# 2011 - 2012 NFL Thread



## Scott Kocourek

It seems like it comes up every couple of weeks that we need an NFL thread so here you go.


I expect a little trash talk but keep it respectful.
As long as the thread is friendly we will keep it open.
Please don't say things that you don't want others to comment on.
Have fun.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Oh, and GO PACKERS!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> Oh, and GO PACKERS!


Go Packers indeed.


----------



## Unknown

Scott Kocourek said:


> Oh, and GO PACKERS!


BOOOO, BOOOO. Go Vikings Go. sorry had to get that in.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Unknown said:


> BOOOO, BOOOO. Go Vikings Go. sorry had to get that in.


As lousy as the Vikings are this year...we'll even give ya that one.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Go Lions. The Chiefs and Broncos were just the appetizer. The Cheeseheads will be devoured like a fat man's dinner on Thanksgiving.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Go Lions. The Chiefs and Broncos were just the appetizer. The Cheeseheads will be devoured like a fat man's dinner on Thanksgiving.


Would you make your signature "GO PACK GO" and your Avatar a Cheese head for the week following the game if you are wrong?


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

This must be a Packer thead, anyway Big Blue will hand the Packers their first loss of the season in a few weeks


----------



## Stewart Vernon

This is a weird year... Green Bay has been the most consistent.

Other teams have at times looked as good as the Packers, but then looked as bad as the worst teams.

No other team epitomizes this quite as much as New Orleans who beats one winless team 62-7, then the very next week loses to a previously winless team.

I can't figure anything out, except that the Packers keep trucking along.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

The season is still < 1/2 done...and I anticipate GB will lose a couple of games along the way - but with a 7-0 start...they would have to collapse not to win the division at this point. Detroit is good, but not as deep and not as solid for the playoffs.

I like the 49ers at this point next in line. Still not convince what kind of team the Steelers realy are this year - very inconsistent.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> Would you make your signature "GO PACK GO" and your Avatar a Cheese head for the week following the game if you are wrong?


Sure but I'd unsubscribe to every thread and not visit the site for that week either. 

What do I get if Lions win though?


----------



## kiknwing

Tebow is a bust (or sabotage by the coach), time to bring back Elway.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Sure but I'd unsubscribe to every thread and not visit the site for that week either.
> 
> What do I get if Lions win though?


How about 50 posts or one month, whatever comes first? It's hard to hide from that. 

I'll do the same.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> How about 50 posts or one month, whatever comes first? It's hard to hide from that.
> 
> I'll do the same.


I can put up the avatar and sig then unsubscribe to everything for a month? sounds good to me.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

kiknwing said:


> Tebow is a bust (or sabotage by the coach), time to bring back Elway.


They say Broncos fans have "Tebow Mania"? More like Tebow Delusional Disorder. 7 sacks and 2 pick 6's? Worst quarterback ever! (in my best Simpsons Comic Book Guy impression)


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Sure but I'd unsubscribe to every thread and not visit the site for that week either.
> 
> What do I get if Lions win though?


Nothing, obviously... since you aren't willing to pay the price when the shoe is on the other foot.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Coca Cola Kid said:


> They say Broncos fans have "Tebow Mania"? More like Tebow Delusional Disorder. 7 sacks and 2 pick 6's? Worst quarterback ever! (in my best Simpsons Comic Book Guy impression)


I'm not a Tebow hater nor lover... but the Broncos are a horrible team.

Almost any QB in the league on that same team would be hard pressed to have won more games.

The problem the Broncos have is that their whole team is so bad, there's no way to tell if Tebow is incapable of improvement OR unable to improve because of the rest of the roster.

Tebow might prove to be a bust... but the team drafted him in the first round... they should either give him the rest of this season or trade him to a better team where he stands a better chance of learning with some better players.

Heck,just last week they traded away their best wide receiver... that made no sense at all... so I wasn't surprised that Tebow had a horrible day.

Also... to be blunt... Detroit is only a couple of years removed from being 0-16, with many of those players on the current roster! They really seem to have a short memory. One could easily have looked at Calvin Johnson or Matthew Stafford a couple of years back when they were losing every game and said "what a joke"...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> Nothing, obviously... since you aren't willing to pay the price when the shoe is on the other foot.


I said I'd change my avatar to the Packers logo and signature to Go Packers and not post anything for a month and I'm willing to do it if the Cheeseheads beat us on Thanksgiving. Bears had 9 false starts on MNF in Motown though so I'm not worried.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> I'm not a Tebow hater nor lover... but the Broncos are a horrible team.
> 
> Almost any QB in the league on that same team would be hard pressed to have won more games.
> 
> The problem the Broncos have is that their whole team is so bad, there's no way to tell if Tebow is incapable of improvement OR unable to improve because of the rest of the roster.
> 
> Tebow might prove to be a bust... but the team drafted him in the first round... they should either give him the rest of this season or trade him to a better team where he stands a better chance of learning with some better players.
> 
> Heck,just last week they traded away their best wide receiver... that made no sense at all... so I wasn't surprised that Tebow had a horrible day.
> 
> Also... to be blunt... Detroit is only a couple of years removed from being 0-16, with many of those players on the current roster! They really seem to have a short memory. One could easily have looked at Calvin Johnson or Matthew Stafford a couple of years back when they were losing every game and said "what a joke"...


Stafford wasn't on the 2008 Lions though, back then he was a junior at Georgia leading the 'dogs to a 10-3 season and winning the Capital One Bowl vs Michigan State. However, Lions have been increasingly better with him at QB, he was injured a lot in 2009 and 2010 but they were 6-10 last year after going 2-14 in 2009. Now they're already 6-2. If they don't make the playoffs this year he should at least win the "Most Improved Player Award" at the team banquet, but it might be a tie with Megatron though, he's caught a touchdown in all but 1 game this year, most of them more than 1.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Coca Cola Kid said:


> I said I'd change my avatar to the Packers logo and signature to Go Packers and not post anything for a month and I'm willing to do it if the Cheeseheads beat us on Thanksgiving. *Bears had 9 false starts on MNF in Motown though so I'm not worried*.


But that was the _Bears_....not exactly a yardstick to measure much by...


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Coca Cola Kid said:


> I can put up the avatar and sig then unsubscribe to everything for a month? sounds good to me.


I'll take that as a big no thank you because you know I won't go into hiding. 

It's only for fun and I don't want to force a member into not participating over a football game.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> I'll take that as a big no thank you because you know I won't go into hiding.
> 
> It's only for fun and I don't want to force a member into not participating over a football game.


Okay then I'll be here. I like my crow medium rare with barbeque sauce.


----------



## vikefan

I believe that the Vikings may have found their QB.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

vikefan said:


> I believe that the Vikings may have found their QB.


I think so too, I just wish they would have waited a little longer to start him.  We don't need him too good before we play them again.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

vikefan said:


> I believe that the Vikings may have found their QB.


Not unless Fran Tarkington is coming back.... 

He can probably still scramble better than McNabb though.

The rookie looks OK...but needs more work.


----------



## vikefan

True. he has the rest of the year to get some of the green off. But that being said. His green looks to have a good tint to it. Here's to the future and what I seen so far I'm feeling good. Packer's look better this year. So maybe by next year we can hang around the top of the division.


----------



## RACJ2

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Go Lions. The Chiefs and Broncos were just the appetizer. The Cheeseheads will be devoured like a fat man's dinner on Thanksgiving.


Someones making bold predictions again. At least this time you let us know that you're going to disappear from this thread, prior to it happening.


Coca Cola Kid said:


> Reality my ass. You must have eaten some expired cheese, you're delusional if you think the Packers or anyone else can beat the Lions this year. 19-0, Lions Superbowl XLVI Champions.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Stafford wasn't on the 2008 Lions though, back then he was a junior at Georgia leading the 'dogs to a 10-3 season and winning the Capital One Bowl vs Michigan State. However, Lions have been increasingly better with him at QB, he was injured a lot in 2009 and 2010 but they were 6-10 last year after going 2-14 in 2009.


That was still my point, though I should have been more accurate about players that were and were not part of the 0-16...

Peyton Manning and Troy Aikman had horrible first year records... Steve Young floundered for a while in places like Tampa Bay before becoming a hall-of-famer with the 49ers.

There are also Ryan Leaf's too...

At this point, we don't know much about Tebow was the main point. I hate it when a player gets stuck with a horrible team and people say "see, we told you he would fail"... Put Stafford on the Broncos, and he is probably already gone for the season with an injury... and I'm not slamming Stafford... rather I'm slamming the Broncos offense.

Is Tebow in the top 5 or even top 10 QBs in the league right now? No. I'm not even sure he will ever be a top 10 QB in the league... BUT with 32 teams, he might very well be able to be a good QB with a good team if he gets to learn how things work and practice for a few years without being beaten down all the time (physically, not mentally from the criticism)...

Look at Jay Cutler with Chicago... he was getting massacred on a regular basis by the poor offensive game plan and line protection... they finally start to use Forte and a running game, and Cutler looks like a Pro-Bowler again.

The Tebow experiment may fail no matter what... I just hope he (like any QB) gets a fair shake.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Stewart Vernon said:


> Look at Jay Cutler with Chicago... he was getting massacred on a regular basis by the poor offensive game plan and line protection... they finally start to use Forte and a running game, and *Cutler looks like a Pro-Bowler again*.


Cutler is currently ranked as the 15th best QB in the league right now...barely in the top half of the list - not exactly Pro Bowl material at this point. He's had 2 good games...maybe 3...so far where he actually looked like a real NFL quarterback. But yes...the Chicago offensive line is indeed offensive.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

RACJ2 said:


> Someones making bold predictions again. At least this time you let us know that you're going to disappear from this thread, prior to it happening.


Won't disappear, Scott said I have to pretend to be a Cheesehead. I'm still gonna trash em, I'll just be in disguise.


----------



## chevyguy559

I don't have much to add except I'm very pleased with my 49ers performance this season! It was a welcome surprise! GO NINERS!


----------



## Stewart Vernon

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Cutler is currently ranked as the 15th best QB in the league right now...barely in the top half of the list - not exactly Pro Bowl material at this point. He's had 2 good games...maybe 3...so far where he actually looked like a real NFL quarterback. But yes...the Chicago offensive line is indeed offensive.


That was kind of my point... Cutler looked awful, but it's not clear how much of that was his fault.

A couple of games now with a strong running game from Matt Forte, and the poor offensive line of the Bears is less exposed, Cutler has more time, and Cutler's performance has been much improved.

It's a good comparison for Tebow too... because Cutler came from Denver back when they actually were a better offensive team than they are now... and even when Cutler played well at Denver they were still losing games.

The point I was essentially making is... for a couple of games Cutler has now looked dramatically different than he did for most of the games prior.

IF Tebow had a running back, a couple of good wide receivers, and more time in the pocket from a better offensive line... then we would see if he is failing because of accuracy and poor decision making... vs being inaccurate and indecisive due to lack of time and confidence in his offensive options.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I agree about Cutler, it's hard to be good when you are running for your life or on your back. They need to protect him and the few times they do he plays well.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Scott Kocourek said:


> I agree about Cutler, it's hard to be good when you are running for your life or on your back. They need to protect him and the few times they do he plays well.


This is in fact one of the reasons why the Packers survived all of their injuries last year.

They lost their starting running back... but they had a good enough offensive line that the backup was able to flourish enough to keep Rodgers from taking defenses full blitz all the time.

Put Rodgers on the Bears, and we wouldn't have been talking about how good Rodgers has been since taking over from Favre.

Heck... I wager some of Favre looking suddenly much older with the Jets and the Vikings was in part because those teams were not as good as the Packers team that he left.

Mind you, Rodgers is good... but we can flip this too... Look how back the Colts are without Peyton Manning this year... but look how the Patriots went 11-5 a couple of years ago when Tom Brady went down.

Nobody would argue Tom Brady isn't a top-tier QB... but clearly the rest of the team is good enough that someone else in the system can carry the day without falling off the table.

Some teams are just built sideways... the Colts are about as sideways as it gets, because their defense is almost completely dependent on their team being able to score and be ahead... and their offense depends so much on Manning making last-second calls that they are screwed thus far without him.

I'm a Rodgers fan... and I don't know who their backup is... but I seriously doubt the Packers would go winless if Rodgers had to miss some games with an injury. They are good at several key positions, and have a good line.

Even though the Broncos have won a couple of games and the Colts are winless... I'm pretty sure the Broncos are the actual worst team in the league. Even Miami, who is also winless like the Colts... the Dolphins players seem to always be playing hard each week and may just be a player or two (QB especially) away from being at least 50/50.

I don't know who could QB the Broncos to much better than they are right now... they have too many holes.


----------



## Kevin F

Let's go Buffalo!

Kevin


----------



## RACJ2

Kevin F said:


> Let's go Buffalo!
> 
> Kevin


I second that motion!

Its going to be a tough game against the Jets this week. If the Jets can execute their game plan to take Jackson out of the game, it could be a long day. If Jackson plays like he has is past games, it could be an exciting game for Bills fans.


----------



## ghontz1

Go Chiefs


----------



## hdtvfan0001

I hear the Vikings are looking at a new domed stadium soon that is worthy of their team...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Poll: Who will win a game first: Colts or Dolphins? Or neither?


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Poll: Who will win a game first: Colts or Dolphins? Or neither?


Dolphins.

The Dolphins have almost won a couple already... the Colts really were only in one game (the Steelers).

Dolphins keep playing hard despite being undermanned. Colts seem to be losing hope in a hurry.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Looks like the Packers brought some good ol Green Bay, WI weather down to San Diego this weekend. 

It's almost showtime!


----------



## Scott Kocourek

*WOO-HOO!*


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> *WOO-HOO!*


*8 - 0 !*


----------



## sigma1914

Can Rivers suck anymore than he is? He handed GB the game...which wasn't new for him.


As for my teams...Giants win, Falcons win, Colts keep the momentum going in the Suck-for-Luck campaign, and the Ravens are about to play a big game. Great Sunday!


----------



## Davenlr

Scott Kocourek said:


> *WOO-HOO!*


I am all for good games, but this one had me on the edge of my chair at the end. They need some serious work on their pass defense. They ALMOST let this one slip away from em...


----------



## MysteryMan

NY just finished shaming the Patriots on their home turf! 24-20


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> Dolphins.
> 
> The Dolphins have almost won a couple already... the Colts really were only in one game (the Steelers).
> 
> Dolphins keep playing hard despite being undermanned. Colts seem to be losing hope in a hurry.


Good call.

Back in 2008 did anyone think in 3 years Lions would be 6-2 and Colts 0-9? :lol:


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Good call.
> 
> Back in 2008 did anyone think in 3 years Lions would be 6-2 and Colts 0-9? :lol:


Easy there...Colts are 0-9 for an obvious reason, not because the organization fell apart.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

sigma1914 said:


> Easy there...Colts are 0-9 for an obvious reason, not because the organization fell apart.


Yeah cuz they think there's an I in team. :nono:


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Davenlr said:


> I am all for good games, but this one had me on the edge of my chair at the end. They need some serious work on their pass defense. They ALMOST let this one slip away from em...


This is how their season has been, they score a lot of points and so does the other team. Thankfully we just seems to score a few more. I didn't start to worry until after the onside kick, UGH.

Gosh I hope the defense comes around in the second half, it sure would be nice to score 40+ points and not have it close.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

sigma1914 said:


> Can Rivers suck anymore than he is? He handed GB the game...which wasn't new for him.


I'm a Rivers fan, but this is not a good year for him. Interestingly, Dallas is catching up to San Diego in terms of overall record, but Rivers isn't getting the same kind of national flack as Romo... and while I'm not a Romo-defender... it is curious when Rivers has given away 2 games in a row now arguably.



Coca Cola Kid said:


> Good call.


Thanks... not sure I expected Miami routing Kansas City like that... but Miami has been playing hard. I know they have been trying to replace their coach since the off-season... but I think their problem is really the GM and player-personnel... Miami just doesn't have the talent to compete and win, but each week they are playing hard, and that has to be a testament to the coach.



Coca Cola Kid said:


> Back in 2008 did anyone think in 3 years Lions would be 6-2 and Colts 0-9? :lol:


Honestly?

The Lions... as much as a lot of people seem surprised... the talent has been building there slowly... so 6-2 for the Lions isn't a huge surprise to me.

But the Colts falling off the table? That's a big surprise. Nobody expected them to be in the running for the playoffs or even the division without Manning... but to be 0-9? That's as big of a surprise as anything this season to me.



sigma1914 said:


> Easy there...Colts are 0-9 for an obvious reason, not because the organization fell apart.





Coca Cola Kid said:


> Yeah cuz they think there's an I in team. :nono:


Actually... there is an "I" in "Indy" 

I compare Indy to Miami in terms of effort... Indy still should have a lot of good players without Manning... so even IF they had the same 0-9 record, there's no excuse for looking as poor and being out of as many games as they have. Contrast that with everything I said above about Miami... Miami as possibly worse at almost every position than Indy, and yet Miami is competing hard each week.

If I were a big Indy fan, I would be concerned... yeah, Manning might get healthy and might be there 3-5 more years... but everyone on that team has shown a serious lack of self-confidence and self-motivation... so even when Manning comes back, the first sign of trouble will bring up these memories.

Go back even to Detroit's 0-16 year... those weren't all blowouts. Detroit actually was competitive in many of those games... Indy sometimes looks like they aren't even trying.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Scott Kocourek said:


> This is how their season has been, they score a lot of points and so does the other team. Thankfully we just seems to score a few more. I didn't start to worry until after the onside kick, UGH.
> 
> Gosh I hope the defense comes around in the second half, it sure would be nice to score 40+ points and not have it close.


Yeah, it's crazy. If you're San Diego you have to think scoring 38 points would win you most games!

If you're Green Bay, you take the win... but to score 45 points, have a 21 point lead late in the game, and have to stop a final drive to win by 7?

Green Bay's defense makes me very nervous. They are VERY lucky their offense keeps rolling along. IF they stub a toe on offense, they could be easy pickings for someone with a good offense.

Strangely, I find myself actually feeling more confident in the 7-1 49ers than I do the 8-0 Packers... because the 49ers are winning some games by stopping people and aren't having to score 30+ each week to win.

The 49ers, if they keep rolling, are exactly the kind of team who could jump up and bite the Packers in the playoffs.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Stewart Vernon said:


> Strangely, I find myself actually feeling more confident in the 7-1 49ers than I do the 8-0 Packers... because the 49ers are winning some games by stopping people and aren't having to score 30+ each week to win.


Stats and standings are always interesting...but in the end...it comes down to winning the division first, home filed advantage, then the conference, then getting to the big game.

The Packers have done it before, and even more important than the 8-0 start...are 5-0 on the road and 6-0 in the NFC. Until someone else shows that kind of stamina...everyone else is playing for 2nd place. Then again, there's 8 more games to play...


----------



## sigma1914

IMO, if GB & NO lost Rodgers & Brees respectively, then they'd be just like Indy. Those teams are dependent on superior QB play. The Colts hung with Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, KC, & Cincy...not everyone has done what the Saints did to them. They have no RB & the defense gets warn out because they're always out there.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> IMO, if GB & NO lost Rodgers & Brees respectively, then they'd be just like Indy. Those teams are dependent on superior QB play. The Colts hung with Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, KC, & Cincy...not everyone has done what the Saints did to them. They have no RB & the defense gets warn out because they're always out there.


Using that logic...I guess you better include Payton's brother Eli, Matthew Stafford, Josh Freeman, Michael Vick, and almost any other NFL team.

The QB sets the pace for everything. Fact is Rodgers is in the midst of perhaps the finest streak of QB play we've seen in a very long time, if not ever. Nothing is given to him, he's simply a solid film study and great athlete.

I followed Brees too at Purdue and knew he would be a great NFL QB, assuming he had some level of talent around him.

I think Phillip Rivers (add him to the list) said it best...giving up yards gets you to 9-7 (their record last year)...WINS get you to the championship.

It's only mid-season, so there's alot of football to be played, but watching Aaron Rodgers this year has been a treat, if not a clinic on elite QB play. Great teams win despite mistakes.


----------



## sigma1914

:lol: I just compared Rodgers to being as great as Manning and the Packers fan still counters me. :lol:

Here's where you're wrong. Those other QBs you listed aren't as key to the team as Rodgers and Manning. Eli and Vick have a solid running game, although the Giants don't seem to run enough. Freeman????? Seriously??? 

GB's defense is as bad as the Colts defense (yardage given)...thankfully, GB has a QB to counter that.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> :lol: I just compared Rodgers to being as great as Manning and the Packers fan still *counters me*. :lol:
> 
> Here's where you're wrong. Those other QBs you listed aren't as key to the team as Rodgers and Manning. Eli and Vick have a solid running game, although the Giants don't seem to run enough. Freeman????? Seriously???
> 
> GB's defense is as bad as the Colts defense (yardage given)...thankfully, GB has a QB to counter that.


I respectfully disagree.

Manning *IS* the Colts (9-0 without him). Rodgers is playing (over the past year now) better than even Manning ever played in his peak. The Packers have numerous other Pro Bowl calibre players, and a capable backup QB. In any case...the whole point was the QB is the hub of any team's success.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I respectfully disagree.
> 
> Manning *IS* the Colts (9-0 without him). Rodgers is playing (over the past year now) better than even Manning ever played in his peak. The Packers have numerous other Pro Bowl calibre players, and a capable backup QB. In any case...the whole point was the QB is the hub of any team's success.


Better than Manning at his peak? :lol: He's on fire this year, yes, but Manning has had some phenomenal years...especially 2004 with 49 TDs, 4,557 yards, 121.1 rating. Compare Rodgers last 16 regular season games to Manning's 2004 season and you will see similar numbers.

Matt Flynn is a capable backup? The Colts have Pro Bowl caliber players, too. Take away Rodgers and GB is likely 0-8...2-6 probably. Certain teams rely solely on the QB & GB is now one of those teams. It's not a bad thing, it's just the reality.


----------



## Touchdown

Interesting matchup tonight with the Da Bears vs. the Eagles. Hopefully the Eagles DL get's lots of sacks (FF points needed!)


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Better than Manning at his peak? :lol: He's on fire this year, yes, but Manning has had some phenomenal years...especially 2004 with 49 TDs, 4,557 yards, 121.1 rating. Compare Rodgers last 16 regular season games to Manning's 2004 season and you will see similar numbers.
> 
> Matt Flynn is a capable backup? The Colts have Pro Bowl caliber players, too. Take away Rodgers and GB is likely 0-8...2-6 probably. Certain teams rely solely on the QB & GB is now one of those teams. It's not a bad thing, it's just the reality.


Matt Flynn nearly beat New England last year when Aaron was out.

This year Aaron's stats are on pace to blow away Payton's best year stats above...and including his performance back to the last 14 games (where they are 14-0)...they are among the best of any QB over that timeframe.

I've always been a big Payton Manning fan, but his unfortunate injury is pointing to a potentially bad ending to his career. Sad in many ways, as he's a class act and great QB. I see the very same attributes in Aaron Rodgers.


----------



## Laxguy

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I've always been a big Payton Manning fan, but his unfortunate injury is pointing to a potentially bad ending to his career. Sad in many ways, as he's a class act and great QB. I see the very same attributes in Aaron Rodgers.


+1.

Mr. Rodgers played at a stadium not too far from my house. Great to see a scholar excel in sports at the pro level.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Matt Flynn nearly beat New England last year when Aaron was out.
> 
> This year Aaron's stats are on pace to blow away Payton's best year stats above...and including his performance back to the last 14 games (where they are 14-0)...they are among the best of any QB over that timeframe.
> 
> I've always been a big Payton Manning fan, but his unfortunate injury is pointing to a potentially bad ending to his career. Sad in many ways, as he's a class act and great QB. I see the very same attributes in Aaron Rodgers.


I just checked and was shocked that Rodgers isn't the top QB thus far in the season for yards per game. Brees & Brady have more yards per game. (YPG is more fair since some teams have played 1 more game.) Brees, Brady, & Rodgers are all on pace to crush Marino's all-time single season record of 5,084.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> I just checked and was shocked that Rodgers isn't the top QB thus far in the season for yards per game. Brees & Brady have more yards per game. (YPG is more fair since some teams have played 1 more game.) Brees, Brady, & Rodgers are all on pace to crush Marino's all-time single season record of 5,084.


Then again, accuracy is higher valued than total # of yards.

24 TD 3 picks (2 of which were receiver tips) - WOW.

3 guys passing more than 5K in yards would be amazing indeed.

These guys are simply fun to watch.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Then again, accuracy is higher valued than total # of yards.
> 
> 24 TD 3 picks (2 of which were receiver tips) - WOW.
> 
> 3 guys passing more than 5K in yards would be amazing indeed.
> 
> These guys are simply fun to watch.


I wish Rodgers the best...unless they are playing the Giants or Falcons in the NFC.  The guy has surprised me...I didn't think he was going to be this good.


----------



## Lord Vader

I'm not a Packers fan at all, but Aaron Rodgers is most likely the greatest QB that has ever played the game in my lifetime. Period.

The scary thing is that he still has a lot of playing time in which to surpass even more records.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Lord Vader said:


> I'm not a Packers fan at all, but Aaron Rodgers is most likely the greatest QB that has ever played the game in my lifetime. Period.
> 
> The scary thing is that he still has a lot of playing time in which to surpass even more records.


Even I forget at times that he's only 27 years old.


----------



## Lord Vader

I know. Better than Bradshaw, Marino, both Mannings, Elway, Montana, Brady...

I don't care that he has yet to win 2, 3, or 4 Super Bowls. That doesn't make a QB great. When everything is taken into consideration, Rodgers is simply the best QB in the NFL right now, and the best that ever played the game in my lifetime. 

I don't say this lightly, because I can't stand the Packers.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> I know. Better than Bradshaw, Marino, both Mannings, Elway, Montana, Brady...
> 
> I don't care that he has yet to win 2, 3, or 4 Super Bowls. That doesn't make a QB great. When everything is taken into consideration, Rodgers is simply the best QB in the NFL right now, and the best that ever played the game in my lifetime.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, because I can't stand the Packers.


The best in your life after a couple years? You must be easily impressed.


----------



## Lord Vader

No, I know excellence when I see it. The guy is simply unbelievable, as close to perfection as a quarterback can get.

It took all the other QBs much longer to be as good.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> No, I know excellence when I see it. The guy is simply unbelievable, as close to perfection as a quarterback can get.
> 
> It took all the other QBs much longer to be as good.


Really? Much longer? Rodgers is in his 7th year, 3 of which he was able to study and learn the game.

Check out where other QBs were by their 7th year.

He's an amazing QB, but the best in recent years is a bit premature.


----------



## Lord Vader

He is in his 3rd year as a playing QB. It's kind of tough to throw passes and do all the things QBs do if you're sitting on the bench.

You're comparison is improper and faulty.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> He is in his 3rd year as a playing QB. It's kind of tough to throw passes and do all the things QBs do if you're sitting on the bench.
> 
> You're comparison is improper and faulty.


He's in his 4th year starting, not 3rd. He has an advantage to learn the game by waiting 3 years on the bench. He was groomed to take over...most are thrown out there pretty quick. He's right where great QBs usually are after 6 and a half seasons.


----------



## Lord Vader

He is the best QB in the NFL, absolutely and unequivocally.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> He is the best QB in the NFL, absolutely and unequivocally.


Ever or now?


----------



## Lord Vader

Now and ever _in my lifetime_, not of all time--yet. I wouldn't doubt, however, that he ends up becoming the best who ever played the game.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Lord Vader said:


> Now and ever _in my lifetime_, not of all time--yet. I wouldn't doubt, however, that he ends up becoming the best who ever played the game.


I don't know how old you are... so I can't say if your statement might be validated by being younger than some of us.

In my lifetime, though...

I still have Joe Montana at the top of my list of "best QB ever"... After that it gets murky for me.

Tom Brady is very Montana-like, and has 3 Super-Bowls... but so does Troy Aikman. No offense to Aikman, but my gut tells me that Brady is smarter than Aikman but that Aikman was better athletically.

So... I probably have to go:

1. Joe Montana
2. Troy Aikman
3. Tom Brady

After that... more murkiness...

John Elway finally won 3 back-to-back SBs and was the losing QB a couple of other times... but Dan Marino has lots of awesome regular-season stats. I also think Jim Kelly of the Bills is WAY underappreciated, especially with the unprecedented 4 SB appearances (albeit losses) in a row that may never be repeated.

I may surprise some folks here...

1. Joe Montana
2. Troy Aikman
3. Tom Brady
4. John Elway
5. Jim Kelly

Marino probably headlines my next group... and then we begin to talk about more of the current crop.

Peyton Manning would be in my top 10... as would Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees.

I would like to think that Eli Manning and Philip Rivers have a shot at working their way into my top 10.

Now ALL that said... my list is only for those QBs in my lifetime... and truth be told, I really didn't start watching football until 1985 when I was 15... so I missed a lot of good QBs.

What about Terry Bradshaw? There are names not even on the tip of my tongue that IF I had lived during their time OR been older to watch their games in my early youth... I might not have any modern/current guys other than Tom Brady if I expanded my top 10 to include "all-time" QBs and not just "in my lifetime" QBs.


----------



## Lord Vader

Stewart Vernon said:


> I don't know how old you are...


A few years older than you. 

Aaron Rodgers is better than all those whom you have listed above. History will confirm that as time goes by.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> He's in his 4th year starting, not 3rd. He has an advantage to learn the game by waiting 3 years on the bench. He was groomed to take over...most are thrown out there pretty quick. He's right where great QBs usually are after 6 and a half seasons.


Actually, he's well ahead of most of them this early and this young.


Stewart Vernon said:


> I still have Joe Montana at the top of my list of "best QB ever"... After that it gets murky for me.


I'd agree Montana is still at the top of the list. Given Aaron 3 more years of great performance (no one can keep up his current performance that long though) - playing at least 80-90% as well as now...and he may become #2 or #3.


> Tom Brady is very Montana-like, and has 3 Super-Bowls... but so does Troy Aikman. No offense to Aikman, but my gut tells me that Brady is smarter than Aikman but that Aikman was better athletically.


Aikman is maybe #10 all time in numerous categories.

BTW - even he was quoated the other day saying "we may never have seen this level of QB play in the NFL in our lifetime".

Brady - no doubt he has won the SBs and done well beyond expectations. Probably in the top 3-4 all time. Still not a fan - he has been on a decline for several seasons now.



> John Elway finally won 3 back-to-back SBs and was the losing QB a couple of other times... but Dan Marino has lots of awesome regular-season stats.


Elway - hardly. He and Marino shared 1 thing - they simply through a ton of passes...and happened to have some great receivers for several years - ramping up the stats. Elway's passes often were "wobblers", whereas Marino was a passing machine, but could never win the big game. Those guys were maybe in the bottom of the top 10.


> What about Terry Bradshaw?


Thanks for bringing him up - do doubt won alot of games, but you and I could have completed the 60% of the passes behind that offensive line during that streak of seasons. He himself has repeatedly admitted "I was an average quarterback surrounded by outstanding talent and playing behind one of the best offensive lines in NFL history.

Give any QB 6 seconds to throw, and they'll complete alot of passes. 


Lord Vader said:


> Aaron Rodgers is better than all those whom you have listed above. History will confirm that as time goes by.


I think its probably too early to look at Aaron in terms of historical comparisons, but for sure, he's off to one of the most remarkable statistical, accuracy, winning, and playing level starts for 3 1/2 seasons that any QB in history has ever demonstrated. Ask me again in 3 more seasons.

Last but not least...there are a number of QBs who played in the 40's, 50's, and 60's who were also among the greatest of all time - but before most of our times. By the way - I always admired the 49'ers, but was never a "fan".

My Top 10 ranking *right now*:

1) Joe Montana
2) Sammy Baugh
3) Tom Brady
4) Steve Young
5) Payton Manning
6) Brett Favre
7) Johnny Unitas
8) Bart Starr
9) Dan Marino
10) Troy Aikman

Alot of anyone's rankings come down to stats, impact to a team, impact to the league, and playoff/championship results.


----------



## Laxguy

I wonder if something has been added to the water in the MidWest?? A few residents have been recently given to wide-sweeping and categorical statements about football teams and certain players.....?


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Laxguy said:


> I wonder if something has been added to the water in the MidWest?? A few residents have been recently given to wide-sweeping and categorical statements about football teams and certain players.....?


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I wasn't even going back to the "classic" good QBs... so I didn't even try to come up with a list that included other eras and QBs like Starr, Unitas, Staubach (sp?), Baugh and others...

Some of the modern guys have to come off the list to make room for the older-era guys... that's why Aaron can't make the list now in my mind.

Do I think he could be there one day? Sure. IF he continues as he has thus far... he could easily get to the top 5 in a few years... but I can't put him there based on potential alone.

I hope not... but he could tank suddenly next year... or suffer a major injury that changes his longevity or performance... or any number of things. Hey, what about Cam Newton? In 5 years we could be talking about him as "the best ever" if he progresses in the next couple of years the way he has played much of this season.

There's just too much unknown for me to put a "he will be" hall-of-famer on my list without some history.

I note that nobody thus far has questioned leaving off two-time SB winner Rothlisberger... Arguably he is a good QB... but even with the 2 big wins, he doesn't feel like "top 10 all time" to me... and no loud screams, so I have to assume there is agreement there.


