NFL 2009 Regular Season Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Hanson Yoo /forum/thread/292446/nfl-2009-regular-season-discussion-thread/90#post_3611524

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem /forum/thread/292446/nfl-2009-regular-season-discussion-thread/90#post_3611210

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell

Ahh, yes. The dreaded SDSFS. I know it well. But here, we use to call it TBPSFS and TBRSSFS. (The Boston Patriots Sports Fan Syndrome and The Boston Red Sox Sports Fan Syndrome. )

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I love the Redskins helmet, Hanson! If Washington gets beat by the horrible Bucs this weekend, it's going to get ugly in the nation's capital.

The Panthers definitely got away from what they do best -- running the ball -- in the Dallas game. Delhomme is not the strength of that team -- Williams and Stewart are. I think Fox will be joining Jim Zorn and Wade Phillips in the unemployment line after this season. The only question will be if Carolina will be able to convince Bill Cowher to leave the cushy broadcast booth.

 

[Hanson]

You know, it dawned on me that the Crying Indian on the helmet has a double purpose:

1) He's crying because the Redskin lost to the Lions

2) He's crying at the sight of all the garbage on the field!

Foxy was not in a really secure position to begin with. He's one of those coaches who has a winning season followed by a losing season, then rinse and repeat. Every other year they're on the verge of firing him when he gets to the playoffs and then they give him another year. I think this cat has run out of loves. It's not a good sign that Julius Pepper was reportedly benched near the end of the game for playing badly. Some people are saying he's mailing it in this season.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Hanson Yoo /forum/thread/292446/nfl-2009-regular-season-discussion-thread/90#post_3611959

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem /forum/thread/292446/nfl-2009-regular-season-discussion-thread/90#post_3611575

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell ">[/url]




Surely between the recent success of the Patriots, the Celtics, and the Red Sox, this syndrome has been cured. At least for a few years.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem




Johnny,

Yes, that's what we use to call it, but thankfully no more!

BTW, before last week's Chargers - Dolphins contest, I gave my son some required reading. I pulled up a couple of articles on "The Epic in Miami." Then I got to thinking how nice it would be to pick that game up on DVD, if it is for sale in its entirety. It would be worth it just to see Kellen Winslow's performance again.

Yeah, I'd buy that too, one of the great playoff games. I remembered that I died several times during that game. "Well, it's over now...They've lost for sure this time."

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell




Yeah, I'd buy that too, one of the great playoff games. I remembered that I died several times during that game. "Well, it's over now...They've lost for sure this time."

Johnny,

I know you won't agree with me here (and that's perfectly understandable given your loyalities), but one writer said it was a game no team should have lost. It truly was a momentous event, and one with such great memories and plays.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem




Johnny,

I know you won't agree with me here (and that's perfectly understandable given your loyalities), but one writer said it was a game no team should have lost. It truly was a momentous event, and one with such great memories and plays.

With the passage of time I can agree that both teams gave it their all and and Miami got more than their share of bad breaks. The Chargers got a score when they kicked off and the ball bounced backwards and the was recovered by the Chargers. Considering we won on a field goal in overtime, take away that freak bounch and we lose.

I'm glad we won. It earned us the privilege of being screwed in the freezer bowl the next week. That game should have been rescheduled.

 

[Ockeghem]

Johnny,

Have you ever tried to find out if the game is for sale somewhere? I haven't researched it yet.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem

Johnny,

Have you ever tried to find out if the game is for sale somewhere? I haven't researched it yet.

No I haven't. I don't recall ever seeing any charger games being for sale.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Well, if you can't be good, get a bad call from the refs. Pats beat the Ravens because they have a 6 point lead. They have a six point lead because the Pats faked a field goal, passed, the replays showed it was short of the 1st down. The refs call a penalty on the Pats for illegal formation or something like that. The Ravens call for a revue and the refs still say it was a 1st down so the Ravens have to take the penalty.

The only way I can think they were right is if it was the kind of penalty that can't be declined. If so, why would the ref bother to say they got the first down? Why even revue the play, just invalidate the play and redo. The Ravens eventually get the ball down to about the 10 or so, but have to go for it on 4th down because they're behind by 6 and the receiver drops the ball.

Even if the refs got it right, the Pats didn't get a first down and the penalty saved their tail...or the blind refs did. Someone explain this one to me.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Johnny Angell

Well, if you can't be good, get a bad call from the refs. Pats beat the Ravens because they have a 6 point lead. They have a six point lead because the Pats faked a field goal, passed, the replays showed it was short of the 1st down. The refs call a penalty on the Pats for illegal formation or something like that. The Ravens call for a revue and the refs still say it was a 1st down so the Ravens have to take the penalty.

The only way I can think they were right is if it was the kind of penalty that can't be declined. If so, why would the ref bother to say they got the first down? Why even revue the play, just invalidate the play and redo. The Ravens eventually get the ball down to about the 10 or so, but have to go for it on 4th down because they're behind by 6 and the receiver drops the ball.

Even if the refs got it right, the Pats didn't get a first down and the penalty saved their tail...or the blind refs did. Someone explain this one to me.

Illegal formation penalties can be declined. I didn't see the game, though, so I cannot comment on the call. The only 1pm game that graced TV's in our area was the glorious Lions game. I played golf instead, and was only subjected to the 2nd half of that one.

I cannot believe Tennessee is 0-4. They could easily be 0-6, too, since they play Indy and New England the next two weeks. What's happened in Nashville?

 

[Ockeghem]

I think the Titans will hand the Colts their first loss of the season.

How about that Jets-Saints game? I must say, the Jets do have a better defense than I thought. I was very happy that the Jets lost, obviously. And the second time the Jets and Pats play will be quite telling.

I think the Ravens and Patriots each played against the best defense either of them have seen this year. I was pleased with the result, but the Patriots still have a lot of work to do. I do wish they could improve their secondary.

I was impressed with the Lions' ability to move the ball (okay, in the first half only). Any more on Stafford? The reports I heard on the radio this morning said the injury wasn't serious.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I am beginning to believe in the Saints. Their defense is playing well, which makes them a very scary team considering that offense. They made Sanchez look like a true rookie QB. The Jets defense is for real, too. Rex Ryan has done an outstanding job there so far. That was a very entertaining game.

Stafford's injury does not appear to be too serious. However, with the Steelers on the schedule this week, I wouldn't be surprised if Culpepper played to protect Detroit's investment. There is no sense in taking chances on bringing him back too soon and risking a bigger injury.

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield

I am beginning to believe in the Saints. Their defense is playing well, which makes them a very scary team considering that offense. They made Sanchez look like a true rookie QB. The Jets defense is for real, too. Rex Ryan has done an outstanding job there so far. That was a very entertaining game.

Stafford's injury does not appear to be too serious. However, with the Steelers on the schedule this week, I wouldn't be surprised if Culpepper played to protect Detroit's investment. There is no sense in taking chances on bringing him back too soon and risking a bigger injury.

Scott,

In western Michigan at least, I am hearing that Culpepper will start (even though Stafford is day-to-day). BTW, I too believe in the Saints at this point. I would love to see New Orleans continue their winning ways.

There are two 4-0 teams that I don't really think are as good as their record (Denver and Minnesota). I do believe the Colts, Giants, and Saints are formidable enough to continue their streak for three or four more weeks. Four of these teams play next week (New Orleans has a bye). I think two of them will fall from the ranks of the undefeated. I'm hoping those two teams are the Broncos and the Colts (although a Bronco victory over New England would not surprise me the way the Patriots have been playing lately). Either way, the Broncos will not get past both the Chargers and (after a bye) the Ravens. The Giants pretty much have a bye as well next week (they are at home against Oakland); however, I'm not ready to concede that the Vikings have a bye, although it is close as they are playing the Rams (on the road). Any chance St. Louis can give the Minnesota Favres a game?

 

[Ockeghem]

I was reading the NHL section of EPSN, and came across this:

"Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday he is teaming up with St. Louis Blues owner Dave Checketts in a bid to purchase the St. Louis Rams."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4535583

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem




There are two 4-0 teams that I don't really think are as good as their record (Denver and Minnesota). I do believe the Colts, Giants, and Saints are formidable enough to continue their streak for three or four more weeks. Four of these teams play next week (New Orleans has a bye). I think two of them will fall from the ranks of the undefeated. I'm hoping those two teams are the Broncos and the Colts (although a Bronco victory over New England would not surprise me the way the Patriots have been playing lately). Either way, the Broncos will not get past both the Chargers and (after a bye) the Ravens. The Giants pretty much have a bye as well next week (they are at home against Oakland); however, I'm not ready to concede that the Vikings have a bye, although it is close as they are playing the Rams (on the road). Any chance St. Louis can give the Minnesota Favres a game?

I am the furthest thing from a Vikings fan, but they seem to have all the right ingredients for a contender -- excellent offensive line, running game, and defense. Favre is the wildcard (along with Childress' coaching), but if he can stay healthy, then I think Minnesota will be a force in the NFC playoffs, along with the Saints and Giants.

I think there is almost zero chance St. Louis gives Minnesota a good game. The Rams are as bad as the Lions were last year -- truly dreadful.

I do agree that Denver is a mirage, though. They have benefited from a very favorable early schedule.