Talk amongst yourselves
Click here to buy PDF version
Need help on FanDuel or DraftKings? Purchase a subscription from the website that specializes in daily fantasy.
15 Sep 2012
Here's the thread for open discussion of all the Week 2 NFL games.
Posted by: Rivers McCown on 15 Sep 2012
189 replies , Last at
21 Sep 2012, 7:02pm by
Bears have -25 passing yards on their first 3 series. Guess it's tougher when you're not playing the Colts defense.
And yes, I fully expect that within 10 minutes of posting this Cutler will throw a 90 yard pass or something and make me look stupid.
“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”
Apparently Aaron Rodgers' has a prestige class feature that grants him a +3 bonus to rules lawyering. Awesome.
As far as the challenged 12-man-on-the-field, I thought the Bear defender were still on the field when the center started to snap the ball - for some reason the broadcast chose to freeze a little bit later, when the ball came out towards Rodgers.
Prestige classes? Bleurgh!
I'm joining Will Allen's campaign for a return to 2nd Edition rules to do away with this nonsense.
If every quarterback in the league got a +3 Ex bonus to rules lawyering it'd be unbalancing.
In fairness, I really don't want to see replacement officials trying to implement individual initiative. Games would last until after the next week's scheduled kick-off.
What do you think Kluwe's THAC0 is?
Hmm. The Beautifully Unique Sparklepony isn't listed in my Monstrous Manual, so I'm unsure of its AC. A regular pony clocks in at 7, but such sparkly horse-like creatures as the Unicorn and Ki-rin register a 2 and a -5 respectively. Similarly, I have no stat line for a frolicking ostrich, but would speculate that its unpredictable movements might shift it a point or two tougher than the 7 listed for its more common kin.
We're going to have to face facts here: at this point in the season, we just have neither the sample size nor a reliable enough impression of opponent strength to make a sensible estimate of Kluwe's THAC0. If the Sparklepony is as strong as we suspect, it may be very low indeed. On the other hand, he might just have rolled a natural 20. National Jump To Conclusions Week. Gotta love it.
As if he needed it, J'Marcus Webb has granted Clay Matthews Vip access into Club Cutler.
To return the favor, Marshall Newhouse has done the same for Julius Peppers to Club Rodgers.
Does DVOA credit that to the special teams?
Colts on road =/= Packers at home.
If Jerry Rice was watching this game tonight, he may have had to vomit at halftime. That was some of the most half-assed receiver play, from both squads, seen this side of a Matt Millen draft pick not named Calvin Johnson. Cutler was bad, too, but not as bad as they guys he throws to. Ugh.
To anybody who wants to defend Cutler, let's not go overboard with the argument that his protection was bad. Yes, it often was, but a lot of the better qbs in this league in recent years have performed better than Cutler did tonight, with protection that was no better, and frequently worse. The guy I saw tonight was not the guy I usually saw last year.
When Tice got the OC job in the offseason, my concern was that the qb and receivers would not get the coaching they would benefit from, with a coach like Tice who is so o-line oriented. You don't want to make too much of one game, but what I saw was consistent with that concern.
Agree about Cutler. I think he's a top ten quarterback, but last night was I think the worst game I think I've seen him play, and I agree it wasn't all on the O-line (even though by his gestures and screaming you would think it was). Not only was he trying to force balls into windows that weren't there, he had a few John Beck moments where he held onto the ball way too long, causing sacks or near-sacks. But even the all-time greats have a stinkbomb game here and there, and I guess he got his out of the way early this season.
-I'm not Billy Bad-Ass.
Cutler does seem to suffer from bursts of trying to win the game by himself (and hence throwing up miracle balls) and the occasional complete brain-cramp (which he perhaps got out early this week by goading the Packers defence). That said he does make his share of spectacular plays normally, and can be fun to watch when even close to on-form as a neutral. He was at times exasperating to follow as a Broncos fan though, and seems to be keeping that up. He is obviously a more than decent athlete with a really good arm, but he hasn't yet got the brilliance/brain-fart ratio into the Roethlisberger/Favre range, and I worry about his durability as well. Losing Forte could make this a very long season for the Bears offence.
"Most half assed..." I see someone doesn't watch Seahawks games.
Ya' gotta point, but, man, both sets of receivers were hideous last night, and the Packers are supposed to be so great in this area, and the Bears so improved. Yes, it matters that Jennings was hurt, but the Packers are supposed to be so deep in that area.
Guys not running routes well, no ball skills displayed, egregious drops, it was bad, bad, bad.
I agree and disagree (shocking!).
Cutler certainly seemed to be holding the ball for far too long, but whenever they showed the end zone view, it also didn't appear as though anyone was remotely open until after he started running forward while twirling, twirling towards freedom. So while he wasn't exactly releasing at 2.5 seconds, his guys didn't seem to actually get open until 5 seconds or so. Also, he can't buy a Brady call.
