View Full Version : 2007 NFL Foosball!
Pet Peeve:
Lions just lost to the Cowboys because instead of just falling on a fumble to end the game the Lions tried to pick it up and run with it. :shakehead
It's not quite that simple. Great breakdown of the game here:
http://cowboys.beloblog.com/archives/2007/12/tale_of_the_tape_8.html
Now, for the flip side, on just how dumb a ballgame the Lions played down the stretch. Twice on their second-to-last drive, Shaun McDonald ran out of bounds when he easily could’ve stayed in, first on a 13-yard catch, then on an 8-yarder. That’s at least 80 seconds the Lions could’ve run off. Assuming all things stay the same, his keeping his head and fighting to stay in would’ve meant the Cowboys would’ve gotten the ball back with, probably, around 30 seconds left for their last drive. They got it, instead, with 2:15 left.
But it doesn’t end there. On Witten’s 6-yard catch, on a first-and-5 (following, by the way, a 12-men-on-the-field penalty on the defense) with 43 seconds left, Witten got the ball on a swing out to the flat. Travis Fisher had him squared up. But instead of trying to wrestle him down inbounds, he dove at him, pushing him further toward the sideline and allowing him to escape out of bounds. Then, on the next play, Sam Hurd’s 16-yard deep out, Dovonte Edwards, inexplicably, was playing inside leverage in covering him. This gave Romo the small window to throw into to get Hurd the ball and get Hurd out of bounds with 26 seconds left. Give up the yardage if you must. But not the sideline. This is the difference (without even mentioning Paris Lennon's gaffe), right now, between the Lions being a contender in the NFC and an afterthought, because that is not a bad football team.
A tragedy that Taylor died but the things that didn't make sense about the first reports still don't make sense: alarm turned off and no 911 call as soon as they heard noise downstairs. Even if a major artery is hit, there's no need to die if the paramedics get there right away.
Turning back to the ball. Romo is the real deal. So is Favre of course. Superbowl might actually be worth watching.
Dr. Corkski
12-12-07, 12:33 PM
1. Agreed. Pretty good D, great running game, and Jackson is no longer a total embarrassment at QB.
2. Meh, maybe, but I think this '07 Browns is farrrrr more legit than the '02 team. Not saying they WILL win, but I think they've got a pretty good shot.:thumbup:This Browns team doesn't have Kelly Holcomb. :gomer:
TKGAngel
12-12-07, 12:57 PM
I think the Brownies have another loss in them this weekend or next...maybe both.
-Kevin
From your mouth to the football god's ears. The Browns lose this weekend, and that's one step the Bills have over them in the playoff hunt.
Sean O'Gorman
12-12-07, 01:32 PM
This Browns team doesn't have Kelly Holcomb. :gomer:
Go away. :gomer: :gomer:
From your mouth to the football god's ears. The Browns lose this weekend, and that's one step the Bills have over them in the playoff hunt.
Yeah, because if the Browns lose, all the good luck goes to Buffalo...
I bet they tie, and the sixth seed goes to Tennessee.
This Browns team doesn't have Kelly Holcomb. :gomer:
And the Steelers don't have Tommy Maddox. :)
-Kevin
I bet they tie, and the sixth seed goes to Tennessee.
unpossible, w/o Haynesworth and w/ Norm Chow calling run on 1st and 2nd every series, tenn sucks more than bud adams
Racing Truth
12-12-07, 03:59 PM
This Browns team doesn't have Kelly Holcomb. :gomer:
Or Dennis Northcutt.:gomer:
Which, combined with a good o-line and Jamal Lewis, is why they're better than '02.
Racing Truth
12-12-07, 04:00 PM
unpossible, w/o Haynesworth and w/ Norm Chow calling run on 1st and 2nd every series, tenn sucks more than bud adams
I think Haynesworth's playing now, BTW.
Insomniac
12-12-07, 04:06 PM
Here's the big difference b/w Cleveland and Pittsburgh:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=ypg&pos=def&league=afc&year=2007&season=2
Pittsburgh has a couple of bad losses. They had no business losing to NYJ, Denver, or the Cards. All were road losses as well. If Pitt plays the Brownies @ home, advantage Pitt. We'll see after this weekend when the Brownies host Buffalo and Steelers host Jax. I think the Brownies have another loss in them this weekend or next...maybe both.
-Kevin
The Patriots just showed those stats don't mean all that much. They threw for more than 200 over their average yards allowed per game and scored more than 20 points over their average points per game allowed. I think it's foolish to say Cleveland is one and done if they make the playoffs, and definitely done if they ended up playing Pittsburgh instead of San Diego. Especially if the basis is Cleveland has an easy schedule and beats easy teams. Pittsburgh has the same schedule except 2 games and lost to teams they should beat. That doesn't exactly make them that much better on paper.
Racing Truth
12-12-07, 04:07 PM
This Browns team is winning because of an incredibly easy schedule. That 2002 Browns team won a bunch of last second games.
Either way, out of the playoffs in the first round is likely, especially against Pittsburgh.
Gotta agree with Boston Boy (Insomniac).
Break the 2 teams down:
RB: William Green v. Jamal Lewis. I'll take Jamal.
QB: DA vs. TCouch/Holcomb. Not convinced yet w/ DA, but he's worlds better than those 2.
