2009 NFL Thread [Archive] - Page 9 - The SuperHeroHype Forums

FaT_tONle

03-23-2009, 11:08 PM

Excel

03-23-2009, 11:08 PM

^No it isn't. McFadden was the flashiest star in the 2008 NFL draft, and JaMarcus Russel was the #1 overall pick 2 years ago. Now consider they are very likely to add Michael Crabtree (or, if not, Jeremy Maclin), who is also the most hyped offensive skill position player in the draft. They have the makings of a super-star trio that will be there for the next decade. The only thing sportscasters like talking about MORE than great players is player who are going to be great. Oakland is loaded with them.

That and Oakland is going to be a legit team next season. Playoffs wont come until 2010 I think, but theyll be a 9-7 team with some close losses.

And lets be serious. You can name the teams that garner viewers outside of football fans on own your hand.

1. The Patriots (when Brady is healthy with Moss)
2. The Colts (when Manning is healthy)
3. The Cowboys (though they dropped a lot since Owens is gone; this is a distant 3rd)
4. The Steelers (team itself famous as is Big Ben, but outside of NFL hes hardly recognizeable; Mendenhall could change that though.

Thats about it. Its all about the stars and teams success. Most teams are lucky to have 2-3 players every NFL fan knows, let alone anybody the general population does. New England has 2 people like that in Tom Brady (games brightest star) and Randy Moss (perenial super star, once games most popular player as rookie). After those 2, they still have a ton of guys every NFL player knows like Welker, Maroney, and countless guys on D. Dallas was like that as well though the loss of Owens seriously hurt them. Indianapolis has Peyton Manning, who has the most commercials in the NFL. Manning and Brady can pretty much sell a team by themselves, as can Moss and Owens. Nobody else can really do that.

The only team I see really being on the brink of becoming huge, as in they can bring in their own audiences outside of the NFL, would be the New Orleans Saints. Bush is extremely famous and that team is super explosive; they can ever regain their 2006 form they could be a force.

Cmill216

03-23-2009, 11:11 PM

Darren McFadden has absolutely zero buzz right now after a non-existant 2008, so that argument holds no water.

NewYorkSpider

03-23-2009, 11:17 PM

Yeah but why do they need that exposure week one? Last time I checked they lost in the Superbowl. Why should the NFL tie itself down to two teams (Superbowl participants) in those prime time games opening weekend. Packers/Bears is a very viable Sunday Night matchup. Packers have a great national fan base, Chicago is a big market. Arizona is not. Carolina is not. You can't open Sunday Night football without a marquee team in there. That's business. You look at NBC's pattern, they always have either a marquee team, or a marquee player (ie: Manning/Farve) on Sunday Night up until week 14. Because after the games with playoff implications take precedence.

So watching Manning/Warner isn't good enough? Just because Arizona finally got back to the playoffs doesn't mean they should be treated like a horrible team. 5 of 6 teams that play on Sunday/Monday night in week one didn't make the playoffs. Is that fair to Arizona? And yes, seeing teams like Bears/Packers play is always enjoyable to watch, but the Cardinals deserve the credit for making it to Super Sunday.

Excel

03-23-2009, 11:19 PM

Darren McFadden has absolutely zero buzz right now after a non-existant 2008, so that argument holds no water.

That explains his Super Bowl commercial :huh:

For guys who came into the league as famous as he did, it doesn't take very long for their buzz to get back to where it once was should not dominate immeadietly. Give McFadden a few good games and he'll be right back where he was prior to last season, as the next big thing.

It didnt take the media very long to start messing their pants over Reggie Bush again did it? Heading into this year the cool topic was "hell be out of the NFL with in 3 years"; but suddenly he gets 8 touchdowns in 6 games and half a dozen highlight plays and he's "one of the NFL's most exciting players".

Again, give McFadden 2 big games, and his buzz will from 0 to 100.

That said, McFadden looks pretty good last year in his limited playing time, especially catching the ball. When Oakland actually competes next season look for him to see a lot more carries.

FaT_tONle

03-23-2009, 11:23 PM

1. The Patriots (when Brady is healthy with Moss)
2. The Colts (when Manning is healthy)
3. The Cowboys (though they dropped a lot since Owens is gone; this is a distant 3rd)
4. The Steelers (team itself famous as is Big Ben, but outside of NFL hes hardly recognizeable; Mendenhall could change that though.

Cowboys a distant third??? What are you smoking? You need to do your homework on that. Yes, the Pats did out-rate the Cowboys in 2007, but that was because they were chasing history. Cowboys have been the highest rated team almost every other year. Colts??? Please....

So watching Manning/Warner isn't good enough? Just because Arizona finally got back to the playoffs doesn't mean they should be treated like a horrible team. 5 of 6 teams that play on Sunday/Monday night in week one didn't make the playoffs. Is that fair to Arizona? And yes, seeing teams like Bears/Packers play is always enjoyable to watch, but the Cardinals deserve the credit for making it to Super Sunday.

Market is market... look at the ratings for Arizona's playoff games... I am sure that Saturday Nighter did lower ratings than expected, even though there was bad weather across the country. The game being a rout certainly did not help its cause. The NFC Championship did poor ratings as well. Arizona just is not up to par with the other markets... I mean their building has just as many Cowboy fans as Cardinal fans on some occassions. But if you want to nit-pick and say the Cardinals should have gotten the second game of the MNF double header then fine. I'd argue again... who on the East Coast is staying up to watch them play? And you can't put them in a 7:00 game either unless they are on the road in an East Coast venue. Unless you want the defending NFC champs to open the season on the road... some fairness...

NewYorkSpider

03-23-2009, 11:46 PM

Market is market... look at the ratings for Arizona's playoff games... I am sure that Saturday Nighter did lower ratings than expected, even though there was bad weather across the country. The game being a rout certainly did not help its cause. The NFC Championship did poor ratings as well. Arizona just is not up to par with the other markets... I mean their building has just as many Cowboy fans as Cardinal fans on some occassions. But if you want to nit-pick and say the Cardinals should have gotten the second game of the MNF double header then fine. I'd argue again... who on the East Coast is staying up to watch them play? And you can't put them in a 7:00 game either unless they are on the road in an East Coast venue. Unless you want the defending NFC champs to open the season on the road... some fairness...

Who on the East Coast is going to watch two West Coast teams play? I think you would draw in more ratings if you had another marquee team playing there. I didn't even watch last years 10:15 MNF game. I think I would find watching Warner/Cardinals and Manning/Colts play more suitable than Oakland/San Deigo..but that's just my opinion. Two Super Bowl winning QB's playing to start the season up is better than watching Rivers/Russell play.

Mastodon123

03-24-2009, 12:43 AM

Was the entire schedule released? Who knows, maybe the Cardnials will have a prime time game this year. Though the only way I can see that happening if they were having a rematch with the Steelers.

NewYorkSpider

03-24-2009, 12:48 AM

Was the entire schedule released? Who knows, maybe the Cardnials will have a prime time game this year. Though the only way I can see that happening if they were having a rematch with the Steelers.

They only released the opening games and Thanksgiving day schedule. The arguements have been the Raiders getting an opening primetime game and the Cardinals don't. IMO that's stupid. The Cardinals deserve it more.

Mastodon123

03-24-2009, 12:54 AM

Yeah they should show a NFC game instead of having SD Vs Oak and having 2 AFC games in one night.

NewYorkSpider

03-24-2009, 01:14 AM

Jacksonville vs Houston last season? Now that was a great pick wasn't it? I think we had this arguement last season during that Monday Night game. Why did they pick that game? It doesn't have any appeal whatsoever.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 10:14 AM

Who on the East Coast is going to watch two West Coast teams play? I think you would draw in more ratings if you had another marquee team playing there. I didn't even watch last years 10:15 MNF game. I think I would find watching Warner/Cardinals and Manning/Colts play more suitable than Oakland/San Deigo..but that's just my opinion. Two Super Bowl winning QB's playing to start the season up is better than watching Rivers/Russell play.

"Oh GOOD FOR YOU..... :oldrazz:" But in all seriousness, unless you are I die hard, you are turning it off after the first half. People have work. Kids are in school. It's not gonna work.

That-Guy

03-24-2009, 11:04 AM

Really? How come it seems it's always the Cowboys in the thanksgiving game? ugh.

But a Titans/Steelers game should be good.

I know, right? I'm sick of them already. And the Lions? I know they might actually rebuild themselves this year, but we ARE talking about a team coming off the worst season in NFL history here. Expectations aren't THAT high. I'm sure there are plenty of other teams that would generate a lot more interest.

But year, Titans/Steelers should be good. I hope. If it goes like they're last meeting... it's going to be a long season for me.

Darthphere

03-24-2009, 11:17 AM

That explains his Super Bowl commercial :huh:

Matt Light was in a Super Bowl commercial too.:huh:

The Incredible Hulk

03-24-2009, 11:17 AM

I know, right? I'm sick of them already. And the Lions? I know they might actually rebuild themselves this year, but we ARE talking about a team coming off the worst season in NFL history here. Expectations aren't THAT high. I'm sure there are plenty of other teams that would generate a lot more interest.

well considering the Lions are responsible for making football on Thanksgiving the institution that it is today, I think they can get a pass. In the 1930's the NFL couldnt pay teams to play on T'Giving because they didnt think anyone would watch. The Lions stepped up in 1934, originally playing the Packers every year (until Lombardi cried that it was a "disadvantage" to his team to play on a short week each year).

Not to mention the fact that a vast majority of the NFL's hand-picked primetime games on MNF are just as bad if not worse than the Lions on T'Giving considering the way team's fluctuate year to year in the league. Hell we had to watch Browns/Bills one Monday Night last season.

Keep the traditional games where they are. They now have the 3rd game at night on T'Giving to rotate between the other teams.

Silver Knight

03-24-2009, 11:18 AM

Darren McFadden has absolutely zero buzz right now after a non-existant 2008, so that argument holds no water.
So very true. Talk about a flop..

Mastodon123

03-24-2009, 11:28 AM

The Lions will have a new challenge ahead of them if the league changes to a 18 game regular season.

Dark Donnie

03-24-2009, 11:48 AM

Raiders still have a big national fanbase. Cowboys and Steelers are far and away numbers one and two. But the Raiders are probably top five. Philli and Arizona are small market and do not draw big ratings nationally. Same with San Diego. They only draw big ratings when they are pitted with teams like Indy, NE, Pitt.

:huh:

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 02:44 PM

:huh:

Philli is small market compared to the other big markets. Boston, New York, Dallas, Pitt, Chicago are all ahead of them in football. Philli is more on the level of a Bay Area team like San Fran or Oakland... only those fanbases are a lot bigger nationally than Philli.

Dark Donnie

03-24-2009, 02:57 PM

Philli is small market compared to the other big markets. Boston, New York, Dallas, Pitt, Chicago are all ahead of them in football. Philli is more on the level of a Bay Area team like San Fran or Oakland... only those fanbases are a lot bigger nationally than Philli.

Where are these stats from?

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 03:38 PM

Where are these stats from?

Philli is barely top ten on most lists as big sports markets... and that is only because they represent all four of the major sports. But from a football standpoint they fall short of many other normally small market venues. Teams like the Dolphins and Steelers have a much bigger national following and are bigger markets from a football stand point. Dallas is not a huge sports market like a NY, LA, Boston but from a football standpoint it's not even close. Philli only draws attention when they play the other big markets like Dallas, NE, NY, etc. I don't think they do well in the ratings nationally. Even their playoff games, the ratings have not been up to par for Fox at least compared to CBS.

That-Guy

03-24-2009, 03:55 PM

well considering the Lions are responsible for making football on Thanksgiving the institution that it is today, I think they can get a pass. In the 1930's the NFL couldnt pay teams to play on T'Giving because they didnt think anyone would watch. The Lions stepped up in 1934, originally playing the Packers every year (until Lombardi cried that it was a "disadvantage" to his team to play on a short week each year).

Not to mention the fact that a vast majority of the NFL's hand-picked primetime games on MNF are just as bad if not worse than the Lions on T'Giving considering the way team's fluctuate year to year in the league. Hell we had to watch Browns/Bills one Monday Night last season.

Keep the traditional games where they are. They now have the 3rd game at night on T'Giving to rotate between the other teams.

Wow, you certainly know your history! Okay, maybe you're right about the Lions.

Yeah, they seriously need to realign what they're doing with Monday night football. I'm glad I got to see Pittsburgh play twice on Monday but some of the other teams they put up for it are awful selections.

The Incredible Hulk

03-24-2009, 04:20 PM

Philli is barely top ten on most lists as big sports markets... and that is only because they represent all four of the major sports. But from a football standpoint they fall short of many other normally small market venues. Teams like the Dolphins and Steelers have a much bigger national following and are bigger markets from a football stand point. Dallas is not a huge sports market like a NY, LA, Boston but from a football standpoint it's not even close. Philli only draws attention when they play the other big markets like Dallas, NE, NY, etc. I don't think they do well in the ratings nationally. Even their playoff games, the ratings have not been up to par for Fox at least compared to CBS.

You seem to be using "market" in place of "fanbase" or "following" and I think that's what is confusing people.

Philadelphia is the 5th largest media market in the country and has a population about 6 times the size of Pittsburgh. Market-wise it's not even comparable. Philly is also a far bigger market than Boston or Dallas (as is the SF bay area).

As for national followings, it's sort of a hard thing to quantify Do teams really have national followings? Or do their fans just travel well? I'd say the Cowboys have a national following akin to the NY Yankees. The Steelers? Not sure. Their fans certainly travel well but do they really have a following outside of the popular relocation areas for Yinzers like Florida and Arizona? Not sure although most teams that have won multiple super bowls tend to pick up fans in other parts of the countries b/c everyone loves a winner I guess.

Excel

03-24-2009, 04:31 PM

Boston, Chicago, Pittsburg, and New York are just huge sports towns.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 04:50 PM

You seem to be using "market" in place of "fanbase" or "following" and I think that's what is confusing people.

Philadelphia is the 5th largest media market in the country and has a population about 6 times the size of Pittsburgh. Market-wise it's not even comparable. Philly is also a far bigger market than Boston or Dallas (as is the SF bay area).