Rodgers has seemed off his 2011 form, too. He's been flat-out missing guys, and that just didn't happen last year.
Like I said, the Bears receivers were worse than Cutler last night, and Cutler was bad.There are times, though, when the qb cannot afford a sack if he can throw the ball away, and Cutler definitely took some coverage sacks when he should have thrown an incompletion.
The Bears do have the sort of offensive line that will make the Packers defense look good, kind of the mirror image of the Niners. The way to defang the Packers defense is to get to punching them in mouth, really hard, and thus make Clay Matthews in particular play less freely.
(edit) Yeah, I think Rodgers has been less accurate than last year's phenomena as well, although two good pass rushing teams have something to do with that. I also think the drop in accuracy has shown the Packers receiving corps to be a bit overrated. I certainly haven't seen much in the way of exceptional ball skills.
Whatever the cause, Aaron Rodger's (apparent) regression is killing my fantasy team. My opponent has Mason Crosby, who outscored Rodgers, for God's sake.
The Bears had two good drives, both were run based. They were actually running pretty well. However, once Forte left they were screwed. Also, they tried to come out passing, and that was a mistake that haunted them for the rest of the game.
There's more to receiving than ball skills.
The Packers' receivers are known droppers, all of them. It's their physical tools and route running that makes them good, all of them, when not held 10 yards downfield (yeah yeah I'm whining), are able to consistantly beat man coverage. And all of them are good both in the slot and outside (except Cobb).
They do make some acrobatic catches now and then but they're more known for dropping the ball than for making hard catches.
Go ask Rodgers if they ran good routes the other night.
You are too funny with your frequent passive aggressive shots at the Patriots. Was it just on this site last year that they proved that Brady didn't get any more RTP calls than usual? ;-)
I was specifically referring to defenders going below the knee. The Brady rule.
Woodsen seemed to keep coming in low, late.
I agree though having gotten a chance to see some of the coaches film both defenses played a part in what we saw last night. Both teams covered well and were applying pressure which tends to make QB's play worse and seems to make catchable throws harder to bring in. It just seems like even when a receiver gets open against a D that is playing like that they are less likely to make the catch in my experience. Perhaps frustration gets to them so they become a bit less fluid, but I've seen it with several teams.
That being said I still think the receivers were bad bad bad for both teams. Rodgers numbers weren't horrendous, he rarely looks amazing against the Bears (or any team that plays a solid cover-2 type D). Though the Packers with Rodgers are 7-2 vs the Bears until last year he really hadn't played great against them. Rodgers results (and game results, Packers always listed first for score)
Bears QB if not Cutler listed.
W11 2008 @P (37-03) 23-30 227 2-1 76.6 7.57 (Orton/Grossman)
W16 2008 @B (17-20) 24-39 260 2-1 61.5 6.67 (Orton)
W01 2009 @P (21-15) 17-28 184 1-0 60.7 6.57
W14 2009 @B (21-14) 16-24 180 0-0 66.7 7.50
W03 2010 @B (17-20) 34-45 316 1-1 75.6 7.02
W17 2010 @P (10-03) 19-28 229 1-1 67.9 8.18
W03 2011 @B (27-17) 28-38 297 3-1 73.7 7.82
W16 2011 @P (35-21) 21-29 283 5-0 72.4 9.76 (McCown)
W02 2012 @P (23-10) 22-32 219 1-1 68.8 6.84
AR CAREER VS BEARS 204-293 2195 16-6 69.6 7.49
So last night for Rodgers looked like most nights outside of 2011 for him vs the Bears. I did think the Bears were better at intercepting him since 12.8% of his ints as starter have come against them, but so have 12.5% of his starts. He has a higher comp % (65.5% career overall) but a lower YPA (8.17 career overall). Basically their defensive style and skill tends to force him into a lot of short throws, a lot of screens and just a few shots down the field and most of his success on those have come with completions to Jennings (I don't have the numbers on hand). Or at least that is how McCarthy tends to game plans for the Bears.
Last night looked a lot like a typical Packers offense with McCarthy and Rodgers vs the Bears, but their defense looked better than normal vs the Bears. Though Cutler has been historically awful at Lambeau 2 TD - 10 INT in his 3 games there, he didn't play there last year.
I realize this is all small sample size and there isn't a lot of good statistical backing to it, but this just seems to be how these teams under McCarthy/Smith with Rodgers/Cutler as QB's look against each other.
As another note I also think the Packers won the "officiating game" though I'm not sure it really had much impact on the outcome (they won that game vs the 49'ers too and it made the game look closer than it was).
I just don't know how much to take away from this game at all as far as how it reflects on the rest of the season. I did like how Tramon Williams played, and I got hope that the Packers pass rush is improved from last year (not just because they dominated a crap o-line but because they got some pressure last week vs a good to great o-line, at least compared to the rest of the league this year). The Bears D still did very well vs an average oline, and at worst above average offense.
