National Football League Thread

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

7 minutes ago, Conker said:

i love how he missed it after Jim Nanz said no fg's have been missed in the stadium all season. Announcer jinx  

 

Loved the announcer talking about the noise in the stadium helping the Pats out...as if it's only now that it's a problem. With other teams and situations it's who gives a damn let shit fly!

 

So far I don't care for the half time but it could have done without a performer who needed to be muted multiple times.

[Conker]

1 minute ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

 

Loved the announcer talking about the noise in the stadium helping the Pats out...as if it's only now that it's a problem. With other teams and situations it's who gives a damn let shit fly!

 

So far I don't care for the half time but it could have done without a performer who needed to be muted multiple times.

personally liking halftime more then last years superbowl halftime and yeah the noise don't surprise me, neither LA team really had what you'd call a true home game with more fans then away team ones  

[majob]

And this folks, is something we're unlikely to ever see again in our lifetime.

 

6 Championships, oldest player to ever win a super bowl. lowest scoring game in decades, ect.

[MidnightDragon]

I didn't watch the game, but saw the score. Not surprised at the final outcome, but I am about the score...that's it?!

[Conker]

6 minutes ago, majob said:

And this folks, is something we're unlikely to ever see again in our lifetime.

 

6 Championships, oldest player to ever win a super bowl. lowest scoring game in decades, ect.

indeed we never will,Brady and Belichick are just amazing and maybe even that low scoring of a superbowl.

 

 

3 minutes ago, MidnightDragon said:

I didn't watch the game, but saw the score. Not surprised at the final outcome, but I am about the score...that's it?!

yeah it was a very defensive battle, neither offense was great, though it was still exciting to watch, and remember when people said defense was dead  

 

Though i have a feeling it would have been higher scoring and result different if Saints had been playing

Edited February 4, 2019 by Conker

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

What a game. Very tense throughout the entire thing with nobody able to do much of anything except punt.

 

I had a feeling that the Rams would miss that last FG.

 

Just now, MidnightDragon said:

I didn't watch the game, but saw the score. Not surprised at the final outcome, but I am about the score...that's it?!

 

It was a very odd game. Not many penalties at all, and just seemed like a very cautious but still rather entertaining game. Definitely not the score a majority of the viewers expected. First TD was with like 9.5 minutes left in the entire game.

[christhedog3]

4 hours ago, christhedog3 said:

 

Absolutely, I don't hate the Pats as a Bengals fan (lol why would I, completely different spheres altogether) but I get why a lot of people do. But the Pats making the Superbowl pretty much guarantees it'll be a really good one.

 

I think if I'm the Rams, I'm pretty happy about playing the Pats. Of course, Brady-Belichick have 5 wins but they also lost 3 of these. Of those 5 wins, 3 of them are now 14+ years ago and were all by a FG margin. The two recent wins were both games that they should've lost. The Pats winning by a TD in Overtime against Atlanta was their BIGGEST winning margin in a SB ever. NE are the dominant team of this millennium, no argument can be had about that. But they aren't dominant in Superbowl's despite winning 5 of them now, and not even close either.

 

That said, if I were putting money on it I'd go with the Pats. Just in a close one. This has the makings of a really good game

 

Quoting myself here as this couldn't have been more wrong lol.

 

Close game, felt like it never really took off. Tough, gritty defensive battles are always good, but I just felt like neither offence really ever got going.

 

Rams cannot leave feeling happy with how they played. Never looked like doing a thing on offence. If anything 13-3 flattered them. Pats dominated the game.

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

Judging from a lot of comments I'm seeing flooding articles on yahoo there's an overabundance of people whining that because it wasn't a high scoring game it wasn't exciting. So apparently defenses should hang back and let the QB's play catch with their receivers.  I get the offense on both teams didn't have rockets in their ass, but that made it more tense to me not knowing where either team was going to be able to go and that with such a small margin, 3-0 and then 3-3, before the Pats pulled ahead. If the Rams could have exploded earlier like they did in their final drive going down the field? They might have panicked the Pats and pulled ahead.

