Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Other Diversions › After Hours Lounge › NFL 2010 Regular Season Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NFL 2010 Regular Season Discussion Thread

post #1 of 359
8/30/10 at 9:18am
Thread Starter 

The preseason is almost over, so it's time to start discussion on the 2010 regular season -- yes, summer is almost over.

Reply
post #2 of 359
8/30/10 at 9:30am
Thread Starter 

I'll start with my team picks:

 

NFC North:

  1. Green Bay
  2. Minnesota
  3. Chicago
  4. Detroit

 

NFC East:

  1. Dallas
  2. NY Giants
  3. Philly
  4. Washington

 

NFC South:

  1. New Orleans
  2. Atlanta
  3. Carolina
  4. Tampa Bay

 

NFC West:

  1. San Fran
  2. Seattle
  3. Arizona
  4. St. Louis

 

NFC Wildcards:

  1. NY Giants
  2. Atlanta

 

AFC North:

  1. Baltimore
  2. Cincinnati
  3. Pittsburgh
  4. Cleveland

 

AFC East:

  1. New England
  2. NY Jets
  3. Miami
  4. Buffalo

 

AFC South:

  1. Indy
  2. Houston
  3. Tennessee
  4. Jacksonville

 

AFC West:

  1. San Diego
  2. Oakland
  3. Denver
  4. Kansas City

 

AFC Wildcards

  1. NY Jets
  2. Houston

 

Super Bowl:  Indy over Green Bay

 

 

A few observations:

  1. I think Minnesota will suffer some under Favre: The Sequel, as they are already struggling with injuries and the season has not started.
  2. I wasn't sure on the Jets vs. the Dolphins for 2nd in the AFC East. Miami could surprise and get NY's playoff spot.
  3. The NFC West is terrible. The 49ers will be the only team with a winning record, and win the division by default. Arizona is going to crash and burn, with only the horrible Rams keeping them out of the basement.
  4. The AFC West isn't much better. The Raiders should be improved if they do not get everyone hurt in the preseason.
  5. The Bears could finish anywhere from 2-14 to 7-9. I think the Mike Martz experiment will fail, and only the Lions presence will keep them out of last place.
  6. The Steelers are also in for a rough season, and could actually finish below Cleveland (but the Browns are very bad, too, so it's hard not to pick them last).
  7. I was leaning towards Dallas winning the NFC, but they have looked terrible in the preseason. I know it's preseason, but I'm giving the nod to the Packers based on this.
Reply
post #3 of 359
8/30/10 at 9:40am
Thread Starter 

Finally, my more in-depth look at the local team... the Detroit Lions.

 

The offense is vastly improved with the addition of Jahvid Best (RB), Tony Scheffler (TE), Nate Burleson (WR) and Rob Sims (G), giving 2nd year QB Matt Stafford some real weapons to go with WR Calvin Johnson. This offense actually should finish in the top half of the league, which is a huge improvement over the past several years.  Best actually looks like he could be something special.

 

The defense, however, is still going to be horrible. Detroit did improve the defensive line a great deal by adding top pick Suh (DT), Corey Williams (DT) and Kyle Vanden Bosch (DE).  However, the linebackers are even worse than last year's very bad group, losing Ernie Sims and Larry Foote. That only leaves two legitimate NFL linebackers -- Julian Peterson and DeAndre Levy (and Levy is hurt again). The secondary is a disaster, with only safety Louis Delmas being a legitimate NFL starter. The cornerbacks are so bad, it's beyond description.

 

So, look for lots of high-scoring games. Unfortunately, the Lions offense will bog down enough that this will still be a last place team.

 

Final record prediction: 4-12 (which is a big improvement, considering they are 2-30 over the past two seasons combined).

Reply
post #4 of 359
8/30/10 at 4:05pm

Scott,

 

I don't see the Lions finishing behind the Bears, but we'll see.  (Then again, I picked Detroit to finish 6-10 last year.)  Mike Martz and Jay Cutler -- are you kidding?  I don't see Cutler making it through the season under his system.

 

I think the Lions will finish either 5-9 or 6-10 this year.  I think they can sweep the Bears and split with the other teams in their division.  They've also got the Rams, Bills, and Bucs, so that's three possible wins.  I like their defensive line (especially their front four).  But, it's their secondary that worries me quite a lot.  I do think that Stafford will get a bit more protection this year, too.  One announcer today (Ray Bentley, a former NFL defensive player who played in two Super Bowls) picked Detroit to finish 10-6!  But Bentley has them defeating the Eagles and (on Thanksgiving Day) the Patriots.  I think that is a bit too optimistic.  You should have heard his co-announcers giving him quite a hard time about predicting a 10-6 finish for Detroit. :)

 

I like most of your picks.  I am trying to envision the Packers ahead of the Vikings, but given that Favre had quite an impressive year last year and is probably due for a mediocre year, I guess I can see this happening.

 

I would have picked the Jets to win their division this time around, but given what they've had to deal with with Revas, and the recent injuries during the pre-season, I think that the Patriots will probably be able to take their division again.

