NFL Discussion - 2013 Season
- Thread starter tomalak301
- Start date
- Status
#itsalwayssunnyinphiladelphia? 
Thanks for the link 
Can someone put the Redskins out of their misery? 
At least the Broncos won.
At least the Broncos won.
I assume there are no more doubts regarding the Patriots and their deal with Satan...
Let's go Patriots!
Gronk died for Billy Five-Aces' sins.
After another 400 yd 4 TD performance from Peyton Manning (this time in the cold), it's starting to look like the reason Peyton loses games isn't because A) they're a playoff game, B) they're a cold weather game, or C) they're against the Patriots. It's starting to look more like Peyton loses games when the defense and special teams fail to execute, requiring perfect play from the QB position, especially after a week of the media taking him out of the game. That's still a huge concern and something that he should try and rectify, but yesterday proves he's more than capable of winning a game in a cold weather environment (which he's done before), and he's won the Super Bowl before, and he's beaten the Patriots before.
Think about his two losses this season: a loss to the Colts after an intense week of interviews and media focus on Peyton's return to Indianapolis, up to and including a pre-game ceremony welcoming Peyton back to Indy for the farewell he never got. Peyton had to give numerous interviews before the game, not to mention the whole Jim Irsay controversy. Even still, they had a shot to win.
Then the loss to the Patriots, when the media was all about Manning/Brady XIV (seriously? Worst name for a "bowl" ever) and again with the pre-game hype about Manning being unable to win in the cold and against Brady. Then the Broncos go up 24-0, and immediately go into "protect the lead, run the ball" mode. When Peyton had to make throws, he did. Again, they had a shot to win, led by a game tying 4th quarter Manning passing drive, but defense and special teams made huge errors. Broncos probably win the rematch.
So if the Broncos are going to miss the Super Bowl this year, it won't be because Peyton can't play in the cold or win a playoff game or beat Brady, it will be because the defense and special teams failed to do their job. Should be an interesting stretch the rest of the way to see how that team handles the pressure.
Think about his two losses this season: a loss to the Colts after an intense week of interviews and media focus on Peyton's return to Indianapolis, up to and including a pre-game ceremony welcoming Peyton back to Indy for the farewell he never got. Peyton had to give numerous interviews before the game, not to mention the whole Jim Irsay controversy. Even still, they had a shot to win.
Then the loss to the Patriots, when the media was all about Manning/Brady XIV (seriously? Worst name for a "bowl" ever) and again with the pre-game hype about Manning being unable to win in the cold and against Brady. Then the Broncos go up 24-0, and immediately go into "protect the lead, run the ball" mode. When Peyton had to make throws, he did. Again, they had a shot to win, led by a game tying 4th quarter Manning passing drive, but defense and special teams made huge errors. Broncos probably win the rematch.
So if the Broncos are going to miss the Super Bowl this year, it won't be because Peyton can't play in the cold or win a playoff game or beat Brady, it will be because the defense and special teams failed to do their job. Should be an interesting stretch the rest of the way to see how that team handles the pressure.
Some crazy games this week: The conditions in Philly, the comeback by New England and the bizarre finish to the Vikes/Raven game all made for some entertaining football.
The Vikings game was kind of dull until those last two minutes (and 5 seconds), then the teams combined for 36 points. We had a 10 number board going at the bar and the winning number kept changing. Can't remember when (if ever) I've seen 5 touchdowns scored that quickly.
Tough day for the Vikes. They lost a screwy game, they're eliminated from the playoffs and Adrian Peterson was injured.
The Packers finally won without Aaron Rogers. Granted, they just squeaked past Atlanta, but their playoff hopes are alive. I figured if they lost Rogers would be shut down for the season. Now there's still a sliver of a chance. Go Pack!!
The Vikings game was kind of dull until those last two minutes (and 5 seconds), then the teams combined for 36 points. We had a 10 number board going at the bar and the winning number kept changing. Can't remember when (if ever) I've seen 5 touchdowns scored that quickly.
Tough day for the Vikes. They lost a screwy game, they're eliminated from the playoffs and Adrian Peterson was injured.
The Packers finally won without Aaron Rogers. Granted, they just squeaked past Atlanta, but their playoff hopes are alive. I figured if they lost Rogers would be shut down for the season. Now there's still a sliver of a chance. Go Pack!!
The five lead-changing touchdowns in 2:30 is an NFL record, I believe.
On the plus side, Billy Cundiff came through for the Patriots again
Maybe the next team he kicks for will make him inactive when they face the Pats.
The Packers only still have a real chance because the Lions can't seem to close the deal. I think it's time to consider a new coach.
Schwartz has done a great job bringing them back from that 0-16 disaster, but they seem to have plateaued, continue to be undisciplined and can't seem to take that next step. A new, veteran coach needs to be brought in to finish the job he started.
Monte Kiffin. Good hire Jerry. I believe the Cowboys defense is in the running for the third worst in NFL history. If it wasn't for Romo earning his money this year they would have been out of the race completely. An Eagles conference win is becoming inevitable.
I am not a fan of Romo, and I remember thinking the contract he signed was a big mistake, but you're absolutely correct. He's earning his pay this year. 98.3 QBR, 27:7 TD:INT, 3200 yds.
Compare that to the other guy who signed a big contract, Joe Flacco: 77.0 QBR, 18:17 TD:INT, and also with 3200 yds.
I disagreed with both contracts, but understood why they were made. You gotta pay that guy what he thinks he's worth, because the odds of finding someone better for less are non-existent in the NFL right now. Your options are going to the draft and getting a rookie, or sticking with the veteran who is merely "serviceable". There's only a handful of Rodgers/Peyton/Brady/Brees in the league, everyone else is a step below.
The NFL flexed the Chicago@Philly game into Sunday night for Week 16.
There's actually at least one scenario (pending the outcome of the other Week 15 and Week 16 games) by which it's already decided going into that game that the game is meaningless from a playoff perspective for Philly*, that they're out of wildcard contention, and that their only path into the playoffs is beating Dallas in Week 17 to win the NFC East.
So the NFL's move to put that game in primetime could potentially blow up in their face, if Philly is playing for nothing, and plays conservative with its starters to protect them from injury, looking ahead to the actually meaningful game against Dallas the following week.
I actually can't remember any previous years in which a team played a meaningless game in Week 16, before a meaningful game in Week 17, but I'm sure it's happened.
* This assumes that they don't care much whether they're the #3 or #4 seed…..which most teams don't seem to care much about, and which usually doesn't affect how many home games you have, though I guess the 2006 AFC playoffs would be one exception.
There's actually at least one scenario (pending the outcome of the other Week 15 and Week 16 games) by which it's already decided going into that game that the game is meaningless from a playoff perspective for Philly*, that they're out of wildcard contention, and that their only path into the playoffs is beating Dallas in Week 17 to win the NFC East.
So the NFL's move to put that game in primetime could potentially blow up in their face, if Philly is playing for nothing, and plays conservative with its starters to protect them from injury, looking ahead to the actually meaningful game against Dallas the following week.
I actually can't remember any previous years in which a team played a meaningless game in Week 16, before a meaningful game in Week 17, but I'm sure it's happened.
* This assumes that they don't care much whether they're the #3 or #4 seed…..which most teams don't seem to care much about, and which usually doesn't affect how many home games you have, though I guess the 2006 AFC playoffs would be one exception.
- Status
Similar threads
