2014-2015 NFL Football thread

[Balta1701]

Why would the Raiders trade Carr? I thought they were high on him at end of last season.

If Mariota is available there, would you pass on him because of Carr?

[bmags]

If Mariota is available there, would you pass on him because of Carr?

 

Yes, probably. Mariota is nice, but bird in the hand.

[SoxAce]

4 QBs in the AFC/NFC Championships:

Tom Brady

Andrew Luck

Russel Wilson

Aaron Rodgers

 

8 QBs in quarters

Tom Brady

Andrew Luck

Russel Wilson

Aaron Rodgers

Peyton Manning

Tony Romo

Joe Flacco

Cam Newton

Yea this isn't the NFL of 10+ years ago. Nowadays you need a top 10-15 QB to get to/win the dance.

[LittleHurt05]

Yes, probably. Mariota is nice, but bird in the hand.

 

Carr's no more of a sure thing than Mariota is at this point. If you think Mariota is better, you take him.

[GoSox05]

Rex Grossman made it to the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl quality QB is overrated. If the rest of the team is outstanding, a guy who can manage the game can win it all. Trent Dilfer has a ring.

 

48 Super Bowl winners.

 

I show 6 that won with either a game manager type or average QB.

 

Brad Johnson was the last. That was 12 years ago.

 

 

You aren't winning a Super Bowl without a good to great QB. You probably aren't getting there either.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

Yea this isn't the NFL of 10+ years ago. Nowadays you need a top 10-15 QB to get to/win the dance.

 

Prior to last season, did anybody really consider Russell Wilson a top 15 QB? Does anybody consider Joe Flacco or Eli Manning to be top 15 QBs? Those are your last 3 Super Bowl winners, and Eli's won 2.

 

You need a guy who can be an average QB who can win games against tough teams. You don't need Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady to win, but they certainly help. I'm not crazy about a guy like Matt Moore, but he isn't the worst choice in the world and he'd provide competition at the very least, though he wouldn't win a Super Bowl. However, guys like Sam Bradford and Jake Locker have the talent to be the type of game manager who can win you a lot of games, but they're incredibly risky due to their injury histories.

 

Put another way, if you asked 100 people who their top 20 QBs were, I think you'd see a lot of fluctuation between 12-20 on that list.

[Balta1701]

48 Super Bowl winners.

 

I show 6 that won with either a game manager type or average QB.

 

Brad Johnson was the last. That was 12 years ago.

 

 

You aren't winning a Super Bowl without a good to great QB. You probably aren't getting there either.

What kind of threshold is "good to great"? Guys like Eli Manning and Joe Flacco have rings from recent years. Would you even put them in the top 10 of the league?

 

"More than 80% of super bowl winners have a top 15 quarterback" is something I'd call fair. Once you get below top 15 then you're in iffy territory.

[bmags]

Re: Russel Wilson, in his 2nd year he proved he was a top 15 QB, so it doesn't really matter.

 

Re: Eli/Flacco - while maybe not elite consistently, both are QBs whom the team feels comfortable asking to win games on their own. You wouldn't go into a playoff game with Matt Moore and say "let's sling it".

 

 

[Kyyle23]

Eli is so weird, because in those superbowl winning seasons down the stretch he had some crazy games and put that team on his back offensively

[GoSox05]

What kind of threshold is "good to great"? Guys like Eli Manning and Joe Flacco have rings from recent years. Would you even put them in the top 10 of the league?

 

"More than 80% of super bowl winners have a top 15 quarterback" is something I'd call fair. Once you get below top 15 then you're in iffy territory.

 

Good to great would be like border line hall of famers. I consider both Eli and Probably Flacco in that category.

 

I consider both Eli Manning and Flacco top 15 qb. They both had bounce back years.

[SoxAce]

Prior to last season, did anybody really consider Russell Wilson a top 15 QB? Does anybody consider Joe Flacco or Eli Manning to be top 15 QBs? Those are your last 3 Super Bowl winners, and Eli's won 2.

Wilson? Absolutely. Guy has been doing work since he was a rookie. And I knew someone would bring up Flacco and Eli. Flacco is an interesting case considering he is just ridiculous in the playoffs. He is the exception, not the rule. Eli was in the conversation (hell many even on this board said he was 11-15 range) before his brutal 2013 season.

[GoSox05]

I think people see Seattle and go "see you just need a good defense to win it all".

 

Seattle is probably going to down in history as one of the best of all time. So were the Ravens and Bucs when they won.

 

 

The Bills have a good defense, but it's not historic. I also don't think it's close.

[Balta1701]

Of course, for now, the bills might well be very, very content with "making the playoffs some year." A home game on top of that would be delightful. It's been a decade and a half.

[shipps]

I really would loooove to see the Bears sign a HC some time soon here, jeez. I get the feeling that every passing day that goes by they are decreasing their chances to get the guy they want and also continue to go the path of not knowing exactly what they want and will wind up with just a guy that happened to still be there that they liked.

 

I swear if turns out in the future that Bowles was the best of the bunch and the Bears missed out by dorking around I wouldnt be the least surprised. Its Arians all over again.

[ptatc]

He had 5 touchdowns in the playoff lost to the Cardinals. This game is a perfect example of why W-L isn't a QB stat.

 

He did have some tough games against the Giants and the 49ers twice, but their defense also played awful in two of those games.