 

I will digest what you've written a bit before commenting too much more at this point.

Reply
post #5 of 359
8/30/10 at 4:40pm
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ockeghem View Post

Scott,

 

I don't see the Lions finishing behind the Bears, but we'll see.  (Then again, I picked Detroit to finish 6-10 last year.)  Mike Martz and Jay Cutler -- are you kidding?  I don't see Cutler making it through the season under his system.

 

I think the Lions will finish either 5-9 or 6-10 this year.  I think they can sweep the Bears and split with the other teams in their division.  They've also got the Rams, Bills, and Bucs, so that's three possible wins.  I like their defensive line (especially their front four).  But, it's their secondary that worries me quite a lot.  I do think that Stafford will get a bit more protection this year, too.  One announcer today (Ray Bentley, a former NFL defensive player who played in two Super Bowls) picked Detroit to finish 10-6!  But Bentley has them defeating the Eagles and (on Thanksgiving Day) the Patriots.  I think that is a bit too optimistic.  You should have heard his co-announcers giving him quite a hard time about predicting a 10-6 finish for Detroit. :)

 

I like most of your picks.  I am trying to envision the Packers ahead of the Vikings, but given that Favre had quite an impressive year last year and is probably due for a mediocre year, I guess I can see this happening.

 

I would have picked the Jets to win their division this time around, but given what they've had to deal with with Revas, and the recent injuries during the pre-season, I think that the Patriots will probably be able to take their division again.

 

I will digest what you've written a bit before commenting too much more at this point.


I feel pretty good about my Lions pick of 4-12 based on their horrible defense, but I do think the Bears are hard to predict. As I said above, I could see them finishing anywhere from 2-14 to 7-9, but I am leaning towards the bottom end of that scale. I think Martz's system, with its lack of focus on protecting the QB, could get Cutler killed behind that poor offensive line. Also, the Bears do not have the talent at WR or RB to run his offense. Their best receiver is TE Olsen, and Martz ignores the tight end.

 

The only reason I have the Lions 4th is because one of these two teams has to finish last, and Detroit has been worse for a long time. I had the same problem picking the worst between the Browns/Steelers, Broncos/Chiefs, and Cards/Rams. I went with recent history in each case to determine who would finish higher, but in all cases none of the teams will compete for a playoff spot, IMO.

 

I think the Jets are overrated, between Revis's holdout and Sanchez not being as good he appeared last year. I really think the Dolphins could keep them out of that wild card spot, but I stuck with the Jets because of their off season improvements. I could see this going either way.

Reply
post #6 of 359
8/31/10 at 6:55am

I'll take a stab at this:

 

NFC North:

 

Green Bay

 

NFC East:

 

Dallas

 

 

NFC South:

 

New Orleans

 

 

NFC West:

 

San Fran

 

 

NFC Wildcards:

  1. NY Giants
  2. Atlanta

 

AFC North:

 

Baltimore

 

AFC East:

 

New England

 

 

AFC South:

 

Indy

 

 

AFC West:

 

San Diego

 

 

AFC Wildcards

  1. NY Jets
  2. Bungals
Reply
post #7 of 359
9/9/10 at 3:35am

AFC east = Pats

 

AFC south = Colts

 

AFC north = Bengals

 

AFC west = Chargers

 

Wildcards = Ravens, Jets

 

NFC east = Cowboys

 

NFC south = Saints

 

NFC north = Vikings

 

NFC west = 49ers

 

Wildcards = Green Bay, Eagles

Reply
post #8 of 359
9/10/10 at 8:43am

I picked the Vikings last night (with the points) and won -- by one point.  I've been thinking of picking every game this year to see how I fare.  My son wants to do this as well.  I told him it's quite challenging to get a lot of the games right when you pick against the spread.

 

Anyway, I was rooting for Minnesota to win outright, which didn't occur.  It was still an interesting game, and I'm happy that the NFL season is upon us again. :)

Reply
post #9 of 359
9/10/10 at 9:05am
Thread Starter 

I only saw part of the first half, but the Vikings offense looked very rusty. I guess that's what happens when your starting QB and best WR miss most of training camp. Of course, the Saints offense struggled at times, too.

 

On Sunday, the Lions will attempt to extend their current 20 game road losing streak. Only four more road losses and they can tie the NFL record the team originally set a few years ago. "The Detroit Lions -- Rebuilding Since 1957!"

Reply
post #10 of 359
9/10/10 at 9:26am

I'm not sure Chicago has enough offense to beat the Lions.

 

Of course that opinion could have something to do with the fact that....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTgPsbwQ9Kk

Reply
post #11 of 359
9/10/10 at 10:27am

Scott,

 

That streak will probably come to an end this weekend....

Reply
post #12 of 359
9/10/10 at 11:20am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ockeghem View Post

Scott,

 

That streak will probably come to an end this weekend....


Being a jaded Lions fan, I gave up predicting wins many years ago. I prefer to be pleasantly surprised when they actual win a game -- sort of like finding a $10 bill when walking down the street.

 

John, the Bears will not need much offense to score on Detroit's horrible defense -- they even made Jake Delhomme and the Browns look like the Colts in the preseason. This will be a case of the resistible force meeting the movable object.

Reply
post #13 of 359
9/10/10 at 12:08pm

Play calling for Vikings was terrible in second half.  They gave up on the run, which was working.

Reply
post #14 of 359
9/10/10 at 1:21pm

^^^

 

Agreed.  That game was there for the taking, and Minnesota seemed to be a bit rusty (as Scott suggested above).  Then again, the Saints didn't look all that impressive either.

Reply
post #15 of 359
9/12/10 at 2:26pm
Thread Starter 

21 straight road losses and counting...

Reply
post #16 of 359
9/12/10 at 2:38pm

Vince Young was made to look like Tom Brady with the ability to run.   Tennessee looked incredible but then you realize who they were playing ;)

Reply
post #17 of 359
9/12/10 at 3:47pm

The Lions got hosed.  That may be "the rule" but it's still wrong.

Reply
post #18 of 359
9/12/10 at 6:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dheiner View Post

The Lions got hosed.  That may be "the rule" but it's still wrong.


How did they get hosed when the officials called the play correctly? Even Lions head coach Schwartz said the officials got it right. Were the refs supposed to ignore the rule and award Johnson a TD?

 

The Lions didn't lose because of that call. They lost because their offense couldn't move the ball most of the game.

Reply
post #19 of 359
9/12/10 at 7:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dheiner View Post

The Lions got hosed.  That may be "the rule" but it's still wrong.


Dheiner,

 

I think I know what you're saying.  The call was consistent with the rule, but the rule in and of itself is wrong.  If that's what you're saying, I agree.  If the rule doesn't exist, it's a touchdown, right?  I'm just asking for some clarification.
 

Reply
post #20 of 359
9/12/10 at 9:10pm

All day long the TV has been saying they refs got it right according to the "rule."  Not once have I head the rule explained.

Reply
post #21 of 359
9/13/10 at 5:05am
Thread Starter 

I do not have a problem with the rule. Otherwise, the refs are being asked to make a judgment on the intent of the receiver -- whether he is starting a new act or completing the initial act of the catch. Under the current rule, all judgment is removed from the process.

 

This is similar to the rule change a couple of years ago where the NFL eliminated the force-out rule for catches in or out of bounds. It removed judgment from the refs on whether the receiver would have come down in bounds.

Reply
post #22 of 359
9/13/10 at 6:48am

On a sports radio program I was listening to this morning, they were saying how this rule seemed to conflict with the example whereby a quarterback crosses the plane by hitting (and in some cases knocking over) the pylon.  He stumbles, knocks the pylon over, and drops the ball as he rolls out of bounds.  But it's still a touchdown.  I think the sports announcers in this case didn't think their position through enough though, as it's a running, rather than a passing, play.  There are different rules for each.

 

I thought the explanation yesterday -- which looked like it was staged for such an eventuality and was begging to be aired -- was quite inadequate.  I think the NFL will be looking at this one a bit more closely, but probably not during the season.

Reply
post #23 of 359
9/13/10 at 7:21am

So, what, exactly, is "The Rule"?

 

According to NFL.com: 

  1. A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

 

I know/think this is out of date, but, I'd like to know the proper current wording.

 

During the game there was some discussion of a "second act."  I could argue that the receiver started his "second act" when he attempted to use the ball to help himself stand up.

Reply
post #24 of 359
9/13/10 at 7:42am

On a side note, Randy Moss' press conference is a thing of beauty.. an absolute laugh riot

Reply
post #25 of 359
9/13/10 at 7:54am

Sorry, double post.

Reply
post #26 of 359
9/13/10 at 8:55am

I found this a few moments ago:

 

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 after he touches 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.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/16142/like-it-or-not-megatron-call-was-right

Reply
post #27 of 359
9/13/10 at 9:02am

And he had control until the ball touched the ground.

Reply
post #28 of 359
9/13/10 at 10:09am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dheiner View Post

And he had control until the ball touched the ground.


This isn't a fumble, where the ground cannot cause a fumble. The ground can cause an incomplete pass.

Reply
post #29 of 359
9/13/10 at 12:41pm

When I've watched the replay, what I see is a player who is more concerned about celebrating the completion and TD than he is about anything else.  How many times do you see a player complete, or nearly complete a play, and a micro-second later he is moving in some form to celebrate.

 

Players today enter a Twilight Zone where they are more concerned about celebrating than they are about winning.

Reply
post #30 of 359
9/13/10 at 1:41pm

Sorry, but I don't agree that the rule is as clear cut as it seems.  There have been cases (e.g., Lance Moore in the SB) where this rule was applied differently due to a judgement based on a "second act." 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: After Hours Lounge
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Other Diversions › After Hours Lounge › NFL 2010 Regular Season Discussion Thread