I still think both of those teams are 10-12 win teams. I want to watch more of the coaches film though.
I just thought it was really weird to have both receiving corps stand out in such a negative way, especially with one team's having such a big reputation, and the other allegedly being so improved. I mean, shoving a guy because he is having a hard time getting Matthews blocked, because he just ain't quick enough, seems kinda' dumb, when you have eminently shovable (and more highly paid) receivers who are bored while running their routes, and yawning while trying to catch the ball.
I did not see that one coming. Specifically, if you had told me yesterday afternoon that the Packers would score 23 points, I would have said the Bears were a lock to win. I was concerned that the Bears' defense wouldn't be able to stop Rodgers from moving down the field at will and that the Bears would put up a decent-to-good offensive attack and just fall short in a shootout.
*Really* trying not to sound bitter, but does anyone else think the Packers didn't look much more impressive last night than they did on Sunday? To me, the difference is that the Bears were just plain awful. Which makes the loss more frustrating to me because that should have been a winnable game.
I feel a lot worse about the Bears' chances this year than I would if Rodgers had torched them for 400 yards and 5 TDs and they lost 42-30, or something like that.
I think a reasonably professional effort by the Bears' receivers results in a close game that is decided within the two minute warning. I also think such an effort may have resulted in Cutler not playing like a moron. These things are fixable, with good coaching. I don't know enough about the Bears qb and receiver coaching situation to have any feeling one way or another as to the likelihood of it happening.
I think if you're going to talk about hypotheticals for if the Bears had played better, you also have to take into account the Jennings injury, James Jones wrong route that resulted in a pick, and the Nelson/Finley drops and fumble, too. Rodgers very easily could have finished with 75 more yards and another TD without a pick having played no different a game.
I can't really hypothetical in catches that Packers don't make. They probably average 4 drops/should have caught plays a game over the last 3 years. Jennings being healthy would have made a difference since he has caught I think it's 7 of the last 9 15+ air yard passes that Rodgers has completed against the Bears.
I think the biggest what if change on the game last night would have been if GB could have converted on 3rd and 2 or less I think they failed at that 4 times last night. While their run game was respectable, their power game was still awful and that hurts.
Even a hypothetical Finley drops balls like he's performing a Braylon Edwards impersonation.
Clay Matthews seems like a front runner for DPOY this year. He was great in both 49ers game and the Bears game. Not only his pass rushing was good, but he played the run well too.
The guy who is hideous against the run, from what I've seen of the Packers this year, is their linebacker who wears 51, whose name escapes me right now. By the Hammer of Nitschke, that guy looked like he was on roller skates against the Niners.
DJ Smith, Desmond Bishop's replacement since Bishop is on IR. He's a 2nd year player, 6th round pick. Most fans were worried about it. He's athletic but Bishop was probably the best backer against the run last year, and Smith is undersized (listed as 5-11 though I think that might be with shoes on). He was better vs the Bears, but if Bishop were healthy he would only be a rotational player (and generally replacing Hawk at that).
I sometimes wonder if the Packers are so bad at run stopping because they have no one good to practice against. The line is average at best at run blocking, with a major weakness being doing anything on the 2nd level. The linebackers have a really hard time getting off blocks, especially if a lineman gets to them on the 2nd level. Coaching can help sure, but if you have crap to practice against raw technique practice can only go so far.
That's DJ Smith, 2nd year man out of Appalachian State. He's only starting because Bishop is out but there are high hopes that he'll play well enough to facilitate Hawk's release before next season.
edit: DPF covered it.
Also, Hawk is so terrible against the run. I don't think I've ever seen him knock a ballcarrier backwards or stop one in his tracks. They always seem to be able to drag him for an extra couple yards.
"Hawk is so terrible" can be applied more generally than just against the run IMO. He wouldn't be that much of a burden on the team--if he was getting paid at, say, the veteran minimum. He's easily the worst draft pick relative to position (5th overall in '06) of the Ted Thompson era.
No, he isn't. Justin Harrell at 16 was by far the worst pick relative to position of the Thompson era, and Pat Lee at 60th is probably 2nd.
Believe it or not Hawk has the most sacks (10.5) and ints (8) of any player that was a LB in college who was drafted in 06 (there are several college DE's that play LB in pro's now who are way better on the sack side of thing but Hawk still leads all of the 06 class in ints and is 12th overall from that class). He is also only slightly behind Chad Greenway and DeMeco Ryans in tackles out of every player taken in that draft (of course you expect LB's to have higher tackle rates than other positions). When you make a claim about relative to position I think it's important to compare to the talent of his draft class, which really wasn't great for linebackers, especially for 4-3 LB's which is what he was drafted for.
If you put any stock in AV he is the 16th best player of that draft. Now AV gets inflated by players getting starts and the Packers keep starting him, but he isn't horrible. He isn't even the worst 5th overall pick in the last 10 years as I'd still take him over Levi Brown and Cadillac Williams and I'm not so sure he is really that much worse than Quentin Jammer. If you want to go back 20 years you can add Trev Alberts, Cedric Jones, Curtis Enis, and Bryant Westbrook (DB not Brian Westbrook RB).
