infrared41

18 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

That team and how they’d die for Dan Campbell is really revealing just how much of football is élan versus EPA.

 

If my choices are 'elan or advanced stats and analytics, give me 'elan every time.  Dan Campbell has that team believing they're actually as good as their record. They're not and we all know it. But they think they are and that's at least half the battle.  In any case, the Lions are a fun story.

2 minutes ago, 8BW14 said:

Just when I thought he Cowboys were actually putting something together they barely escape the Texans and fall on their face agains the Jags. They never fail to disappoint me.

 

The Jags are better than people think and the Texans played the Chiefs tough too. I wouldn't write off the Cowboys just yet.

The Detroit Lions, who went 1-6 in their first seven games, are now 7-7.

6 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

This is prime time Kirk Cousins but on Saturday morning, huh?

 

It was national game, but it was also a day game so Kirk decided to play one half of each.

8 minutes ago, TrueYankee26 said:

27 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

This one is all 1992 Oilers. Right down to the Vikings winning it in OT on a FG.

Them too!

 

Update: Vikings won 39-36.

 

On a FG just as I predicted.

12 minutes ago, TrueYankee26 said:

The spirit of the 2016 Atlanta Falcons live in Indianapolis.

 

This one is all 1992 Oilers. Right down to the Vikings winning it in OT on a FG.

On 12/13/2022 at 7:28 PM, DoctorWhom said:

With Beasley coming out of retirement for the Bills, and the Cowboys signing TY Hilton, all this tells me is that OBJ must seriously be cooked. 

 

Or...OBJ is asking for more money than either of those teams were willing to pay him.

15 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

I'd like to see the Bears roll with the white facemasks and white "C" for one game. We never did get a proper memorial for the Kansas Comet.

 

 

I'm pretty sure Gale Sayers was one of the few players on the team who wore that style of facemask and I don't think he wore it very long. The gray 2 bar is the look I associate with him. The white facemask always looks weird to me.

 

 

 

 

 

5 hours ago, tBBP said:

6 hours ago, jc... said:

Woke up to a Clevejacking. 

 

Yup—and it's going on in two threads simultaneously...

 

You can't stop a Clevejacking, you can only hope to contain it. 

San Francisco vs. Seattle

 

Indianapolis vs. Minnesota

Baltimore vs. Cleveland

Miami vs. Buffalo

Philadelphia vs. Chicago

Detroit vs. NY Jets

Pittsburgh vs. Carolina

Kansas City vs. Houston

Atlanta vs. New Orleans

Dallas vs. Jacksonville

Arizona vs. Denver

New England vs. Las Vegas

Tennessee vs. LA Chargers

Cincinnati vs. Tampa Bay

NY Giants vs. Washington

 

LA Rams vs. Green Bay

7 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

I know LA’s uniforms aren’t exactly everyone’s cup of tea, but Rams-Raiders was a fantastic looking matchup

 

I went back and forth on that one. Couldn't get past all the things I don't like about that Rams combo. Good colors and not much else.

4 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

I think the ultimate difference NASCAR/auto racing in general has to other sports is twofold;

1. Cars just have much more room for ads than the human body, so having ads isn't as distracting as it might be on a baseball uniform (and ads just show up better on cars with large surfaces than on human bodies).
2. Since you don't generally see drivers that much during a race, the car becomes their uniform in a sense. Like, when people talk about Dale Earnhardt, they always mention that iconic black #3 Chevy without fail. Same with Petty and the light blue #43 Superbird.

I think that's the reason other sports are looking into things like digital ads on the playing surface instead of just pumping as many ads onto uniforms as possible; there's just not enough real estate, at least not without compromising the design itself.

 

It's not about available "real estate." It's about using every inch of "real estate." What I was saying is there will come a day when ads all over uniforms will seem normal. If you don't like the NASCAR comparison, we can use European hockey instead.

 

 

That said, ad creep happened in NASCAR too.

 

The #43 car in 1971...

 

 

The #43 car circa 2021...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week 14 was the last bye week. We're back to a full slate of games for the rest of the season. I hope that means we'll see an increase in good match ups, but I wouldn't count on it. Let's get on with the show...

 

 

BEST

 

1. Buccaneers - 49ers: Two of the best looks in the league. What else can you ask for? Well, for starters, better socks (looking at you in particular, Tampa.) That aside, this one was the easy choice for the top spot this week. Great looking game...from the knees up.

