RE: RE:NFL News (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk



Message

Guest -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 7:50:14 AM)

Imagine that, the pilled up hillbilly isn't sure if he's going to play next season.  This season isn't even over and he's talking about his retirement again. 



John Childress -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 7:53:19 AM)

ALRIGHT SPORTS FANS
Let's see people put their knowledge down in print.  Who do you think will make the playoffs in the NFC?  Here are my guesses:
Division Winners
East: Giants*
North: Vikings
South: Panthers
West: Cardinals*
Wild Card: Eagles
Wild Card: Buccaneers


I think the Falcons lose this week in Minnesota.  That will give the Vikings the North and most likely eliminate ATL.  I can't see Dallas beating the Ravens and Eagles in back to back weeks when Romo is throwing so poorly.  He looks like his thumb still is not healed.  However, I would not be shocked to see Dallas win the last game of the season and take the spot because we know the Eagles are not that clutch!  Tampa is playing poorly and Garcia is hurt.  But right now they lead the wild card standings and their last 2 games are at home against losing teams.  Even if they lose to San Diego they probably can grab a spot by beating the lowly Raiders in the last game unless ATL upsets the Vikings this week.



Tim Cady -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 8:10:44 AM)

San Diego Chargers (6-8)
Where do you start with the what-might-have-beens if the Chargers fall one week shy of playing Denver for the division title at home in Week 17? Maybe Week 2, when they lost at Denver in the game Ed Hochuli will never entirely live down.

[&:]I wonder how many strings Ed can pull to make this scenario happen? I have thought all along that SD would win this division, Denver would be a worse division winner than Arizona, imo.

As far as the NFC. I will go in order of seed

1. Carolina -S 1
2. Minnesota-N
3. NYG-E
4. Arizona-W
5. Dallas-WC
6. Tampa -WC

I think the Eagles will drop to Washington(just a gut feeling based on the season, but don't worry philly fans I am terrible picking this year) this week. Dallas will scum by and beat Balt. Then I believe the Eagles/Dallas game may not matter even if Tampa loses this week to SD, because they finish with the Raiders, making 10wins.


AFC
1.Pittsburgh-N
2.Tennessee-S
3.New York Jets-E
4.San Diego-W
5.New England-WC
6.Indianapolis-WC Edit I had a brainfart earliar, even though I think they will lose tonight, I think they will make the playoffs over Baltimore.

[&:]I hope these selections are helpful to betters.



John Childress -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 8:59:26 AM)

Denver, San Diego, and Arizona are three teams that do not deserve to be in the playoffs.  I see the pats beating out the fading jets for the East



John Childress -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 8:59:51 AM)

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/36285644.html

Sad story for former Eagle and Crimson Tide RB



Tim Cady -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 9:33:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

Denver, San Diego, and Arizona are three teams that do not deserve to be in the playoffs.  I see the pats beating out the fading jets for the East


I actually had the pats winning the division, but going off memory, I think the Jets hold the tiebreakers. You are right though the Jets are fading fast and very well might lose at Seattle this week. I absolutely agree on Arizona and Denver not being deserving, to me San Diego has not played well enough, but to they have the talent to at least make a game of it.

I also think that Cutler and Farve are jokes for Pro Bowl. Roethlisberger, Rivers and Pennington more deserving imo.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 9:37:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tim Cady

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

Denver, San Diego, and Arizona are three teams that do not deserve to be in the playoffs.  I see the pats beating out the fading jets for the East


I actually had the pats winning the division, but going off memory, I think the Jets hold the tiebreakers. You are right though the Jets are fading fast and very well might lose at Seattle this week. I absolutely agree on Arizona and Denver not being deserving, to me San Diego has not played well enough, but to they have the talent to at least make a game of it.

I also think that Cutler and Farve are jokes for Pro Bowl. Roethlisberger, Rivers and Pennington more deserving imo.


I wouldn't call Cutler a joke...but Favre certainly is.  I agree on 'berger, Rivers and Pennington though.



Tim Cady -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 10:04:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drviking

stairwell was placed on IR today


Shoot they might win this week![;)]

Marty get a packer blow up doll and sleep with already!

You are right Farve would not have as horrible a record with the Pack this year because they would have benched him if they were below 500 whether it was his fault or not. The collapse of the team can not be blamed on Rodgers, their defense collapsed and their oline has taken a huge step back and Ryan Grant is proving to be the average back most of us thought he was, although I was lobbying that they should pay him based on last year, because of the short shelf life of RBs. I think he could be above average with a really good line, but he is closer to Chester than to Adrian at this point. He will be able to tell his grandchildren about the day he destroyed the Vikings and bettered AD basck in Ought Seven.[8D]

One more thing, if you sincerely want the Packers to continue lose, you will root for the Packers to keep that Ass Clown as GM.




Tim Cady -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 10:06:03 AM)

Hey Scott,

Maybe joke is to harsh, but he is too inconsistent(large number of bonehead ints.) to go ahead of Rivers, Roethisberger and Pennington.



marty -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 10:39:58 AM)

Favre would have given the Packers MORE early leads, therefore Grant would have ran better.  Grant is a GREAT back (not as good as AD, of course), that hasn't taken off like last year because they haven't had the early leads, he was hurt earlier in the season, and for whatever reason, they've been going away from him in the playcalling (calling on Jackson, and using the FB once in while, which costed them in the last game). 

The Packers would right now have 8 or 9 wins with Favre because of his leadership.  He instills confidence that they can come from behind, that they can pull out a close game, and when he gets on somebody for a missed block or running a wrong route he has their attention.  Rogers has NOT earned that yet, and hasn't learned a lot of things yet.    

MANY Packers' losses CAN be blamed on Rogers.  He gets them off to slow starts, plays allright in the 2, 3 and early 4th quarters, only to NOT come through in the last 5 minutes of the game.  He either ends in a sack, INT or watching his defense give up the game winning score in the last 5 minutes.

Favre has taken a team with a worse 2ndary, and has them now with 9 wins.  You can throw out all the stats you want, but it is leadership at the most important position that gets the job done, and that is why the Jets went from 4 wins to 9 (10 or 11), and why the Packers went from 13 wins to 5 (6 or 7).

I sincerely DO want the Packers to continue to lose, and I DO root for the Packers to keep that Ass Clown as GM.  I am GLAD Favre is out of the division, the Vikings now have an opportunity if they can edge out the Bears. 



Trekgeekscott -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 10:52:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tim Cady

Hey Scott,

Maybe joke is to harsh, but he is too inconsistent(large number of bonehead ints.) to go ahead of Rivers, Roethisberger and Pennington.


Well I did agree with you on that, Tim.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 10:55:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

MANY Packers' losses CAN be blamed on Rogers.  He gets them off to slow starts, plays allright in the 2, 3 and early 4th quarters, only to NOT come through in the last 5 minutes of the game. 

He either ends in a sack,


Is that his fault or the protection afforded by the line?

quote:

INT


In half the cases of INTs it is a great play by the defense or a tip, not a bad decision.  So this is 1/2 his fault IMHO

quote:

or watching his defense give up the game winning score in the last 5 minutes.



And just how is this Rodgers' fault exactly?



marty -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 11:35:21 AM)

I think the sacks at the end of the game are usually Roger's fault; experienced, good QBs will try to make something happen and NOT get sacked.  He needs to get better at anticipation and avoiding the rush, having a good internal clock at how fast the rush will come, considering the game situation.  

As you said, the INTs ARE half his fault, sometimes the WRs, sometimes a great play by the defense.  Good QB play results in more good plays or TDs at the end, more wins.  Like the Packers getting 13 wins last year, compared to 5 (6 or 7), this year.  OR the Jets getting 9 (10 or 11) wins this year, compared to 4 last year.

Watching his defense give up the winning TD is partially Rodgers fault because he didn't have his team in the lead.  He probably played poorly to start the game (the Packers are one of the worst teams in the league in 1st quarter scoring), or he didn't get his team ahead at other decisive parts in the game.    

Rodgers has yet to lead his team from behind to a victory at the end of a game.  Therefore, he doesn't have the confidence of his supporting cast.  Rodgers has also rarely put his team ahead with a decisive drive at the end, which Favre has done several times with the Jets, and MANY times last year. 

The Packers have won decisively when Rodgers has given them the early lead.  IF he did that more often, they MIGHT have broken the NFL record (which they were on pace for earlier in the year) for MOST points scored from a defense.   He was helped by a punt return TD and big run by Grant in the win over Minnesota.  Had early lead against Detroit, got the lead in the 3rd quarter against Seattle (didn't have to win it at crunchtime with 5 minutes to go), the defense and special teams beat Indy, and they got the early lead on Chicago and dominated. 

The big difference in GB this year, is that after a 13-3 season and one play away from a SB, they gave up their leader and went to a QB with NO experience, and the result has been not so good.   

Having said all that, I think the Packers definitely took a step backwards this year, but because of that (Rodgers getting all this experience), they might be taking a step FORWARDS next year (whereas NEXT year probably would have looked like THIS year had they kept Favre for ONE more year, and Rodgers 1st started NEXT year).  While they would have been behind for next year, I believe Favre would have gotten them into the playoffs THIS year, how far, we'll just NEVER know. 



Lynn G. -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 11:44:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

You can throw out all the stats you want, but it is leadership at the most important position that gets the job done, and that is why the Jets went from 4 wins to 9 (10 or 11), and why the Packers went from 13 wins to 5 (6 or 7).
 


We'll never know the answer, but I believe that that elusive "leadership" factor may not have existed if the Packers had given in to the extortion and kept Favre. Somewhere in the mix of all that, there was a report that most of the young guys on the team were supporting Rodgers and not Favre, and had they kept the old geezer, there may have been some division in the locker room.

{shrug}

Can't say for sure.



marty -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 11:47:14 AM)

Maybe you're right Lynn, which would have been BETTER, because that would have put Rogers another year back.

But I believe there was already some of that LAST year, and Favre kept things together and led them to a 13-3 record, a lopsided win over Seattle in the playoffs, and one play away from the SB, losing to the SB winner.  As I've said before, I'm VERY happy the Packers let go of their leader.  The Vikes now have a GREAT shot at winning the division.   



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 11:53:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

You can throw out all the stats you want, but it is leadership at the most important position that gets the job done, and that is why the Jets went from 4 wins to 9 (10 or 11), and why the Packers went from 13 wins to 5 (6 or 7).



We'll never know the answer, but I believe that that elusive "leadership" factor may not have existed if the Packers had given in to the extortion and kept Favre. Somewhere in the mix of all that, there was a report that most of the young guys on the team were supporting Rodgers and not Favre, and had they kept the old geezer, there may have been some division in the locker room.

{shrug}

Can't say for sure.


I think that's obvious, the team has rallied around the young kid and are really playing hard for him. All their young stars are tearing it up because they love Rodgers so much. [;)]



Trekgeekscott -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 11:53:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

I think the sacks at the end of the game are usually Roger's fault; experienced, good QBs will try to make something happen and NOT get sacked.  He needs to get better at anticipation and avoiding the rush, having a good internal clock at how fast the rush will come, considering the game situation.  

As you said, the INTs ARE half his fault, sometimes the WRs, sometimes a great play by the defense.  Good QB play results in more good plays or TDs at the end, more wins.  Like the Packers getting 13 wins last year, compared to 5 (6 or 7), this year.  OR the Jets getting 9 (10 or 11) wins this year, compared to 4 last year.


and sometimes the pics are rushed throws by a QB trying to make something happen...Favre threw up ducks all the time, including late in games (remember ther NFCCG last year?) trying to make something happen...and that was an experienced QB.

quote:

Watching his defense give up the winning TD is partially Rodgers fault because he didn't have his team in the lead.  He probably played poorly to start the game (the Packers are one of the worst teams in the league in 1st quarter scoring), or he didn't get his team ahead at other decisive parts in the game.    

Rodgers has yet to lead his team from behind to a victory at the end of a game.  Therefore, he doesn't have the confidence of his supporting cast.  Rodgers has also rarely put his team ahead with a decisive drive at the end, which Favre has done several times with the Jets, and MANY times last year. 

The Packers have won decisively when Rodgers has given them the early lead.  IF he did that more often, they MIGHT have broken the NFL record (which they were on pace for earlier in the year) for MOST points scored from a defense.   He was helped by a punt return TD and big run by Grant in the win over Minnesota.  Had early lead against Detroit, got the lead in the 3rd quarter against Seattle (didn't have to win it at crunchtime with 5 minutes to go), the defense and special teams beat Indy, and they got the early lead on Chicago and dominated. 


Rodgers fault alone that they didn't have a bigger lead?  What about the defense not giving up so many points?  What about the running back running better?  It's Rodger's fault?  That's a stretch at best, utterly preposterous at worst.


quote:

The big difference in GB this year, is that after a 13-3 season and one play away from a SB, they gave up their leader and went to a QB with NO experience, and the result has been not so good.   

 
Funny how you never mention that the ONE PLAY that kept them out was a dipshit throw by the very experienced and so much better Brett Favre.

quote:

Having said all that, I think the Packers definitely took a step backwards this year, but because of that (Rodgers getting all this experience), they might be taking a step FORWARDS next year (whereas NEXT year probably would have looked like THIS year had they kept Favre for ONE more year, and Rodgers 1st started NEXT year).  While they would have been behind for next year, I believe Favre would have gotten them into the playoffs THIS year, how far, we'll just NEVER know. 