Would I take Ryans or Hali over him out of that draft class? Certainly, but he isn't as bad as people want to say he is. He is still a first rounder, just not a what you want from the #5 pick. I'm not sure he is worth the 5 year $33.75 million contract he is on either, because he doesn't make a lot of splash plays, and he does tend to allow 1-2 yards extra when he makes a tackle, but he at least makes the tackles and gets there, and he cleans up for mistakes by other players more than is always obvious. So Hawk averages about $6.75 million a year (4.4 base this year), Hali is averaging about $11.5 million a year on his current contract, and Ryans averages about $8 million a year on his deal.
Hawk has outplayed everyone they brought in to try and replace him. If the Packers cut him today he would be on a team tomorrow. He isn't great but he is a starting caliber LB still.
Bryant Westbrook was actually a heck of a player before he ruptured his achilles. By the 2000 season, he was turning into exactly the kind of ballhawking, shutdown corner that was worthy of a top-ten pick. Then his injury happened and he was never the same. If you want to include career-ending/altering injuries, then yes, he deserves to be on that list, but that's hardly the fault of the team drafting him, that's just bad luck. Speaking of bad luck, his absence probably factored into that 2000 Lions squad collapsing and barely missing the playoffs, causing ownership to clean house and usher in Matt Millen's Reign of Error. Ugh.
I think that honour would still go to Mr. Justin Harrell (16th overall)
Edit: covered above me. Should've refreshed the page.
So the Jaguars are starting not only Guy Whimper but something called Herb Taylor as well. This has to be a good thing, right?
I mean, not for the Jaguars, obviously.
This is how the Jags end
This is how the Jags end
This is how the Jags end
Not with a Bradfield but a Whimper
It turns out that the Jags' way of coping with this situation was to call no passes that involved either a drop of more than three steps or throwing anywhere in a 120° arc in front of Gabbert. This was reasonably effective in limiting sacks, interceptions and JJ Watt pass deflections (only two this week, I think) but spectacularly unhelpful in the matter of actually moving the chains.
What a great slate of games today
And that is why Michael Vick will never actually be an elite QB. He just doesn't have the vision/field sense necessary.
That was a BS roughing call on Reed.
Have Schaub and Foster playing in a FFL. So, first Texans TD is Tate. Who is my handcuff on on the bench.
This is assuaged by being a Texans fan.
I started Tate last week and dropped him for Jacquizz frigging Rodgers this week.
...the touchdown is called back on review, and two plays later Foster scores.
Two Tate TDs later... Clearly Kubiak hates my fantasy team.
Aikman actually makes a good point about single coverage on VJax on TD pass
I have been stunned by the competence the Tampa Bay defense has shown thus far this season.
Now I'm stunned that someone felt the need to make a sequel to "Taken".
If I get KO'd from Survivor with the Pats vs Zona in Week 2, I may retire
By some grace of God, my Cardinals are tied with the Pats at halftime.
Weird that the game is not on here in central Connecticut. I am a Colt fan, so it doesn't bother me, but they have NYG game on Fox instead of Patriots. I would judge that the ratio of NE to NYG fans in this area is something like 3 to 1.
In Central CT, you always get the Giants on Fox. It's basically the local NFC team.
You would get the Pats on CBS. I don't think the Fox affiliate would snub the Giants just because the Pats happen to be on Fox today.
Egads, Eli Manning is having the same first half Matthew Stafford did last week.
For the record, even though Eric Wright made the pick-six, I'm still happy that Martin Mayhew didn't overpay to keep him (that was a staple Matt Millen move).
Same result, too.
Pats are a little off, but AZ is playing good D and just scored a TD from the 2 after blocking a punt.
I can't see it, but the Cardinals defense isn't very good normally, are they? I can't say I follow them. Wondering if they are playing well, or if Brady is a bit off with throws today.
They were dreadful in the beginning of 2011 during Arizona's 1-6 start, but they turned it around and were quite stingy down the stretch (weighted DVOA -2.4). Arizona's defense was the reason John Skelton was 5-2 as a starter last year, not John Skelton.
They played well against Seattle, but it's hard to say whether that is good D or just the Seahawks offense. They've done a good job harassing Brady and the Pats offense doesn't seem fluid after the loss of Hernandez in the first.
Thanks for the notes. I didn't realize Hernandez had been injured. Nor that Arizona's D turned it around late year.
The Pats probably slightly outplayed the Cards in DVOA terms, but only slightly, and blew it all on special teams. Rough, rough game. The Pats' offense seemed consistently out of sync in an odd way; it was as if they were afraid to pass the ball.
Ugh. Colts on their own 2, and they run it up the gut. What was that article about being aggressive inside the 10 on 1st down?