O-line: Not even close
WR's: Braylon, Jurevicius, K2 v. K. Johnson, Northcutt, etc. Again, not close.
Defense: OK, both suck, slight advantage to '02.
And they hung with Pittspuke in the 2nd game.
Insomniac
12-12-07, 05:32 PM
Gotta agree with Boston Boy (Insomniac).
Break the 2 teams down:
RB: William Green v. Jamal Lewis. I'll take Jamal.
QB: DA vs. TCouch/Holcomb. Not convinced yet w/ DA, but he's worlds better than those 2.
O-line: Not even close
WR's: Braylon, Jurevicius, K2 v. K. Johnson, Northcutt, etc. Again, not close.
Defense: OK, both suck, slight advantage to '02.
And they hung with Pittspuke in the 2nd game.
I recall that 2002 game being a good game. Am I wrong? Did Pittsburgh blow them out? Wasn't it in the snow too? (I lived in WV at that time and thought I listened to Myron Cope call the game.)
Racing Truth
12-12-07, 08:10 PM
I recall that 2002 game being a good game. Am I wrong? Did Pittsburgh blow them out? Wasn't it in the snow too? (I lived in WV at that time and thought I listened to Myron Cope call the game.)
It was, but I think both teams, esp. the Browns, won on smoke-and-mirrors that yr. This yr., there's real talent out there, on both sides.
Gotta agree with Boston Boy (Insomniac).
Break the 2 teams down:
RB: William Green v. Jamal Lewis. I'll take Jamal.
QB: DA vs. TCouch/Holcomb. Not convinced yet w/ DA, but he's worlds better than those 2.
O-line: Not even close
WR's: Braylon, Jurevicius, K2 v. K. Johnson, Northcutt, etc. Again, not close.
Defense: OK, both suck, slight advantage to '02.
And they hung with Pittspuke in the 2nd game.
Slight advantage for the 02 defense? Are you joking? Points allowed by the defense in 2002 was 20 points per game, 10th in the league. In 2007 its 27.4, DEAD LAST in the NFL.
Slight advantage. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
It was, but I think both teams, esp. the Browns, won on smoke-and-mirrors that yr. This yr., there's real talent out there, on both sides.
yea, not only are the browns better than they were in 2002 (except on D), the steelers are better as well.
until romeo shows he can beat the steelers, you have to figure the steelers will rock the browns in the playoffs.
The Patriots just showed those stats don't mean all that much. They threw for more than 200 over their average yards allowed per game and scored more than 20 points over their average points per game allowed. I think it's foolish to say Cleveland is one and done if they make the playoffs, and definitely done if they ended up playing Pittsburgh instead of San Diego. Especially if the basis is Cleveland has an easy schedule and beats easy teams. Pittsburgh has the same schedule except 2 games and lost to teams they should beat. That doesn't exactly make them that much better on paper.
Umm, Troy P. was out, and his back up was exposed for 2 or 3 of those TDs. That's like Indy w/o Bob Sanders...night and day.
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-13-07, 10:19 AM
Umm, Troy P. was out, and his back up was exposed for 2 or 3 of those TDs. That's like Indy w/o Bob Sanders...night and day.
-Kevin
I don't know for sure, but the way Troy P. plays and Anthony Smith plays seem to be different. Troy P. is given a lot more responsibility. I would expect the defense to be played differently. However, the key question is, with Polamalu, would they get any more pressure on Brady? He had the time to throw and I don't think anyone is going to be able to cover all the receivers if he gets that time.
Insomniac
12-13-07, 10:25 AM
yea, not only are the browns better than they were in 2002 (except on D), the steelers are better as well.
until romeo shows he can beat the steelers, you have to figure the steelers will rock the browns in the playoffs.
Pittsburgh's defense is significantly better than Cleveland's.
Cleveland's offense is better than Pittsburgh's.
Cleveland's special teams is significantly better than Pittsburgh's.
I just don't see them getting rocked. I see a good game.
Insomniac
12-13-07, 01:39 PM
I will not watch NFL Network games because of Gumbel. At least not with the sound on. I've tried. I've really tried but he just makes it too painful.
NFL Network play-by-play announcer Bryant Gumbel is suffering from a sore throat and will be replaced by Tom Hammond for Thursday's Broncos-Texans broadcast at Reliant Stadium, a network spokesman said Tuesday.
Andrew Longman
12-13-07, 01:55 PM
Too bad I couldn't possibly have less interest in watching a Texan/Broncos game.
Cleveland's offense is better than Pittsburgh's.
I just don't see them getting rocked. I see a good game.
Take away the Cribbs factor and the O is about the same:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=ypg&pos=off&league=afc&year=2007&season=2
20 yards and ~ a FG/game. Steelers 7-10 are points better. The difference in the second game @ Pitt was that the Browns coaches could not adjust in the 2nd half, and had only 1 first down the entire second half. The only score they had was a KO TD return by Cribbs. In any case it's a moot point. Whoever wins this game gets rolled by the Colts or Pats.
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-13-07, 02:29 PM
Take away the Cribbs factor and the O is about the same:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=ypg&pos=off&league=afc&year=2007&season=2
20 yards and ~ a FG/game. Steelers 7-10 are points better. The difference in the second game @ Pitt was that the Browns coaches could not adjust in the 2nd half, and had only 1 first down the entire second half. The only score they had was a KO TD return by Cribbs. In any case it's a moot point. Whoever wins this game gets rolled by the Colts or Pats.
-Kevin
You can't start taking away players. :D I'm just saying I can't just give the game to the Steelers. They'll be favored to win and will have home field, but it won't be a gimme.
Racing Truth
12-13-07, 03:20 PM
Slight advantage for the 02 defense? Are you joking? Points allowed by the defense in 2002 was 20 points per game, 10th in the league. In 2007 its 27.4, DEAD LAST in the NFL.
Slight advantage. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
OK, OK, fair point. Though I maintain both sides of the ball did it w/ smoke-and-mirrors.
You can't start taking away players. :D I'm just saying I can't just give the game to the Steelers. They'll be favored to win and will have home field, but it won't be a gimme.
No, I'm just saying Cribbs skews the offensive scoring numbers. w/o that, the yardage numbers are very close. The defensive numbers are not. I fully expect Cincy to drop 40+ on them again on 12/23 (provided the weather is decent).
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-13-07, 07:29 PM
No, I'm just saying Cribbs skews the offensive scoring numbers. w/o that, the yardage numbers are very close. The defensive numbers are not. I fully expect Cincy to drop 40+ on them again on 12/23 (provided the weather is decent).
-Kevin
Special teams numbers are not included with offensive yardage numbers. The number could be higher because they would have a longer field to work with. They are also putting up more points with similar YPG.
Special teams numbers are not included with offensive yardage numbers. The number could be higher because they would have a longer field to work with. They are also putting up more points with similar YPG.
That's more points with more ypg, yo (+ ~20 ypg). Again, my point was that including special teams scoring with offensive numbers skews the comparison. Just like including Chicago's D and ST points last year made their offense's scoring average look respectable. :gomer: I'm more in favor of the FFL way of handling ST as a separate entity or with D.
-Kevin
Must have been a CCWS car designer involved with selecting the Texans unis worn last night:
http://assets.espn.go.com/media/apphoto/6bf3bccd-c6a0-4660-b9be-a6c7bd6c7385.jpg
:gomer: :saywhat:
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-14-07, 04:58 PM
Must have been a CCWS car designer involved with selecting the Texans unis worn last night
They would've been Red on White. ;)
Well, one good thing resulted from the suckitude of the Bungles L @ SF last night :saywhat: ....the chances of the Pats getting the #2 overall pick were diminished. :thumbup: :gomer:
-Kevin
The weather Brownies/Bills is insane! This is gonna be some good foosball watchin'!!!! :thumbup:
-Kevin
TKGAngel
12-16-07, 04:16 PM
The weather Brownies/Bills is insane! This is gonna be some good foosball watchin'!!!! :thumbup:
-Kevin
Its been a fun game to watch.
The Bills radio feed just said that the Bills are stuck in Cleveland overnight, since the Cleveland airport is closed for the foreseeable future.
Its been a fun game to watch.
The Bills radio feed just said that the Bills are stuck in Cleveland overnight, since the Cleveland airport is closed for the foreseeable future.
Did they leave their O in Buffalo? :gomer: ;)
BTW, Tasker is an idiot for suggesting this game could be 52-50. :saywhat: There's never been a snow bowl game where the offenses have gained any advantage due to the conditions.
-Kevin
Interesting?
How about wrong? A lot.
Someone please tell him that when you punt on fourth down its not called "turning it over on downs".
I caught a couple of the live look ins last night to satisfy my morbid curiosity. Gumbel had a few gems, including calling Frank Gore Al Gore. :laugh: :saywhat: :shakehead
-Kevin
TKGAngel
12-16-07, 04:52 PM
Did they leave their O in Buffalo? :gomer: ;)
BTW, Tasker is an idiot for suggesting this game could be 52-50. :saywhat: There's never been a snow bowl game where the offenses have gained any advantage due to the conditions.
-Kevin
Apparently our California boys need to get further acquainted with snow.
And yes, Tasker can be an idiot from time to time, but he's a Buffalo idiot, so its forgiveable. :)
I'm really hoping the weather is NOT like this for the Ice Bowl on New Year's Day.
Are you kidding me? 4th and 5 on the Brownies 10, 21 seconds to go, and you throw a screen pass? WTF? :saywhat:
-Kevin
TKGAngel
12-16-07, 05:07 PM
Are you kidding me? 4th and 5 on the Brownies 10, 21 seconds to go, and you throw a screen pass? WTF? :saywhat:
-Kevin
I missed that. I was outside showing my father how to close the windows he accidentally put down on my new car.
So much for 0-16. Let's hope 16-0 goes for not, too. :)
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-16-07, 05:27 PM
Well, one good thing resulted from the suckitude of the Bungles L @ SF last night :saywhat: ....the chances of the Pats getting the #2 overall pick were diminished. :thumbup: :gomer:
-Kevin
I know! I was hoping to trade that pick to Dallas for their 2 #1s and Marion Barber (reunite the Minnesota Tandem). Then Jerry Jones could get McFadden. :)
So much for 0-16. Let's hope 16-0 goes for not, too. :)
-Kevin Only Miami and a rematch against the Jets left. It will take quite an upset to prevent it.
stroker
12-16-07, 11:13 PM
So what are the chances of Washington beating Dallas next week? I'm looking for a 30 year anniversary of the Ice Bowl in Green Bay!
