Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

06 Oct 2012

Week 5 Open Discussion Thread

Here's your thread for discussion of all the Week 5 matchups.

Posted by: Rivers McCown on 06 Oct 2012

142 replies , Last at 07 Dec 2012, 11:26am by tiewhesee

1
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:15pm

Rams-Cards or the Star Trek marathon on SyFy?

Heh.

Most noteworthy so far: Amendola is out, and Fitz got away with a pretty egregious facemask grab.

2
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Andrew Potter :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:24pm

That Fitzgerald facemask may well have been a touchdown saving foul. Quite incredible that it wasn't called.

Amendola hurt his shoulder landing badly; no word on what type of injury but he was very upset about it when heading into the locker room and is definitely done for the night. He hadn't been playing well up to that point either, with the exception of one 44 yard catch on the opening drive. He'd dropped a couple of catches he'd normally make and had a bad miscommunication with Sam Bradford on another should-have-been-first-down play; a bad night all round for him.

Quentin Mikell is also done for the night, as I understand. He took a nasty blow to the head from the knee of one of his teammates.

3
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Anonymouse (not verified) :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:32pm

This game is brutal. Instead of "three yards and a cloud of dust", it's "zero yards, and a cloud of QB's throwing balls into the ground"...

7
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Andrew Potter :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:47pm

Bradford hasn't been great, but his receivers haven't helped. The interception was terrible, but he's hit Kendricks once between the numbers and seen it dropped, hit Amendola in the hands twice and seen the ball hit the ground, and seen his other receivers utterly fail to get open. This is not a good offense at all.

Kevin Kolb's going to be lucky to get out of this game uninjured.

4
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:38pm

Terrible pass by Bradford. He was falling down and the Rams were well within field goal range.

Also, I picked up the Rams' kicker for my FF team.

5
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:40pm

Zero completions in the second half. Were at 6:28 of the third quarter.

6
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Andrew Potter :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 10:43pm

The Peterson interception is the only pass in the last seventeen attempts not to have fallen incomplete.

Just as I type that, Fitzgerald breaks the streak.

8
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Paddy Pat :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 11:05pm

All right, this is getting sick. The only reason the cardinals were able to beat the Pats is that they must have gotten away with heinous holding. 7 sacks against the rams? 8 against the Dolphins? I have to go back and watch the film, but this is ridiculous.

9
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Thu, 10/04/2012 - 11:44pm

The Cardinals had only 140 yards passing vs. the Pats. They won the game because the Pats made a lot of mistakes, up to and including the missed FG at the end of the game. Brady's INT on his first pass, a blocked punt that gave the Cards the ball at the Pats' 2 yard line, stupid penalties...

10
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Anonymouse (not verified) :: Fri, 10/05/2012 - 9:03am

I also maintain, as a Pats fan, that other teams get up to play the Patriots like almost no other team in the NFL. I can see Ray Lewis foaming at the mouth screaming about Tom Brady this, and Bill Belichick that. I doubt that other teams get as jacked up for playing Sam Bradford and Danny Amendola.

There is probably no way of proving it, but I feel like, of the Pats 10 non divisional games, the Pats get the other team's "best effort" in six or seven of those games.

11
Thursday Night Game
by commissionerleaf :: Fri, 10/05/2012 - 2:39pm

This is like a college game. Saint Louis is a BCS team starting a rookie quarterback who is hopelessly overmatched by the task of completing passes. Arizona is like a non-BCS team with a couple of players playing out of their minds (Fitz, Peterson) because they are the only players who belong on the field with Saint Louis.

In other words, kick these teams out of the NFL.

12
Re: Thursday Night Game
by nuk :: Sat, 10/06/2012 - 12:33pm

Naw, just kick out the teams that have lost to them.

13
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by joe football (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 12:50pm

Be sure join a star-studded cast of your favorite FO posters for another season of football chat!
Instructions moved to pastebin due to overzealous spam filter: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=Qjf3ZzvE

14
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by B :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 1:19pm

Wheedon with a 62 yard TD strike, and the Browns are up 14-0 on the Giants.

72
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:27pm

I had 10 bucks on this game (Giants 1.25) and wasn't afraid of losing the bet at all.

15
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by billsfan :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 1:38pm

Steelers/Eagles isn't exactly making the case for the urgent return of non-replacement referees.

(I also like the Eagles)

16
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BJR :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 1:44pm

What the heck is Vick doing out there???

17
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:01pm

If anyone is watching the Giants game, is Haden playing?

20
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Anonn (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:15pm

No, he's still suspended. Brown/Patterson are the starters.

18
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:10pm

It's amazing to me that FOX is paying an ex-NFL coach (Brian Billick) to do color commentary and he can't bother himself to do basic research about the NFL rules that have changed since he coached.

And my God, does Reggie Wayne have great hands or what?

19
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Flounder :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:14pm

Nick Perry makes a completely clean hit right into Luck's chest/shoulder, causing a fumble, and he gets a 15 yard penalty. Refs seem to simply react to the fact that it was a really hard hit, and just assumed it was helmet to helmet.