It's all speculation...but facts are pretty clear.  The defense took a nosedive this year...Woodson and Harris aren't getting any younger.  They have no pass rush.  The running game stinks.  Rodgers effect is a game or two at most...not the 8 game slide they took.



Easy E -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 11:54:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

And just how is this Rodgers' fault exactly?


It's like Rodgers says, the fans need to shut up and get behind him.

He's diong a great job, you can't blame him for the losses. And that attitude will serve him well as he goes along.



Lynn G. -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 11:58:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

You can throw out all the stats you want, but it is leadership at the most important position that gets the job done, and that is why the Jets went from 4 wins to 9 (10 or 11), and why the Packers went from 13 wins to 5 (6 or 7).



We'll never know the answer, but I believe that that elusive "leadership" factor may not have existed if the Packers had given in to the extortion and kept Favre. Somewhere in the mix of all that, there was a report that most of the young guys on the team were supporting Rodgers and not Favre, and had they kept the old geezer, there may have been some division in the locker room.

{shrug}

Can't say for sure.


I think that's obvious, the team has rallied around the young kid and are really playing hard for him. All their young stars are tearing it up because they love Rodgers so much. [;)]


I caught the sarcasm - but actually I think the season DID start that way. I think they DID rally around him, and the team started out quite well. But as things started to unravel tempers naturally flare and they're turning on each other. Gosh, what a shame.



marty -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 12:08:51 PM)

I feel like I have to make the same points.  Yes Favre thew a bad pick against the Giants, but the Giants have a good pass rush.  Rodgers has done than MANY times this year against teams that don't have the Giant's pass rush, and the games weren't 50 below zero.

True, Favre made that throw, BUT he also made MANY clutch throws that led to a 13-3 record last year, and MANY that have led to the Jets winning 9 (possibly 11) games this year.

As I've stated, YES it IS Rodgers fault they're rarely in the lead late in the 4th quarter, because he does NOT give them early leads in the 1st quarter (they are one of the WORST teams in 1st quarter scoring), and RBs DO run better when they are given a lead.  THAT is part of the reason why Grant ran better last year, he ran with more leads, and THAT is also why Thomas Jones is running MUCH this year than last.

The Packers' defense is also playing worse because they are not playing with the lead as often.  Several times the Packers DID have early leads this year, the defense dominated and scored points, like last year.  The pass rush also played better last year, in part because they played ahead more often. 

Rodgers IS the difference, and it is from a 6 to 8 game slide.  AND Favre IS the difference for the Jets, and it is a climb upwards from 5 to 7 games.  It's obvious.  I would even take the middle and say the Packers are about 7 games worse going from Favre to a totally inexperienced QB, and the Jets are 6 games better going with Favre.       





Tim Cady -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 12:11:05 PM)

Scott[8|]

I just meant to concede that joke was too harsh for Cutler. Accurate for Farve.



marty -> RE: RE:NFL News (12/18/2008 12:14:17 PM)

It's like Rodgers says, the fans need to shut up and get behind him.
 
I think Rodgers is very intelligent, but doesn't come across as very likeable in interviews.  That MIGHT hurt him in getting players behind him, and could also hurt with trying to get officials behind him.  Officials MIGHT be biased towards players, coaches, or teams that they like better.   



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 12:14:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

I caught the sarcasm - but actually I think the season DID start that way. I think they DID rally around him, and the team started out quite well. But as things started to unravel tempers naturally flare and they're turning on each other. Gosh, what a shame.


This is all quack psych on my part.. but I think ANY team with any player with an ounce of self respect rally around each other going through something like that. I don't think, especially using hindsight, they were rallying around AR in any way shape or form.

And I would say that when he got lucky against us, pulled something out of his butt, and started getting all the accolades, and not only took the spotlight, but reveled in it.. he pretty much lost his team.



Tim Cady -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 12:16:32 PM)

I say Pennington has done more for the Dolphins than Farve has done for the Jets and I believe that a healthy Pennington(like he has been this year) could have done the same for the Jets. Just as I feel Brett would have had similiar results as Rodgers with the Packers. Trust me I have seen Farve a ton, because the dumbass twin cities cbs station, thinks that we all want to see him, so we get every Jet game that is not the same time as a Vikings game.



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/18/2008 12:18:25 PM)

People see what they want to with Favre. It's not a joke he's in the pro bowl to anyone that doesn't hate him. It's entirely expected.

I like a balance between stats and wins, frankly. I'm not all one way or the other, but I do think Philip Rivers is putting up nice stats, and leading his team for crap.



Page: <<   < prev  123 124 [125] 126 127   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode