Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features


» The Deep Ball Project

Guest columnist John Kinsley breaks down the tape of every deep pass in the NFL in 2017 and comes away with a shocking conclusion: even without Andrew Luck, the Colts had the best long-ball quarterback in the league.

12 Oct 2009

Audibles at the Line: Week 5

compiled by Bill Barnwell

Each Sunday, the FO staff sends around e-mails about the games that each of us are watching. We share information about the games that the rest of the group might not be watching, ask questions, and keep everyone else informed about which games they might want to tune into (if they can).

On Monday, we compile a digest of those e-mails and produce this feature. By its nature, it can be disjointed and dissimilar to the other articles on the site.

Please also note that we do not write the e-mails specifically to produce this column, which means we aren't going to cover every game, or every important play. We watch the games that we, as fans, are interested in watching, so your favorite team's game might not be covered to your fullest desires or even at all. (If you are a Seahawks or Patriots fan, you are probably in luck; if you are a Raiders fan, not so much.)

Cincinnati Bengals 17 at Baltimore Ravens 14

Tom Gower: "Fast" game thus far, with 12:26 off the clock and only two possessions. No points, though. First the Bengals stalled out in the red zone, taking their second delay of game to the drive to turn 3&13 into 3&18 and Palmer couldn't scramble for the first. Then, the Ravens got stuffed on first down, ran the option TE shovel right out of the Florida playbook on second down (incomplete), and Flacco got picked by Joseph on 3rd down after he tried to fit a pass in for Heap between double coverage.

Ed Reed opens the scoring with a 52-yard pick-6. The Ravens ran a little bit of an overload to the right side, leaving Ocho isolated in man coverage. An obvious hot read, so Reed, playing deep safety, reads the play immediately and goes from the middle of the field to the sideline to jump the route. Yeah, he's good.

The Bengals got on the scoreboard with a 70-yard drive, 75 of which came on a single pass to Chris Henry on a scramble drill play when Dominique Foxworth kind of gave up on the play because he didn't realize Chris Henry had caught it. The Ravens go three-and-out the next drive, after Pat Sims beat one of the Ravens' interior linemen.

Jeff Triplette is SO aggravating. Mark Clayton catches a short pass for a couple yards, then goes down and the ball comes out. The Bengals recover and run it back about 25 yards for an apparent touchdown. No whistle, play wasn't blown dead, looks like a TD. The refs confer for a minute, then rule that Clayton was down by contact. Lewis challenges, and loses-it was a VERY close call, and whatever the call on the field was was very likely to stand.

Then, after the challenge, they MIS-SPOT the ball by 5 yards, though the Bengals obligingly go offside to make up for the error. Still, that's going to be a really bad one in the gamebook.

Brian Leonard gets into the hurdling game, over a Ravens defender who may or may not have been Dawan Landry, to avoid Foxworth and pick up a first down. Really nice move by Leonard, who's subbing in for Benson in passing situations. Palmer hits 85 over the middle for a big gain the next play, but poor ball security costs him as Ed Reed knocks the ball out.

With Jared Gaither out, the Ravens have Michael Oher at LT going up against Antwan Odom, and he's not looking great. Odom pushed him into Flacco for one sack, and he's gotten pressure a couple other times. The Bengals will have their own problems protecting the passer so long as #74 Dennis Roland is the right tackle.

Doug Farrar: Two interesting rushing notes: Cedric Benson becomes the first running back to gain over 100 yards on the Ravens since 2006, and before Clinton Portis’ touchdown against the Panthers today, the only Redskins rushing touchdown this season came from Hunter “The Punter” Smith.

Awesome touchdown catch by Ray Rice, one play after he gets busted for a chop block. Rice takes the little swing pass and blows through three missed tackle near the line of scrimmage, putting his hand down on the ground to hold himself up. At the second level, he kicked it up about three gears, and he was gone for 48 yards.

Bill Barnwell: Lord, the Bengals are surprising. A late Ravens penalty on 3rd-and-long gives them a new first down, and they throw a game-winning touchdown pass. 4-1, and a tip drill away from 5-0.

Aaron Schatz: The funny thing about the Rams' gigantic pratfall is that a lot of the same positive trends applied to Cincinnati, but we wrote about them all in regards to the Rams because their overall projection came out with more average wins -- largely because of their division. (If you substitute Boller for Bulger, the Rams and Bengals end up with the exact same projected preseason DVOA.) I kinda wish now we had written about the Bengals instead. Heh.

Bill Barnwell: Bengals WERE the most-injured team in the league last year. Year before, it was the Dolphins...

Aaron Schatz: Right. The Bengals (and Jaguars) also qualify for the "teams that draft an OL in the top dozen generally have offensive improvement" trend.

Tom Gower: Bengals defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer deserves kudos. The Ravens scored on an Ed Reed TD and a great individual play from Ray Rice. Flacco was 22 of 31, but for only 186 yards (including 48 to Rice on the TD) and threw 2 picks. That's a pretty good effort.

Vince Verhei: The Bengals had success running whenever they went straight at Baltimore. If they tried delayed handoffs or zone blocking schemes, the Ravens defense was too fast for Cedric Benson and the line. But they had surprising success on power runs. Benson reminds me of Jamal Anderson, a low-center-of-gravity pinball with surprising quickness and moves, if not much speed. And he may get 400-plus carries before the season is done.

The Bengals's young cornerbacks, Hall and Joseph, really impressed me. Between those two and Maualuga, the Bengals have one of the best young trios on defense in the league.

Aaron Schatz: Yes, another thing that was positive for the Bengals going into this season; a lot of first-round cornerbacks don't fully mature until their third or fourth seasons. Joseph is in year four, Hall in year three. I think the surprising part of the Bengals' turnaround is the offensive line more than it is the defense.

Bill Barnwell: It would be hard for the line to suck as much as it did last year. Really, really hard.

Aaron Schatz: Yes, but like the Denver defense, this hasn't been simple regression to the mean. They are playing quite well.

Doug Farrar: Take it from this Seattle resident –- it is possible for an offensive line to not only suck, but to suck more each season in small, but torturous, increments.

Rob Weintraub: The key guy is center Kyle Cook, who is tough and nasty, two traits we haven't had the position in several seasons. Haloti Ngata absolutely kills us twice a year, but today Cook got great push and leverage on him, and Benson ran very hard inside. I'm worried about his carry rate, but the Bengals have made toughness and physical play a priority since minicamp, running several 6 o-lineman formations, bringing Jeremi Johnson back, and giving Ced plenty of opportunites. And then there is Rey -- I'm seriously considering buying my first jersey since 1986 (Boomer E.), and it's Maualuga's #58. The Steelers and Ravens have violent LBs who inspire the team. We finally do too. But let's remember, the D was solid last season, except for rushing the QB. The unit played hard and kept Cincy in games when the offense struggled mightily to gain ten yards over three plays. Often, they caved in from exhaustion in the fourth quarter. Not this season. There are legitimately 17 guys who I like on this defense, approx. quadruple the usual number.

Last note -- when was the last time a team went 4-1 despite having a long snapper that cannot perform this most basic of functions? Two more errant snaps for the erstwhile Brad St. Louis today, a high snap that led to a missed FG on the opening drive, and a Football Follies level snap that landed on the 35-yd line on an PAT, which fortunately was wiped out on a Ravens penalty (for illegal formation--can the defense have an illegal formation, even on a kick?). If it weren't for the late-game heroics, St. Louis would be a major NFL story (this is at least seven bad snaps this season), or, more likely, out on the street.

Mike Tanier: The most frustrating part of the end of this game for Ravens fans is that the two penalties against the Ravens during the Bengals game winning drive were legit and they were dumb mistakes. I better not read a quote from Ray Lewis complaining about the calls after he wrecked Ochocinco over the middle.

Cleveland Browns 6 at Buffalo Bills 3

Aaron Schatz: Rex Grossman may have to give up the title of "Worst QB Performance in a Win." Derek Anderson today was 2-for-17 for 23 yards and Cleveland just won the game 6-3.

Vince Verhei: I had money riding on this game and could still barely pay any attention. MVP should have gone to the Browns' punt team for pinning a pair of kicks inside the five and forcing a turnover on another.

Washington Redskins 17 at Carolina Panthers 20

Doug Farrar: I’m very concerned that the Redskins defense is playing well early on – this week, Greg Blache announced that he wouldn’t speak to the media any more this year. You know how superstitious coaches are; if the Skins came out with a stinker, Blache may have decided that he needed to remain the most quotable coach in the league. Sadly, I fear that we may need to factor in how much a Blache-out would affect TWIQ through the season.

DeAngelo Williams is trying to play smashmouth football in pink cleats.

The Panthers got upended by the Holy Roller Rule, as Jon Fox cursed the ghosts of Ken Stablers past. In the second quarter, Delhomme handed off to fullback Brad Hoover at the Washington 1-yard line, Hoover fumbled it forward, and tight end Jeff King recovered in the end zone. Since you can’t advance the ball with a fumble on fourth down, the Redskins got the ball at their own 1-yard line.

I should clarify that you can’t advance the ball on a fourth-down fumble unless the fumbling player recovers it.