It still is mostly. Of course there is a defense as well. But for every game like this for a QB where they lost when they should have won, there is one on the other side. There was one where he beat the Bears but threw 2 or 3 interceptions without a touchdown and they won 21-10 or something like that.

 

It mostly evens out. It isn't an exact stat but over the course of a career it usually tells the story.

[ptatc]

I really would loooove to see the Bears sign a HC some time soon here, jeez. I get the feeling that every passing day that goes by they are decreasing their chances to get the guy they want and also continue to go the path of not knowing exactly what they want and will wind up with just a guy that happened to still be there that they liked.

 

I swear if turns out in the future that Bowles was the best of the bunch and the Bears missed out by dorking around I wouldnt be the least surprised. Its Arians all over again.

It appears one of the guys they want (Kubiak) would rather stay as an OC rather than become the head coach for the Bears.

[witesoxfan]

I think people see Seattle and go "see you just need a good defense to win it all".

 

Seattle is probably going to down in history as one of the best of all time. So were the Ravens and Bucs when they won.

 

 

The Bills have a good defense, but it's not historic. I also don't think it's close.

 

The Bills allowed the 4th fewest points and yards per game. The Seahawks allowed the fewest points (15.9), followed by the Chiefs and Lions, both at 17.6 followed by the Chiefs and the Lions. The Seahawks also allowed the fewest yards (by quite a bit, 267 yards per game compared to the second place Lions at 300.9)

 

The Bills also led the league in sacks, forced a ton of turnovers, and were on the field more often than the Seahawks were (almost 3 minutes on average per game). They're also getting Kiko Alonso back next year too to add to the linebacking corps.

 

Getting back to the playoffs would be a good thing, and I won't say that the Bills defense is anywhere near Seattle's yet, but they will have another top unit next year barring catastrophic injuries. There may be some conflicts between Ryan and Schwartz, but they could also brainstorm and make the defense better and more complex too.

[LDF]

It appears one of the guys they want (Kubiak) would rather stay as an OC rather than become the head coach for the Bears.

 

and that does speak well for the rep of the bears.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

This.

 

I keep hearing "awful call to end a great game". If Dallas scores, the Packers would of had 3 minutes to get in field goal range.

 

Aaron Rodgers was 10-10 in the 4th quarter. After that play was reversed the Packers took the ball and drove sixty yards in less then two minutes. All while taking their time.

 

.....It was an awful call to end a great game, even if Rodgers comes back and the Packers win. I don't think there is a guarantee the Cowboys win that game if they get the call, but it doesn't change the fact that it would have been a much better ending than the game ending right after an awful call.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Here's Megatron's non-TD catch again

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...Megatron-non-TD

 

Megatron didn't make a "football move" or a "second act" like the announcers say in the video. Not that I would expect him to do so in the endzone, but Dez actually did more to prove he had possession when he made his second act by reaching for the goalline. Megatron's was more of an incomplete catch than Dez's was.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

The highlighted is the only correct part of this post. It's a dumb rule for sure, but it was absolutely the correct call based on those rules. The Lions were legitimately screwed by the refs last week. The Cowboys were lucky to even be here still. Not even the same situation. It is quite the comedic karma seeing the difference in opinion from Cowboys fans from last week to this week however. You see the catch and then it gets reversed. It's almost as if a flag got picked up and cancelled, huh?

 

So do the Packer's have "karma" coming to them next week because they got the benefit of a bad call this week?

 

I assume the difference in opinion between by the fans last week and this week is in no way referring to me, since I've said many times that last week's call was a bad call when it happened.

[LittleHurt05]

Megatron didn't make a "football move" or a "second act" like the announcers say in the video. Not that I would expect him to do so in the endzone, but Dez actually did more to prove he had possession when he made his second act by reaching for the goalline. Megatron's was more of an incomplete catch than Dez's was.

 

 

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/publi...Pass_Fumble.pdf

 

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or

without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting

the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches

the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching

the ground, the pass is complete.

 

Nowhere in the rule about a player going to the ground does it say anything about a "football move"

[StrangeSox]

I saw it the first time after the ruling had been made so maybe that's biasing me, but this doesn't even really seem like a "process of the catch" ruling. He just didn't have control of it as he's falling towards the goal line, and the ball pops out when it hits the ground. Not a bad call and more along the lines of the old standard incompletion rules than the newer "process" rules.

 

Either way, not comparable to the ridiculous officiating gifts Dallas got against Detroit.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Nowhere in the rule about a player going to the ground does it say anything about a "football move"

 

Football move = act common to the game (like diving or stretching for the endzone)

 

(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

© maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to

perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it,

advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).

 

 

Once he performs a move other than just making the catch, he's a catch. If he was just trying to catch it, he would have tucked it in. He clearly felt he had control, because he reached for the endzone with the ball.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

I saw it the first time after the ruling had been made so maybe that's biasing me, but this doesn't even really seem like a "process of the catch" ruling. He just didn't have control of it as he's falling towards the goal line, and the ball pops out when it hits the ground. Not a bad call and more along the lines of the old standard incompletion rules than the newer "process" rules.

 

Either way, not comparable to the ridiculous officiating gifts Dallas got against Detroit.

 

There was more calls that went Detroit's way last week than Dallas'. The biggest/latest call is just the only one people remember. Also, don't forget that the NFL laughably decided Suh could play last week, which had a bigger impact than any blown call in that game. Detroit wouldn't have had a chance without Suh, and that was the biggest blown call/advantage of all.