Colts get lucky. 64 yard punt, and Vikes block in the back on the return. Danger temporarily avoided.
Kolb leads a nice drive finished off with a QB sneak for the TD to give the Cards a 20-9 lead.
Vick throws an INT to Ed Reed. We may be seeing the death of the meme (held by the masses) that Michael Vick is a top-tier quarterback, and confirmation that 2010 was an outlier. Of course it's still only week 2.
By the way, isn't the use of the word "meme" a meme itself? I don't remember hearing that word until about 6 months ago.
Probably true. And I may not even being using it in the right context, but I don't care, I'm going to beat it into the ground until it's dead.
That word has been around for quite a long time. I certainly remember hearing it in college, and that was the 1980s.
It believe it was coined by Richard Dawkins in "The Selfish Gene".
I think the internet subculture has been using it for ~5 years to mean fad, meme, and/or image macro.
By "top-tier" you mean "somewhere near average starting" right? Because thats where he was in 2010.
I should have clarified it as meaning "perception of being top-tier", which is why I included "to the masses there".
And of course, right on cue, Vick pulls an improbable win out of his butt.
Leading a comeback minus a receiver and two starting linemen.
Colts are trying to lose this one: deflect a pass near the goal line, only to have to have it tipped again, and end up a Vikes TD; get a couple of first downs, out to the 45, then Luck takes a 22-yard sack! Punt barely gets back to midfield, returned to the 45. Ugh. Not going to win many this year; it would be nice to get this one.
...and Ryan Williams f***ing fumbles while trying to drain the clock, Pats recover, I will now go lay down in traffic
Just a killer. If you're the Cardinals, do you try to let the Patriots score a TD on purpose?
Or decline this penalty?
Apparently you don't.
holy crap. How do you not just kneel that and punt with 30s left?
Because they clearly hate their fans and winning football games
Not as much as Stephen Gostowski hates employment.
Belichick's not an ass. He's not going to fire the 2nd best kicker in the AFC because he missed a 40-yard field goal.
He shanked it!! Finkle!!
and after about 35 penalties, the Patriots miss a 42yd field goal. doh.
Was that a Vandershank sighting?
Some really screwy ends of games. The Giants are still going; Luck loses then wins (hyperbole, yes, but you get the point)the game for Indy; Arizona gives it away, then NE gives it away. Wish I were at a sports bar watching these instead of watching terrible feeds on the internet!
Screwy end, but you can't really put it on Ghost. He was (I think) 4 for 5 on the day.
Gotta put it on the NE Offense (Or ARZ defense) for basically doing nothing for 55 minutes. Or the ST for the blocked punt and missed FG.
Well now that I'm out of Survivor I can dedicate myself to despising the Patriots with every fibre of my being
It looks like an incomplete pass to me, but its funny how Gumble can't seem to understand that the ball ending up downfield doesn't necessarily mean its a pass.
Not surprising, given that the announcers understand the rules only slightly better than the scab zebras.
It would have been helpful if anyone involved understood the most important applicable rule: Vick was in the pocket, the ball landed six yards behind the line of scrimmage, there was nary a receiver in sight; Eagles' ball at the 11, not the 1.
Ken Whisenhut evidently never heard of the "Miracle in the Meadowlands." The Cardinals did a terrible job of managing the clock at the end of the game, starting with the kick returner failing to run the ball out of the end zone and burning at least six seconds. After brilliantly picking up the critical first down, which started to empty the stands, Arizona fooled around with a couple of uninspired handoffs (the functional equivalent of kneel-downs), then inexplicably decided on a pitchout on third-and-more-than-you're-going-to-get-in-any-case. Why run two plays that are guaranteed not to pick up yards, but which do burn clock, then decide on a fairly risky play in a vain attempt to pick up yards?
New England would have been extremely fortunate to pull this one out thanks to some poor decisions by Arizona; Arizona was extremely fortunate to pull this one out thanks to a missed field goal by an extremely reliable kicker.
Refs just cost Ravens a win. Take away a TD with a bogus offensive PI call when the DB has his back turned and is all over Jones. And, worse, Vick let's a ball go that lands in the middle of nowhere, in the pocket, 4 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Refs incorrectly call it a fumble, overrule themselves, then neglect to call intentional grounding. It's then 3 and goal at the 1, not the 10, which lets the Eagles easily run it in.
"Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion"
Sounds about right to me. Vick was still in the pocket, and that ball had no chance of being a completion.
That being said, the field was pretty damn crowded, and it could easily be argued that there was a receiver in the "vicinity".
Vick was not in the pocket.
Its still intentional grounding if the ball doesn't reach the line of scrimmage.
Anyways, the refs were completely ill-equipped to call the game. They couldn't even spot the ball right, they messed that up at least 3 times and had to stop the game.
And the offensive PI call against Jones was ridiculous. Nnamdi commits illegal contact and holding on pretty much every play, and then Jones uses his hands to disengage and make the catch, and gets called. Ravens should have had a 10 point lead with 5 minutes left.
These were pretty even teams, not saying Baltimore deserved the win. But the result is pretty much meaningless, it just doesn't demonstrate anything. The officials were incapable of calling an NFL game.
I'm watching the replay now - you're 100% right. The ball lands about 6 yards behind the LOS, and the only white jerseys near it are ineligible. It should have been grounding.
But Vick was being thrown to the ground as he threw. Is there no allowance for that in the intentional grounding rule?
No, there's not. If there was, every QB being sacked would just flip the ball forward before hitting the ground and get an incompletion.
If being hit causes an errant throw into an unoccupied area, they don't call it, but Vick was simply and obviously throwing the ball aimlessly to avoid a sack.
I'll happily trade that grounding penalty for the three (at least) roughing the passer penalties Baltimore got away with. To say nothing of Oher preventing a sack by grabbing Cole's face mask or Baltimore's RG committing a false start on every play. The game was terribly called on both sides.
I was wondering what was up with RG all game! I guess he wasn't considered set until he did his little adjustment right before the snap, but it certainly looked odd. The Eagle defenders never complained though.
And the refs let players on both sides blast the QB all day, but threw 1 flag on the Eagles and 2 on the Ravens, one on a very glancing blow to the helmet by Ed Reed and another on the last drive of the game to get the Eagles half the distance to the goal. The last one pretty much looked identical to all the rest of the plays, but got called. Just terribly inconsistent.
The RG thing is OK, it was part of the signalling that Flacco was ready for the snap, I believe. Movement by the offense is only considered a false start if it "simulates the snap". You'll often see guards touch the center as a signal, or lineman turn around when a QB audibles. The Ravens' RG's movement was no different than such things.
I was more asking about what Anger...rising said. Vick was probably grounding it there but I don't think anyone could have thrown the ball past the line in that situation given how he was being hit.
I've never seen an intentional grounding call made when the defender struck the QB's arm on the throw, especially when the ball ended up in the neighborhood of the RB in the flat.
(Bradford threw a duck in the 1st quarter of the Rams-Redskins game under similar circumstances that wasn't remotely IG)
Otherwise there'd be about 10 of those per game.
Incidentally, according to the refs, Baltimore lost of the yardage, but gained a down. The incomplete on 2nd and goal resulted in a 4th and goal, according to the referee.
Robert Griffin is everything people have always pretended Michael Vick could be.
He certainly looks good so far, but I'd be a lot more impressed if his performance so far hadn't been against Saint Louis, and a NO team that doesn't look very good.
I think the Rams defense may actually be fairly decent. Two good pass rushers and a much improved secondary between health and the addition of Finnegan. They're not about to be mistaken for the 2002 Buccaneers, but I don't think they're by any means terrible, and Griffin, while not the finished article, is already a very, very dangerous quarterback.
Holy crap, that was a beautiful catch by Wallace on an ugly Roethlisberger heave.
The Jets' play calling on that last set of downs was...interesting
An absolute howler by the refs in Pittsburgh, awarding a first down on a 3rd & 10 completion when Emmanuel Sanders was down a good yard shy of the marker. Thankfully overturned on review.
And then the Jets promptly muff the resulting punt.
Looks like today, in Penna., is the day the replacement refs jumped the shark
So Danny Amendola... are Washington just not bothering to cover him or what?
If the Seahawks and the Cards both turn out better than expected, maybe the NFC West will be better than expected.
"The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club."
Shrug. No need to bring xkcd into it. I think it's clear what I was saying. Arizona and Seattle both played good teams well and at first glance appear better than expected. If that holds up, we won't be thinking of the NFC West as weak this year.
I know. I was amused that your statement basically saidk "If half the division is better than expected, then the division will be better than expected."
The Jets/Steelers game has become utterly unwatchable, with a flag seemingly thrown on every play and the officials intent on having a mother's meeting after each one. Some really dubious calls in this one, not a good show from the replacement refs.
Terrible DPI call against the Steelers. No interference, legal hit by Ryan Clark. Should have been incomplete.
Let's just pause to note that the call wasn't even on Clark. It was called on a defender who literally never touched the receiver.
As a Cowboy fan, I'm ready to have the real refs back (even though they hate us). The Golden Tate on Sean Lee non-call makes me incredibly angry.
Wow, the Jets can not catch the ball.
AWFUL call in the Steelers-Jets game. Ryan Clark levels Holmes as he's trying to secure the catch. Replacement ref panics and throws the flag on a completely legal hit. In order to save face, refs call PI on Ike Taylor, who never lays a glove on Holmes.
Probably the worst DPI call I have ever seen in the NYJ-PIT game. The PIT corner they called DPI on never actually made contact (at all!, he literally put not one finger on him), and the safety made a completely legal hit to jar the ball lose after Holmes touched hit.