 

Also, LMFAO they booed the FUCK out of Roger at the ceremony hahahahahaha.

[Conker]

14 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Judging from a lot of comments I'm seeing flooding articles on yahoo there's an overabundance of people whining that because it wasn't a high scoring game it wasn't exciting. So apparently defenses should hang back and let the QB's play catch with their receivers.  I get the offense on both teams didn't have rockets in their ass, but that made it more tense to me not knowing where either team was going to be able to go and that with such a small margin, 3-0 and then 3-3, before the Pats pulled ahead. If the Rams could have exploded earlier like they did in their final drive going down the field? They might have panicked the Pats and pulled ahead.

 

Also, LMFAO they booed the FUCK out of Roger at the ceremony hahahahahaha.

people are ridiculous and can't enjoy anything unless it's a shootout, great defensieve low scoring games can be great like tonight.

 

And Goodell deserves all the boo's, would have been better if we couldn't have heard him  

[PerryToxteth]

17 minutes ago, Conker said:

people are ridiculous and can't enjoy anything unless it's a shootout, great defensieve low scoring games can be great like tonight.

 

And Goodell deserves all the boo's, would have been better if we couldn't have heard him  

 

That was a great game of situational football and two defensive legends (Belichick vs. Wade Phillips ) going toe-to-toe in a heavyweight bout.  It felt like a game of yester-year where there weren't any ticky-tack penalties and NO booth reviews! 

 

MVP is Belichick. The defense he dialed up to stymie the Rams, who were running and gunning all year, was spectacular.  Goff was confused all night long and the Rams' RBs were shut down all game long. Rams O-line had the worst performance of any position in the game.

 

Kudos to Wade Phillips and his defense.  You could see how prepared they were when they got Brady to throw that pick in the first series.  That coverage scheme was incredible with how fluid it went through multiple players.  That told Brady right away that this was going to be a hard-fought game.  

 

Biggest loser of the game was Rap Dude at halftime who couldn't keep his two-minute routine clean for a worldwide audience. 

 

And that, makes Playoff Prediction Perfection for me! 11-0!! Too bad I don't live in Vegas.  

[RadiantFlamberge]

5 hours ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

So far I don't care for the half time but it could have done without a performer who needed to be muted multiple times.

I know.   Travis Scott needed to keep in mind that he was performing for a network TV audience, not cable. But anyway, his performance was just generally forgettable to me.  The show would've been better with a little more Maroon 5 or Big Boi instead of him. 

 

It was still a good game, even if there wasn't much scoring.  It was all about defense.  I'd rather have seen the Rams win though... I'm kinda sick of the Patriots.

[Conker]

Sorry to say this Lions fans, Spongebob has been to the superbowl more than you have  

 

and it starting to look like the Raiders will potentially play the 2019-2020 season at the home of the San Francisco Giants http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25921522/raiders-talks-play-home-games-giants-oracle-park-2019

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

9 hours ago, Conker said:

people are ridiculous and can't enjoy anything unless it's a shootout, great defensieve low scoring games can be great like tonight.

 

And Goodell deserves all the boo's, would have been better if we couldn't have heard him  

 

I prefer being able to see the defense work. I don't want to see QB's and receivers have open fields because it means somebody isn't doing their jobs right. Is it great when offense completely blows a hole open in the defense? Yeah, but it's equally as great to see defense make an epic shutdown. Last night it was just the Patriots whose offense pulled a bit further ahead when it was necessary.

 

Also...does anyone else get a bit annoyed when a ball is "intercepted" after it's touched another player(s)? To me an interception is just that. An interception. Defense literally runs from point A to point B and intercepts that ball before it reaches its target, or turns around during a cover to catch it instead. After it's touched someone and has been fumbled around in the air I just never liked it being called an interception. Guess changing it now would be a statistical nightmare though.

[starcrunch061]

There was nothing great about the Super Bowl last night. I like defense as much as anybody, but much of that game looked like ineptitude, not lockdown defense. But whatever; my eyes have stopped bleeding from that performance, and I would prefer not to have my brain bleed as well.

 

I found this side story of the super bowl hilarious:

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/gladys-knights-super-bowl-national-anthem-sparks-controversy-was-it-over-or-under-a4056581.html

 

Apparently, some books are just paying both sides of the bet.

 

10 hours ago, christhedog3 said:

Close game, felt like it never really took off. Tough, gritty defensive battles are always good, but I just felt like neither offence really ever got going.

 

Exactly how I felt. But I really have to quit reading these comments, or I'll give myself a brain bleed.

Edited February 4, 2019 by starcrunch061

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

Just read some dude put a $250 bet on the Rams scoring just 3 points...made 100K off of it. T_T

Hope that guy didn't have a heart attack and die so he could collect lol.

[starcrunch061]

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

After it's touched someone and has been fumbled around in the air I just never liked it being called an interception. Guess changing it now would be a statistical nightmare though.

 

I certainly wish there were a difference stat for interceptions that come from a receiver bobble, or popping out of a receiver's hands, which happens rather frequently. I remember so many Manning interceptions in Indy that happened because one of his twit receivers would bobble a pass right in his hands. 

 

But again, I guess if you change that, you have to start considering interceptions that occur because the receiver runs the wrong route, or breaks off his route, etc. Probably better to just grit our collective teeth.

[djb5f]

An interception is an interception.  If It was picked off before hitting the ground, then, the ruling is correct.   It is definitely not a fumble as the receiver never had control of the ball and the ball would not be "live" if it hit the ground.

 

Yes, sometimes, the ball gets deflected or receiver runs the wrong route, so be it.  On the other side, sometimes the defender drops what would be a sure INT so QBs get a break that way.  Or your receiver makes an amazing catch for a TD on a poor pass.  You still get credit for that TD pass, same with a shovel pass that is less than a yard where the RB does the rest. 

 

The current way of defining interceptions is the only viable way IMO.

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

5 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

I certainly wish there were a difference stat for interceptions that come from a receiver bobble, or popping out of a receiver's hands, which happens rather frequently. I remember so many Manning interceptions in Indy that happened because one of his twit receivers would bobble a pass right in his hands. 

 

But again, I guess if you change that, you have to start considering interceptions that occur because the receiver runs the wrong route, or breaks off his route, etc. Probably better to just grit our collective teeth.

 

Honestly it's like any other fumble at that point imo. It's just in the air lol.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to consider different reasons for interceptions though. A simple "defense got there before offense" explanation is enough. Whether it's the QB throwing it to the defense for whatever reason, a defensive player running to intercept, defensive player tipping it and another defensive player receiving, or a defensive player turning around and jumping to catch the ball while covering. Those are all en route passes that defense got. Not the defense getting a fumbled ball that just happens to be in the air. Once an offensive player touches it it's no longer something the QB has anything to do with.

 

Also...adam levine getting torn apart by the memes of his tank top are funny.  It's really weird it has nearly the exact same design as pillows and curtains. 

[majob]

5 hours ago, Conker said:

Sorry to say this Lions fans, Spongebob has been to the superbowl more than you have  

 

and it starting to look like the Raiders will potentially play the 2019-2020 season at the home of the San Francisco Giants http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25921522/raiders-talks-play-home-games-giants-oracle-park-2019

I'd honestly be more happy with a playoff win than a super bowl appearance right now.

[djb5f]

8 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

 

Honestly it's like any other fumble at that point imo. It's just in the air lol.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to consider different reasons for interceptions though. A simple "defense got there before offense" explanation is enough. Whether it's the QB throwing it to the defense for whatever reason, a defensive player running to intercept, defensive player tipping it and another defensive player receiving, or a defensive player turning around and jumping to catch the ball while covering. Those are all en route passes that defense got. Not the defense getting a fumbled ball that just happens to be in the air. Once an offensive player touches it it's no longer something the QB has anything to do with.

 

Also...adam levine getting torn apart by the memes of his tank top are funny.  It's really weird it has nearly the exact same design as pillows and curtains. 

 

 

It is nothing like a fumble though.  If it hits the ground, it is not "live".  For it to be a fumble, the receiver would have to have possession first.

 

If the defender touches the ball first, and it is deflected into the wide receiver's hands for a catch, should the QB not be awarded passing yards and a completion for that?  Of course, he should.

 

I did not see any of the halftime show as no interest in Maroon 5, or should I say Adam Levine featuring Maroon 5, full blown narcissist lol.

Edited February 4, 2019 by djb5f

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

Just now, djb5f said:

It is nothing like a fumble though.  If it hits the ground, it is not "live".  For it to be a fumble, the receiver would have to have possession first.

 

I did not see any of the halftime show as no interest in Maroon 5, or should I say Adam Levine featuring Maroon 5, full blown narcissist lol.

 

You could call it whatever you want then. But by the definition of interception...it's not. The object completed it's journey without interference. Anything after that leaves interception territory. Call it a fumble from a literal standpiont, turnover, act of god. Doesn't matter much to me. As a QB I'd detest having an interception stat when I made my throw and the receiver interacts enough with it that the defense gets it. (it's not like the NFL has very clear definitions of anything anyways)

^all new stat time...air fumble. ?

 

Didn't have anything else to do so I at least listened to it while playing KH3. Crappy music all around, but I'm just glad they didn't use it to just stand there and politically bash everyone. (unless I missed something lol.)

[djb5f]

3 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

 

You could call it whatever you want then. But by the definition of interception...it's not. The object completed it's journey without interference. Anything after that leaves interception territory. Call it a fumble from a literal standpiont, turnover, act of god. Doesn't matter much to me. As a QB I'd detest having an interception stat when I made my throw and the receiver interacts enough with it that the defense gets it. (it's not like the NFL has very clear definitions of anything anyways)

^all new stat time...air fumble. 

 

Didn't have anything else to do so I at least listened to it while playing KH3. Crappy music all around, but I'm just glad they didn't use it to just stand there and politically bash everyone. (unless I missed something lol.)

 

I'd argue the ball did not complete it's journey

 

Just like in my examples where the QB gets benefited from the defense dropping what would be a sure-interception.  Or where the defender touches it first, but it is deflected into the receiver's hands, that is still a completion.  Or when a receiver makes a ridiculous touchdown catch on a poorly thrown ball. TD pass for the QB.  It goes both ways. 

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

2 minutes ago, djb5f said:

I'd argue the ball did not complete it's journey

 

Just like in my examples where the QB gets benefited from the defense dropping what would be a sure-interception. Or where the defender touches it first, but it is deflected into the receiver's hands, that is still a completion.  Or when a receiver makes a ridiculous touchdown catch on a poorly thrown ball. TD pass for the QB.  It goes both ways. 

 

Didn't even see you posted before me lol. Was wondering where those examples were. 

 

The first one means nothing really. If defense drops it then at that point it's nothing. At best you could call it blocked. No reception was made so it's incomplete, blocked, etc..

 

You're right that they're still completions, but that has no real bearing on what interception actually means. Performance of a catch isn't the topic, TD pass is a TD pass whether it's ugly or not. I'm not well versed in all the stat areas, but is a QB credited at all for a TD if he just hands it off to a runner? I don't remember seeing any stat like that when QB's are brought up on a screen. (I'm not being cheeky btw that was a genuine question.)

 

The fact is if the ball completes it's journey to the receiver then that it. The QB did his job. Receiver drops it, it's on him because as you said, ugly throws can still be caught and more than a few players make beautiful catches on ugly throws whether they are under thrown, over thrown, or just downright thrown to the wrong guy. It's when Object C receives Object A on it's way to Object B that is makes an interception what it is. If it just interrupts it then it's a block.

[djb5f]

6 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

 

. I'm not well versed in all the stat areas, but is a QB credited at all for a TD if he just hands it off to a runner? I don't remember seeing any stat like that when QB's are brought up on a screen. (I'm not being cheeky btw that was a genuine question.)

 

Handoffs are not touchdown passes, but a simple 1-yard (or less) toss/pitch forward to a RB is considered a TD pass, as the ball was moving forward, no matter how short a distance.

[majob]

Looks like yesterday was the lowest rated super bowl in ten years