EPTOn January 20 2015 00:57 oneofthem wrote:
going with team brady on this one
going with team brady on this one
:D
NFL 2014 Season - Page 323
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
Gryffindor_us
United States5606 Posts
:D | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On January 20 2015 00:40 farvacola wrote: And the Seahawks that show up at that next game are going to look like a different team out there, if the past is any indication. Repeatedly pointing out how gimped the Packers were doesn't change how volatile the Hawks are. Yea, his assessment is swimming in homer-related bias. If you really think that the Seahawks come into this game looking questionable or as an underdog after that kind of comeback, then you're just delusional. We've seen how good the Seahawks are. They're defending Super Bowl champions. They have by far the best defense in the league (which also played an OUTSTANDING game yesterday that was only overshadowed by their awful offense and haters trying to blame the Packers instead of giving the 'Hawks credit), and they have a huge momentum swing. They've proven themselves time and time again both last year and this year. This should be a really good Super Bowl game. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On January 19 2015 23:11 AgentW wrote: That's interesting, I think that it's the exact opposite. Luck and Manning were the most sure fire QBs to come out of their draft in their generations, so it doesn't seem fair to attribute their successes exclusively to the Colts. As for your Browns point, I think it comes down to the fact that there is only something like 12 people on the planet who can play Super Bowl caliber football, and the Browns just keep trying to find one of them and miss. Everyone misses on QBs. I think that the successful ones are merely exceptions. They were not just the most sure fire QBs of their generations they were by far the most sure fire QBs. It goes Manning/Luck>Huge Gap>Ryan/Palmer/Eli/Rivers>>Gap>>Stafford/etc Its not even comparable to the Pats (who picked Brady in the 6th) who won 3 SBs when Brady was still a mid-tier QB or the Packers who took Favre and Rodgers as mid-first-round high upside picks. Also, Tony Dungy, hugely overrated. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24976543/report-nfl-investigating-patriots-for-deflating-footballs | ||
|
y0su
Finland7871 Posts
Just got done watching last night's games... Damn! that NFC game was entertaining!! (Also I've enjoyed watching the last few teams that beat Det get beat...) | ||
|
Micro_Jackson
Germany2002 Posts
On January 20 2015 02:14 Stratos_speAr wrote: Yea, his assessment is swimming in homer-related bias. If you really think that the Seahawks come into this game looking questionable or as an underdog after that kind of comeback, then you're just delusional. We've seen how good the Seahawks are. They're defending Super Bowl champions. They have by far the best defense in the league (which also played an OUTSTANDING game yesterday that was only overshadowed by their awful offense and haters trying to blame the Packers instead of giving the 'Hawks credit), and they have a huge momentum swing. They've proven themselves time and time again both last year and this year. This should be a really good Super Bowl game. I agree. I dont know who will be the favorite but this playoffs felt like the last with great NFC teams knocking each other out to play a weaker opponent in the superbowl. However NE looked better then Denver in their championship game. You could argue that Green Bay was the better team for 56 minutes, that they have no receivers and no offense besides Lynch. But the thing that would bug me if i were Bill Belichick is Wilson had horrible 3 1/2 quaters, throw 4 INT, they had 1 fumble bad defensive field position all day, no pass rush, no protection for Wilson AND THEY STILL WON. Was it lucky? Sure. But you have to be pretty good to play like shit and still win a championship game. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
giftdgecko
United States2126 Posts
On January 20 2015 03:08 cLutZ wrote: Oh. And this is hilarious. http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24976543/report-nfl-investigating-patriots-for-deflating-footballs Such a ridiculous thing... Seattle is good, you have to be good to get lucky sometimes. They kept themselves in a position to take advantage of the mistakes from GB. That said they needed some mistakes from GB to win. Pats should probably be the favorites but it should be close, no way NE puts up 45 on them even with 2 DB's injured. NE is historically bad at dealing with running QB's and will look close at the GB game. I don't expect nearly as much blitzing as with the Colts. Seattle has inferior recievers, TE's, and QB to Indy but a rugged run game. I expect Collins to spy for Wilson and Hightower to shadow Lynch leading to a pretty full box. Maybe even Chung slides in to add some more clutter. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
iKill[ShocK]
Vietnam3530 Posts
On January 20 2015 03:45 andrewlt wrote: Hoping Seahawks beat Pats with a last second Hail Mary helmet catch. no pls | ||
GTR
51584 Posts
https://jimlightsfootballblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/1998-oakland-raiders-mini-camp-playbook.pdf | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32132 Posts