Didn't mean much, as NYJ punt 3 plays later, but still...the officiating situation is pretty disgraceful on the part of the league/owners.
Since the opening touchdown drive, Sanchez is 3/17 for 22 yards. Yikes.
I’m surprised no one mentioned this regarding the Jets loss. Before getting speared in the head by Timmon’s helmet early in the 2nd quarter (it rightfully drew a roughing penalty), Sanchez was 6 for 8 for 80 yards and a TD. After, he was 4 for 19 for 58 yards and 0 TDs.
He got hit so hard he remembered who he was?
Josh Morgan MVP
After tomorrow night, there will be 6 undefeated teams left. It's Week 2.
Here are the number of 2-0 teams after week 2 going back a decade. 6 is the lowest, but there were plenty of 7 years. Don't know what this means.
2011 - 7
2010 - 7
2009 - 9
2008 - 10
2007 - 10
2006 - 11
2005 - 7
2004 - 7
2003 - 8
Thanks. Probably a combination of parity & scheduling. But seems like a lot of world-beaters became also-rans & vice-versa.
And conceivably only two in the AFC, neither with an interconference win. The AFC as a whole would be 1-7 against the NFC, with Colts over Vikings the only win.
Lions seem to mimicking the Pats in relying on a run game that doesn't really exist
It was sort of working. It tended to result in 2-3 yard gains, which at least resulted in 3rd-and-manageables.
Lions-like tackling detected!
Any thoughts about the dustup between Coughlin and Schiano after the last kneel-down? I'm curious to see if the FO comments are any smarter than the large quantity of idiots in the NFL.com comments.
Schiano claims he used to do it at Rutgers; maybe someone that follows Rutgers football can confirm whether that's true? Personally I have never seen a defense try to interfere with a kneel down. The unwritten rule is that an offense that's just downing the ball can do so unmolested, and I've always seen that rule followed. I would consider Schiano's actions a breach of etiquette.
I've seen it occasionally. I saw a guy try the Polamalu trick of jumping over the center to hit the QB before he cleanly takes the snap once. It never results in anything, but then, the old "run it into the line" didn't either, until it did.
By the same token, offenses play the game of having the quarterback creep backwards slowly before kneeling to run more time; if they're allowed to play BS games with the kneel, then it's hard to criticize defenses for doing the same.
The kneel down, or victory formation is designed the way it is to protect possession from an all-out blitz from the defense. The Buccs don't owe it to Coughlin to quit because he finds the timing convienent. That's ridiculous on it's face.
I thought it interesting how ESPN showed the Bucs finishing against Carolina last week with 3 straight kneel downs. So much for we play hard for 60 minutes spiel.
I get that Schiano is trying to build a hard-nosed culture/identity, but it rings false in light of that.
You mean the game where the Bucs were up by one score, instead of down.
Yeah, totally the same thing, guy.
Right, how do 3 straight kneeldowns embody this "60 hard minutes" principle? SOunds like kind of a selective principle, like one that you can use as a front to take a free shot at a team you just gave up 600 yards to.
That depends on how they kneel down. Are they doing it like they're expecting to take an all-out blitz and complete the play while retaining possession? Or are they just half-assing it courting serious misfortune by not protecting themselves out of a mistaken sense of entitlement?
Coughlin has no one but himself to blame for his teams carelessness. Pretty funny that a guy who puts such a high premium on accountability and managing details is so quick to point at others for things that are entirely his fault.
I don't get it. It'd be hypocritical if Schiano were to complain if someone submarined his kneeldown. But for his team to kneel, that's not hypocritical itself.
That DPI on Denver looked to me like it came before the tip, contr the announcing crew - when they showed the replay the defender and receiver entered the frame just as the tip occurred, and the defender had his arm underneath and around the receiver's. Anybody else get a better look?
ESPNs refereeing expert (whoever it is) said he'd pick up the flag. If a ball is tipped far away from the interfered reciever, the tip negates any contact - even contact prior to the tip.
I see - I thought that rule existed, but didn't know if it was the one being applied. I left the room and missed the review.
Will Peyton throw another pick before halftime?
How did Atlanta recover that? It didn't look like there were any red jerseys at the bottom of that pile.
I don't see how ATL recovered that. That was Denver ball. Denver guy fell on it, Denver guy came out with it. So I am puzzled.
And this game is on pace to be the biggest embarassment for the replacement refs yet.
These zebras, you guys. Not only do I think the Broncos are getting the short end of the deal right now, but it's taking forever to figure anything out. Almost 60 minutes for the first quarter!
Holy cow NOTHING going the Broncos' way!
What. The. Heck?
John Fox is loosing his cool(can't really blame him). Not a good idea to challenge a five yard penalty on first down.
and now he wasn't even right. Horrible.
I loved that. This game is a joy. (Not exactly a Broncos fan)
You know, as bad as Denver's offense has been, Atlanta really hasn't capitalized.
Denver defense looks as though it could be for real. Any time you turn the ball over 4 times, including down to your own 1 and only give up 13 points you are doing something right. They seem to be getting some pressure without gaping holes for the running game, but they need the ball to bounce their way sometime soon.
They got a few stops out of how many possessions? The time, beating, and looks will wear on them. The Falcons are going to have more looks to get into the Broncos weaknesses, so their effectiveness will accelerate. Meanwhile the Broncos are probably going to have to depend on plays Manning's arm isn't up to making to get into the game before the Falcons start slowly grinding them to death with the clock. The Bronco's defense has played OK, but where are their big plays? They've had their chances to jump routes, pick off tipped balls. But their not making those plays. The difference between the two teams might end up being that disparity in defensive execution, even though it might look like a gap in the two offenses.
Yeah. Wearing down is going to be a problem if the Denver offense cannot get moving. There is a fair amount of randomness in where a tipped ball goes, so it isn't all execution in that. Ryan has not thrown any passes as badly judged as Manning yet.
I don't know, I think if you're a defender and that tip goes off the finger tips, that's something to look at. The Falcons clearly saw something in Peyton's film and the schemed for it. But the tips, every team drills for. The Broncos have had those plays to make, they didn't. So the Falcons have all the extra possessions.
Broncos look like they're gonna go in with some momentum, but they still have to come out on defense. So we'll see.
captcha is: sLEUH
Tips are almost entirely random. Creating them is not, but capitalizing is very random. Perhaps teams drill for it, but like recovering fumbles: you can't really be good at it.
"Come out on defense"? Drive chart:
TD 1 yard
Punt 1 yard
Punt 5 yard
Perhaps a downward trend, but I'll take that production any day.
Is it random though? We have lots of data on fumbles and recoveries, so we can safely say that they are (more or less - if I remember correctly, fumbles by rushers are randomly recovered). Play by play data doesn't record tips, so what data we have is recent and largely incomplete. I could make an argument that tips are more likely to be caught by the defense, if only due to weight of numbers and the fact that they are more likely to be facing the line of scrimmage at the time of the tip.
I could also be entirely wrong and it is truly random, but we don't really know.
Back when I played rugby and touch/flag football we did sometimes work on tip drill, and it does help you get better at catching the tumbling ball. But where it goes is pretty random unless the 'tipper' has chance to make a volleyball style play, even then the more off-round the ball the more it could go anywhere with irregular deflections. Rugby Balls were easier to direct than American Footballs.
Tips might be random if we count from the tip; in the case of the Broncos, I'm counting from glanced off their fingers, or landed right next to them. Those were big plays they needed to maintain parity. The didn't make them. And we see what's happening as a result.
DPI? Are you kidding med?! Jesus - this is getting hard to watch.
Non-contact DPI calls not helping John Fox's blood pressure I think...
Assante Samuel forced a fumble? Which universe did I fall into?
That might technically be holding, but it was also offensive pass interference on #88 with the pick & roll. Shouldn't have been called.
That was a great catch... if it gets over-ruled anyhow...
The Falcons DBs have been lights out so far. Not only the picks, but general coverage as well. And this is without Grimes.
Meanwhile: Thats a touchdown!
Down 13 after that kind of half? I'll take it.
Great footwork by Thomas on that one.
Was the offseason knock on Thomas that his route running wasn't precise enough for Peyton Manning's lofty standards? This half alone he's turned the Atlanta secondary inside out a few times, and those DBs have been rock solid otherwise.
Why on earth are the Falcons punting from the Denver 40 yard line on 4th and 4? Holy cow!
27 yard punt the predictable outcome.
Very nice drive by Falcons there. Atlanta OL, and good use of quick throws and roll-outs, are taking over this one I think.
Ryan looks really good with pressure in his face.
Why don't Denver use their last timeout before the TMW? Surely it is better to use it and keep time on the clock.
Has anyone else noticed that the NFC has opened the year 7-1 against the AFC with the lone win being Colts-Vikings? Yikes, I'm thinking. And the lack of parity is only going to get worse. The NFC gets RG3 and Russell Wilson, while the AFC has to enjoy Tannehill and Weeden. I'm worried that we're going to return to the 1980s and 90s.
AFC does get Luck, who's the only AFC QB with a victory vs a NFC team in 2012...
But the NFC already has Newton, and of the older guys the AFC will lose Peyton, Brady, Roethlisberger and then Rivers over a time frame which will deprive the NFC only of Brees and Eli, while Ryan and Rodgers are still in their approximate primes.
I'm not so down on Tannehill, though. He could perfectly well develop into a very good player.
Not really contesting that NFC seems to be stronger than AFC for now or the foreseeable future (which, in todays NFL, is maybe 2 weeks). But the argument that the gap widens as AFC get Weeden/Tannehill and NFC get RG3/Wilson is cherrypicking, as it conveniently ignores the fifth starting QB drafted this spring - and the one picked first, to boot.
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties