The National Football League

lukin2006 wrote:

SatansFuton wrote:

Jason P wrote:

A good backup QB is going to be more of a premium in the future.

Tell that to the Packers

Last night was the first time I've ever seen Seneca Wallace play, to the best of my knowledge, and I have to think some of his shittiness can be attributed to him just being cold and not getting reps. Because if he were THAT bad all the time, I wouldn't think he'd even have a job in the Arena League. Is that still around? Or maybe he just sucks, either way the Pack should have put a little more thought into what would happen if Rodgers went out. It's not like he's NEVER been injured or anything.

And credit to Chicago's Defense, they made him look bad also. Looking at their Defensive adjustments after Rodgers went out, I'm thinking they put more thought into what would happen if Wallace had to come in than the Packers did.

I went to 2009 and he was middle ground with the exception of 2010 when he was injured (2012-#2, 2011-#9, 2010-32 (inured),2009-#10, 2008-#14,2007-#14,2006-#11), I suspect his number would be off a little this year, he has a rookie receiver as his number 2, a 2nd year receiver as his number 3, a TE who has lost a step or 2 and a emerging number 1. It's totally absurd to think Romo is what the cowboys problems are, they have the last ranked D and are somehow still 5-4 ... even Ponder looked good, this D is the first D to allow 4 quarterbacks to throw for 400 yards against them in the same season, will probably be 5 after this Sunday.

And again, as I said earlier, I'm not putting it all on Romo. I was just explaining why his stats don't impress me all that much as an argument for how great he is. I think he's OK, but not one of the best in the league or anything like that.

I don't think there's anything too special about them being 5-4 though, even with that defense, considering their schedule. They've only played 3 teams above .500, and they're 0-3 in those games. They're 5-1 in the remaining games to teams have a combined record of 17-33. The loss coming from the only .500 team in that lot, the Chargers. So all 5 wins are from teams with losing records. They should win those games. And you can't really put the losses all on the defense, even though they are really shitty and certainly don't help matters any. Most of the teams they've played have had shitty defense too. If you look at the defensive standings, 6 of their 9 opponents (including 3 of the 4 teams who have beat them) join Dallas in the bottom 10 ranked defenses in the league with Philly coming in dead last. I keep hearing people around here say "We would have won if the defense hadn't gotten lit up", but Dallas has the option of lighting up shitty defenses also.

At first the knock against Romo was is air yards were low, when pointed out that he been in top 1/3 or 1/2 most of his career, then it's something else. I don't see anyone here saying Romo is one of the best QB's ... I'm simply pointing out that they have a terrible D and for the most part they do not have enought to overcome really bad defensive efforts ...

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

Dallas should have beaten Denver, but the defence gave up 51 points and blew 2 leads. And they lost to KC by 1 point. I think you can argue that Denver and KC are the 2 best teams in the league; Denver with the highest scoring offence in the league and KC with the best defence and only undefeated team in the league.

It's just a matter of perception. You can say "Dallas should have beaten Denver, but the defence gave up 51 points and blew 2 leads", but one could also say "It shouldn't have even been a close game, but Denver's defense gave up 48 points". Both defenses played bad that day, and it was a shootout, which Dallas fell short in. In this imaginary scenario where Dallas allows less points and wins the game, why does Denver allow the same number as they did in the actual game? Why is it your defense's fault for allowing so many points, but Romo's achievement that he scored so many on Denver's?

To me the bottom line was the end of the game. It was tied 48 to 48 when Dallas got the ball with 2:39 left. The game was in the offense's hands at that point, regardless of everything that happened before. It was essentially a brand new 2:39 minute game at that point, with Dallas in possession. Then Dallas turned the ball over. Not a dumb/choke turnover, but a turnover all the same, and it put Denver in scoring range with 1:57 left in the game. At that point the best your defense could do for you is hold Denver to 3 and out with a FG to give Romo a chance at a 90 second drill. That would have been better than what happened, but as you pointed out Denver has an explosive offense and they were able to move the chains to burn out Dallas' time outs and kick the last second field goal. That's a tough position to put any defense in, especially against Manning.

I've only seen a couple of KC games this year, not enough to really get a handle on how good they are. They're have a good record, but I've heard people talking about their soft schedule as well. And to be honest, it's not that impressive, they've only played one team with a winning record (Dallas) and their opponents have a combined record of 27-49. That's why I'm really looking forward to the Denver game, I want to see if they really have it. I'm looking forward to that more than any other game so far this season. I'd like to see both teams succeed, both are great stories.

lukin2006 wrote:

At first the knock against Romo was is air yards were low, when pointed out that he been in top 1/3 or 1/2 most of his career, then it's something else. I don't see anyone here saying Romo is one of the best QB's ... I'm simply pointing out that they have a terrible D and for the most part they do not have enought to overcome really bad defensive efforts ...

TheWaitingTrophyMan is, and he's mostly who I've been talking to. I don't mean that in a "I'm not talking to you" way, because I always like talking to you, but I think something is getting mixed up in this three way conversation. Especially since you've said multiple times that I'm blaming Romo for Dallas' problems and I can't stress enough that I'm not. I'm simply saying that while their defense is admittedly shitty, I'm with you on that, Romo and their offense are not perfect. Everything I've said about Romo was in response to TheWaitingTrophyMan and our discussion of whether Romo is, in his words, a Superstar. He pointed to passing yards, I pointed to the fact that it's a joint QB/Rec stat and the low air yards stat I heard as an example. You pointed to a list that showed he has the 5th most air yards this season, I pointed out that the stat I heard was probably referring to his percentage of air yards to YAC and average air yards per pass, which drop him into the 20's. I normally don't quote stats all that much, but TWTM threw some out there and I threw some others out there for the fun of it.

It's confusing talking to two Cowboys fans at once. But at least you guys are the Canadian variety, the ones around here are a chore to be around. My favorite bar has a "Dallas Cowboys 2009 World Champions" banner, it's not a joke, and not isolated to that bar. The logic being that Dallas beat New Orleans in the regular season, New Orleans won the Super Bowl, therefore Dallas are the rightful champions. :fp: Texas Cowboys fan logic (not ALL are that way) can be extremely confusing. And it's normally where I'm coming from when discussing Cowboys with you guys, so I apologize if I sound like a dick, but I've usually heard it all, all day long. And don't even get me started on the local media, I could crack you up with some of the shit they say, but this is already and EXTREMELY long post and I should be getting ready for bed.

SatansFuton wrote:

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

Dallas should have beaten Denver, but the defence gave up 51 points and blew 2 leads. And they lost to KC by 1 point. I think you can argue that Denver and KC are the 2 best teams in the league; Denver with the highest scoring offence in the league and KC with the best defence and only undefeated team in the league.

It's just a matter of perception. You can say "Dallas should have beaten Denver, but the defence gave up 51 points and blew 2 leads", but one could also say "It shouldn't have even been a close game, but Denver's defense gave up 48 points". Both defenses played bad that day, and it was a shootout, which Dallas fell short in. In this imaginary scenario where Dallas allows less points and wins the game, why does Denver allow the same number as they did in the actual game? Why is it your defense's fault for allowing so many points, but Romo's achievement that he scored so many on Denver's?

To me the bottom line was the end of the game. It was tied 48 to 48 when Dallas got the ball with 2:39 left. The game was in the offense's hands at that point, regardless of everything that happened before. It was essentially a brand new 2:39 minute game at that point, with Dallas in possession. Then Dallas turned the ball over. Not a dumb/choke turnover, but a turnover all the same, and it put Denver in scoring range with 1:57 left in the game. At that point the best your defense could do for you is hold Denver to 3 and out with a FG to give Romo a chance at a 90 second drill. That would have been better than what happened, but as you pointed out Denver has an explosive offense and they were able to move the chains to burn out Dallas' time outs and kick the last second field goal. That's a tough position to put any defense in, especially against Manning.

I've only seen a couple of KC games this year, not enough to really get a handle on how good they are. They're have a good record, but I've heard people talking about their soft schedule as well. And to be honest, it's not that impressive, they've only played one team with a winning record (Dallas) and their opponents have a combined record of 27-49.
That's why I'm really looking forward to the Denver game, I want to see if they really have it. I'm looking forward to that more than any other game so far this season. I'd like to see both teams succeed, both are great stories.

All fair points you make. I get what you're saying. Totally. I guess from my point of view, as a Romo fan, is that he outplayed Manning in that game and for that reason alone I consider him a superstar QB- to outplay Peyton Manning during arguably the best first 8 games of a season any QB has ever had in the National Football league. That was possibly the single greatest game of Romo's career. And yet people would rather try and take that away from him because he threw the pick at the end. To me, it matters less that they lost that game than how Romo played. Like the saying goes, "it's not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game." And he played brilliantly.

And I'm just going to point out one last thing about the Cowboys' defence here because this is important- if they had been able to stop Manning from tying the game (for the second time in the game), Romo wouldn't have been in the position he was in, which was to throw the ball. He already lead the Cowboys from behind to regain the lead in the 2nd half. If they'd held the lead, then that would have allowed them to run the ball and burn the clock.

I just feel he never gets the credit he deserves because most people(especially the haters) focus on the one negative thing he did, which was to throw the pick, and not the fact that he threw for over 500 yards, 5 Touchdown passes and performed better overall than Manning did. That's all.

Anyway, the game I'm looking forward to the most right now, obviously, is Dallas/New Orleans. But I'm also looking forward to Denver/KC in a couple of weeks, too. Actually Denver/San Diego this weekend should be another great game. Interesting stats you bring up about KC, though. We'll have to wait and see if their defence is the real deal, or if Manning is gonna rip chunks out of it.

Last-12-Exit wrote:

I hate the cowboys. I love to see them lose. I also love to blame Tony Romo for every loss. It was, after all, his fault that the defense gave up 51 to Denver. And it was his fault Calvin Johnson had 329 recieving yards.

Oh yeah and it was his fault that Dez Bryant fumbled the ball in that game against Denver that allowed them to tie the score - yeah NOBODY remembers THAT turnover - or that they're always plagued with injuries.

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Its hard to remember the dez Bryant fumble when Romo let Peyton walk over his defense!

Yep, Like the low life's on twitter and FB like to say: Tony Homo sucks! :roll: idiots. :fp:

If anyone on the team "sucks" it's Miles Austin, but only because it sucks that he's always hurt. Hope he gets healthy soon.

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

I hate the cowboys. I love to see them lose. I also love to blame Tony Romo for every loss. It was, after all, his fault that the defense gave up 51 to Denver. And it was his fault Calvin Johnson had 329 recieving yards.

Oh yeah and it was his fault that Dez Bryant fumbled the ball in that game against Denver that allowed them to tie the score - yeah NOBODY remembers THAT turnover - or that they're always plagued with injuries.

Injuries are no excuse. Every team deals with them.

Umm, okay?

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/

JK_Livin wrote:

Umm, okay?

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/

"Richie is honarary," one player who left the Dolphins this offseason told me today. "I don't expect you to understand because you're not black. But being a black guy, being a brother is more than just about skin color. It's about how you carry yourself. How you play. Where you come from. What you've experienced. A lot of things."

Another former Dolphins employee told me Martin is considered "soft" by his teammates and that's a reason he's not readily accepted by some of the players, particularly the black players. His background -- Stanford educated and the son of highly educated people -- was not necessarily seen as a strength or a positive by some players and it perpetuated in the way Martin carried himself.

:fp:

It sounds like Miami, and Jonathan Martin in particular, could have used some online leadership courses hosted by Mr. Aaron Hernandez during training camp.

:geek: