NFL '13 SEASON THREAD

[dbadefense1990]

I honestly believe that if it weren't for the whole "Crabtree-Sherman quagmire" in the NFC Championship, the 49ers wouldn't have serious consideration for the Thursday night opener. NBC would just shove Manning down our gargles yet again, despite the Broncos being older and most likely breaking up before the season begins. But Seattle-San Francisco has the potential to being the new premier rivalry in the NFL, being this decade's Colts-Patriots.

NBC just cannot pass that up as the opening game. It's the chance for NBC to capitalize on the 49ers seeing the Seahawks championship banner being raised, with the faces of Harbaugh, Kaepernick and Crabtree looking on.

[BlueSky]

Jesus, guys. I was just having some fun. I get that that the WHA and ABA weren't on the same level as the AFL - hell, I was around for all of it. My point was that we're OK with revising NFL history. I used the other leagues as examples of what we do with the NFL. That's all. Revise all you want. It doesn't change the fact that the NFL did indeed exist before 1966.

Just because I want to...

Here's how the Super Bowls would have looked if they began with the AFL in 1960...

1960: Houston Oilers vs Philadelphia Eagles

1961: Green Bay Pakers vs Houston Oilers

1962: Dallas Texans vs Green Bay Packers

1963: Chicago Bears vs San Diego Chargers

1964: Buffalo Bills vs Cleveland Browns

1965: Green Bay Packers vs Buffalo Bills

That's interesting to think about. So "Super Bowl III" (as imagined here) would have led to a sort-of rematch in the "new" SB VIII (the actual SB II) - but with the boost from the AFL's earlier acceptance by the NFL, would the Dallas Texans still have moved to KC? And if they didn't, would the Cowboys have survived, or even come into being? This could be the genesis of the mother of all N "if" L episodes.

That's cool enough, but imagine some of these matchups. Iron Mike Ditka and the smash-mouth '63 Bears vs. Lance "Bambi" Alworth and the wide-open Chargers? Awesome. And in '64 - Bills vs. Browns?!?

To a point raised earlier, I think it's an exaggeration to say nothing before SB I "counts" - it's more a matter of the timeframe from SB I on being an easily defined and widely accepted era that most people are familiar with. Depending on how deeply one wants to drill, it could be argued that any sports league changes so much over time that eras end up almost self-defining themselves (the "dead ball era" in baseball for example). We need a frame of reference most people can relate to.

About the Seahawks, those guys could be scary good for a long time based on their young age and cap-friendly roster. Just read that Brees makes more in one game than Russell Wilson will earn for the entire 2014 season ($662,000). Damn.

Which brings me to a question I asked myself during the Saints' two visits to Seattle and the SB as well: which one of these QBs looks like a 2nd year, 3rd round draft choice and which looks like the future HOFer?

[See Red]

Jesus, guys. I was just having some fun. I get that that the WHA and ABA weren't on the same level as the AFL - hell, I was around for all of it. My point was that we're OK with revising NFL history. I used the other leagues as examples of what we do with the NFL. That's all. Revise all you want. It doesn't change the fact that the NFL did indeed exist before 1966.

Just because I want to...

Here's how the Super Bowls would have looked if they began with the AFL in 1960...

1960: Houston Oilers vs Philadelphia Eagles

1961: Green Bay Pakers vs Houston Oilers

1962: Dallas Texans vs Green Bay Packers

1963: Chicago Bears vs San Diego Chargers

1964: Buffalo Bills vs Cleveland Browns

1965: Green Bay Packers vs Buffalo Bills

That's interesting to think about. So "Super Bowl III" (as imagined here) would have led to a sort-of rematch in the "new" SB VIII (the actual SB II) - but with the boost from the AFL's earlier acceptance by the NFL, would the Dallas Texans still have moved to KC? And if they didn't, would the Cowboys have survived, or even come into being? This could be the genesis of the mother of all N "if" L episodes.

That's cool enough, but imagine some of these matchups. Iron Mike Ditka and the smash-mouth '63 Bears vs. Lance "Bambi" Alworth and the wide-open Chargers? Awesome. And in '64 - Bills vs. Browns?!?

To a point raised earlier, I think it's an exaggeration to say nothing before SB I "counts" - it's more a matter of the timeframe from SB I on being an easily defined and widely accepted era that most people are familiar with. Depending on how deeply one wants to drill, it could be argued that any sports league changes so much over time that eras end up almost self-defining themselves (the "dead ball era" in baseball for example). We need a frame of reference most people can relate to.

About the Seahawks, those guys could be scary good for a long time based on their young age and cap-friendly roster. Just read that Brees makes more in one game than Russell Wilson will earn for the entire 2014 season ($662,000). Damn.

Which brings me to a question I asked myself during the Saints' two visits to Seattle and the SB as well: which one of these QBs looks like a 2nd year, 3rd round draft choice and which looks like the future HOFer?

Well, they're good at drafting, so that certainly helps their cause. This issue with them being good for a long time is that they had such a good cap situation between what they were paying their young stars and so many guys in free agency this season taking cheap, one year deals across the NFL hoping to get a big pay day down the road. They have one more year to pay Russell Wilson pennies on the dollar and then he's going to command a lot of money. If Flacco got 6 years and ~$120 million, Russell Wilson has more value to me than he does. As a second year starter, the inconsistency he shows is to be expected. Then there's Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas. I've read that they'll prioritize Thomas over Sherman. But if Sherman gets Revis money, which he's earned, that's $90+ million. Thomas deserves to be the highest paid safety in the league which is upwards of $9 million per year. I don't see how you can keep all three. Chancellor's going to have to get paid eventually, Michael Bennett was on a cheap, one year deal and has earned a big contract. They can't keep everybody and the guys they do keep are going to handcuff them from stockpiling talent elsewhere.

[BBTV]

To a point raised earlier, I think it's an exaggeration to say nothing before SB I "counts" - it's more a matter of the timeframe from SB I on being an easily defined and widely accepted era that most people are familiar with. Depending on how deeply one wants to drill, it could be argued that any sports league changes so much over time that eras end up almost self-defining themselves (the "dead ball era" in baseball for example). We need a frame of reference most people can relate to.

Similar to how we are in the year 2014. More or less an arbitrary starting point, even though 99.9% of human history occurred more than 2014 years ago.

[Unocal]

Seahawks wouldn't know class if it bit them in the ass.

Outside of Russell Wilson, they are the most unlikeable SB winners since the 2000 Ravens.

[CS85]

Seahawks wouldn't know class if it bit them in the ass.

They won it on the grass and broke up every Manning pass

Seahawks had a blast watching Harvin's touchdown dash

Sherman may be crass but he backed up his sass

Every blue/green wearing lass watched the win and had a gas

[rainmaker17]

Sorry, but sabresrule is right. The Seahawks came off as a chest thumping bag of dicks. They absolutely earned Super Bowl XLVIII, no question. It just saddens me that teams can't with class anymore .

[CS85]

Sorry, but sabresrule is right. The Seahawks came off as a chest thumping bag of dicks. They absolutely earned Super Bowl XLVIII, no question. It just saddens me that teams can't with class anymore .

When was the last time a "team with class" won a title?

You know what, I don't care. It's an absolutely subjective, stupid argument that can bear no fruit other than opinionated nonsense.

[rainmaker17]

I like how everything offends you. I think showboating and self promoting is arrogant.

[rainmaker17]

And I thought you were great on BASS, so this isn't personal. Many people I know who follow the NFL were rubbed the wrong way by Seattle. No need for the "stupid" comment.

[Lights Out]

Sorry, but sabresrule is right. The Seahawks came off as a chest thumping bag of dicks. They absolutely earned Super Bowl XLVIII, no question. It just saddens me that teams can't with class anymore .

Yes, because nothing exudes class more than, say, the Seahawks' opponent, a franchise that has been caught circumventing the salary cap, violating the drug policies (Von Miller), intentionally trying to injure players (Tom Nalen admitted to doing it to Igor Olshansky), cut-blocking, running illegal pick plays, spreading Vaseline on their jerseys, and attempting to videotape an opponent's walkthrough. Compared to all that, Seattle's supposed "classlessness" is nothing.

I'll take some showboating from a team who backs up their talk any day over the normal soulless machine-like nature of the NFL.

[CS85]

And I thought you were great on BASS, so this isn't personal. Many people I know who follow the NFL were rubbed the wrong way by Seattle. No need for the "stupid" comment.

Contrary to popular belief I never try to make things or take things personally. It just comes off that way because I'm...I dunno, confrontational in my language?

I'm of the opinion that people look for irrational reasons to attach to victorious teams that help them internally propagate a preposterous conclusion. It's the same silly horse that happens in partisan political arguments.

I know this because I'm one of those people. Hell, I'm probably the crown prince of irrational stupid loathing.

[rainmaker17]

I'm not a Denver fan, LO, so what's your point?

[CS85]

I'm not a Denver fan, LO, so what's your point?

LAUGH OUT

I dunno man, who wants to have an internet fight?

[rainmaker17]

Well, I was referring to Lights Out, but you're right.

[CS85]

you're right.

[Sport]

Seahawks wouldn't know class if it bit them in the ass.

Outside of Russell Wilson, they are the most unlikeable SB winners since the 2000 Ravens.

The 2005 and 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers have something to say about that.

Other than a few loudmouth, posturing defensive backs I don't know who is unlikeable on the Seahawks. Those Steelers teams were loaded with aholes and dbags (and I'm not just saying that as a rival fan. If I was a Carolina Panthers fan or whatever I would still believe the same thing)

[Gary]

Seahawks wouldn't know class if it bit them in the ass.

Outside of Russell Wilson, they are the most unlikeable SB winners since the 2000 Ravens.

Just curious, but outside of Buffalo, do you like any team? Or do you just like to be a huge ass?

[DustDevil61]

Seahawks wouldn't know class if it bit them in the ass.

Outside of Russell Wilson, they are the most unlikeable SB winners since the 2000 Ravens.

The 2005 and 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers have something to say about that.

Other than a few loudmouth, posturing defensive backs I don't know who is unlikeable on the Seahawks. Those Steelers teams were loaded with aholes and dbags (and I'm not just saying that as a rival fan. If I was a Carolina Panthers fan or whatever I would still believe the same thing)

Carolina Panthers fan here - I can confirm that last statement about the Steelers.

[BBTV]

Some of you guys are really dumb. Every team other than yours is classless, cheats, and is comprised of scumbags (who all of a sudden become great people when they get traded to your team.) Every team's fans are obnoxious and jerks, other than yours of course.