a shame, because if Campbell flops, it's back to Brunell and five yard passes on 3rd and long

Benzhiyi 24-03-2007 03:09 PM

I see we're now courting Trent Green. Why?!

We already have one ageing past his best quarterback in Daunte Culpepper. And the way free agency has gone over the last few weeks, there's a fair chance Brady Quinn will still be around at pick nine. So why not wait to see how the draft pans out before making a move for another veteran QB?

Weird stuff. A trade for Green is a waste of a draft pick IMHO.

RDSdaEAGLE 24-03-2007 03:18 PM

I took delivery of my San Fran 49ers shirt yesterday :lux:

Kitbag.com are doing a sale on NFL shirts, their range is limited but they're 30 quid off, so not bad! :p

elliott 25-03-2007 12:30 AM

Just bought a stitched Pepale Eagles shirt.

And a stitched, personalised (!) Mean machine one.

47 total. Bargain.

elliott 25-03-2007 12:40 AM

Sorry, for a minute there I forgot to mention...

Trent Green!!!

I have my smilies thingy off, but I'm desperate to bang my head very very hard.

How moronic.

joshua1982 25-03-2007 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzhiyi
I see we're now courting Trent Green. Why?!

We already have one ageing past his best quarterback in Daunte Culpepper. And the way free agency has gone over the last few weeks, there's a fair chance Brady Quinn will still be around at pick nine. So why not wait to see how the draft pans out before making a move for another veteran QB?

Weird stuff. A trade for Green is a waste of a draft pick IMHO.

i dont see quin going as far as 9 at all, if one of the top 3 dont want him him i certainly would expect someone to trade up for him.

joshua1982 25-03-2007 12:53 AM

oh and if i had to say i think detriot will take him.

Benzhiyi 25-03-2007 12:58 AM

There's no doubting Detroit should take him (assuming Oakland nab Jamarcus Russell)... but knowing Matt Millen, they'll do something wacko instead. Like taking Calvin Johnson just to continue that baffling wide receiver obsession of his.

joshua1982 25-03-2007 02:16 AM

The trouble is i think Johnson is the standout player in the draft! Maybe detriot would be looking to trade down to aviod the problem altogether?

Strathclyde Eagle 25-03-2007 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzhiyi
There's no doubting Detroit should take him (assuming Oakland nab Jamarcus Russell)... but knowing Matt Millen, they'll do something wacko instead. Like taking Calvin Johnson just to continue that baffling wide receiver obsession of his.
But it's funny. :D

Most mock drafts seem to have Detoilet taking either Joe Thomas (OL, Wisconsin) or trading down.

Chief Brody 28-03-2007 10:45 AM

Looks like Briggs and the Bears #31 pick may be going to Washington in return for their #6 pick. Can see the Bears then drafting Branch or Okoye on the DL.

Now that the Niners have re-signed Gore there remains one loose thread to deal with, Smiley OG. Looks like we have structured all the deals with an eye for minimising any adverse impact on the cap should things not work out. What a delight, given the mis-managment of the previous two regimes that we now have a coherent business strategy.

Oh, and Monday night football to open the new season too. Quietly optimsitic for a sorjourn into the play-offs next season.

Strathclyde Eagle 28-03-2007 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chief Brody
Looks like Briggs and the Bears #31 pick may be going to Washington in return for their #6 pick. Can see the Bears then drafting Branch or Okoye on the DL.
Washington throwing money at a problem, what a surprise. :rolleyes:

What on earth ever happened to them? They used to be an example of just how you should run a professional sports team.

nookiebear 28-03-2007 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Washington throwing money at a problem, what a surprise. :rolleyes:

What on earth ever happened to them? They used to be an example of just how you should run a professional sports team.

Didn't work last off-season, throwing money

I'm not even convinced about Gibbs anymore.

Chief Brody 28-03-2007 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Washington throwing money at a problem, what a surprise. :rolleyes:

What on earth ever happened to them? They used to be an example of just how you should run a professional sports team.

They have been a little scatter gun with their player acquisitions over the last couple of years. I'm just thankful that SF have finally found a decent front office.

saxoneagle 28-03-2007 07:21 PM

Why don't they announce all the fixtures in one go?

I'm going to be in Texas at Christmas and want to go to a Cowboys match and I'm patiently waiting for the THIRD installment of fixtures... (firstly, the London match; secondly, the opening day plus Thanksgiving TV matchs; thirdly, the rest of them)!

For god sake NFL, sort it out :D

Strathclyde Eagle 29-03-2007 12:29 AM

That's an extremely valid point. It annoys me no end.

Chief Brody 31-03-2007 07:23 PM

Looks like Chicago feel they are being a little railroaded into the trade (from Briggs I presume) so have baulked at present. I would not be surprised that come draft day a trade was actually made though.

saxoneagle 05-04-2007 04:41 PM

Seems now the pre-season fixtures have been announced but STILL no sign of all the regular season games.

F*ck sake!

saxoneagle 09-04-2007 03:22 PM

I heard on the grapevine that the NFL fixtures are due to be released "early this week".

Excellent.

Please let the Cowboys be at home on December 23 :p

saxoneagle 10-04-2007 11:19 PM

Finally, tomorrow

http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/10119199

Benzhiyi 11-04-2007 05:23 PM

Blimey, Pacman's been suspended for the season, and Chris Henry for half of it:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119161

A hard line stance which I quite like, particularly the bit about playing in the NFL being a privilege rather than a right.

Chester 11-04-2007 05:32 PM

There are quite a few players who will be looking nervously over their shoulders like Tank Johnson when he is released. It seems to have been met with a positive reaction from everyone including players who were getting tired of being tarnished with the same brush as the likes of Pacman.

Now how long before that plonker in Dallas gets his cumupence

Strathclyde Eagle 11-04-2007 08:07 PM

Unfortunately the one thing TO isn't is a law breaker. :(

nookiebear 11-04-2007 11:50 PM

Redskins v Dolphins first game of the season, Ben :)

Strathclyde Eagle 12-04-2007 12:08 AM

Buffalo and New England away in December again. :bash:

Benzhiyi 12-04-2007 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nookiebear
Redskins v Dolphins first game of the season, Ben :)
Shall we go? How hard are Redskins tickets to get?

I am totally serious.

elliott 12-04-2007 01:11 AM

I wouldn't be.

My friend Paul wanted us to go to Detroit for Thanksgiving to watch GB. Not in.

Seems like Cam-Cam is looking for the Fins to play a bit of Air Coryell football. The interesting thing is that I think they could have the roster to do it. Strong armed QB (if DC plays), fast receivers. Good single back too in Ronnie.

Benzhiyi 12-04-2007 01:17 AM

Contrary to popular opinion, Detroit is quite a cool place as long as you stay away from the trouble spots - just got back from there. I especially recommend the Old Shillelagh irish bar. So I hope it wasn't that which put you off.

Fins vs Skins tickets onsale here for $89 upwards:

http://www.stubhub.com/washington-re...vent_id=380466

With Virgin, flights out on 7 September and returning 10 September are 395 each. Nooks, we really could make this happen. I've got a few pennies in a jar that I'd be more than happy to spend on this.

(And anyone else who fancies it is welcome to join us.)

elliott 12-04-2007 01:30 AM

It was mostly the fact that I'm spending 400+ on Rugby World Cup, and then NFL London the week after.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.