NFL 2010
- Thread starter Dak
- Start date
MasterOLightning
Optimator
I wonder if the NFC West division winner will even get to eight wins. I don't see why they couldn't change the rule to keep a losing team from making the playoffs. Between the Falcons, Saints, Eagles, Giants, Bears, Packers, and Bucs, two must go home, while some awful NFC West team advances. At least one of those teams will feel pretty screwed if the 7-9 Seahawks or Rams get to HOST a first round game. And that 7-9 record will come from playing six games against really poor opposition.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
King Richard
Hello there
Way to be a dick and pick up Westbrook right under my nose Jimmy.
This shit figures, my best running back and highest scoring running back in the league going in to this week is fucking done for the year now. God, whatever.
This shit figures, my best running back and highest scoring running back in the league going in to this week is fucking done for the year now. God, whatever.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
Thaaaaaaat's Fantasy!
haha. I was up and I was drinkign watching that shitting excuse for a game ...and, well, pick up westbrook for good measure.
Ivory is still available man.
haha. I was up and I was drinkign watching that shitting excuse for a game ...and, well, pick up westbrook for good measure.
Ivory is still available man.
King Richard
Hello there
It's cool, I would have done the same thing. I've got a few reserves thankfully so I'm not too annoyed by this loss. Oh well, shit happens!
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
That interview should have ended at 0:20. It really isn't anyone else's business and I don't think Anderson was out of line at all.
AchrisK
Weakling
I see your point about special teams, but the Chargers special teams playing has improved. Regarding garbage time, I believe the teams playing the Chargers have benefited stat-wise from that way more than the Chargers have. They haven't really been trailing by a lot in the games, but they have been leading by a lot in a few games (Denver, Jacksonvile, Arizona, Indy).
I already said that I was aware that those rankings do not translate directly, as far as ranking the quality of the teams in a given order. If you are basing your overrated statement purely on what those rankings say, then I can see that point. But those are just pure rankings based on stats. They are what they are. To me, overrated means that "everyone" (the talking heads) are lavishing endless, undue praises on them. I have not heard that happening. In fact I would say the opposite is true. But then I only really listen to a little sports radio in the morning. I don't have/watch ESPN or any sports channels. Of course you have the game-time commentators who continually exaggerate the greatness of whoever just made a good play or drive. But that is spread across the board pretty evenly.
The Chargers are good and could probably beat any team. But that doesn't mean they would beat any team. I am coming to believe that matchups are a bigger piece of the puzzle than is usually assumed.
I already said that I was aware that those rankings do not translate directly, as far as ranking the quality of the teams in a given order. If you are basing your overrated statement purely on what those rankings say, then I can see that point. But those are just pure rankings based on stats. They are what they are. To me, overrated means that "everyone" (the talking heads) are lavishing endless, undue praises on them. I have not heard that happening. In fact I would say the opposite is true. But then I only really listen to a little sports radio in the morning. I don't have/watch ESPN or any sports channels. Of course you have the game-time commentators who continually exaggerate the greatness of whoever just made a good play or drive. But that is spread across the board pretty evenly.
The Chargers are good and could probably beat any team. But that doesn't mean they would beat any team. I am coming to believe that matchups are a bigger piece of the puzzle than is usually assumed.
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
The Chargers are not overrated because, as AchrisK said, they have improved on their deficiencies. Their special teams has become much more sound and they've also proven that they can win with depth on both sides of the ball. I would be surprised if the Chargers were not the 3 seed in the AFC this year.
Regarding a potential rule change to disallow a losing team from advancing into the playoffs: I disagree with this. Teams play in divisions. Every team's number one priority is to win their division. If they don't win their own division then they have no scapegoat. Every team goes through periods of ineffectiveness, and sometimes it affects an entire conference at the same time. But the 49ers have won 5 super bowls. The Seahawks were in the super bowl 5 years ago. The Rams were in two super bowls a decade ago. The Cardinals are 2 seasons removed from a super bowl. Right now they're all teams looking for answers. But that has nothing to do with whether or not the division deserves to have a team in the playoffs. Besides, if they win a playoff game, then it proves that they deserved to be there. If they lose, then they're quickly eliminated and there's no discussion. And if you're not one of the two best teams to not win your division, then I don't have much sympathy for you. Division winners get rewarded with a playoff spot. That is the incentive for winning your division.
Now on to the Steelers...