On January 19 2015 22:41 GrandInquisitor wrote: Honestly I don't think it's an accident that two well-managed franchises picked up Luck, Rodgers, Brady, etc. You think that Cleveland was just "unlucky" with every single QB they drafted? Sure, Manning probably is a fundamentally better player than Leaf, but at some point you need to give the organization credit for being able to develop QBs, instead of just failing to develop QBs and then labeling them a bust in hindsight. If the Browns or Redskins or [insert bottom-dwelling team here] had drafted Luck, Rodgers, or Brady, those QBs would probably be "busts" too. really the good franchise stuff kind of started with Brady/Belichek. Outside of the tail end of Bledsoe's career there, the Pats were pretty shitty for a while. Also, maybe not Brady, since he was a lower draft pick and didn't exactly come in and play elite right away, but those other two would have been at least above average starters anywhere imo. They're generational talents. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32132 Posts
On January 19 2015 13:50 giftdgecko wrote: Because I'm against paying any player more than 20 mill a year, and the fact that when you overpay the QB's you usually get a team with a pretty good offense and a lot of missing parts. Guy's gotta get paid cuz he's damn good but is he really the best player in football/does he warrant the deal they are talking about? this is absurd wow how did I miss this In his third year, the dude threw up damn near 4800 yds and 40 tds. That is with about half a season of starting a goddamn awful rb who put up 3.3 ypc with his qb going bonkers (seriously, Richardson is AWFUL--how can you be that bad when teams aren't even pretending to stack the box) He did that with TY Hilton being his only genuine weapon. Wayne is awesome, but over the hill. Moncrief might be something eventually but he's nothing special right now. Fleener is about as goofy as he is ugly. He would have 200+ more yards if he wasn't such a bumbling retard. Luck should be getting daily foot rubs from him since he made that dude's career. long story short, Luck is at the very worst going to be a top 5 qb for the forseeable future (imo, him and Rodgers are going to be the new Manning/Brady for the better part of the next decade. Wilson will probably be like Romo if they open up that offense more when lynch leaves). He absolutely deserves whatever payday is coming his way, and from a $ perspective, whatever they sign him to now is going to be middle of the pack money in 5, maybe as little as 3 years. You pay that money if you know you will be top 5 at the most important position. | ||
|
URfavHO
United States514 Posts
SiriusXM's Eddie Borsilli reports the "buzz" at the Senior Bowl is that Adam Gase "screwed up" getting the 49ers' job in his final interview. My bet is that Gase probably said Harbaugh did a good job or something and that probably gashed a paper cut on Jed York's delicate ego. | ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
On January 21 2015 07:46 URfavHO wrote: My bet is that Gase probably said Harbaugh did a good job or something and that probably gashed a paper cut on Jed York's delicate ego. I can see it now: "I'd like to have control over player personnel". | ||
|
giftdgecko
United States2126 Posts
On January 21 2015 06:58 QuanticHawk wrote: this is absurd wow how did I miss this In his third year, the dude threw up damn near 4800 yds and 40 tds. That is with about half a season of starting a goddamn awful rb who put up 3.3 ypc with his qb going bonkers (seriously, Richardson is AWFUL--how can you be that bad when teams aren't even pretending to stack the box) He did that with TY Hilton being his only genuine weapon. Wayne is awesome, but over the hill. Moncrief might be something eventually but he's nothing special right now. Fleener is about as goofy as he is ugly. He would have 200+ more yards if he wasn't such a bumbling retard. Luck should be getting daily foot rubs from him since he made that dude's career. long story short, Luck is at the very worst going to be a top 5 qb for the forseeable future (imo, him and Rodgers are going to be the new Manning/Brady for the better part of the next decade. Wilson will probably be like Romo if they open up that offense more when lynch leaves). He absolutely deserves whatever payday is coming his way, and from a $ perspective, whatever they sign him to now is going to be middle of the pack money in 5, maybe as little as 3 years. You pay that money if you know you will be top 5 at the most important position. 25 mill a year is just too much imo. Dude's making 3.4 mill in 2015 and maybe you can front load some FA signings if you keep that in place, but you made the same point I was trying to make in that the offense is below average around him and the defense lacks any real stars. Being in the top third of the league for an extended period is pretty rough to navigate because they literally get what comes to them in the draft. I just see this team being the same as it was with Peyton where there's regular season success and a playoff win or two but never a real contender. Other "top" QB's like Rodgers (which you mentioned and is probably the best comparison) are getting 20-22 mill on average throughout their contract. That extra 3-5 mill gets you an upgrade at probably 2 positions? It just feels like the Colts gave up too much leverage in the talks if this is how it actually plays out and he averages 25 mill a year... | ||
|
AgentW
United States7725 Posts
| ||
|
Gryffindor_us
United States5606 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
| ||