----------



## MysteryMan

My picks: Johnny Unitas, Bart Starr, Fran Tarkenton, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, Dan Marino, Joe Montana.


----------



## Laxguy

No love for Steve Young?


----------



## sigma1914

Dan Fouts gets no love by people, either. Dan was a heck of a QB, but unfortunately never really had a good enough team to win it all. 

Warren Moon and Kurt Warner deserve mention, as well, IMHO.


----------



## Lord Vader

Good, but not as good as Rodgers.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I haven't looked at the AFC lately... it's kind of a mess... but on the NFC...

Division leaders: NY Giants, New Orleans Saints, Green Bay Packers, San Francisco 49ers.

Leading wildcards: Detroit Lions, Chicago Bears

With a slight hedge towards Atlanta Falcons... is there any reason to think that the above 6 teams aren't already virtual locks for the NFC side of the playoffs at just halfway through this season?

Unless the wheels fall off the division leaders... I see no way they can't win their divisions... and the wildcards only have a little wiggle room if Atlanta gets on a roll.

The AFC has a lot more up in the air at this point.


----------



## sigma1914

Stewart Vernon said:


> I haven't looked at the AFC lately... it's kind of a mess... but on the NFC...
> 
> Division leaders: NY Giants, New Orleans Saints, Green Bay Packers, San Francisco 49ers.
> 
> Leading wildcards: Detroit Lions, Chicago Bears
> 
> With a slight hedge towards Atlanta Falcons... is there any reason to think that the above 6 teams aren't already virtual locks for the NFC side of the playoffs at just halfway through this season?
> 
> Unless the wheels fall off the division leaders... I see no way they can't win their divisions... and the wildcards only have a little wiggle room if Atlanta gets on a roll.
> 
> The AFC has a lot more up in the air at this point.


The Giants have a very tough stretch they just started, which will make or break them. They just beat New England and have the following left:
SF, PHILLY, NO, GB, DAL, WASH, NYJ, DAL.

Other than Washington, those will be tough. There's 10 legit teams in the NFC right now.


----------



## Chuck W

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants have a very tough stretch they just started, which will make or break them. They just beat New England and have the following left:
> SF, PHILLY, NO, GB, DAL, WASH, NYJ, DAL.
> 
> Other than Washington, those will be tough. There's 10 legit teams in the NFC right now.


Yea, the Giants have a ridiculous schedule the 2nd half. Beating New England was a huge first step, but they have a LONG way to go, before they can be considered a lock for the playoffs(and I'm a Giants fan).


----------



## Stewart Vernon

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants have a very tough stretch they just started, which will make or break them. They just beat New England and have the following left:
> SF, PHILLY, NO, GB, DAL, WASH, NYJ, DAL.
> 
> Other than Washington, those will be tough. There's 10 legit teams in the NFC right now.


The problem, though, as I see it... even if the Giants lost to SF, NO, and GB... if they win the other 5 they are still easily atop their division.

Records today are:

Giants 6-2
Dallas 4-4
Philly 3-5
Washington 3-5

In order for someone other than the Giants to win that division, the Giants have to tank AND someone else has to almost win-out.

Washington is done... Philly is probably only a game away from mentally packing it in for the season. Dallas is in the best shot because they still have 2 games against the Giants... but Dallas is the very model of inconsistency... I see Dallas splitting with the Giants, and that being the difference in the season if it even gets close.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

10-6 maybe even 9-7 will be enough for NFC East winner


----------



## Stewart Vernon

JACKIEGAGA said:


> 10-6 maybe even 9-7 will be enough for NFC East winner


Hard to disagree... The Giants could surprise me and be better than I think they are... but if they are who I think they are... then 10-6 seems to be about right for the division winner.

It's just hard to see anyone but Dallas making up that ground at this point, and hard to be confident in Dallas with their 50/50 performance so far.

My gut just tells me the Giants have all but locked this up, not necessarily that they will run away with it... just that everyone else will be barely keeping up when all is said and done.

Also... that said... right now, I don't think it matters... because the winner of that division still won't be as good as the likely wildcards... so they ultimately will just be fighting for the right to lose the 1st round game I think.


----------



## sigma1914

Stewart Vernon said:


> ...
> 
> Also... that said... right now, I don't think it matters... because the winner of that division still won't be as good as the likely wildcards... so they ultimately will just be fighting for the right to lose the 1st round game I think.


If NY survives the remaining games with wins in 6 of those, then that would make them legitimately the 2nd best in the NFC...Maybe even the best. GB is undefeated and an offensive juggernaut, but their defense is not good.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

sigma1914 said:


> If NY survives the remaining games with wins in 6 of those, then that would make them legitimately the 2nd best in the NFC...Maybe even the best. GB is undefeated and an offensive juggernaut, but their defense is not good.


I would say it depends. The Giants could go 5-3 but lose to Green Bay, New Orleans, and San Francisco. Of those 5 projected wins by me, only one of them (if they beat the Jets) would be against a team that currently is above .500 (since Dallas is at .500)

So... The Giants could go 4-4 and not beat a team with a winning record. 5-3 by only beating one, and that one (the Jets) might not be much above .500 depending on things shake out in their division where they are fighting New England and surprise Buffalo!

If the Giants go 6-2, even that would only feature 1 more win against an actual good team (SF, GB, or NO)... so while I grant you that the Giants could finish with a good record... they could do so without actually having to beat many good playoff teams.

I'm not just beating up the Giants (though I know it sounds that way)...but I'm just projecting the current success for the rest of the season. A lot of things could go differently, and the Giants could change my mind in the next few weeks depending upon how they look even if they lose some games. They were 10-6 after all the year they won and beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Omg wtf??????!!?????????!!!!!!!!!!! How much money did the Bears pay the refs to let them win???? Refs have phucked the Lions on every single drive!!!! Phuck this bullzhit!!!


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> Omg wtf??????!!?????????!!!!!!!!!!! How much money did the Bears pay the refs to let them win???? Refs have phucked the Lions on every single drive!!!! Phuck this bullzhit!!!


Um where? Clear fumble by megaton. Clear fumble recovery on the second one. Bad late hit by lions.. This last one was borderline, but the result would have been the same... Field goal. The face mask at full speed


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Easy there CCK, walking a fine line.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> Um where? Clear fumble by megaton. Clear fumble recovery on the second one. Bad late hit by lions, clear pass interference. This last one was borderline, but the result would have been the same... Field goal


The Bears dude was clearly out of bounds ref gave it to them. They "missed" a facemask against the Bears on the opening drive too.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> The Bears dude was out of bounds ref gave it to them. They "missed" a facemask against the Bears on the opening drive too.


The bears dude was inbound, toes count... But it was very close. Still would have been a field goal.
And here is holding, and face masks just about every play... So....

Hester touchdown.... Yah!! Let's wait for replay confirmation


----------



## Earl Bonovich

I know the feeling though. But right now, itnisn't the officials. The Bears are capitalising on every mistake, and not making any of their own.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> Um where? Clear fumble by megaton. Clear fumble recovery on the second one. Bad late hit by lions.. This last one was borderline, but the result would have been the same... Field goal. The face mask at full speed


That was NOT a fumble by CJ. It was either a horse collar or a facemask. The Ref were all eating hot dogs and having a beer in the stadium bar.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> That was NOT a fumble by CJ. It was either a horse collar or a facemask. The Ref were all eating hot dogs and having a beer in the stadium bar.


Sorry, horse collar is when they grab the inside of the shoulder pads, not when they get their arm completely across the body, and punch the ball out at the same time. And they typically don't call a face mask when the player lowers their own head into the other player's arm.

So now the bears have a made a mistake. Can the lions make the most of it?


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> Sorry, horse collar is when they grab the inside of the shoulder pads, not when they get their arm completely across the body, and punch the ball out at the same time. And they typically don't call a face mask when the player lowers their own head into the other player's arm.
> 
> So now the bears have a made a mistake. Can the links make the most of it?


Not a TD but 3 points is better than 0.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Battles for 2nd place are always such a joy.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Bears are trying to break Megatron's neck and refs keep looking the other way!!!!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Bears are trying to break Megatron's neck and refs keep looking the other way!!!!


I'm not sure they'd use the Lions OR the Bears as the NFL's examples of clean team play.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"hdtvfan0001" said:


> Battles for 2nd place are always such a joy.


It's all about getting an invite to the playoffs


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Earl Bonovich said:


> It's all about getting an invite to the playoffs


Quite true.

For today...the Bears are my favorite team. 

Then again...there's tomorrow.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> Bears are trying to break Megatron's neck and refs keep looking the other way!!!!


How is that again? Him looks like Detroit just tried to destroy Cutler.. It's football....


----------



## Scott Kocourek

"hdtvfan0001" said:


> Quite true.
> 
> For today...the Bears are my favorite team.
> 
> Then again...there's tomorrow.


Well said.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Fox really needs to quit showing Rod Marinelli. Worst. Coach. Ever.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> How is that again? Him looks like Detroit just tried to destroy Cutler.. It's football....


If Detroit gets back in this game it could get dirty on both sides, I do agree though Suh tried to rip Cutler's head off.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> Fox really needs to quit showing Rod Marinelli. Worst. Coach. Ever.


I would rather see them stop showing the Mike Pie... crawl, it's getting old.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Game over man, Game over.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

"Scott Kocourek" said:


> Game Over.


Not yet, the fat lady hasn't sang. Remember the Lions/Cowgirls game???


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> Not yet, the fat lady hasn't sang. Remember the Lions/Cowgirls game???


Cutler isn't romo. They are going to run run run


----------



## Earl Bonovich

I wasn't going to comment on the last hit to cutler... But who is trying to take off who's head?
After the interception return?


----------



## Lord Vader

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Omg wtf??????!!?????????!!!!!!!!!!! How much money did the Bears pay the refs to let them win???? Refs have phucked the Lions on every single drive!!!! Phuck this bullzhit!!!





Earl Bonovich said:


> Um where? Clear fumble by megaton. Clear fumble recovery on the second one. Bad late hit by lions.. This last one was borderline, but the result would have been the same... Field goal. The face mask at full speed


The Lions just suck today. Refs had nothing to do with it.


----------



## Laxguy

Niners-Giants three minutes to go.

Only comment is Eli has made some *awesome *throws to keep the Jersey boys in striking distance.

GO NINERS!


----------



## Earl Bonovich

So.. Does that call make up for everything else? Stafford should have been ejected as well...


----------



## Earl Bonovich

It's the glove


----------



## chevyguy559

Laxguy said:


> GO NINERS!


Woo hoo! 8-1!!!


----------



## Laxguy

chevyguy559 said:


> Woo hoo! 8-1!!!


And don't it beat being the run-away leader of a weak conference than being at or near the bottom of that same, weak conference???? :lol:


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Cobb touchdown!


----------



## Davenlr

Didnt take long...


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I couldn't ask for a better win for #9!

GO PACK GO!!!


----------



## sigma1914

Looking at their remaining schedule, 16-0 is possible. Detroit (2 games) is done, TB is horrible, KC is a joke, Oakland & Chicago are inconsistent...only the Giants pose a serious threat.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> I couldn't ask for a better win for #9!
> 
> GO PACK GO!!!


Ditto.

I'm still trying to absorb the level of Rodgers' play this year - we are seeing some historic QB performances. I keep reminding myself of the 2 weeks before the 2005 draft watching ESPN, where the "experts" were questioning "if Rodgers could handle a complex NFL system so different from his college schmea", and also questioning out loud on shows "if Rodgers has the mobility and armstrength for the NFL". Over those 2 weeks, Aaron dropped from a "sure #1 pick" to the green room waiting game and #24 pick.

Mel Kiper - thank you. That brainless assessment has helped fuel that player towards one of the greatest runs of QB play in NFL history.

Other teams are likely taking notice...this is how you build a franchise...make smart draft choices, nurture players and keep them signed together as a team...and watch things grow.

They will lose some time this year...but in the mean time...it is a fun ride - 15 in a row counting last year. WOW.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I can't believe the expectations that I and other people have on this team this year. Watching some of the other games this weekend really makes you think back to the years where you just wait for your team to fall apart. 

Packers fans are so lucky to have had Favre for all of those years and then have Rodgers as a backup that we never really needed to use. So much time learning the game had to have helped him become what he is. It sure is fun for now.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

10-0! Looking forward to Thanksgiving.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Scott Kocourek said:


> 10-0! Looking forward to Thanksgiving.


So am I, should be 3 great games


----------



## Laxguy

Perhaps even more astounding than Roger's stellar year is the fact that Alex Smith, our maligned Niner QB was mentioned as second only to Rogers in some category or other.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

And the Bears just hit a major road block... Jay Cutler out at least 6 weeks, broken thumb on throwing hand.


----------



## Davenlr

And they play the Packers in how many weeks?


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"Davenlr" said:


> And they play the Packers in how many weeks?


5.... Here is to hoping nothing is on the line for both teams and te playoffs are locked up already.


----------



## Lord Vader

Looks like Cutler may be done for the entire year, post-season and all. I hope not, but this does put a major crimp into their trying to knock off the Packers on Christmas night.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Lord Vader said:


> Looks like Cutler may be done for the entire year, post-season and all. I hope not, but this does put a major crimp into their trying to knock off the Packers on Christmas night.


They are saying now they expect him back this season. Who knows?


----------



## Lord Vader

Who's "they"? Head Coach Lovie Smith, who is an idiot and has no clue what's even going on half the time? Cutler hasn't even had surgery yet.

Several news stations along with other sports media folks here believe he's gone for the regular season at least. I hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's at least that bad.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-bears-cutler


----------



## Lord Vader

Note the opening words: "The Bears are confident...". That means the coaching staff and upper management. What would one expect them to say? One report says, "The team is hopeful."

Word around here is that he's done for the regular season, and if they have to put any kind of rod into his thumb, his entire season is done. Some orthopedic surgeon was on the radio this afternoon and said he believes that if reports are accurate according to what he has heard, Cutler is done.

I hope it's neither; I hope he's back sooner.


----------



## jazzyd971fm

Broncos release Kyle Orton, now up to Tebow & Quinn www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8245f614/article/broncos-waive-orton-clearing-way-for-tebow-for-rest-of-season?module=HP11_breaking_news


----------



## sigma1914

jazzyd971fm said:


> Broncos release Kyle Orton, now up to Tebow & Quinn www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8245f614/article/broncos-waive-orton-clearing-way-for-tebow-for-rest-of-season?module=HP11_breaking_news


Chicago should sign him.


----------



## Lord Vader

Word is that the Bears will put a claim on him; however, the Chiefs, who are higher on the waiver list, might do so first.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Sucks for the Bears and Cutler... but maybe they will get the gift of Horton who might be familiar enough with the Bears to run the team and hope Cutler comes back.

Denver is weird... Swearing they were 100% with Horton... then only going with Tebow due to fan pressure... now releasing Horton and still not liking Tebow even though is is 4-1 this year and with a win over Oakland the next time they play could take over the division?

I grant you that Tebow doesn't look pretty out there most of the game... but the guy is winning games. That used to be important, right?


----------



## Lord Vader

As I mentioned above, KC claimed Orton off waivers. The Bears signed McCown instead.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Even weirder... is KC uses Horton to beat out Denver in their own division...

Right now, though, it looks like Oakland might be slowly taking control... but not a "lock".

Speaking of non-locks...

Dallas caught up to the Giants sooner than I thought. I thought for sure they would have to beat the Giants to catch up... but the Giants sure have helped!

I'm beginning to eat my words and lean to the Cowboys in that division now.


----------



## Lord Vader

Don't worry; they ARE the Cowboys after all. Romo will find a way to make sure the team collapses.

As far as the Cowboys, word is that they put in a claim on Horton solely to block the Bears from getting him.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Lord Vader said:


> Don't worry; they ARE the Cowboys after all. Romo will find a way to make sure the team collapses.


True. Sadly, when Romo is on he can be really on... and Dallas has enough talent to compete in the NFC. They just can't consistently compete.



Lord Vader said:


> As far as the Cowboys, word is that they put in a claim on Horton solely to block the Bears from getting him.


I read that too... That was a smart move by them. Horton may not be as good as Cutler, but he would be a drop-in puzzle piece that could keep Chicago hopping in case Cutler can come back.

I hate to see the injuries though. Honestly, I much prefer the games with everyone at full strength even if my team can't pull it out. Chicago was starting to have a good vibe again and things could have been interesting.


----------



## Lord Vader

One thing that nobody here has discussed, and it's something that might be a factor in Cutler's recovery. In fact, very few in Chicago have discussed it, with the exception of a caller on WSCR, The Score, Chicago's bigger sports radio station. 

What has received very little attention is this fact--Jay Cutler suffers from Type 1 diabetes. As the caller and a subsequent doctor explained, Type 1 diabetes can hinder or slow a person's healing from cuts, bruises, and surgery. As most of us know, Type 1 is more serious and problematic than Type 2, which can actually disappear altogether. 

So, will Cutler's Type 1 diabetes be a factor? Time will tell.


----------



## hdtvfan0001




----------



## JACKIEGAGA

!rolling!rolling!rolling!rolling



I hope they don't suck this week. I took them in the office pool getting 4 1/2 points


----------



## hdtvfan0001




----------



## JACKIEGAGA

I got them too getting 9 1/2 points :lol:


----------



## sigma1914

Suh deserves a serious suspension. Also, Detroit is done.


----------



## Davenlr

sigma1914 said:


> Suh deserves a serious suspension. Also, Detroit is done.


Still sputtering tho...


----------



## Scott Kocourek

11 - 0 Woo - Hoo!

Packers had Lion for Thanksgiving.

I going to have Turkey and wash it down with an ice cold Coca-Cola. Sorry kid.


----------



## Davenlr

Scott Kocourek said:


> 11 - 0 Woo - Hoo!
> 
> Packers had Lion for Thanksgiving.
> 
> I going to have Turkey and wash it down with an ice cold Coca-Cola. Sorry kid.


Even better, we get to wager how much the NFL fines SUH, and if he even gets to play in the next meeting against the Pack. How childish was that move?


----------



## sigma1914

Davenlr said:


> Even better, we get to wager how much the NFL fines SUH, and if he even gets to play in the next meeting against the Pack. How childish was that move?


$75,000 and 2 games...minimum.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Davenlr said:


> Even better, we get to wager how much the NFL fines SUH, and if he even gets to play in the next meeting against the Pack. How childish was that move?


Well he will probably get a 20k fine, if he used the "F" word it may be higher.

His little act was +4 on the Packers score but more important was a turning point. What a teammate.


----------



## Laxguy

It wasn't just the stomp on the arm; he was beating the guy's head against the turf, too. If it were up to me, he'd be out the next several games, plus 10% of his salary. Since it's not up to me, I bet one game and $50K.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

This game was full of surprises to me. I was surprised at the lack of early scoring... Then by it becoming a blowout.

I agree Suh went off the rails. I had been supportive of him in the past, but you can't do that stuff on the field.

I hope the wheels don't fall off, but there are signs...


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Suh:

$100k for the pushing the head into the turf.
$100k for the spiking of the arm, as that was no accident + 2 games, because of componding issues.

Could possibly get another $75k for the language, as it was clear as day what he said.

The team should also impose something, as he basically lied to his coach... who was trying to defend him and get him back into the game.

As for Detroit as a whole. If the Bears can win this weekend, Detroits playoff hopes are going to be very slim.

That one play, could seal the deal for that team.


----------



## Lord Vader

Stewart Vernon said:


> ...but you can't do that stuff on the field.


Especially right in front of several officials! What an idiot.


----------



## kikkenit2

Lord Vader said:


> Especially right in front of several officials! What an idiot.


And lots of cameras on thursday. Caught on video. Suh was dominant and ultra dirty in college too.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

kikkenit2 said:


> And lots of cameras on thursday. Caught on video. Suh was dominant and ultra dirty in college too.


Hopefully he got a decent education in college so he has something to fall back on if his NFL career is shorter than exppected.


----------



## djnaldo

What an A##.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

They say a picture is worth a 1000 words...


----------



## RACJ2

Coca Cola Kid said:


> I said I'd change my avatar to the Packers logo and signature to Go Packers and not post anything for a month and I'm willing to do it if the Cheeseheads beat us on Thanksgiving. Bears had 9 false starts on MNF in Motown though so I'm not worried.






Coca Cola Kid said:


> Won't disappear, Scott said I have to pretend to be a Cheesehead. I'm still gonna trash em, I'll just be in disguise.


Not sure which one happened? Did he disappear or is he in disguise? :scratchin

On a side note, the picture above clearly shows that he was just trying to catch his balance!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Won't disappear, Scott said I have to pretend to be a Cheesehead. I'm still gonna trash em, I'll just be in disguise.


Time to pay the piper...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Good (rigged) win yesterday.


----------



## Davenlr

Sore loser !


----------



## vikefan

HDTV, Your words are hurtful:blackeye:


----------



## Scott Kocourek

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> Good (rigged) win yesterday.


Didn't we have a bet?


----------



## hdtvfan0001

vikefan said:


> HDTV, Your words are hurtful:blackeye:


OK...maybe this will cheer you up...I hope the Vikes win the rest of their games...they play the Bears and Lions again...right?


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Good (rigged) win yesterday.


It's a good thing there's all the Packers fans here to offer you cheese for your whine.


----------



## gomezma1

When does the current NFL ST contract with "D" end? If other providers had access to it would it lower the price?


----------



## Earl Bonovich

gomezma1 said:


> When does the current NFL ST contract with "D" end? If other providers had access to it would it lower the price?


January 2015...


----------



## sigma1914

gomezma1 said:


> When does the current NFL ST contract with "D" end? If other providers had access to it would it lower the price?


Other providers had a chance to "access" it, but the NFL (who owns ST) wanted whoever has ST to have it exclusively. The price won't drop & exclusivity won't change, IMHO.


----------



## Lord Vader

IMHO, DirecTV will move Heaven & Earth to retain exclusivity, too.


----------



## vikefan

hdtvfan0001 said:


> OK...maybe this will cheer you up...I hope the Vikes win the rest of their games...they play the Bears and Lions again...right?


Yes that would cheer me up. But the Packers don't need any help I think they are gonna make the 72 Dolphins cry in their beer


----------



## tonyd79

"gomezma1" said:


> When does the current NFL ST contract with "D" end? If other providers had access to it would it lower the price?


There is no evidence that more systems having a premium making the price go down. MLB was almost exclusive on directv. Prices were not driven down as others added it.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> Didn't we have a bet?


Yup. You said I had to have the Packers logo in my avatar and Go Packers in my signature, and I do.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Yup. You said I had to have the Packers logo in my avatar and Go Packers in my signature, and I do.


CCK, your an honorable guy.

Pathetic.


----------



## Davenlr

Scott Kocourek said:


> CCK, your an honorable guy.
> 
> Pathetic.


Guess you forgot to include "prominently displayed" in there...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> CCK, your an honorable guy.
> 
> Pathetic.


Sore winner!

I gotta admit the Packers played (paid the refs) well.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

BTW, being undefeated in the regular season does NOT mean you automatically win the Super Bowl. :cough. 2007 Patriots. :cough.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

18 Patriot wins and 1 GIANT loss


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

JACKIEGAGA said:


> 18 Patriot wins and 1 GIANT loss


:lol:


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> BTW, being undefeated in the regular season does NOT mean you automatically win the Super Bowl. :cough. 2007 Patriots. :cough.


Detroit doesn't even know what Superbowls are like, other than hosting them while other teams play. They might not even make the playoffs this year.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Coca Cola Kid said:


> I gotta admit the Packers played (paid the refs) well.


Pathetic:
commiserable, deplorable, distressing, feeble, heartbreaking, heartrending, inadequate, lamentable, meager, melting, miserable, moving, paltry, petty, piteous, pitiable, pitiful, plaintive, poignant, poor, puny, rueful, tender, touching, useless, woeful, worthless, wretched, *Coca Cola Kid*.

Any questions?


----------



## Game Fan

Suheeeee Pig!


----------



## Davenlr

Wonder who would win in a LSU/Packers matchup? They should have the winner of the Super Bowl play the winner of the BCS every March, just for kicks.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> Pathetic:
> commiserable, deplorable, distressing, feeble, heartbreaking, heartrending, inadequate, lamentable, meager, melting, miserable, moving, paltry, petty, piteous, pitiable, pitiful, plaintive, poignant, poor, puny, rueful, tender, touching, useless, woeful, worthless, wretched, *Coca Cola Kid*.
> 
> Any questions?


Sore Winner: see Scott Kocourek


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Scott Kocourek said:


> Pathetic:
> commiserable, deplorable, distressing, feeble, heartbreaking, heartrending, inadequate, lamentable, meager, melting, miserable, moving, paltry, petty, piteous, pitiable, pitiful, plaintive, poignant, poor, puny, rueful, tender, touching, useless, woeful, worthless, wretched, *Coca Cola Kid*.
> 
> Any questions?





Coca Cola Kid said:


> Sore Winner: see Scott Kocourek


Should we set up a poll?

Hey, this is the last post I'll make on the subject. I thought this was an honest bet with a true football fan, I guess I was wrong. Not the first time and won't be the last. I can't make you be a stand up guy and it seems there is no reason to try.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> Should we set up a poll?
> 
> Hey, this is the last post I'll make on the subject. I thought this was an honest bet with a true football fan, I guess I was wrong. Not the first time and won't be the last. I can't make you be a stand up guy and it seems there is no reason to try.


You never said the Packers logo had to be the _only_ thing in my avatar, nor did you say my signature _only_ had to say Go Packers. I kept my end of the deal, now quit whinning. Next time you sign a contract, have your lawyer check it over first.


----------



## sigma1914

Stay classy, CCK.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> You never said the Packers logo had to be the only thing in my avatar, nor did you say my signature only had to say Go Packers. I kept my end of the deal, now quit whinning. Next time you sign a contract, have your lawyer check it over first.


You are going to make people wish he'd taken the original bet where you had to not post for a month...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> You are going to make people wish he'd taken the original bet where you had to not post for a month...


No bet needed. I'll double down, no posting til D14 is up. See you in 2014.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Now that sucked... ARG!!!!


----------



## Davenlr

Did pretty good for his first game tho.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Unbelieveable finish, all that and end the game with a hesitation that resulted in intentional grounding.

Pack is one step closer to making the playoffs.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Davenlr said:


> Did pretty good for his first game tho.


But unfourtently, the bad that he did... directly impacted the outcome of the game. If the defense didn't play as good as it did, this game could have been a total wash out.

That interception at the end of the half, completely changed the dynamic of the game.

ARG!!!!

Extremely frustrating... This would have been a major win... now a week of questions, and all the tie-breaker scenerios for the Wild-Card come into the picture.

Two defensive let downs... and they would have fully compensated.
Special Teams was just unreal for Oakland today as well.. 80yrd Punt? 6 Field goals... and total coverage on the punts.....

Very frustrated.


----------



## kiknwing

Tebow is starting to grow on me. If you would have told me that Denver would have a winning record at this point in the season, I would've thought you were nuts.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

While I am rooting for some other teams... Part of me would love to see Denver keep winning with Tebow and see how each week they spin it how they cannot win with Tebow


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Stewart Vernon said:


> While I am rooting for some other teams... Part of me would love to see Denver keep winning with Tebow and see how each week they spin it how they cannot win with Tebow


Anyone watching these games... can easily say, they ware winning in SPITE of Tebow. I don't want to see the guy fail, but even in the Bears current delemah... I wouldn't cringe even more if I saw Tebow behind center.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> Anyone watching these games... can easily say, they ware winning in SPITE of Tebow. I don't want to see the guy fail, but even in the Bears current delemah... I wouldn't cringe even more if I saw Tebow behind center.


Perhaps... But could you not say the Jets win in spite of Sanchez? Or even the Bears are defense + running more so than QB.

The Ravens won a Superbowl with defense and a low-risk offense from Trent Dilfer. The classic 1985 Bears arguably did not have star QB play either.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Stewart Vernon said:


> Perhaps... But could you not say the Jets win in spite of Sanchez? Or even the Bears are defense + running more so than QB.
> 
> The Ravens won a Superbowl with defense and a low-risk offense from Trent Dilfer. The classic 1985 Bears arguably did not have star QB play either.


There have been very few teams that have dominated all three phases of the game, and had a star in each one.

Even this year's Packers are an injury away to one said QB (which I don't want to see happen until at least week 16 when my fantasy playoffs are over)... to being a slightly above average team... vs the dominating team they are.

The Bears this year, are solidified with their Defense, added on with great special teams... And Cutler was/is a pretty decent QB, which freed up a very good RB...

But Tebow... it is just weird. Logically, and on paper... they should not be 5-1 under him, but that is why they still play the game on the field, and not on paper.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Plenty of wannabee teams and pretenders this year.

Plenty of woulda coulda shoulda in Fantasy leagues as well.

One thing has remained constant - the one team that has everyone's bullseye on it each week, yet has ramped up to 11-0. 

They have quietly overcome injuries to 3 key starters and 4 other players, yet continue to win. No excuses, no blaming, no whining....just keep on notching victories. Their streak of 17 games going back to last year and 11-0 start are near-historical, yet all you hear on ESPN is the obsession with Tebow. Week after week...the NFL seems to be all about Tebow. 

That's just fine...everyone can focus on those things while the probable repeat approaches.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Plenty of wannabee teams and pretenders this year.
> 
> Plenty of woulda coulda shoulda in Fantasy leagues as well.
> 
> One thing has remained constant - the one team that has everyone's bullseye on it each week, yet has ramped up to 11-0.
> 
> They have quietly overcome injuries to 3 key starters and 4 other players, yet continue to win. No excuses, no blaming, no whining....just keep on notching victories. Their streak of 17 games going back to last year and 11-0 start are near-historical, yet all you hear on ESPN is the obsession with Tebow. Week after week...the NFL seems to be all about Tebow.
> 
> That's just fine...everyone can focus on those things while the probable repeat approaches.


But that is because it is a story.. Tebow that is...

The Packers, yes... have won 17 in a row over two season.
Awsome, great..... won't mean anything unless they finish this year with a Super Bowl Championship. If they end up going what would it be... 23 in a row, but lose that last one this year?... You will get more sports news coverage than you can believe. Ask the Patriots..

If they go into Christmas Day undefeated, you will here more discussion about it... as the Bears do have a defense to compete with Rodgers... even with out Cutler, looking at the schedule... other then themselves, the Bears are their biggest obsticall until the playoffs starts.

So yes... be greatfull that there isn't more to talk about Green Bay.... and not like the Bears fans this week, who will be listening to a bunch of question on if Hanie can get the job done enough until Cutler can come back...

As for Tebow... it really is a story.
As on paper, and just from watching... he shouldn't be a NFL QB right now... at least not one in the conventional sense... and this winning streak he is on, is actually REALLY BAD for Denver... not only are they moving down in the draft, they are building the hopes of fans for the franchise on a QB that may not really have it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Earl Bonovich said:


> But that is because it is a story.. Tebow that is...


Not really....a short lived blip on the NFL radar. Not a sustainable model.


> The Packers, yes... have won 17 in a row over two season.
> Awsome, great..... won't mean anything unless they finish this year with a Super Bowl Championship. If they end up going what would it be... 23 in a row, but lose that last one this year?... You will get more sports news coverage than you can believe. Ask the Patriots..


Perhaps...we'll see.


> If they go into Christmas Day undefeated, you will here more discussion about it... as the Bears do have a defense to compete with Rodgers... even with out Cutler, looking at the schedule... other then themselves, the Bears are their biggest obsticall until the playoffs starts.


I suspect the only real game of any consequnce or impact is coming up this week with the Giants...which everyone this week on all the sports channels almost 100% agrees is the case. The Bears game is simply too little too late in terms of impact based on the schedule.

Once the Packers wrap up home field advantage through the playoffs, which could happen as early as 2 weeks from now...who knows...they might rest some players and the last 2-3 games could be fundamentally playoff practice for the reserves.

Their run of 11-0 following a Superbowl win has been amazing. But you're right...repeating is pretty much all that matters going forward. Still...some folks are enjoying the ride.


----------



## kiknwing

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> As for Tebow... it really is a story.
> As on paper, and just from watching... he shouldn't be a NFL QB right now... at least not one in the conventional sense... and this winning streak he is on, is actually REALLY BAD for Denver... not only are they moving down in the draft, they are building the hopes of fans for the franchise on a QB that may not really have it.


While I like seeing Denver win, I also know that they need help in almost every position. The offensive line needs to be rebuilt, the WR's are not helping Tebow. While some of his throws are not the best, he had some go in and out of their hands.

Right now the defense is holding up the team, not Tebow as the media is reporting.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"kiknwing" said:


> Right now the defense is holding up the team, not Tebow as the media is reporting.


True... But it is equally fair then to blame tat same defense for the early 1-4 start too...


----------



## hdtvfan0001

kiknwing said:


> While I like seeing Denver win, I also know that they need help in almost every position. The offensive line needs to be rebuilt, the WR's are not helping Tebow. While some of his throws are not the best, he had some go in and out of their hands.
> 
> *Right now the defense is holding up the team, not Tebow as the media is reporting*.


Seems pretty much on target.

No doubt Tebow is an interesting story right now, but certainly not THE story as you correctly point out. Still - the media coverage of him is off the charts overplayed every single week. Maybe when they lose again, this will taper off.

There is a history in the NFL of jumbo QBs like Tebow who end up short-lived wonders. Only a *tiny few *(pun) end up with any lasting success...

Daunte Culpepper, Jamarcus Russell, Byron Leftwich, Jared Lorenzen just to name a few over the last decade...a few good years at best...

Ben Roethisberger may be the only exception, and even in his case, they built a team around him using the run as the primary offensive strategy. Obviously in Ben's case, this has worked out well. Maybe Denver will choose to replicate that model...but I doubt it...not as long as Elway calls the shots there.


----------



## sigma1914

It's amusing watching Packers fans continue to talk up their *team* like they're the best ever. They're a great passing offense with no running game & a lackluster bend-but-don't-break defense. Yes, it works & they win. Their only competition is New Orleans because the NFC is a wasteland of mediocrity...
Giants - I love them, but losing Bradshaw killed their running game and they seem to choke regularly after 8 games.
Dallas - The Romo choke factor will happen.
49ers - They're winning because their division is a cake walk.
Atlanta - No defense.
Detroit - They're a mess with no leadership.
Chicago - They need a QB & if Cutler returns...we'll see.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> It's amusing watching Packers fans continue to talk up their *team* like they're the best ever. They're a great passing offense with no running game & a lackluster bend-but-don't-break defense. Yes, it works & they win. Their only competition is New Orleans because the NFC is a wasteland of mediocrity...
> Giants - I love them, but losing Bradshaw killed their running game and they seem to choke regularly after 8 games.
> Dallas - The Romo choke factor will happen.
> 49ers - They're winning because their division is a cake walk.
> Atlanta - No defense.
> Detroit - They're a mess with no leadership.
> Chicago - They need a QB & if Cutler returns...we'll see.


Glass half empty huh? 

As a shareholder and lifetime Packer fan...I can safely say that many of us are quite a distance away from calling them the best team ever. But that doesn't dampen the amazing ride last year and into this year so far.

Their run game does the job when needed to win. Their defense leads the league in takeaways and interceptions...so giving up yards alone clearly is secondary to what counts. Winning.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

The Packers D gives up a lot of yards but there are only 12 teams that give up less points. Oh and no other teams has scored more points.


That's a pretty darn good recipe for winning.


----------



## Laxguy

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Their run game does the job when needed to win. Their defense leads the league in takeaways and interceptions...so giving up yards alone clearly is secondary to what counts. Winning.


Don't you mean, "Winning!!"? 
And, "Tiger blood"!

Anyway, even as a Niners fan, then Bears, then Saints, I am enjoying the Pack's play and success. A. Rogers even has a degree from a real school!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Laxguy said:


> Don't you mean, "Winning!!"?
> And, "Tiger blood"!
> 
> Anyway, even as a Niners fan, then Bears, then Saints, I am enjoying the Pack's play and success. A. Rogers even has a degree from a real school!


I'm enjoying the 49ers success as well this season...a long time coming as you likely know.

While the Pack is "my team", I still enjoy watching the 49ers, Saints, Falcons, and a few other teams play.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Suh gets a two game suspension.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-suhsuspended


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Scott Kocourek said:


> Suh gets a two game suspension.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-suhsuspended


Not enough.

Not because of the act itself... but everything that lead up to it.

AKA, the calling the commishioner, having meetings about what can and can't be done... then calling before the punishment is dished out.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

As for the other discussion...

I hope the Packers go 16-0 (only if the Bears don't need the win to make the wild card).
And if the Bears are knocked out (or not in the playoffs)... then I wouldn't mind seeing them run the table. (Just to finally shut-up the Dolphins, and one-up NE)

Packers/Bears are a great rivalry, but it isn't the hated head buts it was back in the day. That is now reserved for Minn and if Detroit keeps the path they are... it may switch over there.


----------



## MysteryMan

Per CNN: Jaguars fire coach Jack Del Rio after 3-8 start in 9th year.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Earl Bonovich said:


> Not enough.
> 
> Not because of the act itself... but everything that lead up to it.
> 
> AKA, the calling the commishioner, having meetings about what can and can't be done... then calling before the punishment is dished out.


I agree it's not enough, but I have to believe if he comes back and does anything even remotely wrong he'll be done for the season.

How many times do you have to expain things to a person before they get it? Will he remember for next season?


----------



## hilmar2k

Earl Bonovich said:


> Not enough.
> 
> Not because of the act itself... but everything that lead up to it.
> 
> AKA, the calling the commishioner, having meetings about what can and can't be done... then calling before the punishment is dished out.


Agreed. He is a classless player that needs to be taught a lesson. I would have suspended him for the rest of the year.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Will he get a fine beyond two games without pay?


----------



## hilmar2k

Man, the implosion of the Colts this year is epic. Even if Peyton was playing, I can't imagine they win more than 6 games.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story...-defensive-coordinator-larry-coyer-0-11-start


----------



## hilmar2k

Scott Kocourek said:


> Will he get a fine beyond two games without pay?


Doesn't sound like it. He is also appealing the suspension, in hopes that it will be reduced to one game.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

hilmar2k said:


> Doesn't sound like it. He is also appealing the suspension, in hopes that it will be reduced to one game.


I think it should be like when I had to appeal a traffic/car ticket (tinted windows).

If I appeal, and won... no fine.
If I appeal, and lost: 50% increase

So if he appeals and loses, he should have to sit 3 games.

Also the appeal should happen the next day, not two/three weeks later.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

hilmar2k said:


> Doesn't sound like it. He is also appealing the suspension, in hopes that it will be reduced to one game.


Doesn't the pay he was supposed to get for those games, go to charity? (aka, his salary for those two games are the fine)


----------



## hilmar2k

Earl Bonovich said:


> Also the appeal should happen the next day, not two/three weeks later.


The appeal is going to happen before the Lions play the Saints.



Earl Bonovich said:


> Doesn't the pay he was supposed to get for those games, go to charity? (aka, his salary for those two games are the fine)


Yup.


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> It's amusing watching Packers fans continue to talk up their *team* like they're the best ever. They're a great passing offense with no running game & a lackluster bend-but-don't-break defense.


I agree with this, but they DO have the best QB who has ever played the game in my lifetime.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Man, the implosion of the Colts this year is epic. Even if Peyton was playing, I can't imagine they win more than 6 games.
> 
> http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story...-defensive-coordinator-larry-coyer-0-11-start


Seriously? Have you watched any Colts games? I like Indy & watch them a lot; their offense is horrific. They don't even average 200 passing yards per game (181 yds/game) resulting in constantly punting and overworking the defense. Manning moves the ball and scores points...exactly what they're not doing.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> I agree with this, but they DO have the best QB who has ever played the game in my lifetime.


I think you may be forgetting about a couple people. Couple guys names Brady and Manning. Way too early to say Rodgers is better.

The Packers have also played a fairly light schedule.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> Seriously? Have you watched any Colts games? I like Indy & watch them a lot; their offense is horrific. They don't even average 200 passing yards per game (181 yds/game) resulting in constantly punting and overworking the defense. Manning moves the ball and scores points...exactly what they're not doing.


Their defense is pathetic. No way they even go .500 with Manning. In fact, before the season (when I thought he was playing), I predicted 8-8 for them. Even that's a stretch now with that defense. It's plain terrible.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> I think you may be forgetting about a couple people. Couple guys names Brady and Manning. Way too early to say Rodgers is better.


I don't think it's too early at all. I look at a lot of characteristics of Rodgers and see him better than the aforementioned QBs and anyone else in the last several decades.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Their defense is pathetic. No way they even go .500 with Manning. In fact, before the season (when I thought he was playing), I predicted 8-8 for them. Even that's a stretch now with that defense. It's plain terrible.


Don't you realize their horrible offense is why defense is so bad. When you're constantly on the field, you get tired and dominated. Manning completely changes a winless team into an AFC contender. I realize you're a Patriots fan & probably think Brady is the greatest ever, but he's no Manning.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> I think you may be forgetting about a couple people. Couple guys names Brady and Manning. Way too early to say Rodgers is better.
> 
> The Packers have also played a fairly light schedule.


Agreed, but you'll never convince LV to ever change his Death Star colored glasses.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> Don't you realize their horrible offense is why defense is so bad. When you're constantly on the field, you get tired and dominated. Manning completely changes a winless team into an AFC contender. I realize you're a Patriots fan & probably think Brady is the greatest ever, but he's no Manning.


Take a look at their first quarter defensive numbers and get back to me.

For the teams they are on, both Brady and Manning are the best ever. Swap them and neither would be as successful as they have been. They are perfect fits for their given situations. They are both first ballot HOF'ers and should go down as two of the best QB's of all time. They're that good.


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> Don't you realize their horrible offense is why defense is so bad. When you're constantly on the field, you get tired and dominated. Manning completely changes a winless team into an AFC contender. I realize you're a Patriots fan & probably think Brady is the greatest ever, but he's no Manning.


And neither is an Aaron Rodgers.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> And neither is an Aaron Rodgers.


Get back to me when Rodgers throws 50 TD's. Or wins three SB's. Or pulls off one of the biggest upsets in SB history. Or has 119 wins and a .773 winning percentage. That last bit is the best all time, by the way.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Take a look at their first quarter defensive numbers and get back to me.
> 
> For the teams they are on, both Brady and Manning are the best ever. Swap them and neither would be as successful as they have been. They are perfect fits for their given situations. They are both first ballot HOF'ers and should go down as two of the best QB's of all time. They're that good.


I disagree with the interchangeability. Any QB can succeed in the Patriots system, ask Matt Cassel and his 10-6 season.  Manning makes a bunch of nobodies into all-stars. His numbers last year, where his only healthy receiver/tight end was Wayne, shows his greatness. Brady is great, though. (Ugh, I hate typing good things about the Patriots.)


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> I disagree with the interchangeability. Any QB can succeed in the Patriots system, ask Matt Cassel and his 10-6 season.  Manning makes a bunch of nobodies into all-stars. His numbers last year, where his only healthy receiver/tight end was Wayne, shows his greatness. Brady is great, though. (Ugh, I hate typing good things about the Patriots.)


You're kidding, right? Brady won 3 SB's with nowhere near the talent at WR that Manning had year in and year out. Brady *is* the system. Want a perfect example of that; look what has happened with Deion Branch while away from Brady. He was below average at best.

Why are you arguing with me, I'm on your side. :lol: I said both Brady and Manning are better than Rodgers.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> Get back to me when Rodgers throws 50 TD's. Or wins three SB's. Or pulls off one of the biggest upsets in SB history. Or has 119 wins and a .773 winning percentage. That last bit is the best all time, by the way.


One need not win 3 Super Bowls to be the best QB in a generation. Rodgers is superior to both Manning and Brady and will simply get better as time goes along.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> One need not win 3 Super Bowls to be the best QB in a generation. Rodgers is superior to both Manning and Brady and will simply get better as time goes along.


We shall see....


----------



## Lord Vader

Indeed we will.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> One need not win 3 Super Bowls to be the best QB in a generation....


He just needs 2 good years?


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> He just needs 2 good years?


Apparently his generations are very short.


----------



## Lord Vader

Super Bowls aren't won by quarterbacks. Even if his team never wins another, he is still better than Brady and Manning. His arm, his accuracy, his release and more are better than Brady's and Manning's.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Super Bowls aren't won by quarterbacks. Even if his team never wins another, he is still better than Brady and Manning. His arm, his accuracy, his release and more are better than Brady's and Manning's.


Dan Marino.....


----------



## hilmar2k

Earl Bonovich said:


> Dan Marino.....


And is Rodgers has a career like Marino's, the number of SB's he wins will be irrelevant. But until then....

This whole argument is stupid. Cam Newton is off to a better career start than any of these guys, should we go ahead and crown him the king of the world right now? It's too early to say Rodgers is the best,. He needs to do it for more than 3 years.

Tons of QB's have had a couple of amazing years and aren't even in the discussion of best ever.


----------



## Lord Vader

Earl Bonovich said:


> Dan Marino.....





hilmar2k said:


> And is Rodgers has a career like Marino's, the number of SB's he wins will be irrelevant. But until then....
> 
> This whole argument is stupid. Cam Newton is off to a better career start than any of these guys, should we go ahead and crown him the king of the world right now? It's too early to say Rodgers is the best,. He needs to do it for more than 3 years.
> 
> Tons of QB's have had a couple of amazing years and aren't even in the discussion of best ever.


Rodgers is superior to both Marino and Newton.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> I think you may be forgetting about a couple people. Couple guys names Brady and Manning. Way too early to say Rodgers is better.
> 
> *The Packers have also played a fairly light schedule*.


Interesting...ESPN just last night was talking how the Packers actually had one of the more challenging schedules against teams .500 and above in the entire NFC...including their final 6 games, of which only 1 game was a team below .500.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Interesting...ESPN just last night was talking how the Packers actually had one of the more challenging schedules against teams .500 and above in the entire NFC...including their final 6 games, of which only 1 game was a team below .500.


Being above .500 doesn't make you a tough/good team. Plus, the NFC is pretty bad with the exception of GB & NO, and the AFC West (who the NFC North is playing) is pretty weak.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> *Being above .500 doesn't make you a tough/good team*. Plus, the NFC is pretty bad with the exception of GB & NO, and the AFC West (who the NFC North is playing) is pretty weak.


You might be right...but being below .500 certainly shows you're *not* a good team.

NFC has several tough teams, GB, NO, SF, ATL...and NYG and CHI are no slouches, and better than most AFC teams. NFC Central will likely have 2 playoff teams. I stand by GB having a tough schedule.


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> You might be right...but being below .500 certainly shows you're *not* a good team.
> 
> NFC has several tough teams, GB, NO, SF, ATL...and NYG and CHI are no slouches, and better than most AFC teams. NFC Central will likely have 2 playoff teams. I stand by GB having a tough schedule.


The Packers have played only 3 games against a quality opponent, NO, Chicago, and Atlanta. That's it. They got Detroit in the middle of their freefall, San Diego and Tampa after they already imploded, Denver before they started playing good defense (and even now they aren't very good), and everyone else is terrible.

The Packers are a very good team, but they have had a fairly easy go of it so far. Even the rest of their schedule is pretty weak (@NYG, vs Oakland, @KC, vs Chicago without Cutler, vs a back to reality Detroit).

They get by the G-Men and they have a shot at 16-0. I actually like the Giants this week, though.


----------



## Lord Vader

Jay Cutler concedes his season is probably over.

Stupid Head Coach Lovie Smith saying the day after the injury that they expect Jay back before the end of the regular season. Shut up, Lovie. You're an idiot anyway.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Lord Vader said:


> Jay Cutler concedes his season is probably over.
> 
> Stupid Head Coach Lovie Smith saying the day after the injury that they expect Jay back before the end of the regular season. Shut up, Lovie. You're an idiot anyway.


I think Lovie Smith is a great coach for Chicago.  Hopefully the Bears end up just good enough for him to keep his job.


----------



## Lord Vader

Sarcasm fits you well. Not.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Jay Cutler concedes his season is probably over.
> 
> Stupid Head Coach Lovie Smith saying the day after the injury that they expect Jay back before the end of the regular season. Shut up, Lovie. You're an idiot anyway.


Let see... ummm... well 10 days ago, going off early doctor information...
It was a possibility... and that is what Lovie Said.

So what has happened in the last 10 days.

The Surgery has been done, and a week of healing and evaluation.
So yes, in a press confernece today... Jay has an update, and it his evaluation of the sistuation..

You gonna tell Jay to shut up and he is an idiot, if the next three weeks turn out to be very good, and heels faster than expected, and he does play in the playoffs ?

And with the ESPN update that was just played (like 5 seconds ago). Jay himself is hopeful he can return, but he also acknowleged that the season may be over.

Honestly... I can see the Lovie bashing... he has done some dumb things, but a lot of head coaches have.

But to me... Lovie has been fine as a coach... much better than the others we have had since Da Coach...

And for me... a life long Bears Fan... I think Lovie needs to stick around just as long as this core defense does... as there is what 1 maybe 2 more seasons out of this core defense?
Changing the coach now... ends that and adds a lot more confusion then help (IMHO).


----------



## Earl Bonovich

They are still talking about it now on ESPN 1000...
If everything goes well, near perfect....

He may still make it back for the Vikings game, and in totally perfect scenerio... Packers.
But there is so much that can happen between now and then.

ReHab, Healing...

But obviously they have to plan and prepare as if he will NOT be back, and that is the path they are taking. 

What do you want Lovie to Say... doom and gloom, we are packing it in. 

Don't understand the venom.


----------



## Lord Vader

No, he should just stop sounding a clueless doofus.


----------



## meStevo

He's got to sell tickets, they're going to be as outwardly optimistic as possible.


----------



## kikkenit2

Jay Cutler just got engaged to super hot Kristen Cavallari again. 
There goes any quick rehab.


----------



## meStevo

Raiders LB Rolando McClain reportedly pointed a gun at a mans head and after he begged for his life discharged it next to his ear. 

But it happened in Alabama, where that's only a misdemeanor.

Still though, Plaxico was suspended indefinitely for shooting himself, can only wonder what Goodell will do to McClain if he confirms any of this at all.


----------



## Lord Vader

meStevo said:


> He's got to sell tickets, they're going to be as outwardly optimistic as possible.


Remember, Cutler's a Type 1 diabetic. They do NOT heal normally as fast as others do.


----------



## sigma1914

meStevo said:


> Raiders LB Rolando McClain reportedly pointed a gun at a mans head and after he begged for his life discharged it next to his ear.
> 
> But it happened in Alabama, where that's only a misdemeanor.
> 
> Still though, Plaxico was suspended indefinitely for shooting himself, can only wonder what Goodell will do to McClain if he confirms any of this at all.


Plax wasn't suspended, or jailed for that matter, for simply shooting himself. He was charged for weapons possession.


----------



## meStevo

Plaxico was suspended 4 games by the Giants (the remainder of that season) and then suspended indefinitely by the league concurrent with his prison sentence, and had to be reinstated by the commissioner before he could play again.

His plea deal got him out of the more serious charges.

If McClain admits to any of this I think he's done for the season, at least pending the outcome of his case.

He's injured currently, I wonder if the Raiders will do anything in the meantime.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

No surprise but Suh's 2 game suspension upheld.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-suh-appeal


----------



## Davenlr

Sorry Earl...he tried. Thought he was gonna make it on that last drive...


----------



## Lord Vader

The Bears are awful. Stick a fork in 'em. Their season is *OVAH!*


----------



## Laxguy

Ah, my son's team, aka Da Raidahs, don' look so good now, either....


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> The Bears are awful. Stick a fork in 'em. Their season is *OVAH!*


Not many teams can afford to lose their QB.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

"hilmar2k" said:


> Not many teams can afford to lose their QB.


And now their RB

Ugh..


----------



## Lord Vader

It doesn't help that the Bears have God awful receivers and have had that problem for years.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

So... now they have to go out and get McNabb...

If the Lions lose tonight, and the packers hold on to win... the Bears are still the #1 Wild Card Team... Horrible loss... If they would have one... 

This is going to be a painful finish to the season.

But you still have 3 games that your Defense and Special teams can be major factors in... so now you just have to figure out some way to muster up some offense....


----------



## Lord Vader

If they can't beat KC, whom EVERYONE assumed would be an easy win, I can't see them beating anyone else this season.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

While the Resume is still being formed for one said Green Bay QB...

He is leaps and bounds the best Player in the game right now...
And it is a mile of difference between him and whomever you could think of as #2...


----------



## Lord Vader

The greatest QB in our lifetime does it again. Dammit.


----------



## Lord Vader

Shaping up to be a Super Bowl rematch. This time it will be PAYBACK!


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Shaping up to be a Super Bowl rematch. This time it will be PAYBACK!


Getting a little ahead of yourself on the AFC end of that. They're not even going to win their division.

Do they have a decent shot at getting there, sure. But that's all it is...a shot. The Ravens and the Patriots probably have better chances, since they'll likely both have a bye and home field.


----------



## Lord Vader

Uh huh. Steelers will be there. Again.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Lord Vader said:


> The greatest QB in our lifetime does it again. Dammit.


One thing I will say is he doesn't seem to get flustered, he's one amazing quarterback.

12-0 baby!


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Uh huh. Steelers will be there. Again.


We'll see about that.


----------



## Lord Vader

Indeed we will. I was right about them last year, much to the dismay of you and others. I will be right about them this year.


----------



## MysteryMan

Green Bay 38-NY Giants 35. Great game! Giants didn't make it easy for them. Am looking forward to watching this one on Short Cuts tommorow.


----------



## Davenlr

Lord Vader said:


> If they can't beat KC, whom EVERYONE assumed would be an easy win, I can't see them beating anyone else this season.


Unless they play the Colts


----------



## Lord Vader

Somehow, the Bears would screw even THAT up!


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Where are the 72 Dolphins?


----------



## Lord Vader

Who cares?


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Pittsburgh is arguably the best AFC team as long as they can avoid the Ravens.


----------



## meStevo

Earl Bonovich said:


> So... now they have to go out and get McNabb...


With this (wise) assumption out there in the media as well as Favre reportedly 'would listen' if the Bears called, Lovie was emphatic at his Monday morning presser about them not signing anyone.


----------



## Lord Vader

With Forte now reportedly out for the season, this team is toast.

Hanie regressed--dramatically. He's terrible. What's really sad is how bad this team really is. As several sports "gurus" had commented this morning, "When you take two members of this offense out of the lineup and the team performs this badly, it shows how bad this team really is."


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> With Forte now reportedly out for the season, this team is toast.
> 
> Hanie regressed--dramatically. He's terrible. What's really sad is how bad this team really is. As several sports "gurus" had commented this morning, "When you take two members of this offense out of the lineup and the team performs this badly, it shows how bad this team really is."


1) The Defense is still a VERY good defense.
2) The Special Team is still a VERY good one.

But when you lose your starting QB, and one that you did give up a lot for... that is going to hurt. Then when you use lose your #1 running back, and one of your top pass receivers... that is going to hurt as well. As well as your top 2 offense lineman, including your #1 draft pick.

It is going to hurt.. a lot.

It was Cutler, and Forte, that help compensate for the offensive line issues, and that was so present yesterday.

No matter what happens, the Special Teams and Defense CAN'T be relied on to score the actual points... their points scored are bonuses.

If the offense can't manage to score at least 14 points in the game... going to be very hard to win.

If the Bears do win against the Bronoco's and against Seattle... they may hae a chance to get in as a wild card (as I expect them to beat the Vikings). but the idea of knocking of Green Bay on Christmas or the NFC Championship game.... no way. As even as good as the defense is, Rodgers and crew are going to get at least 14 points if not 21...


----------



## Lord Vader

Earl Bonovich said:


> 1) The Defense is still a VERY good defense.


So?



> 2) The Special Team is still a VERY good one.


No it's not. It's mediocre at BEST, and yesterday it was AWFUL. Heck, even both the Score and ESPN 1000 were bemoaning the special teams.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> So?
> 
> No it's not. It's mediocre at BEST, and yesterday it was AWFUL. Heck, even both the Score and ESPN 1000 were bemoaning the special teams.


Mediocre?? Devin Hester alone makes their special teams better than 95% of the league. He's a serious threat.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Things are starting to approach some closure in the regular NFL season.

Green Bay and San Francisco (virtually) have things locked up for their respective NFC divisions. Others are still murky, but getting narrowed within another week or two most likely. The Lions and Bears are nosediving.

Looks like the Saints will be back in the hunt.

The NFC East has been very interesting, but also a major disappointment on several fronts.

The AFC - looks like Pittsburgh is limping their way back into the thick of things, and Denver coming in throught he back door potentially.

Not sure how the Texas or Ravens will finish.

All in all - a hodgepodge of results to date.


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> Mediocre?? Devin Hester alone makes their special teams better than 95% of the league. He's a serious threat.


One person does not a special teams make. As I said, their special teams is mediocre at best right now.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> One person does not a special teams make. As I said, their special teams is mediocre at best right now.


Special teams consist of kickoff returns, punt returns, kickoff coverage, punt coverage, and the kicking game. So Hester accounts for 40% of that.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> So?


So? Basic math. If the Defense keeps points off the board. (Which other than a fluke, right-place-right time, TD on a hail marry yesterday)... your team has a chance to win.



Lord Vader said:


> No it's not. It's mediocre at BEST, and yesterday it was AWFUL. Heck, even both the Score and ESPN 1000 were bemoaning the special teams.


[/QUOTE]

Disagree... Yes, yesterday they were not great... that happens to just about any team... especially when other teams know that is a focus to stop.

But if you shorten the field... it improves the odd's of scoring...

either way... I am not optomistic about the remainder of the season, but morning after it is a little more brighter... but not a lot.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> Special teams consist of kickoff returns, punt returns, kickoff coverage, punt coverage, and the kicking game. So Hester accounts for 40% of that.


That's hogwash and a rather faulty computation there. He's but a small part of the entire special teams, which yesterday was terrible.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Things are starting to approach some closure in the regular NFL season.
> 
> Green Bay and San Francisco (virtually) have things locked up for their respective NFC divisions. Others are still murky, but getting narrowed within another week or two most likely. The Lions and Bears are nosediving.
> 
> Looks like the Saints will be back in the hunt.
> 
> The NFC East has been very interesting, but also a major disappointment on several fronts.
> 
> The AFC - looks like Pittsburgh is limping their way back into the thick of things, and Denver coming in throught he back door potentially.
> 
> Not sure how the Texas or Ravens will finish.
> 
> All in all - a hodgepodge of results to date.


NFC
GB & SF have locked up their divisions.

AFC
The Ravens should win out with their schedule - Indy, @SD, Cleveland, @Cincy.
The Patriots are the Packers of the AFC...No defense but a killer offense.
The Texans have the best running back combo in the league and a VERY tough/great defense...they could win the AFC.


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> NFC
> GB & SF have locked up their divisions.
> 
> AFC
> The Ravens should win out with their schedule - Indy, @SD, Cleveland, @Cincy.


They'll lose at least one of those. After all, they *are *Baltimore.



> The Patriots are the Packers of the AFC...No defense but a killer offense.


Poppycock. They couldn't even beat Pittsburgh. In fact, they got manhandled by the Steelers.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> They'll lose at least one of those. After all, they *are *Baltimore.
> 
> Poppycock. They couldn't even beat Pittsburgh. In fact, they got manhandled by the Steelers.


Pittsburgh is a good team...although, the Ravens are better.


----------



## Lord Vader

Hardly.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> Hardly.



Statistically, their defenses are virtually equal. Offenses are about equal, with Pittsburgh averaging only about 23 more yards...Baltimore scores more.

The deciding factor is head to head, and Baltimore is 2-0 against Pittsburgh with one of those being a blowout.


----------



## Lord Vader

That's all moot when the Steelers win their division or advance farther in the post-season, as they did last year over the Ravens.


----------



## meStevo

I'm pulling for the Ravens but the way they've been so either off or on as a team, they could lose to Indy and Cleveland and beat the Chargers and Bengals and I wouldn't be surprised.


----------



## Lord Vader

meStevo said:


> I'm pulling for the Ravens


May your sister find herself alone among a herd of horny water buffalo.


----------



## meStevo

Lord Vader said:


> May your sister find herself alone among a herd of horny water buffalo.


May they already have been satisfied by the presence of your own siblings


----------



## Lord Vader

They've saved the "best" for last. :raspberry


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Poppycock. They couldn't even beat Pittsburgh. In fact, they got manhandled by the Steelers.


Pats played their worst game by far of the season, in Pittsburgh, and had the ball down 6 with a chance to win at the end of the game. And then lost on an illegal safety.

Let's not crown the Steelers just yet.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> And then lost on an illegal safety.


As opposed to a "legal" safety?


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> NFC
> GB & SF have locked up their divisions.


Yup


> AFC
> The Ravens should win out with their schedule - Indy, @SD, Cleveland, @Cincy.
> The Patriots are the Packers of the AFC...No defense but a killer offense.
> The Texans have the best running back combo in the league and a VERY tough/great defense...they could win the AFC.


I suspect the AFC is far more in question that that sounds...after seeing the Colts come back very quickly on the Patriots, and the inconsistency of the Ravens this year...hard to be all that confident in those results.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> As opposed to a "legal" safety?


Meaning that Polamalu should have been flagged on the play (for punching the ball through the end zone) and the safety should not have been allowed. The Patriots should have retained the ball.


----------



## hilmar2k

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I suspect the AFC is far more in question that that sounds...after seeing the Colts come back very quickly on the Patriots, and the inconsistency of the Ravens this year...hard to be all that confident in those results.


Don't read too much into the last 6 minutes of the Pats/Colts game. The game was long since wrapped up and the defense played like that. They've played much better defense the last 4 or 5 weeks, and still rank in the top third of the league in points allowed (the only stat the truly matters).

Also, their fifth or sixth receiver and special teams captain played all but three snaps on defense in the Indy game. Those would be his first defensive snaps ever. Until their defensive backfield gets healthy, it's hard to judge them too harshly.

Obvously their offense is great, and much better than their defense, but the defense should be good enough when healthy to go far in the playoffs.

Whoever called them the GB of the AFC was pretty close to the mark.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

31-0 mid 2nd quarter. WOO-HOO


----------



## sigma1914

Scott Kocourek said:


> 31-0 mid 2nd quarter. WOO-HOO


31-7...Comeback time! :lol:


----------



## sigma1914

sigma1914 said:


> 31-7...Comeback time! :lol:


Never mind.


----------



## Davenlr

I love the way the crowd got into the "Throw the flag" chant.....


----------



## Lord Vader

Packers suck.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Lord Vader said:


> Packers suck.





Lord Vader said:


> Sarcasm fits you well. Not.


Ahem.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

I am not sure I can believe what I just saw....

I can't recall a team be basically arguably one of the top 5 teams in the league 4 weeks ago... looking at on paper going 5-1... going into the playoffs... to basically done for the year, in embarrising fashion.

I have been watching football my entire life, I don't think I have ever seen a game like this.

This is must how the Arizona fans felt when the Illini came back from 14 down with only 4 minutes left... 

Good Luck Green Bay... Run the Table.


----------



## kiknwing

los Tebows!!!


----------



## sigma1914

Earl Bonovich said:


> I am not sure I can believe what I just saw....
> 
> I can't recall a team be basically arguably one of the top 5 teams in the league 4 weeks ago... looking at on paper going 5-1... going into the playoffs... to basically done for the year, in embarrising fashion.
> 
> I have been watching football my entire life, I don't think I have ever seen a game like this.
> 
> This is must how the Arizona fans felt when the Illini came back from 14 down with only 4 minutes left...
> 
> Good Luck Green Bay... Run the Table.


Injuries...no way a team can lose their QB & one of the leagues best RBs and win.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

sigma1914 said:



> Injuries...no way a team can lose their QB & one of the leagues best RBs and win.


But they should have one this game.
Marion just stays in bounds... game is over...

Oh well... won't change now, can't change now.
Season is over.

Cutler now should just down any rapid re-hab... Forte, shouldn't even think about it....

Worst part... this means Forte will probably hit free-agency and we will lose him for good...


----------



## Lord Vader

Marion Barber. Perhaps the stupidest player on the Bears. He SINGLEHANDEDLY cost the Bears the game.

Da Bears. Stick a fork in them.

*They're done!* :barf:


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Marion Barber. Perhaps the stupidest player on the Bears. He SINGLEHANDEDLY cost the Bears the game.
> 
> Da Bears. Stick a fork in them.
> 
> *They're done!* :barf:


He did it with Both Hands... first the run out of bounds... and then the fumble...

Oh well... at least now I don't have to worry about making any plans to watch games now.... darn shame, Christmas day would have been fun.


----------



## hilmar2k

I am getting tired of teams allowing Tebow to beat them. It is simply amazing. How the Bears managed to lose this game is beyond me. 

Tebow may be a winner, but he isn't a great QB.


----------



## Lord Vader

Earl Bonovich said:


> He did it with Both Hands... first the run out of bounds... and then the fumble...
> 
> Oh well... at least now I don't have to worry about making any plans to watch games now.... darn shame, Christmas day would have been fun.


Now you can concentrate on more important things that day, like giving thanks to your LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST. Oops; slipped into Tebow mode there. :goofygrin

As Ed O'B. and company are discussing on the Score now, the Bears have no offense and haven't had much of one all year long. They don't deserve to be in the playoffs.


----------



## Lord Vader

Well, the demise of the Bears continues, with one of their players arrested in a major drug operation. 

He was arrested last night after planning on buying a thousand lbs. of marijuana and 10 kilograms of cocaine *per week*, with intent to sell and distribute. Reports also say that there may be as many as 15 other NFL players involved in this operation.

Yikes! :eek2:


----------



## Laxguy

Lord Vader said:


> He was arrested last night after planning on buying a thousand lbs. of marijuana and 10 kilograms of cocaine *per week*, with intent to sell and distribute. Reports also say that there may be as many as 15 other NFL players involved in this operation.
> 
> Yikes! :eek2:


Well, now, these are very big guys. Perhaps it was for personal use??

And, Yikes! indeed. Very sad. Disgusting, too.


----------



## Davenlr

Lord Vader said:


> Well, the demise of the Bears continues, with one of their players arrested in a major drug operation.
> 
> He was arrested last night after planning on buying a thousand lbs. of marijuana and 10 kilograms of cocaine *per week*, with intent to sell and distribute. Reports also say that there may be as many as 15 other NFL players involved in this operation.
> 
> Yikes! :eek2:


They must have been planning some really wild tailgating parties up their at Soldier Field  Either that, or they figured if they got their fans stoned, they would care that they were losing.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

So this is what it's like to watch a "regular" team. UGH!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> So this is what it's like to watch a "regular" team.  UGH!


KC got stopped on goal line stands 3 times with only 6 total points.

Let's see if Packer receivers can hold on to passes in the 2nd half - season record drops in the 1st half.


----------



## Davenlr

What one earth is the Packers offensive line doing today, besides playing? Rodgers is getting killed. And the defense isnt stopping anyone. Terrible playing today.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

What a brutal week for football


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Davenlr said:


> What one earth is the Packers offensive line doing today, besides playing? Rodgers is getting killed. And the defense isnt stopping anyone. Terrible playing today.


They must be drinking beers with the D. UGH!


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Let's hope we don't see Rodgers crying in his post game interview. Remember the last guy?


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> Let's hope we don't see Rodgers crying in his post game interview. Remember the last guy?


No kidding. At least he beat Burt's single season passing record.

I have not seen 15 passes dropped by this crowd EVER.

The defense ironically played a great game for GB - 2 goal line stands for field goals and 1 stop there as well.

The receiving corp seemed like they were napping most of the game.

In a way though...its OK to get this whole "unbeaten" distraction out of the way to focus on a couple more wins and the playoffs.

Heck...even the Colts won today for gosh sakes...showing the old "anybody can beat anybody" on "any given Sunday".

Now if we can only get past all the totally over-the-top Tebow talk garbage. Perhaps getting his clock cleaned in the NE game would end all the insanity.


----------



## Davenlr

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Now if we can only get past all the totally over-the-top Tebow talk garbage. Perhaps getting his clock cleaned in the NE game would end all the insanity.


Im not a Tebow fan, but I have to admit, as a team, they are playing pretty darn good.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Davenlr said:


> Im not a Tebow fan, but I have to admit, as a team, they are playing pretty darn good.


It would be even more accurate to say that teams of late playing Tebow are blowing themselves up in a record number of ways.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

If you picked KC or Indy and are NOT a fan, go invest or buy a lottery ticket right now! 

I thought Denver did pretty good except for a couple of really bad turnovers.. I did not think they would win today, but they did compete well for a while.


----------



## Lord Vader

And the news for Bears fans just keeps getting worse. Their top receiver Johnny Knox is out for the season and his career is in jeopardy after an ugly hit that almost literally snapped his back backward. He is scheduled to undergo surgery tomorrow to stabilize vertebrae in his lower spine. He was lucky to not have been paralyzed.

Seeing the replay will absolutely make one cringe in horror.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I sure hope he comes out of the surgery ok and can live a normal life. I was sick to my stomach when I saw that.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> I sure hope he comes out of the surgery ok and can live a normal life. I was sick to my stomach when I saw that.


Very scary hit indeed.

I don't want that to happen to any player...even a Chicago Bear.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

I didn't watch the game, and turned the radio on late.... Just read the article about Knox.... My gosh, in believable. I do hope he recovers from the surgery and will be able to have a fruitful and enjoyable life... And as a bonus to I'm, he can continue playing the game.

As for the Bears... Rewind the clock 5 weeks ago. Big win... Bears are now 7-3, arguable in the top 5 teams in the entire NFL. The first reports of Cutler start to come in.... Then bad loss to Oakland. embarrassing loss to KC. Forte out, offensive line losses another starter. Soul crushing loss to Tebow. Drug bust on the Federal level. And now today's just pitiful, no heart performance... And a broken back for Johnny Knox.

Next week Primetime against the Packers who are out to reprove they are the best team in the league.... My gosh... This has to Boone of the most epic collapses and changes to a season in all professional sports.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Just await on YouTube... And honestly sick to my stomach... How he is going to be okay, I don't know. Makes the Theisman injury look like he just needed a band-aid


----------



## Davenlr

Earl Bonovich said:


> Next week Primetime against the Packers who are out to reprove they are the best team in the league.... My gosh... This has to Boone of the most epic collapses and changes to a season in all professional sports.


Packers lost a lot of their starters too, couple more today I think.


----------



## Lord Vader

Good. All the better for the Super Bowl bound Pittsburgh STEELERS.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Davenlr said:


> Packers lost a lot of their starters too, couple more today I think.


One backup (rookie) lineman by the looks of things.


Lord Vader said:


> Good. All the better for the Super Bowl bound Pittsburgh STEELERS.


Ain't gonna happen.


----------



## Lord Vader

It will. Destiny.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Good. All the better for the Super Bowl bound Pittsburgh STEELERS.





Lord Vader said:


> It will. Destiny.


And you'll be nowhere to be found when they don't even reach the Super Bowl.


----------



## Lord Vader

I'll be here, basking in all the glory that is God's team.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Lord Vader said:


> Good. All the better for the Super Bowl bound Pittsburgh STEELERS.


I thought Rex Ryan said the Jets are going to the Super Bowl:lol:


----------



## Lord Vader

Unlike Pittsburgh, the Jets' performance doesn't indicate they will.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

WOO HOO!

5 Discount Double Checks tonight.


----------



## Davenlr

hdtvfan0001 said:


> WOO HOO!
> 
> 5 Discount Double Checks tonight.


 And I thought we all skipped commercials...


----------



## Lord Vader

The Packers convinced me tonight that despite Rodgers being clearly the best QB in the NFL right now, the Saints are the best _*team*_.


----------



## Davenlr

Lord Vader said:


> The Packers convinced me tonight that despite Rodgers being clearly the best QB in the NFL right now, the Saints are the best _*team*_.


I have a feeling your theory will be tested before the season is over...


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Lord Vader" said:


> The Packers convinced me tonight that despite Rodgers being clearly the best QB in the NFL right now, the Saints are the best team.


How so?

I see the Saints and the Packers as very similar teams... Strong offenses, weak defenses.

I am honestly leaning to either San Francisco or Pittsburgh as the best teams... With both sides of the ball complementing each other.

I see Pittsburgh coming out of the AFC again as long as they don't have to play the Ravens and Roethlisberger gets healthy.

For the NFC I am thinking either Green Bay or the 49ers.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Stewart Vernon said:


> How so?
> 
> I see the Saints and the Packers as very similar teams... Strong offenses, weak defenses.
> 
> I am honestly leaning to either San Francisco or Pittsburgh as the best teams... With both sides of the ball complementing each other.
> 
> I see Pittsburgh coming out of the AFC again as long as they don't have to play the Ravens and Roethlisberger gets healthy.
> 
> For the NFC I am thinking either Green Bay or the 49ers.


I am thinking the Saints have the same offensive firepower as Green Bay, but NO has a better overall defense.

So if it gets to be a shootout, I think NO will edge out GB.

As for the 49ers... I think they are just that enough streaky....

NO in the SuperBowl, against NE


----------



## Lord Vader

Stewart Vernon said:


> How so?
> 
> I see the Saints and the Packers as very similar teams... Strong offenses, weak defenses.
> 
> I am honestly leaning to either San Francisco or Pittsburgh as the best teams... With both sides of the ball complementing each other.
> 
> I see Pittsburgh coming out of the AFC again as long as they don't have to play the Ravens and Roethlisberger gets healthy.
> 
> For the NFC I am thinking either Green Bay or the 49ers.


New Orleans is all around the more complete team.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

The problem with New Orleans... They already lost a shutout with the Packers... And have lost two other games.

That is why I cannot say they are a better team than the Packers because there has been no obvious improvement as the season went forward.

They are good, no doubt... But I have them just a hair below a healthy Green Bay team.


----------



## Lord Vader

Stewart Vernon said:


> The problem with New Orleans... They already lost a shutout with the Packers...


No they didn't. The Pack escaped with a 42-34 victory, far from a "shutout". Since then the Packers have remained consistent, at best. Their offensive line is so-so; their receivers drop too many passes; their defense is porous. New Orleans has improved since that week 1 loss.


----------



## sigma1914

I think he meant shootout.


----------



## Lord Vader

That's a couple letters away from just a typo.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> That's a couple letters away from just a typo.


Autocorrect can be a weird thing. shotout autocorrected to shutout maybe?


----------



## Lord Vader

Autocorrect? Doubtful. He's a Packers fan. They're not know for their intelligence. !rolling


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Not a Packers fan... But not a hater. I have been forced to use my iPad for the last month... And the autocorrect on the DBSTalk app leaves a bit to be desired, especially since I type way faster than the iPad can keep up.

I did indeed mean shoot out... Not shutout.

The larger point being, I could see either team having an equal chance in a rematch... Thus I could not say one team was obviously better than the other based on games thus far... In fact, Atlanta still could win their division if they beat New Orleans tonight and chips fall their way next week... So New Orleans still has some work to do.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

The Lions/Packers rematch is this weekend. Any Cheeseheads wanna make another wager with me?


----------



## Laxguy

Coca Cola Kid said:


> The Lions/Packers rematch is this weekend. Any Cheeseheads wanna make another wager with me?


How many points do you want?

*GO NINERS!*


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Coca Cola Kid" said:


> The Lions/Packers rematch is this weekend. Any Cheeseheads wanna make another wager with me?


Why would anyone make a wager with someone who routinely backs out of the losing bet?


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> Why would anyone make a wager with someone who routinely backs out of the losing bet?


WTF are you talking about? I didn't back out, ask Scott. The agreement was I had to have the Packers logo in my avatar and Go Packers in my signature for a month. I kept my end of the bargain.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I remember someone telling me to hire a lawer if I wanted all the loopholes taken out. (something to that effect.)

No you didn't honor the bet.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Scott Kocourek said:


> I remember someone telling me to hire a lawer if I wanted all the loopholes taken out. (something to that effect.)
> 
> No you didn't honor the bet.


What part of it did I not honor?


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> The Lions/Packers rematch is this weekend. Any Cheeseheads wanna make another wager with me?


The game is meaningless and has no impact for the playoffs. Detroit will get stomped in the 1st round anyway.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> The game is meaningless and has no impact for the playoffs. Detroit will get stomped in the 1st round anyway.


Pretty much the way many folks see it, including the NFL Network and ESPN commentators.

Still...happy for the Detroit folks to make the playoffs for the first time since electricity. 

If people had learned anything from the past 3 years in particular...the playoffs are an entirely new season - almost anybody can beat anybody.

Should be interesting times.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> The game is meaningless and has no impact for the playoffs. Detroit will get stomped in the 1st round anyway.


It matters to Detroit. And Detroit may play the Giants in the first round, which eliminates the possibility of them getting stomped....unfortunately.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> It matters to Detroit. And Detroit may play the Giants in the first round, which eliminates the possibility of them getting stomped....unfortunately.


Whoever plays Detroit will beat them, unless the sorry Cowboys get in.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> Whoever plays Detroit will beat them, unless the sorry Cowboys get in.


Living in NY, I see a lot of the Giants. They are terrible the past 7 weeks. I don't think they can beat the Lions right now. Heck, if Romo is healthy I don't think the Giants can even beat the Cowboys.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Living in NY, I see a lot of the Giants. They are terrible the past 7 weeks. I don't think they can beat the Lions right now. Heck, if Romo is healthy I don't think the Giants can even beat the Cowboys.


I watch them every week (they're one of the four teams I follow), too, but I wouldn't say it's been a terrible 7 weeks. It's been a typical NYG 2nd half of a season... inconsistent. :lol: They should've beat the Packers, they handled the Jets, beat a Romo-healthy Dallas, only lost by 1 TD to a resurgent Philly team & tough 49ers team.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

sigma1914 said:


> Whoever plays Detroit will beat them, unless the sorry Cowboys get in.


As always, you have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even watched a Lions game this year?

My prediction: after they open a can against the Fudge Packers, they go on to win Super Bowl XLVI.


----------



## hilmar2k

Coca Cola Kid said:


> As always, you have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even watched a Lions game this year?
> 
> My prediction: after they open a can against the Fudge Packers, they go on to win Super Bowl XLVI.


Why do fans of historically awful teams always have to take it too far when their team is finally something other than putrid? Really? Win the Super Bowl? This team hasn't even won a playoff game in 20 years. Let's see them do that before we crown them NFL Champs. :nono2:

I look at the Lions as the fifth best team in the NFC playoffs ahead of only the winner of the NFC East (and the eighth best in the NFL playoffs, adding NE, Baltimore and Pittsburgh to the list).


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> As always, you have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even watched a Lions game this year?
> 
> My prediction: after they open a can against the Fudge Packers, they go on to win Super Bowl XLVI.


You've been wrong about Detroit going 16-0, beating GB on Thanksgiving, and other stuff. Your prediction above will continue your incorrect streak. The Lions are mediocre and inconsistent. They also have the scumbag Suh who will likely have another psychotic meltdown.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Coca Cola Kid said:


> As always, you have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even watched a Lions game this year?
> 
> My prediction: after they open a can against the Fudge Packers, they go on to win Super Bowl XLVI.


Sorry... I understand the Euphora of making the playoffs for the first time in a long time.

But I have watched at least 6 Lions games this year... so yes, I have watched them.

They are one of the most see-saw teams that hit the league this year.
One week, they are world beaters. The next week, they couldn't help themselves from making their own mistakes.

Compared to GB and NO, they are not even remotely at the same level as them.

The Lions do have a fair shot at making it out of the WildCard weekend, since they won't have to face Atlanta. They are going to have a tough time against the Giants if they have to face them.

But in the 2nd weekend, if they have to face GB or NO..
EVERYTHING will have to go the Lions way to win... Every Bounce, the QB's have significantly off days... their emotions have to stay in check... and you could almost bet the officials will pre-warn them about the overally aggressive nature that they have shown through out the year.

So congrats to the Lions to get into the Playoffs...

But Super Bowl bound? Yep mathmatically possible, but if you objectively think that they are going to make it there in a cake walk....


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

sigma1914 said:


> You've been wrong about Detroit going 16-0, beating GB on Thanksgiving, and other stuff. Your prediction above will continue your incorrect streak. The Lions are mediocre and inconsistent. They also have the scumbag Suh who will likely have another psychotic meltdown.


You didn't answer the question: have you a watched live Lions game in its entirety this season? or just the highlights on *E*astcoast *S*ports *P*rogramming *N*etwork?


----------



## hilmar2k

Coca Cola Kid said:


> You didn't answer the question: have a watched a live Lions game in its entirety this season?
> 
> and where'd you go to medical school, doctor?


Doesn't take a doctor to diagnose Suh as a scumbag.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

hilmar2k said:


> Doesn't take a doctor to diagnose Suh as a scumbag.


Scumbag no. He's aggressive and plays hard and scares quarterbacks and offensive linemen, but that's what defensive linemen are supposed to do.


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> You didn't answer the question: have you a watched live Lions game in its entirety this season?


Yes


> and where'd you go to medical school, doctor?


See hilmar2k's response.


----------



## hilmar2k

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Scumbag no. He's aggressive and plays hard and scares quarterbacks and offensive linemen, but that's what defensive linemen are supposed to do.


Serioulsy? He stomped someone. He has taken numerous cheapshots on opposing players. He leads the world in personal fouls. He is the definition of scumbag.

Only a Lion fan could possiby describe him otherwise.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

hilmar2k said:


> Serioulsy? He stomped someone. He has taken numerous cheapshots on opposing players. He leads the world in personal fouls. He is the definition of scumbag.
> 
> Only a Lion fan could possiby describe him otherwise.


If you actually watch the stomping incident in slow motion it clearly shows the dude he stomped reaching out and untying his shoe seconds before. Where's the penalty there? Oh yeah, Packers never get penalized cuz they pay the refs and the national media has a boner for them.


----------



## hilmar2k

Coca Cola Kid said:


> If you actually watch the stomping incident in slow motion it clearly shows the dude he stomped reaching out and untying his shoe seconds before. Where's the penalty there? Oh yeah, Packers never get penalized cuz they pay the refs and the national media has a boner for them.


So the appropriate reatiliation for a "shoe untying" is a stomp? And how about the countless other instances he's been penalized and fined for?

Even a homer has to acknowledge in a private moment, that the man is a scumbag. He may grow out of it (I hope he does, I was a fan when he was in college), but he hasn't so far.

EDIT: Just watched the video and see no sign of this mysterious "show untying". All I see is Suh slamming the o-lineman's head into the ground a few times and then stomping on his arm. Like I said....scumbag.


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Scumbag no. He's aggressive and plays hard and scares quarterbacks and offensive linemen, but that's what defensive linemen are supposed to do.


 Right...stomping a player, lying about it in a delusional rant, deliberately trying to hurt players isn't being a scumbag.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

hilmar2k said:


> So the appropriate reatiliation for a "shoe untying" is a stomp? And how about the countless other instances he's been penalized and fined for?
> 
> Even a homer has to acknowledge in a private moment, that the man is a scumbag. He may grow out of it (I hope he does, I was a fan when he was in college), but he hasn't so far.


No he was mad cuz they never penalize the Packers for anything. They're a god in the refs and national media's eyes and can do no wrong.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

hilmar2k said:


> So the appropriate reatiliation for a "shoe untying" is a stomp? And how about the countless other instances he's been penalized and fined for?
> 
> Even a homer has to acknowledge in a private moment, that the man is a scumbag. He may grow out of it (I hope he does, I was a fan when he was in college), but he hasn't so far.
> 
> EDIT: Just watched the video and see no sign of this mysterious "show untying". All I see is Suh slamming the o-lineman's head into the ground a few times and then stomping on his arm. Like I said....scumbag.


Well it was clearly edited after the Packers paid Fox. I saw it live and that's exactly what happened.


----------



## hilmar2k

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Well it was clearly edited after the Packers paid Fox. I saw it live and that's exactly what happened.


Alright, now you're just messing with me. :lol:

You have to be just trying to stir the pot. You cannot possibly believe that to actually be the case.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

hilmar2k said:


> Alright, now you're just messing with me. :lol:
> 
> You have to be just trying to stir the pot. You cannot possibly believe that to actually be the case.


Sure I do, the national media and the refs have been sabotaging the Lions for years.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Let's watch ourselves here... There is good natured fun and then there is out of control... And we are approaching the line where this will no longer be fun.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> Serioulsy? He stomped someone. He has taken numerous cheapshots on opposing players. He leads the world in personal fouls. He is the definition of scumbag.
> 
> Only a Lion fan could possiby describe him otherwise.


With seeing Suh have a series of such ridiculous behavior in games (even before his nationally-televised fiasco)...most folks already know he's a thug.

When 40-50 other players in the league come out (his peers) and publicly state that his history of on-field roughness is unacceptable...there's clearly some truth behind it. While Suh has plenty of talent, he lacks maturity.

He is not the only defense player on that team with that demeanor. You can add Kyle Vanden Bosch to that list.

In any case...Detroit also has some very good players on their team, and it is nice to see *the team* make it to the playoffs despite themselves. The Lions have sabotaged themselves for years.

This is the year they elevated themselves to be at least a Wildcard playoff team...I suspect little more than that. Then again, in the playoffs....there are always surprises.

The real great teams are those that show consistency of winning over time. GB making it through reams of injuries last year to win it all, followed by an incredible winning year (team record) this season shows they've made it to the top tier of 1-3 top teams.

The Saints and Patriots are pretty much up there, while the 49ers took a big step forward this year and the Steelers took a step backward.

That's what makes the playoffs interesting. Any team can beat any other team any given Sunday. I'd like the Packers to repeat, but also know enough that it will take a combination of great play, injury avoidance, and even some luck (which all teams require) to make it to the top.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Stewart Vernon said:


> Let's watch ourselves here... There is good natured fun and then there is out of control... And we are approaching the line where this will no longer be fun.


Okay well on Sunday it'll be Lions 42, Packers 3.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

DISCUSS THE TOPIC AND NOT EACH OTHER.

There is absolutely no reason to be rude and insulting. What happened in this thread up to now is in the past. If you can't let it go then please move on to another thread.

:backtotop

Mike


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

The Lions would be undefeated if the other teams didn't pay the refs and if they didn't have so many injuries.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Coca Cola Kid said:


> The Lions would be undefeated if the other teams didn't pay the refs and if they didn't have so many injuries.


Seriously, do you have some proof, sources, anything at all to support claims that teams paying off the refs?

It doesn't sound the least bit plausible.

Mike


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Mike Bertelson said:


> Seriously, do you have some proof, sources, anything at all to support claims that teams paying off the refs?
> 
> It doesn't sound the least bit plausible.
> 
> Mike


Watch any Lions game. When I say watch I mean live it in its entirety not the lowlights on East Coast Sports Programming Network or Not Fair-treatment of Lions Network. They get penalized more than any other team for bullcrap calls while their opponents get away with facemasks, horsecollar tackles, helmet to helmet hits, holding, pass interference, you name and the ref missed it. Doesn't that seem suspicious to you?


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Watch any Lions game. They get penalized more than any other team for bullcrap calls while their opponents get away with facemasks, horsecollar tackles, helmet to helmet hits, holding, pass interference, you name and the ref missed it. Doesn't that seem suspicious to you?


Interesting, because the last I read the Raiders were the most penalized team in NFL for 2011. Further, the Raiders are actually on pace to set a single season record.

Seems your analysis may have excluded some data.

Mike


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Mike Bertelson said:


> Interesting, because the last I read the Raiders were the most penalized team in NFL for 2011. Further, the Raiders are actually on pace to set a single season record.
> 
> Seems your analysis may have excluded some data.
> 
> Mike


So does ESPN and NFL Networks'. Their "analysis" is based on the lowlights not the actual entire live game, just like everyone on this board.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Watch any Lions game. When I say watch I mean live it in its entirety not the lowlights on East Coast Sports Programming Network or Not Fair-treatment of Lions Network. They get penalized more than any other team for bullcrap calls while their opponents get away with facemasks, horsecollar tackles, helmet to helmet hits, holding, pass interference, you name and the ref missed it. Doesn't that seem suspicious to you?


As noted earlier in this thread, I wasily watched 6 complete Lions games this year, and portions of several others.

And spent a fair amount of time watching 14 Bears Games, and probably a good 20-30 more other games accross the season.

They are calls made all over the league, that you shake your head at.
Some of them are simply because of the rules they have in place, they have no choice.

There are multiple "horsecollar" tackles that are called, which because by definiton they are, but for all intent and purpose they are not.

There is holding on EVERY SINGLE PLAY in the NFL.

Yes, the Lions got a few calls that they probably shouldn't have...
But are you saying they didn't get away with some that they should have been called on?

If so, what NFL games are you watching, and through what shade of glasses.

MOST of the calls, were legit and valid.

If you think the league is out to get the NFL, and the networks... really?
Then why do you bother to watch, if it is all riged?


----------



## sigma1914

Mike Bertelson said:


> Interesting, because the last I read the Raiders were the most penalized team in NFL for 2011. Further, the Raiders are actually on pace to set a single season record.
> 
> Seems your analysis may have excluded some data.
> 
> Mike


Yup, Oakland has the most. In fact, 3 teams have more penalties than Detroit...TB, Seattle, & Oakland.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Coca Cola Kid said:


> So does ESPN and NFL Networks'. Their "analysis" is based on the lowlights not the actual entire live game, just like everyone on this board.


I don't understand. When the NFL says "The Raiders, the most penalized team in the NFL and on pace to set a single-season record" (Link), what is missing from their analysis of the stats?

What are they doing wrong that you think you're doing correctly? Can we see you stats?

I guess you have nothing to back up the pay off claim. If you do I'd be interested to see it.

Mike


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Earl Bonovich said:


> As noted earlier in this thread, I wasily watched 6 complete Lions games this year, and portions of several others.
> 
> And spent a fair amount of time watching 14 Bears Games, and probably a good 20-30 more other games accross the season.
> 
> They are calls made all over the league, that you shake your head at.
> Some of them are simply because of the rules they have in place, they have no choice.
> 
> There are multiple "horsecollar" tackles that are called, which because by definiton they are, but for all intent and purpose they are not.
> 
> There is holding on EVERY SINGLE PLAY in the NFL.
> 
> Yes, the Lions got a few calls that they probably shouldn't have...
> But are you saying they didn't get away with some that they should have been called on?
> 
> If so, what NFL games are you watching, and through what shade of glasses.
> 
> MOST of the calls, were legit and valid.
> 
> If you think the league is out to get the NFL, and the networks... really?
> Then why do you bother to watch, if it is all riged?


Cuz there's nothing else on TV on Sundays except golf, left turn contests, and infomercials.


----------



## hilmar2k

This is getting ridiculous...


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Mike Bertelson said:


> I don't understand. When the NFL says "The Raiders, the most penalized team in the NFL and on pace to set a single-season record" (Link), what is missing from their analysis of the stats?
> 
> What are they doing wrong that you think you're doing correctly? Can we see you stats?
> 
> I guess you have nothing to back up the pay off claim. If you do I'd be interested to see it.
> 
> Mike


Raiders penalties are legit, Lions aren't, is the difference though.


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Raiders penalties are legit, Lions aren't, is the difference though.


:lol::lol::lol:

I thought Dallas fans here in DFW were the biggest homers. I stand corrected.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

sigma1914 said:


> :lol::lol::lol:
> 
> I thought Dallas fans here in DFW were the biggest homers. I stand corrected.


Every team has homers, but us Lions fans have been getting screwed out of money for decades so we're the maddest.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Raiders penalties are legit, Lions aren't, is the difference though.


You posted their "_ "analysis" is based on the lowlights not the actual entire live game_". How does this previous statement fit with the above quoted post?

Do you have a spreadsheet; a list, something on the napkin, anything that will support your assertions? Anything at all that's supportable? It would be an interesting scandal and one heck of a discussion if you could support your claims. I'd really like to hear what you've got.

Mike


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

Mike Bertelson said:


> You posted their "_ "analysis" is based on the lowlights not the actual entire live game_". How does this previous statement fit with the above quoted post?
> 
> Do you have a spreadsheet; a list, something on the napkin, anything that will support your assertions? Anything at all that's supportable? It would be an interesting scandal and one heck of a discussion if you could support your claims. I'd really like to hear what you've got.
> 
> Mike


Just going by what I saw on TV. I'll modify my original statement to Lions get more *B.S.* penalties than any other team.


----------



## sigma1914

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Just going by what I saw on TV. I'll modify my original statement to Lions get more B.S. penalties than any other team.


Do you watch every other NFL game each week to know this?


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Coca Cola Kid said:


> Every team has homers, but us Lions fans have been getting screwed out of money for decades so we're the maddest.


I think your anger is directed at the wrong place, for the low level the Lions have been at.

And I might be a homer when it comes to giving the edge sometimes when they may not really have it, but I am most certainly an objective fan to know that it is the 11 players on the field for the team I cheer for that have the greatest impact, on that snap, to the outcome of the play.

Not the officials... Not the Turf... Not the lord above... Not the League...


----------



## Stuart Sweet

Guys, this thread is going the wrong way. Let's take personal conversations to private message, avoid personal attacks and let's all have fun as we get closer to the postseason. 

Thanks.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid

"Earl Bonovich" said:


> I believe he is referring to the 4 games available on FOX/CBS/NBC
> and then if you have ESPN Monday Night, and the Thursday Night NFL game, if you have it.
> 
> Has nothing to do with the cost of the Sunday Ticket Package.


Watching 3 nationally televised games on TV with anti-Lions biased announcers doesn't make you an expert on Suh's behavior.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Rodgers and others to sit out today. It will be a fun game to watch, maybe even make it fair. 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-lions-packers-inactives

Woodson, Matthews, Jennings, Bulaga, Starks and Cobb sitting this one out too.


----------



## sigma1914

Watching GB's practice squad go up and down the field with ease & their defense still the same just shows how pathetic Detroit is.


----------



## Laxguy

Andy Lee, our pro bowl punter, just put it on the 6" line, though they spotted it on the 1 yard line.... first play from scrimmage: interception. Niners up by two TDs and knocking on the door. 

# 2 seed almost in the bag.......


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Watching GB's practice squad go up and down the field with ease & their defense still the same just shows how pathetic Detroit is.


The GB *backup* QB has 4 TDs and over 400 yards so far...

...I suspect there are some embarrassed Detroit fans right now...


----------



## Davenlr

Flynn sets a GB franchise record of 6 TDs (so far). Not bad for a backup.

Almost (or over by now) 1000 total passing yards...NFL record. Lion's dont have anything to be embarrassed about.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

480 Passing yards, 6 Touchdowns and the first team in the division to sweep!

Woo-Hoo.


----------



## hilmar2k

"Davenlr" said:


> Flynn sets a GB franchise record of 6 TDs (so far). Not bad for a backup.
> 
> Almost (or over by now) 1000 total passing yards...NFL record. Lion's dont have anything to be embarrassed about.


Really? I'd be embarrassed giving the numbers they did today against a backup QB. Detroit is going to get pummeled by NO next week.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Apparently Green Bay is so good my Dish 922 receiver could not stand it and froze, then started to reboot!


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Stafford had over 400 Yards and 5 TDs, they played their butts off even though the Pack had a number of players benched.

What a rollercoaster ride that was.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Stewart Vernon said:


> Apparently Green Bay is so good my Dish 922 receiver could not stand it and froze, then started to reboot!


We can both save $10/Month if you want to switch to the other guys.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Fortunately the outcome of the game wasn't in doubt or I would have gone to another receiver while it was rebooting.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Scott Kocourek said:


> Stafford had over 400 Yards and 5 TDs, they played their butts off even though the Pack had a number of players benched.
> 
> What a rollercoaster ride that was.


I suspect the media in Detroit will have a field day on this game...when the backup QB lights you up for 6TDs, 480 yards, and with 7 players not even playing for GB.

Amazing game.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Really? I'd be embarrassed giving the numbers they did today against a backup QB. Detroit is going to get pummeled by NO next week.


Exactly! God, it's scary always agreeing with a Pats/Sox fan. :lol:


----------



## Lord Vader

Seeya! Chicago Bears GM Jerry Angelo has been fired. 

Good riddance!


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Seeya! Chicago Bears GM Jerry Angelo has been fired.
> 
> Good riddance!


YES!!!!


----------



## hilmar2k

Going to be a lot of changes for a lot of teams this offseason.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Lord Vader said:


> Seeya! Chicago Bears GM Jerry Angelo has been fired.
> 
> Good riddance!


Wonder if "Lovie" is far behind.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder if "Lovie" is far behind.


Based on Fox's announcement piece....apparently Lovie is staying put.

Sometimes the GM and Coach get replaced at the same time...but apparently not in this case.


----------



## hilmar2k

Hey, where's Coca Cola Kid? There's so much about the Detroit/GB game to discuss.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> Hey, where's Coca Cola Kid? *There's so much about the Detroit/GB game to discuss*.


Apparently not....


----------



## Lord Vader

Bears Offensive Coordinator Mike Martz is gone. Woo hoo!


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Bears Offensive Coordinator Mike Martz is gone. Woo hoo!


Two Fer.....


----------



## Lord Vader

Unfortunately, Lovie will most likely be staying. Can't have everything, I guess.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Lord Vader said:


> Unfortunately, Lovie will most likely be staying. Can't have everything, I guess.


There is still plenty of time...


----------



## Lord Vader

Bears fans can only hope.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I honestly don't think Lovie is the problem... Their defense has been good for a while, and the GM is responsible for the offensive coordinator hirings and personnel on offense as a result... Last year they were good, and this year they we're good again until Cutler and then Forte were lost to injury.

I think changing offenses will be a good thing... And a new GM is probably good as well.


----------



## hilmar2k

I think the Bears (and their fans) are overreacting. Like Stewart said they were good until Cutler went down. They make the playoffs if he doesn't get hurt.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

I rather be a Bears fan then a Jets fan right now. Rex Ryan is taking a lot of heat here in NY


----------



## hilmar2k

JACKIEGAGA said:


> I rather be a Bears fan then a Jets fan right now. Rex Ryan is taking a lot of heat here in NY


Being a Patriots fan living in NY, there is nothing sweeter than a complete collapse by the Jets.


----------



## Lord Vader

"Stewart Vernon" said:


> I honestly don't think Lovie is the problem... Their defense has been good for a while, and the GM is responsible for the offensive coordinator hirings and personnel on offense as a result... Last year they were good, and this year they we're good again until Cutler and then Forte were lost to injury.
> 
> I think changing offenses will be a good thing... And a new GM is probably good as well.


Angelo is considered one of, if not the, worst GMs in the NFL. During his entire 11 year-tenure, only 1 of his offensive draft picks made the Pro Bowl. This is but one example of his total incompetence.


----------



## Laxguy

hilmar2k said:


> Hey, where's Coca Cola Kid? There's so much about the Detroit/GB game to discuss.


Hmmmmm... a bit of chum on the waters??


----------



## Scott Kocourek

hilmar2k said:


> Hey, where's Coca Cola Kid? There's so much about the Detroit/GB game to discuss.


Let's leave him alone, sorry to be the bad guy here.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

For those who love NFL stats, or else watch the NFL MVP discussions...

This was just officially released today:

Before this National Football League season started, the ESPN Stats & Information group introduced a new metric to measure effective quarterback play, something it called "Total Quarterback Rating" or Total QBR.

It considers this metric a more comprehensive measure of quarterback play than the passer rating system that has been used for years.

The top 10 quarterbacks in QBR for 2011 were:

•1. Aaron Rodgers, Packers 85.2 (out of a possible 100)
•2. Drew Brees, Saints 84.0
•3. Tom Brady, Patriots 74.2
•4. Tony Romo, Cowboys 70.1
•5. Matt Ryan, Falcons 67.5 
•6. Matt Schaub, Texans 66.7
•7. Matthew Stafford, Lions 65.1
•8. Philip Rivers, Chargers 64.3
•9. Ben Roethlisberger, Steelers 63.3
•10. Michael Vick, Eagles 63.1

These are the top 10 passer ratings for quarterbacks this season based on traditional performance metrics:

•1. Rodgers 122.5
•2. Brees 110.6
•3. Brady 105.6
•4. Romo 102.5
•5. Stafford 97.2
•6. Schaub 96.8
•7. Manning, Giants 92.9
•8. Ryan 92.2
•9. Smith, 49ers 90.7
•10. Roethlisberger 90.1


----------



## Lord Vader

No surprise to see Rodgers, the greatest QB in my lifetime, in the # 1 spot.


----------



## djlong

I'd wait to see what Rodgers has for a complete career but, if he keeps this up, that might become a true statement.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Lord Vader" said:


> No surprise to see Rodgers, the greatest QB in my lifetime, in the # 1 spot.


Matt Flynn made a good case for the system though... Favre,Rodgers, and Flynn all looked good in that system with those players... Favre started to look old after leaving except for that one year with the Vikings.

Brady looks good, but so did Castle that one year... Then Castle left the system and hasn't looked good since.

I like Rodgers... But no way after just a few years and this one stellar year could I declare him the best QB in my lifetime unless I was born last year!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Stewart Vernon said:


> Matt Flynn made a good case for the system though... Fabre, Rodgers, and Flynn all looked good in that system with those players... Fabre started to look old after leaving except for that one year with the Vikings.
> 
> Brady looks good, but so did Castle that one year... Then Castle left the system and hasn't looked good since.
> 
> I like Rodgers... But no way after just a few years and this one stellar year could I declare him the best QB in my lifetime unless I was born last year!


Actually...

Rodgers has now had 4 stellar years so far...but yes...that does not make a "best ever" career.

He's over 4K yards 3 of his first 4 years, and missed that other season by 78 yards. Then there's the Superbowl followed by a 15-1 season therearfter so far. Quite a nice start. This year....an MVP performance.


----------



## sigma1914

Brees deserves the MVP, IMO. He broke one of the most difficult records to break (passing yards in a season) & did so before week 17. 

I'd also put Cam Newton at 2nd. He's getting overlooked because he wasn't on a good team, but look at his stats. Cam had the most passing yards (4,051) EVER for a rookie QB. He was 2nd overall in the league for rushing TDs with 14...which was also a QB record. Other records:
First player in NFL history with 4,000+ pass yards and 10+ rush TDs in a season
First player in NFL history with 4,000+ pass yards and 500+ rush yards in a season
most total touchdowns by a rookie NFL player: 35 (21 pass, 14 rush)


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> Brees deserves the MVP, IMO. He broke one of the most difficult records to break (passing yards in a season) & did so before week 17.
> 
> *I'd also put Cam Newton at 2nd. He's getting overlooked because he wasn't on a good team, but look at his stats. Cam had the most passing yards (4,051) EVER for a rookie QB. * He was 2nd overall in the league for rushing TDs with 14...which was also a QB record. Other records:
> First player in NFL history with 4,000+ pass yards and 10+ rush TDs in a season
> First player in NFL history with 4,000+ pass yards and 500+ rush yards in a season
> most total touchdowns by a rookie NFL player: 35 (21 pass, 14 rush)


That's what Rookie of the Year is for. His number are unbelieveable for a rookie, but simply cannot compare to Rodgers/Brees/Brady (or even Eli or Stafford).


----------



## hdtvfan0001

I suspect the lists reflect the actual performances quite well, with Brees a solid 2nd place for the season -after all, its a season MVP, not just most of the time.

Making any case for Brees overcoming Rodgers with his 15-1 team record, a top QB rating in multiple rankings, and having the most efficient QB passing results in the NFL seems to be a tough sell. records are records...but not the only true measurement.

By the way...I've been a huge Drew Brees fan - going back to Purdue. But Rodgers simply has been the top of the mountain in terms of QB play this year. He's a great person, a super QB, and certainly deserving of his own praises.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> That's what Rookie of the Year is for. His number are unbelieveable for a rookie, but simply cannot compare to Rodgers/Brees/Brady (or even Eli or Stafford).


4k passing yards, 14 rushing TDs, 21 passing TDs are unbelievable for any QB. The guy is like no other QB ever.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I suspect the lists reflect the actual performances quite well, with Brees a solid 2nd place for the season -*after all, its a season MVP, not just most of the time.*
> 
> Making any case for Brees overcoming Rodgers with his 15-1 team record, a top QB rating in multiple rankings, and having the most efficient QB passing results in the NFL seems to be a tough sell. records are records...but not the only true measurement.
> 
> By the way...I've been a huge Drew Brees fan - going back to Purdue. But Rodgers simply has been the top of the mountain in terms of QB play this year. He's a great person, a super QB, and certainly deserving of his own praises.


Interesting ... which QB actually played the whole season?


----------



## Laxguy

*.....deserving his own praises?*?

That kinda shoots the humble part down.....

:lol:


----------



## Laxguy

How 'bout Alex Smith for "most improved QB"?
And the Niners for the "most improved team"?
And Harbaugh for.....


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Interesting ... which QB actually played the whole season?


Which QB won the most games...which is truly the most value of any MVP QB?


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> Brees deserves the MVP, IMO. He broke one of the most difficult records to break (passing yards in a season) & did so before week 17.


It's not that difficult to break now. The game has changed significantly to allow a record like this to more easily be broken.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> It's not that difficult to break now. The game has changed significantly to allow a record like this to more easily be broken.


Yeah, 5k yards isn't tough...everyone does it...all 4 players ever.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Yeah, 5k yards isn't tough...everyone does it.


I sure don't buy that - it held up for decades as a record.

But the measurement for MVP tends to be a mix of stats and subjectivity.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> 4k passing yards, 14 rushing TDs, 21 passing TDs are unbelievable for any QB. The guy is like no other QB ever.


You forgot wins and interceptions. 

The guy is great, no doubt. But how can a player on a 6 win team be the "most valuable"? How much value can you actually add to a crappy team? Take him off the Panthers and they still miss the playoffs. Take Brees or Brady off their respective teams and their dropoff is a huge. The Pats may not even make the playoffs without Brady (and don't talk to me about 2008 and Cassel, totally different circumstances).


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I sure don't buy that - it held up for decades as a record.
> 
> But the measurement for MVP tends to be a mix of stats and subjectivity.


Rodgers was phenomenal, without a doubt, I just feel Brees was the most valuable because there's no way they'd win without him. Flynn showed how great the system is in GB as you alluded to earlier. 


hilmar2k said:


> You forgot wins and interceptions.
> 
> The guy is great, no doubt. But how can a player on a 6 win team be the "most valuable"? How much value can you actually add to a crappy team? Take him off the Panthers and they still miss the playoffs. Take Brees or Brady off their respective teams and their dropoff is a huge. The Pats may not even make the playoffs without Brady (and don't talk to me about 2008 and Cassel, totally different circumstances).


I'm not dumb enough to say he's the best ever on in the discussion, but his rookie year was better than a lot of veterans good years.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> I'm not dumb enough to say he's the best ever on in the discussion, but his rookie year was better than a lot of veterans good years.


You wanted him to be voted #2 for MVP. My point is that he can't be higher than:

Rodgers
Brees
Brady
Stafford
Manning

And maybe others. Nobody on a 6 win team is all that *valuable*.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Rodgers was phenomenal, without a doubt, I just feel Brees was the most valuable because there's no way they'd win without him. Flynn showed how great the system is in GB as you alluded to earlier.


I've heard than angle...just don't buy it.


----------



## Lord Vader

sigma1914 said:


> Yeah, 5k yards isn't tough...everyone does it...all 4 players ever.


More and more are approaching it--with Brees having broken it--than ever before. This just goes to show how the conditions of the game have allowed this record to be more easily breakable.



hdtvfan0001 said:


> I sure don't buy that - it held up for decades as a record.


Sorry, but that record has become easier to break. The game has changed to *make *it easier to break. It doesn't diminish what Brees has accomplished, and I happen to like him as a person and QB. However, the fact remains--the game today allows for much more passing than it did in Marino's days. Even several current and recent QBs have admitted this.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

*Story here:*

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Calvin-Johnson-Jaren-Allen-lead-voting-for-NFL-All-Pro-Team-010612



> _Lions receiver Calvin Johnson and Vikings defensive end Jared Allen are the leading vote getters for The Associated Press 2011 NFL All-Pro Team, each falling one vote short of being unanimous choices.
> 
> Quarterback Aaron Rodgers made the team for the first time, easily beating Drew Brees of the New Orleans Saints. Rodgers led the Green Bay Packers to a league-best 15-1 record this season, after taking them to the Super Bowl title last February._


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> *Story here:*
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Calvin-Johnson-Jaren-Allen-lead-voting-for-NFL-All-Pro-Team-010612


Who were the dopes who didn't vote for Johnson & Allen? :lol:


----------



## sigma1914

I bet a certain member isn't too happy tonight. :lol:


----------



## Earl Bonovich

sigma1914 said:


> I bet a certain member isn't too happy tonight. :lol:


Let's not pile on...


----------



## hilmar2k

Earl Bonovich said:


> Let's not pile on...


In this case, the saying following your name in your sig is very apropos.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Earl Bonovich said:


> Let's not pile on...


Agree Earl.

Besides....that'll get ya a 15 yard penalty.


----------



## Laxguy

hilmar2k said:


> In this case, the saying following your name in your sig is very apropos.


Yes, indeed. Great point.

I'm trying to not jinx the 49ers......and actually am going to be happy that they had a great season, regardless of the outcome of next week's visit by the Saints.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

See you in Lambeau Field


----------



## Davenlr

JACKIEGAGA said:


> See you in Lambeau Field


We are waiting for you.


----------



## sigma1914

JACKIEGAGA said:


> See you in Lambeau Field


I can't wait! G-MEN!!!!!!!!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Something tells me that the Giants will not score the 40+ points it will take to win their next playoff game. 

They also appear to have some significant injuries (2 concussions) from today's game.

No doubt they demonstrated some nice defense today...but it looks like this year...offense is King.


----------



## hilmar2k

Is Denver really going to beat Pittsburgh? Watching how pathetic Pittsburgh's offense looks today, I am not sure that's not who I'd rather see next weekend.


----------



## Lord Vader

"hilmar2k" said:


> Is Denver really going to beat Pittsburgh? Watching how pathetic Pittsburgh's offense looks today, I am not sure that's not who I'd rather see next weekend.


Pittsburgh's offense might be lame today, but their defense has been weak. They picked a fine time to let Tebow have the best game of his career. Ugh!

For the love of God, Pittsburgh, and mainly because I do NOT want to hear more of this Tim Tebow mania, please beat this team!


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Denver deserves to win this game


----------



## Lord Vader

"JACKIEGAGA" said:


> Denver deserves to win this game


The way Pittsburgh has been playing today, I'm inclined to agree.


----------



## sigma1914

Game over!


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

WOW!


----------



## Davenlr

Lord Vader said:


> For the love of God, Pittsburgh, and mainly because I do NOT want to hear more of this Tim Tebow mania, please beat this team!


I predict you will be hearing a LOT about Tebow now......


----------



## kiknwing

"Davenlr" said:


> I predict you will be hearing a LOT about Tebow now......


Starting here, TEBOW!!!


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> The way Pittsburgh has been playing today, I'm inclined to agree.


Ahem....

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2922714#post2922714


----------



## Lord Vader

Davenlr said:


> I predict you will be hearing a LOT about Tebow now......


Time to become a Satanist!


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I actually picked Denver to win... But I had it more like 14-6 and not a score fest!

Pittsburgh had too many hurt players, injured players, and Denver was at home with something to prove. It was a perfect storm.


----------



## tenpins

Ear Plugs DO work well in the Mile High city.


----------



## hilmar2k

Stewart Vernon said:


> I actually picked Denver to win... But I had it more like 14-6 and not a score fest!
> 
> Pittsburgh had too many hurt players, injured players, and Denver was at home with something to prove. It was a perfect storm.


And just the opposite will be true for Denver this weekend. Brady is going to take out his past two years' of playoof frustrations on the Broncos.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> years'





> playoof


Fascinating.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Fascinating.


Only the second one of those is incorrect. But nice try.


----------



## Lord Vader

Actually, they're both incorrect. One day you may come to understand why.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Actually, they're both incorrect. One day you may come to understand why.


Correcting other's grammar on a forum due to the bitterness you feel over your team's ineptitude is not very becoming.

Man up and admit "God's Team" blew chunks yesterday and stop acting childish.


----------



## Lord Vader

It has nothing to do with bitterness over the Steelers, oh "mature" one. 

Tebow's win proves Jesus is a Broncos fan. Be afraid. Be very afraid.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> It has nothing to do with bitterness over the Steelers, oh "mature" one.
> 
> Tebow's win proves Jesus is a Broncos fan. Be afraid. Be very afraid.


I am hardly afraid.

Oh, and by the way:



> We could say twelve weeks' notice and two years' experience, because there are such things as notice and experience, and in some sense they are linked to ("given by" if you like) the twelve weeks and the two years.


http://www.eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm

In case you'd ever like to better your understanding of the English language.


----------



## Lord Vader

My understanding and knowledge--and use--of the English language would run circles around yours, but hey! I'm not the one who's the blatherskite here.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> I am hardly afraid.
> 
> Oh, and by the way:
> 
> http://www.eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm
> 
> In case you'd ever like to better your understanding of the English language.


Actually, since you used 'of' after years, it's incorrect. Had you said, "...years' playoff..." you'd be correct.
http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/apostrophes_in_time_(temporal)_expressions.htm


> DO NOT USE APOSTROPHES FOR ALL TIME EXPRESSIONS - ONLY WHEN THEY COULD REPLACE THE WORD OF
> 
> The following do not have any apostrophes in them:
> 
> I lived in Africa for 3 years.
> She has six months left to run on her loan.
> 
> This point causes confusion amongst many. As a rule, you should only use an apostrophe in an expression where the word 'of' might have been used.
> 
> six months' insurance (six months of insurance)
> a day's leave (a day of leave)
> She has six months' left to run on her
> loan. (She has six months of left to run on her loan.) (This is nonsense. It's wrong.)


----------



## Lord Vader

Indeed. No possession was present; therefore, no apostrophe was necessary. 

I await the apology from the bitter Patriots fan, but I won't hold my breath.


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> Actually, since you used 'of' after years, it's incorrect. Had you said, "...year's playoff..." you'd be correct.
> http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/apostrophes_in_time_(temporal)_expressions.htm


Good point. LV was correct......this time.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Indeed. No possession was present; therefore, no apostrophe was necessary.
> 
> I await the apology from the bitter Patriots fan, but I won't hold my breath.


What's to be bitter about? My team wasn't the one embarassed by the 8-8 Broncos yesterday.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> What's to be bitter about? My team wasn't the one embarassed by the 8-8 Broncos yesterday.


What is there about which to be embarrassed? It's clear that Jesus is a Broncos fan and is teaching folks like you a lesson.


----------



## sigma1914

Awww, poor LV. We'll stop piling on...maybe. :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001

I suspect that after this weekend and seeing the results...it further demonstrates than anybody can beat anybody on any given Sunday (or Saturday).


----------



## Lord Vader

And with the Son of God on your side, you're unstoppable.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Saying Jesus fixed the game is as bad as saying someone paid the refs... I think if there is a God he has more important things to do.


----------



## Lord Vader

Who said Jesus fixed the game? Do not infer that which I did not imply!


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"Lord Vader" said:


> Who said Jesus fixed the game? Do not infer that which I did not imply!


You said he was unstoppable because of divine intervention... That sounds like the definition of game fixing to me.


----------



## Davenlr

Stewart Vernon said:


> Saying Jesus fixed the game is as bad as saying someone paid the refs... I think if there is a God he has more important things to do.


Maybe, but Tebow used to wear eye shadow with John 3:16 written on them. Yesterday he threw for 316 yards, and the birthday of the receiver who caught the overtime pass and scored the touchdown is December 25th...

People can draw their own conclusions 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demaryius_Thomas
http://joybehar.blogs.cnn.com/article/2012/01/09/broncos-beat-steelers-tebow-316


----------



## Lord Vader

Stewart Vernon said:


> You said he was unstoppable because of divine intervention... That sounds like the definition of game fixing to me.


No it doesn't. Don't assume. You know what happens when one does that.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

So many of the most recent posts in this thread are over the top.

The apparent tragedy with the son of the GB Offensive Coordinator Philbin yesterday/today reaffirms just how comparatively trivial some things can be compared to the real world.


----------



## Davenlr

Agreed...here is a link for those, like me, that have not heard about it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/michael-philbin-missing_n_1194997.html


----------



## Lord Vader

Davenlr said:


> Maybe, but Tebow used to wear eye shadow with John 3:16 written on them. Yesterday he threw for 316 yards, and the birthday of the receiver who caught the overtime pass and scored the touchdown is December 25th...
> 
> People can draw their own conclusions
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demaryius_Thomas
> http://joybehar.blogs.cnn.com/article/2012/01/09/broncos-beat-steelers-tebow-316


The Chosen One averaged 31.6 yards per pass. Game-winning receiver Thomas, when he caught the ball, began running at 16.3 mph.

This is no coincidence. It is also what those anti-Christian detractors deserve. Mock God and ye shall pay!


----------



## Davenlr

Lord Vader said:


> This is no coincidence. It is also what those anti-Christian detractors deserve. Mock God and ye shall pay!


I prefer to think He was sending a message to Big Ben and his ways


----------



## Laxguy

BCA Bowl: A bust. Where did LSU go? 

Not a fine evening, unless you're a big Tide kinda person. 

(I know it's not NFL, but the closest FB outside of the bigs.)


----------



## James Long

hdtvfan0001 said:


> So many of the most recent posts in this thread are over the top.


Correct. This is not a forum on religion, so lets stick to football.


----------



## Lord Vader

hdtvfan0001 said:


> So many of the most recent posts in this thread are over the top.


I think some of us were having a little fun with the Tebow thing and all, and that a few folks may not have realized this. I may not like Sunday's outcome--hell, I hate it--but I can't help but scratch my head over the coincidences. Kinda makes me wonder, especially after he just happened to have the best game of his career against the team with more playoff games under its belt than any other in NFL history.

We'll see what happens next Saturday evening at Foxboro.


----------



## brian188

Lord Vader said:


> We'll see what happens next Saturday evening at Foxboro.


Why waste your time? We know what will happen. The biggest waste in NFL history. The Pats will clean their clock. At least the Pats and the Steelers would have been a game.

It's just a shame.


----------



## Lord Vader

With the way the Steelers offense has been playing the last several weeks, I'm not so sure of that.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> With the way the Steelers offense has been playing the last several weeks, I'm not so sure of that.


Honestly, with the injuries the Steelers have, and they way they had been playing, I wasn't sure while watching the game that it wasn't the Steelers I'd rather see on Saturday.


----------



## Lord Vader

It's going to be difficult to beat Tebow and the Power behind him. 

[[REDACTED]]


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> Honestly, with the injuries the Steelers have, and they way they had been playing, I wasn't sure while watching the game that it wasn't the Steelers I'd rather see on Saturday.


Believe it or not, I believe the Steelers would have manhandled the Patriots. They always seem to do just that. I wouldn't doubt if some of the Steelers got a wee bit arrogant and complacent against Denver. They wouldn't have done so if faced with playing New England.


----------



## hilmar2k

"Lord Vader" said:


> Believe it or not, I believe the Steelers would have manhandled the Patriots. They always seem to do just that. I wouldn't doubt if some of the Steelers got a wee bit arrogant and complacent against Denver. They wouldn't have done so if faced with playing New England.


No chance of that as banged up as the Steelers are. The Pats played their worst game of the season, in Pittsburgh, and had the ball down 6 with 2 minutes to go. At home, healthy, against a beat up Steelers team would not bode well for the Steelers.


----------



## meStevo

Lord Vader said:


> Believe it or not, I believe the Steelers would have manhandled the Patriots. They always seem to do just that. I wouldn't doubt if some of the Steelers got a wee bit arrogant and complacent against Denver. They wouldn't have done so if faced with playing New England.


Patriots historically are 3-1 against the Steelers in the playoffs, outscoring them a combined 99-58.

Steelers would have probably had to sign 2-3 people after all the injuries in the Denver game.


----------



## Lord Vader

"hilmar2k" said:


> No chance of that as banged up as the Steelers are. The Pats played their worst game of the season, in Pittsburgh, and had the ball down 6 with 2 minutes to go. At home, healthy, against a beat up Steelers team would not bode well for the Steelers.


As banged up as they were, Pittsburgh has dominated New England the last few years. They would have done so this Saturday. New England should consider themselves lucky they're facing Tebow & the Holy Broncos.

That collective "Whew!" you heard last Sunday evening was the Patriots all breathing a sigh of relief.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> As banged up as they were, Pittsburgh has dominated New England the last few years. They would have done so this Saturday. New England should consider themselves lucky they're facing Tebow & the Holy Broncos.
> 
> That collective "Whew!" you heard last Sunday evening was the Patriots all breathing a sigh of relief.


Going back to the beginning of the Brady/Belichick era:

2001 - Patriots 24 - Steelers 14 (AFC Championship)
2002 - Patriots 30 - Steelers 14 
2004 - Steelers 34 - Patriots 20 
2004 - Patriots 41 - Steelers 27 (AFC Championship)
2005 - Patriots 23 - Steelers 20 
2007 - Patriots 34 - Steelers 13
2008 - Steelers 33 - Patriots 10 (w/o Brady)
2010 - Patriots 39 - Steelers 26
2011 - Steelers 25 - Patriots 17

Now, about that domination......


----------



## Lord Vader

Indeed it is. As I stated above, Pittsburgh has dominated New England the last few years.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Indeed it is. As I stated above, Pittsburgh has dominated New England the last few years.


The delusion is strong with this one.

You cannot possibly look at the results and say the the Steelers dominated the Patriots. That is laughable. They've split the last 4 games, and one of those Patriot losses was without Brady. And prior to that, the Patriots completely owned the Steelers. The only domination hewre is in the other direction.

And Brady has never lost at home to the Steelers. Yeah, we were all shaking in our boots. :nono:


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> You cannot possibly look at the results and say the the Steelers dominated the Patriots.


I can, indeed, because it is a fact. The Steelers have dominated the Patriots the last few years.



> And Brady has never lost at home to the Steelers. Yeah, we were all shaking in our boots. :nono:


And the only reason he won't this time is because he's not playing them, for which he is extremely grateful.


----------



## sigma1914

WOW.....What a game!!!!!!!!


----------



## Davenlr

That was impressive. Very impressive.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Slightly surprised... Less by the outcome than by how it got there... I did not see that score and that outcome happening together.


----------



## kikkenit2

Most exciting game ever. FORTY NINERS! Almost 70 passes and lose.


----------



## Lord Vader

Here come the 49ers! Seeya in Indianapolis, Boys! :joy:


----------



## Lord Vader

Brady looking quite Aaron Rodgers-esque tonight.


----------



## BosFan

Lord Vader said:


> Brady looking quite Aaron Rodgers-esque tonight.


I'd say he's looking more Brady-esque


----------



## Lord Vader

No, he's definitely looking Rodgers-esque.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

2-0 according to picks this weekend here so far...

A 1996 Superbowl replay is looking oh so more likely...one more game just needs to go the right way.

If that happens...I'll go see those two teams play in person just like last time.


----------



## Lord Vader

A rather unimpressive, uninspiring, and quite jejune victory. :sleeping:


----------



## Laxguy

hdtvfan0001 said:


> 2-0 according to picks this weekend here so far...
> 
> A 1996 Superbowl replay is looking oh so more likely...one more game just needs to go the right way.
> 
> If that happens...I'll go see those two teams play in person just like last time.


Don't you need two games to go a certain way? Or are you already past da Gi'nts? :eek2:


----------



## BosFan

hdtvfan0001 said:


> 2-0 according to picks this weekend here so far...
> 
> A 1996 Superbowl replay is looking oh so more likely...one more game just needs to go the right way.
> 
> If that happens...I'll go see those two teams play in person just like last time.


As indicated by my avatar exactly what I am hoping for, preferably with a different result though, even after 15 years in WI still most loyal NE teams


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Laxguy said:


> Don't you need two games to go a certain way? Or are you already past da Gi'nts? :eek2:


Quite True.

But this week is the one that I think has the greatest risk.


----------



## Laxguy

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Quite True.
> 
> But this week is the one that I think has the greatest risk.


Oooooh! Fightin' words! :sure:

My long memory- aided by Search functions- will either recall this post in 24 point pica, or it'll be completely forgotten, at least by moi. Won't know fer sher until next weekend. Meanwhile, I will root for da Pack..... tho I like da Gints good, too.


----------



## Lord Vader

I see the fix is in already for the Packers. Pathetic.


----------



## Lord Vader

Unbelievable! Replay *clearly *showed that ball was out before the guy was down! It was *clearly *a fumble, but the crooked Referee Bill Leavy refuses to overturn it.

It's obvious whom the NFL brass wants to win this game. All the more reason to root for the underdog Giants!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Lord Vader said:


> Unbelievable! Replay *clearly *showed that ball was out before the guy was down! It was *clearly *a fumble, but the crooked Referee Bill Leavy refuses to overturn it.
> 
> It's obvious whom the NFL brass wants to win this game. All the more reason to root for the underdog Giants!


There is a report thread on issues that sound doesn't work....since the play by play (and more accurate) is working just fine here.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Unbelievable! Replay *clearly *showed that ball was out before the guy was down! It was *clearly *a fumble, but the crooked Referee Bill Leavy refuses to overturn it.
> 
> It's obvious whom the NFL brass wants to win this game. All the more reason to root for the underdog Giants!


Yeah, that was a terrible call.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

hilmar2k said:


> Yeah, that was a terrible call.


Then again....the 6 holding penalties that should have been called on the NY offensive line seemed to be invisible too...despite replay that clearly shows those.

Forget the refs...they are failing both ways.


----------



## hilmar2k

The refs have been bad all playoffs, but when make an egregious error on replay, that's inexcusable. Missing a holding call during a play is one thing, but in replay, you need to get the obvious ones right.

The NFL has to fix the officiating.


----------



## Davenlr

Wont matter what the refs do, if Green Bay doesnt start playing in the second half.


----------



## hilmar2k

The last two plays of the first half show just how bad the Green Bay defense really is. That was pathetic.


----------



## Lord Vader

"hilmar2k" said:


> The refs have been bad all playoffs, but when make an egregious error on replay, that's inexcusable. Missing a holding call during a play is one thing, but in replay, you need to get the obvious ones right.
> 
> The NFL has to fix the officiating.


I agree. As a veteran NCAA Baseball Umpire, it's understandable when my judgment might be off, like an NFL official's judgment on holding, but when REPLAY clearly shows one thing and the Referee rules in opposition to said replay, that's unforgivable--and inexcusable.


----------



## spartanstew

I could soon be 0-4 this weekend on teams I wanted to win.


----------



## spartanstew

Lord Vader said:


> I agree. As a veteran NCAA Baseball Umpire, it's understandable when my judgment might be off, like an NFL official's judgment on holding, but when REPLAY clearly shows one thing and the Referee rules in opposition to said replay, that's unforgivable--and inexcusable.


You've also stated that you'd call a strike a ball if it looked like a ball to the people in the stands - and that any good umpire would. Don't see how that's much different than giving a call in football to the home team.


----------



## Davenlr

spartanstew said:


> I could soon be 0-4 this weekend on teams I wanted to win.


Wonder how enthused the rest of the country would be if it was NE and NY in the Super Bowl?


----------



## hilmar2k

Davenlr said:


> Wonder how enthused the rest of the country would be if it was NE and NY in the Super Bowl?


You assume that the Giants could get by SF. I think that's a *huge* assumption.


----------



## spartanstew

Well, lots of people will want the Pats, just because they've become sort of America's Team over the last 10 years.

Can't imagine anybody without a rooting interest caring for the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants. They're just 3 teams that nobody really cares about. People probably don't dislike them, but don't like them either. Just bland teams.

Without the Packers in the way (which is not a conclusion yet), I can't see the Pats losing. Of course, I couldn't really see NO losing or BG losing (if it happens) either.


----------



## spartanstew

hilmar2k said:


> You assume that the Giants could get by SF. I think that's a *huge* assumption.


I don't think he was assuming anything. He was putting a hypothetical situation out there that had both teams from the same part of the country.


----------



## Davenlr

spartanstew said:


> Without the Packers in the way (which is not a conclusion yet), I can't see the Pats losing. Of course, I couldn't really see NO losing or BG losing (if it happens) either.


It looks like a conclusion now. I dont see the Pats losing either. I, like you, expected NO to win. I actually expected it to be Green Bay and New Orleans in the championship next week. Looks like I was wrong on both counts.

Guess State Farm will need to find a new commercial run.


----------



## hilmar2k

Stick a fork in GB.


----------



## Lord Vader

"spartanstew" said:


> You've also stated that you'd call a strike a ball if it looked like a ball to the people in the stands - and that any good umpire would. Don't see how that's much different than giving a call in football to the home team.


Totally different game. I don't expect you to understand that, though. BTW, balls/strikes are not subject to instant replay, which is what I was discussing here with Referee Bill Leavy's refusal to overturn that no fumble call.


----------



## spartanstew

Oh, I understand all right.


----------



## Lord Vader

"spartanstew" said:


> Well, lots of people will want the Pats, just because they've become sort of America's Team over the last 10 years.


That's a crock of crap! If anything, more people hate New England, Brady, and their arrogant head coach than like them.


----------



## sigma1914

Refs are trying to give it to GB. That roughing the passer was BS.


----------



## Lord Vader

"spartanstew" said:


> Oh, I understand all right.


With all due respect, you don't. Baseball is a very different game. This isn't the thread to elaborate on that, so I won't go into it.

I'd recommend you officiate both sports (I have), then you'd understand exactly what I am saying. At the present time, you do not.


----------



## Lord Vader

"sigma1914" said:


> Refs are trying to give it to GB. That roughing the passer was BS.


I agree. Bill Leavy is trying his darndest to keep Green Bay in the game.

BTW, the pussification of the NFL, particularly where the QB rules are concerned, all comes from that wimpy Tom Brady.


----------



## Davenlr

*Game Over*


----------



## hdtvfan0001

spartanstew said:


> Oh, I understand all right.


Not to worry many of us do. 

If a building implodes...it collapses.

If a team hands 3 scores to another on fumbles on a sliver platter, even a lowly / over-rated team like the Giants can somehow avoid losing. That was their worst defensive performance of the season statistically, and they had no run game.

It would seem the mental /enthusiasm part of the game stemming from the death of the GB Offensive Coordinator's son may have played a major role in what looked like an "unfocused" offense. At least 2 GB TDs were dropped among almost 10 passes.

As for the refs...they had little to do with the outcome of this latest game, and even the least knowledgeable of fans understands that. Put simply...the Packers lost the game, the Giants didn't really win it.

You're right spartanstew. It happens. Look at the Saints. Deja Vu all over again.


----------



## Lord Vader

"Davenlr" said:


> *Game Over*


Dear Green Bay,

Enjoy the off-season. You deserve it. You may have the greatest quarterback in a generation, but your receivers SUCKED, and your defense SUCKED even more. You might want to return that defensive secondary you borrowed from Pittsburgh. It didn't work for them, either.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

spartanstew said:


> Oh, I understand all right.


P.S. You're right...as those who really know what went on this week know why things turned out this way. The rest is a farce.


----------



## Lord Vader

"hdtvfan0001" said:


> Not to worry many of us do.


Actually, you folks don't. There is simply _no way for someone who hasn't umpire or played baseball at the higher levels to understand._ I don't hold that against you; it's simply a fact.


----------



## hilmar2k

And that's why I refuse to call Rodgers the best QB of all time (at least yet).


----------



## Earl Bonovich

What a weekend of football... not sure I could have enjoyed it more, without the Bears playing and winning....

Absolutely fantastic, classic game to start Saturday with... 4 lead changes in 3 minutes.

Saturday Night: Real QB vs Not-So-Real QB... Brady put a clinic on how the position should be played.

Sunday Game 1: Almost saw the Ravens go down, in another good game back and forth.

And then of course... The Giants come through and quiet the frozen tundra.....


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Nice Giant win


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> And that's why I refuse to call Rodgers the best QB of all time (at least yet).


It will take time for him to earn the moniker of greatest of "all time." Right now, I don't believe anyone playing the game can be called the greatest of "all time."


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Lord Vader said:


> Actually, you folks don't. There is simply _no way for someone who hasn't umpire or played baseball at the higher levels to understand._ I don't hold that against you; it's simply a fact.


Look - there have been many people reading all the laughable bantor of which one or two people in particular have been leading the charge.

There's enough material just today to have most people laugh their way about those posts well into next year.

For those with basketball referee "expertise" that are discussing football....football is the game not played with a round ball. !rolling

Earl is right - a great weekend of games - regardless of the outcome.


----------



## MysteryMan

:wave: By By Green Bay :wave: :joy: Way To Go Giants!!!! :joy:


----------



## bidger

sigma1914 said:


> Refs are trying to give it to GB. That roughing the passer was BS.


Rogers flopped like a soccer player. It was pathetic.

Discount Double Check No More!!!


----------



## Lord Vader

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Look - there have been many people reading all the laughable bantor of which one or two people in particular have been leading the charge.


You might think it's laughable, but it's not when you're an umpire working his way up the levels who learns that in order to get there, things have to be done a certain way--not "by the book". The people who play the game and administer the game understand this. The average fan does not. If someone wishes to discuss this further, I'd be happy to do so via PM or a separate thread he can start. This thread is about football.


----------



## Lord Vader

bidger said:


> Rogers flopped like a soccer player. It was pathetic.
> 
> Discount Double Check No More!!!



Tebow -- GONE
Rodgers -- GONE


There IS a God!


----------



## chevyguy559

Could the Super Bowl be the Harbaugh Bowl Part II?? :lol:

I don't see NE getting beat, but then again, I didn't see the Giants taking down the Packers either....

All I know is I need to try and sell my soul for a couple tickets to the game next Sunday in SF


----------



## Lord Vader

chevyguy559 said:


> Could the Super Bowl be the Harbaugh Bowl Part II?? :lol:


That would be kind of cool.


----------



## Davenlr

bidger said:


> Rogers flopped like a soccer player. It was pathetic.


Actually, I thought Rogers was on his game. The receivers, on the other hand, were horrible.
As a team, they were pathetic. And hats off to Cruz. He kicked GB's butt.


----------



## Lord Vader

Davenlr said:


> Actually, I thought Rogers was on his game.


I agree. Aaron couldn't do much more than he did--throw great passes right to guys.

Who were dropping them like like they were hot potatoes.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Not to worry many of us do.
> 
> If a building implodes...it collapses.
> 
> If a team hands 3 scores to another on fumbles on a sliver platter, even a lowly / over-rated team like the Giants can somehow avoid losing. That was their worst defensive performance of the season statistically, and they had no run game.
> 
> It would seem the mental /enthusiasm part of the game stemming from the death of the GB Offensive Coordinator's son may have played a major role in what looked like an "unfocused" offense. At least 2 GB TDs were dropped among almost 10 passes.
> 
> As for the refs...they had little to do with the outcome of this latest game, and even the least knowledgeable of fans understands that. Put simply...the Packers lost the game, the Giants didn't really win it.
> 
> You're right spartanstew. It happens. Look at the Saints. Deja Vu all over again.



Nice excuses. The Giants pretty much shut down Rodgers...2 TDs were after the refs clear screw ups. GB just got outplayed...period.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Nice excuses. The Giants pretty much shut down Rodgers...2 TDs were after the refs clear screw ups. GB just got outplayed...period.


Those capable of reading a newspaper or watching news were aware of what happened in GB this week. No excuses...just fact. Those things often have more to do with a team's performance than anything else. I told that to several folks I was with this week ahead of time, and somewhat saw it coming.

It happens in other sports too.

GB wasn't even close to being "outplayed" - the Giants defense had one of their worst outings in months and they couldn't run the ball at all. It was repeated stated and seen by the announcers throughout the game.

GB played bad enough to lose through turnovers - 3 fumbles and 2 dropped TD's that handed the Giants the game.

Quite simple to understand actually.


----------



## Lord Vader

Many say that New Orleans can point to 5 turnovers in their loss yesterday.

Turnovers can and often do decide games.


----------



## spartanstew

Lord Vader said:


> With all due respect, you don't. Baseball is a very different game. This isn't the thread to elaborate on that, so I won't go into it.
> 
> I'd recommend you officiate both sports (I have), then you'd understand exactly what I am saying. At the present time, you do not.


I've played AND officiated both, so get off of your high horse. Not everyone tries to wear their few accomplishments in life on their sleeve. A bad call is a bad call. Knowing what the right call is and calling it something different is, as you said, inexcusable - something you've admitted to doing with regularity. Maybe that's why you're no longer teaching or officiating.



Lord Vader said:


> That's a crock of crap! If anything, more people hate New England, Brady, and their arrogant head coach than like them.


Either way, they'll watch. Love them or hate them, people will view if they're playing, much like the Cowboys and the Yankees (which was my point).

Nobody cares about the Giants, 49ers, or Ravens.



Earl Bonovich said:


> What a weekend of football... not sure I could have enjoyed it more,


Exact opposite for me. Very glad I decided not to go to Vegas for the SuperBowl this year, for the first time in over 15 years. Also, a good chance that I might not even watch the game live for the first time in my life. Just don't have any interest in the four teams left.


----------



## spartanstew

chevyguy559 said:


> Could the Super Bowl be the Harbaugh Bowl Part II?? :lol:


And I definitely wouldn't watch that game.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Those capable of reading a newspaper or watching news were aware of what happened in GB this week. No excuses...just fact. Those things often have more to do with a team's performance than anything else. I told that to several folks I was with this week ahead of time, and somewhat saw it coming.
> 
> It happens in other sports too.
> 
> GB wasn't even close to being "outplayed" - the Giants defense had one of their worst outings in months and they couldn't run the ball at all. It was repeated stated and seen by the announcers throughout the game.
> 
> GB played bad enough to lose through turnovers - 3 fumbles and 2 dropped TD's that handed the Giants the game.
> 
> Quite simple to understand actually.


NY hasn't run the ball well all year, but you keep bringing up their running game. Eli came up big a lot...GB didn't.


----------



## sigma1914

spartanstew said:


> ...
> Nobody cares about the Giants, 49ers, or Ravens.
> 
> ...


The Giants are in the top 5 as the most popular teams.


----------



## Lord Vader

spartanstew said:


> I've played AND officiated both, so get off of your high horse. Not everyone tries to wear their few accomplishments in life on their sleeve. A bad call is a bad call. Knowing what the right call is and calling it something different is, as you said, inexcusable - something you've admitted to doing with regularity. Maybe that's why you're no longer teaching or officiating.


I'm in my 35th year of officiating and still going strong at the NCAA level. Sorry to disappoint you. You have *not *done both if you cannot understand why certain calls in baseball MUST be done a certain way. My superiors and the game's administrators would have long ago made certain I didn't advance unless I called things a certain way. Play the game at a high level, or umpire it at a high level. Maybe then you'd comprehend the game.

Again, I was discussing Leavy's ignoring of instant replay. That is *FAR* different from calling a pitch a ball that is caught by a catcher 2 inches above the ground.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants are in the top 5 as the most popular teams.


Actually, the Giants usually wind up around 7 or 8 in popularity polls.

Mike


----------



## Lord Vader

STEELERS = The REAL America's team!


----------



## sigma1914

Mike Bertelson said:


> Actually, the Giants usually wind up around 7 or 8 in popularity polls.
> 
> Mike


http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/dec/21/packers-most-popular-team-nfl-poll-reports-ar-1739145/


> A national survey by Public Policy Polling said the Packers are more popular than the Dallas Cowboys. In fact, the Cowboys are actually America's least favorite team.
> 
> Of the voters, 22 percent say the Packers are their favorite team, followed by 11 percent for the Cowboys, 8 percent for the Bears, Giants, and Steelers, 7 percent for the Saints, 6 percent for the Patriots, 4 percent for the Redskins, and 2 percent for the Jets.


----------



## Lord Vader

No team has more of its fan base attend its teams games on the road than does Pittsburgh. Not even Green Bay.

That poll you referenced is a load of Packers cheese. I don't believe for a second that the Bears or Cowboys are that unpopular.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

sigma1914 said:


> http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/dec/21/packers-most-popular-team-nfl-poll-reports-ar-1739145/


That's the first time I've ever seen a poll that ranks the Cowboys last. AAMOF, even though I've got a pretty good hatred going for the Cowboys, I would be pretty dubious of a poll ranking Dallas last.

This is more like what I'm used to seeing...

http://www.thephinsider.com/2011/10...-ranks-nfl-teams-by-popularity-miami-dolphins

Mike


----------



## Steve

As a Giant fan, SF scares the hell out of me, because they _already _beat the Giants once this season and since then, they've improved as much as the Giants, IMHO, especially at QB. And they're at home!

I just hope the Giants are in the game in the fourth quarter, where Manning has excelled this year.


----------



## sigma1914

Mike Bertelson said:


> That's the first time I've ever seen a poll that ranks the Cowboys last. AAMOF, even though I've got a pretty good hatred going for the Cowboys, I would be pretty dubious of a poll ranking Dallas last.
> 
> This is more like what I'm used to seeing...
> 
> http://www.thephinsider.com/2011/10...-ranks-nfl-teams-by-popularity-miami-dolphins
> 
> Mike


They're not last...they're #2, but also the most hated.


----------



## satexplorer

Steve said:


> As a Giant fan, SF scares the hell out of me, because they _already _beat the Giants once this season and since then, they've improved as much as the Giants, IMHO, especially at QB. And they're at home!
> 
> I just hope the Giants are in the game in the fourth quarter, where Manning has excelled this year.


49ers are scary? Let's see NFC Championship kickoff time is 3:40PM PT, so that means PG&E would have to monitor all of the lights after Halftime!

Just crazy, both NFC Divisional games had turnovers.


----------



## James Long

Lord Vader said:


> You might think it's laughable, but it's not when you're an umpire working his way up the levels who learns that in order to get there, things have to be done a certain way--not "by the book". The people who play the game and administer the game understand this. The average fan does not. If someone wishes to discuss this further, I'd be happy to do so via PM or a separate thread he can start. This thread is about football.


It sounds like you're talking about cheating ... or at least officials that intentionally blow calls to satisfy the mood of the masses. This thread has plenty of examples of such calls - or at least allegations that such calls have been made. Soyour admission that such calls are just part of the game at the highest levels should be taken to support such arguments.*in order to get there, things have to be done a certain way--not "by the book"*​Personally I'd prefer "by the book" ... and in a sport that has instant replay it seems like the referees would get away with less "bad calls" perhaps "a certain way" still wins out. Or perhaps the calls are fine and those who do not understand them are reading the wrong book.


----------



## Lord Vader

No, James, I'm not talking about cheating at all; rather, I'm talking about calling the game in a manner in which the game is played and understood.

When I first started umpiring, I thought it was clear--if a pitch passed through the strike zone, it was a strike. Period. As my career progressed, I ended up going to professional umpire school, NCAA Umpire camps, etc. At those levels, I remember the comments by those with more experience than me, those who had worked MLB post-season and World Series and those who had worked NCAA Regionals, Super Regionals, and the College World Series. Comments like, "You'll never umpire make it as an umpire of you call that pitch a strike" were often said to those guys who called a strike the pitch that went across the thigh but sank and was caught inches above the dirt. The main rationale? Because to everyone in the ball park, including to the players most especially, that pitch *looked *like a ball, its actual location notwithstanding.

Professional catchers and college catchers understand this, too.

There are the rules, and then there is the spirit of the rules and the way the game is supposed to be played. The latter is what determines if umpires--and the players--advance up the ranks. You may not like it--I may not like it--but that's the way it is.


----------



## Devo1237

"spartanstew" said:


> Nobody cares about the Giants, 49ers, or Ravens.


Except that the first 49ers-Ravens matchup was the highest rated game the NFL Network has ever had.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ns-was-most-watched-nfl-network-program-ever/

Something tells me people enjoy watching good compelling matchups.

The only team left I have no interest in watching is the Pats. And it's not even close how little I want to see them in another Super Bowl. Who wouldn't rather see Flacco or Alex Smith holding up a Super Bowl trophy than Brady again? I would guess everyone that isn't a Pats fan.


----------



## Lord Vader

The Patriots are yesterday's news. More people would rather see Baltimore, San Francisco, or Houston claim the title. 

Brady? Yawn


----------



## spartanstew

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants are in the top 5 as the most popular teams.


Yes, I guess that makes sense being they're from New York. They still seem like a boring team to me.

I know defense wins Championships, but I'd like to see a SuperBowl with some offensive powerhouses, which is why I was hoping for New Orleans or Green Bay (or the Lions).

I can just see the HarBowl with a 9-6 final score. While those types of games have their merits, it's not the type of game I want to see in the Super Bowl


----------



## MysteryMan

Steve said:


> As a Giant fan, SF scares the hell out of me, because they _already _beat the Giants once this season and since then, they've improved as much as the Giants, IMHO, especially at QB. And they're at home!
> 
> I just hope the Giants are in the game in the fourth quarter, where Manning has excelled this year.


Oh ye of little faith......Eli's "Hail Mary" at the end of the first half took the starch out of the Packers. Looked like they were going to their own funeral as they headed to the locker room. San Francisco will be a formidable opponent but they are not invincible. Need I remind you what the Giant's did to the Patriots "perfect season" a few years ago?


----------



## Steve

MysteryMan said:


> Oh ye of little faith......Eli's "Hail Mary" at the end of the first half took the starch out of the Packers. Looked like they were going to their own funeral as they headed to the locker room. San Francisco will be a formidable opponent but they are not invincible. Need I remind you what the Giant's did to the Patriots "perfect season" a few years ago?


I'm not saying they can't beat them. I'm just saying that going into the playoffs, I feared this possible match-up the most. The Giants showed me during the regular season they could play with the Pack and the Pats, and they're arguably a better team now than they were those two games. But the same is true for SF (at home) vs. the Giants. As a result, I think it will be a pretty evenly matched game.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

The bad, my football season is over.  Both touchdowns the Packers scored were due to questionable calls that kept drives alive so realy it looked even worse than the score showed.

The good, I was able to clean up all my series links between the four DVRs and make a spreadsheet on where they are all located so when I set one for the H25 in the kitchen I know what DVR it belongs on.

Congratulations to the Giants! They kicked our butts.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Scott Kocourek said:


> Congratulations to the Giants!


Thanks Scott


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> The Patriots are yesterday's news. More people would rather see Baltimore, San Francisco, or Houston claim the title.
> 
> Brady? Yawn


Pretty sure you meant the Steelers, you know, since they aren't even playing right now.

And Brady? He showed who's the best QB in football right now. Rodgers may get there someday, but Brady still holds the crown.


----------



## sigma1914

spartanstew said:


> Yes, I guess that makes sense being they're from New York. They still seem like a boring team to me.
> 
> I know defense wins Championships, but I'd like to see a SuperBowl with some offensive powerhouses, which is why I was hoping for New Orleans or Green Bay (or the Lions).
> 
> I can just see the HarBowl with a 9-6 final score. While those types of games have their merits, it's not the type of game I want to see in the Super Bowl


The Giants have one of the best offenses, too...8th overall & 5th in passing. That's boring?


----------



## hilmar2k

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants have one of the best offenses, too...8th overall & 5th in passing. That's boring?


Giants aren't boring, just enigmatic. How does a team good enough to possibly reach the Super Bowl lose to Washington twice, and Seattle at home? They can look very good (yesterday, for example) one day, and downright terrible the next.

That, by definition, makes them very un-boring.


----------



## sigma1914

Scott Kocourek said:


> The bad, my football season is over.  Both touchdowns the Packers scored were due to questionable calls that kept drives alive so realy it looked even worse than the score showed.
> 
> The good, I was able to clean up all my series links between the four DVRs and make a spreadsheet on where they are all located so when I set one for the H25 in the kitchen I know what DVR it belongs on.
> 
> Congratulations to the Giants! They kicked our butts.


It's refreshing to see a honest GB fan. Kudos Mr. Kocourek.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> Giants aren't boring, just enigmatic. How does a team good enough to possibly reach the Super Bowl lose to Washington twice, and Seattle at home? They can look very good (yesterday, for example) one day, and downright terrible the next.
> 
> That, by definition, makes them very un-boring.


Exactly. I hate to say it, but I fear they'll have their typical 4th quarter collapse. I hope they don't.


----------



## chevyguy559

Oh yeah! My dad got me a ticket for my birthday! I'll be at the game on Sunday sitting here!  GO NINERS!!


----------



## MysteryMan

chevyguy559 said:


> Oh yeah! My dad got me a ticket for my birthday! I'll be at the game on Sunday sitting here!  GO NINERS!!


That's great! Enjoy yourself. You do realize while at the game you must hold a sign saying chevyguy559 so if the TV camera pans your area we'll be able to recognize you.


----------



## chevyguy559

MysteryMan said:


> That's great! Enjoy yourself. You do realize while at the game you must hold a sign saying chevyguy559 so if the TV camera pans your area we'll be able to recognize you.


You know, I was actually thinking about taking a sign, but then I'd have to worry about carrying it around and then I got to thinking that I'm not creative enough to come up with anything worth getting camera time, so I'm not gonna worry about it :lol:


----------



## spartanstew

sigma1914 said:


> The Giants have one of the best offenses, too...8th overall & 5th in passing. That's boring?


I don't know the Stats, but yes, to me they're a boring team to watch. Maybe it's the team personality, maybe it's the lack of flashy players/stars, maybe it's the coach, maybe it's the boring uniforms. I don't know, they're just a boring team for me to watch.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> Pretty sure you meant the Steelers, you know, since they aren't even playing right now.


No, I meant the Patriots, a far less popular team than the Steelers, who happen to be the team with more playoff games played than anyone in the history of the NFL.



> And Brady? He showed who's the best QB in football right now. Rodgers may get there someday, but Brady still holds the crown.


I'm sure you were laughing your arse off when typing that load of BS. He's far from the best QB in the game. For one thing, he played a poor team. Why not have him play a high school team then claim his 10 TDs in such a game "prove" his greatness.

The only crown Brady's wearing is the paper one he got from Burger King.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> No, I meant the Patriots, a far less popular team than the Steelers, who happen to be the team with more playoff games played than anyone in the history of the NFL.
> 
> I'm sure you were laughing your arse off when typing that load of BS. He's far from the best QB in the game. For one thing, he played a poor team. Why not have him play a high school team then claim his 10 TDs in such a game "prove" his greatness.
> 
> The only crown Brady's wearing is the paper one he got from Burger King.


You lose all credibility when you say things as ludicrous as these.


----------



## Rich

hilmar2k said:


> You lose all credibility when you say things as ludicrous as these.


The only thing wrong with Brady is he isn't on the Jets. Sanchez really sucks. I've been a Jets fan from the beginning and a good quarterback would really make a big difference on this team. But, that's the cost of being a Jets fan.

I've actually been rooting for the Giants for the last few years. They had a lot of injured players who are healthy now. Notice how big the Giants looked compared to the Packers yesterday? They were hard to watch when everyone was hurt, but not now. Not this year.

Rich


----------



## HDJulie

I'm rooting for the Giants & Patriots so the Giants can beat the Patriots in the SB again .


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> You lose all credibility when you say things as ludicrous as these.


I have more credibility than some Brady fanboy who probably has posters of him all over his bedroom and who thinks he's the NFL's greatest thing since sliced bread.

Brady still has skills, but he ain't the QB he used to be, and he's _*far*_ from the best in the game today. I can't help it if the truth hurts. Deal with it.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> I have more credibility than some Brady fanboy who probably has posters of him all over his bedroom and who thinks he's the NFL's greatest thing since sliced bread.
> 
> Brady still has skills, but he ain't the QB he used to be, and he's _*far*_ from the best in the game today. I can't help it if the truth hurts. Deal with it.


He threw for the second most yeards in NFL history (5,235) and 39 touchdowns *this year*. But, yeah, he's not the QB he used to be. :nono2:

In his past 4 seasons (excluding 2008 when he played one quarter of one game), he has 153 touchdowns and 37 interceptions, and has thrown for over 18,000 yards. His career averages are 4,000 yards, 30 touchdowns, and 11 interceptions per season.

The only truth here is that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. And *that* is extremely easy to deal with.


----------



## Lord Vader

Everybody and his grandmother threw for 4000 or 5000 yards this year, in a pussified game (thanks to that she-man Brady, BTW) that has made passing yardage MUCH easier to earn. 

But thanks for playing, fanboy.


----------



## kiknwing

Very true, you can't touch or even think about touching the QB. The only exception to that is Roethlisberger and Tebow just to name a few. Then don't get me started about WR's, act more like divas then a football player. The only time you can touch them is after they have caught the ball.


----------



## Lord Vader

And a lot of those rules are because of one and only one guy--that patsy, wimpy Tommy Brady. He gets a boo-boo and it's time to change the rules. Ridiculous.


----------



## hilmar2k

So let me get this straight, he's a patsy because he didn't play with a blown out knee? The only starts he's missed in his entire career were the 15 games in 2008 after his knee injury in game one against KC. And the NFL didn't change the rule because he went crying to them, they changed it so another superstar QB wouldn't miss an entire season. It's not his fault that the NFL has ridiculous rules that make it a crime to even tap the QB. I think the rules are as riducuous as anyone else (and so does Brady, by the way).

But all that said, I'd be curious to know all of these QB's that you think are better than Brady. There must be many, as you said he was "*far*" from the best in the NFL right now. And if Roethlisberger's name is mentioned, you'll hear me laughing all the way from here.


----------



## djlong

If you're looking for some way to put Tom Brady down, you can't do it by attacking him. The guy has just got TOO many numbers. I mean, they were commenting on how he was setting records concerning numbers like "pass attempts without an interception" until he had a bad stretch in a game earlier this year. I remember one graphic that said "Brady interceptions: Today-3, Previous 200+attempts-0".

The fact is you CANNOT cover Hernandez, Gronkowski, Welker, Woodhead, Edelman and Branch all at once. What Brady has is more weapons at his disposal (IMO) than any other QB in the league - and consider that a high-profile speedster like Chad Ochocinco (who'm I've never been fond of) has been cirtually invisible all year.

What this means is that Brady has more options and, quite simply, has an easier job to do EXCEPT for the fact that he has to SEE and DIGEST all this information on the fly - and make the appropriate decisions on which way to throw.

All this talk about Brady is forgetting something.

A bunch of people in blue jerseys showed up and played defense like we (here in New England) haven't seen all year. THAT is why Brady could do whatever he wanted. Because he wasn't forced into deviating from the game plan. The defense was a stone-cold fortress (especially considering how they'd been all year).


----------



## Steve

djlong said:


> The fact is you CANNOT cover Hernandez, Gronkowski, Welker, Woodhead, Edelman and Branch all at once.


I think if any team has a shot at covering those guys, it's the Ravens, because their 3-man rush is so effective. The question I have is whether or not Flacco can chew up the clock and put enough points on the board vs. the Pats defense, the way they're playing now.

The last over/under for this game I saw was 50.5. I'm not sure we're gonna see that many points. If I _had_ to pick a score, it would be 24-17 Pats.


----------



## hilmar2k

djlong said:


> The fact is you CANNOT cover Hernandez, Gronkowski, Welker, Woodhead, Edelman and Branch all at once. What Brady has is more weapons at his disposal (IMO) than any other QB in the league - and consider that a high-profile speedster like Chad Ochocinco (who'm I've never been fond of) has been cirtually invisible all year.
> 
> What this means is that Brady has more options and, quite simply, has an easier job to do EXCEPT for the fact that he has to SEE and DIGEST all this information on the fly - and make the appropriate decisions on which way to throw.


I think you are overstating how good Branch, Edelman and Woodhead are. Branch did nothing in Seattle, Woodhead was cut by the Jets, and Edelman was a quarterback in college and may be a better cornerback than receiver. Brady is what makes these guys good. I don't think he gets enough credit for that.


----------



## sigma1914

hilmar2k said:


> I think you are overstating how good Branch, Edelman and Woodhead are. Branch did nothing in Seattle, Woodhead was cut by the Jets, and Edelman was a quarterback in college and may be a better cornerback than receiver. Brady is what makes these guys good. I don't think he gets enough credit for that.


I was going to type the same thing. He's like Payton Manning - he makes nobodies into weapons by dissecting defenses with precision. I'll also say Brady is in an excellent system, but he still makes it happen. I still can't stand him. :lol:


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> And if Roethlisberger's name is mentioned, you'll hear me laughing all the way from here.


Nope, I'm certainly not going to mention Ben, because I'm a more objective and honest fan of my team, not some automatic but blinded fanboy who'd sing the praises of someone whom he worships as much as teenage girls worship Justin Bieber.


----------



## Rich

Steve said:


> I think if any team has a shot at covering those guys, it's the Ravens, because their 3-man rush is so effective. The question I have is whether or not Flacco can chew up the clock and put enough points on the board vs. the Pats defense, the way they're playing now.
> 
> The last over/under for this game I saw was 50.5. I'm not sure we're gonna see that many points. If I _had_ to pick a score, it would be 24-17 Pats.


"If I were a betting man" I'd stay far away from any game the Ravens are in. You simply don't know which team will show up, especially away from home, where they seem to be almost unbeatable. Home, almost unbeatable...away, not so good, not nearly as good. And "away" and against the great Brady, it seems like a no-brainer.

This is my first year without betting on NFL games. Another addiction kicked. And, I gotta admit, I enjoyed the football season this year more than I have for a long time. But there's a part of my mind that's going nuts over the Patriots vs Ravens game. I "know" positively that the Pats are gonna destroy the Ravens. That feeling of being absolutely positive is what made me stop betting. That and parity.

Rich


----------



## Rich

hilmar2k said:


> I think you are overstating how good Branch, Edelman and Woodhead are. Branch did nothing in Seattle, *Woodhead was cut by the Jets*, and Edelman was a quarterback in college and may be a better cornerback than receiver. Brady is what makes these guys good. I don't think he gets enough credit for that.


Ah, you hadda throw that in. Another mistake the Jet's management made. They knew he was special and they still cut him. All due credit to Brady, but those of us who study the Jets (poor demented fools that we are) knew Woodhead was special. I couldn't believe it when he was cut. And, of course, Belichick was right there, knowing that he was getting a special player.

Rich


----------



## Rich

Lord Vader said:


> Nope, I'm certainly not going to mention Ben, because I'm a more objective and honest fan of my team, not some automatic but blinded fanboy who'd sing the praises of someone whom he worships as much as teenage girls worship Justin Bieber.


I like Roethlisberger when he's healthy. I really have to respect him for playing hurt. Reminds me of Mickey Mantle. Warrior.

Rich


----------



## Lord Vader

Well, I'll give him this much--he's much more durable, tougher, and gutsier than than that wimp Brady. 

Having said that, he should not have played in their last game or two. By doing so, he caused himself to be less physically capable of performing well in Denver. Tomlin should have sat him and rested him for the playoffs.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Nope, I'm certainly not going to mention Ben, because I'm a more objective and honest fan of my team, not some automatic but blinded fanboy who'd sing the praises of someone whom he worships as much as teenage girls worship Justin Bieber.


Still waiting for the list of QB's better than Brady.



Lord Vader said:


> Well, I'll give him this much--he's much more durable, tougher, and gutsier than than that wimp Brady.


So the guy who has started all 16 games exactly once in his career is more durable than the guy who's only ever missed a game when he blew out his knee? Your ignorance continues to amaze.


----------



## Lord Vader

Brady is a wimp. Face it, fanboy. Ben's much tougher and more durable and plays injured more frequently than Brady has or would even be capable of doing.


----------



## Rich

Lord Vader said:


> Well, I'll give him this much--he's much more durable, tougher, and gutsier than than that wimp Brady.
> 
> Having said that, he should not have played in their last game or two. By doing so, he caused himself to be less physically capable of performing well in Denver. Tomlin should have sat him and rested him for the playoffs.


50% of Big Ben is probably a better QB than anyone they had to replace him.

Rich


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> Brady is a wimp. Face it, fanboy. Ben's much tougher and more durable and plays injured more frequently than Brady has or would even be capable of doing.


You have anything to back up any of the ludicrous statements you have made recently?

Your posts are beginning to resemble a specific Detroit Lions fan's from a few pages back.


----------



## Lord Vader

Rich said:


> 50% of Big Ben is probably a better QB than anyone they had to replace him.
> 
> Rich


Batch would have been an excellent replacement. He's much better than the most teams' backup QBs.


----------



## Lord Vader

hilmar2k said:


> You have anything to back up any of the ludicrous statements you have made recently?
> 
> Your posts are beginning to resemble a specific Detroit Lions fan's from a few pages back.


OK, I admit it. Brady is the greatest quarterback who ever existed in the universe. Brady has the biggest p---s, too. Brady's has the best teeth of any QB in world history. Brady is the smartest man who ever lived. Brady, Brady, Brady. Good God! Your fanboy love for this guy is ridiculous (not to mention rather creepy).


----------



## wv_patsfan

Lord Vader said:


> Brady is a wimp. Face it, fanboy. Ben's much tougher and more durable and plays injured more frequently than Brady has or would even be capable of doing.


Oh, really?

2009 season:

http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nfl/news/story?id=4792547



> New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady has played the last several games with three broken ribs, CBS Sports reported Sunday.
> 
> A source also told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter that Brady also has a broken right ring finger that was giving him more problems than his three cracked ribs on Sunday.


2010 season:

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/21/tom-bradys-foot-injury-only-adds-to-his-2010-season-mystique/



> Very few people have questioned the toughness of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, but he took that reputation to another level at the end of the 2010 season and into the playoffs after it was revealed that he was playing on a severely injured right foot.
> 
> Brady confirmed to the Boston media on Thursday that he had undergone a surgical procedure to repair a stress fracture, one that required a screw to be inserted into the navicular bone of his right arch. What he didn't reveal was how long he played through the pain...


Care to rephrase?


----------



## Lord Vader

Nope. Good, but overrated. The guy cries over a frickin' hang nail, for Chrissake.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> ...Your fanboy love for this guy is ridiculous (not to mention rather creepy).


Says the grown adult who pretends to be Darth Vader.


----------



## Lord Vader

No one's pretending to be anyone. We're talking reality here. 

Deal with it.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Come on guys, let's not get this one closed down before the season ends. It's to the point you all need to agree to disagree and move on.


----------



## Lord Vader

Exactly! If they'd just all agree with me, things would be so much calmer and easier here.


----------



## hilmar2k

Lord Vader said:


> OK, I admit it. Brady is the greatest quarterback who ever existed in the universe. Brady has the biggest p---s, too. Brady's has the best teeth of any QB in world history. Brady is the smartest man who ever lived. Brady, Brady, Brady. Good God! Your fanboy love for this guy is ridiculous (not to mention rather creepy).


You kept making ludicrous (and completely false) statements, and I kept asking for proof. You would just follow up with even more ludicrous statements.

Brady may or may not be the best QB in the league right now, but saying that he is "far" from the best, and then refusing to back that up when pressed, is nonsensical. I was trying to have an adult discussion regarding it, but all you could do was post more and more childish retort. If that's the best we can expect, then I will bow out of the discussion. If you'd like to continue it in an adult manner, then by all means, post some info to backup your opionions and we can discuss.

Now, who does everything think will win this weekend? I like the Pats and the 49ers. I just don't think the Ravens can score enough to keep up with Brady and company.


----------



## Rich

hilmar2k said:


> You kept making ludicrous (and completely false) statements, and I kept asking for proof. You would just follow up with even more ludicrous statements.
> 
> Brady may or may not be the best QB in the league right now, but saying that he is "far" from the best, and then refusing to back that up when pressed, is nonsensical. I was trying to have an adult discussion regarding it, but all you could do was post more and more childish retort. If that's the best we can expect, then I will bow out of the discussion. If you'd like to continue it in an adult manner, then by all means, post some info to backup your opionions and we can discuss.
> 
> Now, who does everything think will win this weekend? I like the Pats and the 49ers. I just don't think the Ravens can score enough to keep up with Brady and company.


Giants and Pats. Again. Same outcome. Pats D cannot compare to the Giants D. Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.

Rich


----------



## Laxguy

Rich said:


> Giants and Pats. Again. Same outcome. Pats D cannot compare to the Giants D. Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.
> 
> Rich


Whoa, Dude! 

The Gi'nts gotta get outta Candlestick first. .... So, we'll be looking back here Sunday evening.....


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Rich said:


> Giants and Pats. Again. Same outcome. Pats D cannot compare to the Giants D. Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.
> 
> Rich


That would be awesome. 

We gotta get past the 49ers first but I'd love to see that match up again.

Mike


----------



## Rich

Laxguy said:


> Whoa, Dude!
> 
> The Gi'nts gotta get outta Candlestick first. .... So, we'll be looking back here Sunday evening.....


If I had to bet on this game...well I wouldn't. But have you watched every Giant game this year? This is not the same team as it was a few weeks ago. Yes, for a while they looked terrible, but they came back healthy and what the 49's are gonna be facing is not the same team they almost lost to the last time they played them.

Rich


----------



## hilmar2k

"Rich" said:


> Giants and Pats. Again. Same outcome. Pats D cannot compare to the Giants D. Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.
> 
> Rich


You do realize that the Giants gave up the most points in the NFC? The Pats' defense, while certainly not on the level of SF or Houston, is at least average. They are middle of the pack in points and near the top in turnovers. The Pats' defense stacks up against the Giants' defense a lot bettet than the Giants' offense does against the Pats'.

