Jump to content

2014 NFL Season Thread


Recommended Posts

Just out of curiosity, what could anybody find dislikeable about Joe Montana? Unless it's just that you were a fan of a team he was constantly beating, I guess...

I was young and didn't like 49ers winning all of the time.

Yeah, but you were patient and it all worked out for you eventually.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Tales of Winless Youth Football" is a thread you need to do.

I've mostly repressed that whole season so I don't think it could fill a whole thread. Maybe it could be called Youth Sports Tales of Woe.

Three awful memories I can recall:

- a kid on our team broke his leg Joe Theismann style in a preseason scrimmage. I saw it happen from two feet away and almost barfed through my facemask.

- our defensive coordinator and our head coach got into a fistfight during halftime of our second or third game. The defensive coordinator took his kid, who was one of our better players, and the two of them left. We never saw either his kid or the defensive coordinator ever again.

- We lost one game by 6 touchdowns and didn't gain a single first down, but in that game I recovered a botched snap. It was literally our only highlight of the season.

- oh and 4 kids from that team ended up playing division 1 football. Our quarterback won a national championship or two as a member of Syracuse's lacrosse team. We had athletes. It was just a case of bad parents getting in the way, as youth sports usually are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm building my ultimate football team I'm taking Peyton Manning as my quarterback. Tonight didn't change that.

That's fine. I'm taking Brady. I know he'll get it done in the regular season. I also know he'll get it done in the playoffs. Something you (a general you) just can't know when it comes to Manning. I felt that way long before last night. Last night was simply the exclamation point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm building my ultimate football team I'm taking Peyton Manning as my quarterback. Tonight didn't change that.

That's fine. I'm taking Brady. I know he'll get it done in the regular season. I also know he'll get it done in the playoffs. Something you (a general you) just can't know when it comes to Manning. I felt that way long before last night. Last night was simply the exclamation point.

I don't know whether we can know that about Brady. To me Manning is the guy that was going to be great wherever he was drafted. Maybe he gets a few titles if he ends up on the Pats, Ravens, Steelers, etc. Maybe he becomes Dan Marino if he ends up with the Vikings, Browns, or Bengals. Manning's Colts situation was not that outstanding...Brady's was. He's very similar to Montana in that they both played for coaches that were a little ahead of everyone else...

If my crummy Vikings could have had either one, I'd take Manning...they'd have been perpetually relevant with Manning...I really don't know what they'd have been with Brady. Maybe just as good. Maybe better. But to take a guy and stick him in a losing franchise...I'd take Manning...maybe that's me getting too hung up on pedigree, regular season numbers, how much Manning's a "quintessential" QB, or whatever...but I think he's a guy that succeeds anywhere and I think Brady got really lucky with his situation. That's not a shot a Brady. He and Montana made the most of their opportunities without question. But we'll never really know what would have happened had Brady ended up with the Colts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Counter-factuals are fun for the sake of speculation but you cannot use them when discussing actuality. It's all guesswork. And yours is no better then the next guy's.

Given what we have to work with (what actually happened)? Brady's the better option. Manning's the guy who put up gaudy numbers and flamed out in the playoffs. If you want to talk about making the most of your opportunities? Manning did the opposite. No one who fails to capitalize as much as Manning did is truly "the greatest" of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I think Arizona is a great place for the Super Bowl. The field conditions seemed great, and I found it to be an aesthetically pleasing game because the first half was in daylight and the second was at night. The natural grass also made it look great, and the weather there is phenomenal. Honestly, I think I would be fine with them playing a lot more Super Bowls there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm building my ultimate football team I'm taking Peyton Manning as my quarterback. Tonight didn't change that.

That's fine. I'm taking Brady. I know he'll get it done in the regular season. I also know he'll get it done in the playoffs. Something you (a general you) just can't know when it comes to Manning. I felt that way long before last night. Last night was simply the exclamation point.

I don't know whether we can know that about Brady. To me Manning is the guy that was going to be great wherever he was drafted. Maybe he gets a few titles if he ends up on the Pats, Ravens, Steelers, etc. Maybe he becomes Dan Marino if he ends up with the Vikings, Browns, or Bengals. Manning's Colts situation was not that outstanding...Brady's was. He's very similar to Montana in that they both played for coaches that were a little ahead of everyone else...

If my crummy Vikings could have had either one, I'd take Manning...they'd have been perpetually relevant with Manning...I really don't know what they'd have been with Brady. Maybe just as good. Maybe better. But to take a guy and stick him in a losing franchise...I'd take Manning...maybe that's me getting too hung up on pedigree, regular season numbers, how much Manning's a "quintessential" QB, or whatever...but I think he's a guy that succeeds anywhere and I think Brady got really lucky with his situation. That's not a shot a Brady. He and Montana made the most of their opportunities without question. But we'll never really know what would have happened had Brady ended up with the Colts.

The most damning(?) evidence against Brady is the 2008 season. With Brady injured, the Pats still went 11-5 with Matt Cassel at QB. Matt Cassel! That suggests that Brady is, at least in some part, a product of the system.

Countering that is the 2011 season. With Manning out for the season, the Colts flirted seriously with 0-16, suggesting that Manning had really been carrying a weak team. Granted, Dan Orlovsky and Curtis Painter are nobody's idea of good QBs (or even anybody's idea of Matt Cassel), but the 2011 Colts were a train wreck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm building my ultimate football team I'm taking Peyton Manning as my quarterback. Tonight didn't change that.

That's fine. I'm taking Brady. I know he'll get it done in the regular season. I also know he'll get it done in the playoffs. Something you (a general you) just can't know when it comes to Manning. I felt that way long before last night. Last night was simply the exclamation point.

I don't know whether we can know that about Brady. To me Manning is the guy that was going to be great wherever he was drafted. Maybe he gets a few titles if he ends up on the Pats, Ravens, Steelers, etc. Maybe he becomes Dan Marino if he ends up with the Vikings, Browns, or Bengals. Manning's Colts situation was not that outstanding...Brady's was. He's very similar to Montana in that they both played for coaches that were a little ahead of everyone else...

If my crummy Vikings could have had either one, I'd take Manning...they'd have been perpetually relevant with Manning...I really don't know what they'd have been with Brady. Maybe just as good. Maybe better. But to take a guy and stick him in a losing franchise...I'd take Manning...maybe that's me getting too hung up on pedigree, regular season numbers, how much Manning's a "quintessential" QB, or whatever...but I think he's a guy that succeeds anywhere and I think Brady got really lucky with his situation. That's not a shot a Brady. He and Montana made the most of their opportunities without question. But we'll never really know what would have happened had Brady ended up with the Colts.

The most damning(?) evidence against Brady is the 2008 season. With Brady injured, the Pats still went 11-5 with Matt Cassel at QB. Matt Cassel! That suggests that Brady is, at least in some part, a product of the system.

Countering that is the 2011 season. With Manning out for the season, the Colts flirted seriously with 0-16, suggesting that Manning had really been carrying a weak team. Granted, Dan Orlovsky and Curtis Painter are nobody's idea of good QBs (or even anybody's idea of Matt Cassel), but the 2011 Colts were a train wreck.

So Manning has a better WAR. :)

It could be argued that this is not a one-for-one comparison. Similarly neither are Manning's teams and Brady's teams. These guys don't play defense, return punts, kick field goals,* or coach any units. It's a total team effort. It's the most important position on the field, and the good ones do make teammates better (I think both do that), but there is so much that goes on. The tuck rule and that interception last night go pretty deep into setting the tone for Brady's legacy. Sure, I cannot with any success argue what could have happened. But in discussing what did happen, there are still inequities to point out.

*Brady broke his/Manning's streak of winning one without Vinatari!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per ESPN, Marshawn Lynch had five rushes from he 1-yard line. He scored once.

Because they only had one time out, they could not run Lynch three times. In theory, if Lynch gets stopped, they are going to have to start throwing...that makes the idea of passing a bit more viable here. Pass on 2nd, run on 3rd (timeout), then you can do either on 4th.

But I still hate the call because 1) they did not even try to make New England think it might go to Lynch, 2) because the pass was into the middle of the field (i.e., heavy traffic) and 3) it did not provide any option for Wilson to do what he does best; use his legs to either throw on the run or trot in. Going a bit out of the box is one thing but this play had the ultimate combo of being one-dimensional and dangerous.

Ironically, Belichick not calling timeouts may have led to this play call...I think a lot of people thought he should be stopping the clock there. Is Bill that smart or just lucky, this time (I go with the latter).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm building my ultimate football team I'm taking Peyton Manning as my quarterback. Tonight didn't change that.

That's fine. I'm taking Brady. I know he'll get it done in the regular season. I also know he'll get it done in the playoffs. Something you (a general you) just can't know when it comes to Manning. I felt that way long before last night. Last night was simply the exclamation point.

I don't know whether we can know that about Brady. To me Manning is the guy that was going to be great wherever he was drafted. Maybe he gets a few titles if he ends up on the Pats, Ravens, Steelers, etc. Maybe he becomes Dan Marino if he ends up with the Vikings, Browns, or Bengals. Manning's Colts situation was not that outstanding...Brady's was. He's very similar to Montana in that they both played for coaches that were a little ahead of everyone else...

If my crummy Vikings could have had either one, I'd take Manning...they'd have been perpetually relevant with Manning...I really don't know what they'd have been with Brady. Maybe just as good. Maybe better. But to take a guy and stick him in a losing franchise...I'd take Manning...maybe that's me getting too hung up on pedigree, regular season numbers, how much Manning's a "quintessential" QB, or whatever...but I think he's a guy that succeeds anywhere and I think Brady got really lucky with his situation. That's not a shot a Brady. He and Montana made the most of their opportunities without question. But we'll never really know what would have happened had Brady ended up with the Colts.

The most damning(?) evidence against Brady is the 2008 season. With Brady injured, the Pats still went 11-5 with Matt Cassel at QB. Matt Cassel! That suggests that Brady is, at least in some part, a product of the system.

Countering that is the 2011 season. With Manning out for the season, the Colts flirted seriously with 0-16, suggesting that Manning had really been carrying a weak team. Granted, Dan Orlovsky and Curtis Painter are nobody's idea of good QBs (or even anybody's idea of Matt Cassel), but the 2011 Colts were a train wreck.

This is my position as well. Manning wins no matter what team drafts him. If the Colts draft Ryan Leaf and the Chargers take Manning then he wins with San Diego.

I'm not sold that Brady wins anywhere without Belichick.

Of course that's all conjecture and hypotheticals in the face of evidence, but I still think it's valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A day later and the play still stings. If the Seahawks had been stacked up, that's one thing. But Lynch had basically been getting five yards a pop the whole game, even when it was obviously going to him.

It feels like the Seahawks were trying to win on style points, which is dumb because they hadn't played consistently enough through the game to win with style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last 20 seasons dating back to the 1995 season only 7 teams have represented the AFC in the Super Bowl.

Patriots - 7 (f************ck)

Steelers - 4 (double f*************ck)

Broncos - 3

Colts - 2

Ravens - 2

Raiders -1

Titans - 1

That sucks. I hate the NFL. It is never fun. Ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that kept me from being the greatest QB of all-time is that I didn't play football. But imagine if I had.

After thinking about it a little more, I'm pretty sure I would have led my team to 6 straight Super Bowls. We would have won 5 of them. It could have been 6 straight, but Jerry Rice might have made a ridiculous hail mary catch in the 4th Super Bowl to win the game for the Browns. Still, I think I if I had won 5 out of the six Super Bowls, combined with what could have been 8 straight seasons of 5,000 yards passing - including 3 of those seasons in which I might have rushed for over 1,000 yards, it would have been pretty tough to argue that I wasn't the greatest QB ever. Damn, if only I had played football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Seahawks on the whole have been good for the NFL, depending on how you feel about Adderall. Yeah, they blew it last night, but at least the franchise shows that you can break through with sustained success following years of mediocrity. Also, note that their success was timed with leaving the AFC.

So basically, as McCarthy notes, the AFC is broken. And eff the Patriots big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last 20 seasons dating back to the 1995 season only 7 teams have represented the AFC in the Super Bowl.

Patriots - 7 (f************ck)

Steelers - 4 (double f*************ck)

Broncos - 3

Colts - 2

Ravens - 2

Raiders -1

Titans - 1

That sucks. I hate the NFL. It is never fun. Ever.

I don't know...that Titans one was pretty fun. And they played the upstart Rams to the wire in the Super Bowl.

Yeah, the AFC has been pretty bleak for a while. I don't think the NFC's been tons better either, but Tampa, Arizona, Hasselbeck-Seattle, Atlanta (over the Vikes), New Orleans (over the Vikes) added some twists. OK, I guess I'm just upset about the Vikings...The NFC's been better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last 20 seasons dating back to the 1995 season only 7 teams have represented the AFC in the Super Bowl.

Patriots - 7 (f************ck)

Steelers - 4 (double f*************ck)

Broncos - 3

Colts - 2

Ravens - 2

Raiders -1

Titans - 1

That sucks. I hate the NFL. It is never fun. Ever.

I don't know...that Titans one was pretty fun. And they played the upstart Rams to the wire in the Super Bowl.

Yeah, the AFC has been pretty bleak for a while. I don't think the NFC's been tons better either, but Tampa, Arizona, Hasselbeck-Seattle, Atlanta (over the Vikes), New Orleans (over the Vikes) added some twists. OK, I guess I'm just upset about the Vikings...The NFC's been better.

Let's see here. In the last 20 years the NFC has been:

Seahawks - 3

Packers -3

Giants - 3

Rams - 2

49ers - 1

Bears - 1

Eagles - 1

Cardinals - 1

Panthers - 1

Falcons - 1

Cowboys - 1

Saints - 1

Bucanneers - 1

13 teams in 20 years. Almost double that of the AFC. I think that's about the ideal spread. It feels like any NFC team could reach the big game. Unless you're one of the big 5 in the AFC making the Super Bowl feels impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • IceCap locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.