I don't really have a ton of things to say this time. They got lucky in the end, but they only needed to get lucky because of their own errors. Yes, they almost lost to the Bills when Stevie Johnson dropped a 40 yard touchdown pass that was in his hands in the end zone in overtime, but the other team has to execute to win too. It's not Ike Taylor's fault he didn't do his job.
The Steelers looked great on the opening drive, possibly their most impressive opening drive of the season, which isn't saying much, but they couldn't maintain that momentum despite having possession for almost the entire first half, and they only led 13-0 at halftime because of failures to execute when it counted. On the plus side, new kick Shaun Suisham was 4 for 4 on the day with all of his FGs coming between 40 and 49 yards.
The running game was overall effective, but unimpressive against a bad rushing defense. This is on the offensive line and not on the running backs. Mendenhall had 151 yards, but he needed 36 carries to get them. Redman was very effective when given the opportunity. I believe he had 5 carries for 25 yards, many of them in 3rd and short situations. He still needs to be utilized more. Mewelde Moore has turned around from his very slow start at the beginning of the season, thankfully, but he's still nothing more than a change of pace back with the occasional hot route or dump off pass on 3rd down. I think this is his last year here.
There was really only one bad play on defense, and that was the touchdown, obviously. A 65 yard catch and run to a running back. By far the worst play allowed by this defense this year, but I guess even that is saying something about how they've played up to this point. Troy Polamalu had a great game and another timely interception to stall a Bills drive in the redzone late in the game. William Gay stepped up big when Bryant McFadden left with a hamstring injury. McFadden is questionable to play next week, which could be an issue. If he doesn't play, Keenan Lewis or Crezdon Butler need to step up. James Harrison also had another good game with a sack and a forced fumble and a $25,000 fine.
Brett Keisel should finally be back this week, which is just in time because Nick Eason just sprained his MCL, though Tomlin says he's optimistic about him playing as well. Having another D lineman in the rotation should help with the pass rush, especially with a starter returning, as Keisel is better at taking up blockers than Eason. Aaron Smith has for a while now been projected to return in week 16 against the Panthers and I haven't heard anything to the contrary regarding that thus far. I hope that he is back by then, giving him two games to get ready for the postseason. And of course, it wouldn't be a Steelers season without Roethlisberger battling an injury at some point, and it's finally happened. He has a sprained foot and is in a walking boot, but there's no way in hell he's not playing. He got injured in the second quarter and it was never even a question that he wouldn't finish the game. He even had an 18 yard scramble on a 3rd and 17, so it can't be too awful. His mobility will possibly suffer a bit, but maybe him being pressured more to stay in the pocket will be a good thing.
Mike Wallace and Emmanuel Sanders both had key drops during the game. Shit happens, but when it does, it still sucks. Sanders needs to keep his head up, and Tomlin needs to continue to allow him to improve. And of course Wallace is only a year in advance of Sanders in NFL age. They're both young guys with lots of room to improve.
Regarding a potential rule change to disallow a losing team from advancing into the playoffs: I disagree with this. Teams play in divisions. Every team's number one priority is to win their division. If they don't win their own division then they have no scapegoat. Every team goes through periods of ineffectiveness, and sometimes it affects an entire conference at the same time. But the 49ers have won 5 super bowls. The Seahawks were in the super bowl 5 years ago. The Rams were in two super bowls a decade ago. The Cardinals are 2 seasons removed from a super bowl. Right now they're all teams looking for answers. But that has nothing to do with whether or not the division deserves to have a team in the playoffs. Besides, if they win a playoff game, then it proves that they deserved to be there. If they lose, then they're quickly eliminated and there's no discussion. And if you're not one of the two best teams to not win your division, then I don't have much sympathy for you. Division winners get rewarded with a playoff spot. That is the incentive for winning your division.
Now on to the Steelers...
I don't really have a ton of things to say this time. They got lucky in the end, but they only needed to get lucky because of their own errors. Yes, they almost lost to the Bills when Stevie Johnson dropped a 40 yard touchdown pass that was in his hands in the end zone in overtime, but the other team has to execute to win too. It's not Ike Taylor's fault he didn't do his job.
The Steelers looked great on the opening drive, possibly their most impressive opening drive of the season, which isn't saying much, but they couldn't maintain that momentum despite having possession for almost the entire first half, and they only led 13-0 at halftime because of failures to execute when it counted. On the plus side, new kick Shaun Suisham was 4 for 4 on the day with all of his FGs coming between 40 and 49 yards.
The running game was overall effective, but unimpressive against a bad rushing defense. This is on the offensive line and not on the running backs. Mendenhall had 151 yards, but he needed 36 carries to get them. Redman was very effective when given the opportunity. I believe he had 5 carries for 25 yards, many of them in 3rd and short situations. He still needs to be utilized more. Mewelde Moore has turned around from his very slow start at the beginning of the season, thankfully, but he's still nothing more than a change of pace back with the occasional hot route or dump off pass on 3rd down. I think this is his last year here.
There was really only one bad play on defense, and that was the touchdown, obviously. A 65 yard catch and run to a running back. By far the worst play allowed by this defense this year, but I guess even that is saying something about how they've played up to this point. Troy Polamalu had a great game and another timely interception to stall a Bills drive in the redzone late in the game. William Gay stepped up big when Bryant McFadden left with a hamstring injury. McFadden is questionable to play next week, which could be an issue. If he doesn't play, Keenan Lewis or Crezdon Butler need to step up. James Harrison also had another good game with a sack and a forced fumble and a $25,000 fine.
Brett Keisel should finally be back this week, which is just in time because Nick Eason just sprained his MCL, though Tomlin says he's optimistic about him playing as well. Having another D lineman in the rotation should help with the pass rush, especially with a starter returning, as Keisel is better at taking up blockers than Eason. Aaron Smith has for a while now been projected to return in week 16 against the Panthers and I haven't heard anything to the contrary regarding that thus far. I hope that he is back by then, giving him two games to get ready for the postseason. And of course, it wouldn't be a Steelers season without Roethlisberger battling an injury at some point, and it's finally happened. He has a sprained foot and is in a walking boot, but there's no way in hell he's not playing. He got injured in the second quarter and it was never even a question that he wouldn't finish the game. He even had an 18 yard scramble on a 3rd and 17, so it can't be too awful. His mobility will possibly suffer a bit, but maybe him being pressured more to stay in the pocket will be a good thing.
Mike Wallace and Emmanuel Sanders both had key drops during the game. Shit happens, but when it does, it still sucks. Sanders needs to keep his head up, and Tomlin needs to continue to allow him to improve. And of course Wallace is only a year in advance of Sanders in NFL age. They're both young guys with lots of room to improve.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
So a team winning a division at 8-8 compared to a team not winning a division at 11-5 and missing the playoffs because they play in a better division is fair!?
You're wrong. It's traditionalist bullshit! Concepts are meant to be changed for the better.
The incentive ( what ever they determine that is, home field per record, maybe the draft ) should and will be changed in the future.
You're wrong. It's traditionalist bullshit! Concepts are meant to be changed for the better.
The incentive ( what ever they determine that is, home field per record, maybe the draft ) should and will be changed in the future.
AchrisK
Weakling
I guess, to be honest the current system is somewhat based on tradition, but just because it has been done that way for so long. It is a logical way to organize a system, and I think what its benefits to the sport outweigh the potential "injustices" it may produce.
You play your own division twice each, so you really have the chance to set yourself apart within that division. It creates division rivalries, which are just fun. It allows a larger percentage of your games to be closer geographically, which is easier on the team. Each division sort of forms an identity and it gives fans and teams real motivation to root against certain teams, or even for certain teams for "division pride".
If you abandon the current system, then you abandon everything about it, because divisions will have no meaning. There is no reason to play the teams in your division twice.
As far as strong teams being left out, every team has the opportunity to be in the playoffs by winning their division. If they can't do that, they have a small chance to get in based on their strength. And the thing is, the next best two teams get to go. So that's two non-division winning teams, and they are the next two strongest teams. So really, how unjust is it? Most likely it will be only one or two teams with better records than division winners will be left out. But they had the chance not only to win their divisions, but to be one of the two next best teams.
The current system is fine and I think the sport will lose much more than it gains if it decides to change it.
You play your own division twice each, so you really have the chance to set yourself apart within that division. It creates division rivalries, which are just fun. It allows a larger percentage of your games to be closer geographically, which is easier on the team. Each division sort of forms an identity and it gives fans and teams real motivation to root against certain teams, or even for certain teams for "division pride".
If you abandon the current system, then you abandon everything about it, because divisions will have no meaning. There is no reason to play the teams in your division twice.
