|
Trin Tragula posted:They're two of the oldest rules in the book and two of the most important and influential - they were created in the 1900s to ban the kind of mass-momentum plays that had hundreds of players dying on the field and the President threatening to ban the sport unless it could be made safer. Yep, because back in those days a lot of the time you just had an amorphous mass of dudes all swarmed around the ball carrier, pushing in opposite directions. This resulted in people getting crushed and/or trampled and caused all loving kinds of severe life-threatening injuries - because everyone else on the offense was pushing/pulling/propping the runner to keep him standing as all the defenders were trying to get him on the ground. You can't control what's going on in this human blob - half the time you can't even see it. Plays would end and there would be two guys with broken necks and poo poo like that 
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2011 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
Bashez posted:A bunch of idiots get motivated when they think someone isn't giving them enough respect so coaches feed this poo poo like crazy to motivate people. Belichick is really good at this. This goes hand in hand with bulletin board material. If someone says something like "oh yeah we feel like we can score a touchdown against them and hopefully our defense will carry us" you blow that poo poo up and post "oh yeah we feel like we can score" somewhere the defense will see it all the time and then post "our defense will carry us" so that the offense gets angry too. After that you see if you can't suss out some signals from your video, while listening to some Bon Jovi. Yes. Then your lovely team loses, and doesn't even make the playoffs. It's easy to talk poo poo in that case. Clearly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:How much is the Steelers Super Bowl XLIII ball I got with my SI subscription worth? This could be important, because then it would be a fun relic of an earlier time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2011 05:41
|
|
|
Why are the divisional playoffs called that? Is it because the division winners play?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2011 13:42
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:Is it also a phone? I wish to god that it was. I told my roommate it was and he thought I was serious, he was so disappointed when I opened the package.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2011 05:33
|
|
|
Rathen posted:Why are the divisional playoffs called that? Is it because the division winners play? It's because the Elite 8 was already taken. The real reason is because the marquee teams (the #1 and #2 seeds in both the AFC/NFC who are automatically division winners) play this week after spending the week off admiring how swell they are. It can be a division winner matchup only if the #3 and #4 seeds survive against the wildcards. Usually at least one wildcard will bring down a division winner(usually the #4 seed which is in a weaker division will fall to the 2nd best team in a really good division)
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
pasaluki posted:Usually at least one wildcard will bring down a division winner(usually the #4 seed which is in a weaker division will fall to the 2nd best team in a really good division) I came in to ask a question pretty much about this. I've been reading people saying things like "the superbowl could be the battle of the sixth seeds!" but I don't see how it's such a big deal. In Australia's AFL this would be remarkable because there's a single league ladder. In the NFL it seems conceivable, even likely, that a couple of divisions could share the best teams in the league. Isn't that the point of having wildcards? I follow the Packers from afar so I'm probably confused as well as biased 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2011 03:08
|
|
|
deep square leg posted:I came in to ask a question pretty much about this. I've been reading people saying things like "the superbowl could be the battle of the sixth seeds!" but I don't see how it's such a big deal. In Australia's AFL this would be remarkable because there's a single league ladder. In the NFL it seems conceivable, even likely, that a couple of divisions could share the best teams in the league. Isn't that the point of having wildcards? It's extremely unlikely the best teams actually go to the superbowl. Football is a weird game that way, I don't think anyone's confused that the Seahawks are better than the Saints. Or the Jets Pats for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2011 14:47
|
|
|
Bashez posted:It's extremely unlikely the best teams actually go to the superbowl. Football is a weird game that way, I don't think anyone's confused that the Seahawks are better than the Saints. Or the Jets Pats for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
Who is Megatron? He seems to be a wide receiver in an NFC North team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2011 22:14
|
|
|
OperaMouse posted:Who is Megatron? Calvin Johnson.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2011 22:25
|
|
|
He's like if you took the height, speed, and hands of the best receivers and put them together in one. His measurables are off the charts and on a good team he would be shredding the record books for #2 all-time. I firmly believe this. When he did the weigh-in at the combine, his freaking muscles had muscles. Deion Sanders says he told his wife to turn off the tv.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 00:49
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:He's like if you took the height, speed, and hands of the best receivers and put them together in one. His measurables are off the charts and on a good team he would be shredding the record books for #2 all-time. I firmly believe this. And yet Al Davis, who usually masturbates to the idea of a receiver like that, took JaMarcus Russell over him. One of the great mysteries...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 01:38
|
|
|
JaMarcus could throw a football 200 yards while lying flat on his chest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 01:57
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:He's like if you took the height, speed, and hands of the best receivers and put them together in one. His measurables are off the charts and on a good team he would be shredding the record books for #2 all-time. I firmly believe this. Then again, he's not the first and won't be the last really good player on (insert bad team here) that gets overlooked, unfortunately. The worst part: His best statistical year just had to be when the Lions went 0-16. On ANY other team this stat line does NOT get snubbed come Pro Bowl time: pre:G Rec Yards Avg Y/G Long TD 20+ 40+ 2008 Detroit Lions 16 78 1,331 17.1 83.2 96T 12 21 7 e: VVV If Stafford stays healthy and the secondary improves, the NFCN becomes a brutal 3-horse race (sorry, Vikings... it's your turn to sit in the corner for at least a year or three) and Megatron will destroy everyone
Fenrir fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Jan 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 03:34
|
|
|
Fenrir posted:Definitely. Put him on the Patriots, Colts, Packers, Saints, Chargers (insert other teams with very prolific passing games and consistent QB play here) and there's no way in HELL it's 2010 before he makes his first pro bowl. Matt Stafford is getting adamantium shoulders and we're taking the league by storm next season, just you loving wait I know the TFF consensus is that the Lions are trending up, thanks for the support guys
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 03:37
|
|
|
deep square leg posted:In the NFL it seems conceivable, even likely, that a couple of divisions could share the best teams in the league. Isn't that the point of having wildcards? It is the point of the wildcards in general,but there have been plenty of times where all of the division winners had better records than the wildcards. This year was sort of special in how good the wildcards were and how bad some of the 3 and 4 seeds were. Because of this there was sort of an elevation of the wildcard teams and a backlash against the division winners since the division winners got to host the game despite having a weaker record. With Seattle being 7-9 and still making the playoffs there was more controversy about this than there usually is. The last time that it was like this was when San Diego made the playoffs by winning their division and New England didn't make the playoffs with a much better record.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
pasaluki posted:It is the point of the wildcards in general,but there have been plenty of times where all of the division winners had better records than the wildcards. This year was sort of special in how good the wildcards were and how bad some of the 3 and 4 seeds were. Because of this there was sort of an elevation of the wildcard teams and a backlash against the division winners since the division winners got to host the game despite having a weaker record. I love that the last four teams that've made the playoffs with an 8-8 record or worse have actually won their first playoff game
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 07:51
|
|
|
Rathen posted:Why are the divisional playoffs called that? Is it because the division winners play? i think its a relic from when the second wildcard was added. Back then wild card weekend was just played between the 2 wild card teams and all 3 division winners got a bye. Eventually a third was added and its the system we have today. (which was 3 division winners 3 wildcards, and now is 4 winners and 2 wildcards)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 11:32
|
|
|
Also, one thing people forget about Calvin Johnson is that his size and speed make no sense. Like none at all. At the combine, he ran a 4.35 40, did an 11'07" broad jump(!!!!!), and had a 42.5" vertical. Those are incredible results for any wide receiver, let alone one who's 6'5". But even that's not the insane part. He did all of that at 239 lbs, which is incredibly heavy for a wide receiver with his speed - before the weigh-in, people thought he was around 225. To put it in perspective, CJ has 2 inches and 15 pounds on Andre "Best WR in the NFL" Johnson, with a faster 40, 7 more inches in the broad jump, and 1 more inch in vertical jumping ability. Calvin Johnson is a FREAK
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2011 23:01
|
|
|
What are some good football blogs/sites? Analysis, humor, whatever. I just like reading about football! I'm familiar with Football Outsiders, but I was reading in the Jets/Steelers thread that they are looked down upon somewhat, so I want to branch out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 18:45
|
|
|
NuclearGuru posted:What are some good football blogs/sites? Analysis, humor, whatever. I just like reading about football! I'm familiar with Football Outsiders, but I was reading in the Jets/Steelers thread that they are looked down upon somewhat, so I want to branch out. For college football you want: -edsbs -Dr. Saturday -Pre-Snap Read Smart Football is pretty popular. He seems to write more about college than NFL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
I like Yahoo! Sports (nfl.yahoo.com) but they got some new writers this year and I haven't been reading as much as in past years. Mike Silver is really good, at least, and he's funny as hell sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Has the NFL made any special provisions or whatever to keep the Jets from playing the Giants? The Raiders and Niners are, technically, walking distance away from one another and they still play one another, so would they have set up any special rules to just reroll the schedule for either the Jets or Giants should they get each others numbers?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
Evoq posted:Has the NFL made any special provisions or whatever to keep the Jets from playing the Giants? The Raiders and Niners are, technically, walking distance away from one another and they still play one another, so would they have set up any special rules to just reroll the schedule for either the Jets or Giants should they get each others numbers? They played in the regular season in 07 and in the preseason in 08 and 09.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Evoq posted:Has the NFL made any special provisions or whatever to keep the Jets from playing the Giants? The Raiders and Niners are, technically, walking distance away from one another and they still play one another, so would they have set up any special rules to just reroll the schedule for either the Jets or Giants should they get each others numbers? Re-roll what? There's no chance in the NFL schedule, 14 of 16 games are already known for the next year once the season begins. I could tell you 14 of the Chargers 16 games for the 2020 season right now, provided everything stays the same with the schedule system and there are only 16 games
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
Oodles of Wootles posted:No, why would they need to do that? Yeah but were they sharing a stadium in 2007? Also if I remember correctly the NFL doesnt set preseason schedules. SteelAngel2000 posted:Re-roll what? There's no chance in the NFL schedule, 14 of 16 games are already known for the next year once the season begins. I could tell you 14 of the Chargers 16 games for the 2020 season right now, provided everything stays the same with the schedule system and there are only 16 games The schedule is subject to change though, is it not? What sense would it make for them to not change the schedule when *whatever* happens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 04:57
|
|
|
Evoq posted:Yeah but were they sharing a stadium in 2007? Also if I remember correctly the NFL doesnt set preseason schedules. I have no idea what you're talking about, but the NFL has no problem with the Jets and Giants playing each other, either in the preseason or the regular season. Yes, they shared Meadowlands stadium in 2007. And while the times of games are flexible, opponents are pre-determined by a simple formula. Play your division 2x, one of the 3 other same-conference divisions (on a 3-year rotation), and one of the 4 other-conference divisions (also on rotation). Then your last 2 games are the teams that finished "equal" to you (first, second, third or fourth in their division) in the same conference you're in. So, take the Browns. Bengals Bengals Ravens Ravens Steelers Steelers Rams (our turn to play the NFC West) Cardinals 49ers Seahawks Jaguars (our turn to play the AFC South) Colts Texans Titans Raiders (finished 3rd in the AFC West) Dolphins (finished 3rd in the AFC East) There you have it! Every team's schedule follows that formula.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 05:03
|
|
|
Pretty sure they have been sharing a stadium since they stopped playing in sheah(how do you spell this?) forever ago. Its been quite a long time. And while the schedule can change, the teams playing eachother rarely if ever does
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 05:03
|
|
|
DO YALL WANT A HAM posted:I have no idea what you're talking about, but the NFL has no problem with the Jets and Giants playing each other, either in the preseason or the regular season. Yes, they shared Meadowlands stadium in 2007. I didnt know they shared a stadium back then, which exactly answers my original question. DO YALL WANT A HAM posted:There you have it! Every team's schedule follows that formula. I know how the scheduling works, I was implying that there has to be a rule or whatever in place for the NFL to say "no, no we dont want you to play this team, go play that team instead."
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 11:10
|
|
|
Evoq posted:I was implying that there has to be a rule or whatever in place for the NFL to say "no, no we dont want you to play this team, go play that team instead."
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 13:51
|
|
|
Yes. And the Stadium is subtly different when each team plays, they like switch the lights and stuff. I don't know what happens when they play each other, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 15:24
|
|
|
Uh, guys. One of the teams is designated the home team based on scheduling rules. Or, for the preseason, they alternate, not that it matters much. In 2009 the Giants were at home, in 2008 the Jets were.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2011 18:45
|
|
|
DO YALL WANT A HAM posted:One of the teams is designated the home team based on scheduling rules. Naw, really? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2011 01:50
|
|
|
Oodles of Wootles posted:I'm just wondering why them playing in the same stadium means that only one of them would be there at a time. Is there only one home locker room that gets cleaned out every week? There are separate home locker rooms for the Jets and the Giants in the stadium. They don't re-decorate the same one every week. Having to schedule around the Jets and Giants not having home games on the same weeks is no worse than having to schedule around the other events that happen in every major stadium.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
To continue this subject - When the Jets and Giants play each other in NY, would anyone know if they both use their separate home locker rooms, or would one of them have to use the visitor room?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 21:32
|
|
|
Dramatika posted:To continue this subject - When the Jets and Giants play each other in NY, would anyone know if they both use their separate home locker rooms, or would one of them have to use the visitor room? Good question, I presume they might use the visitor's locker room so they can go directly to their sidelines / etc as the visiting team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
Dramatika posted:To continue this subject - When the Jets and Giants play each other in NY, would anyone know if they both use their separate home locker rooms, or would one of them have to use the visitor room? I would assume they would have to use the visitor's locker room, if only because not having your own stuff and your own decorations and colors and not being "home" is the only real part of the "home field advantage" the de facto home team gets in that particular game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
Dominion posted:I would assume they would have to use the visitor's locker room, if only because not having your own stuff and your own decorations and colors and not being "home" is the only real part of the "home field advantage" the de facto home team gets in that particular game. Well, there's also the fact (OK I'm not 100% sure on this so correct me if I'm waaaay off) that the season ticket holders for the 'home team' are going to compose the majority of the crowd, or at least I would think so.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
Dramatika posted:Well, there's also the fact (OK I'm not 100% sure on this so correct me if I'm waaaay off) that the season ticket holders for the 'home team' are going to compose the majority of the crowd, or at least I would think so. Sure, but the "visitors" fans will also be in attendance in large numbers, and it's a stadium you know well and feel comfortable in, etc. It's certainly completely different for the Giants to play an "away" game against the Jets than it is for them to play an away game against any other team.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 18:44
|
|