NFL Week 10

[naiwf 0]

Ha ha that was wacky. Run back a field goal for a TD? Every player forgot you can run back the ball? (I did too)

 

What is the rule exactly anyway? Can you run back any FG?

 

You have to catch it in the air in that instance. Coughlin is a fucking chump for trying it, the team just showed why they'll win the division and get stomped in the 1st playoff game they play again. Can we never play on Sunday night again please?

 

New York City sports teams should be renamed New Choke City.

[devo 0]

Here are the Bears we all know and love.

[Guest Felonies!]

Did the Bears get penalized for doing the taunt that New York does EVERY SINGLE TIME?

[Open the Muggy Gate 0]

Holy mother of god, we're leading!!!!!!11111

 

I swear on my mother's grave, if we hold on to this lead, I'll track down Marty and offer to suck his balls.

 

Time to find out where Marty is right now Richard.

 

 

And man, when the Bears turn it on, they are nucking futs.

[strummer 0]

It's funny at the same time, in the same city, you had Luvie Smith and Dusty Baker both preaching about "Speed killing" but it actually matters in Smith's sport

[Guest Felonies!]

Lovie Smith must've made some death threats at halftime. What a tale of two teams.

[cabbageboy 0]

Okay lemme check the results:

 

Sunday 1:00:

 

NY Jets (4-4) at New England (6-2): NE is usually solid coming off a loss and the Jets don't really rock my world or anything. Pats by 10. (Jets surprised me a bit in miserable weather today. 0 for 1)

 

Kansas City (5-3) at Miami (2-6): Will the Dolphins keep it going after beating the Bears? Will Huard continue his hot play? I'm not real sure either way, but I'll go with the Dolphins here to keep their jobber run going. Miami by 3. (Nailed this one dead on. 1 for 2)

 

San Diego (6-2) at Cincinnati (4-4): The Bengals flat out must win this game if they want to stay in the playoff hunt. That said, Chargers are better so unless they really screw up they should take this. SD by 7. (SD rallied to win by 8 actually. 2 for 3)

 

Buffalo (3-5) at Indianapolis (8-0): I can't see the Colts losing that 1st game at home to the Bills. Yet I also don't think this is a huge squash for some reason. Indy by 10. (Well I was right about it being a trap game for the Colts and not a squash. 3 for 4)

 

Baltimore (6-2) at Tennessee (2-6): The Ravens are the epitome of a man's team. They should keep it rolling hear and smash the Titans fairly easy. Baltimore by 14. (Well, the Ravens didn't play so manly but still managed to edge the Titans. 4 for 5)

 

Houston (2-6) at Jacksonville (5-3): The Jags seem back on track with Garrard in the game. Sure, Houston shocked them earlier but it won't happen twice. JAX by 13. (Well it did happen twice. Really odd. 4 for 6)

 

Washington (3-5) at Philadelphia (4-4): A curious matchup. Oddly I think both teams might be better than the record indicates, and since Philly has this at home I'll take them by 7. (Wasn't even close. 5 for 7)

 

Green Bay (3-5) at Minnesota (4-4): Packers always have had trouble in Minnesota, and the fliratation with decency looks to be over. Vikings by 9. (Packers get a nice win in the dome, surprising. 5 for 8)

 

San Francisco (3-5) at Detroit (2-6): How the hell are the Niners 3-5? I think the Lions can be dangerous at home, at least enough to beat the Niners. Detroit by 4. (Hard to predict these jobber matchups. 5 for 9)

 

Cleveland (2-6) at Atlanta (5-3): The Falcons are a baffling team, capable of looking wonderful one week and losing to the Lions the next. Still, this is the Browns we're talking about here. Atlanta rebounds and wins by 14. (What the hell is up with Atlanta? Losing to the Lions and Browns? Yeesh. 5 for 10)

 

4:00

 

Denver (6-2) at Oakland (2-6): This should be a boring affair similar to the first meeting. Raiders have been surprisingly dangerous at times at home, but I can't see them winning here. Denver in another snoozer, 17-3. (Raiders played better than I figured, still a typical Broncos snoozer though. 6 for 11)

 

New Orleans (6-2) at Pittsburgh (2-6): Steelers are reeling and the Saints continue to do well this year. For some reason though I can't help but think the Steelers bear down at home and pull this one off, 28-24. (Ended up 38-31 for the Steelers. 7 for 12)

 

St. Louis (4-4) at Seattle (5-3): First matchup was great, this one I dunno so much. Rams really should have won the first meeting and I think they will take this one 34-31. (Man, Rams just can't buy a win against these guys. 7 for 13)

 

Dallas (4-4) at Arizona (1-7): The ultimate humiliation for the Cowboys would be to lose here. Not even I am so cruel as to predict that however. Dallas by 10. (Easy one here, Cowboys won by 17. 8 for 14)

 

8:15:

 

Chicago (7-1) at NY Giants (6-2): Giants are incredibly banged out right now and the Bears will look to rebound from the embarrassing loss last week. I can't see the Giants winning one. Bears by 7. (Bears won it by more than that. 9 for 15)

[naiwf 0]

The Bears defense wasn't that impressive tonight and the Giants still lost by 18 at home. What a shitty effort by the home team from the allowed 3rd and 22 on a DRAW of all things, to the end of the game. Coughlin must go. The disclipinarian shit isn't working, he makes stupid decisions routinely and I'm sick of seeing him needing a diaper change on the sidelines after every play.

 

His postgame press conference made him seem like an even bigger dunce. "I know Feely missed from closer on that side of the field, but I thought he could make it this time and we needed to try and win ugly because that's how you beat Da Bears!" Way to use logic tough guy. Even if the guy doesn't go 108 to the house, the odds are Feely misses, you're still down 4 and the Bears have it at your 42. If it had been 23-20, by all means try to tie it, but when a field goal only gets you to the point you need another one to take the lead, you're 50+ yards away, it's GIANTS FUCKING STADIUM, at night, in the rain, in NOVEMBER just punt the ball and play "defense" you stupid douche.

 

[/rant]

 

It's looking more and more like Bears/Colts will be the Super Bowl matchup and if Rex Grossman ends up winning a ring the year after Big Ben I may just have to give up on the NFL for good.

[Guest Felonies!]

Not to take anything away from the Bears, who really switched it on there, man, Coughlin isn't very good.

[Guest Vitamin X]

It's looking more and more like Bears/Colts will be the Super Bowl matchup and if Rex Grossman ends up winning a ring the year after Big Ben I may just have to give up on the NFL for good.

Why? It's not like either was a central component of their team's rise to the Super Bowl. Credit the defenses.

 

Are you offended that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson won rings too?

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Bears/Ravens SB!

 

I was gonna say how funny it'd be if the Ravens and Giants met up in the SB this year but I doubt that will happen.

[Guest Vitamin X]

No Marv, we already went through that debacle in 2000.

[naiwf 0]

It's looking more and more like Bears/Colts will be the Super Bowl matchup and if Rex Grossman ends up winning a ring the year after Big Ben I may just have to give up on the NFL for good.

Why? It's not like either was a central component of their team's rise to the Super Bowl. Credit the defenses.

 

Are you offended that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson won rings too?

 

Yes. Especially since Dilfer beat the Giants to get his. That's not entirely true, it's just the fact that QBs in the league get judged by how many rings they've won even when they had little, or in Dilfer's case NOTHING to do with winning it.

 

I think "game managers" are bad for football, much like I hate the way baseball is turning into a game over who has the best middle relief because starters can't pitch 7 innings and closers can't pitch 3 days in a row. I'm not saying we need a league of superstar QBs, but when the media spends weeks/years blowing mediocre QBs who won playoff games and/or titles because their defense was legendary, that doesn't sit well with me.

 

As someone whose team has always been about run, run, run, smashmouth defense that style is very boring to watch even when my team is playing it, so I can only imagine how much worse it is for someone not rooting for them. Since the NFL is a copycat league, I won't be interested in seeing guys putting less and less responsibility on the QB whose job these days seems to be to try not to lose. I'd much rather see a QB go out and win a game or lead his team to victory, not go 20 for 35 for 175 yards with nothing but underneath stuff and hand it off 30 times.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

It's looking more and more like Bears/Colts will be the Super Bowl matchup and if Rex Grossman ends up winning a ring the year after Big Ben I may just have to give up on the NFL for good.

Why? It's not like either was a central component of their team's rise to the Super Bowl. Credit the defenses.

 

Are you offended that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson won rings too?

 

Yes. Especially since Dilfer beat the Giants to get his. That's not entirely true, it's just the fact that QBs in the league get judged by how many rings they've won even when they had little, or in Dilfer's case NOTHING to do with winning it.

 

I think "game managers" are bad for football, much like I hate the way baseball is turning into a game over who has the best middle relief because starters can't pitch 7 innings and closers can't pitch 3 days in a row. I'm not saying we need a league of superstar QBs, but when the media spends weeks/years blowing mediocre QBs who won playoff games and/or titles because their defense was legendary, that doesn't sit well with me.

 

As someone whose team has always been about run, run, run, smashmouth defense that style is very boring to watch even when my team is playing it, so I can only imagine how much worse it is for someone not rooting for them. Since the NFL is a copycat league, I won't be interested in seeing guys putting less and less responsibility on the QB whose job these days seems to be to try not to lose. I'd much rather see a QB go out and win a game or lead his team to victory, not go 20 for 35 for 175 yards with nothing but underneath stuff and hand it off 30 times.

 

I'll take win a super bowl with a game manager style QB (Trent Dilfer!!) over repeatedly losing in the playoffs despite having out of this world regular season stats (Looking straight at Peyton Manning).

[Guest Felonies!]

As a Bears fan, I'll take what I can get. As a disinterested viewer of a football game, why the fuck would I want to watch a game manager?

[naiwf 0]

I'll take win a super bowl with a game manager style QB (Trent Dilfer!!) over repeatedly losing in the playoffs despite having out of this world regular season stats (Looking straight at Peyton Manning).

 

Peyton and the Ravens 'D' of that era would be equal to the New England Pats' dynasty. That's the problem with the game manager. They don't win you anything on their own. Trent Dilfer on the Pats would be a team losing early and often in the postseason if they got that far.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Well you know, that's the thing that happens when you throw all the team's money away on defense and on linemen rather than on the QB. There are a lot of teams that traditionally play one style and stick to it.

 

And hey, Dilfer threw the first TD of that Ravens-Giant SB to Brandon Stokley. A 65-yarder, too. So he had SOMETHING to do with it. He was the very definition of an average QB, though.

 

And who cares what other people judge them as? Do YOU judge a QB by how many rings he's won? A judge teams by that, not individuals. It's not necessarily Manning's fault that he's had a traditionally shitty and collapsing defense in the playoffs, nor had bad coaching.

 

Brady and the Pats of the 2000's defines what it is to be the most well-balanced team of this decade, particularly the 2003 champions.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Man, the Raiders should've won that game. What a bummer. You gotta pull for the Raiders sometimes.

 

I've always hated the Raiders, but I can't help to root for them now... just feel so bad for that team.

 

And I was almost right this week...

[MrRant 0]

It makes me happy watching the Raiders flail. The only person I feel for is Tui and slightly feel for Moss since this team will ruin his career.

[Guest Paul]

Coughlin isn't very good.

 

No, no he isn't.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Only two QBs, Ben Roethlisberger (183) and Trent Dilfer (167) averaged less than 190 YPG the season they made the Super Bowl. In ten Super Bowls from 1996 - 2005, most Super Bowl QBs averaged 200+ yards per game with exceptions being made for Jake Delhomme in 2003 (198) and Tom Brady in 2001 (190).

 

190 YPG still equates to 3,040 yards over a 16 game season.

 

Roethlisberger had five 200+ yard games and one 300+ yard game during the 2005 season. While his attempts were low, he still threw for 275 yards and 2 TD against the Broncos in the AFC Championship game.

 

Trent Dilfer had three 200+ yard games while playing only the 2nd half of the 2000 season (9 games. Tony Banks was the initial starter).

 

Note: Tony Banks averaged 34 attempts per game from Week 1 through Week 8. Dilfer averaged 25 attempts per game. As much blame goes to Billick and the coaching staff as it does to Dilfer and the media for "blowing mediocre QBs" like Dilfer.

 

As far as Dilfer having "nothing" to do with the team's run at the SB, that's just a dumb argument. The Ravens were 5-4 entering week nine. When Dilfer became the starting QB, the Ravens went 7-0 and 4-0 in the playoffs (they were a Wildcard team, which people forget) including a SB victory.

 

In the 2000 playoffs, Dilfer threw for 590 yards, 3 TD, and 1 INT. In the playoffs, teams can't afford mistakes and QBs are key in that regard. If you have a great running game and defense, why throw the ball 35 times and risk more interceptions/fumbles/sacks?

[snuffbox 0]

That was a really fun Sunday.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Only two QBs, Ben Roethlisberger (183) and Trent Dilfer (167) averaged less than 190 YPG the season they made the Super Bowl. In ten Super Bowls from 1996 - 2005, most Super Bowl QBs averaged 200+ yards per game with exceptions being made for Jake Delhomme in 2003 (198) and Tom Brady in 2001 (190).

 

190 YPG still equates to 3,040 yards over a 16 game season.

 

Roethlisberger had five 200+ yard games and one 300+ yard game during the 2005 season. While his attempts were low, he still threw for 275 yards and 2 TD against the Broncos in the AFC Championship game.

 

Trent Dilfer had three 200+ yard games while playing only the 2nd half of the 2000 season (9 games. Tony Banks was the initial starter).

 

Note: Tony Banks averaged 34 attempts per game from Week 1 through Week 8. Dilfer averaged 25 attempts per game. As much blame goes to Billick and the coaching staff as it does to Dilfer and the media for "blowing mediocre QBs" like Dilfer.

 

As far as Dilfer having "nothing" to do with the team's run at the SB, that's just a dumb argument. The Ravens were 5-4 entering week nine. When Dilfer became the starting QB, the Ravens went 7-0 and 4-0 in the playoffs (they were a Wildcard team, which people forget) including a SB victory.

 

In the 2000 playoffs, Dilfer threw for 590 yards, 3 TD, and 1 INT. In the playoffs, teams can't afford mistakes and QBs are key in that regard. If you have a great running game and defense, why throw the ball 35 times and risk more interceptions/fumbles/sacks?

 

LOL..we Ravens fans phase out Tony Banks from that season..and so its funny we got Trent Dilfer and Tony "1 fumble a game" Banks Super Bowl rings..lol

 

The sad part about this season is, McNair isnt a long term solution..he might only be around 1 more year..they have Boller but by the time McNair leaves, Boller will probably be bolting as well. But for right now its all about basking in the glory of a 7-2 record and being 3 games ahead of the Bengals with the Steelers and Browns being right behind them..

[naiwf 0]

Only two QBs, Ben Roethlisberger (183) and Trent Dilfer (167) averaged less than 190 YPG the season they made the Super Bowl. In ten Super Bowls from 1996 - 2005, most Super Bowl QBs averaged 200+ yards per game with exceptions being made for Jake Delhomme in 2003 (198) and Tom Brady in 2001 (190).

 

190 YPG still equates to 3,040 yards over a 16 game season.

 

Roethlisberger had five 200+ yard games and one 300+ yard game during the 2005 season. While his attempts were low, he still threw for 275 yards and 2 TD against the Broncos in the AFC Championship game.

 

Trent Dilfer had three 200+ yard games while playing only the 2nd half of the 2000 season (9 games. Tony Banks was the initial starter).

 

Note: Tony Banks averaged 34 attempts per game from Week 1 through Week 8. Dilfer averaged 25 attempts per game. As much blame goes to Billick and the coaching staff as it does to Dilfer and the media for "blowing mediocre QBs" like Dilfer.

 

As far as Dilfer having "nothing" to do with the team's run at the SB, that's just a dumb argument. The Ravens were 5-4 entering week nine. When Dilfer became the starting QB, the Ravens went 7-0 and 4-0 in the playoffs (they were a Wildcard team, which people forget) including a SB victory.

 

In the 2000 playoffs, Dilfer threw for 590 yards, 3 TD, and 1 INT. In the playoffs, teams can't afford mistakes and QBs are key in that regard. If you have a great running game and defense, why throw the ball 35 times and risk more interceptions/fumbles/sacks?

 

The Ravens defense won them that SB. Dilfer was just along for the ride.

 

The Steelers running game and defense won them that SB. Big Ben was along for the ride for the most part as evidenced by the Steelers not losing much from last year's team and being terrible for most of this season.

 

If the Bears win this year Rex Grossman will get a ring in spite of himself.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Good teams win with a strong run game, great defense, and solid QB play regardless if the QB can throw for 300+ yards or 150+ yards. Why limit the QBs who aren't relied upon to throw 40 times for 300 yards a game?

 

QBs usually play it safe during the playoffs anyway. Were these QBs just along for the ride until the SB came around?

Phil Simms in 1986: 136 yards and 90 yards in the two prior games.

Jeff Hostetler in 1990: 112 yards and 176 yards in the two prior games.

Jim McMahon in 1985: 216 yards and 164 yards in the two prior games.

Tom Brady in 2004: 144 yards and 207 yards in the two prior games.

Brett Favre in 1996: 190 yards and 222 yards in the two prior games.

John Elway in 1997: 170 yards and 210 yards in the two prior games.

John Elway in 1998: 182 yards and 173 yards in the two prior games.

Steve Young in 1994: 143 yards and 155 yards in the two prior games.

[cabbageboy 0]

I don't get the argument that the Pats with Tom Brady are really the epitome of well balanced offense. The past couple of years Brady has been a superstar QB, but with the Super Bowl teams? He was mostly the epitome of a game manager on a high level. Brady usually never went nuts on someone, the Pats just played good defense, kicked the ball well, didn't turn it over much, and had solid special teams. Then won seemingly all their games 17-13 or so.

 

As for the Colts, I have to wonder....has the D REALLY cost them the past 3 years? In the 2 Patriot losses they gave up 24 and 20 points. That isn't really terrible if the Colts offense shows up and scores 28. Last year they gave up 21 to the Steelers, which isn't awful either.

 

I don't much care for these game manager QBs either. History won't remember teams like the 2000 Ravens or the 2002 Bucs as being all that good, certainly nowhere near teams like the 49ers, Steelers, Cowboys of the past. The 2000 Ravens are a bit of a guilty pleasure, but I don't think they played anyone in the playoffs that year that was worth a damn.

[naiwf 0]

I read it wrong, nevermind.

 

Even still the franchise QB's listed got their teams there. They didn't manage the games from Week 1 through SB.

[Brett Favre 0]

I think the prior two games were playoff games, not end of season games.

[Open the Muggy Gate 0]

Really, what the fuck was it with all these blocked field goals and missed ones all weekend. In college and in the pros.... God, the Titans losing like that just....oy...

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Somehow I get the sense naiwf is just a sore loser. Didn't he predict the Giants would beat the Bears and now he fell on his face with that one? Yeah...