NFL Week 4 Thread

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

If Coughlin doesn't find a way to stop the Eagles next Sunday, he's probably not going to make it to week 6.

(looking at the schedule, it's a short week for them, so he probably gets one more shot in the Thursday night game, but with only two games over the following month, they would make the change).

No way Coughlin gets canned

[cuervo72]

That was all sorts of pathetic, Flynn.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Yay, called DirecTV and can actually see the Eagles game now (or, boo?)

Also, lol@WAS punting unit.

what did they say? Screen is all black for me.

[cuervo72]

They sent out a signal to my box and it unlocked both that and the DAL/SD game. I'd also seen the blackout message earlier for PIT/MIN, but thought nothing of it when I realized that game had already finished. I don't know why we weren't getting it before (our box has had issues getting the guide for a while, but that is probably unrelated as I'd not had any issues prior to this week).

Oddly, Jets/Titans was coming in fine. I don't know if PIT was affected because we were being shown the BAL game, and DAL/PHI because of WAS?

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by frnk55

Goin all the way baby!

With the way the division is going, they will be in the mix for the divisional title.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Lathum

No way Coughlin gets canned

This. I just don't see a two-time Super Bowl winner not getting to finish out the season. Who would they put in charge? Gilbride?

[BillJasper]

Locker just took a brutal hit and they're bringing out the cart. Should've been a flag.

[RedKingGold]

Looks like a dislocated hip for Locker.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Looks like a dislocated hip for Locker.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking as well.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

This. I just don't see a two-time Super Bowl winner not getting to finish out the season. Who would they put in charge? Gilbride?

You could throw the blame on the front office for letting the offensive line get to this point. But this team is a mess. Not like Jaguar mess, where it's systemic and change would be simply for the sake of change. A team that should be competitive isn't even remotely competitive, and there's internal turmoil. Something has to be done.

What's the point of letting the oldest head coach in the NFL finish a season unless you're admitting the season is over? And that's not a given with poor competition. If Dallas were 4-0 and beating teams by 30, maybe. A blowout next week and you lose the team entirely. Do you risk that carrying over into 2014?

[rowech]

At some point, I hope the Bengals coaches will realize that throwing three to four yard patterns is not the same as running the ball and that a team has to commit to running the ball even if its not going unbelievably well.

Running 64 plays in a 17-6 game and only running it 16 times is unacceptable.

Having your captain say half your team ran the wrong play on 4th and 1 isn't all that good either.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

This. I just don't see a two-time Super Bowl winner not getting to finish out the season. Who would they put in charge? Gilbride?

Dont know, but the ownership is a very loyal group that will give Coughlin a chance to walk away. No way they embarrass the guy who has guided them through maybe the most successful period in team history.

[Danny]

It would be pretty bad for the Redskins to lose to a Raiders team without Pryor, McFadden and Reece.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

definite wow there-you knew they would be better with Andy Reid and Alex Smith, but this much better?

KC had SIX pro bowlers last year on a 2-14 team. It was very clear that KC could get turned around in a hurry if they just had someone who knew how to lead a NFL team. Sure, 4-0 is a bit surprising, but no one should be surprised that they were able to turn around this team in short order. They're honestly the least surprising surprise team.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

You could throw the blame on the front office for letting the offensive line get to this point. But this team is a mess. Not like Jaguar mess, where it's systemic and change would be simply for the sake of change. A team that should be competitive isn't even remotely competitive, and there's internal turmoil. Something has to be done.

What's the point of letting the oldest head coach in the NFL finish a season unless you're admitting the season is over? And that's not a given with poor competition. If Dallas were 4-0 and beating teams by 30, maybe. A blowout next week and you lose the team entirely. Do you risk that carrying over into 2014?

The O-line lost their best player to retirement and are down 2 more starter to injury. No one could have predicted Wilson would be so bad and Eli depends on play action to be successful.

I would be shocked if you find a Giants fan who wants Coughlin fired and it will never happen this season, it just isn't the "Giants way."

TBH with where Coughlin took the Giants the last 8 years I would rather go 0-16 and see him be treated with class then treated the way the Phillies did Charlie Manual.

[Danny]

Has a team ever had 3 1000 yard receivers before? Denver seems a shoe in as long as Thomas, Decker and Welker stay healthy

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

You could throw the blame on the front office for letting the offensive line get to this point. But this team is a mess. Not like Jaguar mess, where it's systemic and change would be simply for the sake of change. A team that should be competitive isn't even remotely competitive, and there's internal turmoil. Something has to be done.

What's the point of letting the oldest head coach in the NFL finish a season unless you're admitting the season is over? And that's not a given with poor competition. If Dallas were 4-0 and beating teams by 30, maybe. A blowout next week and you lose the team entirely. Do you risk that carrying over into 2014?

I'm just not sure I see the point because you'll be running the same schemes and you'll still have the same poor talent on the offensive line. Plus, in season changes rarely change a teams fortune.

[chadritt]

Originally Posted by Danny

Has a team ever had 3 1000 yard receivers before? Denver seems a shoe in as long as Thomas, Decker and Welker stay healthy

Its happened 4 times before, 5 if you include a tight end.

2008 Arizona Cardinals
2004 Indianapolis Colts with Manning
1995 Atlanta Falcons
1989 Washington Redskins
1980 San Diego Chargers

[bob]

Whatever happened to the post-week 1 over reaction of "the Eagles are gonna win the Super Bowl?"

[SnowMan]

Originally Posted by Danny

Has a team ever had 3 1000 yard receivers before? Denver seems a shoe in as long as Thomas, Decker and Welker stay healthy

I think the Rams did with Bruce, Holt, and Faulk.

[Danny]

Has a team ever had 4? Its unlikely, but Julius Thomas isnt too far off the pace so far.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by bob

Whatever happened to the post-week 1 over reaction of "the Eagles are gonna win the Super Bowl?"

I thought they looked impressive but I said defensive coordinators would figure it out.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I thought they looked impressive but I said defensive coordinators would figure it out.

The bigger issue is their defense

[Matthean]

At the end of the day it is still about execution, and the Eagles are being executed.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

What are the thoughts on protecting players with the ball?

Thought the spear at the end of the Bears game was a bad one. I'm not sure why that wasn't a penalty - even an ejection under the rules.

Then you have that situation where a defensive player is wrestling with a big receiver, stops him and finally throws him to the ground. Thought it looked worse than it was, but the whistle had blown so the call may have been a good one. Problem is, it's a result-changing 15 yards for Seattle. Add that to the questionable punt coverage penalty and I'm sure there will be plenty of complaints this week from Houston.

Going back to last week, what about a penalty on Cutler during his scramble when he knocked the defensive player out? The rules should also apply to offensive players who make life miserable for those trying to tackle them.

I'd like to see better protection for players. Still some kinks to work out, but the change is necessary.

Originally Posted by miami_fan

As someone who has been cast as anti player safety, this is my number one complaint. It was amazing how "cute" everyone made the Cutler situation out to me but there would have been calls for suspension if the roles were reversed. Someone on the board said it best during one of the many discussions on the topic. The league is not concerned with player safety, it is concerned with the safety of certain players.

This type of thing is what is making the game more and more unwatchable for me, over the last 5 seasons. I find myself looking for a flag and/or something that went wrong but didn't get noticed until we see 300 replays.

Well, that and the Steelers slow death march.

[TroyF]

Broncos had a horrible start on defense. A KO return for a TD and a three and out exhausted them and they gave up some yards and points.

Then, the second half break kicks in and just like they've done all year, it was slaughter time.

Long, long season, but this is as dominant of an offense as I've ever seen. And if Von Miller comes back at his old level? Good lord this is going to be a dominant team.

[cuervo72]

It is dumb that the announcers have to keep saying "Helu Junior." I don't care about his lineage, just his last name. Thanks Ob-I mean, RG3.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by bob

Whatever happened to the post-week 1 over reaction of "the Eagles are gonna win the Super Bowl?"

Turns out it was an overreaction.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Radii

Turns out it was an overreaction.

I could have told everyone that.

[Matthean]

I'm just curious to see how this Denver offense does once it gets cold. It's not like it is going to be warm and fuzzy inside of the Super Bowl.

[Racer]

Is there an NFL rule on TV blowouts? My local station was showing Philadelphia@Denver but switched to Dallas@San Diego. I guess I always thought a network had to stick with whatever game it chose to broadcast.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I could have told everyone that.

I really believe the Eagles have a dominant offense. In the first three games, Vick left TD after TD on the field with poor passes down the field and his usual turnovers.

Even today, they ran the ball better on Denver than anyone has all year and had open chances down the field. I really believe this offense will succeed in the NFL and that they will start throwing up 30 a game by the end of the year. An offseason to fix the QB problem and get more types of players like Kelly wants and I think they will be strong.

I guess what I'm saying is there was an overreaction and now I think the over reaction is sliding the other way. I fully expect them to be among the top 5 offenses by next year.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Racer

Is there an NFL rule on TV blowouts? My local station was showing Philadelphia@Denver but switched to Dallas@San Diego. I guess I always thought a network had to stick with whatever game it chose to broadcast.

I'm not sure what the official rules are, but I believe if its your local team then you're in til the bitter end, but if its not then there is some leeway.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Racer

Is there an NFL rule on TV blowouts? My local station was showing Philadelphia@Denver but switched to Dallas@San Diego. I guess I always thought a network had to stick with whatever game it chose to broadcast.

As long as it isn't the home market, they can do what they want. They cannot change the game in the home market under any circumstance.

[cuervo72]

Sure, the offense itself isn't a problem.with the Eagles though it won't be enough to get past a) their defense and b) Vick's decision-making.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Sure, the offense itself isn't a problem.with the Eagles though it won't be enough to get past a) their defense and b) Vick's decision-making.

Exactly.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Danny

It would be pretty bad for the Redskins to lose to a Raiders team without Pryor, McFadden and Reece.

Is it bad that I keep thinking Breaking Bad and the actor who has cerebral palsy?

Their quarterback is Terrelle Pryor....

"no, not Pryor any more, it's FLYNN."

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

This type of thing is what is making the game more and more unwatchable for me, over the last 5 seasons. I find myself looking for a flag and/or something that went wrong but didn't get noticed until we see 300 replays.

Well, that and the Steelers slow death march.

Now that I'm aware that there are serious after-effects from concussions, possibly including strong suicidal thoughts and an inability to concentrate years later, I have a harder time seeing someone lead with his head or get knocked silly. I can understand someone making choices that will lead to early arthritis or other aches and pains. You play contact sports, you know that cost. These concussions are something else, though.

A friend of mine has a son who's my son's age. The kid is a talented hockey player, but had a moderate concussion last winter. They held him out the rest of the season, which was good. Just months later, when the Red Wings were having all those playoff battles with the Blackhawks, she posted one of those stupid meme pictures on her Facebook that showed a Red Wing standing over an obviously shaky Chicago player lying on the ice and a caption essentially making fun of getting knocked out. I blocked her feed.

I don't think the game is becoming unwatchable. I think it's only course that can save the game. These changes need to go all the way down past high school. Once they do, players will come up knowing safer tackling. They will police themselves and the flaggable hits will be more obvious.

This is an uncomfortable transition stage that's probably near the peak of uncomfortable.

[DaddyTorgo]

Stupid Pats giving Manning another weapon...what were they thinking????

They're not making it past Denver this year unless something changes significantly. Sure hope I'm wrong about that, but that's how I see it.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I'm just not sure I see the point because you'll be running the same schemes and you'll still have the same poor talent on the offensive line. Plus, in season changes rarely change a teams fortune.

I think the alternative is a full-scale house-clearing of players during the off-season. What we're hearing out of Giantland runs deeper than losing. It's a leadership issue.

Coughlin is a fantastic coach when he has a team. He's proven that many times. If he loses this team, though, which may have happened, his style will exacerbate this problem.

But I agree that the fans aren't ready. It would have to be a retirement, and it would have to come with Coughlin's blessing. That may not be possible.

They have enough talent that if they play hard, they can win a few games. Eli has to adjust, play safer. And he's best when he's the tall, cool gunslinger. So it won't be easy.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Sure, the offense itself isn't a problem.with the Eagles though it won't be enough to get past a) their defense and b) Vick's decision-making.

I'm sure blabbing a lot this evening, but...

They make a point out of claiming they don't give a damn about time of possession. Is this a "good" offense? Well, it speeds up the game, meaning more plays are run. They score a decent amount of points per play. But in doing so, they make every opponent score more points - they have more plays, too. Which puts a lot of pressure on the defense. And that defense isn't very good.

Granted their strength of schedule is high, but they're being outscored 138-99 this season (34.5-24.8 per game). The record is 533 for a 16-game season. I don't think time-of-possession is overrated in the slightest, and Kelly's choice of an offense that minimizes it is absolutely relevant when evaluating how good it is.

As for Vick, he's perfect for this offense (or would be if he made better decisions throwing into coverage). His running ability means that an offense that gets him out of the pocket nearly every time he throws cannot account for a back leaving pass protection. This offense doesn't work nearly as well without his speed and ability to throw outside the pocket.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Now that I'm aware that there are serious after-effects from concussions, possibly including strong suicidal thoughts and an inability to concentrate years later, I have a harder time seeing someone lead with his head or get knocked silly. I can understand someone making choices that will lead to early arthritis or other aches and pains. You play contact sports, you know that cost. These concussions are something else, though.

A friend of mine has a son who's my son's age. The kid is a talented hockey player, but had a moderate concussion last winter. They held him out the rest of the season, which was good. Just months later, when the Red Wings were having all those playoff battles with the Blackhawks, she posted one of those stupid meme pictures on her Facebook that showed a Red Wing standing over an obviously shaky Chicago player lying on the ice and a caption essentially making fun of getting knocked out. I blocked her feed.

I don't think the game is becoming unwatchable. I think it's only course that can save the game. These changes need to go all the way down past high school. Once they do, players will come up knowing safer tackling. They will police themselves and the flaggable hits will be more obvious.

This is an uncomfortable transition stage that's probably near the peak of uncomfortable.

I wonder about the severity of concussions in the NFL as compared to concussions you'd see elsewhere, and also what effect those helmets has on them. I have the pleasure to have been concussed on four separate occasions, and I'm 32. Three of them happened during childhood.

1. Fell off a slide (~7 feet, maybe?) onto my head into tanbark.
2. Ran into another kid at full speed, heads first (not sure how we accomplished this, neither of us saw the other).
3. Took a softball line drive to the face, fracturing my cheekbone in the process. Hit me pretty much on the left eye socket...no damage to the eye itself. Left a nice bloody mark in the shape of stitches on my forehead though.
4. Took a golf ball to the dome from about 30 yards away (short chip).

1-3 happened between the ages of 5 and 15, 4 happened two(ish) years ago. I have seen absolutely no side effects after the immediate headaches/disorientation. Following along with the NFL's concussion discussions, I wonder if I will notice anything long-term or if the concussions I've had just don't even register on the same scale as these sort of things.

[Coffee Warlord]

Tell you what, making a waiver claim for whatever defense has been playing Jacksonville for the past 2 weeks has been quite profitable.

[Alan T]

I swear, I am so tired of Atlanta's anemic red zone offense thus far this season.

Every game they drive down the field with amazing ease but can't do anything once inside the 20.

[cuervo72]

Solder, you pronounce your name wrong.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Stupid Pats giving Manning another weapon...what were they thinking????

They're not making it past Denver this year unless something changes significantly. Sure hope I'm wrong about that, but that's how I see it.

Yeah your not wrong. They are rolling.

[DaddyTorgo]

Ugh.

SUCK ASS PATRIOTS!!!!

[DaddyTorgo]

I'm going to watch Homeland in a minute and then come back and catch back up on the game in an hour.

[BishopMVP]

How is that not 15 yards and an ejection against Davis? Pats blocker dis-engaged and he launched himself shoulder first into Edelman 2 seconds before the ball got there.

[Racer]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

How is that not 15 yards and an ejection against Davis? Pats blocker dis-engaged and he launched himself shoulder first into Edelman 2 seconds before the ball got there.

Thought it was fair catch interference as well but unless that's an automatic ejection, I don't think the Falcons player should have been ejected. It didn't really look intentional. The guy was coming off a block.