NFL '13 SEASON THREAD

[alxy8s]

One loss was to a 7-9 team, the other involved 5 turnovers. Just things that never would happen in the Superdome. Especially frustrating because the Saints had to go on the road because of rules about division champs and in-conference record.

They certainly aren't a bad team on the road. They just make mistakes atypical of the well-oiled machine they are at home. Brees especially.

[Kramerica Industries]

Division rules I can go along with. I prefer records dictating home field, not divisional rank.

In-conference record, though, is legit. Not that I think you're complaining about that as much as just noting how that's why the game was in San Francisco and not New Orleans.

[ninersdd]

The funny thing is that one of the losses was one of St. Louis' 2 wins, and another was to Tampa, who sucked that year. Though that loss was in October, before the team phoned it in.

[Kramerica Industries]

The Bucs also held the Saints to their home season-low in points, with 27, which was also the only home game that New Orleans didn't post at least 30 points.

Amusing, considering Tampa Bay gave up a franchise record 494 points that year.

[The_Admiral]

Cutler's played with a lot of guts today but the guy can barely walk now. He'll probably finish the damn game but he really should be taken out of the game. Painful to watch.

Who was the FOX crew on that game today? No matter, at one point, the color commentator made note about how "nobody has ever questioned Jay Cutler's toughness". And, you know, Jay Cutler is one tough Mo-Fo.

Except dolts people HAVE questioned his toughness before. There were people out for his head that he didn't finish the 2010 NFC Championship Game. And it was awful of those people. But questioning did happen at some point, that's for certain.

Fox itself questioned Cutler's toughness, ripped from the fictitious headlines:

[Rockstar Matt]

Man, this bye week can't come fast enough.

And I'm glad the Cowboys are getting their a** kicked. Maybe it'll wake them up. On the bright side, we're still in first place...

[rams80]

Division rules I can go along with. I prefer records dictating home field, not divisional rank.

In-conference record, though, is legit. Not that I think you're complaining about that as much as just noting how that's why the game was in San Francisco and not New Orleans.

Nah, having the division champs get a home game is fine with me. 3/8 of your schedule is against your division, which means that winning the division should be rewarded appropriately. It also means you control your destiny. Sweep your division games and you're going to have a hard time losing said division.

[dbadefense1990]

Looks like Romo is channeling his inner-Jim Everett at this point.

And holy crap. Who would have thought the Giants, at 0-6 to begin the year, would have a legitimate shot at winning the division at this point? No one.

[Kramerica Industries]

Yeah, well, an Aaron Rodgers-less Packers team and the Cowboys venture the Meadowlands in the next two weeks, and I'm cautiously optimistic the Giants will be 5-6 at that point. Depending on how things break, that could legitimately push them into a tie for first place. Hell, there could be a four-way tie for first place after Week 12, all teams being 5-6.

[DS729]

Thank you, New Orleans. Skins still have a shot.

[infrared41]

Man, this bye week can't come fast enough.

And I'm glad the Cowboys are getting their a** kicked. Maybe it'll wake them up. On the bright side, we're still in first place...

1. They can "wake up" all they want. It won't change the fact that they aren't a very good team.

2. For now. Enjoy it while it lasts.

[Lee Noire]

That game was hard to watch. Sigh...to be a Cowboys fan.

[CS85]

That game was hard to watch. Sigh...to be a Cowboys fan.

Saw this stat on reddit, kinda interesting: Cowboys are 133-133 since 1997. 8-8 last two seasons. Are basically .500 against the Eagles over the last 10 years (10-9). They are the golden standard of football mediocrity.

[STL FANATIC]

That game was hard to watch. Sigh...to be a Cowboys fan.

Saw this stat on reddit, kinda interesting: Cowboys are 133-133 since 1997. 8-8 last two seasons. Are basically .500 against the Eagles over the last 10 years (10-9). They are the golden standard of football mediocrity.

Kinda funny (just since you're the one posting it), I've always considered the Bears to be the epitome of mediocrity. That's mostly just a gag reflex to all the Bears fans I was around while in Champaign. A gag of course that was needed because the Rams were flat awful and the Bears were at least pretty good to really good. So I opted for the "never great" route and called them mediocre.

So for the hell of it, I ran that same time span for the Bears, and they're 129-135 since 1997. Of course the Bears have played in a SB in that stretch.

Anyways, I didn't really mean to post debating the merits of whether the Bears qualify as mediocre. Just since mediocrity came up and you happen to be a Bears fan, I thought I'd check to see how my gag reflex actually added up.

[CS85]

That game was hard to watch. Sigh...to be a Cowboys fan.

Saw this stat on reddit, kinda interesting: Cowboys are 133-133 since 1997. 8-8 last two seasons. Are basically .500 against the Eagles over the last 10 years (10-9). They are the golden standard of football mediocrity.

Kinda funny (just since you're the one posting it), I've always considered the Bears to be the epitome of mediocrity. That's mostly just a gag reflex to all the Bears fans I was around while in Champaign. A gag of course that was needed because the Rams were flat awful and the Bears were at least pretty good to really good. So I opted for the "never great" route and called them mediocre.

So for the hell of it, I ran that same time span for the Bears, and they're 129-135 since 1997. Of course the Bears have played in a SB in that stretch.

Anyways, I didn't really mean to post debating the merits of whether the Bears qualify as mediocre. Just since mediocrity came up and you happen to be a Bears fan, I thought I'd check to see how my gag reflex actually added up.

I don't disagree. The Bears were, a couple seasons aside, one of the most routinely middling teams for a very long time. Could still be, depending on how the next 3 or 4 years go, but you gotta think that there's a lot of teams that are in a similar quandary.

[Rockstar Matt]

Man, this bye week can't come fast enough.

And I'm glad the Cowboys are getting their a** kicked. Maybe it'll wake them up. On the bright side, we're still in first place...

1. They can "wake up" all they want. It won't change the fact that they aren't a very good team.

2. For now. Enjoy it while it lasts.

1. I meant that hopefully someone in the front can see that this team isn't very good (especially the play-calling on both sides), and some changes are needed.

2. Despite everything that has gone wrong for the Cowboys, we've been either first or tied for first the whole season. Really speaks to the awful-ness of this division. This team should not be a division leading team. I fear it's giving the team a "false" confidence.

I still think we'll win this division, but with a 9-7 or 8-8 record and the right to be destroyed by the Niners.

The rest of the East is just so bad, the Cowboys would have to lose Romo in order for us to not win it.

[HedleyLamarr]

Division rules I can go along with. I prefer records dictating home field, not divisional rank.

In-conference record, though, is legit. Not that I think you're complaining about that as much as just noting how that's why the game was in San Francisco and not New Orleans.

Nah, having the division champs get a home game is fine with me. 3/8 of your schedule is against your division, which means that winning the division should be rewarded appropriately. It also means you control your destiny. Sweep your division games and you're going to have a hard time losing said division.

"We'll show you!"

[Sport]

Such a shame this was wasted.

After Gio Bernard's run against Miami this is the second game in a row the Bengals have squandered an incredible offensive touchdown.

[OnWis97]

I am probably wrong, but it seems like this may have been the first game started for the Packers by someone other than Favre or Rodgers since Favre took over in the early 1990s (rather, the first game that mattered...I know there may have been a couple Week 17 starts for backups). It's really amazing (and frustrating for a fan of a division rival). 20 + years of unbelievable stability.

[LAWeaver]

I am probably wrong, but it seems like this may have been the first game started for the Packers by someone other than Favre or Rodgers since Favre took over in the early 1990s (rather, the first game that mattered...I know there may have been a couple Week 17 starts for backups). It's really amazing (and frustrating for a fan of a division rival). 20 + years of unbelievable stability.

Matt Flynn had a couple starts in there. Once when Rodgers suffered a concussion or something against Detroit (?) a few years ago and when they won the #1 seed Flynn started when Rodgers was resting at home, the same game in which Flynn blew up offensively.