Printable View
I 2nd that. Beers flowing starting in the am and no one complains. Good times.
Ps Mcfarland, the colts run stopper (cough) is out with an injury. It changes things. I'm surprized they didn't go after more free agent d help. I would also be surprized if the colts make a repeat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJBeanPole17
As a Steeler fan I was glad for the good showing on Sunday. Watched the entire game. Tomlin has made his mark on the players. Ravens and Bengals will be picked above the Steelers but IF play is consistent and IF no serious injuries the Steelers could have a decent year.
A coaching change was overdue, and will be a healthy switch for Pittsburgh.
[QUOTE=Spank_Me_Hard]To an extent, I agree.
Quote:
Most teams that have won the SB historically though have had a good defence (both against the run AND the pass).
There have been a few exceptions... the Rams and the Broncos come to mind.
I didn't think that either of those teams defences were that good. But their offenses were SO dominating that they got up on other teams so quickly... that they forced other teams out of their gameplans and forced them to basically abandon the run.
Still... though I didn't think that there defences were "good", they were good enough. And they were much better than what I think that the Colts have. I don't think that their run defence was anywhere near as porous as the Colts was last season.
I am not saying have a bad run defense is a goal. I am saying I think a good pass defense and pass rush is what a lot of team now go for over a great run defense. And in the past super bowl it worked and paid off. I am sure a lot of team would like to have it all on D, but its not realistic with the cap.
I also am not saying a defensive team cannot win on just defense, but it just seems to be the trends in the league are moving away from that, a lot of teams trying to load up on offense and have a D thats just good enough to hold the other team back.Quote:
I fully agree with this statement. Balance is more the key. And the Colts don't have it.
And yet even so... there are a few exceptions here as well.
The Ravens of a few years ago, and the aforementioned Giants come to mind. Both had VERY average offenses. But they were also ball control offences as well... they could run the ball consistently for 4 yards per pop.
Nope, not a chance. The Bears offense blew. Grossman was horrible last year, I am not saying he will not improve, but he looked more like a bumbling idiot at times last year than a NFL QB.Quote:
Well... the game didn't really show this... but I think that the Bears offence is way better than the Colts defence. I think that if you replay that game a few times... that the Bears win it more than they lose it.
Injuries are part of football. Bob Sanders was out for 12 games in the regular season while the Colts where giving up all those rushing yards. He came back and all of a sudden there D looks great. I don't think a safety could make such a huge difference in run D, but there must have been some reason. Maybe with him in there there run D is not that bad?Quote:
And I also think that the Bears had a key injury (Tommy Harris - DT) that hurt their defence much more than any injuries that the Colts had on offence. Tommy Harris was a TERROR last year... he made the defence dominant. He was the straw that stirred the drink. And got a lot less credit for the Bears defence than he deserved.
Urlacher is an awesome linebacker... but I think he gets most of the glory where Harris did a lot to collapse the pocket and keep blockers off of Urlacher.
Who knows what difference that Harris may have made had he played (both Colt RBs had a pretty good day running the ball). But we'll never know... we can only speculate.
My point is every team seems to have some of these guys. Tight ends are running wild down the field for half the teams now, catching passes. Most teams don't even seem to care if they block well. And Faulk, Sharpe, and Keyshawn are players from this era, so yes those are the guys I am talking about. As for the receivers, guys like Moss, Owens, Burress, it does not even matter if they are covered, they still make the catches a lot of the time.Quote:
This is all true... but only to a point.
There are players historically who fit these descriptions to a T.
Pass catching RBs... Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, Ronnie Harmon, Larry Centers.
Fast TEs... Shannon Sharpe, Keith Jackson
Large WRs... Cris Carter, Keyshawn Johnson
There may be more of these type players than ever before... but there have been plenty of good exmaples of these players historically.
I hope these last few posts don't make it look like i expect the colts to repeat. I put them around 5 or so in my personal power rankings right now. If they lose any more guys they may fall further in my mind. I do think teams like them, and the Saints for another example, teams offensive heavy, have just as good a chance of winning as a defensive team like Baltimore however.
And I wasn't trying to imply that you did.Quote:
I am not saying have a bad run defense is a goal.
Now THAT, I don't believe.Quote:
I am saying I think a good pass defense and pass rush is what a lot of team now go for over a great run defense.
A onetime occurence. We'll see if any teams follow suite... focusing more on pass defence than run stuffing defences. My guess is that they won't (i.e. 330lb DTs who can't move much laterally, and control the middle "phone booth" will still be highly sought after).Quote:
And in the past super bowl it worked and paid off.
Balance had been mentioned earlier. I think that teams CAN have it all... they just need to be smart about it.Quote:
I am sure a lot of team would like to have it all on D, but its not realistic with the cap.
To me the beauty of the Patriots system is that they really don't overpay for superstars. Their defence is FILLED with good, solid, deep, interchangeable parts.
I'd say the same for the Steelers the year that they won. And I'd say the same for the Eagles.
There may be one position that isn't as stong as one of the others... but not an ENTIRE layer (i.e. defensive linemen, linebackers, defensive backs).
In short... great defence can be achieved through defensive system, coaching, philosophy, and good but not *great* (i.e. cap busting) players.
I'm not sure that I'd quite go that far.Quote:
I also am not saying a defensive team cannot win on just defense, but it just seems to be the trends in the league are moving away from that, a lot of teams trying to load up on offense and have a D thats just good enough to hold the other team back.
The Broncos won in the late 90's with a pretty average defence, and a overpowering offense. The Rams also had success with that shortly after. But then the Ravens won... and the trend was reversed.
Passing may be the theory du jour... with Indy winning last year, and teams like the Eagles showing great success mostly passing... but I for one would like to see more than one year with a SB champ winning it this way before I make any judgement.
To me, a team winning the SB with the worst run defence during the regular season is a fluke... until proven otherwise.
What you call "horrible", I call below average.Quote:
Nope, not a chance. The Bears offense blew. Grossman was horrible last year, I am not saying he will not improve, but he looked more like a bumbling idiot at times last year than a NFL QB.
Grossman finished something like 23rd in the league in QB rating. And that didn't include "starters" like Trent Green and Drew Bledsoe. Had those "starters" been included in the mix, Grossman would have ranked even higher.
When I use a description like "horrible", I am thinking of Vinnie Testaverde in his first season (you know... as in 35 INTs *horrible*).
I'm not saying that Grossman was a wizard... just not nearly as bad as you make him out ot be.
As for the rest of the Bears offence... Thomas ran for 1,200 yards and a 4.1 average despite being a "comittee" running back. Benson... the other "comittee" RB got 600 yards and the same average per carry. Had either of those backs been a "featured" back... we'd be talking about how they were one of the best in the league.
So I think that saying that the Bears offense "blew" is being just a tad dramatic. The Raiders offense BLEW... let's keep it realistic here.
Yes... injuries are part of football. In fact... with the team that wins the SB... there seems to be a bit of luck involved in this department.Quote:
Injuries are part of football. Bob Sanders was out for 12 games in the regular season while the Colts where giving up all those rushing yards. He came back and all of a sudden there D looks great. I don't think a safety could make such a huge difference in run D, but there must have been some reason. Maybe with him in there there run D is not that bad?
Hence why I think teams like the Patriots... who have great depth are even smarter.
I think that Sanders was probably a huge player for the Colts... but as for run defence... I can't imagine that he had more impact than Harris (who's very much an integral part of the run defence every single play) did.
I will give you that missing Sanders had some impact... just not near the impact that Harris did.
I'm not so sure about this... there are some very good TEs in the game right now... but I'm not sure that the new DVD "TEs gone wild" will be coming out anytime soon as you allude to.Quote:
My point is every team seems to have some of these guys. Tight ends are running wild down the field for half the teams now, catching passes. Most teams don't even seem to care if they block well.
There are still plenty of TEs in the league who are run blocking plodders. Guys who can catch the ball... but only in the short soft spots in the zone that they can find. Not quite so many running deep patterns splitting the safeties like Antonio Gates.
These guys are all retired. They are more from yesteryear when they were actually IN their prime. In fact, Sharpe specifically was on the Ravens team that won the SB with pure defence... and his skills had slipped some at that point even. Those guys were all in their primes in the late 90's and early 2000's.Quote:
And Faulk, Sharpe, and Keyshawn are players from this era, so yes those are the guys I am talking about.
Owens and Burress I will give you... they are both freakishly big (and aging mind you).Quote:
As for the receivers, guys like Moss, Owens, Burress, it does not even matter if they are covered, they still make the catches a lot of the time.
Moss isn't so much big and tackle breaking as freakishly fast.
I think that he's a bad example of a freakishly BIG WR.
Lastly, I would also add that the Patriots success came from balance... not just on defence... but running and passing as well. Back when #28 was actually good, and they had a lot of *good* but not *great* recievers.
Aye, +1 for beerdrinking goodness. I haven't been paying attention to much anything football... I'm usually not too big into sports but since my g/f consists on watching every football game its the only thing I really got into. I'm sure they are working on that run defense right in camp :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mindwarper
Wait, your g/f insists that all football is watched? I am so very jealous. You're living the dream. Beerdrinkin' goodness for all :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJBeanPole17
I'm not quite as lucky as that, but my wife will at least ignore football without comment (or complaining:p ). She actually watches when Seattle's on though, so I've got it pretty good.
Yesterday consisted of me waking up at 11, grabbing a beer, then my roommates woke up started drinking too and played Madden ALL DAY LONG on the new TV while wishing that Madden 08 for the 360 was out :p it was a good day.
She is a very hardcore football fan, especially for the Colts. When we were watching the SuperBowl I wasn't allowed to talk to her unless it was a commercial. She was SOOOOOOOOO pissed when the Bears scored that first touchdown from the opening kickoff. She was crying when they won it though. I was in awe. I didn't know what was going on. For their Sunday games, usually on Friday she'll be like "so pizza and the game at my place?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Mindwarper
I feel very lucky :D
I just bring my booze over, eat pizza, and watch it with her at the same time. And YES, she does demand it! It's friggin awesome!
I even managed to turn her on to UFC. She can't get enough of it.
I remember a girl that I had just started seeing onetime calling me up and asking me over to her place for "Pizza, football, beer, and a f***".Quote:
I just bring my booze over, eat pizza, and watch it with her at the same time.
I was like "If you're a guy... does it just get any better than that"?!?
Talk about hitting the right stimuli
Yep... unfortunately (although I wouldn't count this) the Colts have a preseason game tonight but she's ditching me to hang out w/ her roommate. Oh well!Quote:
Originally Posted by Spank_Me_Hard
On the radio this morning the DJs were talking about Reggie Miller pondering going to the Celtics to get a championship ring (oh come on...) and one of them goes, "you know what I think about this?" (hits a sound bite button) and then you hear what sounded like george w saying "Are you ready for some football?" and they both started laughing.
THANK GOD.
Madden next tuesday. I'm thinking of taking wed off :) More football tonight. Good times are a startin'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakespy
It doesn't get better then that. I'm serious. You are super ****in lucky. My gf doesn't see the need for the whole game and wonders why an hour of football isn't enough and why the last few minutes of a game last a half hour. (I pointed to the clock with like 5 minutes in the 4th and she thought it would take 5 minutes :) I did once get a great bj during a ot game of the Raiders and they won. It was like heaven. BJ and the Raiders win. Oh yeah.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spank_Me_Hard