NFL Season 2009

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:29 pm

I don't think there's a right answer for pulling your starters. You get criticized if you do or people ask "what the hell are you doing???" if you leave them in. Bottom line is if you win the superbowl, the no one will care what you did in week 16/17.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:44 am

greggsand wrote:I don't think there's a right answer for pulling your starters. You get criticized if you do or people ask "what the hell are you doing???" if you leave them in. Bottom line is if you win the superbowl, the no one will care what you did in week 16/17.

I agree and will drop it because we'll never know until the season plays out and we'll never know if Peyton Manning or Dallas Clark would have torn their ACL in the second half against the Jets. The Steelers clearly benefited from the Colts' rust in 2005. The Colts passing game was out of sync, especially on the offensive line. Sure the Steelers had a good scheme, but it was the same exact scheme and players that the Colts had dominated a month and a half earlier when they were running on all cyclinders. It took the Colts almost 3 quarters to get their rhythm and they would have been blown out if it wasn't for the bad call on Polamalu's interception and Bettis' fumble. Hopefully, these Colts learned from that game and find a way to regain their momentum. Luckily for them the 2005 Steelers were much better than any of their possible first round opponents.

I much prefer the way the 1978 Steelers handled a similar situation (play through week 15 and then rest some players in week 16) when they finished 14-2 with the closest team being 11-5. They ended up rolling through the AFC playoffs 67-15 and winning the Super Bowl. Of course, they were a deep and tough battle-hardened team from a different era when some players actually played full games in the *pre-season*.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 2:27 pm

Bill Simmons made an interesting point. He asked if you were only going to play your starters for a half, why not play them in the 2nd Half of the game instead of the 1st??? I think that's pretty awesome. Bring Manning & the gang in the 2nd half to try and win the game (or maintain the lead). That would be a great 'drill' for starters as well. I'd love to see that.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:40 pm

Snowstorm in Buffalo! Now that's football weather. The candy-asses who play in San Diego and Miami have no idea what they're missing!

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:48 pm

pk500 wrote:Snowstorm in Buffalo! Now that's football weather. The candy-asses who play in San Diego and Miami have no idea what they're missing!

Hey don't forget Miami won last year in frigid KC. There's a first for everything I guess.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:25 pm

Rodster wrote:
pk500 wrote:Snowstorm in Buffalo! Now that's football weather. The candy-asses who play in San Diego and Miami have no idea what they're missing!
Hey don't forget Miami won last year in frigid KC. There's a first for everything I guess.

Yeah, but it was the Chiefs ...

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:06 pm

Don't forget Herm Edwards had them play to win the game, so that win counts.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:07 pm

The Rams are on the clock...

1-15 and 3-29 over the last two seasons. Last in points scored with 175. 175 f***in points in 16 games...The defense was a little better as they were 31st in points allowed.

Special thanks from the Rams to the Detroit Lions for that one lonely win and for pulling off the miraculous feat of having a worse defense than them.

Now we wait and see how the Rams will f*** up the draft.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:10 pm

XXXIV wrote:The Rams are on the clock...

1-15 and 3-29 over the last two seasons. Last in points scored with 175. 175 f***in points in 16 games...The defense was a little better as they were 31st in points allowed.

Special thanks from the Rams to the Detroit Lions for that one lonely win and for pulling off the miraculous feat of having a worse defense than them.

Now we wait and see how the Rams will f*** up the draft.

Maybe they can trade their #1 to the Dolphins for Pat "Patcat" White.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:22 pm

Rodster wrote:
XXXIV wrote:The Rams are on the clock...

1-15 and 3-29 over the last two seasons. Last in points scored with 175. 175 f***in points in 16 games...The defense was a little better as they were 31st in points allowed.

Special thanks from the Rams to the Detroit Lions for that one lonely win and for pulling off the miraculous feat of having a worse defense than them.

Now we wait and see how the Rams will f*** up the draft.
Maybe they can trade their #1 to the Dolphins for Pat "Patcat" White.

If he's even still alive after getting absolutely destroyed.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:30 pm

Shhhhhhhhhhhhh..... ok how about a #2?

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:38 pm

I don't know about Suh at the #1 pick.

An interior defensive lineman is easier to neutralize than an elite DE because the center could double-team him, you could run to the outside, etc.

The last DT to be drafted #1 overall was Dan Wilkinson in '94. There have been good players picked #1 as DTs but they're not exactly HoF players:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/alltimeno1

Haynesworth had some dominant seasons as a DT and got a huge contract but he hasn't done much this year.

Is Suh going to be a "once in a generation" kind of player or maybe the other top prospects don't look so great in comparison?

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:53 pm

Depends on how hes neutralized. If hes a great player and its done with doubles and triples then it will be some great times for Long on the pass rush and much easier for the Rams LBs stopping the run.

The Rams have nothing to lose.

The Cards Packers game is a strange event.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:17 pm

pk500 wrote:Snowstorm in Buffalo! Now that's football weather. The candy-asses who play in San Diego and Miami have no idea what they're missing!

I know what Buffalo is missing... the post season (cue: rim shot).

thank you & good night!

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:54 pm

wco81 wrote:I don't know about Suh at the #1 pick.

An interior defensive lineman is easier to neutralize than an elite DE because the center could double-team him, you could run to the outside, etc.

What?

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:42 pm

Tom Coughlin is toast.

Scary and sad thing is, he might come cheaply, which would make him an attractive candidate for tightwad Bills owner Ralph Wilson.

Coughlin has a predictable pattern. The drill-sergeant act cleans up and improves a team for a few seasons, and then the players tune him out. Happened in Jacksonville and now New York.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:42 pm

wco81 wrote:I don't know about Suh at the #1 pick.

An interior defensive lineman is easier to neutralize than an elite DE because the center could double-team him, you could run to the outside, etc.

The last DT to be drafted #1 overall was Dan Wilkinson in '94. There have been good players picked #1 as DTs but they're not exactly HoF players:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/alltimeno1

Haynesworth had some dominant seasons as a DT and got a huge contract but he hasn't done much this year.

Is Suh going to be a "once in a generation" kind of player or maybe the other top prospects don't look so great in comparison?

If teams have to adjust their game plan (ex 'run outside') because of one player, that's a pretty valuable dude. I say when you have the #1 pick, you either trade the pick or take the best player regardless of 'need'.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:00 pm

It's valuable but a DT hasn't really been consistently disruptive enough to be an MVP or even defensive player of the year:

http://football.about.com/od/nflhistory ... rdsdpy.htm

In the last 10 years, one DT has won it, while there are 2 DEs and one LB who all won it being edge pass rushers. And Sapp probably got a lot of sacks to win the award that year.

If Suh ties up blockers (and gets the MLB on his team to the Pro Bowl) and averages double-digit sacks each year, then yeah, he's totally worth the pick.

But it's kind of been hard for DTs to do that year after year, especially the sacks. Seems like he's more of a 4-3 DT and a 3-4 DE, given his size.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:10 pm

greggsand wrote: If teams have to adjust their game plan (ex 'run outside') because of one player, that's a pretty valuable dude. I say when you have the #1 pick, you either trade the pick or take the best player regardless of 'need'.

Exactly...Either take Suh or trade the pick for many picks. Im happy either way.

"Need" for the Rams exists at many positions and DT definately one of em. They do not have the push up that middle. They do not have that anchor.

As far as importance of DT's... Think about the 70s Steelers and 80s Bears. You get Joe Greene and Dan Hampton. Defense begins right there. With that anchor.

Good D's to dominant D's without good to dominant DT's are hard to impossible to find.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:20 pm

How is Howie Long's kid doing for the Rams? He looks like a slightly beefier version of Jason Taylor.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:29 pm

bkrich83 wrote:
wco81 wrote:I don't know about Suh at the #1 pick.

An interior defensive lineman is easier to neutralize than an elite DE because the center could double-team him, you could run to the outside, etc.
What?

Exactly. I'll take a beast of a tackle who requires a double-team every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Defensive ends can be chipped by the TE, WR, FB, or HB all with minimal disruption of the play. A beast tackle dictates where the offense attacks making it easier to defend.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:42 pm

Rodster wrote:How is Howie Long's kid doing for the Rams? He looks like a slightly beefier version of Jason Taylor.

After being pure crap his first year and a half with only 4 sacks he was okay the last half of this season. Getting 5 sacks.

Im hoping...and maybe with the addition of a good DT?

icvu42 · Post by **icvu42** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:52 pm

Not to make excuses for the Dolphins, because they had plenty of chances this year and failed to capitalize. But man their schedule was brutal. They played only 3 teams that finished the season below .500, Buffalo, Tampa Bay and Jacksonville.

I'll be more than happy to see that 3rd place schedule next season.

Rick

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:07 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:Exactly. I'll take a beast of a tackle who requires a double-team every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Defensive ends can be chipped by the TE, WR, FB, or HB all with minimal disruption of the play. A beast tackle dictates where the offense attacks making it easier to defend.

Me too Scoop. I'd take Suh, period.. he's going to be an impact player right off the bat.

Unless the Rams get some ridiculous trade, they need to stick with their #1 and get Suh.

I can't believe the idiots that call into radio talk shows and say trade Jackson for more picks.. yeah... ok...

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:12 pm

MizzouRah wrote: I can't believe the idiots that call into radio talk shows and say trade Jackson for more picks.. yeah... ok...

...See that. Rams management could be worse afterall.