21
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:17pm

Except that he led with his helmet and he launched into the QB.

Thanks for posting Coach Billick.

23
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Flounder :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:23pm

He didn't launch - he ran right through him.

24
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:29pm

His helmet hit Luck's helmet.

26
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Flounder :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:35pm

That is simply not true. His helmet hit Luck's chest/shoulder.

Nor, might I add, did his helmet at any point subsequent ride up into Luck's helmet.

29
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:45pm

All irrelevant and have nothing to do with article 8f...I.e., the spearing rule.

"If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily" it's Unneccessary Roughness.

The player could have easily made the hit with his head up and arms extended...easy, easy call to make in the middle of the field.

27
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:36pm

If you run into a doorframe straight on with your shoulder- does your face hit the door?

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

28
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Flounder :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:41pm

If you are running and have your body bent in any fashion, your head is in front.

31
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:49pm

exactly my point , you'd have to run with your chest leaning backward to avoid leading with your head.

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

32
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:52pm

But your head doesn't and SHOULDN'T be pointed down when making a tackle. That's spearing and if done purposefully its a 15-yard penalty.

http://videos.usafootball.com/pages/tackleprogression/

http://www.nata.org/NR071106

"See what you hit."

34
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:59pm

Except your original comment said

"he led with his helmet"

my argument is in any typical running posture , you do so inherently due to physiology.

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

36
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:03pm

New rule all players must run backwards!

37
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:07pm

When you watch the 100-yard dash do you see 10 guys running with their head down?

This isn't an arguable POV if you know the rules of football. He dropped his head and drove the crown of his helmet into the player when he could have easily kept his head up and extended his arms in a much less dangerous fashion and still made a crushing hit.

That's the fundamental and basic rule of 15-yard Uneccessary Roughness Spearing.

And I wonder why year after year I keep getting these kids at the HS school level who have no idea how to tackle properly...

40
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:09pm

I'll take strawmen for $2000, Alex

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

41
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:16pm

Instead of playing Jeopardy, I'd recommend you and Josh should actually learn about the basic rules of tackling.

43
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:29pm

Are you comparing running in a straight line as fast as you can to running in response to someone else, while trying to hit them and transfer your strength and momentum into them , hence bringing them downward to the ground?

Oh. You are.

PS, what do runners often to at the finish tape ?

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

46
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:37pm

"my argument is in any typical running posture , you do so inherently due to physiology."

48
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:53pm

you're semantically correct, there was an implied 'playing defense in american football"

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

51
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:04pm

This is your quote knucklehead.

53
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:12pm

And now I see that you're just trolling.

Should have known better
--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

59
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:07pm

Spearing (that is, hitting a player with the crown of your helmet) has been a penalty for years. Sounds to me that you're not arguing that it was spearing, you're just making excuses.

64
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by billsfan :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:50pm

He also argues below that both helmet-to-helmet penalties against the Steelers (Clark and Mundy, both of whom have previously been fined for similar hits) were "nonsensical."

It's possible that he sincerely believes that hitting things with the helmet is an important part of the game.

(I also like the Eagles)

68
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:08pm

He might believe that, but his arguements are ridiculous.

139
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Intropy :: Tue, 10/09/2012 - 3:42am

The Mundy one was pretty ridiculous. Can't even tell if their helmets touch in the replays, but if they do it's incidental as the hit was delivered shoulder to shoulder.

44
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:32pm

PS,

would you coach players never to try diving tackles at runners legs?
Since that's face down and leading with the helmet

*popcorn munch*

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

49
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:53pm

no answer, huh coach?

pretty damning

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

80
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 7:43pm

Be careful not to post in daylight, you'll turn to stone.

Isn't it stuff like this that got your last username banned?

50
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:02pm

Since you can dive at a players legs with your head not face down and you should always try to keep your vision on a ball carrier who can adjust his route...of course not. You'd know that if you had the slightest idea about how to tackle.

Also, diving at the legs isn't spearing and not illegal. Try putting down the popcorn and read the rulebook and watch the tackling videos.

116
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by 'nonymous (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 7:13am

In a 100-yard dash, sprinters' heads are down for the first 5 meters or so, because they are accelerating so rapidly. And if they had to change direction at top speed, they would do so by leaning sharply, with their heads leading the way.

I would really like to know if the NFL considers this hit illegal. In real-time, you could easily believe there was helmet-to-helmet contact; but there was none.

140
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Intropy :: Tue, 10/09/2012 - 3:56am

I think you are misunderstanding the terms. Imagine you are a tackler running towards a ball carrier. You are leaning forward at, say, 20 degrees in a natural running posture. When I say leaning forward I am referring to the orientation of the spine with respect to an axis vertically extending to the Earth (and I know it's a simplification that the spine wouldn't be curved, but let's keep it anyway).