As far as strong teams being left out, every team has the opportunity to be in the playoffs by winning their division. If they can't do that, they have a small chance to get in based on their strength. And the thing is, the next best two teams get to go. So that's two non-division winning teams, and they are the next two strongest teams. So really, how unjust is it? Most likely it will be only one or two teams with better records than division winners will be left out. But they had the chance not only to win their divisions, but to be one of the two next best teams.
The current system is fine and I think the sport will lose much more than it gains if it decides to change it.
Mort Divine
Shrine Maiden of the In-Crowd
If a team finishes below .500 they do not deserve a playoff spot. End of discussion.
If the playoffs started today the 7-4 Packers would not make the playoffs while the 5-6 Rams would.
There is a great fucking deal wrong with that.
If the playoffs started today the 7-4 Packers would not make the playoffs while the 5-6 Rams would.
There is a great fucking deal wrong with that.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
I propose that division games count even more so.
Check this out...
Division record means home field if the two teams meet in the playoffs.
Playoff teams are ordered 1-6 within each conference.
There are not only Division winners by record, but the division record determines home field only against the division opponent. Rank in the top 6 counts of course, but the division is only won by a combination of over all record and division wins.
Example:
Giants 12-4 Giants are 4-2 in the division
Eagles 11- 5 Eagles are 6-0 in the division
Eagles win home field against the Giants by one division game and they fall into the order of the top 6 regardless, but if the Eagles play the Giants in the nfc championship, the Eagles get home field.
I feel as a system it is the lesser evil and it is backed by reason.
Check this out...
Division record means home field if the two teams meet in the playoffs.
Playoff teams are ordered 1-6 within each conference.
There are not only Division winners by record, but the division record determines home field only against the division opponent. Rank in the top 6 counts of course, but the division is only won by a combination of over all record and division wins.
Example:
Giants 12-4 Giants are 4-2 in the division
Eagles 11- 5 Eagles are 6-0 in the division
Eagles win home field against the Giants by one division game and they fall into the order of the top 6 regardless, but if the Eagles play the Giants in the nfc championship, the Eagles get home field.
I feel as a system it is the lesser evil and it is backed by reason.
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Mort, there's not a god damn thing wrong with that. The Packers lost to the Bears. Every team's destiny is in their own hands. There's nothing "unfair" about a division winning team with a losing record getting a playoff spot over a division losing team with a winning record. Fairness is not even in question when you are the authority of your own fate. If you don't win your division AND you're not one of the top two teams to lose your division, then I'm not compelled to listen to your complaints. Just because the six best teams in each conference don't necessarily make the playoffs doesn't mean that the system is broken. It means that the system is not designed to get the 6 best teams in each conference into the playoffs. Divisions are divisions. The sport would lose more by getting rid of the division concept by simply taking the 6 best teams in each conference and pairing them off than awarding each division winner a playoff spot regardless of record. The most important thing that would suffer, in my opinion, is rivalry games. Rivals wouldn't play as often, they wouldn't have as much meaning, and they would have no incentive to compete at full tilt for the division title if there's no title on the line. Look at this week. It seems likely that the winners of the Jets-Patriots game and the Steelers-Ravens game will be the number 1 and 2 seeds in the AFC, while the losers are probably going to be the 5 and 6 seeds.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
^Incentive/proposal above your post^
Please evaluate, I am open to criticism. Just brainstorming here.
Please evaluate, I am open to criticism. Just brainstorming here.
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
I don't like it. The division is more than the division games because every team in a division plays their division games + AFC Division X + NFC Division Y, plus two games determined based on Strength of Schedule Parameters. I don't think a team that doesn't win their division should get a home game in the playoffs.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
Fair point. I just can't stand the idea of a 7-9 team in the playoffs while a 11-5 team can be watching it on T.V.
...and I understand your points on winning the Division and the next best two teams becoming the wild card, but I still don't like it.
The Giants, Packers, Saints and Bears are much better teams than the Rams. It's really just not fair to the fan and when it comes down to it is bad for the league and the networks when an inferior team is in the playoffs.
Oh well, I tried.
...and I understand your points on winning the Division and the next best two teams becoming the wild card, but I still don't like it.
The Giants, Packers, Saints and Bears are much better teams than the Rams. It's really just not fair to the fan and when it comes down to it is bad for the league and the networks when an inferior team is in the playoffs.
Oh well, I tried.
Similar threads
