NFL Season 2009

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:53 pm

Good grief! That fake FG thing last night was the most Bear-like play of the year from a non-Bears team.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 9:33 pm

Thought the jaded Bears fans here would enjoy a post I wrote, "The Island of Misfit Bears."

http://blogblitz.nfl.com/chicago-bears/ ... sfit_bears

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:46 pm

So glad to see the Stillers beat baltimore today. Win next week at Miami and hopefully they'll get in.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:14 pm

I hope the Colts lose quickly in the playoffs, nice to see they can churn out clones as coaches down their.

I don't think the Broncos defense has stopped anyone on a drive that has mattered in the last 7 weeks.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:21 pm

Screw the Colts...The Chargers should handle the Colts if they would meet.

I didnt care that they gave up on 19-0, I didnt think they would make it all the way anyway. I care because the game mattered. If the Jets win next week someone will have lost out on a playoff spot because the Colts as an organization just dont respect the game....They screwed the Browns out of any shot at a playoff spot a few years back laying down like whores in the very same way.

The Rams are one loss away from screwing up the #1 pick in the draft. #32 and not at all proud of it.

Anyone else enjoy watching the king of douchebags, Jeff Fischer, getting it shoved right back up his smug punk ass? Hows that taste asshole?

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:47 pm

They won't screw it up.. Suh all the way and I don't think someone like Spaggs will pass on a stud defensive player.

I'm not sure I don't disagree with the Colts coach though.. get Peyton out of there, it's not like they need the game. Same reason I wondered why Warner was in there when I figured Leinart could easy handle us.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:53 pm

MizzouRah wrote:They won't screw it up.. Suh all the way and I don't think someone like Spaggs will pass on a stud defensive player.

I'm not sure I don't disagree with the Colts coach though.. get Peyton out of there, it's not like they need the game. Same reason I wondered why Warner was in there when I figured Leinart could easy handle us.

Only the blind would pass on Suh...The Rams?

P.S. Please stop using rational thought on what is clearly meant as a sunday drinking rant thread.

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:56 am

XXXIV wrote:
Only the blind would pass on Suh...The Rams?

P.S. Please stop using rational thought on what is clearly meant as a sunday drinking rant thread.

I'm with ya!

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 9:40 am

MizzouRah wrote:I'm not sure I don't disagree with the Colts coach though.. get Peyton out of there, it's not like they need the game.

Then why play him and the other key starters at all? I could see resting your starters in the final game, especially if you don't have a bye, but playing your key players for one half in the penultimate regular season game with huge playoff implications in the AFC doesn't seem quite right.

I know there is no right answer and teams have won the Super Bowl both ways but I always preferred going into the playoffs on a roll. I can see a team like the Ravens or Patriots going there and knocking off a rusty Colts team. The Colts are a Tom Brady third down conversion away from a decade of playoff failures so I thought they would want to try something different this time around.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:45 am

It looks like the Steelers are the team who are going to lose as a result of the Colts' decision to lie down against the Jets. Hope it burns 'em in the long run.

HipE · Post by **HipE** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:59 am

GTHobbes wrote:It looks like the Steelers are the team who are going to lose as a result of the Colts' decision to lie down against the Jets. Hope it burns 'em in the long run.

To be fair, the Steelers are going to lose because they couldn't beat the Chiefs, Raiders or Browns. I won't feel bad for them at all if they go 9-7 and miss the playoffs because the Colts rested some players.

On the other hand, I do wonder why the Colts want to rest their starters for so long. Don't they have a decade of experience that shows them it doesn't work? If the Bengals beat the Jets, and the Steelers win and get some other help, it really could setup an interesting playoff scenario. On the road vs the Bengals, then win that to go on the road against a rusty Colts team. Deja vu?