Ignoring rotating you head as you would looking left or right as well as bending your head sideways ear-to-shoulder there are three orientations for your head.

1. Your neck can be roughly in line such that the spine above and below the shoulder level are collinear. In this position your head is "up."
2. Your neck can be angled forward from case 1 such that the part of the spine above the shoulders is farther from the vertical than the rest of the spine. In this position your head is "down" or "lowered."
3. Your neck can be angled backwards from case 1 such that the part of the spine above the shoulders is closer the vertical than the rest of the spine. In this position your head is "back."

In case one you aren't lowering your head, but since you head is atop your body and you are leaning forward it will be in front of you. But don't confuse a normal head up position with a lowered position just because it is forward.

33
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:54pm

The bottom line is it was a silly penalty. Luck was even smiling and laughing after it. There are bigger hits in my 30+ no-check hockey league than that.

Just leave the flags in the pockets on QB hits unless it is egregious, is that so hard?

22
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:23pm

And now Billick is justifying a horrible PI call with "face guarding"...which isn't a component of NFL PI.

WOW...I love his commentary and insight...but how does an 8-year ex-HC have such a poor grasp of the rules?

25
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:34pm

Refs in the Pitt-Philly game are abysmal. Worse than any of the scrubs.

Also, #42 scuzzy move throwing Brown's shoe OOB. Hopefully he'll get a Hines Ward quality earhole on some peelback in the 2nd half.

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

30
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ammek :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 2:47pm

Disappointingly, with 0:20 to go, Mike McCarthy chose not to attempt the fourth two-minute drill of the first half. The previous 13 plays had taken a minute and a half off the clock without a timeout being used by either side, for 30 net yards, plus a defensive penalty and a missed field goal.

GB/Indy: a battle of defensive titans.

35
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Tomlin_Is_Infallible :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:03pm

Another completely nonsensical roughing call against the Steelers.

Consider me shocked.

--------------------------------------
Velvet Sky fan

42
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by billsfan :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:18pm

That implies that Clark wasn't doing his best Iron Man impersonation on the first one.

(I also like the Eagles)

138
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Intropy :: Tue, 10/09/2012 - 3:40am

That call was good because it was late. Of course Redman (from memory, could have been Mendenhall) got taken down by an even later after the whistle hit and didn't receive a similar flag.

38
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BJR :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:07pm

Just a gorgeous cut from McCoy on that TD pass.

39
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by duh :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:09pm

Sure seemed like RG3 was starting to slide when he got crushed there.

45
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by CoachDave :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:36pm

And now Billick just explained the horse collar rule incorrectly.

The player put his hand in the shoulder pad area, but the ball carrier fell forward, thus no penalty.

Billick said "putting your hands inside the jersey (behind the shoulder pad), it gets called." When in fact the hands in the pads isn't the penalty, the act of doing so to gain tackling leverage and pull the ball carrier backwards (high risk of injury tackle) is the penalty.

This is why football fans have a horrible understanding of the rules...just terrible.

47
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by justanothersteve :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 3:40pm

Shields once again gets screwed by the refs on a pass interference.

63
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Nevis (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:30pm

Shields is the best at that. Happens once per game lately. He is the one gets gets interfered with and the call goes against him. I even thought the ball in this play was unwatchable.

52
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by JohnD (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:11pm

Who are these Colts? Any Given Sunday, here we come. (Knock on serious wood.)

54
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by JohnD (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:19pm

Yeah, there's the Colts defense we know and despise.

55
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by JohnD (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:37pm

Reggie bleepin' WAYNE

115
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by evenchunkiermonkey :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 3:27am

Cory Redding was seriously motivated, plus the Colts D got to play as if they had the lead because the Packers stopped running too much after Benson went out. How many runs did the Packers call in the 3rd quarter? Kills the success of the play action pass when the play calling gets predictable, and that kills the Packers every time. McCarthy needs to trust Alex Green to take some more touches.

56
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Purds :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:48pm

No Brady rule for Manning.

57
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Joshua Northey (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:52pm

The announcers are killing me today. Billick was uncharacteristically bad, the NYG CLE game had to be muted, and now the MIN game features an announcer who apparently doesn't know Percy Harvin runs the ball sometimes.

"The Titans know they have to keep an eye on Percy Harvin, but they had no idea he would ever line up in the backfield."

Apparently the announcer thinks the Titans have done no film study, but more likely he just doesn't know anything about the teams.

58
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by B :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 4:52pm

Hey, remember when Welker was getting phased out of the Patriots offense? It didn't take.

67
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by MJK :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:53pm

True, but only part of it is that Welker is just as good as he ever was. Losing two other key skill players (Hernandez and Welker's supposed replacement Edelman) to injury for an extended period of time might have something to do with it as well.

60
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jonnyblazin :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:07pm

If I were the Broncos I'd designate one defensive lineman to stay down after every play. Since you rotate D linemen a lot anyways, it wouldn't take your best players out. And as long as he knows he going down after the play, you won't have one of those Giant-esque plays where the guy does an obvious "Oh wait, I'm injured!" play.

