NFL Off Topic

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Your 2013 NFL All Pro Teams:

First Team Offense
Quarterback: Peyton Manning, Denver
Running Backs: LeSean McCoy, Philadelphia; Jamaal Charles, Kansas City
Fullback: Mike Tolbert, Carolina
Tight End: Jimmy Graham, New Orleans
Wide Receivers: Calvin Johnson, Detroit; Josh Gordon, Cleveland
Tackles: Joe Thomas, Cleveland; Jason Peters, Philadelphia
Guards: Louis Vasquez, Denver; Evan Mathis, Philadelphia
Center: Ryan Kalil, Carolina
Kicker: Justin Tucker, Baltimore.
Kick Returner: Cordarrelle Patterson, Minnesota
First Team Defense
Defensive Ends: J.J. Watt, Houston; Robert Quinn, St. Louis
Defensive Tackles: Gerald McCoy, Tampa Bay; Ndamukong Suh, Detroit
Outside Linebackers: Robert Mathis, Indianapolis; Lavonte David, Tampa Bay
Inside Linebackers: Luke Kuechly, Carolina; NaVorro Bowman, San Francisco
Cornerbacks: Richard Sherman, Seattle; Patrick Peterson, Arizona
Safeties: Earl Thomas, Seattle; Eric Berry, Kansas City
Punter: Johnny Hekker, St. Louis
Second Team Offense
Quarterback: None
Running Backs: Adrian Peterson, Minnesota; Eddie Lacy, Green Bay
Fullback: Marcel Reece, Oakland
Tight End: Vernon Davis, San Francisco
Wide Receivers: A.J. Green, Cincinnati; Demaryius Thomas, Denver, and Antonio Brown, Pittsburgh
Tackles: Tyron Smith, Dallas; Joe Staley, San Francisco
Guards: Jahri Evans, New Orleans; Logan Mankins, New England, and Josh Sitton, Green Bay
Center: Alex Mack, Cleveland
Placekicker: Matt Prater, Denver
Kick Returner: Dexter McCluster, Kansas City
Second Team Defense
Defensive Ends: Mario Williams, Buffalo; Greg Hardy, Carolina
Defensive Tackles: Dontari Poe, Kansas City; Muhammad Wilkerson, New York Jets, Jurrell Casey, Tennessee, and Justin Smith, San Francisco
Outside Linebackers: Tamba Hali, Kansas City; Ahmad Brooks, San Francisco
Inside Linebackers: Vontaze Burfict, Cincinnati; Karlos Dansby, Arizona
Cornerbacks: Aqib Talib, New England; Joe Haden, Cleveland, and Alterraun Verner, Tennessee
Safeties: Eric Weddle, San Diego; Kam Chancellor, Seattle, Jairus Byrd, Buffalo, T.J. Ward, Cleveland, Devin McCourty, New England, and Antrel Rolle, New York Giants
Punter: Brandon Fields, Miami

[N51_rob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Wait, there is no 2nd team QB?

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

For some teams, it does. Especially if one or both teams are good.


How so?

Hate to answer a question with a question, but how is it "everything that makes a game special" even if both teams are good?

I watched the Ravens play the Bears in a tornado. That was horrible football. You could say "special" if you want, but not what makes me want to watch the sport.

Don't get me wrong, there have been some great games in snow... there have been some awful ones too. More importantly, there have been infinitely more great games that had little to no weather influence at all. If it's what makes the sport special then that's like saying the games aren't much unless weather plays a role. That's pretty extreme considering how few "weather" games we get a year and how much we all enjoy the NFL.

[thaima1shu]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Wait, there is no 2nd team QB?

Yup, Peyton Manning got all 50 votes, so no 2nd team QB.

[N51_rob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Yup, Peyton Manning got all 50 votes, so no 2nd team QB.

I'm somewhat amazed by that, given regional biases. Good on the voters then.

[Sportsforever]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The Super Bowl, at least for me, has become everything that is wrong with the NFL. It's not about the game, the players, it's about all the 'event' crap and the 'there to be seen' crowd that goes with it. It still determines the championship, but I enjoy the Conference Championship games 1000x's more than the Super Bowl these days.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Hate to answer a question with a question, but how is it "everything that makes a game special" even if both teams are good?

I watched the Ravens play the Bears in a tornado. That was horrible football. You could say "special" if you want, but not what makes me want to watch the sport.

Don't get me wrong, there have been some great games in snow... there have been some awful ones too. More importantly, there have been infinitely more great games that had little to no weather influence at all. If it's what makes the sport special then that's like saying the games aren't much unless weather plays a role. That's pretty extreme considering how few "weather" games we get a year and how much we all enjoy the NFL.

Again, hence me saying it depends on the teams.

But I do know that there were certainly quite a few Packer games that enjoyed, partly because of the Weather. Sounds like you're taking that specific quote to the extreme.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Again, hence me saying it depends on the teams.

But I do know that there were certainly quite a few Packer games that enjoyed, partly because of the Weather. Sounds like you're taking that specific quote to the extreme.

It's an extreme statement. Weather is "everything" that makes it special? I'd agree that there have been some special games involving weather, but personally I'm not sure I'd say we even see weather enough to argue that I'd miss it. So to say it's everything that makes the game special is pretty far out there imo.

I don't really agree with "everyone should have a dome" bc I think dome games are a different experience all together. I'm not ready to make this an arena league. But I'd still love the NFL if I didn't have that chance to see one... maybe two games a year with snow.

[SPTO]

Re: NFL Off Topic

We're lucky to see two games with flurries a year (this year was definitely an exception, not the norm and there haven't even been that many this year). But weather is "everything that makes the game special"?

Saying every game should be in a dome is more than a bit extreme, but I think you guys are going a bit overboard on the other end of the spectrum too.

First let me put more precision to my rather blanket statement. When I say weather is "everything that makes the game special" I mean in terms of the imagery and iconic images one associates with it. I'm not saying I want to see weather play a part in every contest but it's nice to have a game or two a year where weather can be a big factor in the game.

When a game is being dictated on some level by snow or rain etc etc people on social media will talk about it and you bet your *** that most people will at the very least take a peek at that game. The other thing about weather and football is that it is a big part of the mythology of the game. We have games such as "The Mud Bowl", "The Ice Bowl", "The Freezer Bowl", "The Fog Bowl", the monsoon game in KC from the '90s, etc etc. Add to that the images of players running in the muck or the great images of games played in the snow. (The recent Philly game this year is a prime example) There's the imagery of Dick Butkus with his hands all taped up in the cold and the Vikings of the '70s being tough as nails not needing any heaters while their opponents freeze to death at the old Met and of course who can forget the classic icy conditions of one of the AFC Championship games between the Raiders and Steelers.

Those are the things that make the game so special and if that's replaced with the sterile environment of domed stadiums and field turf that never gets muddy than that takes away the charm and myth making that has been a sizable part of what makes the NFL what it is today.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I like when the weather impacts the game. I think my biggest thing for liking weather influencing games is that coaches actually try to run the ball, and defenses are actually allowed to play, unlike in "perfect" dome conditions where the passing game dominates and essentially negates being able to play defense because of the NFLs stupid rules.

I guess the stupidity of the NFL's rules make me like bad weather games better. Also, I just hate the advantage southern teams get, having the championship game always hosted in the south, so I like when southern, Cali or dome teams come to the Ralph, Lambeau, or Foxboro in the later months of the season and have to play in the wind, cold and sometimes snow.

I like rain games, especially downpours like the Steelers-Dolphins games a few years back where the field is just mud.

I should end this post saying that this is coming from a guy who finds the Wingbone type triple option to be the most exciting offense and would rather watch three yards and a cloud of dust over a vertical offense.

[wco81]

Re: NFL Off Topic

NFL took off in popularity after they moved to the Super Bowl, pitting the NFL and the old AFL champions.

Except for this NY game, which is to help finance the new stadium there, there is very little appetite for holding them outdoors in bad weather.

Besides the comfort of the VIPs, you want players to be able to perform at their best, meaning you don't get more fumbles or dropped passes because of the conditions or problems passing because of the wind.

Look at the Vikings Ravens game. Would they have scored that much in the last 2 minutes if the weather wasn't so crazy? One or two cuts by the ball carrier and the defense couldn't react.

I recall one game in Kansas City, where it was freezing rain. Elway couldn't grip the ball at all and his stat line was dismal. Is it really a better experience for the fans if some players just can't function in certain weather conditions?

I'm not advocating all domed stadiums. I'm just saying there is no reason to have outdoor stadiums in cold cities, just because of some nostalgia for legendary cold weather games, most of them before we were born.

As for the 49ers new stadium, I'm saying a dome might have made it more likely that they get to host more than the one SB that every new stadium seems to get from the NFL. From that standpoint, it would have made more economic sense.

[kingkilla56]

Re: NFL Off Topic

How is the superbowl being held in NJ financing the stadium?

[wco81]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Well it's providing a better return on it than it otherwise would have, which is probably accounted for when the stadium is planned.

At least that's the case with the stadium out here, that they expected the NFL would award one SB to be hosted at the new stadium.

[roadman]

Re: NFL Off Topic

NFL took off in popularity after they moved to the Super Bowl, pitting the NFL and the old AFL champions.

Except for this NY game, which is to help finance the new stadium there, there is very little appetite for holding them outdoors in bad weather.

Besides the comfort of the VIPs, you want players to be able to perform at their best, meaning you don't get more fumbles or dropped passes because of the conditions or problems passing because of the wind.

Look at the Vikings Ravens game. Would they have scored that much in the last 2 minutes if the weather wasn't so crazy? One or two cuts by the ball carrier and the defense couldn't react.

I recall one game in Kansas City, where it was freezing rain. Elway couldn't grip the ball at all and his stat line was dismal. Is it really a better experience for the fans if some players just can't function in certain weather conditions?

I'm not advocating all domed stadiums. I'm just saying there is no reason to have outdoor stadiums in cold cities, just because of some nostalgia for legendary cold weather games, most of them before we were born.

As for the 49ers new stadium, I'm saying a dome might have made it more likely that they get to host more than the one SB that every new stadium seems to get from the NFL. From that standpoint, it would have made more economic sense.

Sorry, I wouldn't trade Lambeau for a multi-billion dollar looking Jerry Jones stadium for anything.

How often is there inclement or icy cold weather to deal with at Lambeau? There might be two home games in December and at the most, three home games in January, if they make it that far. The home games in December could have temperatures in the 30's or 40's.

It's not bone chilling cold like it will be on Sunday at Lambeau every year. The last game that was remotely similar was in 1967, 47 yrs ago. So, something that happens once every 47 years and you want a dome over Lambeau?

[wco81]

Re: NFL Off Topic

My initial point was, if they're building a new stadium in a cold weather city, it makes little sense not to cover it.

If the Packers' ownership situation was more conventional, I would imagine they would try to maximize revenues by building a new stadium.

If they ever get to building a new stadium up there, it would make sense. The Packers are one of the most prolific passing teams in the league. I remember how they lit it up in Atlanta in the playoffs and then had to play at Chicago, where they didn't score as much because well the Bears had a better defense than Atlanta that year and the weather was harsh, IIRC.

So you would hope they'd strongly consider it, unless "frozen tundra at Lambeau" is such a thing.