[46.]

^^^ great stuff in this thread Timoteo. Thanks for the QB breakdown. Also funny Franco Harris had the same "Soft" reputation for going out of bounds to avoid hits... and both him and Dickerson are in the hall.

[Timoteo]

(01-14-2013 03:55 PM)46. Wrote:  

^^^ great stuff in this thread Timoteo. Thanks for the QB breakdown. Also funny Franco Harris had the same "Soft" reputation for going out of bounds to avoid hits... and both him and Dickerson are in the hall.

One of the saddest sights for me is seeing Earl Campbell now. His hair is white, and he has to walk with two canes. He's virtually crippled. All of those hits, and him running over and dragging guys destroyed his body. As great as Adrian Peterson is right now, I forsee the same for him because he's such a violent runner - he practically seeks out contact. You look at Barry Sanders, who because he was so low to the ground and such a great cutter, never took clean, hard shots. He's just fine physically now.

[Joga Bonito]

(01-14-2013 12:21 PM)kosko Wrote:  

(01-14-2013 12:15 PM)46. Wrote:  

Well the great thing about all the young QBs in the playoffs- RG III, Luck, and especially Colin and Russ- is that coaches seem be becoming less risk averse, taking chances with the best fit instead of the usual. I love these bold moves.

It's a good trend and I hope these young guys steer the league away from old school logic of what wins you games - Making plays wins games. Strait up. I hate stiff old school QBs and I hate athletic prototypes like Mike Vick. RGIII, Luck, Wilson, Kaperneck all got solid arms and legit pocket presence but they are all strait up athletes as well which mirrors what's going with other positions in the league. Unless you got arm assassins like Rogers or Brees I don't care much for the old school types.

Keep in mind that if that Vick was the trailblazer for guys like RGIII, Wilson and Kapernick, because he is a running and passing threat. Sure Vick has lost a bit of the form that made him so infamous in the first place, but when he was on he was one of the toughest guys in the league to game plan for. Rogers is pretty athletic in his own right and can definitely scoot if the option is there.

[Joga Bonito]

(01-14-2013 04:09 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

(01-14-2013 03:55 PM)46. Wrote:  

^^^ great stuff in this thread Timoteo. Thanks for the QB breakdown. Also funny Franco Harris had the same "Soft" reputation for going out of bounds to avoid hits... and both him and Dickerson are in the hall.

One of the saddest sights for me is seeing Earl Campbell now. His hair is white, and he has to walk with two canes. He's virtually crippled. All of those hits, and him running over and dragging guys destroyed his body. As great as Adrian Peterson is right now, I forsee the same for him because he's such a violent runner - he practically seeks out contact. You look at Barry Sanders, who because he was so low to the ground and such a great cutter, never took clean, hard shots. He's just fine physically now.

Yeah, I love AP, but I cringed when he came back so early from that ACL injury, sure he played historically well(which was definitely surprising) this season, but I can't help but feel all the hits and knee injuries will catch up to him sooner or later.

[Timoteo]

(01-14-2013 05:03 PM)iWin Wrote:  

(01-14-2013 12:21 PM)kosko Wrote:  

(01-14-2013 12:15 PM)46. Wrote:  

Well the great thing about all the young QBs in the playoffs- RG III, Luck, and especially Colin and Russ- is that coaches seem be becoming less risk averse, taking chances with the best fit instead of the usual. I love these bold moves.

It's a good trend and I hope these young guys steer the league away from old school logic of what wins you games - Making plays wins games. Strait up. I hate stiff old school QBs and I hate athletic prototypes like Mike Vick. RGIII, Luck, Wilson, Kaperneck all got solid arms and legit pocket presence but they are all strait up athletes as well which mirrors what's going with other positions in the league. Unless you got arm assassins like Rogers or Brees I don't care much for the old school types.

Keep in mind that if that Vick was the trailblazer for guys like RGIII, Wilson and Kapernick, because he is a running and passing threat. Sure Vick has lost a bit of the form that made him so infamous in the first place, but when he was on he was one of the toughest guys in the league to game plan for. Rogers is pretty athletic in his own right and can definitely scoot if the option is there.

What many don't realize about Vick is that he has a great arm, but in his first incarnation with the Falcons, he admitted that he really didn't study the intricacies of the position. He didn't sit in the pocket and run through his progressions. If the first guy wasn't open, he knew he could just run and make a play. You still had to fear his arm, even though he wasn't accurate, because he could get the ball downfield pretty quickly. In trying to become more of a pocket passer with the Eagles, he's actually MORE vulnerable to hits because he's behind such a weak offensive line. His instincts are to always try to make a positive play, while for the sake of his health, he should dance around in the backfield looking for a receiver, and if he can't find one, get out of bounds or throw the ball away. His abilities as a runner (which is what makes him special) cause him to always try to make a positive play (because he can), meaning he's always going to get hit. You definitely can't question his toughness.

[Enigma]

(01-13-2013 05:49 PM)IQVX Wrote:  

My picks this round were brutal. Going to be 1-for-3 assuming the Pats win this one.

As for the earlier game today, I still think the Seahawks are a better team than the Falcons. Perhaps the best team in the entire league if we're going by talent. Some bad clock management and coaching decisions cost them, but the fact they were down 20-0 at half and fought back to take the lead is just scary. Sorry, Falcons fans, still not putting any stock in your team. You're lucky to have barely won your first playoff game and you'll need to be better to beat the 49ers, who run a similar offense to Seattle, and on defense are more experienced.

(01-14-2013 12:30 AM)IQVX Wrote:  

The best team doesn't always win. I think the Seahawks are the best team in the league.

Damn, you're not putting stock in our team? That really hurts bro

The Falcons constantly let teams back into the game. If Matt Ryan had calmed down and made his throws, the game would've gotten extremely ugly. This so-called elite secondary was getting beat all game despite some of Ryan's miscues. They couldn't even keep us out of FG range for 30 seconds.

We let them back into the game with terrible offensive playcalling. Should've pounded the rock with Turner and ran clock. Without the bad decision by Ryan to throw into double coverage up 13 (clear pass interference on the corner btw; you can't just stop running and box out the receiver like that, you have to play the ball) the Seahawks don't even have the opportunity to come back.

Anyways, who cares if they were the better team. They're home now and wouldn't have even made the playoffs without the replacement refs.

(01-13-2013 07:00 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

[Avarence]

(01-14-2013 06:10 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

*Various excuses about letting a 20-0 halftime lead get erased*

...

Anyways, who cares if they were the better team. They're home now and wouldn't have even made the playoffs without the replacement refs.

This is incorrect.

If you change the win over Green Bay to a loss, it drops Seattle to 10-6. They still would have been the #5 seed, due to head-to-head victory over Minnesota. In fact, if you gave the Seahawks an extra loss just for the hell of it, they still would have made the playoffs at 9-7 due to tiebreakers over Dallas and the NY Giants.

As for the game, I was mainly trying to start shit with the Falcons hate. My bad.

But, some of your attacks on Seattle are unwarranted, especially given that you barely escaped that game. Also, if you were "barely ever out of FG range", I expect more than 30 points. Rewind to the first half: Seattle could have scored 3, 7, 10, even 14 points, but came away with none due to bad clock management and bad play-calling. Adding just 3 points amounts to a Seattle victory. Also, let's not forget that at the end of the game, the first FG attempt was no good, wide-right. If Pete Carroll doesn't take the timeout, your Falcons are sitting at home.

Don't mistake these points for excuses.
Atlanta deserved to win the game, I just think the Seahawks are better.

And like I said, the better team doesn't always win.

[Enigma]

(01-15-2013 12:51 AM)IQVX Wrote:  

(01-14-2013 06:10 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

*Various excuses about letting a 20-0 halftime lead get erased*

...

Anyways, who cares if they were the better team. They're home now and wouldn't have even made the playoffs without the replacement refs.

This is incorrect.

If you change the win over Green Bay to a loss, it drops Seattle to 10-6. They still would have been the #5 seed, due to head-to-head victory over Minnesota. In fact, if you gave the Seahawks an extra loss just for the hell of it, they still would have made the playoffs at 9-7 due to tiebreakers over Dallas and the NY Giants.

As for the game, I was mainly trying to start shit with the Falcons hate. My bad.

But, some of your attacks on Seattle are unwarranted, especially given that you barely escaped that game. Also, if you were "barely ever out of FG range", I expect more than 30 points. Rewind to the first half: Seattle could have scored 3, 7, 10, even 14 points, but came away with none due to bad clock management and bad play-calling. Adding just 3 points amounts to a Seattle victory. Also, let's not forget that at the end of the game, the first FG attempt was no good, wide-right. If Pete Carroll doesn't take the timeout, your Falcons are sitting at home.

Don't mistake these points for excuses.
Atlanta deserved to win the game, I just think the Seahawks are better.

And like I said, the better team doesn't always win.

Actually, if the Seahawks had finished 9-7 the Bears would have made the playoffs at 10-6. The replacement refs affected the first quarter of the season in more instances then that play but there's no real way to prove that Seattle would've missed the playoffs so I concede that point. They did need that missed call and an epic collapse by Chicago to make it though. Hardly the best team in the league. The Falcons didn't lose outside the division and swept both the NFC East and AFC West, controlling their destiny from the beginning.

I was saying that they were not able to keep us out of FG range for the final 30 seconds of the game which they needed in order to win. If you want to talk about points that should've been...Roddy on the first drive has Sherman beat in the endzone. Ryan misses the throw. A few drives later, Julio has Sherman beat for an easy TD. The ball is under thrown. Several less notable bad throws. A big drop by Douglas deep on a play late in the game.

I give the Hawks all the credit in the world. I said earlier in this thread that I didn't like our matchup with them. But their defense was thoroughly exposed through the air and on the ground in this game. The only reason they got back in the game is because of boneheaded mistakes on our own part.

[Excelsior]