*Yards*
Pats - 31st
Giants - 27th

*Points*
Pats - 15th
Giants - 25th

*Turnover Differential*
Pats - 3rd
Giants - 8th

I would love a rematch of 2007, because I think the Pats would fare very well in that game.


----------



## Rich

hilmar2k said:


> *You do realize that the Giants gave up the most points in the NFC? *The Pats' defense, while certainly not on the level of SF or Houston, is at least average. They are middle of the pack in points and near the top in turnovers. The Pats' defense stacks up against the Giants' defense a lot bettet than the Giants' offense does against the Pats'.
> 
> I would love a rematch of 2007, because I think the Pats would fare very well in that game.


Injuries. Just injuries. They are almost healthy. Wait, we'll see. No reason to argue now.

Rich


----------



## hilmar2k

Rich said:


> Injuries. Just injuries. They are almost healthy. Wait, we'll see. No reason to argue now.
> 
> Rich


Everyone had injuries. While the Giants had more than most, the Patriots lost a bunch of their top defenders (Spikes, Chung, etc.) for large chunks of the season. They are healthy now, and will be just fine.

You're right though, we need to get by the Ravens and the 49ers....then we can argue.


----------



## MysteryMan

Rich said:


> Giants and Pats. Again. Same outcome. Pats D cannot compare to the Giants D. Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.
> 
> Rich


+1


----------



## Lord Vader

Rich said:


> Pats are lucky to be playing the Ravens.
> 
> Rich


Indeed. I like Brady's comment: "I'm just glad we don't have to face Pittsburgh."

How lucky they are, for they'd be watching the Super Bowl from their living rooms had they had to face Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship. As it is, Pittsburgh made their path much easier.


----------



## Rich

hilmar2k said:


> Everyone had injuries. While the Giants had more than most, the Patriots lost a bunch of their top defenders (Spikes, Chung, etc.) for large chunks of the season. They are healthy now, and will be just fine.
> 
> You're right though, we need to get by the Ravens and the 49ers....then we can argue.


If the Pats play the 49ers in the Super Bowl I would bet on the Pats. And be quite confident of winning. The rest of the possibilities I gotta give more thought.

Rich


----------



## Dave

Lets just say that Eli is comin. The Giants look good right now to be the Super Bowl Champs.


----------



## Lord Vader

The 2011 New England Patriots--the NFL's most overrated team. During the regular season, they did not beat one team with a winning record. Thirteen victories against under .500 teams. How lame. Explains a lot.

_(Woosh! Sound of a certain Tom Brady-is-God fanboy here who rushes at top speed to his PC to post some wimpy but useless rebuttal.) _


----------



## Rich

Lord Vader said:


> The 2011 New England Patriots--the NFL's most overrated team. During the regular season, they did not beat one team with a winning record. Thirteen victories against under .500 teams. How lame. Explains a lot.
> 
> _(Woosh! Sound of a certain Tom Brady-is-God fanboy here who rushes at top speed to his PC to post some wimpy but useless rebuttal.) _


Gonna try to ruin another thread that others might be enjoying?

I think we need a Moderator here.

Rich


----------



## Lord Vader

Hardly. I'm just having a little fun in a thread where ribbing is rather common. 

Only someone with no sense of humor would think it's appropriate to act like it's time to play tattle tale.


----------



## hilmar2k

Rich said:


> Gonna try to ruin another thread that others might be enjoying?
> 
> I think we need a Moderator here.
> 
> Rich


Leave LV alone, he needs something to do while *not* rooting for his team in the playoffs.


----------



## kikkenit2

This just in. Eli Manning reviewed the 49er all pro line(1), linebacker(2) and secondary(3) and has been sick to his stomach all week. Just like Drew Brees felt.


----------



## Lord Vader

"hilmar2k" said:


> Leave LV alone, he needs something to do while not rooting for his team in the playoffs.


All that matters is that MY team (the team with more playoff appearances than any other in NFL history) wiped the floor with Mrs. Brady & the Patriots. It says a lot when a team with 13 regular season victories _ can't even beat a single team with a winning record. _


----------



## James Long

Lord Vader said:


> All that matters is that MY team (the team with more playoff appearances than any other in NFL history) wiped the floor with Mrs. Brady & the Patriots. It says a lot when a team with 13 regular season victories _ can't even beat a single team with a winning record. _


That still doesn't give your team good seats in Indianapolis.


----------



## Lord Vader

I'm sure they can find better places to be than that armpit known as Indianapolis.


----------



## James Long

Lord Vader said:


> I'm sure they can find better places to be than that armpit known as Indianapolis.


Without a victory since 1985 I can understand why they wouldn't even want to try. Remind me, who beat your team the last time they got to the Superbowl?


----------



## Lord Vader

"James Long" said:


> Without a victory since 1985 I can understand why they wouldn't even want to try. Remind me, who beat your team the last time they got to the Superbowl?


Huh? What have YOU been smoking? My team won it February 1st, 2009, and 3 years earlier, and 4 times before that, giving them _ more Super Bowl victories than any team in NFL history, _ including the overhyped Packers & widely disliked Patriots.


----------



## James Long

Lord Vader said:


> Huh? What have YOU been smoking? My team won it February 1st, 2009, and 3 years earlier, and 4 times before that, giving them _ more Super Bowl victories than any team in NFL history, _ including the overhyped Packers & widely disliked Patriots.


Sorry ... I thought your team was a little closer to home.


----------



## Lord Vader

That's OK. I guess most folks would assume the Bears are my #1 team since I was born & raised in this area, but I have been a lifelong, die hard STEELERS fan.


----------



## Lord Vader

Wow. A frickin' chip shot. Clearly Baltimore lost this game. New England surely didn't win it, especially since they looked mediocre at best, with the usual inconsistent Tom Brady. The NFC should have an easy victory in Indianapolis in two weeks.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Dang, I turned the game on with 15 seconds left in the game and was sure there would be OT. Think the kicker will be riding the same bus home?


----------



## Lord Vader

The only thing that can explain that weird kick and some very questionable calls and penalties is that the game was fixed. Typical.


----------



## redsoxfan26

Lord Vader said:


> All that matters is that MY team (the team with more playoff appearances than any other in NFL history) wiped the floor with Mrs. Brady & the Patriots. It says a lot when a team with 13 regular season victories _ can't even beat a single team with a winning record. _


They beat one today. The team that beat your Steelers twice this year.


----------



## Lord Vader

No they didn't. New England didn't beat anybody. Baltimore lost.


----------



## redsoxfan26

The final score says otherwise...


----------



## Lord Vader

The final score confirms what I said, that Baltimore lost. Anyone with half a brain who watched the game saw the same thing, too. New England looked, at best, mediocre (fortunately for them, Baltimore looked worse). They're going to need to play better than that to win the Super Bowl.


----------



## redsoxfan26

I'll agree with you on that last sentence. New England needs to play much better _offensively_ to win in two weeks. I think there defense is much improved.


----------



## sigma1914

Yessssssss!!!!! Superbowl bound!!!!!! G-men!!!!!!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Really great playoff results.

Now most of the country will have all that free time by not watching a Superbowl with teams nobody outside the NorthEast cares about... cool.


----------



## Davenlr

Davenlr said:


> Wonder how enthused the rest of the country would be if it was NE and NY in the Super Bowl?





hilmar2k said:


> You assume that the Giants could get by SF. I think that's a *huge* assumption.


Uh huh 

Wonder if the Brady Show is going to be transmitted to the Galactic Empire?


----------



## MysteryMan

:joy: Go Giants! :joy:


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Really great playoff results.
> 
> Now most of the country will have all that free time by not watching a Superbowl with teams nobody outside the NorthEast cares about... cool.


 Yeah, ratings will be abysmal.


----------



## kiknwing

Two huge let down games. Nothing like a bad play to ruin a team's season.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Yeah, ratings will be abysmal.


West of the Mississippi and south of Washington DC folks will be watching re-runs of Gilligan's Island instead - more interesting for sure.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> West of the Mississippi and south of Washington DC folks will be watching re-runs of Gilligan's Island instead - more interesting for sure.


:lol: Starring Aaron Rodgers.


----------



## Laxguy

Congratulations to the football "Gi'nts"! 

Not my kind of game tonight, and don't care for the result, but at least I have been rejuvenated as a fan of the Niners. Vindicated, also. 

Hope it's a shoot out next month....


----------



## Sixto

Great games today. Never been a Giants fan but was really rooting for Coughlin, Eli, and Cruz today. Now they just need to go beat the Pats. They have a real good shot.


----------



## Lord Vader

Davenlr said:


> Uh huh
> 
> Wonder if the Brady Show is going to be transmitted to the Galactic Empire?


That show was canceled and replaced by reruns.


----------



## satexplorer

Super Bowl no longer a East vs West showdown. You can take away a viewer tally from those ratings.


----------



## Lord Vader

Oh? With one team representing the largest television market in the country, if not the world, you really think the ratings will be so bad? I'm willing to bet otherwise.

Game Total Viewers
Super Bowl XLV (Packers-Steelers), 2/6/11 162.9 million
Super Bowl XLIV (Colts-Saints), 2/7/10 153.4 million
Super Bowl XLIII (Cardinals-Steelers), 2/1/09 151.6 million
Super Bowl XLII (Giants-Patriots), 2/3/08 148.3 million
Super Bowl XXXVIII (Patriots-Panthers), 2/1/04 144.4 million

Super Bowl XLII between the Patriots & Giants was at that time the most watched Super Bowl ever.


----------



## satexplorer

::Super Bowl rematches::
Patriots vs Giants 2008 & 2012
Bills vs Cowboys 1993 & 1994
Bengals vs 49ers 1982 and 1989
Steelers vs Cowboys 1976 and 1979
Dolphins vs Redskins 1972 and 1982

I see Tom Brady vs Eli Manning, same coaching staffs. Most of the big names Offense/Defense starters from 2007 season are gone.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Lord Vader said:


> Oh? With one team representing the largest television market in the country, if not the world, you really think the ratings will be so bad? I'm willing to bet otherwise.
> 
> Game Total Viewers
> Super Bowl XLV (Packers-Steelers), 2/6/11 162.9 million
> Super Bowl XLIV (Colts-Saints), 2/7/10 153.4 million
> Super Bowl XLIII (Cardinals-Steelers), 2/1/09 151.6 million
> Super Bowl XLII (Giants-Patriots), 2/3/08 148.3 million
> Super Bowl XXXVIII (Patriots-Panthers), 2/1/04 144.4 million
> 
> Super Bowl XLII between the Patriots & Giants was at that time the most watched Super Bowl ever.


NY is the largest but Boston is in the top 10. Both huge markets so IMHO the ratings will also be rather huge too...especially if history is any indicator. 

Mike


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Yeah, ratings will be abysmal.





sigma1914 said:


> :lol: Starring Aaron Rodgers.


Yeah...those reruns will likely be watched more than this SB.

The NY and Boston markets are substantial...but once you get outside that area...it'll be interesting to see if anyone even cares about the game.

I talked to 2 friends last night - 1 of whom owns a popular sportsbar, and he told me he was seriously thinking of cancelling their Superbowl night activities based on patron feedback during/after this weekend's games. He said customers and interest in this weekend's games was way down compared to last year.

I suspect market location will matter *alot* for ratings/interest this year.

Congrats to the Giants and Patriots. Yawn.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yeah...those reruns will likely be watched more than this SB.
> 
> The NY and Boston markes are substantial...but once you get outside that area...it'll be interesting to see if anyone even cares about the game.
> 
> I talked to 2 friends last night - 1 of whom owns a popular sportsbar, and he told me he was seriously thinking of cancelling their Superbowl night activities based on patron feedback duirng/after this weekend. He said customers and interest in this weekend's games was way down compared to last year.
> 
> I suspect market location will matter *alot* for ratings/interest.
> 
> Congrats to the Giants and Patriots. Yawn.


It may be a yawn fest for you but in 2008 the Giants-Patriots matchup has the fourth highest Super Bowl viewership as well as being in the top 5 in TV history (behind the series finale of M*A*S*H and three other Super Bowls). You can't draw 100 million viewers from the North East alone. The viewership will be nationwide. That is a fact regardless of a few local areas with a bad taste left over from their loss in the post season. 

This years Super Bowl is expected to draw as many so for the overwhelming majority of viewers on Super Bowl Sunday (and yes 100 million viewer for one TV program is an overwhelming majority) it's not so much of a yawn fest...I'm just sayin' :grin:

Mike


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Mike Bertelson said:


> This years Super Bowl is expected to draw as many so for the overwhelming majority of viewers on Super Bowl Sunday (and yes 100 million viewer for one TV program is an overwhelming majority) it's not so much of a yawn fest...I'm just sayin' :grin:
> 
> Mike


There are alot of New Yorkers out there for sure...especially in Florida. 

*Yawn...*


----------



## hilmar2k

redsoxfan26 said:


> They beat one today. The team that beat your Steelers twice this year.


Don't bother. Nothing the Patriots could have done for LV not to come in and Patriot/Brady bash. Just a bitter Steelers fan.



Davenlr said:


> Uh huh


Uh, it *was* a huge assumption. I never said the Giants couldn't (or wouldn't) beat the 49ers. But clearly it was a huge assumption on your part that they would.

Bottom line is that both the Pats and the Giants got a bit lucky yesterday. Eli should have had multiple picks, they got two bad fumble recoveries, etc. And while no one knows what might have happened in OT in Foxborough, I'm sure glad they didn't have to play it.


----------



## Steve

hilmar2k said:


> Eli should have had multiple picks


After throwing 58 times (half of those in the rain) and getting hit 20 times, I wonder if that's a playoff record? Most attempts/hits _without_ an INT?


----------



## Laxguy

But for one (now ex) player on the Niners, we'd be heading to Indiana next month. To assume the Giants were even favored to win was a stretch.... 

But good luck to them and to the Brady Bunch! 

I will watch.


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yeah...those reruns will likely be watched more than this SB.
> 
> The NY and Boston markets are substantial...but once you get outside that area...it'll be interesting to see if anyone even cares about the game.
> 
> I talked to 2 friends last night - 1 of whom owns a popular sportsbar, and he told me he was seriously thinking of cancelling their Superbowl night activities based on patron feedback during/after this weekend's games. He said customers and interest in this weekend's games was way down compared to last year.
> 
> I suspect market location will matter *alot* for ratings/interest this year.
> 
> Congrats to the Giants and Patriots. Yawn.


Here in Dallas, where the Cowboys haven't been in the SB for like 17 years, the Superbowl is still huge every year. The Patriots (and Cowboys) are like the Yankees of football...People love or hate them, so people will watch.


----------



## Sixto

sigma1914 said:


> ... so people will watch.


Exactly.


----------



## chevyguy559

Wow, what a game....I have no voice, a huge headache and the 3 hour drive home was very quiet and depressing :lol:


----------



## Laxguy

chevyguy559 said:


> Wow, what a game....I have no voice, a huge headache and the 3 hour drive home was very quiet and depressing :lol:


Wow, nice set of photos!

Hopefully not being too Pollyanna-ish, I take great joy in knowing the Niners are finally competitive after a long hiatus.


----------



## spartanstew

sigma1914 said:


> Here in Dallas, where the Cowboys haven't been in the SB for like 17 years, the Superbowl is still huge every year. The Patriots (and Cowboys) are like the Yankees of football...People love or hate them, so people will watch.


Plus, I don't think the fact that they're both NorthEast teams has much bearing on who will watch (regionally).

If Houston were in, would more people in California watch? If the Seahawks were in, would more people in California watch? What about the Vikings? I doubt it. People usually favor their home team, but after that I don't think regionality has much to do with it. I like the Dolphins, Packers, Cardinals, Saints, and Lions. Quick, without looking, where do I live??

People like teams for many reasons. With the exception of the ONE local team, proximity rarely has anything to do with it.


----------



## Laxguy

spartanstew said:


> Plus, I don't think the fact that they're both NorthEast teams has much bearing on who will watch (regionally).
> 
> If Houston were in, would more people in California watch? If the Seahawks were in, would more people in California watch? What about the Vikings? I doubt it. People usually favor their home team, but after that I don't think regionality has much to do with it. I like the Dolphins, Packers, Cardinals, Saints, and Lions. Quick, without looking, where do I live??
> 
> People like teams for many reasons. With the exception of the ONE local team, proximity rarely has anything to do with it.


+1.

If the Houstons were playing the Seattles, I'd be watching Gidget Goes the Distance or something.....


----------



## djlong

Heh... Having people put the Patriots in the same class as the Yankees (as far as teams people love to hate) makes me laugh hysterically.

I was a Patriots fan back when they were the hapless Boston Patriots. Some of the things that come to mind about the history of the Patriots.

- Having to dress in locker rooms across the street from the stadium in which they played (Harvard Stadium in the 1960s).
- Building their brand-new stadium (Schaefer/Sullivan/Foxboro Stadium) and having all the toilets back up during the first game because the plumbing had never been tested.
- Having a head coach almost electrocute himself to death on a microphone at a podium.
- Having a head coach quit (Chuck Fairbanks) and be forced, under court order, to coach a playoff game. What's wierder is that this would almost repeat itself with Bill Parcells who didn't even take the same plane home after the Patriots lost to the Packers in the Super Bowl.
- The utter unbelievability of the Patriots going to the Super Bowl in 1986. Local papers used phrases like "elephants are flying" and "pigs are singing".
- The Patriots leading wide receiver (Irving Fryar) slicing his hand up in a fight with his wife just before said Super Bowl.
- The infamous phantom "roughing the passer" call on Ray Hamilton in the 1976 playoff game against the Raiders. A lot of people look at the "tuck rule" play as payback for that one.
- Heck even when they DID make it to the Super Bowl that first time, they set a record for being shellacked. Most lopsided loss in a Super Bowl to that date!

I mean, yeah, the Patriots may be looked at like the Yankees *now* - but back then? It's was more like the Cleveland Spiders or the Mudville 9. They were *awful* - for quite a while.


----------



## Lord Vader

All this talk about the teams and the markets in terms of ratings. Remember that last year's Super Bowl featured a team from one of the tiniest markets in the nation, Green Bay; yet that broadcast was the most watched television broadcast *ever*. One of the reasons was because it featured the NFL team with the most frequent playoff appearances ever, and the largest nationwide fan base, the Pittsburgh Steelers. Having popular Green Bay didn't hurt, either.


----------



## MysteryMan

hdtvfan0001 said:


> There are alot of New Yorkers out there for sure...especially in Florida.
> 
> *Yawn...*


Yup......They're what truck drivers call the "Geriatric Convoy". Every May they get into their Cadillacs and head north for the summer. A very scary sight to see.


----------



## hilmar2k

I have watched every Super Bowl since I was too young to remember. This holds true for most people I know (the sports fans, at least). The Super Bowl is bigger than the teams that play in it. It's an event, and will always draw ridiculous ratings. 

Are there matchups that the NFL prefer? Absolutely. I am sure that if Baltimore had beaten NE, that the NFL/network/advertisers would have preferred a SF win, but with the Patriots winning, they are happier with the NYG victory. But regardless, it will be watched by an insane number of people.


----------



## chevyguy559

Laxguy said:


> Wow, nice set of photos!
> 
> Hopefully not being too Pollyanna-ish, I take great joy in knowing the Niners are finally competitive after a long hiatus.


I agree, the next few years should be good to be a Niner fan, only thing that comes with that is all the band-wagon fans....but they don't really bother me all that much, I've been a Niner fan since day 1 (day one of my life :lol


----------



## TBoneit

Lord Vader said:


> Oh? With one team representing the largest television market in the country, if not the world, you really think the ratings will be so bad? I'm willing to bet otherwise.
> 
> Game Total Viewers
> Super Bowl XLV (Packers-Steelers), 2/6/11 162.9 million
> Super Bowl XLIV (Colts-Saints), 2/7/10 153.4 million
> Super Bowl XLIII (Cardinals-Steelers), 2/1/09 151.6 million
> Super Bowl XLII (Giants-Patriots), 2/3/08 148.3 million
> Super Bowl XXXVIII (Patriots-Panthers), 2/1/04 144.4 million
> 
> Super Bowl XLII between the Patriots & Giants was at that time the most watched Super Bowl ever.


I wonder how many will tune in for the Non football Entertainment and the over-hyped commercials.


----------



## BosFan

satexplorer said:


> ::Super Bowl rematches::
> Patriots vs Giants 2008 & 2012
> Bills vs Cowboys 1993 & 1994
> Bengals vs 49ers 1982 and 1989
> Steelers vs Cowboys 1976 and 1979
> Dolphins vs Redskins 1972 and 1982
> 
> I see Tom Brady vs Eli Manning, same coaching staffs. Most of the big names Offense/Defense starters from 2007 season are gone.


You missed Steelers vs Cowboys 1996, three meetings for them.



djlong said:


> Heh... Having people put the Patriots in the same class as the Yankees (as far as teams people love to hate) makes me laugh hysterically.
> 
> I was a Patriots fan back when they were the hapless Boston Patriots. Some of the things that come to mind about the history of the Patriots.
> 
> - Having to dress in locker rooms across the street from the stadium in which they played (Harvard Stadium in the 1960s).
> - Building their brand-new stadium (Schaefer/Sullivan/Foxboro Stadium) and having all the toilets back up during the first game because the plumbing had never been tested.
> - Having a head coach almost electrocute himself to death on a microphone at a podium.
> - Having a head coach quit (Chuck Fairbanks) and be forced, under court order, to coach a playoff game. What's wierder is that this would almost repeat itself with Bill Parcells who didn't even take the same plane home after the Patriots lost to the Packers in the Super Bowl.
> - The utter unbelievability of the Patriots going to the Super Bowl in 1986. Local papers used phrases like "elephants are flying" and "pigs are singing".
> - The Patriots leading wide receiver (Irving Fryar) slicing his hand up in a fight with his wife just before said Super Bowl.
> - The infamous phantom "roughing the passer" call on Ray Hamilton in the 1976 playoff game against the Raiders. A lot of people look at the "tuck rule" play as payback for that one.
> - Heck even when they DID make it to the Super Bowl that first time, they set a record for being shellacked. Most lopsided loss in a Super Bowl to that date!
> 
> I mean, yeah, the Patriots may be looked at like the Yankees *now* - but back then? It's was more like the Cleveland Spiders or the Mudville 9. They were *awful* - for quite a while.


Oh I so remember those days! I don't laugh about the current hatred I just sort of scratch my head while listening all the reasons to hate them. Oh well.


----------



## MysteryMan

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yeah...those reruns will likely be watched more than this SB.
> 
> The NY and Boston markets are substantial...but once you get outside that area...it'll be interesting to see if anyone even cares about the game.
> 
> I talked to 2 friends last night - 1 of whom owns a popular sportsbar, and he told me he was seriously thinking of cancelling their Superbowl night activities based on patron feedback during/after this weekend's games. He said customers and interest in this weekend's games was way down compared to last year.
> 
> I suspect market location will matter *alot* for ratings/interest this year.
> 
> Congrats to the Giants and Patriots. Yawn.


While I disagree it could be worse. Steven Tyler could be asked to do a encore performance of the National Anthem. :sure:


----------



## spartanstew

He's a Rock Star. I wasn't expecting a vocal performance like Kristin Chenoweth gave. I thought he did fine.


----------



## Steve

spartanstew said:


> He's a Rock Star. I wasn't expecting a vocal performance like Kristin Chenoweth gave. I thought he did fine.


Tyler's originally from my neck of the woods (Yonkers, NY), so I was surprised to see he appears to be a Pats fan. I guess he lives up there now.


----------



## hilmar2k

Steve said:


> Tyler's originally from my neck of the woods (Yonkers, NY), so I was surprised to see he appears to be a Pats fan. I guess he lives up there now.


He spent the lion's share of his life in the Boston area. He played his first concert at my high school (Nipmuc Regional then in Mendon, MA, though now in Upton, MA). Aerosmith is, after all, a Boston band.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

All four teams in the Championship "wanted" to win, unlike my team that played their playoff game and just assumed they would win. (Still a bitter Pack fan)


----------



## Lord Vader

Scott Kocourek said:


> (Still a bitter Pack fan)


:raspberry:raspberry:raspberry


----------



## hdtvfan0001

MysteryMan said:


> While I disagree it could be worse. Steven Tyler could be asked to do a encore performance of the National Anthem. :sure:


Then again...that would almost fit the matchup that remains. :lol:


----------



## RACJ2

Lord Vader said:


> All this talk about the teams and the markets in terms of ratings. Remember that last year's Super Bowl featured a team from one of the tiniest markets in the nation, Green Bay; yet that broadcast was the most watched television broadcast *ever*. One of the reasons was because it featured the NFL team with the most frequent playoff appearances ever, and the largest nationwide fan base, the Pittsburgh Steelers. Having popular Green Bay didn't hurt, either.


Thanks for reminding me, I forgot who the Packers played. And as far as ratings go for this years game, some think it may get a few viewers [link]:



> *Giants-Patriots Super Bowl Could Set Ratings Record*
> 
> The final contest in the National Football League (NFL) has a chance for super ratings. On February 05, 2012, the New York Giants will face the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLVI. The event could set a new television ratings record for a Super Bowl. Here is why...


----------



## spartanstew

RACJ2 said:


> Thanks for reminding me, I forgot who the Packers played.


LOL, actually so had I.


----------



## Steve

According to *ESPN*:



> The New York Giants' overtime victory over the San Francisco 49ers was the third-most watched conference championship game in 30 years.
> 
> New York's 20-17 win for the NFC title Sunday on Fox had a 30.6 fast national rating and 44 share, Nielsen Media Research said Monday.
> 
> [...]
> 
> New England's 23-20 win over Baltimore in the AFC title game drew a 27.4/48 fast national, the highest rating for an early AFC championship since the San Diego's 17-13 win over Pittsburgh drew a 28.3/58 on NBC in January 1995. The Patriots' win drew 48.7 million viewers.


----------



## Lord Vader

It doesn't seem to matter which teams play, for the most part. These NFL games just keep earning higher and higher ratings. NFL = juggernaut.


----------



## Davenlr

2012 ProBowl and Cam Newton is totally overrated. Needs to go back to high school.


----------



## sigma1914

Davenlr said:


> 2012 ProBowl and Cam Newton is totally overrated. Needs to go back to high school.


It's the Pro Bowl; it's more meaningless than preseason.


----------



## Davenlr

sigma1914 said:


> It's the Pro Bowl; it's more meaningless than preseason.


Yea, but I like the "what rules" format they are playing. No time outs, no replays. The game is going to finish on time, and its entertaining.


----------



## sigma1914

Davenlr said:


> Yea, but I like the "what rules" format they are playing. No time outs, no replays. The game is going to finish on time, and its entertaining.


I'm a serious sports fan, but I just could never watch all-star games in any of them.


----------



## Lord Vader

I used to watch the MLB All-Star game, which has long been considered to be the best All-Star game of all the major sports, but when Bud Lite Selig made it "count" and determine the World Series host (i.e., home team), I stopped watching it.


----------



## Laxguy

Lord Vader said:


> I used to watch the MLB All-Star game, which has long been considered to be the best All-Star game of all the major sports, but when Bud Lite Selig made it "count" and determine the World Series host, I stopped watching it.


"Best All-Star game" is like saying best venereal disease, or best way to be drawn and quartered, or.....

Besides, it's more of a spectacle than an actual game. I think making it count for something was a small plus.


----------



## Lord Vader

No, having it determine the World Series home team was just stupid. Absolutely stupid.


----------



## djlong

I can't remember the last time I watched the Pro Bowl.

I watched about a dozen plays last night.

The worst example of the kind of play was when they lined up for a field goal. The snapper snaps it, the holder puts it in place - and the offensive and defensive lines just stand up. The defensive guy put their arms in the air AND THAT'S IT.

What a waste! What a joke - and a BAD one!


----------



## hilmar2k

The only AS game I watch at all is MLB. Even though I don't agree with "making it count", it is the closest of any of them to an actual game.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Steve said:


> According to *ESPN*:


It would be even more interesting to see the market breakdowns...to help identify which teams were actually being followed in various parts of the country...

Having read about the 14% drop in prices for Superbowl ads this year...that would seem to point to anticipated lower viewing in regions outside the NorthEast this year.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I've never even watched a quarter of a Pro Bowl.

I used to like the NBA all-star game... because even though they didn't really play defense, they would execute fancy stuff on offense that was entertaining if they had the right mix of all-stars.

IF I liked hockey, though, I tend to think the NHL all-star game might be the best all-star game... followed closely by baseball (which I also don't follow).


----------



## Rich

sigma1914 said:


> It's the Pro Bowl; it's more meaningless than preseason.


I've never watched one. I even have a hard time watching the All-Star game, unless it's mostly Yankees on the team. Even then...

Rich


----------



## Rich

sigma1914 said:


> I'm a serious sports fan, but I just could never watch all-star games in any of them.


One thing I've found out over the years, you cannot assemble the best players on each team and turn those players into a "team". Just never seemed to work for us. Especially in tournaments where we'd always run up against a team that played together all season long, then went on the tournament trip. You could see we had the better players, but baseball in any of it's forms is a team sport and a good team will usually beat an "all star" team.

Rich


----------



## Rich

Laxguy said:


> "Best All-Star game" is like saying best venereal disease, or best way to be drawn and quartered, or.....
> 
> Besides, it's more of a spectacle than an actual game. I think making it count for something was a small plus.


I do too. At least it gives some measure of importance to the game. Still don't watch them.

Rich


----------



## spartanstew

I love baseball's All Star game and also enjoy Hockey's all star game (and the skills challenges).

Have never watched a complete Pro Bowl Game


----------



## la24philly

Hey Guys, I didn't want to start another thread.

I got the NFL ST free last year due.

However I noticed when you log in to your account on directv.com

I see the tab my sports.

NFL Sunday ticket ultimate 300 x1 or 50 x6

Is that for next season? I mean are they taking orders now this early for next year. Or is that still for this current season, even though its the superbowl left to play.


----------



## Davenlr

Probably left over from this year. It will autorenew, so come about a month before the season starts, you will see a NFL Sunday Ticket $0.00 on your bill to warn you they will charge you the next month.


----------



## sigma1914

It's for next season.


----------



## Davenlr

They dont autorenew anymore?


----------



## sigma1914

I don't know but NFL ST Ultimate is for the 2012 season and includes the online package for $300.


----------



## la24philly

i hope they have that offer up for a few months, thats not a bad deal

I could do it now but i got the other 3 im paying off


----------



## Davenlr

I see that now on the site. I thought he was talking about a line item on his bill for some reason... Ill shut up now. That is a good price if you need all that online stuff too.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Let's Go Big Blue!


----------



## 1953

I hope New Orleans beats Kansas City today! :nono2: :lol:


----------



## redsoxfan26

45 minutes until kickoff. Go Pats!!!


----------



## Rich

JACKIEGAGA said:


> Let's Go Big Blue!


Not betting on this game is killing me.

Rich


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Rich said:


> Not betting on this game is killing me.
> 
> Rich


I got a bunch of boxes thats it


----------



## Lord Vader

Good game, but it just proved what is obvious to all--Brady's washed up. Done. Yesterday's news. 

Can't win the big one, Tommy, and your age is showing. Buh bye.


----------



## Sixto

Congrats to the Giants.


----------



## Lord Vader

Indeed. And I loved the halftime show, too. One of the better ones in a while.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Congratulations Giants! You played the game like you wanted to win.


----------



## Davenlr

They pretended they were playing against the Packers


----------



## yosoyellobo

Way to go Giants.


----------



## Lord Vader

"Scott Kocourek" said:


> Congratulations Giants! You played the game like you wanted to win.


They sure did. Patriots looked like they were lacking the energy the Giants had.


----------



## MysteryMan

:joy: Go Giants! :joy:


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Congrats to the Giants....but honestly...that was one of the most boring Superbowls in memory.

The commercials had more action than the game...and most of them were subpar too.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Anybody thinking the Patriots were "washed up" didn't watch the same game I watched.

I saw a game where both teams played hard and mostly smart... and maybe another minute on the clock and the Patriots might have scored last.

I was going to be happy either way, but I admit to rooting for (and picking in the pool I participated in this year) the Giants... so I kind of got nearly the perfect game in that both teams played hard and competitive so it was entertaining the whole way through and the team I most wanted to win pulled it out at the end.

Now maybe people will quit asking if Eli is an "elite" QB and maybe, just maybe, we can stop with the "fire Coughlin" stuff every year.


----------



## Laxguy

Was this the most error-free Super Bowl ever? Sure seemed so. I am glad for Eli and the whole Manning family, Tom Coughlan and perhaps there's some karma for Belichek? Brady has nothing to be ashamed of, either.


----------



## Lord Vader

It definitely wasn't "boring."


----------



## Sixto

Great game right to the end. 

Some great plays, and another 4th quarter comeback. (and that last ball almost got tipped to Gronk).

And now the 2012 season begins!


----------



## Lord Vader

Am I alone in saying that I am officially tired of all the commercials featuring dogs? One or two might have been good, but really. Way too many damn canines in commercials! :sleeping:

One of my favorites was the kid who ended up peeing in the pool. Brings back memories of...well...never mind.


----------



## kiknwing

My summary of the Superbowl.
A good close game, that's all I wanted.
Halftime was horrible.
Then the commercials weren't that good, a couple were funny but overall lacking this year.


----------



## sigma1914

That game wasn't boring at all. I'm so damn happy right now.


----------



## Lord Vader

I actually enjoyed the halftime show.


----------



## James Long

Weirdest touchdown ever?

What ever happened to going all out? Has everything turned in to a reality show "strategy" play where people want to do less than they are capable of doing? Holding back?

I suppose he expected to be tackled and not have it so obvious that he didn't want to score.


----------



## Laxguy

kiknwing said:


> My summary of the Superbowl.
> A good close game, that's all I wanted.
> Halftime was horrible.
> Then the commercials weren't that good, a couple were funny but overall lacking this year.


*Do please post your observations on commercials at this place!!*

All comments welcome!


----------



## Laxguy

James Long said:


> Weirdest touchdown ever?
> 
> What ever happened to going all out? Has everything turned in to a reality show "strategy" play where people want to do less than they are capable of doing? Holding back?
> 
> I suppose he expected to be tackled and not have it so obvious that he didn't want to score.


That was weird! When I first saw it I thought maybe he was showing off and was strutting in backwards. Weirder would have been if he stopped on the 1 yard line, and then they couldn't get it in....


----------



## bidger

Stewart Vernon said:


> Now maybe people will quit asking if Eli is an "elite" QB and maybe, just maybe, we can stop with the "fire Coughlin" stuff every year.


You can't spell "Elite QB" without "Eli" and I would hope that two SB victories in 4 years time would make Tom bullet-proof. And so much for it being "your teams town" Rex Ryan. You know have one more Lombardi trophy in the case that has to be concealed during Jets home games. Yeah, it is very satisfying.



Lord Vader said:


> I actually enjoyed the halftime show.


All I ask for is a show for Half Time and Madonna and company provided it. Too bad M.I.A. chose to flip the bird. And if you found the game "boring" then you clearly don't know what constitutes an exciting game.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Everybody is talking about the halftime bird-flip...

But...

Am I the only one who noticed Madonna almost took a spill off the back of the stage when she had trouble stepping up on that highest step early in the show? Good recovery, but man it looked like she almost went for a tumble.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Stewart Vernon said:


> Everybody is talking about the halftime bird-flip...
> 
> But...
> 
> Am I the only one who noticed Madonna almost took a spill off the back of the stage when she had trouble stepping up on that highest step early in the show? Good recovery, but man it looked like she almost went for a tumble.


I say that too. My daughter kept saying "she was supposed to do that".  :lol:

Mike


----------



## MysteryMan

Stewart Vernon said:


> Everybody is talking about the halftime bird-flip...
> 
> But...
> 
> Am I the only one who noticed Madonna almost took a spill off the back of the stage when she had trouble stepping up on that highest step early in the show? Good recovery, but man it looked like she almost went for a tumble.


She admitted prior to the game she was very nervious about doing the halftime show. Turned out to be better way then I expected. I tip my hat to Madonna.


----------



## Steve

What was better? The throw or the catch? The ESPN analysts this morning seemed to think it was the pass, but Manningham's ability (all year) to keep his feet in bounds was pretty amazing, IMO.

And what is it about Eli and the fourth quarter? Most TDs in a season, second only to Rogers in QB rating for the season, and off the charts in road playoff games. Talk about clutch.


----------



## djlong

I had a feeling the Patriots weren't going to be quite up to winning. Just a tad too much desperation and mistakes did them in.

I mean, their opening play - a safety? That's a HORRIBLE mistake and it meant handing almost the entire first quarter to the Giants.

There were a lot of "almosts" in the fourth quarter - one pass caught instead of missed and the Giants don't get the time they need. I knew the Patriots were done when they were up by 2 and the Giants got the ball back. There was enough time for the Giants to score and keep the Patriots from coming back - and I knew the defense wasn't going to be able to hold enough to prevent ANY points. I knew at least 3 were coming for NY.

But I would be remiss if I didn't say something about the halftime show.

This was the most self-indulgent display I've ever seen.

The opening song being a vacuous, vapid pop song about a magazine devoted to a vacuous, vapid industry that promotes lies, deception and hiding your true self. A whole opening of what was basically a product placement ad ("Vogue").

If I thought that was bad, I had no idea what else was coming. I mena, whole choruses singing Madonna's name? A "marching band" emblazoned with her initial? You normally have to go to politics to see that kind of egomaniacal display. Good grief, the bands I listen to used to get poor reviews for being "self indulgent" in writing songs that lasted over 15 minutes. If *that* is self-indulgent, they haven't invented words for what this was.

Don't get me wrong - Madonna's got a voice and one heck of a lot of business acumen to go with it (the way she re-invents herself repeatedly over time). But this? Man, I've never seen anything like it and I hope I never do again. She almost looked like she was trying to start her own religion complete with litter-bearing slaves.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Lord Vader said:


> It definitely wasn't "boring."


I stopped by a sports bar and the place was 1/2 empty with people still leaving by the middle of the 3rd quarter...so it seems there might be folks (outside of the NorthEast U.S.) who might just disagree.

The game was everything I suspected it would be...a low-scoring competition between 2 teams that backed into being there. I bet a 49'ers / Ravens game would have been *far more *interesting and entertaining (and I don't have the slightest emotional equity in either of those 2 teams either...).

This one was the Superbowl dud of the last last decade.

But somebody had to win, so given the choice...ALL HAIL THE NEW YORK GIANTS.


----------



## 1953

Laxguy said:


> Was this the most error-free Super Bowl ever? Sure seemed so. I am glad for Eli and the whole Manning family, Tom Coughlan and perhaps there's some karma for Belichek? Brady has nothing to be ashamed of, either.


Well stated.


----------



## RACJ2

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I stopped by a sports bar and the place was 1/2 empty with people still leaving by the middle of the 3rd quarter...so it seems there might be folks (outside of the NorthEast U.S.) who might just disagree.
> 
> The game was everything I suspected it would be...a low-scoring competition between 2 teams that backed into being there. I bet a 49'ers / Ravens game would have been *far more *interesting and entertaining (and I don't have the slightest emotional equity in either of those 2 teams either...).
> 
> This one was the Superbowl dud of the last last decade.
> 
> But somebody had to win, so given the choice...ALL HAIL THE NEW YORK GIANTS.


I thought it was one of the more exciting Super Bowl's I've watched. Going down to the last play to be absolutely sure who was the winner. You had two elite QB's who were capable of driving down the field on the last drive, to win the game. Held my interest until the last second.

It may not have been as exciting to you, because your team looked like the team to beat this year, but they weren't even in it. And I'm sure Packer fans were disappointed and may have been more excited to see Aaron Rogers in the pregame show, then watching the game. Prior to the game, some were predicting that if it was a close one, the ratings will beat last years game. We'll probably find the answer to that soon.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

As a Pack fan myself I would say the Giants kinda made it to the Super Bowl and won it in a similar fashion as the Packers did themselves last season.

The beginning of the season was so-so and they came alive at the end when it mattered. that's my take on it.


----------



## RACJ2

djlong said:


> I had a feeling the Patriots weren't going to be quite up to winning. Just a tad too much desperation and mistakes did them in.
> 
> I mean, their opening play - a safety? That's a HORRIBLE mistake and it meant handing almost the entire first quarter to the Giants.....


And in the end, that 2 points may have cost the Pats the game. If they didn't get that safety, the Giants would have been leading by 2 after they scored their last TD. Instead of going for 2, they would have kicked the extra point to make it 3. So it would have been 20 to 17 with a close to a minute left. So all Brady would have needed was to get them in field goal range. And how many times have we seen him do that. If the Pats did make the FG, then we might have seen the first Super Bowl ever to go into overtime.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

RACJ2 said:


> I thought it was one of the more exciting Super Bowl's I've watched. *Going down to the last play to be absolutely sure who was the winner*.


That part is quite true...but the reason it went down to the wire was because there was little happening until that point - making it a boring game for over 3 quarters. No big plays, no stellar performances...just methodical practice-squad kind of stuff.

- 10-9 score at halftime?

- 1 major drive by each team in the first half?

- Manning 266 Total Passing Yards...Brady 282 Total Passing Yards...in the "Year of the QB"?

...193 total rushing yards by both teams COMBINED?

Exciting?


----------



## bidger

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Exciting?


 20,000+ posts and you're totally clueless. On this topic anyway.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

All that said - *Congrats to the Giants *- who won a pretty cleanly-played game for the most part.


----------



## Laxguy

djlong said:


> I
> This was the most self-indulgent display I've ever seen.
> 
> The opening song being a vacuous, vapid pop song about a magazine devoted to a vacuous, vapid industry that promotes lies, deception and hiding your true self. A whole opening of what was basically a product placement ad ("Vogue").


<< Snipped bits out >>

So, I take it you didn't care for it?



*I agree with what you said.* It's also the first year I actually watched the whole half time show. The lighting effects were good at the end!

I wonder what Vogue paid to be so featured. And one of the dancers seemed to be made up to look like Lady GaGa.


----------



## RACJ2

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That part is quite true...but the reason it went down to the wire was because there was little happening until that point - making it a boring game for over 3 quarters. No big plays, no stellar performances...just methodical practice-squad kind of stuff.
> 
> - 10-9 score at halftime?
> 
> - 1 major drive by each team in the first half?
> 
> - Manning 266 Total Passing Yards...Brady 282 Total Passing Yards...in the "Year of the QB"?
> 
> ...193 total rushing yards by both teams COMBINED?
> 
> Exciting?


I would have enjoyed a little more scoring, but it just meant the defenses played well. It could have been like the Pro Bowl game 59-41, now that was exciting. :nono2: Any way, the preliminary numbers are in and it seems this years Super Bowl held its own.



> The New York Giants' victory over the New England Patriots was the No. 3-rated Super Bowl in history, according to the early numbers.
> 
> The game posted a 47.8 household ratings and 71 share on NBC, according to the early numbers.
> 
> Nielsen said the game was less than 1 percent off the highest household ratings: 47.9 for both Super Bowl XLV and Super Bowl XXI.


----------



## Devo1237

Laxguy said:


> That was weird! When I first saw it I thought maybe he was showing off and was strutting in backwards. Weirder would have been if he stopped on the 1 yard line, and then they couldn't get it in....


It wasn't weird, he screwed up scoring the touchdown. He tried to stop on the one yard line because that would have been the smart play. They could have taken a knee on the next down to use up the remaining time and kicked an extra point length field goal for a 1-point win, WITHOUT giving Brady a chance to score with 57 seconds remaining.


----------



## Devo1237

spartanstew said:


> Well, lots of people will want the Pats, just because they've become sort of America's Team over the last 10 years.
> 
> Can't imagine anybody without a rooting interest caring for the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants. They're just 3 teams that nobody really cares about. People probably don't dislike them, but don't like them either. Just bland teams.


Judging by the ratings, the Patriots are a bland team, too.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/super-bowl-down-a-notch-from-last-year-in-overnight-ratings/


----------



## Laxguy

Devo1237 said:


> It wasn't weird, he screwed up scoring the touchdown. He tried to stop on the one yard line because that would have been the smart play. They could have taken a knee on the next down to use up the remaining time and kicked an extra point length field goal for a 1-point win, WITHOUT giving Brady a chance to score with 57 seconds remaining.


I understand what happened and why. What was weird to me was looking up and seeing him fall backwards into the end zone. On replay I understood the strategy on both sides.


----------



## RACJ2

Devo1237 said:


> Judging by the ratings, the Patriots are a bland team, too.
> 
> http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/super-bowl-down-a-notch-from-last-year-in-overnight-ratings/


As I posted above, it's the #3 highest rated Super Bowl????


----------



## Devo1237

Laxguy said:


> I understand what happened and why. What was weird to me was looking up and seeing him fall backwards into the end zone. On replay I understood the strategy on both sides.


Yeah, it was weird that he didn't just stop. It sure seemed like he had time, and knew that was the right move. He must have been surprised that the Patriots opened up that HUGE lane for him to score (probably a smart move on their part to get the ball back and keep their timeout).


----------



## hdtvfan0001

RACJ2 said:


> I would have enjoyed a little more scoring, but it just meant the defenses played well. It could have been like the Pro Bowl game 59-41, now that was exciting. :nono2: Any way, the preliminary numbers are in and it seems this years Super Bowl held its own.


Agree, especially for a year known for scoring, lots of QB passing, and lots of game action...

I'm still waiting to see the ratings by region. No doubt they were high in the Northeast.


----------



## Devo1237

RACJ2 said:


> As I posted above, it's the #3 highest rated Super Bowl????


Believe me, the expectation is for growth every year with the Super Bowl, especially after this year's regular season numbers. Finishing 3rd (behind a super bowl from the 80's) is a disappointment.

My opinion is that rematches are not that interesting to casual viewers, they'd much rather see good story lines or first time winners like Rodgers last year or the 1987 game with the Giants first super bowl trip against Elway's first trip. That's way more compelling than another trip by the boring Patriots (which was the only team Spartanslaw thought anybody would watch).


----------



## Steve

Devo1237 said:


> It wasn't weird, he screwed up scoring the touchdown. He tried to stop on the one yard line because that would have been the smart play. They could have taken a knee on the next down to use up the remaining time and kicked an extra point length field goal for a 1-point win, WITHOUT giving Brady a chance to score with 57 seconds remaining.


Ya. Purposely not scoring probably went against every one of Bradshaw's competitive instincts. Manning apparently tried to get him to fall down instead of scoring, but he couldn't stop his momentum.

And had he not fallen backwards, I'm pretty sure a Pat defender would have tried to push him into the end zone anyway.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/sports/football/bradshaw-backs-into-victory.html


----------



## David Ortiz

Devo1237 said:


> Believe me, the expectation is for growth every year with the Super Bowl, especially after this year's regular season numbers. Finishing 3rd (behind a super bowl from the 80's) is a disappointment.
> 
> My opinion is that rematches are not that interesting to casual viewers, they'd much rather see good story lines or first time winners like Rodgers last year or the 1987 game with the Giants first super bowl trip against Elway's first trip. That's way more compelling than another trip by the boring Patriots (which was the only team Spartanslaw thought anybody would watch).


Four years ago, I watched the game because of the potential for the undefeated season by the Patriots. No such incentive this time.


----------



## David Ortiz

Steve said:


> Ya. Purposely not scoring probably went against every one of Bradshaw's competitive instincts.


Kind of like trying not to FFWD through commericials during the game.


----------



## Laxguy

David Ortiz said:


> Kind of like trying not to FFWD through commericials during the game.


Brilliantly stated! I felt like Dr. Stangelove, one hand doing the opposite of the other. Also: Put down that remote! Back away and put down that remote! :lol:


----------



## Rich

My wife talked me out of betting on the Giants yesterday. I had my finger on the button and she gave me a speech about how well I'd done this year by not betting and blah, blah, blah.

I won't tell you how much I was gonna bet, but I'd be a lot happier this morning if I had made that bet.

Good game tho, glad the Giants won. 

Rich


----------



## Steve

David Ortiz said:


> Kind of like trying not to FFWD through commericials during the game.





Laxguy said:


> Brilliantly stated! I felt like Dr. Stangelove, one hand doing the opposite of the other. Also: Put down that remote! Back away and put down that remote! :lol:


Well said! :lol:

I'm away this week, so I watched the game in a hotel, with no option to watch delayed and skip over commercials. It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be.


----------



## Lord Vader

Devo1237 said:


> Judging by the ratings, the Patriots are a bland team, too.
> 
> http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/super-bowl-down-a-notch-from-last-year-in-overnight-ratings/


OK, so who's correct? A few minutes ago a news update on the local sports radio station here said, "According to the latest ratings, last night's Super Bowl was the most watched television event in this country's history."


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Devo1237 said:


> Judging by the ratings, the Patriots are a bland team, too.
> 
> http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/super-bowl-down-a-notch-from-last-year-in-overnight-ratings/


The website is updated it is the most watched ever.


----------



## sigma1914

Lord Vader said:


> OK, so who's correct? A few minutes ago a news update on the local sports radio station here said, "According to the latest ratings, last night's Super Bowl was the most watched television event in this country's history."


http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...atched-television-show-in-u-s-history/118826/


> The game, in which the New York Giants defeated the New England Patriots, 21-17, was seen by a record 111.3 million viewers (6:31-9:58 p.m. ET), topping last year's 111.0 for Super Bowl XLV on Fox and is the biggest audience to watch a television program in U.S. history.
> 
> MOST-WATCHED PROGRAMS IN U.S. TELEVISION HISTORY
> 
> 1. 111.3 Million - Super Bowl XLVI, NBC (Last Night's Game)
> 
> 2. 111.0 Million - Super Bowl XLV, Fox
> 
> 3. 106.5 Million - Super Bowl XLIV, CBS
> 
> 4. 106.0 Million - M.A.S.H. Finale, CBS
> 
> 5. 98.7 Million - Super Bowl XLIII, NBC


Didn't a certain HDTV fan say something like, "Now most of the country will have all that free time by not watching a Superbowl with teams nobody outside the NorthEast cares about..."


----------



## Lord Vader

The same person who said the game, which came down to the last couple minutes, was "boring."


----------



## Laxguy

Can we agree on one thing?

That great numbers does not equal, in many instances, great show? Or game? Or hamburger? Or automobile or truck?


----------



## Laxguy

Do they count overseas viewers in those totals?


----------



## Lord Vader

Mrs. Brady blasts receivers and blames them for the loss.

How long until our resident Brady fanboy pops in to defend what was a slightly better than average--if that--performance by the aging QB? 

Those damn receivers and the safety they caused and the interception they caused!!!


----------



## sigma1914

Laxguy said:


> Do they count overseas viewers in those totals?


"...the biggest audience to watch a television program in *U.S. history*."


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Laxguy said:


> Can we agree on one thing?
> 
> That great numbers does not equal, in many instances, great show? Or game? Or hamburger? Or automobile or truck?


AMEN.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

sigma1914 said:


> Didn't a certain HDTV fan say something like, "Now most of the country will have all that free time by not watching a Superbowl with teams nobody outside the NorthEast cares about..."


Yup...and those numbers still don't prove anything. If almost everyone in the Northeast watched...that alone would equal most of the total number....while the rest of the country could have been watching reruns of I Love Lucy.


----------



## Laxguy

sigma1914 said:


> "...the biggest audience to watch a television program in *U.S. history*."


Yeah, but that statement alone isn't clear that it's the most U.S. citizens to watch a TV program. It could be that they meant that; it's just they do not say that. I have no proof that it isn't so; just that hard info hasn't been presented.

Heh: Do they count US military watching in any of the 'Stans? Or in Germany?  Do they take out illegal immigrants watching in L.A.?


----------



## Laxguy

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup...and those numbers still don't prove anything. If almost everyone in the Northeast watched...that alone would equal most of the total number....while the rest of the country could have been watching reruns of I Love Lucy.


Perhaps someone will do a demographic study pitting each DMA's 2012 numbers vs. last year's......


----------



## sigma1914

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup...and those numbers still don't prove anything. If almost everyone in the Northeast watched...that alone would equal most of the total number....while the rest of the country could have been watching reruns of I Love Lucy.


Markets in bold aren't northeast - keep reaching for excuses.

TOP 10 METERED MARKETS FOR SUPER BOWL XLVI:

1. Boston, 56.7/81

*2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79*

3. Norfolk, 54.2/73

*4. Columbus, 54.1/72

5. New Orleans, 54.0/72

T6. Nashville, 53.5/74

T6. Jacksonville, 53.5/70*

8. Buffalo, 52.9/72

*9. Kansas City, 52.1/73

10. Milwaukee, 52.0/73*

*New York ranked 18th with a 49.7/74


----------



## RACJ2

Devo1237 said:


> Believe me, the expectation is for growth every year with the Super Bowl, especially after this year's regular season numbers. Finishing 3rd (behind a super bowl from the 80's) is a disappointment.
> 
> My opinion is that rematches are not that interesting to casual viewers, they'd much rather see good story lines or first time winners like Rodgers last year or the 1987 game with the Giants first super bowl trip against Elway's first trip. That's way more compelling than another trip by the boring Patriots (which was the only team Spartanslaw thought anybody would watch).


Remember they were preliminary numbers. So now that its the highest rated, I guess you are going to say, but not by much? So the ratings weren't as good as they should have been. And there's probably a lot of people that did watch, because of the Patriots. Although it might have been to hope that they would see Brady, Belichick and the gang go down in defeat. Just like many NFL fans did when the Cowboys were in the big game (if you can still remember those days).

I agree with you on the point of liking to watch new teams play and win. Although, not all teams are going to draw high numbers like the larger markets. The Packers and Steelers being smaller market teams did a good job with the ratings last year. If the Falcons and the Jaguars are in it next year, would you expect them to beat this years ratings? (no offense to fans of those teams, just an example)


----------



## Mike Bertelson

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup...and those numbers still don't prove anything. If almost everyone in the Northeast watched...that alone would equal most of the total number....while the rest of the country could have been watching reruns of I Love Lucy.


Do you really believe it's gonna breakdown like that...with the entire North East watching and no one else? Really? 

BTW, the total population of NJ, NY, CT, RI, MA, ME, VT, NH is less than half the ratings for last nights game...I'm just sayin' :grin:

BBTW, here are the top ten, and the eighteenth, markets for last nights game.

TOP 10 METERED MARKETS FOR SUPER BOWL XLVI:

1. Boston, 56.7/81
2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79
3. Norfolk, 54.2/73
4. Columbus, 54.1/72
5. New Orleans, 54.0/72
T6. Nashville, 53.5/74
T6. Jacksonville, 53.5/70
8. Buffalo, 52.9/72
9. Kansas City, 52.1/73
10. Milwaukee, 52.0/73
*New York ranked 18th with a 49.7/74
(Source)

Mike


----------



## Devo1237

RACJ2 said:


> Remember they were preliminary numbers. So now that its the highest rated, I guess you are going to say, but not by much? So the ratings weren't as good as they should have been. And there's probably a lot of people that did watch, because of the Patriots. Although it might have been to hope that they would see Brady, Belichick and the gang go down in defeat. Just like many NFL fans did when the Cowboys were in the big game (if you can still remember those days).
> 
> I agree with you on the point of liking to watch new teams play and win. Although, not all teams are going to draw high numbers like the larger markets. The Packers and Steelers being smaller market teams did a good job with the ratings last year. If the Falcons and the Jaguars are in it next year, would you expect them to beat this years ratings? (no offense to fans of those teams, just an example)


The corrected ratings definitely look better now, but I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't still a little disappointed. The regular season NFL numbers were insane this year, and I know NBC had a lot of eggs in the basket of a HUGE increase in ratings. Keep in my ratings are different than the total viewers. Total TV viewers go up (almost) every year as more people start watching TV, but the rating (or percentage of viewers watching one channels versus the others) is as important to advertisers/networks/NFL as the total number of viewers. No matter what, they're gonna issue press releases making it sound like they kicked butt in whatever demographics or "households" they did best in, so it's always hard to gleam what the viewers wanted to see.

I agree with you though, some people probably wanted to watch the Patriots lose, but I think it would have helped to have another team that hadn't just won do it. Regardless, the numbers are looking better by the hour, so maybe my opinion is invalid. lol


----------



## Devo1237

Mike Bertelson said:


> Do you really believe it's gonna breakdown like that...with the entire North East watching and no one else? Really?
> 
> BTW, the total population of NJ, NY, CT, RI, MA, ME, VT, NH is less than half the ratings for last nights game...I'm just sayin' :grin:
> 
> BBTW, here are the top ten, and the eighteenth, markets for last nights game.
> 
> TOP 10 METERED MARKETS FOR SUPER BOWL XLVI:
> 
> 1. Boston, 56.7/81
> 2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79
> 3. Norfolk, 54.2/73
> 4. Columbus, 54.1/72
> 5. New Orleans, 54.0/72
> T6. Nashville, 53.5/74
> T6. Jacksonville, 53.5/70
> 8. Buffalo, 52.9/72
> 9. Kansas City, 52.1/73
> 10. Milwaukee, 52.0/73
> *New York ranked 18th with a 49.7/74
> (Source)
> 
> Mike


That's an interesting list. Shows you what towns are all about sports. I'm not surprised NYC isn't in the top ten, it's a city with a split interest (Jets) and a lot of people that could care less about sports. Sort of like LA. I swear even the sports fans here couldn't care less if they get an NFL team or not.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

Devo1237 said:


> That's an interesting list. Shows you what towns are all about sports. I'm not surprised NYC isn't in the top ten, it's a city with a split interest (Jets) and a lot of people that could care less about sports. Sort of like LA. I swear even the sports fans here couldn't care less if they get an NFL team or not.


I'm from the NY area (north Jersey) and I'm a little surprised the NY area wasn't in the top ten. I wonder if these metered areas are by DMA or some other sort of region setup.

Mike


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Mike Bertelson said:


> Do you really believe it's gonna breakdown like that...with the entire North East watching and no one else? Really?


Yup. Still think so.

Just because the TV is turned on doesn't mean people are watching. I personally saw over 50 TVs turned on in 2 sportsbars that almost turned into ghost towns by the middle of the 3rd quarter. The TVs out-numbered the patrons.

But your list is interesting for sure....real sports towns I suppose....and yes...there are Giants fans all over the country, as well as Patriot fans too.

Boston being on top and local Indy there too are no surprise.


----------



## James Long

sigma1914 said:


> *2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79*


In town for the party but no tickets for the game.

Of course, I had it on for the commercials. 

Good to see a Manning play, and win, in Indianapolis.


----------



## Sixto

Thanks for posting the geographic ratings, exactly as expected, for those thinking rationally.

Exciting game, great ratings, country wide. Enough said.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup. Still think so.
> 
> Just because the TV is turned on doesn't mean people are watching. I personally saw over 50 TVs turned on in 2 sportsbars that almost turned into ghost towns by the middle of the 3rd quarter. The TVs out-numbered the patrons.
> 
> But your list is interesting for sure....real sports towns I suppose....and yes...there are Giants fans all over the country, as well as Patriot fans too.
> 
> Boston being on top and local Indy there too are no surprise.


Ok. You may still think so, although I can't understand why...especially considering the entire population of New England + NY + NJ is only 38% of the total number of views. Even if every pair of eyes in those eight states were watching last night the math still blows your theory out of the water. Fully one third of the entire country was watching last night and those eight states make up less than 14% of the population your assumptions still make no sense...at least that's how it appears to me. :grin:

I still don't get why NY is 18th. :scratchin

MIke


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Sixto said:


> Thanks for posting the geographic ratings, exactly as expected, for those thinking rationally.
> 
> Exciting game, great ratings, country wide. Enough said.


:goodjob:!rolling


----------



## Davenlr

Devo1237 said:


> That's an interesting list. Shows you what towns are all about sports. I'm not surprised NYC isn't in the top ten, it's a city with a split interest (Jets) and a lot of people that could care less about sports. Sort of like LA. I swear even the sports fans here couldn't care less if they get an NFL team or not.


And if ticket prices werent so high to see the game, this would not have happened:


> 2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79


Its a shame you have to win a lottery to be able to afford a ticket.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Mike Bertelson said:


> Ok. You may still think so, although I can't understand why...especially considering the entire population of New England + NY + NJ is only 38% of the total number of views...
> I still don't get why NY is 18th. :scrtchin
> 
> MIke


Cool.

Part 1 - "Watching the Game" and "watching" the game may differ. I saw one poll with about 115,000 votes so far that rated the game at 71% on a scale of 100%. I guess there are at least 44,840 people in that poll (so far) bored like me. :lol:

Part 2 - Agree with you that NY being 18th seems beyond puzzling.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Laxguy said:


> Perhaps someone will do a demographic study pitting each DMA's 2012 numbers vs. last year's......


Who knows...there could be a bigger story than even the TV numbers...


----------



## RACJ2

Lord Vader said:


> Mrs. Brady blasts receivers and blames them for the loss.
> 
> How long until our resident Brady fanboy pops in to defend what was a slightly better than average--if that--performance by the aging QB?
> 
> Those damn receivers and the safety they caused and the interception they caused!!!


That is pretty funny, although it is his wife, so she is trying to defend him. Better then her saying, I knew that loser husband of mine was past his prime. And the receivers seem to be believing what whe said as well. I read that Welker was upset about missing that pass late in the game and felt bad he missed it. That pass was terrible, behind him and rather high. I wouldn't blame Welker on that one.


----------



## Devo1237

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Part 2 - Agree with you that NY being 18th seems beyond puzzling.


Keep in mind, they were 18th in RATINGS, not the total # of viewers. I'm sure they were #1 in viewers. They still pulled in a 49% viewership, which is pretty good considering the number of non-sports fans that live in a city like New York. Meanwhile, most of the people that live in Columbus are their because it's a (college) football town.


----------



## Mike Bertelson

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Who knows...there could be a bigger story than even the TV numbers...


I just can't get over the name of the stadium. It seems ...wrong. I guess it pays the bills. :shrug:

Mike


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Devo1237 said:


> Keep in mind, they were 18th in RATINGS, *not the total # of viewers*. I'm sure they were #1 in viewers. They still pulled in a 49% viewership, which is pretty good considering the number of non-sports fans that live in a city like New York. Meanwhile, most of the people that live in Columbus are their because it's a (college) football town.


Good explanation and valid point.


----------



## djlong

Lord Vader said:


> Mrs. Brady blasts receivers and blames them for the loss.
> 
> How long until our resident Brady fanboy pops in to defend what was a slightly better than average--if that--performance by the aging QB?
> 
> Those damn receivers and the safety they caused and the interception they caused!!!


You're not going to find many people defending Gisele in this area. Local papers are saying that it's about 80% vitriol against the innacurately-dubbed "Supermodel" (nothing in modelling can be considered "Super", IMO) and the other 20% is only slightly less acidic.

The basic response is "Hey, Gisele, you don't throw your husband's BEST receiver in HISTORY under the bus - and maybe that pass shouldn't have been thrown BEHIND him." (referring to her comment against Wes Welker).

The understory is now "Will this create a Yoko Ono-like problem in the Patriots locker room come next season".


----------



## Rich

Laxguy said:


> Can we agree on one thing?
> 
> That great numbers does not equal, in many instances, great show? Or game? Or hamburger? Or automobile or truck?


I'll agree to that. The number of lemmings who, after all, determine the ratings of many things is much larger than the better informed minority.

Rich


----------



## Rich

sigma1914 said:


> Markets in bold aren't northeast - keep reaching for excuses.
> 
> TOP 10 METERED MARKETS FOR SUPER BOWL XLVI:
> 
> 1. Boston, 56.7/81
> 
> *2. Indianapolis, 56.4/79*
> 
> 3. Norfolk, 54.2/73
> 
> *4. Columbus, 54.1/72
> 
> 5. New Orleans, 54.0/72
> 
> T6. Nashville, 53.5/74
> 
> T6. Jacksonville, 53.5/70*
> 
> 8. Buffalo, 52.9/72
> 
> *9. Kansas City, 52.1/73
> 
> 10. Milwaukee, 52.0/73*
> 
> **New York ranked 18th with a 49.7/74*


I would have thought the NYC Metro Area would have had the top ranking. I'm surprised. Lots of Patriot fans in upstate NY too.

I doubt if anybody measured in any way the amount of folks who watched the game in bars in NYC.

Rich


----------



## Rich

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup. Still think so.
> 
> Just because the TV is turned on doesn't mean people are watching. I personally saw over 50 TVs turned on in 2 sportsbars that almost turned into ghost towns by the middle of the 3rd quarter. The TVs out-numbered the patrons.
> 
> But your list is interesting for sure....real sports towns I suppose....and yes...there are Giants fans all over the country, as well as Patriot fans too.
> 
> Boston being on top and local Indy there too are no surprise.


You'd really have to watch the game in a bar in Manhattan to appreciate how many rabid fans of the Giants there are in our area. I was watching the game in bed and I knew when the game ended and I knew the Giants had won and I was only in the first quarter. When the game ended the fireworks began. And they kept going off for quite a while. I just laid back and watched the game, knowing the outcome, but still intrigued to see just how it ended.

I live just down the street from Rutgers Stadium (I know it's been renamed, I've already forgotten the new name, it'll always be Rutgers Stadium to me) and I was surprised nobody fired the cannon a few times.

Rich


----------



## Rich

James Long said:


> In town for the party but no tickets for the game.
> 
> Of course, I had it on for the commercials.
> 
> Good to see a Manning play, and win, in Indianapolis.


With any luck you might get to see two Mannings play in NJ next year.

Rich


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

The city was jumping today for the parade!


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Rich said:


> You'd really have to watch the game in a bar in Manhattan to appreciate how many rabid fans of the Giants there are in our area.
> 
> Rich


I wouldn't doubt that for a second.


----------



## Steve

Another 2+ million watched the game via internet streaming. It got poor reviews for PQ, however.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/09/super-bowl-internet-debut-breaks-records-disappoints-some-viewe/


----------



## Rich

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I wouldn't doubt that for a second.


I'd imagine it was like New Year's Eve in the City. Sometimes I wish I still drank. Barhopping in the City must have been great fun, if you could get in the bars.

Rich


----------

