smittywerb
-
Posts
3,137 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by smittywerb
-
-
Well, him fumbling the ball doesn't look all that bad anymore.
-
I have to say Chapman. What I saw was good, granted it was a preseason game, but I saw what I needed to see. Chap was taking up 2 OL and getting penetration at times. When Chuck begin to implementing his exotic blitzes, that should help with the double teams. But good to see him finally touch the field and show he can play.
-
did playing with Montana, Young, and Gannon hold Rice back?
A guy who votes on this said on the radio last week you can't hold the murder stuff against Marvin because he was never even charged with anything let alone convicted.
If anything keeps Marvin out it would be te attitude WRs have to wait but if you keep Marvin out no WR is going in on the first ballot for a long time which means at worst he goes in next year.
Oh no, I think he should definitely be a 1st Ballot HOFer, I'm just regurgitating the nonsense that other fans have told me. If you ask me, I think Marvin is in the discussion of being a top 5 WR to play the game.
I'm sorry if I confused anyone. Starvin Marvin is definitely a HOFer in my eyes.
-
Can we actually wait until we lose Allen before we come up with "we are going to be okay because" scenarios?
You're asking fans not to panic?
-
When it comes to Marvin, he has the career for it, he has the stats for it, but playing with Manning, that murder stuff, and his rumored incidents on the field is what's going to hold him back.
-
Landry and Chapman. I gotta feeling these 2 are going to be the face of our new nasty defense.
The Hit Squad Pt. 2?
-
Yeah, that's really for any situation. If the ball is touched in any situation, everything except for holding, tripping, and face mask is fair game. That's why when you see the ball get tipped in the air the receiver usually gets whacked.
-
Here's what was wrong with the jh situation:
- he was a first round pick. This made people expect him to perform like a first rounder, and that was not going To happen because of who he played behind and the rawness of his talent. Another downfall is that there were other players who were available and needed, and it didn't help that those players went on to be productive players.
- this was a tear jerk move. This was after the Super Bowl and polian felt that freeney being hurt was a big factor in our loss. I guess this pick was insurance for freeney.
-
I don't know. It's hard to predict when he'll decline because his game does not depend on athleticism. What makes Wayne great is his football IQ, hands, and crisp route running. He doesn't use speed, height, or physicality to produce. And players like that tend to last a long time, no matter the sport. Look at Tim Duncan, another vet who was written off as "old" by the media. I would say, if a serious injury was to happen to Reggie, than i could see him declining or might even gone, but until then we can expect the same hard hat Reggie.
-
Usually the speedy receivers in Madden are the most productive. They could have bad rating, but if you know what you are doing with them, racking up the stats is nothing. Even before the update and TY Hilton had a bad rating, I would still have monster games with him.
-
It is true that a better team will have a easier time to win in a 7 game series as opposed to a one game playoff . . . I do love the one game SB, but at the same time spreading out a great 7 game series over a two week period is fun too and has a differ dynamic and feel if you win . . .
Basically yeah, the 7-game series isn't built for the team who has less talent. It takes a lot of coaching (and luck) for an inferior team to win a 7-game series against a better team. Case in point, 2011 finals. Heat were the favorites to take it but the Mavs had coaching and a hot Dirk on there side. That's why the NBA playoffs are pretty much predictable. The way they are built, the majority of the better teams will make it. I think they should actually shorten the series to 5 games. First to 3. And then the finals should be a 7 game series.
BUT another thing is the 7 game series format drags out the playoffs which means MORE TV DEALS AND RATINGS which is so important in the NBA.
-
No I didn't. Organizations make bad moves and it hurts them. They aren't always competitive. Lakers we're not really competitive in the mid and late 70s, the Celtics were absolutely dreadful in the 90s (though that was arguably due to some unfortunate events) and early/mid 2000s. Even the more storied franchises can have crappy years.
There's a reason why the changed the CBA (Even though I still think they did a mediocre job). They did make some changes that needed to be made and the cap penalty will actually start to really effect teams (If anyone thinks the Lakers truly have no problem being this high over the cap you're insane).
NFL is struggling to fill stadiums as well this isn't just a basketball issue it's a sports issue in general. It's competing with television and making the sports experience in person better than sitting on the couch and watching that's an issue with both league. There's a reason why games being a blacked out has become an annoying thorn in the NFLs side.
- Are you serious? The 70s was the most even decade OF the NBA. There were no repeats! And actually, the Lakers WERE competing and they had a nice team in West-Goodrich-Chamberlain.
- I don't believe in the new CBA because it is not a hard cap. Nothing is going to change the NBA until
- And when comparing the "filling" problem to the NFL, it's apples and oranges. How many teams in the NFL have moved in the past 10 years? Now how about the NBA? Yeah, it's a BIG difference. Some good teams can't even fill their arenas in the NFL.
-
I love how people think NFL is that much different from the NBA when it comes to competition. Look at the past 30 years of super bowl champions. Patriots and Steelers = 5/10 Super Bowls from 2000-2009, Broncos Cowboys and 49ers = 7/10 Championships from 1990-1999 and 1973-1981 outside of the Dolphins, Steelers and Raiders the Cowboys were the only team to win a title.
NFL and NBA aren't that different.
Besides the Cowboys, you named some world-class organizations that CONSISTENTLY make good moves and have one of the best front offices that make the strategic moves to keep their franchises competitive. That's why people have no problem with that and see it as such. Also, the hard cap promotes parity which leaves everyone happy because if your team suck, it's most likely because your front office sucks (Browns, Lions, Jaguars,etc.) Heck, look at our Colts. We've had PLENTY of crappy years that we can soley credit to our front office.
Not the case in the NBA, you have good front offices in the NBA who try their best to win a ring but because they are always being outbidded by larger markets, players are jetting their teams to join up in a bigger market, because one bad contract is hampering them while a bigger market team just spends more money, and many more reasons, is why people are fed up. People are tired of paying for a crap product, that is why the NBA is struggling to fill arenas and teams are moving left and right. I can name plenty of teams in the NBA who have good front offices but go nowhere.
What you are doing is looking at the numbers and saying "They aren't that different". It's deeper than the numbers.
-
Might want to include the finals losers as well. The competition has been better than people assume, especially when you look at the teams those champions faced and how far the series went. There are a couple who were dominant in the finals (Rockets sweeping Magic, Lakers in 01, 02, Spurs in 99, 07 etc etc.)
I could do the same for any sport it would make the list longer too. Heck, I could do that for the NFL where you RARELY see the same team go back to back. What matters is the winner because it shows where the parity exists, how it is easy for larger market teams to repeat and go back while the small markets go through a period of rebuild or mediocrity.
And to be honest, you can not look at that list and say something is not wrong when in the other major American sports (NHL, MLB, NFL) the # of past champions in past 30 years exceeds 15 different teams.
I understand what you are saying, but that it's the critical thing to look at and what should be looked. Of course, we could do that with ANY sport.
I never said there were never any competitive series, but the playoffs ARE built for the better team to win. Like someone said above me, there is LITTLE chance the better team ever loses 4 games in the playoffs. (KEYWORD: little)
-
As far as contenders, in the last twenty years, how many different franchises have won or been in a championship game?
I think the # is 7 or 8 and that is absolutely HORRIBLE.
EDIT: Past 30 years Champs are as follows:
LAKERS = 6 TITLES (9 FINALS APPEARANCES)
BULLS = 6 TITLES (6 FINALS APPEARANCES)
SPURS = 4 TITLES (5 FINALS APPEARANCES)
PISTONS = 3 TITLES ( 4 FINAL APPEARANCES)
HEAT = 3 TITLES (4 FINALS APPEARANCES)
ROCKETS = 2 TITLES (2 FINALS APPEARANCES)
CELTICS = 4 TITLES (7 FINALS APPEARANCES)
MAVERICKS = 1 TITLE (2 FINALS APPEARANCE)
That's 8 teams. Wow! lol
-
On the flip side you get to see better basketball. Kobe and Pau vs. Garnett, Pierce and Allen, Lebron and Wade vs. Dirk, Lebron and Wade vs. Durant and Westbrook, Lebron and Wade vs. Tony Parker and Tim Duncan. NBA is all about superstars and while a little more parity would be nice, nothings better than superstars fighting it out to the end.
Yeah, I'll admit, when the NBA was on the verge of going under, David Stern did the right thing and made it player-oriented. But times have changed and now it's the the thing that's killing the league. People are tired of seeing the same teams/players make it every year. People want to see the excitement of the NFL but in the NBA. That's why people are asking for shorter seasons, shorter playoffs, parity. But the players don't want that, that means less money and that is why they fought so hard not to have a hard cap.
-
It's a lot of things that happen in the NBA that doesn't happen in the NFL.
In the NBA, you have players running to each other in hopes of winning rings, players taking less money to play for bigger markets, etc. It's all about how the money is set up. I have to respect the NFL, because they have it set up where every team has a good chance to succeed if they make the right moves. I can't say the same for the NBA. Players run to big markets over-looking small markets, big market teams just buy whatever player they want while the small market have to tread lightly, the lottery doesn't guarantee a bottom feeder team will be able to build.
To be honest, it's so many reasons why it is the way it is between the NFL and NBA, but I can say the main difference is a HARD CAP!
But I rather win a SB. Rings in the NBA are becoming kind of lame because superstars are teaming up together and the league is really becoming boring and not competitive.
-
If Toler pans out like Pags think he will, I won't regret this pick. Either way, we needed a pass rusher but could have used another CB. I'm comfortable with how it went.
-
Ever since we lost PM, people have been saying "We will not _________.". Don't really care for what analyst say now-a-days, as most of them just spurt out opinions and ride the hottest wave.
-
A very thoughtful and unbiased write up.
Pretty much exactly how I saw this offseason. Good write up!
-
While I agree your first goal is to win your division you do have to realize 1 thing first.....Oakland a couple years ago WON EVERY SINGLE DIVISIONAL GAME and still LOST their division. Granted it is very difficult to win your division if you can't beat the the teams you place twice a year but it does NOT ensure you win the division. The reason we built up our run defense was simply because we had a TERRIBLE run defense.......we wanted to be balanced on defense. It allows you to have extra help in coverage (not having an extra man in the box) and also helps keep your secondary healthy not having to come up and make as many tackles....smallish secondary guys usually get hurt tackling...not covering. I 100% believe Pagano and Grigson believe you WIN GAMES AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE...and that is the basis for beefing up the lines. What Pagano was saying was definately true....our divisional opponents have a very similar offensive scheme and that makes it easier to game plan for....and yes we don't want to have our biggest weakness be their strength...but regardless we have to build a team to win ANY game....not just our divisional ones. Going 6-10 won't do anything for us. It didn't even get Oakland to the playoffs to win their division...and we've seen teams like Cincy get in despite struggling with divisional opponents. You build the best football team you can....you don't build a team to beat certain other teams...it just doesn't work that way. You may add a piece like a lock down corner....or a pass catching TE or something to exploit a weakness but the NFL is hard week in and week out...you can't specialize to beat a couple teams. You have to have the most complete team you can or improve it the best you can to get to the playoffs and win it all. It would do us no good to build a team that could win our division and yet not be able to compete against NE or DEN or BAL or anyone that deploys a pass oriented attack. I fully understand your points about winning the division but we had some terrible run defenses and won the division almost every year....we simply had better talent...a better team...(yes likely due to 1 guy) but we just wanted to build the best team we could...the most complete...and doing so we felt the line of scrimmage was a priority.....it works out well that our division may allow us to face similar looks and stopping the run will be key in winning those 6 games.
Oh of course, I agree 100%, our defense has to be able to adjust to any team, not just our division. But I have to agree to disagree, our sole purpose is not win our division but it should be #1. We HAVE to gameplan against our division. For example, look at how the Texans were building their team. Even though Manning wasn't play them when they had all the pieces together, but the Texans were a very talented team that had a good mix of pass rushers and run stoppers with defensive backs who were able to bang with Peyton MAnning if needed (kudos to Wade Phillips for building that squad). You have to take care of business at home first. Not saying our team should be built soley for our division, but it should be tailored to our division and flexible enough to hang with NE and SF, which I think it is for all the reasons you have given.
So I agree, but then disagree also. lol.
-
People are really underrating Bethea. SMH
100 tackles for a safety speaks more about the defense than himself.
Just because he doesn't have the INT's/DEF's mean 2 things: Teams chose to run against us than pass (true), people rarely threw his way, look at Nnamdi, no one knew his name until he became a FA.
-
My dream for them is Trey Burke of Michigan..but they'd have to trade up...
Well, I'm a Chris Paul/Pelicans fan, and you're going to have to jump the Pels because we need a point BAD, like you guys. If the consensus top 5 goes before us, we are definitely picking Burke.
-
Seems like the board has turned a leaf for toler, good for him!
ESPN ranks Ricky Jean Francios #3 overpaid player
in Colts Football
Posted
According to them, Larry Fitz is the seventh most overpaid player in the league? WHAT!? How can a top 3, if not THE best WR in the game ends up on a list like this? Was that a typo by the reporter or something? How does that happen?
Anyone who takes this list seriously must have been one of those people who were unhappy with our offseason and wants to use this as ammunition for their argument.