|
Is the New York stadium in Jersey because of taxes, or something? I never realized until I lived there, but it's really far from NY proper. They couldn't put it in Westchester or something? Wasn't it in Queens before? e: Oh yeah, Shea Stadium is totally in Queens. But what's the story?
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
Short version: Cablevision has rather feverishly fought off any attempt to build a major stadium/arena complex in Manhattan because they don't want competition for major concerts, boxing, and other special events that have usually been held at Madison Square Garden. Cablevision basically owns state assembly speaker and all-around corrupt rear end in a top hat Shelly Silver, and he's used his position to personally kill any stadium or arena projects, including the Jets West Side Stadium.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
Oh right, Albany. I forgot. gently caress those guys and girls collectively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 22:59
|
|
|
I don't really think that the Meadowlands is particularly less convenient from the city than the Citi Field/former Shea site or the Westchester County Center, FWIW.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
Smash route concepts http://www.americanfootballmonthly.com/Arena/NS_Magazine/Current/smash.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
I hear a lot about how many carries an RB gets per game. What's considered high and low in this respect? I'd also like to know the same thing about QBs and passes. I've been trying to get a better understanding of how long it takes for these guys to get tired, and I'm sure this has a lot to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2011 18:49
|
|
|
For rb carries, just off the top of my head around 15 is on the low end of normal in a game, about 30 is the high end, for a one back team anyway. For a qb, 30+ passes is alot, but they don't really get tired. Brian Griese threw like 55+ times in a game a few years ago, their arm's don't really tire out. Its not like a pitcher in baseball.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
Pop Dog posted:For rb carries, just off the top of my head around 15 is on the low end of normal in a game, about 30 is the high end, for a one back team anyway. For a qb, 30+ passes is alot, but they don't really get tired. Brian Griese threw like 55+ times in a game a few years ago, their arm's don't really tire out. Its not like a pitcher in baseball. Peyton had a shitload of throws this season. He had 3 games where he threw more than 50 passes, and 7 others where he threw more than 40.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't think there's any correlation to pass attempts and play regressing beyond teams that throw a poo poo ton do so because they're losing, but that's pretty much a chicken from the egg thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2011 20:15
|
|
|
For RBs, 330 carrier is a big season and 400+ will run them into the ground. See: mid-2000s KC Chiefs
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:For RBs, 330 carrier is a big season and 400+ will run them into the ground. See: mid-2000s KC Chiefs There's also a belief in the "Curse of 370", wherein 370+ is the magic number of carries that makes a RB regress the following year. It's generally BS, there's nothing magical about 370 as opposed to 369 or 375 that makes it a breakpoint, but people talk about it as if it were.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
kyuss posted:I'm tempted to shell out the $99 for a 2010 NFL Game Pass account. Very late reply, but NFL Game Rewind completely owns (never tried the audio package). The biggest down-side is that you can't watch it when live games are being broadcast (Sun noon to midnight, during MNF and Thursday night football). The Sunday afternoon games are almost always posted right at 12:00 AM on Monday. The games are the straight Fox / CBS / ESPN feeds with commercials and half-time removed. Games are broken down by play and you can skip around like chapters or scenes on a DVD and they even have a little DVR type button to rewind 5 seconds. Full screen looks great (to me at least) and I've never had any type of problems with the stream. Assuming you don't have some other premium NFL package, $50 to watch EVERY game, EVERY week in HD on demand is a steal, highly recommended. EDIT: And for the 2010 season the cost was $50 at the start of the season and that subscription was good until the playoffs started. Half way through the season they changed it to $25 for the remainder of the season (up to the playoffs) and you could still watch the previous weeks as well as all the games from 2009. hackedaccount fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Feb 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2011 08:27
|
|
|
Why is the NFL Combine in Indianapolis? Any specific reason why it's there every year?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 22:22
|
|
|
konna posted:Why is the NFL Combine in Indianapolis? Any specific reason why it's there every year? I'm going to assume the central location (well, kind of) of Indianapolis, along with the dome, make it the easiest location for all the teams, players and everyone else to get to. You're going to need a dome to conduct all the drills at and it's the only dome in the middle of the country. I could be wrong though, that's just my guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 02:52
|
|
|
Can anyone other than the head coach or QB call a timeout?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 03:51
|
|
|
Doppelganger posted:Can anyone other than the head coach or QB call a timeout? Any player + Head coach can call a timeout
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 04:13
|
|
|
Jeez, who did you piss off?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 04:18
|
|
|
nnnAdam posted:I'm going to assume the central location (well, kind of) of Indianapolis, along with the dome, make it the easiest location for all the teams, players and everyone else to get to. You're going to need a dome to conduct all the drills at and it's the only dome in the middle of the country. I could be wrong though, that's just my guess. That plus Lucas Oil Stadium is known to have a very fast running track, which inflates (or deflates, I guess) everyone's 40 stats and makes them look better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
Dominion posted:That plus Lucas Oil Stadium is known to have a very fast running track, which inflates (or deflates, I guess) everyone's 40 stats and makes them look better. I had no idea about this part. That's really interesting actually.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2011 02:32
|
|
|
Lucas oil stadium is only a couple years old though, isnt it a much longer tradition than that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2011 02:44
|
|
|
Dominion posted:That plus Lucas Oil Stadium is known to have a very fast running track, which inflates (or deflates, I guess) everyone's 40 stats and makes them look better. I'd heard it was considered slow but now I can't remember where hrm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2011 10:07
|
|
|
Something I always wondered, if the Green Bay Packers are owned by shareholders but the stock pays no dividends, where do the profits go?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
Satisfaction Guaranteed posted:Something I always wondered, if the Green Bay Packers are owned by shareholders but the stock pays no dividends, where do the profits go? From my understanding, it goes to city improvement. I could be mistaken however. e- Also, back into the team.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
Could someone explain the differences between various positions along a defensive line? Like, what is the difference between a 1-tech, 2-tech, 3-tech etc.?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
color posted:gaps are denoted as such From page 4 and an excellent explanation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
Satisfaction Guaranteed posted:Something I always wondered, if the Green Bay Packers are owned by shareholders but the stock pays no dividends, where do the profits go? Most of it goes back into stadium district improvement. The county voted for a .5% sales tax increase to pay for renovations when the stadium was being rebuilt a while back and thanks to the Packers the team has actually dumped into back into repayment that the loan and tax are going to be finished well ahead of schedule. They're also planning on doing an addition to the stadium grounds that's going to have a strip mall type set-up with restaurants and poo poo so they bought up a bunch of houses in the area for well above market value. I know they just built a new practice field so that they could hold more spectators and be safer for fans and motorists too. I don't read their books or anything, but I'm sure they have a decent amount of money going into other aspects of the community as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 08:53
|
|
|
I'm interested in learning more about runningbacks. I hear different labels like "powerback" and "every down back". Are there more than just these two? What qualities are most important to the different roles? Who would be good examples of these categories?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
Doppelganger posted:I'm interested in learning more about runningbacks. I hear different labels like "powerback" and "every down back". Are there more than just these two? What qualities are most important to the different roles? Who would be good examples of these categories? Every down backs are the guys that will get between 20-25 carries a game, and are usually a main focal point of the offense. Recently the single load running back has been kind of fading in favor of a running back by committee approach in the NFL, but guys like Adrian Peterson in Minnesota, LaDainian Tomlinson in San Diego, or Shaun Alexander in Seattle were good examples of this. Goal line backs are usually much bigger than every down backs, and have a very specific purpose. Pick up short yardage, whether that means picking up a 3rd and short, or plowing into the endzone. Mike Alstott and Jerome Bettis were this. Then there are specialty backs whom you bring out in certain situations. Guys like Darren Sproles, who are too small to be used as a primary back but is a very good receiver out of the backfield, for example, is brought out when the Chargers are in a third and long situation. I suppose guys like Brian Westbrook at this stage in his career would fit this description.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 18:06
|
|
|
A lot of times there's overlap among the terms, so "power back" and "goal line back" are probably just about the same. Their running style is to seek out contact and drive through it. "Scatback" and "third down back" are also similar, in that they're quicker, shifty, more likely to be used as receivers. Basically if you knew Cleveland Browns' history, I could just say Kevin Mack and Eric Metcalf, and you'd know the two categories. Mack was all power and cocaine, Metcalf was all speed/quickness (and probably cocaine). That's why Browns fans will always remember "Metcalf up the middle" with bitterness and disgust: because you don't send that type of RB up the middle. Give it to Hoard or Byner or whoever else we had--the bigger guy. Let the two guys play the roles they should, stop with the "surprise" poo poo. You'll still see teams do that sometimes, go for the surprise. Third and short, they'll bring on the power guy but fake the handoff to him and try to throw it to him in the flat, stuff like that. When it works, great, but I usually don't like teams trying to use players against their role. You don't once in a while put an LB on Andre Johnson just to switch it up; don't do it on offense either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:Every down backs are the guys that will get between 20-25 carries a game, and are usually a main focal point of the offense. Recently the single load running back has been kind of fading in favor of a running back by committee approach in the NFL, but guys like Adrian Peterson in Minnesota, LaDainian Tomlinson in San Diego, or Shaun Alexander in Seattle were good examples of this. In case you don't know what "running back by committee approach" is (I didn't for a while!  ) it means that the team is using more than one running back during the course of a game in order to keep all of them less tired & better able to break off big runs when the defense gets tired in the 4th quarter. Usually in this scenario they'll have two different styles - the Patriots from last year were a good example of running back by committee, as they had Benjarvus Green-Ellis for most first and second downs, Danny Woodhead for most third downs, and Sammy Morris and Fred Taylor mixed in when they were healthy all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 19:20
|
|
|
DO YALL WANT A HAM posted:A lot of times there's overlap among the terms, so "power back" and "goal line back" are probably just about the same. Their running style is to seek out contact and drive through it. "Scatback" and "third down back" are also similar, in that they're quicker, shifty, more likely to be used as receivers. Another example of this with a different team from a while back was the Giants - Ron Dayne and Tiki Barber: "Thunder and Lightning" (except Dayne sucked rear end)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 13:49
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:Another example of this with a different team from a while back was the Giants - Ron Dayne and Tiki Barber: "Thunder and Lightning" (except Dayne sucked rear end) They keep trying to use the term still, with Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw. And when it was Jacobs, Bradshaw, and Derrick Ward, they tried to sell it as Earth, Wind, and Fire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 17:42
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:Another example of this with a different team from a while back was the Giants - Ron Dayne and Tiki Barber: "Thunder and Lightning" (except Dayne sucked rear end) I'm sorry that your team ruined an awesome running back with terrible scheme and play calling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
Wollawolla posted:I'm sorry that your team ruined an awesome running back with terrible scheme and play calling. Not my team 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 23:36
|
|
|
I would like to know about linebackers. 1. I get that the MLB runs the show. What do strongside and weakside backers do in the 4-3? Is one more likely to blitz than the other? Obviously there are different systems, but give me an outline. 2. Are there standard roles for the middle guys in the 3-4? Do they tend to do the same stuff? 3. I know one 3-4 outside backer is usually a pass rush specialist. What does the other do? Sorry if these are dumb questions...
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 22:17
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:
For a 3-4, it really depends on what variant of a 3-4 your team is running, if it's an aggressive blitzing 3-4 or not. The Chargers run a very blitz heavy aggressive 3-4 defense. Especially when Shawne Merriman was on the team, the two outside linebackers almost never fell into coverage, and would rush the passer 9 downs out of 10. The two inside backers were responsible for dropping into coverage. If your team runs a 3-4 that doesn't blitz as much, it's more common to have one of the OLBs rush the passer while another drops into coverage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 23:15
|
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:I would like to know about linebackers. 1. The strongside linebacker (SAM) is generally a bit bigger/stronger to help with run support (as the tight end is on the strong side). The Weakside linebacker (WILL) is usually a bit smaller and faster (he is more likely to cover cutback lanes) and the better pass coverage guy. This isn't the case will all teams but this is the "theory" behind them as I understand it. 2. The two middle linebackers in a theoretical 3-4 are the TED and the MIKE. The MIKE is the same guy as a 4-3 middle linebacker, with the same size/responsibilities. The TED is usually the biggest linebacker on the team, and his job is to get into the middle and take on linemen during run plays, essentially making him a "fourth lineman" for run plays. 3. I think SA2K pretty much covered this. In theory they're both able to rush the passer and have the other one drop into coverage. The theory is to confuse the offensive line on assignments and who they need to block, because it's not the same four down linemen coming for sure, every play. Again this is a lot of theory rather than actual practice, and is based pretty much on a standard base defense, rather than a lot of the exotic stuff you can do, especially in the 3-4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2011 23:38
|
|
|
Thanks chaps, that makes things much clearer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 00:31
|
|
|
After watching a few segments on ESPN, can someone answer why the NFL doesn't like QBs coming from a spread offense? What are the pros and cons of it and why isn't it heavily used in the NFL like it is in college? Also, they keep talking about "foot work" what are they referring to, I thought that only matters if a QB has to scramble?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
Who or what is an Elephant?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2011 22:08
|
|