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:45 pm

HipE wrote:
GTHobbes wrote:It looks like the Steelers are the team who are going to lose as a result of the Colts' decision to lie down against the Jets. Hope it burns 'em in the long run.
To be fair, the Steelers are going to lose because they couldn't beat the Chiefs, Raiders or Browns. I won't feel bad for them at all if they go 9-7 and miss the playoffs because the Colts rested some players.

Absolutely. I'm not even convinced the Steelers, a 2-5 road team, will beat Miami on Sunday. Plus, even though they won at Buffalo on the last game in 2004 I believe they rested most of their key players with Buffalo fighting for a playoff spot.

jLp vAkEr0 · Post by **jLp vAkEr0** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:04 pm

Giants fall flat on their faces...

Good riddance to Giants Stadium, it's been a house of horrors for them the last 2-3 years.

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:42 pm

Leebo33 wrote: Then why play him and the other key starters at all? I could see resting your starters in the final game, especially if you don't have a bye, but playing your key players for one half in the penultimate regular season game with huge playoff implications in the AFC doesn't seem quite right.

I know there is no right answer and teams have won the Super Bowl both ways but I always preferred going into the playoffs on a roll. I can see a team like the Ravens or Patriots going there and knocking off a rusty Colts team. The Colts are a Tom Brady third down conversion away from a decade of playoff failures so I thought they would want to try something different this time around.

True.. the Rams continued to play Jackson even though I wondered why take a chance.

I see both sides, but I don't believe in the "rusty" arguments because a team rested their player(s).

You're right though.. there is no right or wrong. Teams can only blame themselves if they don't make the playoffs.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:44 pm

I have no issue with what the Colts did. The goal is to win a Super Bowl, not go undefeated in the regular season. Facing a hard-hitting Jets team, why risk keeping Manning out there? I think I'd rather have my starters play the first half in the last two games, to avoid having the long layoff of resting them for the final game and then the playoff bye. I also don't see a veteran team like the Colts being rusty.

Other teams need to take care of their playoff business and not worry about whether a team with the #1 seed locked up is playing backups.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:09 pm

Brando70 wrote: Other teams need to take care of their playoff business and not worry about whether a team with the #1 seed locked up is playing backups.

MizzouRah wrote: Teams can only blame themselves if they don't make the playoffs.

I understand that and it its true. Its not as though I feel sorry for the team that might or might not lose that last spot.

The Colts goal is the Colts goal. If it were my team that is probably what I would have done...but on the otherhand the Jets are still alive because the Colts decided they were going to be the Rams in the 2nd half. Something is wrong with that.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:13 pm

XXXIV wrote:
Brando70 wrote: Other teams need to take care of their playoff business and not worry about whether a team with the #1 seed locked up is playing backups.
I understand that and it its true. The Colts goal is the Colts goal. If it were my team that is probably what I would have done...but on the otherhand the Jets are still alive because the Colts decided they were going to be the Rams in the 2nd half. Something is wrong with that.

Locking up the No. 1 seed early is valuable precisely because it affords you the option to do things like the Colts did. Other teams' playoff situation are their own problems.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:21 pm

RobVarak wrote:
Locking up the No. 1 seed early is valuable precisely because it affords you the option to do things like the Colts did. Other teams' playoff situation are their own problems.

Again I agree that the team that might or might not lose out deserves no sympathy.

Ill also admit to some level of hypocracy in that I would probably do the same thing if it were me.

Ill still however think that something just isnt right about a team not trying to win a game when something is at stake. Goes against the point of playing the game.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 9:21 pm

Brando70 wrote:I have no issue with what the Colts did. The goal is to win a Super Bowl, not go undefeated in the regular season. Facing a hard-hitting Jets team, why risk keeping Manning out there?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commenta ... id=4776931

Then Caldwell should be scrutinized heavily, as Howard Bryant points out, for his handling of Manning during the season:

"Take, for example, how Caldwell handled Manning earlier this season:
• Led 31-10 in Week 3 at Arizona with 11:31 left. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-3 in Week 4 versus Seattle with 8:02 left in the third quarter. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 31-9 in Week 5 at Tennessee with 7:32 left and a bye week coming up. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-6 in Week 7 at St. Louis at the end of third quarter. Manning played the whole game.

So Caldwell coached a certain way all season long. Why, then, would Manning be more at risk on Sunday than he had been during the rest of the regular season? If the stated objective is to win the Super Bowl, wasn't Manning unnecessarily at risk on the field for the entire game in a 42-6 win over the Rams?"

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:03 am

Leebo33 wrote:
Brando70 wrote:I have no issue with what the Colts did. The goal is to win a Super Bowl, not go undefeated in the regular season. Facing a hard-hitting Jets team, why risk keeping Manning out there?
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commenta ... id=4776931

Then Caldwell should be scrutinized heavily, as Howard Bryant points out, for his handling of Manning during the season:

"Take, for example, how Caldwell handled Manning earlier this season:
• Led 31-10 in Week 3 at Arizona with 11:31 left. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-3 in Week 4 versus Seattle with 8:02 left in the third quarter. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 31-9 in Week 5 at Tennessee with 7:32 left and a bye week coming up. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-6 in Week 7 at St. Louis at the end of third quarter. Manning played the whole game.

So Caldwell coached a certain way all season long. Why, then, would Manning be more at risk on Sunday than he had been during the rest of the regular season? If the stated objective is to win the Super Bowl, wasn't Manning unnecessarily at risk on the field for the entire game in a 42-6 win over the Rams?"

Because the game meant NOTHING.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:21 am

He's not "more at risk" in last week's game than in those others. It's an even less meaningful game in greater proximity to the playoffs, which changes the equation.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:22 am

That Monday Night game was far too entertaining for a game involving the Bears. LOL

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 2:56 am

Leebo33 wrote:[
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commenta ... id=4776931

Then Caldwell should be scrutinized heavily, as Howard Bryant points out, for his handling of Manning during the season:

"Take, for example, how Caldwell handled Manning earlier this season:
• Led 31-10 in Week 3 at Arizona with 11:31 left. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-3 in Week 4 versus Seattle with 8:02 left in the third quarter. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 31-9 in Week 5 at Tennessee with 7:32 left and a bye week coming up. Manning played the whole game.
• Led 28-6 in Week 7 at St. Louis at the end of third quarter. Manning played the whole game.

So Caldwell coached a certain way all season long. Why, then, would Manning be more at risk on Sunday than he had been during the rest of the regular season? If the stated objective is to win the Super Bowl, wasn't Manning unnecessarily at risk on the field for the entire game in a 42-6 win over the Rams?"

Those aren't scores you see NFL teams rest their starters in. Nor will they usually pull the QB until midway through the 4th.

The clinched the #1 seed. They felt the need to get their guys some playing time. At the same time they wanted to minimize the risk.

I don't see the problem, nor is it particularly uncommon. The Chargers have done the exact same thing in the past.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 2:59 am

HipE wrote:
GTHobbes wrote:It looks like the Steelers are the team who are going to lose as a result of the Colts' decision to lie down against the Jets. Hope it burns 'em in the long run.
To be fair, the Steelers are going to lose because they couldn't beat the Chiefs, Raiders or Browns. I won't feel bad for them at all if they go 9-7 and miss the playoffs because the Colts rested some players.

Agreed.. The Steelers have no one to blame but themselves. If you rely on other teams losing to get in to the playoffs, then this is the price you pay. Steelers should have won more games.

And lets face it this Steeler team is simply not very good, and not a championship caliber team.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 3:33 am

RobVarak wrote:That Monday Night game was far too entertaining for a game involving the Bears. LOL

I know it's meaningless, that the season is still a huge disappointment, the Bears still have a boatload of issues, and that the Vikings are still going to the playoffs, but anytime the Bears beat Favre I am happy. I can't wait to see that phony d***** get bounced in the playoffs.