 

 

 

2. Ravens - Steelers: Last week, if you had asked me the chances of the Ravens in purple pants making the best list, let alone the #2 spot, I would have said "slim and none." Ask me again today and I'll tell you that even I'm surprised by how much I liked this Ravens look.  I must be mellowing with age or something.

 

 

 

3. Browns - Bengals: This one could have been a complete disaster. Honestly, I was expecting the Bengals in all black and the Browns in white over brown. I was pleasantly surprised to see that they decided on the best possible match up. When these two aren't screwing around with mono-black, mono-brown, brown pants, orange over black, and so on, they have two of the best looks in the league. Well done, idiots. The only downside to watching this game was seeing Deshaun Watson sullying a Browns uniform.

 

 

 

4. Eagles - Giants: Solid, good looking match up. As usual.

 

 

 

5. Texans - Cowboys: I'm still a fan of the Texans look, but it could use some minor tweaks. Better jersey stripes and maybe lose the sleeve numbers. Nothing drastic, just tighten it up a little. The Cowboys looked great as usual.

 

 

 

WORST

 

1. The Arizona Cardinals: Enough with this disaster already. The best combo in the Cards set is God-awful. All red? Since this is a family show, I'll keep it at you looked like bottles of Heinz ketchup running around out there. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, Arizona? Keep the helmet and throw the rest of this nightmare in the trash. I would say it's outlived its usefulness, but it never had any.

 

 

 

2. Jaguars - Titans: This one was butt-ugly. I can't add anything to that.

 

 

 

3. Jets - Bills: The Bills could have saved themselves from a spot on the worst list. There's nothing the Jets can do but run out the clock on their terrible uniforms.

 

 

And that's a wrap, kids.

 

 

23 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

how long until it would seem weird for the Habs and hypothetically the Yankees to NOT have an advertisement somewhere. 

 

Before I answer your question, let me make this as clear as I possibly can. I am not, in any way, endorsing putting ads on jerseys. I don't like ads on jerseys and I'll never like ads on jerseys.  There are enough alternate revenue streams available to teams to more than make up for any ad money lost by keeping the jerseys ad-free. OK, with that out of the way...

 

We discussed a similar topic on the most recent episode of Basically a Sports Show (Available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever fine podcasting is sold) and this is how I saw it. I've been a NASCAR fan for most of my life. Without sponsors, there is no NASCAR, F1, IndyCar, NHRA, or any other type of racing. Seeing all the ads on the cars isn't in issue to me because I'm used to it. It's all I've ever known. Unfortunately, there will come a day where sports fans will not only be used to seeing the New York Yankees look baseball's version of a NASCAR Cup Car, they'll expect it because anything else would look weird. Case in point...

 

Which one of these cars do you think looks weird to a NASCAR fan?

 

 

To answer your question, it will take about one generation.

25 minutes ago, Cujo said:

Derek Carr is a lot like Andy Dalton: A 2nd round pick turned franchise QB, consistently put up good numbers, made several Pro Bowls, etc etc -- but ultimately you just know he's never gonna be the guy who gets you to a Super Bowl.

 

And look at what happened when the Bengals finally moved on. Just sayin.

 

Exactly, but until someone better comes along, the Raiders may as well hang on to him. I don't know what Carr's contract status is, but unless he's in his walk year, I don't think the team can afford to cut him loose and carry that money. My guess is there aren't too many, if any, teams out there willing to pay the freight on the rest of his contract. Then again, the idiot Browns traded away their future and paid a quarter of a billion dollars to get a serial sex offender who hadn't played a game in two years. When compared to that, maybe picking up Derek Carr isn't as dumb as it seems. So who knows?

45 minutes ago, DoctorWhom said:

I never said Carr is Bad QB

 

And I never said he is a great QB. I think we're saying the same thing, but we're taking different sides on the matter. My point is that I don't see an available QB that's significantly better than Carr right now. You think they should cut him loose and go with someone like Mayfield or Brissett. (Neither of which are as good as Carr) I think the Raiders should ride it out with Carr until there is a clear upgrade available to them. Right now, outside the draft, that upgrade isn't available to them. 

 

We both agree that he's not the QB that will get Raiders to the Super Bowl.

1 minute ago, DoctorWhom said:

33 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Carr threw for 4800 yards with a 68.9 completion percentage last year playing for an interim coach and the Raiders made the playoffs. You really believe you're going to get that out of Mayfield, Brissett, or Jimmy G? The problem with the Raiders isn't Derek Carr, it's Josh McDaniels.

Getting rid of Bisaccia was definitely a mistake, but blaming McDaniels is a cop out answer when they've struggled long before they hired him. 2016 was the only other year the Raider made the playoffs and Carr got hurt and didn't play in that game.  He's not hurting the Raiders, but he certainly is not helping them. One way or the other they need to move on from him. Otherwise the Raiders will continue to be stuck in mediocrity, or Worse. 

 

The Raiders have been "stuck in mediocrity" since 2003. Carr is the Raiders all-time passing leader. You sure you want to hang all of this on him? And replace him with Baker Mayfield? All due respect, but if there's someone out there who would do a worse job of running that team than Mark Davis has, it just might be you.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

6 minutes ago, Cujo said:

Has the NFL put a re-ban on stadiums piping in crowd noise?

 

I feel every LA game (Rams and Chargers) sounds about 50/50, tho the road team clearly packs in far more fans.

 

Good to know I wasn't the only one who was thinking "wow, those 523* Chargers fans are really loud."

 

*523 may be an exaggeration. It was probably less than that.

1 hour ago, DoctorWhom said:

With how they've been, I don't really see how they can do much worse. Carr isn't the answer for them either way. 

 

Carr threw for 4800 yards with a 68.9 completion percentage last year playing for an interim coach and the Raiders made the playoffs. You really believe you're going to get that out of Mayfield, Brissett, or Jimmy G? The problem with the Raiders isn't Derek Carr, it's Josh McDaniels.

8 minutes ago, JerseyJimmy said:

lol miami are 100% throwing to hurt the jets

 

The Jets are more than capable of hurting themselves. They don't need Miami's help.

7 minutes ago, DoctorWhom said:

If you feel that way sure, but he's been the Raiders QB for how long, under how many coaches? and hasn't really accomplished anything.  Raiders need to realize they aren't going anywhere with him. 

 

"Under how many coaches" may be part of the answer to your question. I'm not saying Carr is a top five QB or even a top ten QB. All I'm saying is that as things currently stand, the Raiders don't have any significantly better options.

6 minutes ago, DoctorWhom said:

You act like Carr is a better QB than them when he really isn't. At best he's always been mediocre. 

 

I'm not acting. He's better than Mayfield and Brissett for sure, Brady is too old, and Jimmy G can't stay on the field.

6 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

Either White is stupid, the Jets medical staff is stupid for allowing him to go back in twice, or the NFL just doesn’t care for player safety.

 

Correct.

34 minutes ago, DoctorWhom said:

I feel like Brady is always going to be an option for teams as long as he plays, just because of his reputation.  People thought he was washed in 2019 with the Patriots, then wins Super Bowl MVP the very next year.

 

As for other options for the Raiders, they should end up with a decent draft pick if they want to go that route. Baker & Garoppolo may be available as well. There are rumors Love  wants to be traded (Though I doubt the Packers entertain that). Brissett could be option too.  

 

Reputation doesn't win games. Take it from someone who's been there, you age quite a bit between age 40 and 45. Brady may not be done, but he's not TOM BRADY any more. And he's certainly not worth whatever the Raiders would have to pay to get him. I could be wrong, but I don't see Brady playing for league minimum just to keep playing. Add that to the fact that the Raiders are already buried under bad contracts and it's pretty clear that Brady's not a serious option.

 

Are you seriously saying Baker Mayfield is a better option than Derek Carr? Again, take it from someone who's been there, Baker is just as likely to go 11-35 with 3 INTS next week as he is to recreate what he did Thursday night. Jimmy G is a lateral move at very best. Jacoby Brissett is a good option...as a back up.

51 minutes ago, DoctorWhom said:

Well regardless, I don't see the Raiders sticking with Carr. 

How many chances has that guy gotten to prove he's a great QB? 

 

Fair enough, so other than the draft, where do they find someone better? Keep in mind that Brady is closer to my age than he is to Derek Carr's age. I don't see him as a viable option for the Raiders.