As for national followings, it's sort of a hard thing to quantify Do teams really have national followings? Or do their fans just travel well? I'd say the Cowboys have a national following akin to the NY Yankees. The Steelers? Not sure. Their fans certainly travel well but do they really have a following outside of the popular relocation areas for Yinzers like Florida and Arizona? Not sure although most teams that have won multiple super bowls tend to pick up fans in other parts of the countries b/c everyone loves a winner I guess.

I don't buy Philli being miles ahead of Boston or Chicago or even the Bay area... it's debatable for the Bay area... but not the former two in my opinion. And as far as national followings... it has little to do with how well certain fanbases travel. There are just more 49er fans, Raider fans, Bear fans out there nationally than Eagle fans. I think that certainly helps from a ratings standpoint. The Bay area teams have been **** as of late which is why there has been an heavy East Coast bias from media covering the NFL as of late. But a few lopsides years like that doesn't mean Philli can put themselves on the same pedestal as the Boston, NY, Chicago football markets. They are up there by default.

Dark Donnie

03-24-2009, 05:35 PM

Philly is easily in the top 6 in terms of sports markets. In terms of NFL, they have to be pretty high as well. There merchandise sales are always near the top, if not the top(2005) every year so they have a huge following. Not to mention we travel extremely well.

Excel

03-24-2009, 05:39 PM

Like him or not, McNabb is an enormous star, and its the stars that carry teams. The Phils...Howard, Rollins, Utley, Hamels...they're stacked.

Dr. Evil

03-24-2009, 05:44 PM

Miami will began renovations to Dolphins Stadium in a few years.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 05:54 PM

StorminNorman

03-24-2009, 06:06 PM

I don't know why people bother debating Fat Tonie.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 07:01 PM

I don't know why people bother debating Fat Tonie.

Well... T.O jerseys may have a had a little factor in that.

NewYorkSpider

03-24-2009, 07:46 PM

"Oh GOOD FOR YOU..... :oldrazz:"

You sound like Christan Bale now. :p

But in all seriousness, unless you are I die hard, you are turning it off after the first half. People have work. Kids are in school. It's not gonna work.

But you're still missing my point. Who on the east coast is going to watch two west coast teams play? You're better off having two teams that are worth watching. You might draw in more ratings.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 08:44 PM

You sound like Christan Bale now. :p

But you're still missing my point. Who on the east coast is going to watch two west coast teams play? You're better off having two teams that are worth watching. You might draw in more ratings.

I am saying I think that is the reason the NFL is experimenting with this double header stuff... they want to see if this thing will have a footing to be something on a weekly basis. MNF has been watered down as it is being on ESPN and all. The mystique and appeal of "one more game" is fading especially with the Kornheisers of the world in the booth. Might as well give America two games each week. One for the majority of the country, one for the west coast. How many people in Cali get home from work from work by 5:45 WT anyhow? Likewise, they probably do low ratings on the west coast as it is. Might as well give everybody a 7:00 pm game.

Cunning Stunts

03-24-2009, 09:05 PM

The Incredible Hulk

03-24-2009, 09:35 PM

^ yeah the NFL is truly a nationalized sport. Most people will watch any NFL game as long as the teams are decent regardless of where they're located. You dont see that with baseball or basketball.

Cunning Stunts

03-24-2009, 09:38 PM

Especially since almost every game is absolutely imperative to each team's success.

In baseball and basketball, there are so many games, they can all afford to lose quite a few and still make it to the playoffs.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 09:43 PM

NewYorkSpider

03-24-2009, 09:50 PM

Cunning Stunts

03-24-2009, 10:04 PM

Some of my big sports radio personalities admitted they did not stay up to watch the completion of Denver/Oakland in last year's Monday Night opener... or was it San Fran/Arizona??? Whoever. But when people who cover the stuff for a living don't stay up until 1:30 watching that game... surely much of America is missing out as well.

So, because some "big sports radio personality" that you listen to didn't watch the game, the rest of America should just go to bed and ignore the game?

Those "big sports radio personalities" you listen to aren't necessarily die-hard football fans. Just because they cover the sport doesn't make them the most all-knowing and best analyst of the sport. I listen to radio religiously (sports radio included), and half of them are just as dumb about football as any other regular, overbearing fan that "knows more about football than anyone else." They just happen to have sources that let them know things before the average Joe can find them out.

I like to consider myself a die-hard football fan. Unless I've got to be up real early the next day, I am going to do everything I can to watch- if not keep total track of- every football game that goes on every day that a game is being played (NFL, I mean... Never been a big college ball fan, but I'll even watch that whenever I see it on too).

That said, I'll watch an Oakland-San Diego game Prime Time if it's on. Sure, I'd rather other teams, but even the two worst teams in the NFL can put on a damned good game... That's the beauty of professional sports.

FaT_tONle

03-24-2009, 10:07 PM

I'm sure the NFL would have a Saturday Night game if it wasn't for College Football. You would have a Thursday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday night game to open the season. I still disagree with Oakland getting a primetime slot. I would much rather watch Seattle/Arizona play.

That's fine... but don't believe that matchup will draw significantly better than Chargers/Raiders... which is a sexier matchup IMO. And even Cardinals/Pathers or Cardinals/Colts would be best saved for later in the year as opposed to week one.

So, because some "big sports radio personality" that you listen to didn't watch the game, the rest of America should just go to bed and ignore the game?

By that logic... Because YOU are an NFL guy that would stay up... everyone else on the East Coast would as well???

Those "big sports radio personalities" you listen to aren't necessarily die-hard football fans. Just because they cover the sport doesn't make them the most all-knowing and best analyst of the sport. I listen to radio religiously (sports radio included), and half of them are just as dumb about football as any other regular, overbearing fan that "knows more about football than anyone else." They just happen to have sources that let them know things before the average Joe can find them out.

I wouldn't know my own guys??? Francesa is HUGE in New York... does a national broadcast on the radio every gameday for two hours. Of course baseball is number one, but the NFL is still the NFL.

I like to consider myself a die-hard football fan. Unless I've got to be up real early the next day, I am going to do everything I can to watch- if not keep total track of- every football game that goes on every day that a game is being played (NFL, I mean... Never been a big college ball fan, but I'll even watch that whenever I see it on too).

Again that's you... that's me too. But my point is why waste a potential marquee matchup at 10:15 ET when there will be 15 other prime time opportunities on MNF... not to mention Sunday Night Football... or even Thursday Night Football.

That said, I'll watch an Oakland-San Diego game Prime Time if it's on. Sure, I'd rather other teams, but even the two worst teams in the NFL can put on a damned good game... That's the beauty of professional sports.

If you stay up to watch Detroit/St. Louis then God Bless you...

or rather God Help you...

NewYorkSpider

03-24-2009, 10:08 PM

The Raiders never perform on MNF. In 2006 they played two games and had a combined total of 0 points. :o

They didn't stay up to watch it cause it was blowout. :o

Excel

03-24-2009, 10:17 PM

Yes, but this year when Oakland is legit and all footballdom is going ape over the fact that Russell, Bush, Dmc, Miller, and Crabtree are all under 25, people will tune in.

Dr. Evil

03-24-2009, 10:18 PM

Chargers and Raiders are only on Monday Night to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the American Football League, which both teams were a part of.

Excel

03-24-2009, 10:25 PM

Police have released the report from Stallworths incident, complete with a nifty little picture at the bottom.

http://www.fox8.com/extras/wjw/miscfiles/DOC151.PDF

It was reportedly very busy...unless Stallworth was drunk, he should be in the clear. WTF was the guy doing out there?

Cunning Stunts

03-24-2009, 11:53 PM

By that logic... Because YOU are an NFL guy that would stay up... everyone else on the East Coast would as well???

Did I say that? No, I didn't. You came here assuming that people wouldn't watch it because "east coasters don't watch west coast games." I live on the East Coast, I watch every football game. There are a lot of guys like me out there. I never said ALL die-hard football fans do it, but there are plenty of us who do.

I wouldn't know my own guys??? Francesa is HUGE in New York... does a national broadcast on the radio every gameday for two hours. Of course baseball is number one, but the NFL is still the NFL.

Yeah, you're making no sense here. I never said you didn't know your own guys. I said that just because your particular favorite analyst has a certain opinion about anything pertaining to football, doesn't make it so, which is the belief you seemed to have been expressing.

Again that's you... that's me too. But my point is why waste a potential marquee matchup at 10:15 ET when there will be 15 other prime time opportunities on MNF... not to mention Sunday Night Football... or even Thursday Night Football.

In order to give all teams a chance. The NFL doesn't worry about "who did better" as much as it does, "who will draw big ratings." Teams with high draft picks tend to garner decent ratings at first because people are interested in how the team/new players will do. On top of that, San Diego vs. Oakland is a divisional match-up with one of the most talked about teams in the NFL (Chargers, due to L.T. and his drama, the defense, and Philip Rivers- yes, I know, not THE most, but they're up there)

If you stay up to watch Detroit/St. Louis then God Bless you...

or rather God Help you...

If you were trying to be funny, you failed. NFL football is NFL football. Detroit vs. St. Louis would be more fun for me to watch than Detroit vs. New England. I'd always rather see a well-matched game over a lopsided victory.

Johnny Drama

03-25-2009, 12:05 AM

If you were trying to be funny, you failed. NFL football is NFL football. Detroit vs. St. Louis would be more fun for me to watch than Detroit vs. New England. I'd always rather see a well-matched game over a lopsided victory.

I agree. But then again, look at last year when the previously win-less Miami Dolphins beat the previously undefeated (not counting Superbowl) New England Patriots. That was epic.

Cunning Stunts

03-25-2009, 12:11 AM

I agree. But then again, look at last year when the previously win-less Miami Dolphins beat the previously undefeated (not counting Superbowl) New England Patriots. That was epic.

I won't deny that should-be blowouts are fun to watch too, it's just if a game is expected to be a better match-up, I'd probably rather watch that. On top of that, every one of New England's games were exciting to watch because I always like to see the big guy go down to the small guy. I agree, awesome game, regardless. :up: This season was a lot more fun for me with Peyton doing badly (at first) and Tom Brady out because both factors seemingly threw the entire league into shambles (again, at first), and new balances kind of built throughout the year. This year was one of my favorite to watch.

Every now and then, it's still fun to watch such a powerful attack like Warner and Fitzgerald rip apart a defense, just for potential highlights' sake.

If a game's on, I'll watch it. To be honest, I usually switch back and forth between however many games are on, no matter who's playing (unless it's Pittsburgh, then I usually keep my eye mainly on that game, but I'll still glance over at the other games).

FaT_tONle

03-25-2009, 08:26 AM

If you were trying to be funny, you failed. NFL football is NFL football. Detroit vs. St. Louis would be more fun for me to watch than Detroit vs. New England. I'd always rather see a well-matched game over a lopsided victory.

I am not getting on the fact that you'd watch those games spare for that little joke. It's the fact that that west coast game is geared for people on the west coast, which is why you only have west coast teams involved. If you want to stay up that is all well and good. The point I am making is why put a marquee team in that slot that is based in the east or central time zone? Because I don't think it is going to improve ratings that much considering its a 10:15 ET kickoff and obviously not everyone will be watching the second half.

Cunning Stunts

03-25-2009, 12:15 PM

I am not getting on the fact that you'd watch those games spare for that little joke. It's the fact that that west coast game is geared for people on the west coast, which is why you only have west coast teams involved. If you want to stay up that is all well and good. The point I am making is why put a marquee team in that slot that is based in the east or central time zone? Because I don't think it is going to improve ratings that much considering its a 10:15 ET kickoff and obviously not everyone will be watching the second half.

How about west coast games are there because there are teams in west coast divisions near each other... Which is indeed why they are placed in western divisions.

The NFL has their own reasons for putting certain teams in certain games at certain times. They discuss all that, and probably have their own system that we might never know. That said, it is quite evident that they try to get as many teams into Prime Time slots as they can. As an owner, how pissed would you be if your team got no Prime Time games just because it was in a smaller market?

And if all these west coast games are geard for west coast fans only, then why the hell should east coast teams get all the prime time slots instead? That would be segregating the entire fan base, and that would be a big ratings no-no.

My uncle, for example, has never left the east coast... Yet he's still a Raiders fan. Should his favorite team never get a Prime Time slot simply because it's not in the same place that he lives?

The reason that the NFL has added different days to the football schedule is for this exact reason... To expose fans to more teams, to get more teams on the bigger stages (big market or not), and to give more fans the ability to see more games... Thus, higher ratings.

StorminNorman

03-25-2009, 12:42 PM

McDaniels on the Cutler controversy:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f6e06a

Again, my prediction is Cutler will be the starting QB for YOUR Denver Broncos.

Cmill216

03-25-2009, 05:09 PM

FaT_tONle

03-25-2009, 05:26 PM

How about west coast games are there because there are teams in west coast divisions near each other... Which is indeed why they are placed in western divisions.

The NFL has their own reasons for putting certain teams in certain games at certain times. They discuss all that, and probably have their own system that we might never know. That said, it is quite evident that they try to get as many teams into Prime Time slots as they can. As an owner, how pissed would you be if your team got no Prime Time games just because it was in a smaller market?

And if all these west coast games are geard for west coast fans only, then why the hell should east coast teams get all the prime time slots instead? That would be segregating the entire fan base, and that would be a big ratings no-no.

My uncle, for example, has never left the east coast... Yet he's still a Raiders fan. Should his favorite team never get a Prime Time slot simply because it's not in the same place that he lives?

The reason that the NFL has added different days to the football schedule is for this exact reason... To expose fans to more teams, to get more teams on the bigger stages (big market or not), and to give more fans the ability to see more games... Thus, higher ratings.

So now West coast teams do not get prime time slots :huh:? You realize that there is only one 10:15pm ET kickoff all year... the MNF double header for opening weekend. There is NO REASON whatsoever to put an East coast team in that slot. Is this so hard to understand... that SOME people on the East Coast may simply not stay up that late to watch their team play? Other than that I am not exactly sure what you are arguing about with me. You and your family watch every NFL game I get it... the point being... I am not putting the Colts, Panthers, Patriots, Giants, Eagles, Dallas, etc in a 10:15 ET slot when there is only one game... all year... that kicks off that late.

Dr. Evil

03-25-2009, 05:31 PM

Interesting:

http://www.fox4kc.com/wdaf-chiefs-labor-dispute-story-032509,0,7361945.story

Immortalfire

03-25-2009, 05:40 PM

Interesting:

http://www.fox4kc.com/wdaf-chiefs-labor-dispute-story-032509,0,7361945.story

Weird.

