NFL 2010 Regular Season Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Patrick Sun]

Nowadays, it's not about the next/new contract, but about the signing bonus, as that's the only guaranteed money (more or less).

 

[Ockeghem]

Well, I've posted items from ESPN before, only to discover that the information was premature. But the following link asserts that the trade of Moss to the Vikings is a done deal:


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5655381

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem


As for the lockout, even with a contract no player will get paid, so that really doesn't enter into the equation for Moss. Actually, the owners make out pretty well in a lockout. They still get TV money (it's in their network contracts), but the players will not be getting anything. The owners hold all the cards in this contract negotiation.

 

[Ockeghem]

"The owners hold all the cards in this contract negotiation."


It would be interesting to see just how many cards the owners held if the players -- assuming this were possible -- went 2-3 years without playing.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Ockeghem

"The owners hold all the cards in this contract negotiation."


It would be interesting to see just how many cards the owners held if the players -- assuming this were possible -- went 2-3 years without playing.

Considering the average length career for an NFL player, more than half the players would never make it back if a lockout goes for 3 years.


I think there will be some lost games, but the players will eventually give in. If not for that TV money guarantee, though, the owners would not be in nearly as strong a position.

 

[Steve_Tk]

The reason they want their new contract ASAP is the gauranteed money. Brady extended his contract, of which $49 million is gauranteed. So Sunday, if he blows out his knee and never plays again he is golden. If he didn't have that extention, and blows out his knee sunday, you really think they are going to give it to him then? Of course not. It sucks for the fans when players hold out, but if I was in the position I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing.

 

[Malcolm R]

Oh man, next week's Cowboys vs. Vikings is going to be something to watch as two supposed Super Bowl favorites find themselves both at 1-3...and one of them will leave the field next week at 1-4.


Not really a fan of either, but it's always fun to see the Cowboys lose, so I'll be rooting for the Vikings.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Wade Philips is on life-support in Dallas, as is Norv Turner in San Diego and Childress in Minnesota.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Wade Phillips, Norv Turner, and Jon Fox will not be at at the same team next year. That's my list I feel is gauranteed. Jon Fox's contract is up, so he may not be fired, but just not renewed.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Ah yes, the Chargers are off to their usual 2-3 start. This time though, all 5 games were not just winnable games, they were games supposed to be won. A 3-2 start would have only been just ok and 4-1 really the minimum expected. Now they're 0-2 and the division.


All three losses on the road, all three directly attributable to special teams. Has there ever been a worse performance by special teams before? I don't recall one. The first 12 points came from 2 consecutive blocked punts. Simply unbelievable.


But let's not stop there. In all three losses the offense had the ball inside of 2 minutes to go and did not get the job done. In the loss to the raiders, the defense gave up two long drives to an offense that hadn't been successful all game long. This is something I've seen before from the D. When push comes to shove, they are not very good. They can keep the other team out of the endzone until crunch time.


What is scary is that the chargers don't seem to know what's wrong. I think you have to start with turner. That's 4 straight seasons with slow starts with the team starting in a hole. 2 out of 4 would be one thing, but 4 out 4 is a trend. The first year for Turner, 2 playoff wins. 2nd there was 1 playoff win. 3rd there was 0 playoff win. Even in an weak division (but it's more competitive this year I think), I think the trend continues. What's worse than 0 playoff wins? Not making the playoffs.


Ah, but we get to play St. Louis on the road, another supposed to win game. Going by the pattern, we'll be looking at 2-4 after Sunday.


Then there's the GM who seems more intent on screwing players than doing what's best for the Chargers. It's clear VJ has not future with the chargers, so why is he still a charger? He's just sitting there not playing for anyone and we have gotten nothing for him. Jeez, it'd be worth it to trade him for a top notch special teams performer. I think they could use a little help there.


2 consecutive blocked punts for 9 points and another 3 from a field goal after the safety. Believable!


Turner has to go. Why couldn't we have gotten the Jet's coach? He can get his guys ready to play. Not Turner.

 

[Patrick_S]

I have to say the Chargers’ special teams have been bad so far this year but let’s not sell the other teams short. In the case of the Raiders they obviously saw a flaw in the Chargers’ blocking and executed a rush that took advantage of the flaw.


The Chargers should still win the West since it appears to be a rather weak division but I have to say the window of opportunity for them to win the SB appears to be closing if it hasn’t already closed.


As for the Raiders, it will be interesting to see if they can finally win two games in a row. Somehow I doubt they will win next Sunday.

 

[Patrick Sun]

The Saints loss this weekend kinda tainted the Falcons win over the Saints. Heh. I guess the Reggie Bush factor is coming into play for the Saints offensive scoring woes.

 

[Ockeghem]

The 2-3 [ ] Lions will no doubt be pleased that this is at least being looked at.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5677841

 

[Malcolm R]

He got both feet and a knee on the ground before putting the ball on the grass and beginning to celebrate. It was ruled incomplete because Johnson didn't maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire process of the catch.

It does seem like a dumb rule. If he had "both feet and a knee on the ground," then the play is over. What happens to the ball after that should be irrelevant. If he were at mid-field, he would have been ruled down as soon as the knee hit and the play would have been over.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Malcolm R



It does seem like a dumb rule. If he had "both feet and a knee on the ground," then the play is over. What happens to the ball after that should be irrelevant. If he were at mid-field, he would have been ruled down as soon as the knee hit and the play would have been over.

What is even more dumb is that Johnson, supposedly a "professional", did not understand the rule for performing one of the most basic functions of his job -- catching the ball. Instead he was too concerned about celebrating instead of securing the ball. That is his fault -- not the league's.


I have no problem with the NFL reviewing the rule in the off season. They do that all the time with rules. However, under the current rule it was not a catch.

 

[Malcolm R]

Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield




What is even more dumb is that Johnson, supposedly a "professional", did not understand the rule for performing one of the most basic functions of his job -- catching the ball. Instead he was too concerned about celebrating instead of securing the ball. That is his fault -- not the league's.

It's like that player a couple seasons ago who streaked away for the touchdown, but then dropped the ball just before he reached the goal line to begin celebrating. Fortunately the fumble was recovered by his teammate and they were able to score from the 1 yard line.

Like it's somehow cool to score the touchdown, but not cool to hold on to the ball in the actual end zone. I'd seen this type of thing several times in college, and I think this was a rookie NFL player. They would often drop the ball the split-second after they crossed the goal line. In this case, he dropped it a split-second too early.

 

[Hanson]

Originally Posted by Malcolm R



It does seem like a dumb rule. If he had "both feet and a knee on the ground," then the play is over. What happens to the ball after that should be irrelevant. If he were at mid-field, he would have been ruled down as soon as the knee hit and the play would have been over.

Actually, that rule applies all over the field. And what happens to the ball, ie possession, is the whole point of the rule. Let's say you catch a ball, fall on your knees, land on the ball, and then the ball squirts out. Is that a catch? It isn't, because it doesn't exhibit control. They should make it clearer in the rule as to what constitutes control, but I agree with Scott -- if Johnson was as aware of the rules as he should have been and not so clouded by the anticipation of celebration, he would have hung on to the ball all the way through. It's no different than when DeSean Jackson let the ball go inches from the goal line and resulted in a fumble. And to be clear, I am equating both players' inability to follow the rules, not the differences in possession.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Originally Posted by Malcolm R




It's like that player a couple seasons ago who streaked away for the touchdown, but then dropped the ball just before he reached the goal line to begin celebrating. Fortunately the fumble was recovered by his teammate and they were able to score from the 1 yard line.

Like it's somehow cool to score the touchdown, but not cool to hold on to the ball in the actual end zone. I'd seen this type of thing several times in college, and I think this was a rookie NFL player. They would often drop the ball the split-second after they crossed the goal line. In this case, he dropped it a split-second too early.

That was DeSean Jackson from the Eagles. I could of sworn after seeing that he would always be an "issue", seems to have shaped up into a great player since then.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Congratulations to the Detroit Lions for equaling their own NFL record of 24 consecutive road losses. That's three years to you and me, Rusty!


Wow, twice in a single decade they have gone three years without a road win! Now, that's ineptitude!

 

[Malcolm R]

The Chargers might as well just stay home the rest of the year. I'd be embarassed to take the field after getting beat down by the Raiders and Rams in consecutive weeks.