NFL 2016/17

Status
Not open for further replies.
JustAFan said:
No different then people getting upset with Jose, SAF, Pep, etc because of the line up they pick or the subs they make.

The game and it's rule are designed to favor the pass, hence there is a lot of passing. Atlanta passed almost 200 times more than they ran the ball this season including the post season. I think New England played the run better in the 2nd half, certainly better than they did in the first. They also hung onto the ball, thus the huge difference in plays and time of possession even in the first half. At one point between half time and the Patriots controlling the ball Atlanta's offense sat sidelined for over an hour.

The way the Pats controlled the clock to keep the high powered Falcons offense off the field, aided by some good defense and mistakes by the Falcons of course, was a bit like the Bills-Giants Super Bowl where the Giants had more offensive plays, a huge time of possession lead (though accomplished more from the running game and some timely passes) and stopped what many thought was an unstoppable offense. Some very big differences in the two games also, so it is not exactly like for like. When faced with a high powered offense, the more you keep the off the field the better.
Click to expand...

While I exaggerated a bit, you are kind of making my point.

The Falcons defense played almost 60mns, they were exhausted in the 4th and part of the problem was caused by the fact that Shanahan didn't stick to the running game, he also decided to not run when he was in field goal range and they fumbled the ball.
In the first half the Pats tried to run outside the tackles, instead of running between them and that against a very fast defense and instead of adjusting they abandoned it and put Brady under huge pressure. They fixed that problem in the second half and were far better which comes to point. Run the ball!!:D
 
987EBx.gif
 
Billy Blaggs said:
It's anyone else a Brady fan now?
Click to expand...

I've been pretty anti-Brady over the years - ever since the playoff game against the Raiders (ie. the Tuck Rule game in 2002ish), but its hard not to be in awe of his accomplishments. The longevity alone is incredible and then you have the 7 Super Bowls, 5 rings and all his individual stats. I don't think we will see this kind of domination again for a long time.
 
I like Mike Florio's idea, that they keep it like this for the regular season as extended games is no bueno in a violent sport with variable breaks. This current system encourages a swift outcome. But in the playoffs where there is no next week for one team, each side gets at least one possession regardless of if the first results in a TD.
 
In the worst kept secret in NFL history, the Niners have just hired Kyle Shanahan as Head coach. I'm excited about the prospect of a genuinely offensively minded coach.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Why are the Patriots and Brady unpopular?
Click to expand...

In America, we have a knack of placing athletes, celebrities, and entertainers on a pedestal and knocking them off as soon as possible. And we grow to despise sports clubs/franchises that begin to win annually, draw headlines both positively and negatively, have divisive personalities within, etc. Not a single person really hated New England circa 2000. Even after the miracle win over the heavily favored Rams in Jan 2002, most likely celebrated the underdog Pats win. Then they started winning often, with two more titles in the 2003 and 2004 seasons. But spygate turned the tide against.

Jealousy. Fanaticism. Lunacy. Hatred. I'm certain a few more reasons are out there.
 
Summit said:
Yeah much more. Why the difference in rules from college, to nfl though? College football is huge, I'd have thought the rules would mirror the NFL.
Click to expand...

Probably an amateur versus professional reasoning. There are numerous differences between the college game and the pro game. Even the ball is different.
 
Last edited:
Snow said:
The raised the field goal bars after kickers managed to shoot right over the sticks several times.

American sports are generally quick to react to something being "wrong" with their rules so I wouldn't rule out that it won't get changed. I can't see how unfair or time comusing it would be if Atlanta had gotten one run as well. Just make it so if a team scores from their first attack then the opponent gets one chance. If both fail it's sudden death.
Click to expand...

They also pushed them to the back of the end zone from the front of the end zone in the 20s or thereabouts, then back to the front for a few decades, and again to the back of the end zone in the early 70s.
 
Summit said:
Yeah much more. Why the difference in rules from college, to nfl though? College football is huge, I'd have thought the rules would mirror the NFL.
Click to expand...
College football is huge. So huge in fact, that it's difficult to ref every game evenly. So down by just being down instead of with contact, one foot instead of two for a catch, the clock stops after a 1st down so they have time to get their shit together (used to be for the whole game resulting in incredibly long games; now just inside 2 minutes of the half) all make for easier refereeing.

That is only one reason though. Another, aside from the fact that the NCAA is incompetent, is that the centers of power in the collegiate world do not take well to change. The whole aura of the game, which might not make sense to some people, is built upon tradition. Changing to keep up with the NFL doesn't suit them. At least until their old eyes see the $$$ that could be made from a playoff, and then they're like, 'Oh Hell Yes. Double it already!'

All that said, even they managed to improve overtime better than the NFL...
 
JPRouve said:
I stumbled on this article about OT.

https://theringer.com/nfl-overtime-rules-super-bowl-li-patriots-falcons-62316a6f8e3c#.ob1vahv5b
Click to expand...

So that article supports the other stats I found that in College Football you have roughly the same chance of winning the game in OT if you win the coin toss (something like 90% of the time college coaches go with playing defense first according to one stat I read) as you do in the NFL.

Though in college football if you win the coin toss you definitely want to make sure the number of OT's stay an odd number (1,3,5,7 etc) since those will likely be the rounds you go second in, assuming you have played the percentages. Even rounds (2, 4, 6 etc) the team losing the coin toss defends first. I believe in those rounds they have a roughly 54% chance of winning. Around 68% of the games never get beyond the first OT though. Once you add in the games that go 3 or 5 or 7 etc (I think that accounts for around 75% of the games) you can give yourself a better chance of winning if you win the coin toss.
 
Brady saying he won't retire, despite Gisele wanting him to. I thought he might seriously consider it. Won 5 rings, you're not going to get a better performance in a SB than what he just did, everyone loves him (except the annoying anti-Pats brigade) & his mother's health might make him consider going out now. But apparently he's having too much fun :lol:

Personally, I'd rather see him go out on top now than do a Peyton where he could win another ring but look a shadow of his former self. That said, I think he showed Sunday he still has at least 1 more season left in him at the top.
 
ha_rooney said:
Brady saying he won't retire, despite Gisele wanting him to. I thought he might seriously consider it. Won 5 rings, you're not going to get a better performance in a SB than what he just did, everyone loves him (except the annoying anti-Pats brigade) & his mother's health might make him consider going out now. But apparently he's having too much fun :lol:

Personally, I'd rather see him go out on top now than do a Peyton where he could win another ring but look a shadow of his former self. That said, I think he showed Sunday he still has at least 1 more season left in him at the top.
Click to expand...

I don't think he'll stop until he has most of Peytons career records, especially total passing yards and TDs. Petty, i know, but I think the rivalry between the two is bigger than they make us believe.

If he maintains his body like he's doing now, without any major injuries or setbacks, there's no reason for him to hang up the boots just yet.
 
ha_rooney said:
Brady saying he won't retire, despite Gisele wanting him to. I thought he might seriously consider it. Won 5 rings, you're not going to get a better performance in a SB than what he just did, everyone loves him (except the annoying anti-Pats brigade) & his mother's health might make him consider going out now. But apparently he's having too much fun :lol:

Personally, I'd rather see him go out on top now than do a Peyton where he could win another ring but look a shadow of his former self. That said, I think he showed Sunday he still has at least 1 more season left in him at the top.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't retire if I was him. He still has another couple of years left at the top.
 
JarleA said:
I don't think he'll stop until he has most of Peytons career records, especially total passing yards and TDs. Petty, i know, but I think the rivalry between the two is bigger than they make us believe.

If he maintains his body like he's doing now, without any major injuries or setbacks, there's no reason for him to hang up the boots just yet.
Click to expand...

It'll take him another 3 seasons to break the passing and TD records - He's not going to play till 45 like he says...but, barring a major injury, I can definitely see him playing another 3 seasons.
 
Don't think he will grab all the records, and if he does it won't be for long. Brees is a lock for most.
 
altodevil86 said:
Don't think he will grab all the records, and if he does it won't be for long. Brees is a lock for most.
Click to expand...

Drew Brees
Age: 38
Yards: 66,111
TDs: 465

Tom Brady
Age: 39
Yards: 61,582
TDs: 456

Peyton Manning
Yards: 71,940
TDs: 539

Not sure how long Brees keeps going - he's never going to have a D and will never win anything again. He has his ring too...
 
I think Brees maybe will grab both yards and tds before her retires, but as neutral points out, when will that be? My guess is after next season or the season after, if they don't improve their O-line and D drastically.
After he retires, all the records are up for grabs for Brady - who'll be playing well into his sixties.
 
With a couple of Patriots saying they won't visit the WH...here's a list of others

Players who skipped the WH visit

President Obama honored the 1972 Miami Dolphins this week, the only NFL team to complete an undefeated season (sorry, Patriots fans). However, three members of that team — Hall of Fame center Jim Langer, guard Bob Kuechenberg, and defensive tackle Manny Fernandez — declined the invite, citing political differences.

Kuechenberg: "
I just don't believe in this administration at all."

Fernandez: "
[M]y views are diametrically opposed to the president's."

Langer:
"I don't want to be in a room with those people and pretend I'm having a good time. I can't do that."

Yet those three are hardly the first athletes to snub a sitting president's White House invite. And not everyone who has in the past spurned the commander-in-chief has done so for overtly political reasons.

Here, 15 other athletes who were White House no-shows:

Matt Birk
The former Baltimore Ravens center won the Super Bowl earlier this year, but refused to meet President Obama because of the president's support for Planned Parenthood.

"I am Catholic, I am active in the pro-life movement, and I just felt like I couldn't deal with that," Birk said. "I couldn't endorse that in any way."

Tim Thomas
In 2012, Thomas, a noted Tea Partier, posted a screed against the entire government on his Facebook page to explain his refusal to visit Washington with the rest of the 2011 Stanley Cup-winning Bruins.

"
I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People," he wrote.

"This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country."

James Harrison
Harrison twice declined White House invites after winning the Super Bowl, spurning both Obama and former President George W. Bush — not because of their politics, but because he felt the whole idea of inviting championship teams was hollow.

"This is how I feel — if you want to see the Pittsburgh Steelers, invite us when we don't win the Super Bowl," he said. "As far as I'm concerned, he [Obama] would've invited Arizona if they had won."

Manny Ramirez
Manny, being Manny, didn't show up to meet George W. Bush for no apparent reason other than that he just didn't feel like it.

"I'm sorry [David Ortiz's] running mate, Manny Ramirez, isn't here,'' Bush said. "I guess his grandmother died again. Just kidding. Tell Manny I didn't mean it."

Mark Chmura
A member of the 1996 Super Bowl-winning Packers, Chmura skipped a trip to meet President Clinton, citing a previously scheduled golf tournament. After the Lewinsky scandal broke, however, he said, "
I knew it all along" adding, "It doesn't really say much for society and the morals [Clinton] sets forth for our children."

Tom Lehman
An American golfer known to proudly flaunt his Christian faith, Lehman declined to meet President Clinton, instead referring to him as a "draft-dodging baby killer."

Michael Jordan
Yes, even Air Jordan has had a presidential no-show controversy. When Jordan opted not to meet President George H. W. Bush in 1991, a fuming Chicago Tribune story blared, "Snub By Jordan Undermines Team."

Jordan later defended his decision, saying he wanted to spend time relaxing with his family back in North Carolina.

"As you know, my schedules have been very hectic," he said. "You guys have seen me, I've been every which way, and because I choose to take my private three days somewhere no one can call me, it's my prerogative."

Larry Bird
Bird and others from the 1984 Celtics turned down the chance to visit President Reagan for unspecified reasons, with Bird later quipping, "If the president wants to see me, he knows where to find me."

Albert Pujols, Tony LaRussa
Pujols and LaRussa, who both took part in Glenn Beck's big Tea Party rally back in 2010, did not travel with the rest of the Cardinals to be congratulated by Obama in 2012. Neither cited politics to explain their no-shows, and both were already on their way out of St. Louis by then; LaRussa retired, and Pujols signed a mega-deal with the Los Angeles Angels.

Pujols also missed a meeting with President Bush in 2005 while on a humanitarian mission in his native Dominican Republic.

Ozzie Guillen
The oddball (former) manager and friend of the late-Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez skipped a team meeting with President Bush after the White Sox won the 2005 World Series. He did, however, appear on Chavez's radio show after winning that title.

Greg Biffle, Carl Edwards, Kevin Harvick, and Tony Stewart
The handful of NASCAR standouts all turned down an invite from President Obama, citing "scheduling conflicts."
Click to expand...
 
From a skim through that it seems like the Patriots lads are the first to have sane reason for not going.
 
Rado_N said:
From a skim through that it seems like the Patriots lads are the first to have sane reason for not going.
Click to expand...

Just not wanting to go or thinking the whole idea of visiting the White House because your team won the Championship are fair enough reasons. Pujols working on a humanitarian project is also pretty sane. Jordan preferring to have the days off, can't blame him. It really is just a big photo-op for the President, so if I already had other things planned not sure I would want to cancel them just so The President (any President) can look good.

Chmura smacks more than a bit of hypocrisy given his problems a few years later (yes found not guilty of sexual assault but later admitting he behaved inappropriately for a married man).
 
Neutral said:
Mark Chmura
A member of the 1996 Super Bowl-winning Packers, Chmura skipped a trip to meet President Clinton, citing a previously scheduled golf tournament. After the Lewinsky scandal broke, however, he said, "
I knew it all along" adding, "It doesn't really say much for society and the morals [Clinton] sets forth for our children."
Click to expand...



Criminal charges[edit]
On April 8, 2000 Chmura was accused of sexually assaulting the 17-year-old babysitter of his children. Chmura was tried but found not guilty of all charges.[5] Two days after being acquitted of child enticement and third-degree sexual assault, Chmura acknowledged that his behavior at a post-prom party "wasn't something a married man should do."[6]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.