El_Citrus

03-25-2009, 09:05 PM

I got an idea for a question from Stormin Normin over in the uniform thread. As of right now, based on free agency and current situations like Denver, who do you think would represent the AFC and NFC in the superbowl? I'll let Normin elaborate on his pick of the Texans here if he hasn't in the Uniform thread. Personally, I'd see the Cardinals possibly making it back to the Super Bowl as of right now for the NFC, with New England representing the AFC.

Cmill216

03-25-2009, 09:08 PM

On paper, Pittsburgh looks absolutely amazing right now, especially when you consider they'll be getting a guy like Mendenhall back. All their key players are in their prime, and Santonio Holmes looks to be coming into his own. With another good draft, they should be dominant.

And for the NFC, as long as the Giants find an answer at wide receiver, they look stellar. Especially with the depth and talent they have on the defensive line, which includes getting Osi back.

Bond

03-25-2009, 09:22 PM

Mendenhall is will be Julius Jones soon enough.

Caped Crusader

03-25-2009, 09:32 PM

And for the NFC, as long as the Giants find an answer at wide receiver, they look stellar.

We did.. :hehe::hehe:

Cmill216

03-25-2009, 09:42 PM

:p :heart:

Excel

03-25-2009, 10:40 PM

On paper, Pittsburgh looks absolutely amazing right now, especially when you consider they'll be getting a guy like Mendenhall back. All their key players are in their prime, and Santonio Holmes looks to be coming into his own. With another good draft, they should be dominant.

Patriots will CRUSH puny Steelers! :cmad:

But seriously, yeah, they will. Just imagine...

23: Rey Maualuga
34: Hakeem Nicks
47: Alphonso Smith

Thats in addition to Fred Taylor, Leigh Bodden, Shawn Springs, and Joey Galloway, Laurence Maroney, and Tom Brady all being in addition to the team that won 11 games last year.

19-0 anyone? :o

Dr. Evil

03-25-2009, 10:41 PM

What a moron:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4014514

Cmill216

03-25-2009, 10:47 PM

I can't label New England the #1 unit till I see Tom Brady on the field. That's still a question mark.

vindrow

03-25-2009, 11:01 PM

Patriots will CRUSH puny Steelers! :cmad:

But seriously, yeah, they will. Just imagine...

23: Rey Maualuga
34: Hakeem Nicks
47: Alphonso Smith

Thats in addition to Fred Taylor, Leigh Bodden, Shawn Springs, and Joey Galloway, Laurence Maroney, and Tom Brady all being in addition to the team that won 11 games last year.

19-0 anyone? :o

And, of course that is assuming that they get those players in the draft....but I can see Goodell doing something to make that happen:woot:

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 01:59 AM

I like Houston as the up and coming team that surprises people. Every year we have one and I really like what Houston has set up. If Matt Schaub stays healthy, their offense is beastly (especially considering they could add a Knowshon Moreno). Their defense received a huge boost in Antoine Smith from Arizona to complement Williams. I think Okaoye is doing the right things to become a great DT in this league.

I like Arizona to win the NFC because I believe in Larry Fitzgerald. Another team that could add an explosive playmaker like Moreno, their defense has added great talent.

CrypticOne

03-26-2009, 03:51 AM

McDaniels on the Cutler controversy:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f6e06a

Again, my prediction is Cutler will be the starting QB for YOUR Denver Broncos.

God, I hope so. I don't want to lose Cutler.

Excel

03-26-2009, 09:36 AM

Houston has potential, but I like Oakland & New Orleans as next years 2 big breakouts.

Silver Knight

03-26-2009, 10:09 AM

Whats the latest on Peppers? Is he joing New England afterall?

Erzengel

03-26-2009, 11:27 AM

Thanksgiving

Packers at Lions
Raiders at Cowboys
Giants at Broncos

El_Citrus

03-26-2009, 11:28 AM

I admit Houston could have a great breakout year. Slaton is coming on just like he did at West Virginia with a big splash his first year and a playmaker from then on. (Wish he would have stayed at WVU for one more season.) Andre Johnson is on the same level as Fitzgerald and their defense is young and adding talent. I could see them capitalizing on a mistake by the Titans or Colts and sneak in as a wild card and maybe make it to a divisional round, but not the super bowl in my opinion.

I really like Pittsburgh as an early favorite, but the Patriots wouldn't have traded Cassel if they weren't sure Brady would be Brady when it's kickoff time and after losing Super Bowl XLII and losing their captain last year, I expect this team to come into the 09 season with a vengeance.

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 12:18 PM

I didn't even know the draft order was based solely on records, even amongst the playoff teams. That's crazy.

I mean, think about it. Philadelphia beat Minnesota in the playoffs and advanced further, but they're still picking ahead of Minnesota in the draft.

Its ridiculous.

Houston has potential, but I like Oakland & New Orleans as next years 2 big breakouts.

I need to see more stability from JaMarcus before I can like Oakland - they still have holes at DT, RT, WR, etc. They need a great draft to be a real contender and I never bet with Al Davis on the draft.

New Orleans is interesting and I could see them winning that division. I could also see them going 5-11 though.

I think Gary Kubiack is a better coach than either Cable or Payton.

Alex The Great

03-26-2009, 01:56 PM

The Hammer is looking to extend the season to 17-18 games.

Great, now the Patriots have to go 21-0! :cmad: [/Excel]

Cmill216

03-26-2009, 02:04 PM

Extending the season just so you can make a few extra bucks? Yeah. Genius idea.

Of course, this is without even taking into consideration the physical stress it'll have on key players.

Alex The Great

03-26-2009, 02:05 PM

Well, they would shorten the pre season by 2 games or whatever. so it kinda evens it self out.....But at least this means that teams need more that a super star starter....and need depth at backup etc.

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 02:09 PM

Extending the season just so you can make a few extra bucks? Yeah. Genius idea.

Of course, this is without even taking into consideration the physical stress it'll have on key players.

He's also hinted at shortening the pre-season as well....that's what he's quoted in the ESPN article as stating...If you're going to extend the season 2 weeks than add in a bye week so that each team gets 2 weeks off during the season

Cmill216

03-26-2009, 02:16 PM

It doesn't even itself out because most key players don't play in much of the preseason at all anyway.

If anything, key players would have to take part in most of those two preseason games because they only have two to get ready for the season.

The Incredible Hulk

03-26-2009, 02:18 PM

They made the same arguments in the early 80's when they changed the schedule from 14 to 16 games. However the players and owners will go for it because it means more money in both of their pockets.

Excel

03-26-2009, 03:16 PM

Im not against it as long as its the final 2 weeks of pre season. The PS sucks right now, but if it was just 2 games long it would be interesting.

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 03:17 PM

Bond

03-26-2009, 03:20 PM

I kind of wish the NFL would do it like the NBA or NHL. Just the top 8 teams make it to the playoffs. No Wild Card or anything. I doubt that will ever happen though.

Darthphere

03-26-2009, 03:22 PM

Yeah, the current system rewards some teams for playing in a weak division.

Excel

03-26-2009, 03:26 PM

^No doubt; the Chargers going instead of New England or New York last season was a joke.

I need to see more stability from JaMarcus before I can like Oakland - they still have holes at DT, RT, WR, etc. They need a great draft to be a real contender and I never bet with Al Davis on the draft.

The offensive inproved a tremendous amount as last went on, as they did, so did Russell. They also signed Barnes.

They'll add a wide reciever in the draft no doubt, whether it be Crabtree, Maclin, or Heyward Bey at #7. Miller is a stud TE A healthy Walker still has some upside and Schilens is developing. A lot of it depends on the RB situation. It needs to be McFadden, Bush, Fargas, in that order. Last year McFadden and Bush hardly played; if they can each be getting 15+ carries a game, Russell will always been facing defenses playing the run, plus theyll be able to control the clock and tempo.

I dunno if I see a real big time contender, but I dont think 9-7 or even 10-6 is out of grasp.

I agree New Orleans is a huge hit or miss, but if theyve added some good cb's and will likely draft one; if Sedrick Ellis comes along they should be able to win atleast 10 games; though they need Reggie Bush to stay healthy.

Cmill216

03-26-2009, 03:50 PM

Changing the playoff system in that manner would make divisions, in general, completely obsolete.

The Game

03-26-2009, 04:00 PM

Changing the playoff system in that manner would make divisions, in general, completely obsolete.

Agreed

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 04:00 PM

Extending the season just so you can make a few extra bucks? Yeah. Genius idea.

Of course, this is without even taking into consideration the physical stress it'll have on key players.

The regular season games will simply replace one off season game, so the increase in physical stress is not that great. Also this BENEFITS the players - they make no money in pre season games, but if they make one of those games count a player earns one more game check. Their value instantly goes up. And the teams benefit because the tv/stadium/game revenue is going to exceed the cost increase on players. Everyone benefits.

Also I think the NFL needs to develop a minor league system. Acquire the new USFL, add on four more teams and you have an instantly successful league. People will watch because it will carry the NFL name.

Excel

03-26-2009, 04:12 PM

Also I think the NFL needs to develop a minor league system.

They already have one, called NCAA football. While it doesnt allow them to make money directly like the minor leagues to for baseball, NCAA is 10x as popular as minor league baseball. Thats how you saw JaMarcus Russell and Darren McFadden both in the top 10 highest selling NFL jerseys before they ever stepped foot on the field. That would be IMPOSSIBLE in baseball; where its impossible to tell who the big rookies will be unless your some minor league expert.

Excel

03-26-2009, 04:13 PM

Changing the playoff system in that manner would make divisions, in general, completely obsolete.

Thats pretty much the point. The only think divisions would determine would be the the teams you play twice. Again, its quite simply not fair an 8-8 or 9-7 team goes in ahead of a team that goes 11-5 or 10-6. That is absurd. That IS problem, and needs fixing.

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 04:14 PM

Life isn't fair, Excel

Showtime

03-26-2009, 04:31 PM

We get it...the Patriots didn't make the playoffs last year.

Excel

03-26-2009, 04:39 PM

Life isn't fair, Excel

Yes, but anytime something can be fair, it should be. Imo this is one of those times.

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 04:41 PM

Yes, but anytime something can be fair, it should be. Imo this is one of those times.

Who filled your head with those lies??:oldrazz:

Immortalfire

03-26-2009, 04:41 PM

We get it...the Patriots didn't make the playoffs last year.

And the Chargers did. Therefore, the system sucks.

enterthemadness

03-26-2009, 04:59 PM

And the Chargers did. Therefore, the system sucks.

Not really. Yeah, messed up a 11-5 team didn't make the playoffs, but the Chargers won a weak division AND won a playoff game. Got hot down the stretch and deserved to be in. Won their division.

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 05:07 PM

And the Chargers did. Therefore, the system sucks.

The system only sucks when it doesn't fit in with your personal preferences....Fire, why are you even complaining...your team has been reinvigorted and is going to be taken seriously this year.....get happy:yay:

Immortalfire

03-26-2009, 05:13 PM

The system only sucks when it doesn't fit in with your personal preferences....Fire, why are you even complaining...your team has been reinvigorted and is going to be taken seriously this year.....get happy:yay:

You totally missed it, that comment was a poke at Excel :oldrazz:

Oh I am..I haven't been this pumped for the Falcons in......forever. :woot:

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 05:31 PM

yea...as a Giants fan, I only want two things...beat Dallas in the regular season and making sure Dallas doesn't win the NFC East....anything more than that is a bonus

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 05:37 PM

Thats pretty much the point. The only think divisions would determine would be the the teams you play twice. Again, its quite simply not fair an 8-8 or 9-7 team goes in ahead of a team that goes 11-5 or 10-6. That is absurd. That IS problem, and needs fixing.

Guess what, if the Patriots had actually beaten the Chargers in the regular season New England would of been in the playoffs and San Diego would be sitting at home. Sorry, but New England didn't deserve to be in the playoffs over SD.

Raiden

03-26-2009, 05:38 PM

yea...as a Giants fan, I only want two things...beat Dallas in the regular season and making sure Dallas doesn't win the NFC East....anything more than that is a bonus

Well, Giants not only won the SB 2 years ago, but they also spoiled Pats' bid to be the first perfect season team since the 'Fins, so I'm sure you guys will be happy for the next few years no matter what.

Excel

03-26-2009, 05:49 PM

Guess what, if the Patriots had actually beaten the Chargers in the regular season New England would of been in the playoffs and San Diego would be sitting at home. Sorry, but New England didn't deserve to be in the playoffs over SD.

Maybe if San Diego hadnt lost half of their games, they could have had a top 8 record and been in fairly.

Cunning Stunts

03-26-2009, 05:55 PM

Guess what, if the Patriots had actually beaten the Chargers in the regular season New England would of been in the playoffs and San Diego would be sitting at home. Sorry, but New England didn't deserve to be in the playoffs over SD.

No, but did the Cards deserve to be in the playoffs this year, period? Not at all. They managed to put together an incredible run for the Super Bowl, but they sucked for most of the regular season. This was the team dubbed "The Worst Playoff Team Ever" by NFL analysts.

The Chicago Bears had a tougher schedule, as did the Cowboys, and both of them managed to pull the same record the Cards did with a pretty weak schedule.

To be quite honest, if the proposal to switch the playoff format went through, the Cards would never have been in the playoffs this year, let alone in the Super Bowl.

Excel

03-26-2009, 05:59 PM

Well New England DID beat them by 40 points in week 16...that was their "wake up".

BlackLantern

03-26-2009, 06:01 PM

Well, Giants not only won the SB 2 years ago, but they also spoiled Pats' bid to be the first perfect season team since the 'Fins, so I'm sure you guys will be happy for the next few years no matter what.

Yes....I will anyway..can't speak for any other Giants fan

The Incredible Hulk

03-26-2009, 06:54 PM

the Playoff system is fine as is....win your division or the wild card.....I don't see the NFLPA going for this though unless they get something out of it....like a severly short preseason or an extra bye week

I'm sure the 12.5% pay increase will be enough.

I kind of wish the NFL would do it like the NBA or NHL. Just the top 8 teams make it to the playoffs. No Wild Card or anything. I doubt that will ever happen though.