I wonder what the league would do to penalize a team that does this.

62
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Andrew Potter :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:21pm

I wonder what the league would do to penalize a team that does this.

A simple mandate that any player who is sufficiently injured to cause a stoppage of play either costs his team a time out or must sit out the rest of the current possession (or quarter) should suffice. They could even claim it's a player safety rule to ensure that his team doctors are given time to properly assess him.

66
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by MJK :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:52pm

Who are you, Nick Saban?

61
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jonnyblazin :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:10pm

Thought the Bronco's got away with a hold on that PI call. But fact remains Pats have two of the worst starting CBs in the league.

65
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by MJK :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 5:51pm

That's pretty strong. While they won't go to many Pro-bowls, they're servicable. All I have to do to feel better about the Pats cornerbacks is think back to Duane Starks or Earthwind Moreland, and McCourty/Arrington don't seem that bad.

After seeing the replay, I actually didn't think McCourty made much (if any) contact before the ball got there on the PI call. Mostly faceguarding, which is legal. However, live I was just as sure as the refs that it was PI, so I can't fault them for throwing the flag.

69
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jonnyblazin :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:10pm

That was pretty blatant interference. The receiver started going back for the ball and McCourty pushed him so he couldn't make the adjustment.

70
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:18pm

Danny Woodhead is demonstrating again why his DVOA is so ridiculously high.

71
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by TimK :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:25pm

Nice following the blocks and going fast into the hole by Woodhead.

Joe Mays is not doing much against the run and is still a liability in coverage. Denver probably be looking for ILB upgrade in time for next year.

Von Miller seemed to spot something on the 3rd down conversion, but the play was running away from him.

74
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:43pm

I thought Miller made the best play of the game with that run stop at the goal line just before halftime. Got umder the blocks and still had enough leverage to launch and bring down the runner behind the line. Just a great athletic play and great awareness. Denver did very well picking him.

91
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:23pm

Woodhead has a huge split between his rushing DVOA (-8.4) and his receiving DVOA (142.4, based on only 5 receptions coming in to today).

93
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:28pm

I think that might change a bit after today with a couple of big rushing 1st downs.

98
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:50pm

It should change some, but he's got a lot of 2-yard runs this season that need to be counter-balanced. I suspect his overall rushing DVOA will still be negative.

73
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:35pm

The Seahawks fullback is doing excellent work today.

75
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jonnyblazin :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 6:52pm

Why are the Pats snapping the ball with 20 seconds on the play clock with a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter? For a team with a bunch of smart guys, their end of game management is sometimes questionable.

92
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:27pm

To move the ball?

Sometimes, the best clock management doesn't entail burning through the play clock as much as possible on each play. Sometimes getting 1st downs is more important.

95
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:35pm

I would think that keeping the defense off balance is as important as burning the clock when there's nearly a full quarter left to play.

76
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Insancipitory :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 7:06pm

After that 3rd quarter offensive implosion, I thought my Seahawks were toast. But I was very pleased with the way they refused to quit. Smart safety call at the end. To strangle the life out of the Panthers offense like they did was pretty impressive.

104
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ticttoc (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:29pm

The Hawks D was again very impressive. Only gave up a field goal, other points being a safety and a pick six. The goaline stop late in the game was huge. Chasing down Newton on the outside run then Browner and Tru(?) stopping the Panther's WR when it looked like he was in for a TD. Irvin also had a big impact. Legion of Boom. Need to cut down on the silly penalties and continue to loosen the handcuffs on Russell Wilson. Bevel seemed to open up the passing game a bit and Wilson responded decently. The pick 6 was a bad throw but his 2nd one wasn't on him.

111
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 12:00am

Well that, anda after being hammered for not going for it on 4th and one because he has two goal-line backs and the best short-yardage QB in the game, Rivera decided that he would... send up a long-developing pass play on fourth and goal from the one. Seriously, I want to like Rivera as a coach, but he makes it SO difficult...

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

114
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Insancipitory :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 1:15am

It's not like Rivera ignored that advantage. They go to the back, he's crushed immediately for a 3 yard loss. They go to Cam, and that play would have scored 80% time, but the speed of the defense defeats it. 4th he probably left it in Cam hands with a pass/run option, Cam had brain-lock forgot it was 4th down threw it in the dirt rather than risk the then inconsequential interception. Seahawks get paid too, at least that's what the Panthers should take away from it. They tested every part of that goaline defense, the catch at the goalline and Cam's run in particular, would almost always result in a TD. I just don't see that as an indictment of anything the Pathers do. Could be the homer in me, unrepentently so, but I think it's a credit to the guys on the otherside of the ball.

77
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Theo :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 7:08pm

With about a minute on the clock at their own 18, the Seahawks take a safety.

78
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by LionInAZ :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 7:31pm

Von Miller makes two great plays to keep the Broncos alive, McGahee makes two mistakes to negate those chances. Tough game for the Broncos.