Only Miami and a rematch against the Jets left. It will take quite an upset to prevent it.
Jets rematch was today. Pats close vs. Fins and giants. I know, small chance in hell.... :\
-Kevin
So what are the chances of Washington beating Dallas next week? I'm looking for a 30 year anniversary of the Ice Bowl in Green Bay!
Never say never the way this season has gone.
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-17-07, 10:29 AM
Jets rematch was today. Pats close vs. Fins and giants. I know, small chance in hell.... :\
-Kevin
Never know. Look at the Ravens. They played better than the Pats for 58 minutes (ignoring the officiating through most of the game) and the next 2 weeks they were blown out by Indy and lost to an 0-13 team. Teams step it up against the Pats. I feel like they are back to their 2003-2004 form where they played to the level of competition.
Never know. Look at the Ravens. They played better than the Pats for 58 minutes (ignoring the officiating through most of the game) and the next 2 weeks they were blown out by Indy and lost to an 0-13 team. Teams step it up against the Pats. I feel like they are back to their 2003-2004 form where they played to the level of competition.
The Giants are a train wreck, and lost Shockey last night. It would take a perfect storm for the Pats to lose over the next two weeks, IMHO. Of course that's what it took for the Bucks to make it into the BC$ Championship, so who knows. :)
-Kevin
Andrew Longman
12-17-07, 12:24 PM
If the Giants lose in Buffalo this week then they will likely have to win against the Pats to make the playoffs... so of course they won't.
If they beat the Bills, then they are in the playoffs, and then they might play fast and loose and surprise the Pats... Maybe.
I hate these Giants. They looks cold and uninspired playing a December game in the Meadowlands last night. That's supposed to be what visiting teams do.
This team lacks toughness and meanness and strong leaders (excepting Pierce) who knock heads.
The Giants in the Barber, Strahan, Shockey era are too quick to believe their press clippings when they win and too quick to dismiss them when they lose.
Insomniac
12-17-07, 12:34 PM
The Giants are a train wreck, and lost Shockey last night. It would take a perfect storm for the Pats to lose over the next two weeks, IMHO. Of course that's what it took for the Bucks to make it into the BC$ Championship, so who knows. :)
-Kevin
The thing is, the Pats were supposed to blow out the Eagles, Ravens and Jets. And play a close game with the Steelers. They didn't blow out the Steelers (relative to other blowouts by the Pats), but they beat them down pretty good.
A nice write up about former Giants DE George Martin and his walk across America in Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback (best online column, IMHO...I'm gonna hate him leaving SI for E$PN :( ):
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/12/16/week15/index.html
-Kevin
The thing is, the Pats were supposed to blow out the Eagles, Ravens and Jets. And play a close game with the Steelers. They didn't blow out the Steelers (relative to other blowouts by the Pats), but they beat them down pretty good.
In both cases, they took away Moss, but both the Ravens and the Iggles lost the TO battle, and thus the game. I would have expected the Ravens D to put up a good fight, but they also had their best offensive game of the season. The Iggles are perplexing...not as bad as their record indicates, but not quite playoff worthy. The Gints play like the Bungles, but have the opposite record. It's not unpossible, but I just don't see any magic coming from Doogie Howser, QB.
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-17-07, 01:23 PM
I'm gonna hate him leaving SI for E$PN :(
What??? He's leaving for ESPN?
Insomniac
12-17-07, 01:26 PM
In both cases, they took away Moss
The Jets did too. I'm not sure what happened, but Brady threw to Moss like crazy yesterday and decided "the open receiver" was no longer his favorite receiver.
What??? He's leaving for ESPN?
Actually, I goofed. Reilly is leaving SI (good riddance) for E$PN. :thumbup:
-Kevin
The Jets did too. I'm not sure what happened, but Brady threw to Moss like crazy yesterday and decided "the open receiver" was no longer his favorite receiver.
I haven't read anything about the Jets game, but I figgered the weather was more likely the reason for a low scoring, closer than expected game.
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-17-07, 02:45 PM
I haven't read anything about the Jets game, but I figgered the weather was more likely the reason for a low scoring, closer than expected game.
-Kevin
I thought Pennington looked better than Brady out there. Brady was inaccurate and forcing balls to Moss.
TKGAngel
12-17-07, 02:51 PM
Actually, I goofed. Reilly is leaving SI (good riddance) for E$PN. :thumbup:
-Kevin
That's where he's going? I thought he was just going off to do his own thing and write books.
That's where he's going? I thought he was just going off to do his own thing and write books.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3074248
Arrogant bastid. Never cared his stuff much. :irked:
-Kevin
TKGAngel
12-17-07, 03:32 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3074248
Arrogant bastid. Never cared his stuff much. :irked:
-Kevin
I usually liked Reilly's writings. There was a willingness to poke fun at himself that's sometimes missing in sports writing. I just hope he doesn't turn into the arrogant little bastid that John Buccigross is. That guy makes my blood boil.
And in the "adding insult to injury column," the Bills had to be bused back to Cleveland today, as their plane went off the runway at Cleveland's Hopkins International. Thankfully, they were not on the plane at the time.
Andrew Longman
12-17-07, 03:34 PM
I haven't read anything about the Jets game, but I figgered the weather was more likely the reason for a low scoring, closer than expected game.
-Kevin
Sloppy conditions. Wet balls and wind. Brady had only 140 passing yards and no TDs.
Pennington's dink and dunk style made him look better under those conditions, but once in the red zone he's too easy to bottle up. And Chad is incapable of stretching the field. But he sure looked better than Clemens. :rolleyes:
And in the "adding insult to injury column," the Bills had to be bused back to Cleveland today, as their plane went off the runway at Cleveland's Hopkins International. Thankfully, they were not on the plane at the time.
Can you say bus trip back to Buffalo? :gomer:
-Kevin
Insomniac
12-17-07, 05:18 PM
Sloppy conditions. Wet balls and wind. Brady had only 140 passing yards and no TDs.
Pennington's dink and dunk style made him look better under those conditions, but once in the red zone he's too easy to bottle up. And Chad is incapable of stretching the field. But he sure looked better than Clemens. :rolleyes:
The dink and dunk may've made him look better, but it moved the ball down the field. If you are going to be zipping the ball, they have to be more accurate and Brady was off yesterday. Clemens only had 2 plays. Seymour (good to see he still plays for New England) flattened him when he was trying to throw it away and the Pats got an easy pick-6.
Andrew Longman
12-17-07, 05:55 PM
Clemens only had 2 plays.
Yeah I saw that. I meant Pennington looked better than Clemens has since he began starting, but Pennington's reminded Jet fans why they made the change too. That dinking moves the ball but doesn't score.
Brady's was off yesterday but given the talent of Moss (and the other receivers) it isn't necessarily a bad idea to put the ball up and let him go after it. My critique was the Jets did a pretty good job covering Moss and regardless Brady seemed in love with him. There were other receivers with cless coverage he ignored
Insomniac
12-17-07, 06:14 PM
Brady's was off yesterday but given the talent of Moss (and the other receivers) it isn't necessarily a bad idea to put the ball up and let him go after it. My critique was the Jets did a pretty good job covering Moss and regardless Brady seemed in love with him. There were other receivers with cless coverage he ignored
The thing is, Brady has been making those throws all year. A lot of those spectacular catches wouldn't have happened if Brady moved on because Moss was covered one-on-one. So, if his first read is Moss and he's covered by only a CB, he's not going to continue his progression. I just don't think those were the conditions for that kind of passing attack.
Andrew Longman
12-17-07, 06:59 PM
So, if his first read is Moss and he's covered by only a CB, he's not going to continue his progression. I just don't think those were the conditions for that kind of passing attack.
Well, he usually was in 2 deep coverage with help from the safety, but your point holds. The conditions were not good enough to reliably get the ball to Moss but it was good enough to get the ball to the other receivers in single coverage.
Insomniac
12-17-07, 09:11 PM
Well, he usually was in 2 deep coverage with help from the safety, but your point holds. The conditions were not good enough to reliably get the ball to Moss but it was good enough to get the ball to the other receivers in single coverage.
Technically that's one-on-one with safety help for anyone going deep. ;) Baltimore and Philly were actually rolling a safety his way from a Cover-2 look to double him. If Brady had better accuracy yesterday (quite a few of his passes were simply off the mark) it would've been a better game. Just seemed like a day where you want to find a guy that is clearly open instead of a mismatch.
Andrew Longman
12-17-07, 10:24 PM
Just seemed like a day where you want to find a guy that is clearly open instead of a mismatch.
dats what I'm sayin'
Who's yer mama!
Recivers picked before TJ Houshmandzadeh in the 2001 NFL draft:
First Round: David Terrell, Bears (8); Koren Robinson, Seahawks (9); Rod Gardner Redskins (15); Santana Moss, Jets (16); Freddie Mitchell, Eagles (25); Reggie Wayne, Colts (30).
Second Round: Quincy Morgan, Browns (33); Chad Johnson, Bengals (36); Robert Ferguson, Packers (41); Chris Chambers Dolphins (52).
Third Round: Steve Smith, Panthers (74); Marvin Minnis, Chiefs (77).
Fourth Round: Milton Wynn, Rams (116); Justin McCareins (Titans) 124; Cedric James, Vikings (131).
Fifth round: Vinny Sutherland, Falcons (136); Alex Bannister, Seahawks (140); Scotty Anderson, Lions (148); Onome Ojo, Saints (153); Darnerien McCants, Redskins (154); Eddie Berlin, Titans (159); Jonathan Carter, Giants (162).
Sixth Round: Bobby Newcombe, Cardinals (166); Cedrick Wilson, 49ers (169); Kevin Kasper, Broncos (190); Francis St. Paul, Rams (197).
Seventh Round: T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Bengals (204).
Good to see TJ going to the Pro Bowl. He has been one of the hardest workers on the team since day one and always shows up for every game. He just needs to cool his temper a bit at times.
While TJ goes to the pro bowl Chad settles for first alternate. Not a bad year by most standards, but I wouldn't have voted for him this season. He needs to get squared away and recapture his focus. Mistakes and poor execution hurt the team too many times this season.
Who's yer mama!
Good to see TJ going to the Pro Bowl. He has been one of the hardest workers on the team since day one and always shows up for every game. He just needs to cool his temper a bit at times.
While TJ goes to the pro bowl Chad settles for first alternate. Not a bad year by most standards, but I wouldn't have voted for him this season. He needs to get squared away and recapture his focus. Mistakes and poor execution hurt the team too many times this season.
Yup. TJ is da man. :thumbup: Chad has had too many drops, ran poor routes, and spends too much time pouting/feuding with CP. :saywhat: He needs to grow up a bit, or have someone kick him in the ass. Bungles really need a Munoz/Reggie Williams type to step and take charge of the team. IMHO.
-Kevin
racermike
12-20-07, 03:47 PM
Sounds like Troy Smith is gonna start for the Ravens against my Seahawks.
Me and the rest of my 68,787 friends will be nice and loud on sunday to confuse him on the field. Bad day to be a rookie QB starting your first NFL game.
Don Quixote
12-20-07, 05:43 PM
Troy may surprise you. ;)
Threecast!
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3169075
I hope like heck this doesn't mean Gumball is on all three broadcasts. :saywhat: :yuck:
-Kevin
Andrew Longman
12-27-07, 01:35 AM
"We have taken this extraordinary step because it is in the best interest of our fans," commissioner Roger Goodell said...
Sadly what he really means is they've gone 17 weeks into the season and no one has missed their sorry ass network and their dreams of becoming the next ESPN are going up in smoke. They desperately need to get more people interested in their product, or save what face they have left.
And yes that almost certainly means Gumble will be on all three network confusing the meager audience they will muster.
Insomniac
12-27-07, 11:00 AM
Threecast!
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3169075
I hope like heck this doesn't mean Gumball is on all three broadcasts. :saywhat: :yuck:
-Kevin
They're just broadcasting the NFL Network feed.
Insomniac
12-27-07, 11:05 AM
"We have taken this extraordinary step because it is in the best interest of our fans," commissioner Roger Goodell said...
Sadly what he really means is they've gone 17 weeks into the season and no one has missed their sorry ass network and their dreams of becoming the next ESPN are going up in smoke. They desperately need to get more people interested in their product, or save what face they have left.
And yes that almost certainly means Gumble will be on all three network confusing the meager audience they will muster.
I think the threat of Congress even mentioning they might look at their anti-trust exemption had them think about this move as well. Unfortunately, I'm sure there will be an excessive amount of promotion for the NFL Network as well.
Personally, I like the stand-off. Too bad it won't result in a la carte programming.
Andrew Longman
12-27-07, 12:49 PM
Threecast!
In NY and NE it will be quadcast.
Locally WWOR ch 9 was going to show it over the air anyway since it was a restricted NFL network broadcast, now add WCBS 2 and WNBC 4, all with the same feed. Try to sell ad time for that.
I have seen nothing about why Fox and ESPN aren't broadcasting the game too. I have to assume they were offered it along with the other broadcast partners, but chose to go with their regular programming. I also haven't seen anything about if CBS and NBC are paying more for this game of is it included in their existing contract. If they are paying it seems odd because you would think the NFL would just offer it to the highest bidding partner.
I have seen nothing about why Fox and ESPN aren't broadcasting the game too. I have to assume they were offered it along with the other broadcast partners, but chose to go with their regular programming.
E$PN has a bowl game @ that time, and Fox probably figgered that their share wasn't worth it to pre-empt Cops. Nuttin' like watching Cops on a Sat night with a bottle of Mad Dog. :gomer:
-Kevin
I think the threat of Congress even mentioning they might look at their anti-trust exemption had them think about this move as well. Unfortunately, I'm sure there will be an excessive amount of promotion for the NFL Network as well.
Personally, I like the stand-off. Too bad it won't result in a la carte programming.
Right. Plenty of folks have wanted NFL network but only now has anyone been motivated enough to start rattling the anti-trust sword. Bad luck for the NFL network to end up with a historic game between two of the biggest east coast markets.
E$PN has a bowl game @ that time, and Fox probably figgered that their share wasn't worth it to pre-empt Cops. Nuttin' like watching Cops on a Sat night with a bottle of Mad Dog. :gomer:
-Kevin
Zap yourself with a frayed lamp cord and it's almost like being there. :gomer:
Personally, I like the stand-off. Too bad it won't result in a la carte programming.
FCC Chief Martin proposed a la carte earlier this year, and it went over like a fart in church. He lost face over that and then the other FCC commissioners recently voted against him on pushing ahead with the 70% cable rule. The rule mandates open access to cable pipes once cable reaches 70% penetration in the market. Apparently he fudged the figures in the report that showed 70% had been reached. Not gonna happen. :\ AT&T U-verse is now launching in Cbus, and they offer a la carte programming, so I may need to look into that (despite how much I loathe SBC/AT&T). Of course the idiots announced the service recently, but they haven't managed to make any details about available on their site since it's not launching in all of central Ohiya @ the same time. Morons. :irked:
I, too, am a big fan of the NFL and BTN disputes, and I hope they both die. :mad: If they succeed, there will just be more of them, and we'll end up with 500 channels gathering .1 ratings. :shakehead
-Kevin
Andrew Longman
12-27-07, 02:26 PM
If they succeed, there will just be more of them, and we'll end up with 500 channels gathering .1 ratings. :shakehead
-Kevin
Help me understand why that would be a bad thing.
Almost everything I watch would not even be offered on a a la cart platform. It wouldn't even have been made because there wouldn't be enough certainty it would be picked up.
I don't want to go back anywhere near to when there were only three networks to watch producing programming for the widest possible audience.
In fact, some of the best cable channels IMHO started out much better than they became ones they became popular. (see Speedvision, The Learning Channel, The History Channel, FoodTV, etc.)
Help me understand why that would be a bad thing.
Almost everything I watch would not even be offered on a a la cart platform. It wouldn't even have been made because there wouldn't be enough certainty it would be picked up.
I don't want to go back anywhere near to when there were only three networks to watch producing programming for the widest possible audience.
In fact, some of the best cable channels IMHO started out much better than they became ones they became popular. (see Speedvision, The Learning Channel, The History Channel, FoodTV, etc.)
Ya still gots to pay for the somehow, and that my friend ends up being us. :(
Secondly, there's just too much clutter out in the TV universe, IMHO. I have no use for 80% of the channels that are available, and might watch a channel like BTN for a total of two hours/month. Plus, the argument channels like BTN make about cable cos. making $$$ off selling ads on these channels won't work if they register .1 ratings.
Channels like Speed went downhill once they were acquired by larger media empires, which then made them E$PNesque to shill for their other properties. Not much different than a mom and pop diner that becomes a chain, which then homogenizes the quality.
-Kevin
Andrew Longman
12-27-07, 03:11 PM
I think your case holds up well against the extortion game regional sports networks such as BTN, YES, etc. play. These are big time money grabs and we end up paying for it.
I think the same does not hold true for a lot of other programming. As you said, 80% of what's out there does not interest you. But it is not likely to be same 80% that disinterests me, or your neighbor or my wife. The cable companies are willing to pay for a lot of programming because it helps fill up available capacity and helps them build a bigger subscriber base by appealing to every conceivable niche (which OTA programming cannot).
At the same time, they don't have to pay much for the niche programming and production cost can stay relatively low because, well, its a niche. With lower barriers to entry, more diverse and riskier programming is possible leading to better end products. Many shows would never get a chance otherwise. (Not one of my favs but e.g., see Queer Eye, which started out on Bravo and moved to NBC)
I find it pretty believable that if every subscriber was allowed to pick their own programming to buy there would be less choices, more vanilla variety and higher actual costs because the cost of operating the system would be the same and the actual production values (and talent) would need to be higher.
Insomniac
12-27-07, 03:13 PM
In NY and NE it will be quadcast.
Locally WWOR ch 9 was going to show it over the air anyway since it was a restricted NFL network broadcast, now add WCBS 2 and WNBC 4, all with the same feed. Try to sell ad time for that.
I have seen nothing about why Fox and ESPN aren't broadcasting the game too. I have to assume they were offered it along with the other broadcast partners, but chose to go with their regular programming. I also haven't seen anything about if CBS and NBC are paying more for this game of is it included in their existing contract. If they are paying it seems odd because you would think the NFL would just offer it to the highest bidding partner.
I thought maybe they were offered it, but since they broadcast in 720p (NFL Network, CBS and NBC are all 1080i) they didn't want to convert the feed and have their broadcast run behind the other networks. This of course assumes that they were going to have to pay for it.
I wonder how it all will work though. The NFL Network sets aside commercial time for the cable companies. Will NBC and CBS now get to sell that time? Is the NFL Network now changing their ad rates for this. They had already jumped from $70k to $200k. CBS was charging $700k during the NE-Indy game.
It's all quite interesting. And as Bill Belichick said: "It’ll be like the State of the Union address," he joked. "You can flip to every channel and see it."
cameraman
12-27-07, 03:18 PM
I find it pretty believable that if every subscriber was allowed to pick their own programming to buy there would be less choices, more vanilla variety and higher actual costs because the cost of operating the system would be the same
Got to agree with that but the higher production cost thing probably isn't true, the "quality" tv right now is Howie Mandel and if their competition was reduced they wouldn't even spend that much.:shakehead
Insomniac
12-27-07, 03:19 PM
FCC Chief Martin proposed a la carte earlier this year, and it went over like a fart in church. He lost face over that and then the other FCC commissioners recently voted against him on pushing ahead with the 70% cable rule. The rule mandates open access to cable pipes once cable reaches 70% penetration in the market. Apparently he fudged the figures in the report that showed 70% had been reached. Not gonna happen. :\ AT&T U-verse is now launching in Cbus, and they offer a la carte programming, so I may need to look into that (despite how much I loathe SBC/AT&T). Of course the idiots announced the service recently, but they haven't managed to make any details about available on their site since it's not launching in all of central Ohiya @ the same time. Morons. :irked:
I, too, am a big fan of the NFL and BTN disputes, and I hope they both die. :mad: If they succeed, there will just be more of them, and we'll end up with 500 channels gathering .1 ratings. :shakehead
-Kevin
On the flip side of what you said, the cable companies funded an a la carte study that said it would cost consumers more. The FCC accepted that report. Others would also argue that the cable companies are fudging the 70% numbers so they stay below it. Either way, they are right near it.
In reality, I think a la carte would kill a bunch of channels off first. Which may or may not be good depending on how you look at it. I know for me, I'd be shocked if the dozen or so channels I'd want year round would cost more than $50/mo.
Insomniac
12-27-07, 03:24 PM
I think your case holds up well against the extortion game regional sports networks such as BTN, YES, etc. play. These are big time money grabs and we end up paying for it.
I think the same does not hold true for a lot of other programming. As you said, 80% of what's out there does not interest you. But it is not likely to be same 80% that disinterests me, or your neighbor or my wife.
So shouldn't that work the same way for the sports networks? Shouldn't others subsidize those channels for sports lovers? The only method to the madness is what will make the cable/satellite company the most money. It has nothing to do with the consumer, except what we would be willing to pay/buy.
cameraman
12-27-07, 04:06 PM
I know for me, I'd be shocked if the dozen or so channels I'd want year round would cost more than $50/mo.I thought the porn channels cost more than that...
Insomniac
12-27-07, 04:37 PM
I thought the porn channels cost more than that...
The Internet is way less than $50/month. :p
Insomniac
12-30-07, 11:23 AM
How many people watched the game last night? Was there a lot of demand to see it from the people on here? It was a good game. They both played hard to the end.
For me, it had a play-off feel to it in the sense that if the Patriots lost, something was over. Obviously a championship trumps 16-0 but it was cool to see. And now Brady has the rings and the stats. So for now, Brady > Manning again.
How many people watched the game last night? Was there a lot of demand to see it from the people on here? It was a good game. They both played hard to the end.
For me, it had a play-off feel to it in the sense that if the Patriots lost, something was over. Obviously a championship trumps 16-0 but it was cool to see. And now Brady has the rings and the stats. So for now, Brady > Manning again.
Yeah, I watched it. Rooted like hell for the Gints. Goodell can kiss my ass about NFLN. :thumdown: Nice staged 'interview' before the game. :irked:
-Kevin
jcollins28
12-30-07, 12:57 PM
Go Cowboys. Pats can kiss my @$$.
BTW how drunk is Robert Kraft?
He was drunk before the game, during the game, at least Jerry Jones can hold his liquor. Kraft = amateur
And now Brady has the rings and the stats. So for now, Brady > Manning again.
Yea, and Emmitt > Barry. :laugh:
TravelGal
12-30-07, 02:48 PM
We watched it. TravelGuy is a diehard Giants fan. Agree that it was one of the best, no THE best, game I've seen all season. You knew it really meant something.
For a brief moment I even thought the Giants would win. Then the REAL Eli Manning showed up and we were doomed.
Insomniac
12-30-07, 04:11 PM
Go Cowboys. Pats can kiss my @$$.
BTW how drunk is Robert Kraft?
He was drunk before the game, during the game, at least Jerry Jones can hold his liquor. Kraft = amateur
Robert Kraft always sounds/talks like that.
Insomniac
12-30-07, 04:14 PM
Yea, and Emmitt > Barry. :laugh:
Manning/Brady is a more fair comparison than Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. What can you say that Manning does better than Brady? Objectively, Brady has more rings and the single season stats now. Subjectively, I think he's better in the pocket than Manning. Manning throws a better ball.
Emmitt has the rings and stats too.
Andrew Longman
12-30-07, 04:40 PM
Brady doesn't annoy me with all those hand signals and audibles that Payton does.
Brady seems much calmer and cooler and I think it helps keep his mates more focused. Montana did that too.
Brady seems more accurate and throws a pretty ball, though Peyton is not slouch.
Peyton does too many commercial, though a few lately have been pretty funny.
Emmitt > Sanders? No way. Only thing Emmitt had over Barry was a bigger ego.
Andrew Longman
12-30-07, 04:41 PM
Robert Kraft always sounds/talks like that.
So he's always drunk? He's rich. I guess he's entitled.
Emmitt > Sanders? No way. Only thing Emmitt had over Barry was a bigger ego.
Don't tell a Dallasite that. Or you be gettin' ready for a lynchin'
So he's always drunk? He's rich. I guess he's entitled.
If either of us could pull it off we would be too :D
Emmitt > Sanders? No way. Only thing Emmitt had over Barry was a bigger ego.
Well that and the and the fact that E played for a team that was loaded. Barry only played on a couple of even respectable Lions teams. Only one playoff victory during the 90s, and they got destroyed in the NFC Championship game back in '92 ('91 season).
-Kevin
Andrew Longman
12-30-07, 05:21 PM
Don't tell a Dallasite that. Or you be gettin' ready for a lynchin'
Oh I forgot, I heard Emmett did do pretty well on Dancing With the Stars. But a goofy girly foreign race driver won that this year. :D
Oh I forgot, I heard Emmett did do pretty well on Dancing With the Stars. But a goofy girly foreign race driver won that this year. :D
Don't be dissin' DWTS to Ank....he's secretly hoping Tiki does it next. Prolly you, too. :gomer: ;)
-Kevin
TKGAngel
12-30-07, 05:29 PM
Don't be dissin' DWTS to Ank....he's secretly hoping Tiki does it next. Prolly you, too. :gomer: ;)
-Kevin
Hey, Tiki just did Project Runway. Based on his demeanor on that show, I can't see him doing DWTS. The clothes and concept would be way too flamboyant for him. Not to mention he has a gig on the Today show, which is on a competing network.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.