Those leagues effectively do have Wild Cards. Three division winners and then 5 Wild Cards in each conference. The NFL has 4 Division winners and only 2 Wild Cards.

Bond

03-26-2009, 07:38 PM

This is what I like to hear, coming out of Big D:

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/03/wade-phillips-wants-all-three-rbs-involv.html

Here's a crumb from Wade Phillips' breakfast chat with reporters yesterday at the owners' meetings: Phillips said he believes the running game will be a bigger factor for the Cowboys and wants the offensive coaches to find ways to get all three tailbacks involved.

The Giants proved last season that a three-back system can work, using their "Earth, Wind and Fire" trio to lead the league in rushing. The Cowboys' trio is probably more talented. One-time Pro Bowler Marion Barber is one of the league's most physical backs, and Jerry Jones has made it clear he wants "The Barbarian" fresh when it's time to finish games. First-rounder Felix Jones averaged an eye-popping 8.9 yards per carry in his abbreviated rookie season. And, after toe injuries sidelined the two guys above him on the depth chart, fourth-rounder Tashard Choice showed down the stretch that he can produce against the NFL's elite defenses.

The Wildcat would be one way to get multiple backs involved, and Phillips wants Jason Garrett and Co. to figure out other ways to feature one of the team's biggest strengths.

Excel

03-26-2009, 07:47 PM

Shouldnt be hard. Poeples Choice is the main back with Jones as his speller; Barber is goal line back who comes in the 4th. Barbers far too slow to be a main back himself.

FaT_tONle

03-26-2009, 09:07 PM

Barber is a closer... he can be what Vinateri was for the Pats all those years. You get him mostly involved in the second half and he'll close out those games like the game against the Skins last year.

And as far as Goodell and the owner meetings... here's hoping the regular season doesn't expand... I like the 4 16 4... perfect symmetry. The schedules are balanced as they are. No need for two more games. 17 may be doable though. And as far as playoffs... hell no to 7 or more teams... HELL NO!!!!!! Now reseeding is something I can live with.

Bond

03-26-2009, 09:09 PM

Yep, I say Choice be the main back with Felix coming in as a change of pace, and then let Barber close out the 4th. Sounds sexcellent.

FaT_tONle

03-26-2009, 09:18 PM

I still think I'd be wise for the Boys to add a fourth back in the draft. These guys never stay healthy... even the Giants with "Water"... what's the kids name from Georgia? Patriots had like 6 backs one year when they were down to their practice squad. You need about four or five guys back there. It's becoming the "bullpen" of football.

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 09:27 PM

Maybe if San Diego hadnt lost half of their games, they could have had a top 8 record and been in fairly.

They got in fairly this year. The fact is that San Diego earned their playoff spot. They won their division - something NE failed to do. Again, if New England had beaten San Diego when they had the chance they would of been in the playoffs. New England fans have zero room for complaints.

StorminNorman

03-26-2009, 09:29 PM

No, but did the Cards deserve to be in the playoffs this year, period? Not at all.

Did they win their division? Yes? Then they deserved it.

They managed to put together an incredible run for the Super Bowl, but they sucked for most of the regular season. This was the team dubbed "The Worst Playoff Team Ever" by NFL analysts.

They went 9-7, so they clearly didn't suck. Also who is to say that Arizona loses all the games they do if they don't wrap up their division when they did?

The Chicago Bears had a tougher schedule, as did the Cowboys, and both of them managed to pull the same record the Cards did with a pretty weak schedule.

Completely irrelevant.

To be quite honest, if the proposal to switch the playoff format went through, the Cards would never have been in the playoffs this year, let alone in the Super Bowl.

And we would of missed the best performance by a single player in the playoffs ever in Larry Fitzgerald.

FaT_tONle

03-26-2009, 09:38 PM

It makes it a lot more exciting when there are like four or five 9-5 teams fighting for two wild card spots/divisions. Even if another division winner is 8-8 and gets in over a 10-6, so be it.

Excel

03-26-2009, 09:41 PM

^Easy for you to say :o

Cunning Stunts

03-26-2009, 09:55 PM

Did they win their division? Yes? Then they deserved it.

They went 9-7, so they clearly didn't suck. Also who is to say that Arizona loses all the games they do if they don't wrap up their division when they did?

Completely irrelevant.

And we would of missed the best performance by a single player in the playoffs ever in Larry Fitzgerald.

I'm aware of the "statistics", and that it's irrelevant giving this system, I just don't think the Cards deserved to be in (other than winning in the weakest division in the league)... Which was my point. I'm completely aware of how this system works.

FaT_tONle

03-26-2009, 09:59 PM

^Easy for you to say :o

Well it doesn't happen very often... period. When was it 1985 Denver Broncos... missing out at 11-5? Like 25 years ago. Most times that will get you in. Two cases in the last 30 years does not call for an entire revamp of the current system.

vindrow

03-26-2009, 10:29 PM

Well it doesn't happen very often... period. When was it 1985 Denver Broncos... missing out at 11-5? Like 25 years ago. Most times that will get you in. Two cases in the last 30 years does not call for an entire revamp of the current system.

Exactly, but when it happens to the Pats...well, its time to change things then.

El_Citrus

03-26-2009, 10:34 PM

Regarding the playoff system, it's just fine the way it is. Find a way to win your division and you're in. Regarding the Card, that beating they took in Foxboro was the best thing to happen to them. They realized that winning their division so early wasn't enough and that everyone had to step up their game and look where it got them.

DChero

03-26-2009, 10:34 PM

Going with a system where the top whatever amount of teams get in over a divisional system only works where everyone has the same schedule, or plays everyone. If we get to the point with no divisional winners we run the risk of looking like the NCAA, where voters decide. We can't leave it to voters to judge the toughest schedule or who's "at large." The system's fine, there's only one automatic slot for division winners. Those teams outside still have two more chances to get in.

That-Guy

03-26-2009, 10:55 PM

I think the playoff system is fine the way it is. I can understand people's complaints, but hell... last year, the 10-6 Giants beat the 16-0 Pats in the Super Bowl... maybe people were b**ching then, but I don't remember it.

Anyway...onto this Michael Vick business. I hate to say it, but I have to defend the man. Why? Well, let's see here. Did he commit a despicable crime? Absolutely. Is he a horrible person? Probably. But we're talking about the same league that lets scumbags like Pacman Jones play. The NFL is chock full of woman-beaters, alleged murderers... this isn't the f**king Boy Scouts. If Goodell wants to get up on his high horse and talk about how players need to prove to the organization that they're moral people, then he might as well suspend half the league. I'm not defending what Michael Vick did, or the type of person he is. I'm just saying that just because, for once, the public didn't turn a blind eye to a professional athlete committing a heinous crime (cough, Kobe Bryant, cough) it doesn't mean Vick should be barred for life from the game.

**Note, I know Kobe Bryant plays basketball and not football, but I don't think one sport is on some higher level than another.

DChero

03-26-2009, 11:28 PM

I don't think the problem is the way Vick is being handled, it's those that slip through the cracks. Pacman, Matt Jones, Burress, etc. They all need real repercussions. It's getting ridiculous when there are only a few poster-boys, the league needs to give more fitting, or harsher punishments for violating rules as well as giving the league a bad image. It's amazing to think these athletes were actually in collegiate classes at one point.

I'm from Pittsburgh and I still think Santonio Holmes got off too light for violating drug laws. In addition, Jerry Jones needs to be slapped. Not just for the way he handles his team, but just in general. Maybe it's more of a personal thing for me, heh.

That-Guy

03-27-2009, 11:12 AM

Well, in Holmes case, I think he honestly did make an effort to turn himself around after that... I'm not just saying that because I'm a Pittsburgh fan; after that incident, Holmes really did seem to play with a lot more focus and evolved into arguably the team's most vital receiver (especially in the post-season).

Anyway, it probably is true that the league is looking at past incidents and thinking, "well, we blew it letting this guy back in, but at least we can do something about the Vick case."

BlackLantern

03-27-2009, 11:13 AM

also the previous names mentioned were dealt with when Tagliabue was commish and he was a total pushover when it came to that stuff

Dr. Evil

03-27-2009, 12:19 PM

DChero

03-27-2009, 12:22 PM

That's exactly where RG is failing now. He's not standing up to the NFLPA either, then he has to choose a poster-boy.

I'd rather athletes in the NFL that kids can look up to, RG should have cracked the whip when he had more pull.

In terms of Holmes, it does look like he turned around over the course of the year. I just thought the one game club suspension was kind of a joke. The Steelers have been known as a no tolerance team, this was a little too weak for the Rooneys.

DChero

03-27-2009, 12:22 PM

vindrow

03-27-2009, 02:46 PM

Quick question:

Who the hell is going to backup Big Ben in Pittsburgh next year? Dennis Dixon is the only other QB on the roster right now. Leftwich and Batch are free agents and I have yet to hear anything in regards to other teams being interested in either.

Colbert is working on trying to bring back Leftwich, and Batch and have Dixon on teh PS....but, I think that sometime after the draft Leftwich will get picked by someone and offered a starting position and the Steelers will have Batch and Dixon as backups.

That-Guy

03-27-2009, 04:10 PM

Colbert is working on trying to bring back Leftwich, and Batch and have Dixon on teh PS....but, I think that sometime after the draft Leftwich will get picked by someone and offered a starting position and the Steelers will have Batch and Dixon as backups.

That's probably how it will work out. Leftwich is in kind of a tight spot. There are probably plenty of teams that would willingly take him as a backup, but in that case, he might as well re-sign with the Steelers if they want him back. The trouble is, he wants a starting job, and with his history of injuries and somewhat limited mobility, there aren't many teams that are going to be interested. However, I think he might get picked up by a team that drafts a young QB and wants to pick up an experienced QB to take the reigns while they develop the youngster. If that happens, I'm thinking he could end up in Detroit.

Dr. Evil

03-27-2009, 05:03 PM

That's probably how it will work out. Leftwich is in kind of a tight spot. There are probably plenty of teams that would willingly take him as a backup, but in that case, he might as well re-sign with the Steelers if they want him back. The trouble is, he wants a starting job, and with his history of injuries and somewhat limited mobility, there aren't many teams that are going to be interested. However, I think he might get picked up by a team that drafts a young QB and wants to pick up an experienced QB to take the reigns while they develop the youngster. If that happens, I'm thinking he could end up in Detroit.

Detroit already has Culpepper.

StorminNorman

03-27-2009, 05:46 PM

Excel

03-27-2009, 05:50 PM

Leftwich needs to do what Culpepper did last year and just chill...a spot will open.

FaT_tONle

03-27-2009, 11:08 PM

Leftwich needs to do what Culpepper did last year and just chill...a spot will open.

And where is Culpepper now?

El_Citrus

03-27-2009, 11:41 PM

And where is Culpepper now?

Employed, unlike a lot of former NFL quarterbacks.

I could see Leftwich landing at the NYJ as a back up if he doesn't beat out Clemens or any other QB's the Jets bring in, but it looks like Clemens is already a little pissy about the Cutler rumors. Chicago, again, another backup situation where Leftwich could be a starter if he outplays Orton. I agree with Normin that those are the likely places he'll end up. I'm not sure I'd count out Tampa either if they don't get someone in the draft.

Cunning Stunts

03-27-2009, 11:42 PM

Quick question:

Who the hell is going to backup Big Ben in Pittsburgh next year? Dennis Dixon is the only other QB on the roster right now. Leftwich and Batch are free agents and I have yet to hear anything in regards to other teams being interested in either.

They'll likely resign one of them... If Leftwich gets no attention, he might try to return, but they've liked Batch for years now, and he's been a damned good backup.

Then again, so is Leftwich.

SurfDUI

03-30-2009, 11:50 AM

25

Didn't know today was a holiday didja folks? Time flies, dammitt time flies!

25th Anniversary of the Mayflower leavin the old country, and comming to Indianapolis with the COLTS in tow...have a beer on Surfer, wear ur oldest colts gear, its a celebration batches!!!

What did happen to Bubby Brister?

Immortalfire

03-30-2009, 11:51 AM

:facepalm

That-Guy

03-30-2009, 01:19 PM

Raiden

03-30-2009, 01:56 PM

Employed, unlike a lot of former NFL quarterbacks.

I could see Leftwich landing at the NYJ as a back up if he doesn't beat out Clemens or any other QB's the Jets bring in, but it looks like Clemens is already a little pissy about the Cutler rumors. Chicago, again, another backup situation where Leftwich could be a starter if he outplays Orton. I agree with Normin that those are the likely places he'll end up. I'm not sure I'd count out Tampa either if they don't get someone in the draft.

I don't see why Clemens should be pissed about Jets possibly bringing in a Pro Bowl QB, since he hasn't shown that he's ready to lead a team to a winning record, and beyond. I think Leftwich may be a good fit in New York, but they should still contemplate drafting a QB for the future if they can't get Cutler.

NewYorkSpider

03-30-2009, 03:23 PM

Pre-Season schedule announced. Cardinals/Steelers face off on Aug 13th.

Schedule (http://www.nfl.com/news/story?campaign=ec0005&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true&id=09000d5d80f8347d)

Mastodon123

03-30-2009, 04:12 PM

I don't see why Clemens should be pissed about Jets possibly bringing in a Pro Bowl QB, since he hasn't shown that he's ready to lead a team to a winning record, and beyond. I think Leftwich may be a good fit in New York, but they should still contemplate drafting a QB for the future if they can't get Cutler.

A few players don't want Cutler in NY. Rhodes doesn't want him there because he thinks Cutler is too cocky, and childish. When the Broncos played the Jets, Cutler would get in some of the Jets faces and chirp like a chicken.

StorminNorman

03-30-2009, 04:20 PM

Cutler won't be traded.

Immortalfire

03-30-2009, 04:26 PM

With the Kiper avy, my respect for Norman is now gone.

BlackLantern

03-30-2009, 04:33 PM

Mel Kiper only exists for 2 months out of the whole year.....he's like a bastard version of Santa Claus

StorminNorman

03-30-2009, 04:38 PM

Mel Kiper is awesome.

Dr. Evil

03-30-2009, 05:13 PM

Mel Kiper > Todd McShay and Mike Mayock

Cunning Stunts

03-30-2009, 11:38 PM

A few players don't want Cutler in NY. Rhodes doesn't want him there because he thinks Cutler is too cocky, and childish. When the Broncos played the Jets, Cutler would get in some of the Jets faces and chirp like a chicken.

What Cutler needs is a tough-guy official or surrounding player(s) to straighten him out. He's a great player, but he's such a baby.

I'd guarantee my entire year's salary that if Cutler pulled that **** under Parcells, Belichick, or Tomlin, he'd get a swift (metaphorical) kick to the nuts.

FaT_tONle

03-31-2009, 12:11 AM

I hope Cutler stays... I like a division with a lot of young QB's around the same age. Helps build/re-establish those rivalries for years to come... Cassel, Russel, Rivers, Cutler... that's brewing to be a big time QB driven division. Like the NFC East right now.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 12:21 AM

I agree. The NFC East is basically a toss up every year between the Giants/Cowboys/Eagles. The Redskins aren't too far away from being really competitive. I think they should give Colt Brennan a shot this coming season if Jason Campbell doesn't work out.

Cunning Stunts

03-31-2009, 12:31 AM

BlackLantern

03-31-2009, 12:37 AM

I'd guarantee my entire year's salary that if Cutler pulled that **** under Parcells, Belichick, or Tomlin, he'd get a swift (metaphorical) kick to the nuts.

those 3 coaches would have been man enough to tell Cutler he was being shopped around...not lie about it, get caught, and still lie about it....

Cunning Stunts

03-31-2009, 12:44 AM

those 3 coaches would have been man enough to tell Cutler he was being shopped around...not lie about it, get caught, and still lie about it....

I've also explicitly stated before that McDaniels is a terrible example of how a coach should handle public and player relations, especially in the first month or so of your tenure. They both effed up, but the ways both Cutler and McDaniels handled the situation were terrible.

That said, Jay Cutler is a professional now, and you would think would know better than to act like a child when things don't go your way.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 08:34 AM

Mel Kiper only exists for 2 months out of the whole year.....he's like a bastard version of Santa Claus

https://home.comcast.net/~briteuf/kipermcshaycrazy.png

Dr. Evil

03-31-2009, 11:32 AM

I remember a few years ago McShay doing both NFL Draft Coverage and College Football Recruiting.

NotFadeAway

03-31-2009, 11:59 AM

So Lion fans, what was your opinion of Gosder Cherilus after his rookie season? I liked both Cherilus and Jeff Otah coming of college, my team got Otah, so how did Cherilus pay off?

NotFadeAway

03-31-2009, 12:07 PM

And I still want the Panthers to trade for Tyler Thigpen. Mark my words, this guy will be a quality NFL starter. If I were the Panthers, Jets, Bears, and Lions I would be taking a look at Thigpen.

I'm kinda shocked that the Jets and Bears have not brought in Leftwich yet. Does anyone still think he can be developed into a decent Quarterback? I think if he were to start somewhere, he would need to play in a system similiar to the Steelers.

Also, I still think Michael Oher and Eben Britton will turn out to be the two best Left Tackles in the draft. As for Andre Smith, if he is played at Left Tackle, he will at best be average. If played at Right Tackle, he will be a dominant pro bowler. I also think Phil Loadholt and Fenuki Topou will be great Right Tackles.

Immortalfire

03-31-2009, 12:58 PM

Looks like Vick is going to pay back $6 million to the Falcons, making the way for them to officially release him. Finally.

Now if the media will leave Blank and company the freak alone, and quit asking about him..we'll be good to go.

Excel

03-31-2009, 01:22 PM

Im anxious to see Vick come back. Hes done his time and accepted his punishment, everybody loves a comeback.

Also, I still think Michael Oher and Eben Britton will turn out to be the two best Left Tackles in the draft. As for Andre Smith, if he is played at Left Tackle, he will at best be average. If played at Right Tackle, he will be a dominant pro bowler. I also think Phil Loadholt and Fenuki Topou will be great Right Tackles.

Andre Smith might be the most natural player in the whole draft; he was quite simply dominant in his games. If he had gotten a decent combine and itnerviews hed be the hands down #1 choice; now detroit might be able to get him at 20 and take staff at 1. funny how it works out.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 01:47 PM

Mel Kiper > Todd McShay and Mike Mayock

Mayock > Kiper > McShay

I've also explicitly stated before that McDaniels is a terrible example of how a coach should handle public and player relations, especially in the first month or so of your tenure. They both effed up, but the ways both Cutler and McDaniels handled the situation were terrible.

I disagree. I don't see what McDaniels did wrong here.

So Lion fans, what was your opinion of Gosder Cherilus after his rookie season? I liked both Cherilus and Jeff Otah coming of college, my team got Otah, so how did Cherilus pay off?

He looks to be a solid RT who should only improve. He can't be a LT though in this league.

And I still want the Panthers to trade for Tyler Thigpen. Mark my words, this guy will be a quality NFL starter. If I were the Panthers, Jets, Bears, and Lions I would be taking a look at Thigpen.

I'm not so sure. I love Thigpen and watching him is fun - but I think he needs an offense geared around him. Last year KC's offense was simplified completely when he came in. Basically he had one read - if that WR wasn't open he would run. It was effective, but that sort of play won't last long in the NFL.

Now if he can learn how to make the reads, I agree - the guy has potential.

I'm kinda shocked that the Jets and Bears have not brought in Leftwich yet. Does anyone still think he can be developed into a decent Quarterback? I think if he were to start somewhere, he would need to play in a system similiar to the Steelers.

I am not so much actually. The Jets seem to have real trust in Ratliff and Clemens and the Bears have a similar stance on Orton. I think these are both teams that should DRAFT QB's, not sign a starter-quality FA.

Also, I still think Michael Oher and Eben Britton will turn out to be the two best Left Tackles in the draft. As for Andre Smith, if he is played at Left Tackle, he will at best be average. If played at Right Tackle, he will be a dominant pro bowler. I also think Phil Loadholt and Fenuki Topou will be great Right Tackles.

Eben Britton isn't a left tackle, he could be a great right tackle though. I like Michael Oher but he has been spotty since college. I really like William Beatty and Jason Smith.

You are probably right about Andre Smith, he is too short and his feet aren't quick enough for LT.

Im anxious to see Vick come back. Hes done his time and accepted his punishment, everybody loves a comeback.

I agree.

Andre Smith might be the most natural player in the whole draft; he was quite simply dominant in his games. If he had gotten a decent combine and itnerviews hed be the hands down #1 choice; now detroit might be able to get him at 20 and take staff at 1. funny how it works out.

Not true. What no one seems to remember is that Andre Smith was falling BEFORE the combine. Andre Smith isn't a great fit to play LT in this league - his feet aren't quick enough and he is a few inches too short. Now Andre Smith could end up being the best RT in the game, and one of the best RT's ever - but you don't draft a RT with the number one pick.

Also there is no way in hell Andre Smith is on the board at 20. He likely won't make it pass San Fransisco if he makes it there.

El_Citrus

03-31-2009, 04:01 PM

I disagree. I don't see what McDaniels did wrong here.

He just made a bit of a rookie mistake. He's still very young and after coaching Matt Cassel and seeing what he can do, he immediately tried to make a play for him since he already knew what Cassel could do, which dumped a 50 pound bag of sand in Cutler's diaper. McDaniel's made a small mistake in trying to go after I guy he knew when he has a pro bowl QB in his lap, and Cutler's just being a cry baby about it all.

Regarding Vick, I think it would be interesting to see Vick return, but he'll be booed everywhere he goes, maybe even the team he plays for, although football fans will forgive him if he comes to play for their city and does well. He was fun to watch at least.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 04:11 PM

He just made a bit of a rookie mistake. He's still very young and after coaching Matt Cassel and seeing what he can do, he immediately tried to make a play for him since he already knew what Cassel could do, which dumped a 50 pound bag of sand in Cutler's diaper. McDaniel's made a small mistake in trying to go after I guy he knew when he has a pro bowl QB in his lap, and Cutler's just being a cry baby about it all.

But we don't know that! We don't know if Denver actually tried to get Cassel. We are basing this off of second and third hand accounts. It seems as if it was Minnesota and Tampa that initially showed interest in Cutler who thought Cassel was a useful tool in that. McDaniels and the Broncos stance is still that they never tried to trade Cutler.

Regarding Vick, I think it would be interesting to see Vick return, but he'll be booed everywhere he goes, maybe even the team he plays for, although football fans will forgive him if he comes to play for their city and does well. He was fun to watch at least.

Fans are going to boo an opposing QB? OMG! We can't let that happen. If he wins, if he has success, the home team will love him.

El_Citrus

03-31-2009, 04:25 PM

But we don't know that! We don't know if Denver actually tried to get Cassel. We are basing this off of second and third hand accounts. It seems as if it was Minnesota and Tampa that initially showed interest in Cutler who thought Cassel was a useful tool in that. McDaniels and the Broncos stance is still that they never tried to trade Cutler.

If the Broncos didn't listen to offers or at least casually engage in offers, especially with McD coming in from NE and knowing what Cassel is capable of, then why has it been dragged out this far? If Cutler's skin is this thin and ego that fragile to believe these rumors if they are just rumors and continue this situation, then he needs to grow up and FAST.

Fans are going to boo an opposing QB? OMG! We can't let that happen. If he wins, if he has success, the home team will love him.

Touche, but he could face some of the heaviest and downright nastiest treatment from fans we've ever seen. Hopefully prison gave him some thick skin (And not that kind of thick skin.)

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 04:29 PM

If the Broncos didn't listen to offers or at least casually engage in offers, especially with McD coming in from NE and knowing what Cassel is capable of, then why has it been dragged out this far? If Cutler's skin is this thin and ego that fragile to believe these rumors if they are just rumors and continue this situation, then he needs to grow up and FAST.

Google Bus Cook.

Touche, but he could face some of the heaviest and downright nastiest treatment from fans we've ever seen. Hopefully prison gave him some thick skin (And not that kind of thick skin.)

I will always be a Mike Vick fan. I loved, truly loved, watching that man play. I really want him to succeed, both on and off the field. Every Falcons fan owes a great deal to Mike Vick because he made the Falcons relevant and interesting. The Falcons were the third most important football team in Georgia before Vick now they are...well second. :woot:

El_Citrus

03-31-2009, 04:55 PM

Google Bus Cook.

If he is stirring things in Denver, he's not helping his or Cutler's image one bit.

I will always be a Mike Vick fan. I loved, truly loved, watching that man play. I really want him to succeed, both on and off the field. Every Falcons fan owes a great deal to Mike Vick because he made the Falcons relevant and interesting. The Falcons were the third most important football team in Georgia before Vick now they are...well second. :woot:

:hehe: I agree, Vick would be fun to watch if he comes back, especially if he lands with a team wanting to run the wildcat (Public image aside, Vick playing in Miami with Pennington, Brown, and Williams would be the most fun team to watch in the NFL.)

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 05:19 PM

If he is stirring things in Denver, he's not helping his or Cutler's image one bit.

Bus Cook didn't seem to care all that much about destroying Favre's image last year.

:hehe: I agree, Vick would be fun to watch if he comes back, especially if he lands with a team wanting to run the wildcat (Public image aside, Vick playing in Miami with Pennington, Brown, and Williams would be the most fun team to watch in the NFL.)
I like it.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 08:12 PM

Cutler to be traded.

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Denver Broncos President and CEO Pat Bowlen today released the following statement:

"Numerous attempts to contact Jay Cutler in the last 10 days, both by Head Coach Josh McDaniels and myself, have been unsuccessful.

A conversation with his agent earlier today clearly communicated and confirmed to us that Jay no longer has any desire to play for the Denver Broncos.

We will begin discussions with other teams in an effort to accommodate his request to be traded.”

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=8920

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:25 PM

I...was wrong? :eek:

Has Shawn Rodgers shown up in Cleveland yet?

Dark Donnie

03-31-2009, 08:26 PM

So it will be The Jets, Bucs, Lions....who am I missing.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 08:27 PM

I'll bet Cutler ends up in Tampa, New York or Chicago. I doubt he'll end up in Detroit. The Lions are all ready to select Stafford at #1.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:29 PM

It will be the Jets, Bucs, Vikings, Cleveland, Washington.

Detroit doesn't have enough trade capital to make a deal.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:29 PM

I'll bet Cutler ends up in Tampa, New York or Chicago. I doubt he'll end up in Detroit. The Lions are all ready to select Stafford at #1.

Chicago is high on Orton and, honestly, they have a reason to be. Orton's production pre-injury was fantastic and enough to earn another season.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 08:34 PM

Chicago is high on Orton and, honestly, they have a reason to be. Orton's production pre-injury was fantastic and enough to earn another season.

True.

It's gonna be intresting to see how this plays out.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:37 PM

Cleveland will be involved. They have the obvious target QB for Denver in Quinn and if Mangini really was high on Quinn, he wouldn't be having to win the job.

Cutler with Anderson as a backup makes the Cleveland QB rather sexy. Anderson is going to cost Cleveland only 1.2 Million dollars this season (also making him a sexy trade acquisition).

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 08:44 PM

I would love to see that trade happen. The Browns play the Broncos IN Denver. That would be worth watching. I also like Quinn going to Denver.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:47 PM

Another team that could be interested with a possible trade piece?

Carolina.

Excel

03-31-2009, 08:56 PM

Cutler continues to sell his own stock, so stupid. How is he NOT talking to his head coach and gm? Other coaches are watching this guy who truly thinks he calls the shots.

Imo this is a worse act than anything Moss or Owens have ever done. This is a joke; he's becoming the Manny Ramirez of football but without the accomplishments.

Denvers not going to trade him for draft picks unless they get #1 or some guarentee to land Stafford or Sanchez. My guesses for possibilities are:

Buffalo Bills
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions
Carolina Panthers
St. Louis Rams

Other Carolina I dont know why Cutler would pick them over Denver. I'd say the forementioned Quinn/somethign else for Cutler trade sounds the most likely.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 08:57 PM

A Julius Peppers trade could end up being in the mix. He wants to play in a 3-4 defense. That's exactly what Denver is going to.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 08:58 PM

I don't think Cutler's problem is with Denver, its with McDaniels.

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:02 PM

A Julius Peppers trade could end up being in the mix. He wants to play in a 3-4 defense. That's exactly what Denver is going to.

They wont trade him if they cannot get a quarterback, there is just no way. McDaniels team will be designed to score and offense based.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:02 PM

A Julius Peppers trade could end up being in the mix. He wants to play in a 3-4 defense. That's exactly what Denver is going to.

Bingo.

Though this would depend on Denver liking Chris Simms (which is VERY possible), if Denver wants a QB...another team with a 3-4 system is Cleveland.

Imagine this:
Cleveland gets:Julius Peppers and Jake Delhomme
Carolina gets: Pick 2-19 and Jay Cutler
Denver gets: Brady Quinn and Shaun Rodgers

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:04 PM

^Then Cleveland has no QB. I mean, if they really like Chris Simms...it could work. McDaniels is offensive is go deep every other play; if he can throw the deep ball they will be ok.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 09:07 PM

^Then Cleveland has no QB. I mean, if they really like Chris Simms...it could work. McDaniels is offensive is go deep every other play; if he can throw the deep ball they will be ok.

Cleveland still has the 5th pick in the draft. They could select Sanchez or Stafford if he falls to them.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:08 PM

^Then Cleveland has no QB. I mean, if they really like Chris Simms...it could work. McDaniels is offensive is go deep every other play; if he can throw the deep ball they will be ok.

Edited*

Edited again*

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:15 PM

I dont think we see some enormous deal; I say he just goes somewhere for somethign straight up. I would bet his actions have put off a ton of teams.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 09:23 PM

It will be the Jets, Bucs, Vikings, Cleveland, Washington.

Detroit doesn't have enough trade capital to make a deal.

Wrong again. We have 5 picks in the first three rounds of the draft. You're also completely ignoring the ability of the Lions and Broncos to pull in another team.

I'll bet Cutler ends up in Tampa, New York or Chicago. I doubt he'll end up in Detroit. The Lions are all ready to select Stafford at #1.

Are they? Or is that they want us to believe? Why would they rave up a guy make their want known and put themselves behind the 8 ball when it comes to negotiating a contract? Doesnt make much sense. The Lions may have in fact liked Stafford's workout today but I doubt they'd let their decision be known 4 weeks before the draft. They want their pick signed before the draft a la Jake Long or Mario Williams. If they lose the ability to play Curry or Jason SMith against Stafford they can cost themselves a ton of money.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 09:27 PM

Are they? Or is that they want us to believe? Why would they rave up a guy make their want known and put themselves behind the 8 ball when it comes to negotiating a contract? Doesnt make much sense. The Lions may have in fact liked Stafford's workout today but I doubt they'd let their decision be known 4 weeks before the draft.

How do you know that Cutler won't act this way in Detroit? Seems pretty risky to me to trade for a guy who hasn't talked to anybody in Denver for the last 10 days. From what I've read and saw in the last two weeks, I seriously believe the Lions are drafting Stafford.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 09:32 PM

How do you know that Cutler won't act this way in Detroit? Seems pretty risky to me to trade for a guy who hasn't talked to anybody in Denver for the last 10 days. From what I've read and saw in the last two weeks, I seriously believe the Lions are drafting Stafford.

You dont know that, but we havent had a decent QB since Greg Landry in 1971. I'd rather take the risk on the 25 yr old guy who's already made the Pro Bowl and thrown for 4500 yds in an NFL season vs. the crapshoot coming out of college. Remember this is the franchise who's been burned by drafting the likes of Andre Ware, Rodney Peete, Joey Harrington, etc. Not to mention I think Jim Schwartz is a vastly superior coach to McDaniel and wouldnt make the same gaffes with a franchise player.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:33 PM

I dont think we see some enormous deal; I say he just goes somewhere for somethign straight up. I would bet his actions have put off a ton of teams.

Cutler being trading is an enormous deal.

Wrong again. We have 5 picks in the first three rounds of the draft. You're also completely ignoring the ability of the Lions and Broncos to pull in another team.

No, this time I was right. Just because the Lions HAVE 5 draft picks in the first three rounds doesn't mean they have trade capital. You are correct, Detroit has 5 picks in the first three rounds, they also have three picks in the final four. This is a team that just went 0-16, they lack the ability to mortgage the future for a QB. They can't afford to trade multiple draft picks.

Also no I am not ignoring the ability to bring in a third team, I am discounting it because (like a trade for Cutler) it simply won't happen. Bringing in a third team doesn't change the fact that Detroit has only one pick to trade.

The only that COULD happen is if a team really wanted the number one pick.

But if other teams actually wanted the number one pick the Lions would be happier anyway.

Are they? Or is that they want us to believe? Why would they rave up a guy make their want known and put themselves behind the 8 ball when it comes to negotiating a contract? Doesnt make much sense. The Lions may have in fact liked Stafford's workout today but I doubt they'd let their decision be known 4 weeks before the draft.

I think its quite clear that the Lions want us to believe they won't be taking Stafford. Schwartz is on the record praising, not Stafford, but Jason Smith and Aaron Curry. The reports of Stafford's workout being "flawless" was made NOT by Lions personale, but by outside observers. The only sign the Lions have given us that they are interest in Stafford are the ones you can't BS - mainly the workout and the lack of veteran QB pursuit.

Aaron Curry and Jason Smith are smokescreens. Huge, obvious, neon smokescreens.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:35 PM

You dont know that, but we havent had a decent QB since Greg Landry in 1971. I'd rather take the risk on the 25 yr old guy who's already made the Pro Bowl and thrown for 4500 yds in an NFL season vs. the crapshoot coming out of college.

It's not a crapshoot. This isn't the lottery - its about talent evaluation. Cutler wasn't randomly good, Harrington wasn't randomly bad.

Remember this is the franchise who's been burned by drafting the likes of Andre Ware, Rodney Peete, Joey Harrington, etc. Not to mention I think Jim Schwartz is a vastly superior coach to McDaniel and wouldnt make the same gaffes with a franchise player.

I love Schwartz but he has given no indication of being a vastly superior coach to McDaniels, mainly due to the fact McDaniels has done nothing wrong.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 09:43 PM

It's not a crapshoot. This isn't the lottery - its about talent evaluation. Cutler wasn't randomly good, Harrington wasn't randomly bad.

regardless of the underlying cause of Harrington's failure, it's the perception thats enough to make the franchise gun shy. Outside of Millen being gone, this is largely the same front office that drafted Joey Sunshine in 2002. i can see them being very weary of drafting another Top 3 pick QB again. C'mon dude, take off those Georgia blinders for a second.

I love Schwartz but he has given no indication of being a vastly superior coach to McDaniels, mainly due to the fact McDaniels has done nothing wrong.

Schwartz was a DC for 8 years and a guy who's players would take a bullet for him. (Keith Bulluck's words). McDaniels will be another in a long line of failed Belicheck disciples who tried to undercut the Pro Bowl QB on his new team and then lied to his face about it before finally telling the truth 3 weeks later. You bet your ass he's done something wrong.

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:43 PM

Not to mention I think Jim Schwartz is a vastly superior coach to McDaniel and wouldnt make the same gaffes with a franchise player.

Um, what?

When it comes to grooming a franchise QB...you take McDaniels over Scwartz (who was a defensive coordinator) everytime...hell you take McDaniels over ANYBODY after what he did with Cassel.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:48 PM

regardless of the underlying cause of Harrington's, it's still enough to make the franchise gun shy.

Only if you are a bad, poorly run franchise.

Outside of Millen being gone, this is largely the same front office that drafted Joey Sunshine in 2002. i can see them being very weary of drafting another Top 3 pick QB again.

This would make sense if it wasn't for the fact that this same group (outside of Millen) drafted a WR with the second pick in the draft, right after being burnt twice with top 10 WR's.

C'mon dude, take off those Georgia blinders for a second.

My Georgia blinders may impact my view of Stafford but it doesn't impact common sense. If the Detroit Lions trade two picks in the first three round for Cutler they are every bit the POS franchise they proved last year. Period.

C'mon dude, Joey Harrington isn't hiding in your closet. You have no reason to be afraid of him any more, he can't hurt you.

Schwartz was a DC for 8 years and a guy who's players would take a bullet for him. (Keith Bulluck's words). McDaniels will be another in a long line of failed Belicheck disciples who tried to undercut the Pro Bowl QB on his new team and then lied to his face about it before finally telling the truth 3 weeks later. You bet your ass he's done something wrong.

He never said he went after Cassel and we currently have no idea if the Broncos did go after Cassel. Also you can't use Mangini and Crennel against McDaniels (especially since Mangini isn't a failure). Also players loving a former DC turned HC is hardly something new.

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 09:49 PM

You dont know that, but we havent had a decent QB since Greg Landry in 1971. I'd rather take the risk on the 25 yr old guy who's already made the Pro Bowl and thrown for 4500 yds in an NFL season vs. the crapshoot coming out of college. Remember this is the franchise who's been burned by drafting the likes of Andre Ware, Rodney Peete, Joey Harrington, etc. Not to mention I think Jim Schwartz is a vastly superior coach to McDaniel and wouldnt make the same gaffes with a franchise player.

So you believe the Lions are willing to give up draft picks while they're in rebuilding mode for Jay Cutler? I know that a three team deal could happen, but they're are very rare in the NFL. They have the opportunity to draft one of the best QB's to come out of college in quite some time. I also understand you're worried that Stafford could turn into a potential bust. From what I've seen from Stafford, I really don't think that will happen.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 09:50 PM

Um, what?

When it comes to grooming a franchise QB...you take McDaniels over Scwartz (who was a defensive coordinator) everytime...hell you take McDaniels over ANYBODY after what he did with Cassel.

When exactly did Cassell become a "franchise QB?" He had one decent season playing on what's likely one of the greatest teams in NFL history, that he didnt even get into the playoffs. You talk as if Cassell is Dan Marino. I'd bet dollars to donuts that most of Cassell's success was do to Belicheck not McDaniels.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 09:52 PM

When exactly did Cassell become a "franchise QB?" He had one decent season playing on what's likely one of the greatest teams in NFL history, that he didnt even get into the playoffs. You talk as if Cassell is Dan Marino.

He's not talking like Cassell is Dan Marino. In fact I think that's the point. Cassell, an amazingly average QB, looked great thanks to McDaniels.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 09:56 PM

He's not talking like Cassell is Dan Marino. In fact I think that's the point. Cassell, an amazingly average QB, looked great thanks to McDaniels.

What specifically can you point to about Cassell and say, "yes, that's McDaniels doing?" What exactly did McDaniels do with him that Belicheck didnt have a hand in?

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:58 PM

When exactly did Cassell become a "franchise QB?"

He had a better QB rating then Cutler last season, and also got BETTER as the season went on Cutler got worse.

He had one decent season playing on what's likely one of the greatest teams in NFL history, that he didnt even get into the playoffs.

Cassel proved his decision making was ahead of Cutler on several occasions last year; if you dont think so just check the 2nd half of the Jets game, 4th quarter vs. Indy...they lost both games but Cassel was brilliant. Anybody who can watch Cassels film and not think he has franchise potential is just flat out stupid.

And you can also factor in that he was the opposite of "fresh" or "seasoned" in the NFL. He hadnt started since high school.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that most of Cassell's success was do to Belicheck not McDaniels.

And as a die hard Patriots fan I would tell your wrong. Belichick had very little to do with New England offense the past 2 years ask any Patriots fans; the only ones he ever talks to were the defense.

And even if ti were Belichick; Bill isnt the guy out there making the throws or chosing the targets. Its Cassel. Coaches only do so much.

Seriously, stop trying to take credit away from Mcdaniels. Its dumb. 2007 speaks for itself.

Excel

03-31-2009, 09:59 PM

What specifically can you point to about Cassell and say, "yes, that's McDaniels doing?" What exactly did McDaniels do with him that Belicheck didnt have a hand in?

What didnt he do? Dont sit here and try to say something is different than what it looks like to everybody else, because theres absolutley nothing to back that up.

Belichick isnt some offensive genius; McD was the one calling the shots.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:01 PM

So you believe the Lions are willing to give up draft picks while they're in rebuilding mode for Jay Cutler?

Considering they were one of two teams who tried to acquire Cutler a few weeks back which is what started the whole Cutler drama, yes. Besides that, who wouldnt want a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB on their team? That's sort of the foundation of "rebuilding."

I know that a three team deal could happen, but they're are very rare in the NFL. They have the opportunity to draft one of the best QB's to come out of college in quite some time. I also understand you're worried that Stafford could turn into a potential bust. From what I've seen from Stafford, I really don't think that will happen.

I just dont get why people think Stafford is some cant miss prospect here? He's the "best" QB in what's largely a weak draft for QB's. In fact this may be the worst year for QB's coming out since Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers came out. Not to mention that he comes from a program that hasnt produced a decent NFL QB in decades. Sorry, I just dont but the Stafford hype.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:07 PM

What didnt he do? Dont sit here and try to say something is different than what it looks like to everybody else, because theres absolutley nothing to back that up.

so basically you cant point to anything that Cassell did in his game that was McDaniels responsibility? Thats pretty much what I thought. You stated a premise. I said, "OK where's your proof of that?" And your response, was basically that I dont have any proof to the contrary so your premise must be true." Sorry, that's not how it works.

If youre gonna come out and state that McDaniels is this genius QB developer then please state why that is? And dont point to the Patriots team achievement of an 11-5 record. What mechanically did he change with Cassell? Did he change the offense at all? etc.

Belichick isnt some offensive genius; McD was the one calling the shots.

you're right, the Patriots shed coordinators year after year but maintain the same level of success while said coordinators like Crennel, Weis, Mangino, etc. stumble all over themselves wherever they go. I'm sure Belicheck has nothing to do with it.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:07 PM

What specifically can you point to about Cassell and say, "yes, that's McDaniels doing?" What exactly did McDaniels do with him that Belicheck didnt have a hand in?

Belicheck isn't an offensive guy. McDaniels has been Belicheck's offensive mind ever since Weiss left.

El_Citrus

03-31-2009, 10:16 PM

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 10:18 PM

Considering they were one of two teams who tried to acquire Cutler a few weeks back which is what started the whole Cutler drama, yes. Besides that, who wouldnt want a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB on their team? That's sort of the foundation of "rebuilding."

Yes, it's the foundation of rebuilding, but you're only supplying your team with a QB. What about boosting up the offensive line and getting a defensive threat? You're basically throwing away your future.

I just dont get why people think Stafford is some cant miss prospect here? He's the "best" QB in what's largely a weak draft for QB's. In fact this may be the worst year for QB's coming out since Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers came out. Not to mention that he comes from a program that hasnt produced a decent NFL QB in decades. Sorry, I just dont but the Stafford hype.

So what's going to happen when they pass on Stafford? Sanchez isn't going to be there at 20. Hell, Freeman might be gone by then as well. You're basically stuck with Culpepper for another season. If he gets hurt, then you have Stanton who in my eyes isn't an NFL starter. They would basically have to draft a QB in the later rounds(which you say is a horrible draft class) or sign a free agent. Have you looked at the free agents out there? Losman, Grossman. You have Jeff Garcia out there, but he's 39 years old.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:21 PM

What specifically can you point to about Cassell and say, "yes, that's McDaniels doing?" What exactly did McDaniels do with him that Belicheck didnt have a hand in?

Watch Cassell, watch his improvement from week one to week 17. And then actually look at Cassell. Cassell isn't impressive in any way. Coaching.

Considering they were one of two teams who tried to acquire Cutler a few weeks back which is what started the whole Cutler drama, yes. Besides that, who wouldnt want a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB on their team? That's sort of the foundation of "rebuilding."

Lions was one of several teams that tried to acquire Cutler (the Vikings were the first team).

That's not rebuilding, not when you give away your draft to get it.

I just dont get why people think Stafford is some cant miss prospect here?

Because I have watched him, I have heard him interview, I know the system he used at Georgia, I know his intelligence.

He's the "best" QB in what's largely a weak draft for QB's.

It has nothing to do with his draft class. If Stafford's draft class included 2008 and 2010 Stafford would be no lower than second in the draft and as high as one.

In fact this may be the worst year for QB's coming out since Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers came out.

Just because the QB's behind Stafford are weak doesn't change Stafford. That's comeltely illogical. Stafford is the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning.

Not to mention that he comes from a program that hasnt produced a decent NFL QB in decades. Sorry, I just dont but the Stafford hype.

Only Miami has more players in the NFL than Georgia. You don't get the Stafford hype because you don't want to - you have made that perfectly clear resorting to the Joey Harrington defense. Fear is an enemy of logic.

you're right, the Patriots shed coordinators year after year but maintain the same level of success while said coordinators like Crennel, Weis, Mangino, etc. stumble all over themselves wherever they go. I'm sure Belicheck has nothing to do with it.
You can't compare the offensive success New England had with Weiss to the success New England had with McDaniels.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:22 PM

He had a better QB rating then Cutler last season, and also got BETTER as the season went on Cutler got worse.

How do Cutler's stats relate at all to Cassell being a franchise QB? And who cares about QB Ratings? Garcia, Schaub, and Pennington had better QB ratings than Cassell. Are they "franchise QB's" too?

Cassel proved his decision making was ahead of Cutler on several occasions last year; if you dont think so just check the 2nd half of the Jets game, 4th quarter vs. Indy...they lost both games but Cassel was brilliant. Anybody who can watch Cassels film and not think he has franchise potential is just flat out stupid.

One season behind a team that is flat out stacked and coming off an 18-1 season does not make him a great QB. To think the team he was on doesnt factor into the equation is what's stupid. We'll agree to disagree now but watch Cassell fall flat on his face in KC this year without the Patriots lineup with him.

And as a die hard Patriots fan I would tell your wrong. Belichick had very little to do with New England offense the past 2 years ask any Patriots fans; the only ones he ever talks to were the defense.

And even if ti were Belichick; Bill isnt the guy out there making the throws or chosing the targets. Its Cassel. Coaches only do so much.

but then that would negate your premise that McDaniels was some expert QB architect wouldnt it?

Seriously, stop trying to take credit away from Mcdaniels. Its dumb. 2007 speaks for itself.

you're right. I'm sure it takes a genius to diagram plays where your legend, Hall of Fame QB heaves the ball up to your all world WR.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:25 PM

Holy **** this is huge. I think you're right on this Norman and that Cook has been stirring the pot all along (pun intended). He was there when Farve and the Packers fell apart and he's here when Cutler and the Broncos fell apart. This HAS to ruin his reputation and it's strange that Cutler can't put 2 and 2 together here. Cleveland looks to be the best option for him to land right now since they have the picks and QB's, but this could go almost anywhere right now. This week just got more exciting.

How is Eli Manning's reputation? If Cutler succeeds in his next stop, and if he doesn't cause any more trouble, his reputation will be fine.

Yes, it's the foundation of rebuilding, but you're only supplying your team with a QB. What about boosting up the offensive line and getting a defensive threat? You're basically throwing away your future.

Apparently the Hulk would prefer Detroit to be more Washington Redskins than San Diego Chargers.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:28 PM

How do Cutler's stats relate at all to Cassell being a franchise QB? And who cares about QB Ratings? Garcia, Schaub, and Pennington had better QB ratings than Cassell. Are they "franchise QB's" too?

Garcia and Pennington are not Franchise QB's simply because of their age and injury history (more with Pennington than Garcia).

Schaub is a Franchise QB.

One season behind a team that is flat out stacked and coming off an 18-1 season does not make him a great QB.

No one thinks he is. No one is saying that Cassell is a great QB! Cassell PLAYED like a great QB late in the season, as shown with his multiple 400+ yard games. That's coaching.

To think the team he was on doesnt factor into the equation is what's stupid. We'll agree to disagree now but watch Cassell fall flat on his face in KC this year without the Patriots lineup with him.

Actually since Cassell won't have McDaniels with him Cassell failing in KC wouldn't prove anything.

El_Citrus

03-31-2009, 10:30 PM

How is Eli Manning's reputation? If Cutler succeeds in his next stop, and if he doesn't cause any more trouble, his reputation will be fine.

I was referring to Cook's reputation as an agent, not Cutler's as a player.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:31 PM

Six Teams And Counting Interested In Cutler (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/31/six-teams-and-counting-interested-in-cutler/) Posted by Mike Florio on March 31, 2009, 10:19 p.m. EDT

The “For Sale” sign has been planted in the front yard, and the Broncos will soon be showing potential buyers the partially-finished basement.
According to Charles Robinson and Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/31/six-teams-and-counting-interested-in-cutler/#), at least six teams are interested in Cutler.

The Jets, Buccaneers, Bears, Lions, 49ers, and Browns already have been identified. Per Robinson and Cole, the Jaguars have shown interest as well.
As we’ve been saying over and over until people tell us to shut up, any team contemplating using a first-round pick on a quarterback should be interested in Cutler, because unlike an unproven rookie first-rounder Cutler has shown that he can perform at the NFLhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/31/six-teams-and-counting-interested-in-cutler/#) level.

Meanwhile, chatter persists in league circles regarding the Redskins. We heard several weeks ago that the ‘Skins are indeed interested. As one league source reiterated moments ago, the pursuit of Cutler in 2009 could be driven by the intended pursuit of the man who drafted him in 2010 — former Broncos coach Mike Shanahan.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:31 PM

Because I have watched him, I have heard him interview, I know the system he used at Georgia, I know his intelligence.

It has nothing to do with his draft class. If Stafford's draft class included 2008 and 2010 Stafford would be no lower than second in the draft and as high as one.

Just because the QB's behind Stafford are weak doesn't change Stafford. That's comeltely illogical. Stafford is the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning.

C'mon man, put down the UGA Kool-Aid for a second. That's a flat out ridiculous statement and you know it. Not even Kiper is going that far with this and he's the only othr person I've heard of besides you that's so high on Stafford.

Only Miami has more players in the NFL than Georgia.

Great, and how many are QB's?

You don't get the Stafford hype because you don't want to - you have made that perfectly clear resorting to the Joey Harrington defense. Fear is an enemy of logic.

You're right, I'm too scared of having a great QB on my favorite team. :rolleyes: I didnt use Harrington as a defense to anything. I used him as an example of why a team like the Lions would rather have a sure thing at QB then what's at best an unknown commodity. Whiffing on a top QB can cripple a franchise for years, and the Lions are already about as crippled as you can get.

You can't compare the offensive success New England had with Weiss to the success New England had with McDaniels.

You're right. Weiss didnt have Randy Moss.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:32 PM

I was referring to Cook's reputation as an agent, not Cutler's as a player.

Aha. I agree. His advantage is that unlike Drew Rosenhaus he doesn't do a lot of ESPN. Its hard to hate a face you don't know.

Dark Donnie

03-31-2009, 10:33 PM

Dr. Evil

03-31-2009, 10:34 PM

Immortalfire

03-31-2009, 10:35 PM

That's a flat out ridiculous statement and you know it.

Even I don't agree. It might be somewhat true if Staff had done the proper thing and stayed his senior year, but no. Of the 2 main ones, he and Sanchez... Matthew is the better QB. More experience, played in a better conference, faced better teams and bigger challenges.

But comparing him to Peyton at this point is just wrong.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:39 PM

Yes, it's the foundation of rebuilding, but you're only supplying your team with a QB. What about boosting up the offensive line and getting a defensive threat? You're basically throwing away your future.

We have 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. Even if we dealt two of those we still have 3 solid picks left to improve the lines. Keep in mind, the Lions arent going to be a 1 year fix. It's going to take 2-3 years to patch the holes.

So what's going to happen when they pass on Stafford? Sanchez isn't going to be there at 20. Hell, Freeman might be gone by then as well. You're basically stuck with Culpepper for another season. If he gets hurt, then you have Stanton who in my eyes isn't an NFL starter. They would basically have to draft a QB in the later rounds(which you say is a horrible draft class) or sign a free agent. Have you looked at the free agents out there? Losman, Grossman. You have Jeff Garcia out there, but he's 39 years old.

Ideally they'd be passing on Stafford because they traded for Cutler but if they didnt, I still dont think they should take Stafford. Again, you have to pick the best players available. Stafford may be the best QB coming out this year, but you dont take him just because of that. Jim Schwartz just came from a team that had the best regular season record in the league with a QB who many believed was washed up 3 seasons ago. The Titans won because they had a great defense and a good o-line. I'd rather see the Lions build those and worry about getting a QB down the road, either in later drafts or free ageny classes when the supporting cast is in place that will allow them to succeed.

The Incredible Hulk

03-31-2009, 10:42 PM

Aha. I agree. His advantage is that unlike Drew Rosenhaus he doesn't do a lot of ESPN. Its hard to hate a face you don't know.

plus he's named after public transportation. How can you hate on public transportation?

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 10:48 PM

C'mon man, put down the UGA Kool-Aid for a second. That's a flat out ridiculous statement and you know it. Not even Kiper is going that far with this and he's the only othr person I've heard of besides you that's so high on Stafford.

No, the statement's not ridiculous at all. I believe it with every fiber of my being. The guy's arm is amazing, he is accurate, he is smart, he has been in an Pro Style for years, he just had a private workout described as "flawless" personally designed by Schwartz (who would have nothing to gain from being anything short of hard on him). And the guy has a history of last minute heroics (the "it" factor).

Draftcountdown.com - there is someone higher on Stafford than Cutler.
Or Jaws - "We just finished watching (Georgia's) Matthew Stafford, and it's my opinion that Detroit should not mess around and that he should be the top pick in the draft."

Great, and how many are QB's?

One, D.J. Shockley. Stafford is also significantly the most talented QB Richt has ever had.

Using this logic you wouldn't of wanted Detroit to pick Cutler in 2006. Or Ryan in 2008. Or Flacco. Or Eli Manning. Or Peyton Manning.

You're right, I'm too scared of having a great QB on my favorite team. :rolleyes:

No, you are afraid of DRAFTING a great QB on your favorite team. You clearly want Cutler, you want him so much you want the Lions to hinder trade away incredibly value draft picks for him hurting the team.

I didnt use Harrington as a defense to anything. I used him as an example of why a team like the Lions would rather have a sure thing at QB then what's at best an unknown commodity. Whiffing on a top QB can cripple a franchise for years, and the Lions are already about as crippled as you can get.

Scoring on a top QB can make your franchise a power for years. The crippled state of the Lions is exactly why they can't trade away multiple potential starters for a QB. ESPECIALLY when you have, at worst, Cutler-light in Stafford at 1.

You're right. Weiss didnt have Randy Moss.

Lets look past that.

2005, McDaniels first year serving as Offensive Coordinator: Patriots offense ranked 2nd in the NFL.

2004, Weiss last year: Patriots offense ranked 11th

Immortalfire

03-31-2009, 10:50 PM

I am convinced that Norman is in real life...Mel Kiper Jr.

One, D.J. Shockley DJ is a DGD for sure, but I figure Hulk meant starting QBs. But then, we've got starters in numerous other positions all around the league.

Dark Donnie

03-31-2009, 10:51 PM

I am convinced that Norman is in real life...Mel Kiper Jr.

hahah I was just going to say that. The "every fiber of my being" is a Kiper line.

As is this one

It's not a crapshoot. This isn't the lottery - its about talent evaluation. Cutler wasn't randomly good, Harrington wasn't randomly bad.

I could see him yelling that at McShay

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:01 PM

I thought Cutler and Shanny never spoke either:huh:

Absolutely not true. They had a great relationship.

Also many would argue that Matt Ryan, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning were all better QB prospects coming into the NFL then Stafford....I might be forgetting someone.

And I would argue against that. Stafford is more physically gifted than all three of those QB's (something that cannot be disputed), the rest is simply how people read college production. It's unfair to say I am wrong simply because Ryan, Palmer and Manning had good careers - not when Stafford hasn't had the same chance. I think in five years Stafford will be considered better than all three of them.

Jacksonville? I wonder what the cap hit would be for releasing or trading Garrard?

Jacksonville carefully structured Garrard's. It would be very easy to get out of in 2010.

Even I don't agree. It might be somewhat true if Staff had done the proper thing and stayed his senior year, but no. Of the 2 main ones, he and Sanchez... Matthew is the better QB. More experience, played in a better conference, faced better teams and bigger challenges.

Stafford did the proper thing when he left. I love Stafford (I also love Joe Cox), it would of been a foolish move to go out next year - especially when there is a very good chance of a rookie cap next year.

Stafford is by far the best junior QB prospect to ever come out of college.

But comparing him to Peyton at this point is just wrong, IMO.
Which is great, you are certainly welcomed to it. I disagree. My opinion is no more wrong than yours.

We have 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. Even if we dealt two of those we still have 3 solid picks left to improve the lines. Keep in mind, the Lions arent going to be a 1 year fix. It's going to take 2-3 years to patch the holes.

Immortalfire sure is glad that the Falcons didn't have that sort of attitude.

Ideally they'd be passing on Stafford because they traded for Cutler but if they didnt, I still dont think they should take Stafford. Again, you have to pick the best players available.

No, its not just about best player available. If the Lions have Stafford as the best player available, and they trade for Cutler, it would be illogical to draft Stafford. You can't ignore team need. Detroit spent a first round pick last year on a tackle. They spent a first round pick on Backus at left tackle. They would be ridiculous to draft Curry with Peterson and Sims on the roster.

Stafford may be the best QB coming out this year, but you dont take him just because of that. Jim Schwartz just came from a team that had the best regular season record in the league with a QB who many believed was washed up 3 seasons ago.

And he watched his team lose to a team that went on to win a Super Bowl with a QB picked in the first round.

The Titans won because they had a great defense and a good o-line. I'd rather see the Lions build those and worry about getting a QB down the road, either in later drafts or free ageny classes when the supporting cast is in place that will allow them to succeed.

To quote you, the Lions have 5 picks in first three rounds.

plus he's named after public transportation. How can you hate on public transportation?

:lmao:

NewYorkSpider

03-31-2009, 11:02 PM

We have 5 picks in the first 3 rounds. Even if we dealt two of those we still have 3 solid picks left to improve the lines. Keep in mind, the Lions arent going to be a 1 year fix. It's going to take 2-3 years to patch the holes.

IMO, it would be better to find out what you need to patch up if you had a young QB at the helm. Find out if he needs more of an offensive line, a better running game, another WR to throw to. Don't fix your team now when you don't have a future QB.

Ideally they'd be passing on Stafford because they traded for Cutler but if they didnt, I still dont think they should take Stafford. Again, you have to pick the best players available. Stafford may be the best QB coming out this year, but you dont take him just because of that.

Anytime there's a great QB prospect coming out of the draft, and you need one, you take him. Don't waste the opportunity now when you don't know what the future holds.

Jim Schwartz just came from a team that had the best regular season record in the league with a QB who many believed was washed up 3 seasons ago. The Titans won because they had a great defense and a good o-line. I'd rather see the Lions build those and worry about getting a QB down the road, either in later drafts or free ageny classes when the supporting cast is in place that will allow them to succeed.

The Lions could have one of the best passing attacks with Stafford/Johnson if they select him. The Bears/Vikings/Packers don't have very good secondary's. Their rush defense on the other hand is good. The Vikings/Bears are in the top 5 at stopping the run I would rather have a good QB at the helm then to try and boost by running game at the moment.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:03 PM

I am convinced that Norman is in real life...Mel Kiper Jr.

That's ridiculous, my hair isn't half as nice.

DJ is a DGD for sure, but I figure Hulk meant starting QBs. But then, we've got starters in numerous other positions all around the league.

How did a defense with Champ Bailey, Richard Seymore and Marcus Stroud ever give up a point? :huh:

Curse you Donnan!

hahah I was just going to say that. The "every fiber of my being" is a Kiper line.

I have never denied being a fan ;)

I could see him yelling that at McShay

:lmao: He would, he so would.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:05 PM

Any team with Calvin Johnson and Kevin Smith shouldn't be happy with a mediocre QB. The strength of that team is the skill positions, build on that.

Excel

03-31-2009, 11:05 PM

Stafford is NOT the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning, come on how can you say that with a straight face?

I'd rank it:

1. JaMarcus Russel
2. Eli Manning
3. Carson Palmer
4. Matt Ryan
5. Donovan McNabb

Mike Vick & Culpepper were better too.

How do Cutler's stats relate at all to Cassell being a franchise QB? And who cares about QB Ratings? Garcia, Schaub, and Pennington had better QB ratings than Cassell. Are they "franchise QB's" too?

C'mon now, you know bloody well the reason those guys are behind Cassel is because of age. If Pennington was Cassels age then YES, he is a franchise QB no doubt.

One season behind a team that is flat out stacked and coming off an 18-1 season does not make him a great QB. To think the team he was on doesnt factor into the equation is what's stupid. We'll agree to disagree now but watch Cassell fall flat on his face in KC this year without the Patriots lineup with him.

Of course the team factors in but than again, What was the "team" prior to McD? How was Welker before getting into McDaniels offense? Sammy Morris? Jabar Gaffney? Hell, what had Randy Moss been doing lately?

but then that would negate your premise that McDaniels was some expert QB architect wouldnt it?

No, thats the very heart of the argument. Cassel isnt born knowing to make those decision; his coach is putting him in the right situation. Succeeding in the NFL as a player is all abut the situation your put into...as a qb it really depends on the coaches. If their bad, you getting Jey Harringtons or *cough*matt Stafford in Detroit*cough*, or if their good, it just seems to "click". Outside of a select few who are just elite either mentally or physically when they get drafted, the difference in physical tools is not very big.

you're right. I'm sure it takes a genius to diagram plays where your legend, Hall of Fame QB heaves the ball up to your all world WR.

That doesnt explain 2005 or 2008. And it isnt like Denver doesnt have great wide recievers anyway.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:06 PM

Anytime there's a great QB prospect coming out of the draft, and you need one, you take him. Don't waste the opportunity now when you don't know what the future holds.

As we have talked about, next year's QB class looks horrible right now.

The Lions could have one of the best passing attacks with Stafford/Johnson if they select him. The Bears/Vikings/Packers don't have very good secondary's. Their rush defense on the other hand is good. The Vikings/Bears are in the top 5 at stopping the run I would rather have a good QB at the helm then to try and boost by running game at the moment.

Bingo.

Immortalfire

03-31-2009, 11:06 PM

Stafford did the proper thing when he left. I love Stafford (I also love Joe Cox), it would of been a foolish move to go out next year - especially when there is a very good chance of a rookie cap next year.
Aw..less money, boo hoo. It is my belief that more seasoned QBs make for better pro careers.

Joe is certainly going to be a better leader than Matthew. Same for the following season with Aaron Murray..all the land will be saying "Tebow who?"

Which is great, you are certainly welcomed to it. I disagree. My opinion is no more wrong than yours. Do not alter my posts. :cmad:

Immortalfire sure is glad that the Falcons didn't have that sort of attitude. I have never been more glad to have been so wrong.

Excel

03-31-2009, 11:07 PM

Any team with Calvin Johnson and Kevin Smith shouldn't be happy with a mediocre QB. The strength of that team is the skill positions, build on that.

CJ is on thing, but I think its about time people stopped overhyped Kevin Smith. He is GOOD. But beyond that...no.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:11 PM

Stafford is NOT the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning, come on how can you say that with a straight face?

I'd rank it:

1. JaMarcus Russel
2. Eli Manning
3. Carson Palmer
4. Matt Ryan
5. Donovan McNabb

I think we can agree we don't see the same things with evaluating players.

Mike Vick & Culpepper were better too.

You can't compare Mike Vick to any other QB. Physically he is the most gifted player ever.

C'mon now, you know bloody well the reason those guys are behind Cassel is because of age. If Pennington was Cassels age then YES, he is a franchise QB no doubt.

Already Pennington WAS a franchise QB, so he really has no case there.

That doesnt explain 2005 or 2008. And it isnt like Denver doesnt have great wide recievers anyway.
Exactly! :lmao:

Dr. Evil

03-31-2009, 11:13 PM

Next year's QB class will not be any good, with the exception of Jevan Snead.

Snead, Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy

Umm...yeah. 2011 might be good though.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:15 PM

Aw..less money, boo hoo. It is my belief that more seasoned QBs make for better pro careers.

Less money, boo hoo? You do realize this is the guys career right? His job?

Stafford is seasoned. He had four offseasons at Georgia and started more games than Matt Ryan.

Joe is certainly going to be a better leader than Matthew. Same for the following season with Aaron Murray..all the land will be saying "Tebow who?"

Matthew was a fantastic leader, honestly I am shocked at all you would saying something like that. How many times did Stafford lead Georgia back to victory? Virginia Tech in 2006, Alabama in 2007, Kentucky in 2008. Stafford stepping up against Auburn had a big deal with Georgia turning the 2006 season around (should I mention again, Stafford bringing Georgia back from an 18 point deficient against VT while earning MVP honors)?

Do not alter my posts. :cmad:

Did you take away my Suri Cruise thread? :csad:

CJ is on thing, but I think its about time people stopped overhyped Kevin Smith. He is GOOD. But beyond that...no.
I disagree. With you. On a RB. Surprise!

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:15 PM

Next year's QB class will not be any good, with the exception of Jevan Snead.

Snead, Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy

Umm...yeah. 2011 might be good though.

Stafford > Snead with five years of starting experience.

Dr. Evil

03-31-2009, 11:20 PM

Stafford > Snead with five years of starting experience.

I agree, but Snead will be the best out of 2010, which isn't saying much. Stafford though will sit behind Culpepper for a few games. When Daunte is injured or gets benched because he sucks, Stafford will take over. Of course, once that happens, Culpepper will whine about how he wants to start. It's why he "retired" last offseason and turned down an offer to backup Big Ben in Pittsburgh.

I think Stafford is going to do well in the NFL. The best the Lions can hope for is Phillip Rivers.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:21 PM

I think Stafford will beat out Daunte for the starting position in Detroit in the Pre-Season.

Dr. Evil

03-31-2009, 11:23 PM

I think Stafford will beat out Daunte for the starting position in Detroit in the Pre-Season.

In that case, I see Daunte throwing a fit.

StorminNorman

03-31-2009, 11:23 PM

Which will be cute.

Excel

03-31-2009, 11:25 PM

If he goes to Detroit, I think theyll start Daunte and see how they do. If they suck, they ought to just stick with Culpepper. They wont want Stafford manning the ship with a ****** team around him. Ifthey are even remotely decent I would expect them to throw him in.

Darthphere

04-01-2009, 12:57 AM

Silver Knight

04-01-2009, 08:19 AM

Frankly, I think you should be banned from talking football after this.
Agreed. I laughed when I was reading that.

Immortalfire

04-01-2009, 08:21 AM

Which will be cute.

I've been sig'd! Quite an honor :wow:

El_Citrus

04-01-2009, 08:48 AM

I've been sig'd! Quite an honor :wow:

Your avvy creeps me out though......But if you give it some glasses and the hair a windtunnel test it would look just like Kiper.

Immortalfire

04-01-2009, 09:07 AM

I would never degrade Guy Smiley by making him look like Kiper :down :oldrazz:

Excel

04-01-2009, 09:33 AM

Frankly, I think you should be banned from talking football after this.

I hope this is a joke; Russel was an absurd prospect. I wont even bother with comparing physical tools because Russells are better than anybodys around, so well talk #'s.

J. Russel: 232 pc-343 pa; 3129 yards, 67.8 complet. %, 9.15 ypa, 28 td, 8 int,
M. Stafford: 235-383, 3,459 yards, 61.4 complet. %, 9.03 ypa, 25 td, 10 int
Matt Ryan: 388-654, 4,507 yards, 59.3 complet. %, 6.8 ypa, 31 td, 19 int.
Jay Cutler: 273-462, 3,073 yards, 59.1 complet. %, 6.65 ypa, 21 td, 10 int
Matt Leinart: 283-432, 3,815 yards, 65.7 complet. %, 8.85 ypa, 28 td, 8 int.
Eli Manning: 279-481, 3,401 yards, 58.0 complet. %, 21 td, 15 int

Russell not only had easily the greatest physical tools for a pocket passer in a long time, but had the best completition %, yards-per-attempt, and touchdown-to-int. ratio (3.5 td for every 1 int). All this while playing in the SEC.

Somebody explain to me how he isnt the best qb propect since peyton manning.

Go Web Go!

04-01-2009, 09:38 AM

I hope this is a joke; Russel was an absurd prospect.

April Fool's! Right?

Right? :csad:

kane9321

04-01-2009, 10:08 AM

If detroit was smart (lol) They should go after cutler with guns ablazing. Why go after an unproven talent like stafford...when cutler is right there. Also the lions wouldnt be on the hook for that #1 money they'd have to pay.....this is a no brainer

Excel

04-01-2009, 10:23 AM

So much for 16-0- 2.0, The Patriots got a damn hard schedule:

Week One (Monday, September 14): Bills

*Week Two (September 20-21): at Dolphins

*Week Three (September 27-28]: Jets

*Week Four (October 4-5): at Broncos

*Week Five (October 11-12): Ravens

*Week Six (October 18-19): Falcons

*Week Seven (Sunday, October 25): at Buccaneers (in London)

*Week Nine (November 8-9): at Jets

*Week Ten (November 15-16): Dolphins

*Week Eleven (November 22-23): at Texans

*Week Twelve (November 29-30): at Colts

*Week Thirteen (December 6-7): Panthers

*Week Fourteen (December 13-14): Jaguars

*Week Fifteen (December 20-21): at Saints

*Week Sixteen (December 27-28]: Titans

*Week Seventeen (January 3): at Bills

Thats a combined record of 151-105 :eek:

Darthphere

04-01-2009, 10:38 AM

I hope this is a joke; Russel was an absurd prospect. I wont even bother with comparing physical tools because Russells are better than anybodys around, so well talk #'s.

J. Russel: 232 pc-343 pa; 3129 yards, 67.8 complet. %, 9.15 ypa, 28 td, 8 int,
M. Stafford: 235-383, 3,459 yards, 61.4 complet. %, 9.03 ypa, 25 td, 10 int
Matt Ryan: 388-654, 4,507 yards, 59.3 complet. %, 6.8 ypa, 31 td, 19 int.
Jay Cutler: 273-462, 3,073 yards, 59.1 complet. %, 6.65 ypa, 21 td, 10 int
Matt Leinart: 283-432, 3,815 yards, 65.7 complet. %, 8.85 ypa, 28 td, 8 int.
Eli Manning: 279-481, 3,401 yards, 58.0 complet. %, 21 td, 15 int

Russell not only had easily the greatest physical tools for a pocket passer in a long time, but had the best completition %, yards-per-attempt, and touchdown-to-int. ratio (3.5 td for every 1 int). All this while playing in the SEC.

Somebody explain to me how he isnt the best qb propect since peyton manning.

Oh Jesus, you're serious. If we go by numbers, Colt Brennan is the best QB prospect to have ever walked the Earth.:whatever: