Super Bowl LI

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:56 pm

Remus West wrote: Romo will probably be given say in where he ends up as well so that pretty much assures you he won't end up behind a paper offensive line.

You wouldn't be saying that if our best player wasn't dead.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:10 pm

For years I have watched the Lions repeatedly find ways to lose games. It is very bizarre to have a season where pretty much in every victory, they have managed to find a way to come from behind to win. Today was no exception. As a life long Lions fan, I am still waiting for the inevitable collapse that crushes all hope but for now at least, it's a happy thanksgiving in the D. Oh and once again, thank you so very much for Matt Pater, Denver.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:51 pm

Jeff V wrote:
Rip wrote:Romo to the Bears in 3....2....1....
Not unless he goes for a bargain price.

The Bears are in such miserable shape right now that even PEDs can't even help them win. This week, the second starter in as many weeks was suspended. That they seemed content with the performance of a career backup earlier this year, I'll expect the Bears to go cheap at QB (or maybe draft one). If they were a big time QB away from contention -- then maybe an interest in Romo. Given their utter lack of receivers, hiring an expensive QB would be like giving a diamond ring to someone with no fingers.

A saucer and a cup of coffee to a one armed man...

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:51 pm

Redskins/Cowboys was an electric game.

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:00 pm

pr0ner wrote:Redskins/Cowboys was an electric game.

I never really felt like the 'Skins were actually in it. There were a few glimmers, but trading TD for FG never really works out well. Cousins lit it up again though - pay the man, Danny!

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:31 am

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:31 pm

That Pats/Jets game took years off my life. Nice win to keep pace with Miami. Ugh.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sun Nov 27, 2016 10:25 pm

Good thing Bellamy realized the team is supposed to lose out and saved us from an unlikely victory.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 11:04 am

Jay Cutler Has Earned An Absurd Amount Of Money Per Game With The Chicago Bears

Through eight seasons, including the playoffs, Cutler's win-loss record is 52-52. During that time, the Bears have paid him $103.8 million. That's almost $1 million per game – $998,077 to be exact. That's quite a bit of money to be paying a guy with just one career playoff win.

Of course, football is a team sport, and Cutler has had his moments. He's the franchise leader in wins, career passing touchdowns, yards, and game-winning drives.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 11:27 am

stessier wrote:That Pats/Jets game took years off my life. Nice win to keep pace with Miami. Ugh.

Fortunately I just tuned in for the (good) ending.

Also enjoyed seeing San Francisco's record along with the score in their game yesterday. Great move getting rid of Harbaugh, eh?

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 2:46 pm

Gronkowski is having surgery for a herniated disk and will be out for 2 months. If anyone can survive a loss like that, it's the Pats, but man that's gotta hurt their chances in the playoffs.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 3:00 pm

Captain Caveman wrote:Gronkowski is having surgery for a herniated disk and will be out for 2 months. If anyone can survive a loss like that, it's the Pats, but man that's gotta hurt their chances in the playoffs.

Ugh. Hopefully he'll be back by the AFC Championship game (if they make it that far), but even that seems aggressive.

At the same time, I can't complain too much - Gronk's injury risks were known at the time of the draft, and they're a big part of the reason why he was available for the Patriots to draft. Also Bennett's been great this season, so that helps somewhat.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:10 pm

Cutler done

Jay Cutler's 2016 season is now officially over, and it seems very likely that his career with the Bears is over as well.

On Thursday the team announced Cutler would miss the remainder of the year and undergo surgery on a torn labrum, which will result in him being placed on injured reserve.
...
There's a very good chance that Cutler is no longer with the Bears next year. The dead money on his contract drops from $19 million -- which made him essentially uncuttable coming into the year -- to $2 million, which makes him imminently cuttable, especially when his cap hit is $16 million.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:17 pm

So when the Bears lose this Sunday, they will be in the drivers seat for the #2 pick. Any chance of getting a good player next near?

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:29 pm

Nope.

It's entirely possible that Cutler remains Chicago's the best available option in 2017, even at a pretty high price, given what's considered a weak QB class in the draft. There could be some big names in free agency, like Kirk Cousins, but it's not guaranteed.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 11:42 pm

Third surgery on the back for a herniated disc? That can't be good. Has anyone come back from that? That is really rolling the dice with back surgeries like that.

I love Gronk (I use the fact that he's a Buffalo native to overrule his Patriotsness and propensity to commit offensive pass interference all the time).

As much as I hate that goddamn team, I wish Gronk well in his recovery.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 11:45 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Nope.

It's entirely possible that Cutler remains Chicago's the best available option in 2017, even at a pretty high price, given what's considered a weak QB class in the draft. There could be some big names in free agency, like Kirk Cousins, but it's not guaranteed.

Saw a report that the Redskins already plan on giving Cousins the franchise tag again if they can't re-sign him.

Xmann · Post by **Xmann** » Fri Dec 02, 2016 3:05 am

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:38 pm

Brady sets the wins record against a sompletely over matched Rams team. Fortunately, the Rams locked up Fischer for 2 more years over the summer (though wisely only announced today) so they can see this level of competence for some time to come!

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Sun Dec 04, 2016 8:52 pm

It continues to amaze me that Jeff Fisher is still an NFL head coach. When was the last time one of his teams was anything better than mediocre?

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:28 pm

I have been a fan of Matt Stafford since he became a Lion. He had shown flashes of potential but this year its seems like he has taken a big leap forward. Today he out Brees'd Brees with a 341 yd, 2 TD performance. Kudo to the Lions D as well who shut down Brees, intercepting him 3 times. The D for Detroit has really stepped up as well. They have held their last 6 opponents to 19 pts or less. The Lions are now 8-4 and looking like a good football team. They have a real test coming up as their last three games are against the Giants and Cowboys on the road, and then Green Bay at home. First they have to deal with the Bears at home, who already beat Detroit in Chicago earlier. Preseason I did not think the Lions would be a playoff team, especially with the loss of Megatron but after a shaky start with a bunch of new receivers, Detroit has seemingly figured it out. Being a true Lions fan I am still waiting for the wheels to come off the cart but its starting to look like that may not happen. It sure is strange to be in a playoff race in December.

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 2:43 am

Kap, 1 completion 4 yards, for the entire game. HOF here he comes!

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:47 am

rshetts2 wrote:He had shown flashes of potential but this year its seems like he has taken a big leap forward.

We can agree on that even if we put him at different starting points.

Preseason I did not think the Lions would be a playoff team, especially with the loss of Megatron but after a shaky start with a bunch of new receivers, Detroit has seemingly figured it out. Being a true Lions fan I am still waiting for the wheels to come off the cart but its starting to look like that may not happen. It sure is strange to be in a playoff race in December.

They made me watch this year, and I didn't think I would. I figured this would be the third year in a row I claimed my Sundays back after week two. OtOH, being a not so true Lions fan, I don't think it takes the wheels coming off the cart. If Green Bay wins out and we go .500, the dream of home field advantage goes away, doesn't it? And that's the real dream, not just to make the playoffs (even if that's way better than I figured they'd do) but win the division and then win a home playoff game.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 12:20 pm

LordMortis wrote:
rshetts2 wrote:He had shown flashes of potential but this year its seems like he has taken a big leap forward.
We can agree on that even if we put him at different starting points.

Preseason I did not think the Lions would be a playoff team, especially with the loss of Megatron but after a shaky start with a bunch of new receivers, Detroit has seemingly figured it out. Being a true Lions fan I am still waiting for the wheels to come off the cart but its starting to look like that may not happen. It sure is strange to be in a playoff race in December.
They made me watch this year, and I didn't think I would. I figured this would be the third year in a row I claimed my Sundays back after week two. OtOH, being a not so true Lions fan, I don't think it takes the wheels coming off the cart. If Green Bay wins out and we go .500, the dream of home field advantage goes away, doesn't it? And that's the real dream, not just to make the playoffs (even if that's way better than I figured they'd do) but win the division and then win a home playoff game.

If Detroit wants to take that next step forward, beating GB at home in the final game is a great way to do it. I dont know if they can beat the Cowboys or the Giants on the road, I certainly dont count on it but those two games become moot if they take care of business at home. They are facing the toughest final 4 games of anyone in their division. We will get to see exactly what kind of team they are down this stretch.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 12:54 pm

I hated myself after reading this - SI article on how four players deal with Mondays (the day of pain).

gameoverman · Post by **gameoverman** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 5:51 pm

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:It continues to amaze me that Jeff Fisher is still an NFL head coach. When was the last time one of his teams was anything better than mediocre?

I assume the Rams owner promised the other owners he has what it takes to make an LA team successful. He'd look like an idiot if he has to clean house the first year he's here. So he justs continues on this path, playing it off as if this disaster is all just part of the process. "Don't worry, I know what I'm doing" something like that.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 9:55 pm

Why the NFL’s TV ratings crashed in 2016. And how they might rebound

Theories abound about the NFL’s ratings decline. And critics have pounced. Everyone with a grievance against the league can now project their issues about what is to blame.

The quality of play stinks (subjective). Quarterbacks can’t throw (they can). Games are too long (maybe). Referees are blind (more than before?). Too many penalties (flags have increased). Players protest too much (not quantifiable). Concussions are brutal (yeah they are). The hypocritical commissioner doesn’t care about domestic violence (plenty of op-eds on that subject). Too few star players (maybe). The market is over-saturated with a blizzard of games, such as Thursday night (maybe).

For me the games are way too long with way too many interruptions between the action. I don't have 3 hours to hang out in front of a TV anymore. Too many other things I would rather or have to do.

xenocide · Post by **xenocide** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:00 am

Moliere wrote:For me the games are way too long with way too many interruptions between the action. I don't have 3 hours to hang out in front of a TV anymore. Too many other things I would rather or have to do.

This is the main problem for me as well. I had DirecTv and a DVR for a long time (no sunday ticket, just regular games). I no longer have any cable or DVR. Live games are almost unwatchable. Without the ability to fast forward commercials and all the other BS non game stuff it is miserable. I still watch some but way less than I used to. I will 1/2 watch and do something else at the same time, or just turn in to close games towards the end.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 8:43 am

What a bunch of complainers.

The games aren't any longer, there aren't more commercials or more breaks (else the games would be longer), refs aren't worse.

We're just crankier and older.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:39 am

If you think the pacing due to commercial breaks is bad on TV, go see a game live. The breaks in the flow of the game are painfully long, when there's nothing else to fill that time.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:39 am

The games might not be longer, but I have more entertainment options than I did 20 years ago and I have other commitments that keep me from having 3 hour blocks of time to sit in front of the TV.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:25 am

rshetts2 wrote:If you think the pacing due to commercial breaks is bad on TV, go see a game live. The breaks in the flow of the game are painfully long, when there's nothing else to fill that time.

I used to think that, but I've been to three live games this year, and it was significantly less noticeable to me than years past. I suppose if I was sitting by myself, I would notice it, but when watching the game live with friends, it gives you a chance to talk about the game and stuff. Or laugh about dildos that are being thrown on the field right in front of you.

Moliere wrote:The games might not be longer, but I have more entertainment options than I did 20 years ago and I have other commitments that keep me from having 3 hour blocks of time to sit in front of the TV.

I certainly don't disagree with you on that, since that's your subjective opinion. But in most respects, the thing that changed is you, not the NFL. Which is totally fine. As the biggest block of NFL fans in the history of the game get older, it makes it more likely for life to pull you away or for your interest to slip.

If I had to guess at the NFL's actual problem (and the thing that worries me), it's that they aren't capturing new fans at the rates they need.

For me, it's still the most significant entertainment in my week during the season. I watch the Thursday game, two games at 1 PM, two games at 4 PM, the Sunday Night and Monday Night games. I don't tire of it. I wish it was officiated better. I wish there were less injuries, but I still love watching.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:28 am

RunningMn9 wrote:What a bunch of complainers.

The games aren't any longer, there aren't more commercials or more breaks (else the games would be longer), refs aren't worse.

We're just crankier and older.

The games actually are longer...7 minutes I believe was in the article I saw.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:10 am

stessier wrote:The games actually are longer...7 minutes I believe was in the article I saw.

7 whole minutes?!?!?

All I know is that the 1 PM games have always wrapped up right around 4 PM unless there was overtime. The 1 PM games are still wrapping up right around 4 PM unless there is overtime. The notion that somehow NFL games have become "too" long is false in an objective sense.

In a subjective sense, of course they can be "too" long. But that ratio is more based on how the individual has changed than it is about the games being appreciable longer.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:29 am

This article explains the issues with football and actual game time.
http://qz.com/150577/an-average-nfl-gam ... s-of-play/

The bottom line: The football is actually in play around 11 minutes per game. The average play is 4 seconds, then comes the milling around etc. and then there are the time outs and tv time outs. They actually found that there is more time wrapped up in replays than there is in actual time spent moving the football. This is all wrapped around a package of up to 100 commercials. Basically football is a delivery vehicle for commercials.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:19 pm

Right, but that's been true forever, there's nothing new there. It's not like the game clock used to be 6 days and we were getting 78 minutes of actual football plays in yesteryear. For my entire adult life (20+ years), football games have taken around 3 hours to complete, including now.

And I would guess that there are more actual plays in a game today than there were in 1984.

xenocide · Post by **xenocide** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:30 pm

RunningMn9 wrote: But in most respects, the thing that changed is you, not the NFL.

You're right. For me it's going from a recorded (or at least paused for an hour or so) game on a DVR to live games that got me. I notice it now more than before.

rshetts2 · Post by **rshetts2** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:55 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Right, but that's been true forever, there's nothing new there. It's not like the game clock used to be 6 days and we were getting 78 minutes of actual football plays in yesteryear. For my entire adult life (20+ years), football games have taken around 3 hours to complete, including now.

And I would guess that there are more actual plays in a game today than there were in 1984.

Not saying anything is different just posted it because it breaks down the actual time frame for football and its a bit surprising how little actual football there is in a football game. Its an interesting perspective. It also shows why watching a game live vs TV seems stretched out. Without all the filler commentary and stuff TV provides, its a completely different game experience.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:05 pm

rshetts2 wrote:Not saying anything is different just posted it because it breaks down the actual time frame for football and its a bit surprising how little actual football there is in a football game.

I consider a lot of things "football" that doesn't occur between the snap and whistle. When I coached Midget football, I was shocked at how fast games ended, because the actual play was a respite between the real work, which was calling the game and getting kids where they needed to be, doing what they needed to do. In an NFL game, there is an awful lot going on before the snap and after the whistle, and I am intrigued by all of it. TV time outs at games aren't exciting, but that's when you talk to other humans.

At home, while watching on TV, I toggle between two games using DirecTV's Double Play feature and so I never watch commercials.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 2:53 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:We're just crankier and older.

And I don't think we are being replaced by younger fans. They have other toys and they see all of the negative news about rapes and beatings and concussions and their parents are concerned about that news as well. And have other distractions also isn't driving them to fantasy football, which I think was cause for a big spike for a long time. What are the Fantasy Football participation levels comparatively?

7 whole minutes?!?!?

That's 7 more minutes of not playing when you are watching TV. It's 7 more minutes to get distracted by something else. In my case, it's 7 minutes more likely that I'm going to nap while watching.

Since losing TiVo on my real TV and I started watching live TV again, it seems like there are a lot more commercials for everything per hour and as a result of no TiVo and lots of commercials, I watch almost no TV. Sports ends up the exception, as sports are only really worth watching live for me. However, I do find myself doing other things during commercials and then not coming back to the games as quickly.

I'd say it's the attention problem of the modern age, but it's sort of the opposite. As I get older I don't want the stop and start and stop and start that frequent commercials provide.