McGahee is a good runner, but with a -37% DVOA on passes maybe not a great choice on a 4th down pass when you're down by 10.

79
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 7:40pm

I am quite glad that I'm not a Bills fan, that was ugly.

The 49ers have run for 556 yards in the past two weeks, with q scoring aggregate of 79-3, it's like Harbaugh never left Stanford.

94
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Aloysius Mephis... :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:34pm

I keep telling myself to remember it's just the Bills, but damn that was impressive shredding of a very bad defense. Going back to the end of PFR's box score database in 1940, that's the only time a team has ever had 300 passing yards and 300 rushing yards in the same game (several teams came very close over the decades). 1990 was the last time a team had 300 rushing yards and 250 passing yards in a game.

81
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:01pm

Trivia time: For the second straight week, the Bears had interception returns for TDs by both Charles Tillman and Lance Briggs. Has any other team had two players both have Pick 6s in consecutive games?

82
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:19pm

Is this the first time that two different players have scored Interception TDs in back-to-back games for the same team?

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

90
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:13pm

Ha! I posted the same question above. Apparently this has never been done before in the NFL.

83
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jimm (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:48pm

nfc vs afc

15-5, 594-388 pts
AFC has not one a game by more than 7 and 4 wins by 3 or less

86
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Purds :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:54pm

Good catch. Amazing that it was just a few years ago when NE/Pit/Indy were the sure SB winners (actually, the SB winner was NE or the team that beat NE in the AFC playoffs!).

109
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jimm (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 11:52pm

I posted the exact stats comment on pro football talk and got 10 thumbs up and 6 thumbs down...it's hilarious that people give thumbs down to a statistic

It's fun to post the same comment on this site and then on pft - just to see the huge difference in the type of replies.

88
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:56pm

This was shown in last week's DVOA ratings where the bottom six teams were from the AFC, with ten of the bottom 14. There are six decent teams in the AFC according to DVOA.

I'd also point out that 80 points of that differential is from the Bears-Jags and 49ers-Bills games, which distort the picture as the losers of those games have been getting whipped in the AFC (though the Jags have escaped some beatings by being in the AFC South, which is a dismal division outside of Texas).

110
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by jimm (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 11:58pm

one correction...NFC is now 15-6 after the NO win tonight..had a 3 pt Indy win over Minn as the other way around.

the two SF wins were 80 of the differential but there were also these results:

Atl 27 SD 3
Atl 40 KC 24
Minn 30 Tenn 7
Chic 41 Indy 21
NYG 41 Clev 27

in total 7 of 21 games were NFC wins of 14 plus points.

84
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:50pm

Meachem's TD catch against the Saints provide a useful talking point. For an instant Malcolm Jenkins had a hand on the ball too, in this case he then lost any contact. However, if Jenkins and Meachem had both caught the ball then the possession would have been awarded to the offensive player. This is my roundabout way of saying that the fuss over the GB-Seattle game was caused by people not knowing the damn rules, or possibly by the NFL making the rules so complex that they are no longer intuitive in order to reduce every grey area to a minimum.

85
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:53pm

No, it was made by people not undesrtanding the rule to the degree that they think this play was in any way similar to that one.

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

87
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 8:54pm

Actually, I lie. They were both similar in that in neither case did simultaneous posession apply, since both Jennings and Meacham CLEARLY had posession beofre the other team's player grabbed the ball.

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

89
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:02pm

Feet down etc. Actually the GB case was unusual because in the air both players had a claim on the ball, and they did when they fell to the ground. It only caused such a fuss because Williams rolled his body in the way after they had fallen to the ground.

Basically, if the GB player had been invisible then it would have been ruled a catch for the seahawks, hence a win.

Never has a correct call been the cause of so much opprobrium, apart from the 'Calvin Johnson rule' which was also caused by people not knowing a rule that was counterintuitive.

96
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:37pm

So you're saying that no referee would award possession to an invisible receiver or defender?

Thanks for the contribution.

"Never has a correct call been the cause of so much opprobrium, apart from the 'Calvin Johnson rule' which was also caused by people not knowing a rule that was counterintuitive."

To argue that this was a "correct call", you are invoking possibilities from the world of Marvel Comics.

From the reply I saw, with visible players, it was clear that Jennings had control of the ball when Tate didn't. This isn't a "rules interpretation" question. We know what the rules are. We also know what we saw. Yes, your argument would have more force if Jennings had been invisible. But putting forth such a weak argument is tantamount to an admission that you have nothing else to offer.

But in the spirit of your comment, if the Packers had invisible defenders, why wouldn't they put 30 of them on the field? They could even have some line up offside. I bet the Seahawks would be hard-pressed to make a single yard of offense when invisible BJ Raji forced a loss of yardage every single play.

99
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:54pm

I tried to reply to this but was prevented by the fucking spam filter.

In a nutshell, concurrent possession is awarded to the offense, possession has to be established by either side and neither the best hold of the ball or event after the official end of the play count.

Your thirty player comment is pathetic.

100
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:07pm

Like I said, we know what the rule says. Stop acting like we don't know what the rule says.

Jennings had possession before Tate did. Didn't I just say that? The simultaneous possession rule does not apply when one of the players has possession before the other does.

"Rule 8 - Section 3 - Article 1 - Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball."

Emphasis added.

Pathetic is ignoring what other people say. You continue to act like others don't know what the rule is. Why are you talking about "concurrent possession" to a person who has said that possession was not simultaneous? Your argument makes no sense.

I thought my argument about the 30 invisible players was funny. But I also thought it appropriately mocked your silly argument about how possession would have been awarded to Seattle if only Jennings had been invisible. In what forum is this considered a reasonable argument? As I said before, if Tate had been invisible, the reception would have been awarded to Jennings!

Who gives a shit about either of these possibilities?

103
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:12pm

Those with a cranium filled with said substance?

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

106
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:37pm

That isn't the situation that rule was designed for, it is referring to a blatant pulling the ball away from somebody well after the catch/interception. Tate's left hand is around the ball from the same instant as Williams (though it was close, he'd just finished shoving the other Packer in the back), go back and look. A one handed catch on the ball versus a two handed catch be the defender is awarded to the offensive player.

The invisible thing was to illustrate that the offensive player has pre-eminence, if he can be seen to catch the ball it really doesn't matter what the defender does as long as the offensive player is catching the ball at the same time, which he clearly was, if only with one hand. The idea that the Packer deserves the ball comes from the actions that take place after they land on the ground.

107
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:39pm

"Rule 8 - Section 3 - Article 1 - Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball."

Yeah, this is correct. I can't remember who posted it (Travis?) or in which thread, but someone posted this rule and then an example in which two players were in the air attempting to catch the ball. In the example, one of the players (Player B) gained control while in the air, followed by the other player (Player A) gaining joint control, with Player B never losing control of the ball. That is exactly what happened in the Green Bay-Seattle game. According to the example given in the rule book, that is not a simultaneous catch; the ball belonged to Player B, who first gained control and never lost control. That example was directly on point and shows that it should have been ruled an interception.

I think much of the confusion comes from the difference between control and possession. You can't establish possession while in the air because you might not complete the catch or interception for whatever reason (you land out of bounds, the ball gets knocked out before you establish yourself on the ground, the "Calvin Johnson" rule, etc.), but you certainly can establish control.

108
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:54pm

Except that if you look at the play you will see that Tate has his left hand around the ball at the same time as Williams, which means that that rule and the example is not relevant, along with the movement to gain greater control made by Williams after they land.

To be more clear, they saw a 8.26 and correctly called a 8.26, even if it was a one handed 8.26, that doesn't matter.

112
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 12:04am

I have always expected people I debate to accept evidence and concede when it is not in their favor (not ot mention, stop using the now defeated arguments). I can certainly expect no less from myself.

I went and looked at the replays, and what I thought I saw is not what happened at all. Karl Cuba is right. Tate gets his hands on the ball at pretty much exactly the same time as Jennings. he does nto relinquish control of the ball after that. The fact that jennings got two hands on it while Tate only got one at first is irrelevant. I am now convinced this was a correctly called simultaneous catch.

Here's the video: http://youtu.be/ddEIlvH27u0?t=7m8s

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

113
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 12:37am

Actually, I have seen at least two former officials or officiating supervisors (Gerry Austin and Mike Pereira) disagree with you. Austin also specifically said that the fact that Jennings had two hands on the ball (and had the ball pulled to his chest) while Tate only had one hand on the ball means that Jennings had control, while Tate did not (at least not at the same instant that Jennings did).

In any event, we can just agree to disagree.

101
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by BigCheese :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:08pm

Except that in the Jennings catch, THERE WAS NO SIMULTANEOUS POSESSION! Jennings clearly had control of the ball, uncontested, before Tate got his hand on the ball. Hence, by rule, it was an interception, but the call was botched.

While I'm 100% with you on the Calvin Johnson TD, where people didn't understand the rule, which was correctly enforced (and to this day there are commentators who think the rule has been changed as a result of that play, not realizing it's the same exact rule), here it is you who aren't understanding the rule.

Same happened tonight with Meacham. He had posession of the ball before the defender got his hands on it, hence no simultaneous posession.

- Alvaro

Phil Simms is to analysts what Ryan Leaf is to NFL QBs

117
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by justanothersteve :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 1:59pm

If the GB defender (Jennings) isn't there, Tate doesn't control the ball. It drops silently to the ground. Tate never had the ball. He had a hand on the ball. That is not control. That was a catch as much as Vinny Testeverde got the Jets a TD against Seattle. Both were incorrect calls that the officials botched.

118
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Insancipitory :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 2:09pm
119
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 2:12pm

I thought dual possession was a very defensible call at the time. It certainly was not the worst call the refs made in that game.

120
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Insancipitory :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 2:30pm

As I've written many times; at this point I've given up hope of seeing a game well officiated. Games like the Redskins Buccs wild card playoffs in 2005 are like Unicorns; possibly with double rainbows. We can only enjoy the fleeting apparition, and long for their blessing to return; the meaning is not for mortal divination.

All I can reasonably hope for, now, is that they're fairly officiated; that the game is called or not called the same both ways, erratically if need be. I would like to see the complaining about the terrible officiating continue. I would prefer to see the intensity increase and the NFL force the crews to do press conferences that end when the media decides they end. So, in that sense I've been slightly pleased, my internal demons do not cry out for the blood of hypocrites.

Even the games I watched this weekend were a mess. Steve Smith probably should have been ejected, ridiculous no calls on both sides, silly ticky tack calls on both sides. The officals definately interfered with the games, so they may have changed the outcomes, but I never felt that they unbalanced them (I will understand if Chargers fans wish to politely disagree).

97
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Karl Cuba :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 9:39pm

The one handed TD catch by Colston in traffic demonstrates that superstar one handed catches with defenders in proximity are often the result of offensive pass interference.

102
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by JohnD (not verified) :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:11pm

Reggie Wayne begs to differ. (Yes, I know you qualified that with "often.")

105
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by RickD :: Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:34pm

Hey, my brother's online!

Heh heh.

121
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 8:12pm

Ditka in the pregame show: "They are 25-7 when they run the ball 30 or more times," and then "It doesn't matter if they don't gain any yardage; they have to establish the run."

There just are no words.

122
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 8:26pm

I had the same reaction.

123
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Jim W. (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 8:48pm

Second week in a row that I've watched the Jets, and both times their front seven has looked slow.

Owen Daniels' just had the lamest TD celebration ever.

124
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 8:51pm

What's the over/under on how many times they say Tebow's name tonight?

127
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by B :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:25pm

A billion. It seems like.

129
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by tuluse :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:39pm

"You can't talk about Tebow enough"

125
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Jim W. (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:09pm

Any idea why Joseph was called for DPI?

126
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ticttoc (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:21pm

'cause the scabs suck. Oh wait...

128
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ticttoc (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:34pm

I am not sure if the Texans O usually uses alot of misdirection and other (minor) trickery but they are obviously having more success with just giving Foster the ball.

130
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by SFC B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 9:41pm

Brian Cushing goes down and clutches his knee after a Jet dives/is pushed into the back of his knee as the play ends.

131
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by Marko :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 10:01pm

Awesome play by the Jets (picking up Sanchez's fumble after a strip sack and gaining about 7 yards). They should put that in their playbook. Lucky for them it happened as the last play before the two minute warning.

132
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ticttoc (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 10:09pm

Wow. Huge turnaround there on the Int. Even though the Texan off. can't take advantage

133
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by SFC B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 10:11pm

JJ Watt tips a Sanchez red zone pass which is then intercepted by McClain who takes it back to the Jets 8. Texans unable to pass it into the end zone in two attempts and kick a FG as the half expires. Watt has been held sackless so far, but he's been in the Jets back field most of the night despite double, and triple, teams.

134
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by SFC B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 10:45pm

Special teams will continue to hold the Texans back. McKnight takes the kickoff back for a TD.

135
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by SFC B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 11:12pm

And now Holliday bobbles the kickoff then takes it from about 4 yards deep to the 10. Special teams will continue to haunt the Texans.

136
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by ticttoc (not verified) :: Mon, 10/08/2012 - 11:12pm

JJ Watt is like a "mesh fence" in the backfield. He knocks down everything.

137
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by DEW (not verified) :: Tue, 10/09/2012 - 1:31am

Week in, week out, the Rex Ryan Jets are less of a football team and more of a circus act. It all begins with their blowhard of a head coach, who never met a chance to give a sound bite to a press he didn't like. Then there are the antics of players like Holmes and Bart Scott, who regardless of their actual football ability can't keep their mouths shut either. Then there's the whole bit about signing Tebow in the offseason, which regardless of his playing ability guarantees noise, just like signing guys like Braylon Edwards and Plaxico Burress did. And now there's the Sparano offense, which brings the circus onto the field (not that it wasn't there already under Schottenheimer): Tebow at QB, McKnight running a genuine Wildcat, a fake punt, an onside kick, Cromartie (currently their *best* DB) playing WR. There were several stories before the game, too, about how the wacky blitz packages were operating on defense to basically cover up the fact there was no pass rush. I'm not surprised that they burned TOs getting on and off the field--rather than focusing on blocking, on having running backs run, their QB throw, and their receivers catch, it's all trick plays and crazed antics. Gadget plays are supposed to catch the defense off-guard because the defense has to work hard to deal with mundane football (see: SF *against* the Jets last week), but the Jets seem to throw them in just because Ryan likes them. They were always a little bit like this, but they've completely devolved into a clown organization playing clown football.

141
Re: Week 5 Open Discussion Thread
by apbadogs :: Tue, 10/09/2012 - 7:22am

If it was the Cleveland Jets or Kansas City Jets they would be seen for what they are, an incredibly unathletic team and an incredibly untalented team instead of trying to figure out why they aren't 4-1 or 5-0. They just aren't good.

142
web hosting companies
by tiewhesee (not verified) :: Fri, 12/07/2012 - 11:26am

more..
Excellent Website Hosting Assistance For Everyone To Utilize

You might have issues finding a services that is dependable while offering the features that you desire. Finding the right variety is hard due to many different available choices. The information incorporated here will provide you with the main advantage of the skills of your friends who may have been with the most severe and created a web hold that worked ultimately.

Once you have choosing your online web hosting service organization, you need to prefer to make repayments every month, instead of investing in a lengthier period of time. You can't foresee what your business will likely be or what your number can do in the upcoming weeks. Should your organization grows too big for that number or your company shuts, you could possibly drop the cash you compensated, except if the hold states or else.

Website hosting service providers value their standing, because you can understand a whole lot from what end users record. Study website hosts to determine what possess a trustworthy status and a lengthy history of good support. This may also enable you to type out those who don't have a good reputation.

Particular internet hosts will assist you to receive a return proportional to the quantity of down time your internet site endures. This will not be much of a return in comparison to a reduction in product sales during the down time. You should opt for a website hosting solution that offers reliable up-time in contrast to refunds as being traditional.

Should your internet hosting assistance provides on the internet talks, forums or posting boards, then utilize them for immediate access to information regarding them. Provided you can find out about your issues, you may exclude professional services that won't work for you. Discovering the right host company will be easier whenever you affirmed by great critiques. When you can meet with a present customer of any organization, they will most likely be the best person to find out information about a firm you are searching for.

Should you be a novice in web design, choose a web host that offers wonderful customer service rather than a large amount of features. When you initially get started there are a lot of inquiries that appear in your thoughts about website hosting, so you're going to desire a hold which includes excellent customer care available and ready to respond to all your questions. The tech support that you will receive from a business with fantastic customer satisfaction is going to be far more helpful to you than a deal of functions you might never use.

Are you currently contemplating hosting your site having a cost-free host company? You will need to keep the very own backups of most your significant information, given that cost-free web hosting service services usually have little backup professional services, if any. Consequently, if anything goes away, you're out of luck.

Select your host depending on a variety of requirements rather than producing your decision according to price by itself. Abandon your alternatives open so that you can find what works well with you. Look at all variables prior to selecting your host then choose a prepare which is within your budget. Be certain that the number provides every little thing needed.

When deciding on an internet internet hosting company, it may be beneficial to decide on one which has gotten quite a few prizes. When a organization has several web hosting service honours, for example, this can provide you with a good feeling of the help and repair they provide. Having an award is an excellent sign how the web hosting clients are dependable and it has many happy customers. Try to find hosts that have received honours that had been granted dependant on client votes they are the best option.

Be sure to know any down occasions your internet hosting assistance could have planned. It is perfect for the maintenance to become scheduled at most once a month. If it's more often than that, it can lead to excessive downward time for your site.

If transferring your internet site to a new number is something you are considering, be sure to investigation into regardless of whether you will certainly be permitted to exchange your website address. Some hosts can keep your website name whenever you keep. Then you will need to improve your label, confusing your while guests.

Plenty of website hosts will give you a few accessories who go with what their assistance, however these features vary from host to host. Stay with the companies that offer the assistance you want. As an example, some features may be available on higher-costed programs, so be on the lookout for relevant stipulations.

When you are evaluating a web variety, perform some additional investigation on-line apart from merely reading through the host's website and advertising components. Visit websites that are independent and have no link with your provider, then read through end user testimonials there. These testimonials will help you recognize an excellent assistance from other hosts.

Some website hosts use the services of a greater host to offer their products to you personally. These firms get a prohibit of room in the hosting server at a discount, and change a profit by renting area to smaller sized sites. You can examine out different online hosts under the very same company, you might locate a better bargain by doing this!

Read through your commitment very carefully, and inquire the web host company to describe any uncertain conditions to you. Service fees and clauses is definitely not readily evident within the principal textual content of your contract. No sales hype is going to level them over to you. Take into account the complete expense of the services, which include setup costs and fees and penalties for very early cancellation, before signing about the dotted range.

A web-based host needs to have a number of support links just in case their major one particular will go off-line. Ensure that the web hosts you are looking at have this. Should your hosting company only has a single connection to the net, this can be high-risk mainly because that when it goes off-line, your site will likely go off-line. Make sure the business has unnecessary connections and this all of these contacts can perform supporting your site.

To summarize, it can be hard for the greatest web host. As a result of many factors that must be considered, it can be hard to find out which web host is going to be suitable. Here are some ideas when selecting an online variety to match both you and your enterprise.

Login or register to post comments