Official NFL Discussion Thread

[Stennick]

I'm of the opinion that he can act like an ass all he wants and if the D wants to put him on his within the rules and not intentially injuring this guy then I say go for it. If he comes across the middle and they can light him up for it? Go for it I find just as much entertainment in legal hits as I do someone being an assclown.

 

Would I find entertainment in a late hit or on a guy thats in the air making a play on the ball? Absolutely not but if they can hit him within the rules I say go for it.

 

The NFL told Jared Allen he couldn't do his Rodeo taunt after a sack. I see no difference in that and what Jackson did. If they guy makes a huge play and wants to showboat on either side of the ball I say let them do it.

 

I think defensive guys get away with more celebrations than offensive guys do to be honest. Thats a whole nother argument though.

[Stennick]

Edit: I doubt Ware gave a crap. It wasn't him chasing down Jackson being humiliated was it?

 

If I was the corner, or safety or whoever it was that he did it to. Yeah I'd like to light him up if I could but if I'm a DL guy and my corner just got burned on a deep route and embarrassed I'm thinking "maybe next time he won't screw up the coverage".

[BHK1978]

<p>The NFL has to do something about their playoffs. The 7-9 Seahawks make the playoffs! Seriously? What a way to reward mediocrity.</p><p> </p><p>

And this is not coming from a bitter Giants fan, because the Giants do not belong in the playoffs. They did what I said they were going to do before the season started, and that is give up. It is the same thing they do every season (with the exception of the Super Bowl season).</p><p> </p><p>

In my opinion the Bucs should be there and the Seahawks should be bounced out. The NFL should have stuck with the three divisons format. Now granted this could still have happened if there were three divisions, but it would not have been as likely in my opinion. </p><p> </p><p>

I mean it is a moot point because Seattle will be eliminated in the first round anyway. I just think that the Bucs would have probably made for a more competitive game.</p>

[PeterHilton]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The NFL has to do something about their playoffs. The 7-9 Seahawks make the playoffs! Seriously? What a way to reward mediocrity.<p> </p><p> And this is not coming from a bitter Giants fan, because the Giants do not belong in the playoffs. They did what I said they were going to do before the season started, and that is give up. It is the same thing they do every season (with the exception of the Super Bowl season).</p><p> </p><p> In my opinion the Bucs should be there and the Seahawks should be bounced out. The NFL should have stuck with the three divisons format. Now granted this could still have happened if there were three divisions, but it would not have been as likely in my opinion. </p><p> </p><p> I mean it is a moot point because Seattle will be eliminated in the first round anyway. I just think that the Bucs would have probably made for a more competitive game.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is the only time this has ever happened, so i doubt there's a reason to make any serious changes. I mean, unless you eliminate divisions entirely there's always the possibility.</p><p> </p><p> I do think it creates an argument for eliminating the whole 'division winners get a guaranteed home game' deal</p>

[GruntMark]

<p>I disagree.</p><p> </p><p>

Since 1990, 252 team have qualified for the playoffs.</p><p> </p><p>

One of them has had a losing record. </p><p> </p><p>

Thats, obviously, less than one half percent. Seattle making the playoffs isnt reason to reorder everything. Its almost a statistical aberration.</p><p> </p><p>

The division system encourages you to play your divisional rivals hard and well. Bucs and Giants didnt, so they get to sit home for the playoffs. They know the system just as well as anyone else, mising out on the playoffs in only on them, not the format.</p><p> </p><p>

But if we were going to have a hypothetical "which one deserves it more after Seattle?" then its got to be the Giants. Bucs got to play the Panthers twice and all of Seattle's division (which, you think is too terrible to allow even the winner of into the playoffs), that should almost spot you 6 wins.</p>

[masterded]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="PeterHilton" data-cite="PeterHilton" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This is the only time this has ever happened, so i doubt there's a reason to make any serious changes. I mean, unless you eliminate divisions entirely there's always the possibility.<p> </p><p> I do think it creates an argument for eliminating the whole 'division winners get a guaranteed home game' deal</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree with this. I wouldn’t want to see divisions go away or wining a division not guaranteeing a playoff spot, but the idea of seeding being based only on record (and what ever tie breakers are needed) I could get behind.</p>

[lazorbeak]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="PeterHilton" data-cite="PeterHilton" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>This is the only time this has ever happened, so i doubt there's a reason to make any serious changes. I mean, unless you eliminate divisions entirely there's always the possibility.<p> </p><p> I do think it creates an argument for eliminating the whole 'division winners get a guaranteed home game' deal</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah this is the thing I think the NFL should potentially re-think. Every wild card team is better than the division winner they play this year. The closest thing to an exception is 10-6 Eagles taking on the 10-6 Packers, except for the part where Green Bay already beat Philadelphia in Philadelphia this season. I like how the NBA does it: a division winner is guaranteed at worst a 4 seed, but if the 5 seed has a better record they get the home court advantage. </p><p> </p><p> You could argue that doing that would take away some of the luster of being divisional champs, but being the best team in the NFC West is not much of an accomplishment. In the AFC West, Kansas City couldn't even win 3 games in their traditionally mediocre division and yet they still get rewarded with a home game while the Jets and Ravens have to travel because they play in the same divisions as the top two teams in the league? Not that winning 10 games is ever easy, but the Chiefs last place schedule meant games against Buffalo and Cleveland, plus the AFC West played the NFC West, so they got 4 out of conference wins against awful teams, and for this they get to host a playoff game?</p>

[PeterHilton]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah this is the thing I think the NFL should potentially re-think. Every wild card team is better than the division winner they play this year. The closest thing to an exception is 10-6 Eagles taking on the 10-6 Packers, except for the part where Green Bay already beat Philadelphia in Philadelphia this season. I like how the NBA does it: a division winner is guaranteed at worst a 4 seed, but if the 5 seed has a better record they get the home court advantage. <p> </p><p> You could argue that doing that would take away some of the luster of being divisional champs, but being the best team in the NFC West is not much of an accomplishment. In the AFC West, Kansas City couldn't even win 3 games in their traditionally mediocre division and yet they still get rewarded with a home game while the Jets and Ravens have to travel because they play in the same divisions as the top two teams in the league? Not that winning 10 games is ever easy, but the Chiefs last place schedule meant games against Buffalo and Cleveland, plus the AFC West played the NFC West, so they got 4 out of conference wins against awful teams, and for this they get to host a playoff game?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree. I don't even think it would make anything 'lose the luster' because you are STILL getting a playoff spot. </p><p> </p><p> Seattle winning their division is rewarded by getting a berth over two teams with better records. But them getting a home game? against a team that was 4 games better? that's silly.</p>

[BHK1978]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GruntMark" data-cite="GruntMark" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I disagree.<p> </p><p> Since 1990, 252 team have qualified for the playoffs.</p><p> </p><p> One of them has had a losing record. </p><p> </p><p> Thats, obviously, less than one half percent. Seattle making the playoffs isnt reason to reorder everything. Its almost a statistical aberration.</p><p> </p><p> The division system encourages you to play your divisional rivals hard and well. Bucs and Giants didnt, so they get to sit home for the playoffs. They know the system just as well as anyone else, mising out on the playoffs in only on them, not the format.</p><p> </p><p> But if we were going to have a hypothetical "which one deserves it more after Seattle?" then its got to be the Giants. Bucs got to play the Panthers twice and all of Seattle's division (which, you think is too terrible to allow even the winner of into the playoffs), that should almost spot you 6 wins.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yes but with three divisions there was less of a chance of a crappy team winning a division. The four divisions have only been around since 2002, so this very well could be the first of many times in the future when a sub .500 team makes it in.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Yeah this is the thing I think the NFL should potentially re-think. Every wild card team is better than the division winner they play this year. The closest thing to an exception is 10-6 Eagles taking on the 10-6 Packers, except for the part where Green Bay already beat Philadelphia in Philadelphia this season. I like how the NBA does it: a division winner is guaranteed at worst a 4 seed, but if the 5 seed has a better record they get the home court advantage. <p> </p><p> You could argue that doing that would take away some of the luster of being divisional champs, but being the best team in the NFC West is not much of an accomplishment. In the AFC West, Kansas City couldn't even win 3 games in their traditionally mediocre division and yet they still get rewarded with a home game while the Jets and Ravens have to travel because they play in the same divisions as the top two teams in the league? Not that winning 10 games is ever easy, but the Chiefs last place schedule meant games against Buffalo and Cleveland, plus the AFC West played the NFC West, so they got 4 out of conference wins against awful teams, and for this they get to host a playoff game?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree with this, I would say that this is probably the best bet with the four divisions.</p>

[GatorBait19]

So I looked at the thread from the beginning of last offseason and man did we all make some bold and dumb predictions lol.

 

1) No one expected the Bucs to win more than 8 games.

2) Most thought the Redskins would contend for a playoff.

3) Cowboys were a couple SB favorites.

4) People thought the Pats were rebuilding for the future. Well they are but the present isn't looking to shabby.

5)NFC South was the best conf this year in the NFL

6) Most thought Carolina would be an okay team with people thinking 6 to 8 or 9 wins was in grasp.

7) Bryan Bulaga did a very good job for the packers as a tackle.

8) Randy Moss, Brett Farve, Darren Sharper aren't elite anymore.

9) Wade Phillips, Brad Childress, Josh McDaniels, Eric Mangin, John Fox, Tom Cable are no longer employed. 3 of the 6 are not a surprise, two where supposed to contend for the SB this year though

10) We saw the future is bright with young QB's, Matt Ryan, Sam Bradford, Josh Freeman, Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow.

11) The NFC West is a joke

12) Both Manning struggled

13) Young coaches are the way to go

14) There is still a lockout looming

15) The Glazer are reportedly putting Man U up for sale

16) For the first time in a long time the SB playing teams made it back to the playoffs

17) Tom Brady is the MVP favorite, but has a lot of suiters like Brees, Manning, Ryan, Freeman.

18) With the amount of injuries piling up 18 games is going to be hard to sell to player with out a full retirement type benefit.

19) Michael Vick can throw

20) McNabb might soon be on his third team in 12 months, him and Moss could join forces in Tenn. and make music together.

21) I don't think we ever have seen 6 of the top 10 teams picking in one draft have a chance to win their division or make the playoffs the next year (Rams, Bucs, Raiders, Chiefs, Jags, Seahwaks.)

[GruntMark]

I'm sure I was wrong about a lot of stuff.

 

But I did pick the Seahawks to win a crappy division, so that's a small feather in my cap.

[GatorBait19]

I'm sure I was wrong about a lot of stuff.

 

But I did pick the Seahawks to win a crappy division, so that's a small feather in my cap.

 

we were all wrong about stuff.

[GruntMark]

So, the Saints are the worst playoff team then?

[moon_lit_tears]

Is it bad that I hope the Ravens lose tomorrow?

[GruntMark]

Is it bad that I hope the Ravens lose tomorrow?

 

No.

 

It would be bad if you hope the Packers lose.

[Eigan]

That Marshawn Lynch run is the stuff of legends. Incredible.

[cappyboy]

Is it bad that I hope the Ravens lose tomorrow?

 

Not at all. I have them in the Grey Dog pick pool because I expect them to beat Kansas City. But I rather hope to be wrong in that one as well. For obvious reasons.

[moon_lit_tears]

No.

 

It would be bad if you hope the Packers lose.

 

I hope they lose too.

 

Go Seahawks all the way to the superbowl.

[The Final Countdown]

I hope they lose too.

 

Go Seahawks all the way to the superbowl.

Oh god, that would be terrible.

[Prophet]

Oh god, that would be terrible.

 

Seahawks vs. Chiefs ... Superbowl Legen ... wait for it ... dary!

[moon_lit_tears]

Oh god, that would be terrible.

 

Seahawks vs. Chiefs ... Superbowl Legen ... wait for it ... dary!

 

What he said!

 

I think it would be cool if the Seahawks won. I like rooting for the underdogs!

[BHK1978]

I have no choice but to watch them each and every week because they are the local team. They just seem to be playing good but not great. Yes they win but they seem to be missing something. Like the game against the Chargers. There is no way the Chargers should have been allowed to make that a game and yet they did.

 

To me they seem like a team that is going to tear through the regular season and then come playoff time they will be eliminated.

 

I was right. Sorry this was in regards to the Patriots losing yesterday.

[Comradebot]

KUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHNNNN!!!!!

 

 

 

 

[moon_lit_tears]

If the Steelers win the super bowl I will be pissed.

 

I hate the Steelers..

[Comradebot]

If the Steelers win the super bowl I will be pissed.

 

I hate the Steelers..

 

Well, what can ya say? Big Ben just forced his way in... to the Super Bowl.

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I know how wrong that is, and I apologize profusely.

 

 

But, seriously, go Packers. They're one of the three teams that, under almost no circumstances, would I never stop loving (others being the Texans and the Rams). Great organization that tends to have great people in it. Considering how many injuries they've had to overcome just to get into the playoffs, I'm both amazed and rather chipper to see them fight their way into the biggest game of the year.

 

Also, they have John Kuhn. Kuhn is awesome, and that can't be argued. That game against the Giants towards the end of the regular season was surreal, with the fans calling for the freakin' fullback of all people to get the ball before it was even snapped. That, and from what I understand he's a truly amazing, down to earth person off the field, which is where part of his "blue collar folk hero" reputation comes from.

 

Finally, have any of yall watched Aaron Rodgers being interviewed? Guy cracks me up with his mannerisms.

 

Go Pack go.