At the end of the first half, Jake Delhomme appeared to throw out of bounds on a Hail Mary. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before. Yup –I wound it back and you can clearly see the Panthers and Ravens adjusting beyond the edge of the right sideline on the throw. Weinke Deinke Doo, where are you?

Pittsburgh Steelers 28 at Detroit Lions 20

Mike Kurtz: Culpepper has had a fumble/sack and just fumbled a snap. He also got a massive run on a third down scramble. Incidentally, looks like this crew is calling holds soft.

Even with Stafford out, the Lions' passing game is still looking sharp. The routes are well-designed, and the playcalling is if not clever, at least efficient. They just got a long reception to a little-used TE, so they've really done their homework against the Pittsburgh defense, especially missing polamalu. Of course, then Culpepper runs 10 yards backwards, throws up the most blatant IG ever, and they're left with 3&G at the 28, which is way overthrown and nearly picked off. Oh, well.

As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with Rodney Harrison ... just put flags on the QB and leave it at that. Steelers got bailed out of an awful INT on a really questionable RTP.

On one hand, Roethlisberger's short passes lack a lot of zing, which contributed in some part to the pick-6. On the other hand, he's just playing pitch and catch with Miller, either lined up in the slot or as an h-back, and the Lions are giving it to him.

The Steelers' offense seems to be the opposite of last year. Last year, they were disciplined executed cleanly and fell apart in the end zone. This year, they seem more disjointed and sloppy, but are having great success getting into the end zone.

After Harrison's third sack: "Now Harrison has the trifecta!"

I think Enberg's lost it.

David Gardner: CBS commentators of Steelers-Lions game:

"What is it about Brett Favre when the lights come on?"
"Well, he'd be pretty good in the dark too."

Easy fellas.

Bill Barnwell: At one point, I was watching those announcers talk about Brett Favre during the Lions-Steelers game that was airing instead of the Giants-Raiders game. FML

Doug Farrar: The Lions remind me of this year’s Washington Huskies. A winless team replaces an all-time incompetent with a very solid staff, and all of a sudden, they’re competitive against teams that would have slaughtered them before and they’ll throw a surprise uppercut once in a while and pull off an upset. Pretty neat teams to watch in both cases if you like seeing things develop.

That said, I think they should put three tight ends to Jeff Backus’ left. Harrison-on-Backus violence is just not fair.

Bill Barnwell: Amazing how Harrison can consistently get underneath Backus, huh? Backus has 50 pounds on him, and it's worth absolutely nothing.

Mike Kurtz: Interesting dynamic working here ... Pittsburgh is blitzing with great success, killing Detroit in passing, so Detroit is dialing up RB screens on third and long and just killing them with it.

I think we can just go ahead and say that the Steelers aren't very good this year. The offense is somewhat explosive, but the defense is pretty hapless.

Aaron Schatz: I do think the Steelers deserve the benefit of the doubt until we see what the defense looks like when Polamalu returns.

Dallas Cowboys 26 at Kansas City Chiefs 20

Aaron Schatz: You know that this week's matchups are not very good when the FOX #1 team is covering a game where the teams have a combined two wins. Joe Buck says that the Cowboys think Anthony Spencer is getting closer to making an impact in their defense. Wait, Anthony Spencer isn't making an impact in their defense *now*?

Doug Farrar: Spencer’s ineffectiveness is one of the primary reasons DeMarcus Ware isn’t getting sacks this season. Turns out Greg Ellis may have had something to do with Ware’s production last year.

Aaron Schatz: I don't know. He always seems to be playing fairly well when I see him in pass coverage. Maybe he's just surprised people by being a better drop-back OLB than pass-rush OLB.

Doug Farrar: Right – I think they’re missing the push on the other side, allowing offenses to account more for Ware.

Mike Vrabel catches a touchdown for the Dallas Texans against the Dallas Cowboys. Wide open. Did not the Cowboys not review any of the old Patriots tape lying around this week?

Aaron Schatz: Miles Austin is having quite a coming-out party against Kansas City, including going high for a deep ball and taking it away from the cornerback when they both had it.

Bill Barnwell: 10-250-2 isn't bad. Of course, Maurice Leggett (in coverage on the final play) blows.

Mike Kurtz: I'm nominating Miles Austin for best FF FA sunday pick-up ever.

Oakland Raiders 7 at New York Giants 44

Aaron Schatz: Dan Dierdorf: "Did you ever see a grandpa who was as smitted with his grandkids as Tom Coughlin? Good ol' Uncle Tom there, always talking about those kids."

Despite Dierdorf saying ridiculous things and confusing Grandpa Coughlin with "Uncle Tom," I do have to give him points for some good commentary regarding Brandon Jacobs. The Raiders stuffed Jacobs on the goal line twice, on second and third down. They stood him up right at the line and while they couldn't get him down, he couldn't get across. Dierdorf mentioned that Jacobs has a problem where he likes to run tall, and tends to keep his pad level high, and sometimes that creates problems in the red zone. Sure enough, Coughlin goes for it on fourth down and brings in Ahmad Bradshaw, and Bradshaw takes the same handoff up the middle, gets small, and sneaks in under a pile of Raiders defenders for the touchdowns. Turns out the Madden Truck Stick doesn't work on every single play, even if you ARE as big as Brandon Jacobs.

Bill Barnwell: Well, Jacobs has really good numbers inside the five. So it's not a huge problem for him.

Aaron Schatz: I wonder if it is a specific problem this year. Subjectively, I remembered seeing Jacobs with similar problems a couple weeks ago. I went and looked, and Jacobs is only 2-of-6 on short yardage going into this game. Small sample size, of course, but still.

Bill Barnwell: It's all small sample sizes, but he was ahead of expectation in 2006-2008. Truthfully, how low can a 265-pound guy get?

Aaron Schatz: I think I've discovered something less accurate than JaMarcus Russell's passes -- the tackle attempts of the Oakland Raiders linebackers and safeties. When we chart this game with the new "broken tackles" category, we're going to end up with something like 30 broken tackles on Ahmad Bradshaw alone.

Doug Farrar: Yep. On his first-quarter touchdown run, he didn’t just cut – he came to a dead stop, called his dry cleaner, texted his mom, and then took the appropriate angle for the score.

Bill Barnwell: Another thing I've learned from watching the Raiders: They're one of the worst teams against screen passes I've ever seen. They had a play against the Texans last week where, somehow, half their team loafed their way into getting blocked out of the play. The Giants just picked up 50+ yards on a screen to Bradshaw.

The book on them was always that their linebackers were underrated, but they've looked terrible. Thomas Howard in particular.

Doug Farrar: JaMarcus Russell has five completed passes and three fumbles. Can’t wait to see the Quick Reads writeup on that one!

Bill Barnwell: What's the worst adjective you can think of?

Doug Farrar: He JaMarcused it. From this season going forward, whenever a quarterback has a truly horrific day on the field, all you’ll need to say is, “He JaMarcused it”, and the world will know exactly what you mean.

Aaron Schatz: Just out of curiosity, I pro-rated JaMarcus Russell's stats after five games to a full season and ran similarity scores. Here's the dishonor roll:

Orton Kyle 2005 CHI
Evans Vince 1981 CHI
Hilger Rusty 1988 DET
Deberg Steve 1978 SF
Williams Doug 1979 TB
Mirer Rick 1994 SEA
Trudeau Jack 1986 IND
Pagel Mike 1982 BALC
Collins Kerry 1997 CAR
Klingler David 1993 CIN

Showing that JaMarcus might still have hope: The 2-year similarity list includes Kerry Collins (years 2-3) and Phil Simms (years 1-2).

Chicago Bears at Bye Week

Mike Kurtz: I was really disappointed by the Bears this week, it's like they didn't even show up to play. I kept looking for the improvement on offense that everyone is talking about, I just saw a whole lot of nothing. Absent-minded playcalling, players not on the field ... I think Urlacher contributed just as much to the team this week as the other players combined, and he's on IR! Really dismal performance, and I don't see them winning any more games this season if they put up more performances like this.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 14 at Philadelphia Eagles 33

Doug Farrar: I didn’t see the deep scheme on the play, but it looked like the Bucs might have had single-deep on that 51-yard McNabb touchdown pass. I think it’s time to dust off the Tampa-2 worksheets, guys.

David Gardner: That's the seventh time the Bucs have allowed a play of 30 yards or more on defense. The route by Maclin wasn't realy impressive, but he's playing against a practice-squad caliber corner in Elbert Mack, and Donovan McNabb had time to do some underwater basket weaving before he threw the pass.

Doug Farrar: No, you don’t need to run great routes against them. Just a sideline stutter-go against that Cover-1, and it’s all over.

David Gardner: Bucs make a good call to go for it on fourth and 2 in Eagles territory, and drew up a good play, but the receivers aren't able to hold onto any passes today.

Bill Barnwell: Eagles are actually giving Jeremiah Trotter playing time, which surprises me. Josh Johnson isn't picking up blitzes so well, it turns out.

The Buccaneers are running a very weird offensive scheme. To counter the Eagles' speed and blitzing, they're running a lot of quick hitches and bubble screens. That makes sense. On the other hand, they're running a lot of option stuff with Josh Johnson. The Eagles are probably the worst team in the league to run those against.

Aaron Schatz: Well, the Eagles are starting a 97-year-old middle linebacker today who didn't even play in the league last year. I can think of some worse defenses to run that stuff against. Pittsburgh and Baltimore, to start.

Bill Barnwell: Philly's a quicker defense than either of those teams, though, especially at the ends.

David Gardner: Josh Johnson has been very impressive so far. He's only got six or so incompletions, and almost all of them are the receivers' fault. Then, on this drive, he has stood tall in the pocket, absorbed hits, and thrown really tight passes. He has given the Bucs the only hope of getting a "W" this season.

Bill Barnwell: Tampa was dead last in the league against #2 wideouts heading into this week, and that won't change; Jeremy Maclin (starting for an injured Kevin Curtis) is just killing them downfield.

Eagles blitz three times in a row. The third time, a blitzer coming through tips a pass in the air and Donald Penn catches it and runs for 15 yards. So happy I'm not charting that game.

David Gardner: And then the graphic before the next play -- "Donald Penn: First career reception."

Mike Tanier: The Eagles had it very easy on both sides of the ball against Tampa. Josh Johnson played better than he did against the Redskins, but he had about 4 passes dropped. He's just a runner at quarterback and I cannot see what he is giving the team at this point.

Trotter saw a lot of playing time at MLB. He was definitely in the running downs package and I saw him drop into the middle zone a little. It was hard to evaluate him because there were four Eagles in on every tackle. No one was getting blocked at all. The Eagles sent a defensive back through the A gap over and over again. I didn't like the call, because Johnson was sidestepping the blitz early on and completing some passes, but it started to work and led to a few interceptions and other mistakes. What's interesting is that Trotter used to be the guy who blitzed the A gap. Of course, Sean Jones is a little faster.

Minnesota Vikings 38 at St. Louis Rams 10

Sean McCormick: My, do the Rams look better in those old uniforms. It's time to go back to those full time.

Now all they have to do is figure out how to play football.

Aaron Schatz: For those who don't know, the Rams were the first NFL team to ever have a helmet logo... the horns were actually designed in 1948 by halfback Fred Gehrke, who was an art major at Utah. I grew up with those classic Rams uniforms, so I definitely agree. Also, to match the memories of my childhood, all Rams should wear goggles like Eric Dickerson.

Doug Farrar: Kyle Boller, wearing the Dieter Brock throwback, does a nice little Brady Quinn Reverse Forward Pass. Jared Allen, playing at an absolutely insane level this season takes it back for a touchdown. With the Lions in the rise (at least incrementally), it’s time to talk more about how crushingly awful the Rams are.

Atlanta Falcons 45 at San Francisco 49ers 10

Bill Barnwell: Nate Clements get caught in a bad spot on a 90-yard touchdown pass to Roddy White. Matt Ryan throws a ten-yard fade to White on third down, and Clements mistimes his turn; right as he turns, the ball is going past him and is in White's hands, and by the time he adjusts, White has three yards on him and beats him on a sprint to the end zone.

Doug Farrar: Serious Wood-Chopping from 49er cornerback Dre Bly, who picks off Matt Ryan deep in San Francisco territory and sort of half-asses it downfield, celebrating with the Deion “hand-up” move, and forgetting that Roddy White is REALLY fast. White catches up to Bly, and the tackle causes a fumble, which Atlanta recovers. I would not want to be Bly when he has to go to the sideline and explain his thought process to Mike Singletary for anything.

Houston Texans 21 at Arizona Cardinals 28

Doug Farrar: Andre Johnson went all Mark Bavaro on the touchdown that tied the game at 21. He blew up three potential tacklers and sent linebacker Gerald Hayes sideways. As fast as that guy is in space, he’s also a real pain to bring down.

Tom Gower: Matt Schaub's streak of about a dozen consecutive completions ends dramatically with a pick-6 on an out by Rodgers-Cromartie to take the lead. Just a bad play by Schaub, throwing late to the outside. I'd be interesting to see the charting numbers-I switched over to this game from JAC-SEA late and it seemed like the Cardinals starting bringing less pressure and dropping more guys into coverage that last drive, but that doesn't quite comport with Andre Johnson running over three guys downfield.

Bill Barnwell: Cardinals are actually being really smart with time management, starting to call timeout after the Texans drove the ball to their 1-yard line on first and goal with :55 seconds left so they can get the ball back after Houston (theoretically) scores.

The Cardinals restrict that scoring to theory...

Happy I threw in that qualifier. The Cardinals stuff the Texans on either side of a play action pass that Schaub horribly overthrew because he didn't set his feet and ended up making a jumping throw from across his body.

New England Patriots 17 at Denver Broncos 20

Bill Barnwell: Apparently, the Broncos forgot their uniforms at home and picked up the Steelers' practice jerseys.

Aaron Schatz: These Denver throwbacks are great. Where's Steve Garvey?

Doug Farrar: A pox on those stupid Copper Bowl unis. Why not the outstanding 1965 bucking Broncos unis instead?

Bill Barnwell: Interesting stuff from the Broncos, as they line up Russ Hochstein as the second TE/split-out FB and then motion him into a trips bunch set before running behind him.

Aaron Schatz: Broncos are also running a formation they are calling the "Wild Horses." Like the Wildcat, except with Orton off on the wing as a WR, and half the time Orton motions back behind center and just calls a normal Shotgun play. The other half the time, Moreno is running it like a Wildcat. This isn't actually getting them much, though. They barely used it on their 90-yard touchdown drive in the second quarter -- that one was more about Brandon Marshall being good. Fantasy players who decided to take a chance on the crazy are getting a payoff.

Mike Kurtz: The Broncos are just not blitzing effectively, and their linebackers are about 17 different kinds of awful in coverage. I'm willing to bet that the only reason this game isn't out of Denver's reach is that Bailey is doing a good job on Moss.

Aaron Schatz: They're blitzing well when they do something to send a guy untouched, a stunt or delay or sending a guy in off the side. Andra Davis and D.J. Williams both got to Brady and Brady was good enough to stay upright and throw the ball away. The problem -- give Phil Simms credit, he analyzed this correctly -- is that when it is just the Broncos' linemen and linebackers straight-up against the Patriots' offensive linemen, the Patriots linemen are handling them easily.

Bill Barnwell: Brandon Marshall is pretty much the worst possible matchup for the Patriots. They use Springs against #1 guys, and give them tons of cushion because they're pushing safety coverage to the other side and are terrified that Springs is going to get beat deep. So Marshall is going to get a lot of fade patterns and quick hitches.

Good to see Vince Wilfork's attempted sliding celebration stopped by the sheer force of his gut.

Brandon Meriweather is called for "taunting."

Bill Barnwell: The ref clearly threw the flag before Merriweather started pointing and taunting at Royal. I'm guessing some will suggest that he wanted to make a call for a late hit, realized that he couldn't call that penalty because the ball had been tipped, and pretended it was for taunting instead.

Doug Farrar: I’m guessing some will be right if they guess that. Though you can’t stand over a guy and point like Meriweather did, which gives the refs a legit CYA. I wonder if they’ll being that one up when Mr. Pereira visits with Rich Eisen on Wednesday.

Mike Kurtz: The most likely scenario is that the side judge threw the flag for helmet-to-helmet/defenseless, THEN the taunting happened, other official either disputed the call or the ref said no, taunting called separately. I think that makes sense in light of the ref telling the other refs "we got this" right before announcing.

Essentially, the first foul was (in essence) picked up, there was already a flag out when the second foul happened.

New Kyle Orton looks like old Kyle Orton. Decent arm, decent accuracy and good placement short, no deep ball and bad mid-long accuracy.

Moreno ran to put the Broncos in FG range, I should note that that entire run happened because Moreno, while facing a defender, JUST RAN FORWARD. Players leave so many yards on the field because they try to break down or juke or fake, instead of just running forward for a bit of momentum falling forward at the least. Moreno was rewarded by a missed tackle and a solid gain.

Doug Farrar: On the other hand, kudos to that same crew for not calling the ticky-tack interference on the overtime play where Eddie Royal and Shawn Springs got their feet tangled. A lot of crews would have screwed that one up.

Aaron Schatz: Grrr. Dumb penalties. Defensive meltdown in overtime. Grrr. Also: Too much Josh McDaniels talk, not enough Mike Nolan talk. What Nolan has done with that defense is remarkable.

Will Carroll: Is Nolan the defensive Cam Cameron?

Aaron Schatz: Heh. Unless Gregg Williams is.

David Gardner: My description of the Broncos' defensive progress would be literally unbelievable. Every week, I expect for them to be exposed, but they have been consistent all season.

Bill Barnwell: A very good defense with fortuitous plays at the right time (e.g. sack of Brady that led to fumble). Have to think their playcalling would have been different if Light had been in there; a bunch of runs and then when they drop back to pass, Brady gets strip-sacked.

Doug Farrar: Not to mention the year Champ Bailey's having. It's one thing to say that you're going to limit the Pats downfield and force them to pick away, and quite another thing to actually, y'know, DO IT.

Jacksonville Jaguars 0 at Seattle Seahawks 41

Bill Barnwell: Wow, did Monroe get abused by Darryl Tapp on that play.

Tom Gower: Maybe it's time for Jack Del Rio to go back to last week and play Tra Thomas at LT and Mo Williams at RT with Nwaneri at RG. Monroe and Britton at LT and RT doesn't seem to be working very well.

Of course, that probably wouldn't help Mathis from getting roasted like he was on Housh's TD or failing at tackling like he just did on Burleson's TD.

Oh, and Jack Del Rio did finally wise up a little and play Thomas at LT. Didn't teach Mathis how to cover, though, as he was beat by Housh for another TD. It also hasn't really helped the offense of the league's most schizoid team. One thing that might help is forgetting Marcedes Lewis plays for you, since he keeps failing to catch passes in key situations. I'm starting to wonder if the Seahawks are leaving him more loosely covered on purpose.

Indianapolis Colts 31 at Tennessee Titans 9

Aaron Schatz: Why do the Colts hate their colleges so much? Well, except Antoine Bethea.

Tom Gower: Tony Ugoh is a MASSIVE liability for the Colts. With Charlie Johnson the first couple games, plays like the hit by Ford on the Bulluck pick weren't happening.

Bill Barnwell: Al Michaels talks about how the Colts' final drive of the first half was slow and methodical. Meanwhile, the on-screen graphic lists: "6 plays, 93 yards, 48 seconds". Right.

Tom Gower: Is there any precedent for two safeties who as long ago as last year were considered among the league's best for immediately becoming awful? Hope and Griffin seem to be in a continuing contest of who can screw up more often this year.

Bill Barnwell: Not the same, but what about Nathan Vasher and Charles Tillman?

Aaron Schatz: Can anyone think of a team that has had more success on the undrafted free agent market than Indianapolis over the last few years? The Chargers found Eric Parker and Antonio Gates, but the Colts just find defensive starter after defensive starter after defensive starter...

Can we just forward this thing to the end so I can start working on the stats already? We've had an amazing run of good prime-time games this year but wow, is this not one of them.

Mike Kurtz: Crowd calling for Vince Young. I support this, but only if NBC accompanies the rest of the game with an endless loop of Yakkity Sax.

Tom Gower: Something the SNF guys haven't pointed out: Dan Federkeil is in for Tony Ugoh at LT. Not sure if it's performance or injury-related, but that probably wasn't in the Colts' preferred plans for this evening. Hey, I'm looking for small favors.

Aaron Schatz: Collinsworth and Michaels say that Peyton Manning needs to win another Super Bowl to be in the conversation for best quarterback of all-time with Montana, Unitas, Marino, Elway, Favre... Um, guys? Marino never won a Super Bowl. Favre only won once. Peyton could be hit by a bus tomorrow and he would be in the conversation.

Doug Farrar: And the affront to good football continues. Vince Young comes in the game halfway through the fourth quarter, and begins his night by underthrowing Tim Jennings of the Colts. I'm not going to assume that he was aiming at Kenny Britt, since the throw hit the ground three feet in front of Britt. Then again, the whole "aiming" concept is a relative one for our man Vince.

Erectile Disfunction

Aaron Schatz: If my mirror reflection started to counsel me about erectile dysfunction, I think I would seriously consider suicide.

David Gardner: I was wondering if the guy had considered talking to his doctor about his schizophrenia?

Vince Goes To The Casino

Vince Verhei: I watched games this morning at the MGM Grand sports book in Las Vegas. Always wanted to do that. At first it was quite a disappointment -- just a really, really crowded sports bar with nowhere to sit and little place to stand by the time I got there a half-hour before the first games kicked off. Then things turned around. You had fans there from all over the country, so between fantasy players, gamblers, and regular fans, every long gain, turnover, or score would draw passionate cheers from the peanut gallery. The endings of CIN-BAL and CAR-WAS were particularly raucous. It started out like a sports bar, but by the end it was like being in a half-dozen stadiums at once. In short, it was quite, quite great, and I intend to do this again at least once each season. (Using FO Premium picks, by the way, I bet on five games, and went 3-0 on Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Washington to make a profit before the late games had even started. That probably helped my mood.)

If anyone wonders, my other two bets were on Houston and Indy to win.

Bill Barnwell: Mmm, Stage Deli.

Several hours pass...

Vince Verhei: And Indy wins to put me at 4-1! Did I mention that I walked out of the MGM and it was 80 degrees and sunny? So yeah, Las Vegas is better than Delaware.

Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 12 Oct 2009

212 comments, Last at 14 Oct 2009, 3:41pm by zlionsfan


by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:22am

The Bengals (and Jaguars) also qualify for the "teams that draft an OL in the top dozen generally have offensive improvement" trend.

I know Audibles is taken from emails and often edited and placed in different ways to make sense when posted in a series of statements, so some statements can be seen to be taken out of context and what not...

I just hope you're not suggesting that Andre Smith is in anyway a factor in the Bengal's resurgence.

by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:44am

Hey Barnwell, post MMQB already. I have no idea how to get to it without the XP link.

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:41am

Yeah, typing si.com is an awful lot of work.

by Omroth-UK (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:51am

Google "peter king si.com" - first result and first link on that page.

by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:59am

I didn't mean this literally guys. Thanks for the help though.

by JMM :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:30am

"On one hand, Roethlisberger's short passes lack a lot of zing, which contributed in some part to the pick-6."

The "lack of zing" contributed a lot less than Wallace's inexperience and BB's late throw. Receivers who try to catch the 5 and out pass without coming sharply back to the QB to catch it are likely to have to chase the corner following the interception. Combining his drop on the deep pass and allowing the pick-6 Wallace was worth a 14 point swing in 3 plays. He'll get a pass (I hope he catches it) for it because 1) he is fast, 2) the Steelers won, and 3) he isn't Limas Sweed.

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:48am

Actually, he will likely get a pass because he caught a 50 yard TD pass not long afterward.

by TomC :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:00pm

Yeah, looking at that replay, Ben's pass has plenty of velocity, it's just thrown way, way too late. On the other hand, Schaub's version of that exact play in the HOU/ARI game was just as late but was also a horribly thrown wounded duck. Either way, it astounds me that a veteran QB would even attempt that throw if the DB is less than 5 yards off the receiver.

by rageon :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:35am

In my mind, Champ Bailey is making a huge difference over last year. He officially only played 9 games, but I specifically remember him not being anywhere close to 100% healthy in many of them. Bailey at 75% is still good enough to start, but he was certainly not a star player last year.

Additionally, the Broncos simply needed to stop giving playing time to a lot of terrible players. That's one thing I won't defend Shanahan for. Denver's defense played best last year in a stretch of games where many of their "starters" were injured; and as the starters got healthy, the team played worse. Simply getting rid of guys like Nate Webster and Boss Bailey makes a huge difference. (I'd love to see Denver's defensive DVOA with and without Webster.)

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:40am

A few thoughts from a Vikings fan who watched the Red Zone Channel, since it is impossible to learn anything about your team, when they are playing a team as bad as the Rams (no, I was not surprised to see Boller faint at the sight of an oncoming Kevin Williams, giving a touchdown to Jared Allen):

The numbers 30 and 31 should be retired by the Chiefs, so no future player has to be associated with either Brown or Leggett, who appeared to have taken the Miguel Cabrera approach to preperation. The fact that the Chiefs took it to overtime with those two in the Chiefs defensive backfield should temper a Cowboys fan's urge to induct Miles Austin into their Ring of Honor.

The Raiders, meaning the entire roster and management, have essentially quit. Their qb threw 13 passes in a game where they were beaten by 37 points. I'm about half serious when I say Oakland's season ticket customers should sue for a refund. Is there not an implied contactual obligation for the Raiders to try to win? This ain't even funny anymore, if it ever was.

At what point does Shanahan's record over the last few years in Denver start to harm his public perception, and thus his negotiating position for his next job? Wasn't it his responsibility to find a good defensive coordinator, and didn't he have almost carte blanche control of defensive personnel? I ask this as a guy who always has thought very highly of Shanny.

Kudos to Marvin Lewis for working around Mike Brown very effectively. A completely healthy Carson Palmer helps.

Culpepper is mobile again, which means he has a chance to be a competent qb again. Not that I would bet on it.

I guess the Singletary approach has it limits. I was really surprised to see the 49ers play so poorly, especially on defense.

Between Dre Bly and the idiot Rams wr who did an extended touchdown dance when his team was down 31-10 in the fourth quarter, we can safely say that the Force of Stupidity remains formidable.

by peterplaysbass (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:37am

"I was not surprised to see Boller faint at the sight of an oncoming Kevin Williams"

Did that happen before or after KW nearly took Boller's head off when dragging him down by the earhole? It didn't look intentional or malicious to me, but I wouldn't blame Boller for having nightmares about ol' number 93.

by Adderley (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:12pm

The fumble happened before - on the first offensive series for the Rams.

by RickKilling (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:54pm

Before. The earhole tackle sent Boller to the bench where he sat and made circular yoga-type motions with his head.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:53pm

Boller was likely just making efficient use of his time, since yoga instruction may be his next career move.

by jimm (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:00pm

Will - agree with you one game against a bad team doesn't tell you much but 6 road wins in a row and 5 by more than 14 points is definitely a sign of a much better team than we've seen in Minnesota in quite some time.

One thing that's been nice about the Childress era for Viking fans - his teams have very rarely been blown out (14+ points). He's had 12 such wins and only 3 such losses, two of which came in 2006.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:36pm

Well, I've been hard on The Chiller for signing one lousy qb after another, until he got lucky enough to have something fall into his lap, namely a 40 year old Hall of Famer, who had a previous relationship with The Chiller, and who knew the offense as well as The Chiller, and who, amazingly, still has a very good fastball, but I also have thought that a lot of the crticism of The Chiller has been misplaced.

Strangely enough, the playcalling improved dramatically, once there was a qb who could use the entire field. It has appeared to me that Childress is a pretty effective communicator, for all the flack he received about the manner such players as Marcus Robinson and Troy Williamson were cut. If nothing else, Childress effectively communicated that sucking while putting forth an unprofessional effort was a good way to get kicked off the team, which strikes me as fairly wise. Childress has shown himself to be flexible in response to feedback from veterans worth listening to, like Antione Winfield or Pat Williams. An owner could do worse than Brad Childress, and many often have.

by PerlStalker :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:41am

The Broncos 1960 uniforms are exceedingly awful but, if wearing them means wins against tough opponents, they can keep wearing them all season.

Nolan gets HUGE props for the turn around the Denver defense has made this year.

by DR Ryan (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:47am

Just to start this weeks grammar topic. Why do people say 'I could care less' are these people totally stupid?

It should be 'I Couldn't care less!'

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:50am

You're technically right, but I believe "could" began, long ago, as sarcasm: "yeah, really, like I could possibly care less about this...." but over the years, the tone deaf have conflated the two and lost the sweet sting of sarcasm.


by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:53am

but over the years, the tone deaf have conflated the two and lost the sweet sting of sarcasm.

I enjoyed that :)

Bobman, I'd just like you to know that I'm a big fan of your comments.

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:38pm

Do I detect the sweet sting of sarcasm? Probably not, but with my 8 year-old in the house, I am on the look for if every minute.

by DGL :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:51pm

The National Sarcasm Society.

Like we need your support.

by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:39pm

No, I genuinely enjoy your comments. (Although, said in a certain voice, that could be taken sarcastically as well... WHY IS NOTHING SAID SINCERELY ANYMORE????)


by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:13am

We could care less, but it's not worth the bother.

by starzero :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:14am

if we're being grammatically correct here, shouldn't it be "this week's grammar topic?"

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:44am

I think he meant "this weak grammar topic".

by The Powers That Be :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:55am

I think it's safe to say the original poster was being ironic, considering he made no fewer than four grammar/usage errors in his post bemoaning poor grammar.

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:01pm

Yes. We had noticed.

by TomC :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:01pm

I'm not so sure, actually....

by Tommy (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:55pm

Trolling grammar nazi's is a art.

by Nate :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:35pm

nazis, not nazi's


by Dan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:54pm

Godwin! This discussion is over.

by galactic_dev :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:48pm

Literally, you'd be correct. But the expression "I could care less" is meant to be a snarky implication of "I COULD care less, but it would be exceedingly difficult to do so."

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:48am

Random comments: Thanks, Aaron for b-slapping Collinsworth for his "greatest ever" conversation, rife with inconsistencies in just one sentence! What a tool he can be.

Those NE unis were sweet. Something about white--I like 'em better than the powder blues in SD.

I am so pissed I couldn't watch the Bears this weekend. I'm calling my cable provider today.

Crazy stats day: Every QB NOT over 300 yards take a step back. Now every WR under 200 yds? Good. Were there like five 200 yd rushing games I missed? Or a Bettis-FF-Special 5 carries, 11 yds, 3 TDs?

Hey, that Jared Allen guy is okay. One might say, he's Favretastic.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:28am

Bobman, at a minimum, I think Peyton signed a long term lease, as opposed to a short-term rental. I keep watching the crowd shots during Colts games, trying to spot the fella with the pointed ears and horns.

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:44pm

Will, Come on, still with the Faustian conspiracy theory? If Manning signed a pact with the devil, would Reggie Wayne have just flat-out dropped that sure TD pass? I don't think so. Or maybe that constitutes breach of contract by Mephistopheles (remembering to boost the youngsters' talents but failing to keep his evil eye on Reggie).

Keep looking, though; ya never know.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:01pm

Bobman, THAT is just the sorta thing ol' Mephi does to throw you off your suspicion! Just wait until my stubbled jeans-modeling hero shows up in Miami, and casts some Holy Water on your soul-leasing slinger, during the coin toss in February! A global audience will witness the righteousness of pitching flat-screen televisions, compared to the wretchedness of being a flak for sugar-filled cookie sandwiches!

by Spoon :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:49am

The Chris Collinsworth comment was mind-boggling. It was tossed out there with no support, almost Bayless-ian in its attempt to be contrary, and even when Collinsworth realized his mistake there was no effort to take it back. If anything, Chris proved the opposite of the point he was trying to make: when given the descriptor "greatest quarterback of all time" one of the first names his mind came up with was a guy who hadn't ever won a single Super Bowl. It was almost stream of conscious like.

The only thing more mind-boggling than that conversation was the Reggie Wayne dropped TD pass. I'm actually still in disbelief that Reggie let one get away like that.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:14pm

The topic "Best quarterback of all time" reliably provides a lot of stupid punditry.

by Paul A (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 7:07pm

Collinsworth is why I won't let my kids play Madden with the sound on when I'm home.

by t.d. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:49am

Mike Nolan for coach of the year. What he's done is more incredible than what Williams has accomplished given the apparent lack of 'talent' he was assumed to be working with. The transformation in Dumervil alone is astonishing. This was a historically bad defense last season, per DVOA. I ridiculed McDaniels before the season, and while I still think he was wrong in how he handled the Cutler thing, he clearly has some idea what he's doing.

by MJK :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:12pm

I was one of McDaniels' advocates on these boards before the season. Several of us Patriots fans were trying (mostly unsuccessfully) to convince Denver fans that they were actually getting a good coach.

He did mishandle the Cutler thing, but rookie coaches inevitably make some mistakes, and from what I read about the whole situation, I think Cutler and Cutler's agent are as much to blame, and Bowlen even more so, than McDaniels. And anyway, would the Broncos be in a better position right now with Cutler? They couldn't possibly have more wins than they do right now, and while their offense would certainly be more dynamic, it would also be more mistake prone (I think another poster already pointed out that it's possible, with Cutler in there, they they have more than zero real interceptions right now, in which case they may not win one of these games that they did win).

Anyway, I've long maintained that head coaches often excel at the area that is NOT their specialty...i.e. "defensive" guys like Dungy build good offenses, and "offensive" guys like Billick build good defenses. I think it has to deal with personal hubris and familiarity with variety...an offensive guy necessarily knows how to beat a wide variety of defenses, so will design a defense with the tools he has to minimize these vulnerabilities. But he generally knows one offensive system really well (his own) and was ostensibly hired to install that system, so he'll try to fit his players into it even if they're a square peg-round hole. Likewise defensive coaches knowing a wide variety of offenses so they design the best possible defense, but think it's their way or the highway on defense.

So it doesn't surprise me that the Broncos have a better defense than offense under McDaniels. I'm just surprised it happened so quickly. Of course, I'm sure Nolan is a big help too, and deserves a huge share of the credit.

Frankly, even though I'm a Patriots fan first and foremost, the fact that I like McDaniels, and that the Broncos have gotten rid of the whiny prima donna, and that I love defensive football, has made me root for the Broncos this year. So this Pats loss doesn't sting as badly as it should.

by Dave Bernreuther :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:34pm

I like that theory (3rd paragraph).

by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:59pm

I'm tuly amazed that I have not yet seen anywhere even a mention of the truly hideous, Norv-Turner-Andy-Reed-and-Brad-Childress-trying-to-outdo-each-other-couldn't-have-topped-it, game management by McDaniels at the end of overtime.

You are in FG range in overtime, your QB was almost intercepted not three plays ago, and insted of goign for the FG on third down, or at least running up the middle to try and center the ball, youcall a pass into the end-zone? That was a certain interception dropped by the DB? That was the answer to the question "What if the 2007 Bill Bellichick had sustained brain damage but insisted on coaching?"

If the DB doesn't drop that INT, EVERYONE is laying in on McDaniels for blowing that game for a petty, run-up-the-score in freaking overtime call. And even after the drop I was sure people would still at least comment on it, but no such luck.

And the way McDaniels acted after the FG? Complete disgrace. When even Bill Billichek is getting off the field with a "what the hell is wrong with this guy?" face, you know it's serious. All that was made during the game that McDaniels was the one Billiciple that didn't end up on bad terms with the grim-faced one, and Billicheck even goes looking for McD-bag, only to have him completely ignore him..

As a Bears fan I wish nothing but the best to Orton, who I think was underrated last season, but I can't wait for the incerdibly dumb luck they've had to run out and the Broncos to be pummeled to the ground several times this season. I now hate McD-bad almost as much as I hate Princess.

- Alvaro

by MJK :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:29pm

Yes, that was rather curious, and it did seem rather run up the scorish and arrogant. I can't account for it, except for the fact that the Broncos had already missed one 40-ish yard FG, and McDaniels wanted to actually try to get in closer. And running wasn't doing it, especially when you RB is prone to fumbling. But I agree that fade passes to the end zone don't make a lot of sense...

The impression I got was that Belichick and McDaniels had trouble finding each other because they were both being chased by too many camermen...

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:29pm

I heard it reported that Belichik suggested before the game that the post game handshake be eschewed for a simple wave/salute after the game. Bud Grant always made that suggestion to the opposing coach. I also heard it reported that McDaniels and Belichik did talk inside the stadium afterwords, and it was a warm exchange. Maybe these reports are false, but it would seem that describing McDaniels behavior as a "complete disgrace" is a rather large stretch.

by Purds :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:15pm

"And the way McDaniels acted after the FG? Complete disgrace. When even Bill Billichek is getting off the field with a "what the hell is wrong with this guy?" face, you know it's serious"

BigCheese, are you seriously suggesting anyone should take coaching etiquette notes from BB? The 30-second SB loss interview remind you of anything? Not saying the name of a former colleague remind you of anyone? Dead-fishing more handshakes than a presidential candidate remind you of anyone? Please.

by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:13pm

Uhh.. no. I'm suggesting that when even BB, who is known for having NO coaching etiquette whatsoever, thinks that you're being classless, that means you're on a whole other level.

It's like if I said "When Ann Coulter thinks you're going too far with your Democrat-bashing, you know you've gone too far." At no point does that imply that one should take non-bashing advice from Coulter.

Now, if they indeed agreed on this before the game, and they had a cordial meeting inside, well, then my point is moot. But it really didn't seem like it from the shots I saw. BB was indeed looking for McDaniels, but McD-Bag made absolutely 0 effort to look for him. None whatsoever. And the way BB kept looking back as he walked off the field, even seeming to want to stop and go back, makes me really wonder if they indeed agreed to just wave (which they didn't do either, come to think of it) beforehand.

- Alvaro

by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:16pm

Or to make it clsoer ot home: "When even raiderjoe tells you to lay off the excesive Raiders praise and Sierra Nevada, you know it's serious."

- Alvaro

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:50pm

Except Raider Joe has never inferred an entire manifesto from a facial expression as viewed from a one-second TV shot. I'll take drunk-and-optimistic over creepy, hallucinogenic faux mind-reader any day.

by Anonymous908752345 (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:35am

I think he did bring up some good points though, but he over exagerated. That was one of the weirder BB and disciple interactions I've ever seen. My theory is that Bill made two clones of himself but split them in two. Mangini got all of his demeanor, the gruff, strict discipline that makes you look like a head coach but none of his ability to match scheme to personel. The other clone, McDaniels, was given a great deal of x and o talent, but has the authoritative demeanor of a petulant 14 year old.

Captcha is "Horsiest Pride"

by MJK :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:07pm

Kind of like that Star Trek (TOS) episode where Captain Kirk get's split in two by a transporter accident. One side has all his good qualities, the other all his bad, but neither one is an effective captain (the commentary they made is that all the decisiveness and risk taking ability ended up in his evil self).

However, I'll take scheming ability over authoritative demeanor. It's not exactly like Dick Vermeil never showed emotion, and he was an all right coach...

by zlionsfan :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:41pm

I don't think you can really call six vs. three "running up the score", and that's leaving aside a) whether or not it should even be an issue in the NFL and b) whether or not there's a difference between trying to score when the game's out of reach and obviously trying not to score.

Besides, there have been plenty of examples of special-teams problems this season. I don't blame McDaniels for taking a shot. (And I wouldn't blame him for the interception, either ... if anything, Orton should be sharing the blame for that one, as in "throw it if it's there, but don't turn it over.")

I'm actually pleased to see coaches/OCs being more aggressive this season, especially when it freaks out the commentators.

by C (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 1:50pm

"Coaches excel in areas that aren't their specialty".

Either that or they have Peyton Manning, Edge James, Marvin Harrison.
Or Ray Lewis and half a defense full of pro bowlers.

It's a causation/correlation problem. The reason why they bring these guys in is because they know they will be strong in one area, and they want the HC to build up/do a good job with their weakness. If I know my defense will be stout, then bring in an offensive guy to maximize our weakness.

Dungy & Billick are good examples of overrated head coaches. Are they bad? No, but they hardly deserve the praise that they get. If Dungy had any playoff game planning at all ( Tampa & Indy) then he'd have a few SB rings and Billeck got run out of town...

by tunesmith (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:17pm

Here's how you transform Dumervil: - take your best defensive front-seven lineman of the past few seasons, and... uh, start him.

Nothing against Nolan, but a lot of his success is low-hanging fruit.

by PerlStalker :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:25pm

Dumervil was always undersized as DE in the 4-3. He was too small to be much good against the run against the larger O-lines.

The move to DE/LB tweener in the 3-4 is a much better fit for his size and skill set. It also lets him do what he does best: rush the passer.

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:03am

Well, Dumervil was a starter the previous two seasons, so I'm unclear what point you're trying to make here. And "low-hanging fruit"? Huh? Granted, healthy Champ Bailey versus unhealthy Champ Bailey is a gift. But integrating 8 new starters, a new scheme (and a relatively complicated one at that), still with mis-matched and often bargain personnel, and not completely sucking is a reach well beyond low-hanging. On the other hand, you do grasp that two-word modifiers should be hyphenated, which elevates your style beyond at least one FO contributor. Speaking of low-hanging fruit.

by bravehoptoad :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 11:58am

In retrospect, it's easy to say "low-hanging fruit," but no one was saying that before the season. "That Denver D is just so darned talented. Why are they underperforming?"

Hah, hah.

by John G (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:49am

Kyle Orton just wins games, baby!

by Johnny Socko (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:26pm

don't forget Derek Anderson....he just wins games too!

by starzero :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:49am

I know they're undefeated and Manning looks awesome, but have the Colts played a good team this year? I can't help but thinking they're not really being challenged. Denver may be for real, but no one's questioning the Colts' dominance. Is that because we're used to it?

by t.d. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:53am

The only unequivocally good teams I've seen this year are the Giants and the Saints, so, no, the Colts haven't played a good team this year

by Todd S. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:05am

I'll give you the quality of competition so far (and the next two games are STL and SF), but at least the Colts are dominating, which is a sign of a legitimately good team.

by zlionsfan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:12am

I think it's a little of both. It does seem as though the Colts have adjusted very well to offseason changes, or perhaps that other teams still somehow believe that Peyton isn't going to find that one guy open 20 yards downfield, in much the same way they apparently believe that Vrabel isn't really going out for a TD pass this time. But some of it is probably expectations ...

However, there also seems to be more of a difference between the groups of teams so far this season (best, middle, worst) ... the Colts actually have played the most difficult schedule of the unbeaten teams to this point in the season. (Qualifier: margin of error is most likely very high. We're 3-4 games in for DVOA and DAVE is still playing a pretty big role.) So with the exception of New Orleans playing Philadelphia, there just haven't been games between the top teams. (Side note: as of week 4, New Orleans' future schedule was ranked 32nd. Start printing playoff tickets.) (Cue Mora video on YouTube.)

by Mr Shush :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:27am

I put it to you that the Jets are a top team, which means the Saints have played two such in their four games. I think the Colts ought to be favoured for the Superbowl, because the AFC looks like the weaker conference this year, but I think the Saints are the best team in football - or at any rate ought to be ranked as such based on their performance to date, discarding preseason perceptions.

by Kevin from Philly :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:25pm

Top defense, maybe. Top team? Hard to be a top team with a rookie QB.

by Gruntled (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:22pm

"the Colts actually have played the most difficult schedule of the unbeaten teams to this point in the season."

I'm not sure how much you can make of that, other than that they're the only team in that group that hasn't played 2 or 3 games against the bottom feeders of the league. The Saints and Broncos have at least each played a couple of suspects.

The Colts are also the only team in that group that hasn't played at least one team that currently has a winning record.

by andrew :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:17pm

I thought clobbering bad teams (Stomps) were more indicative of good teams than edging good teams (I forget the term offhand)...

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:25pm


by Mr Shush :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:54am

Ach, that was a frustrating game. Schaub played pretty well overall, but that pick-6 was a nightmarishly awful play. Missing Dreesen in the endzone was also poor, but I do half-think that if that had been Daniels he might have come down with it in bounds, and if it was, say, Marvin Harrison in his prime, he certainly would have. It was a bad pass, but it could still have been caught. Anticipated and hated the Brown-up-the-gut-from-the-I call on 4th down. 1. If I could see it coming presumably so could Arizona. 2. The Cardinals interior run defense, with Dockett, Dansby and Wilson, is the strongest part of that unit. 3. Houston without Chester Pitts looks a very much worse team running inside, especially in short yardage. Replacing Myers with Caldwell might help in that regard, but I guess they don't think he's ready yet.

On the bright side, the defense played a very good second half indeed, and Okoye looked a genuinely useful mammal for the second game in a row. The Texans front 7 is young and competent. The secondary is young and . . . well, it's young, anyway. There are still plenty of weaknesses on that side of the ball, and plenty of mistakes being made (any time Bernard Pollard is in coverage or Fred Bennett is on the field, for starters), but I actually think that unit may have turned the corner. Two competent games in succession, for the first time since 2004, is something to feel good about.

by LukeM :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:54am

The first rule of Erectile Disfunction, is you do not talk about Erectile Disfunction.

by Temo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:58am

Shoot, now you've got me thinking about it. That's the first step :(

Uh oh... can't... perform... need blue pills now!

by Charlie (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:25pm

"You say it, you think it, you think it, you got it..."

by Kevin from Philly :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:33pm

No problem - you only need to maintain the essence of your precious bodily fluids.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:45pm

No fluoridated water for me!

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:50pm

P.O.E., baby!

(That'll be Al Davis's final, drooling comment after seeing an all-night Kubrik marathon in 20 years. "The quarterback must protect his purity of essence, and he must protect it hard.")

by Chocolate City (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 3:22pm

I wanted to draw some comparison to Al Davis as Ripper in the office firing the machine gun, but I can't think of anyone in the Raiders organization rational enough to play the Mandrake role.

I CAN imagine the Raiders coaching staff one day standing outside a bathroom while they're on the draft clock trying to guess Al Davis' pick... then he blows his brains out.

Captcha: "Hauptfleisch pulsates"-- I guess I won't be needing any blue pills.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:56pm

That's why I drink nothing but pure grain alcohol. . .

by chemical burn :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:56am

Tanier talked about being unable to really evaluate Trotter on his comeback with the Eagles, but I just wanted to mention that there was a discussion on the Extra Points thread about his re-signing - the main argument revolved around whether Trotter would become a liability for the passing game not because he would be dropped into coverage too much, but because Gocong would end up in coverage frequently (and whether that would or would not be a problem).

If this game is any indication, Gocong will be a problem in coverage. He just got beat over and over and over again versus the Bucs. As a matter of fact, to the extent that the Bucs were in the game at all, it was because of how terribly Gocong played in coverage (he was the main coverage guy on Winslow all game - although Macho Harris did also get beat by Winslow on a couple plays). Gocong was a clear, huge liability in coverage and he was in coverage because Trotter played the run fairly exclusively (although Tanier is right that Trotter did drop back into a zone a couple times).

Anyway, I think the Eagles will have some problems in the future if this is really their strategy - having two linebackers who are so limited in their coverage skills (Trotter and Gocong) on the field at the same time is just going to mean that TE and RB are going to have a field day... like Kellen Winslow did on Sunday. Sure, its the BUcs so it doesn't really matter too much, but the Eagles face people like Jason Witten and Chris Cooley and Ahmad Bradshaw in the coming weeks...

by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:14pm

Sorry, I don't agree. Winslow had:

1) a 24 yarder in which Akeem Jordan and Macho Harris bracketed him, but Johnson hit the hole in the zone.
2) a 9 yard TD in which he was one-on-one with Macho Harris in the back of the end zone
3) a 24-yard DPI on Gocong, where Gocong had him one-on-one and the blitz never got there. That was just a bad matchup for Philly - no strongside linebacker's going to run step-for-step with a receiving TE on a post route.
4) a 9 yard TD where Gocong blitzed and Mikell had Winslow one-on-one.

Other than that, he had

1) an 8 yard gain on 3rd and 7 where he was covered by Clemons, a DE
2) a 5 yard gain on 3rd and 7 (that's a win for Philly)
3) a 10 yard pickup where he was covered by Parker, a DE who dropped into coverage
4) a 14 yard pickup where he beat Gocong.

Plus three incompletes.

That last play is the *only one* where Gocong was in coverage with him and should've had him. It was also 31-7 late in the 4th quarter at that point.

If you don't believe me, the plays are pretty much all on NFL.com.

Gocong was a clear, huge liability in coverage and he was in coverage because Trotter played the run fairly exclusively

Yeah, on plays where Trotter was in, they didn't pass much, so I can't agree here.

by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:44pm

Let me take that last comment back a little: there is one play where Trotter overplayed the run and they picked up 8 on 1st and 10, but Gocong wasn't involved in coverage that play. On the other plays where they passed when Trotter was in, he wasn't involved in the play, so it's not like Gocong had a chance to be a liability - for example, the TD to Winslow in the back - Trotter had coverage responsibility on the RB, who stayed in to pass-protect, so Trotter ended up just attempting to get in the throwing lane.

by chemical burn :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:45pm

No - I believe you that Gocong gave up two big plays to Winslow (and unlike you I don't disregard the DPI when he was badly beaten - and DVOA won't either) and made a good tackle to prevent a third. Those are just the plays to Winslow on which he was beaten in coverage - throughout the game, Gocong was beaten in pass coverage to other recievers, too. And I guess we can go through play by play to see who was really responsible on each of Johnson's 26 receptions (I actually can't tell who is supposed to be in coverage on those two you attribute to DE's - the Clemons one looks like a linebacker getting out of position, but I can't tell what's actually happening or who it is), but we'll obviously find a couple more where Gocong was in coverage. It appears to me he has the underneath bracket on a couple of the passes to WR's (who are wide open)...

I guess our disagreement isn't about whether Gocong is good in coverage (he had zero passes defended, as near as I can tell), but whether or not someone will be able to exploit Gocong and Trotter being on the field at the same time. I hope you're right and the Eagles shut down the Cowboys, Giants and Redskins in the short and intermediate passing game where they have the TE's and RB's to kill even very talented opponents. In this game it hurt the Eagles (to the tune of at least 38 yards) to have Gocong in coverage - I honestly don't think the Bucs make either of those plays if Jordan or Gaither is in coverage. But whatever - I hope you are right...

by chemical burn :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:20pm

I'm just going through the game tape right now - and there's a play to 88 on the Bucs for 8 yards on first down where Gocong bites on play action and doesn't have the recovery speed to get anywhere near the TE before Johnson makes the completion. (Trotter actually makes the tackle downfield!) But so, far it looks like they're taking Gocong out on most passing downs (similar to what they did with Trotter) - and the ones where he's in, they bring him on the blitz. It looks like the Eagles coaching staff agrees with me in that regard - they don't want Gocong in coverage either...

BUt there's two points here then: 1) Is Gocong a liability in coverage? 2) Does the addition of Trotter mean Gocong ends up in coverage more frequently. I think the answer to 1) is "yes" and the answer to 2 is "not in the game versus the Bucs."

For evidence on 1), I took a look at the Saints game, but Gocong is rarely in on passing downs. On the plays where he is in coverage, he's overmatched as an open-filed tackler for the Sainst speedy players and whiffs on Reggie Bush a couple times... Also, they defense doidn't even play that bad - I'm sure its obvious, but the Saints are really, really good.

by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:20pm

That's Trotter that bites on the play action, not Gocong. Gocong's on the other side of the line. You can tell because Jordan's on the line and blitzes, and also you can see the "54", at least on the NFL.com feed.

(Also, bad Trotter for biting on the play action on that play, but also 1) nice recovery speed, and 2) bad Asante Samuel for either biting on the play action as well or bizarrely abandoning contain on Josh Johnson)

by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:13pm

(and unlike you I don't disregard the DPI when he was badly beaten - and DVOA won't either)

Really, find me a SAM backer who can keep up with a good receiving TE 24 yards down the field and I'll show you a Pro Bowler. If there was individual pass defense DVOA, it would compare the average performance of a TE vs a SAM LB 24 yards down the field - and a DPI is probably a pretty average result (i.e. reception, no YAC).

the Clemons one looks like a linebacker getting out of position,

Nah, the LB blitzed. Clemons dropped into coverage. Neither Gocong nor Trotter were on the field anyway, it was a nickel formation (Gaither and White): they had 6 at the line (a DB and a LB showing blitz). 5 of those 6 rushed, and Clemons dropped back. The other LB (Gaither) blitzed on a delay, but Winslow chipped and went into the flat to his right, and Clemons was screwed, as the WR pushed the CB deep and two people went into the zone he was covering.

I honestly don't think the Bucs make either of those plays if Jordan or Gaither is in coverage. But whatever - I hope you are right...

Well, of course not, but the DPI play was never supposed to have Gocong in coverage that long, as it was a blitz that got totally picked up. That sort of play happens - here it happened with Gocong in coverage, but it could've happened with, say, a DE in coverage if they had zone blitzed, which would've been worse. That's part of the danger of blitzing.

The 14-yard pickup was similar. Just a good pickup and play call by the Bucs. Gocong should've had that one, though.

I hope you're right and the Eagles shut down the Cowboys, Giants and Redskins in the short and intermediate passing game where they have the TE's and RB's to kill even very talented opponents.

Yeah, I'm guessing on those games they'll rely more on Gaither on first down. Andy said the only reason Trotter started was the personnel on the field, so my guess is that Trotter won't play many non-short yardage downs vs. say, the Giants.

Tough call, though, because I'd want Trotter vs. Brandon Jacobs. Jacobs outweighs Gaither by like 20 pounds!

by chemical burn :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:23pm

Yeah, agreed on Trotter versus Jacobs - what I actually want is Trotter in his prime versus Jacobs because that would really be a classic battle...

by Eddo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:56am

Rob Weintraub: "[C]an the defense have an illegal formation, even on a kick?"

Yes. On kicking plays, the defense cannot line anyone up directly in front of the long snapper.

by J.D. (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:18pm

Are you sure that's a rule in the NFL? I know it's true in HS and college, but I had thought that part of being a long snapper in the NFL is getting planted on your ass every play.

by Eddo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:13pm

Yep. I believe it was only added a few years ago, but I have definitely seen it called multiple times in the last few years. It's a player safety rule.

by Trogdor :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:37pm

And if you watch before some kicks, the umpire will actually warn members of the kick block team if they're lined up over the snapped. I saw it a few times in the Colts/Titans game last night, and possibly in the Dallas/Dallas game when current Dallas blocked the 50-yarder in the 4th.

by Eddo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:45pm

Trogdor, you give new meaning to the phrase "the Cowboys beat themselves today". :P

by Trogdor :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 10:58am

I'm thrilled that Cleveland added another big play to their offensive arsenal. At first it was just "hope to hold them to a FG, then Cribbs returns the kick for a TD so we win the exchange". On occasion it would be "somehow, someway force a punt, then hope Cribbs returns for a TD or at least close enough for us to kick a field goal after losing seven yards". But finally they have a third play! "Punt and hope the other team's returner fumbles close enough for us to kick a field goal, because we sure ain't scoring a touchdown even if we recover on the 3".

In all, I'm very relieved and thrilled that they got one in the W column, accomplished entirely by randomly matching up with a team that's just a tiny bit more thoroughly entrenched in suckitude. Tremendous performance from Anderson, getting the win despite completing only 2 more passes for 23 more yards than I did (although since I didn't throw a pick, my QB rating is higher). Above all he provided Exhibit A for the next time someone busts out a QB's 'record' as the be-all end-all of quality. In your face, Super Bowl-winning Trent Dilfer!

On the plus side, Cleveland's defense has looked downright competent the last two games. The team as a whole seems to have a pulse, which is apparently all it takes to win at Buffalo now. Jim Kelly must be spinning in his grave. Plus, this game illustrates just how tremendous Detroit's accomplishment lasy year truly was. If this Cleveland team can win a game, if the freaking Raiders can win a game, how hard must it be to go winless?

by Todd S. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:04am

To be fair, the Browns did play the Bengals really close (not that any team HASN'T done that yet). I'm wearing my Browns shirt with pride today, proclaiming to anyone that will listen: "Not only did they get their first win, they doubled-up the opposition!"

by bubqr :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:02am

"MVP should have gone to the Browns' punt team for pinning a pair of kicks inside the five and forcing a turnover on another."

They didn't force anything. Parrish had a brain fart.

Chicago Bears previous audibles reference made me laugh. It was good.

I can't wait for the numbers to come out on that Eagles game : I don't recall watching that many blitzes ever.

Kyle Boller fumble deserves more press : It's nearly a Orlovsky-like move.

by t.d. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:05am

agreed on the bears comment

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:20am

On that play, Boller really looked like a person with a rodent phobia, upon spotting a mouse scampering across the kitchen floor.

by t.d. :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:05am

Funny thing is, the Cowboys game would never have gone to overtime if Miles Austin hadn't dropped like two TD passes on separate drives earlier in that game.

by Anonymous908752345 (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 7:43pm

Aw, give the kid a break. For at least the entire second half, he looked like he was the only cowboy who wasnt looking vacantly at the ground while the Chiefs were quietly trying to take a win.

by Podge (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:07am

I didn't think the Rams were completely terrible on Sunday. I think if we'd been playing the Bills or Browns we might have had a shot at winning.

I don't understand how we can be so bad in the redzone so consistently. Off the top of my head I make it now 4 turnovers and one touchdown when we've been inside the 10 this year. I wouldn't be surprised if its more turnovers, but I've just double checked (there's not much checking to do) and there's definitely no more TDs.

Kyle Boller was surprisingly not terrible on Sunday (well, apart from the backwards throw episode). He looked like a QB an NFL team could win with, as long as the other team isn't too good. I guess it makes it easier when the game is all but over after about 7 minutes and the opposition is basically playing 11 men in the box, but he still looked somewhere just below competent, which is pretty good given that its Kyle Boller throwing passes to such luminaries as Keenan Burton (who looked quite good) and Danny Amendola.

Steven Jackson and Nnamdi Asomugha should petition someone or other to force them to be traded, because they clearly deserve better. How Steven Jackson gets 80+ yards against the Vikings I don't know, but he deserves much better. On a team with actual competence he would be breaking 2 tackles and dragging 2 guys on his way to 20 yard runs, not breaking 2 tackles and dragging 2 guys for no gain. He made one move in the 2nd quarter (I think) where 3 Vikings were all lined up to hit him, he looked like he was just going to tunnel into them for a yard then as they braced just jumped outside and took it for 10 or so yards.

RE: Broken Tackles - does this mean you'll be tracking them for both offensive and defensive (as in tackles attempted and broken) players this year? Massive addition this.

by PerlStalker :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:16am

I have to admit, it's kinda nice not having a QB that throws bonehead pics every game. I'd have been scared to death on that 98-yard drive that Cutler would have thrown a stupid interception around the 50 and killed all hope for a win. All hail Kyle "Just Wins" Orton. ;-)

It was nice seeing Marshall and Royal getting some work again. The SD game next week is looking veeeewy inewesting.

by John Doe (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 9:28pm

To be fair, if Cutler had been playing and threw a pick six on that drive the Broncos would likely have still been winning by double digits.

by johonny (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:21am

So let me get this straight: Jack in the Box is the appropriate alternative to stealing left over food off of the trays in a hotel hallway. Wow th

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:21am

"(for illegal formation--can the defense have an illegal formation, even on a kick?)"

I'm not sure, ut i assumed it was "lining up directly over the center"-rule? Somewhat giving the snapper an excuse.

Seems to me that having "St. Louis" in your name, means bad things in the NFL.

by jimm (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:31am

There are 17 teams with 2 wins or less. Only GB of those 2 win teams has beaten a team with 3 or more wins.

There are 10 teams with 1 or more wins - 6-42 total record. Of those 6 wins two were against Washington and 4 were when they played each other.

by the silent speaker (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 9:23pm

"One or fewer wins," I assume you mean?

by bubqr :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:45am

Roughing The Passer comment(s) :

I saw a big non-call late in the DEN-NE game, when 2 Patriots just went straight to Orton knees, and no flag. I don't mean to bring up any controversy, but I have m opinion about what would have happened if Brady was hit like that.

Have there been any study about :

- "Famous", "Successful" QBs getting more RTP calls than other ones ?

- average number of hits between RTP calls for "mobile" QBs vs "immobile" QBs (After watching McNabb getting hit late/injured all the time, I have my theory about it) ?

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:54am

"I saw a big non-call late in the DEN-NE game, when 2 Patriots just went straight to Orton knees, and no flag."

I saw the same thing. That game should have never made it to OT, a correctly called RTP would have put Denver well into field goal range.

by MJK :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:59am

I actually thought the Den-NE game was called OK, and I'm a big ref critic. I didn't see the play you are talking about...did they actually make contact with Orton's knees? If there's no contact, there's no penalty. If you wanted to penalize guys for "trying to hit a guy's knees", you'd have refs trying to judge intent, and then they become acting critics, not refs. Calling penalties for "coming close to the knees" would be even worse (although, the way the league is going, I could see that happening a a couple of years).

The only two real WTF refereeing moments in that game were the taunting call thing and the inexplicable "forward progress" call that negated an obvious Denver fumble deep in their own end. I think Tanier was right about the tuanting thing...the ref close by the throws the flag BEFORE the taunt was throwing a flag for DPI, but by rule, there can't be DPI if the ball is tipped (and it was), so he picked up his flag. The ref on the far side of the field called the taunt.

The only call that really bugged me was the forward progress call. The Broncos receiver (Gafney, I think?) gets wrapped up, rolls to his side in an effort to break the tackle, moves sideways (not backwards) and the tackle is finished at most a second later by another guy. During the process, the ball pops out clearly before the runner is down, perhaps a half-second after initial contact is made. Patriots recover.

But the referee had blown the play dead (or so he claimed) because "forward progress had been stopped". And that's not challengable (although Belichick tried). Now, I'm as big a fan as anyone of protecting the players, and if the player is obviously not going anywhere, blow the play dead. But I would define "not going anywhere" as being solidly wrapped up by multiple guys and moving backwards, not in the process of trying to break a single tackle and rolling sideways. Sometimes you see a good three or four seconds of a guy being driven backwards before they blow it dead. If forward progress was always called the way it was on that play, then there would almost never be any fumbles at all, and probably a lot fewer highlight reel runs, because almost as soon as any player got his arms on the ball carrier, the play would be dead. Roethlisberger would become the most sacked QB in the the league, and almost no team would ever score on power runs from the 1 yard line.

I'm not bitter--stuff like that happens, and the Pats had plenty of other opportunities to win, which they did not capitalize on--but it was the one bad call that stood out.

by PerlStalker :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:21pm

From what I saw watching the game this morning, the defender had been knocked to the ground by the blocker and roll/crawled to try to get to Orton but, from what I saw, didn't get there because Orton and stepped up. I think RTP would have been a bad call there.

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:52pm

The play I am talking about there was clear contact with Orton's knees. If the play against Brady last week was RTP, then this one absolutely was.

As far as the taunting penalty, the commentators said that there were two flags on the play. But I think the important thing to make clear here is that it was the correct call. He stood over a player on the ground and ran his mouth. That is a textbook taunting call.

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:10pm

Let me fix that for you.

"I'm talking about the play where a player lying on the ground made clear contact with Orton's leg."

As long as we're all clear on that, it's a fine to debate whether a player lying on the ground can be correctly called for roughing the passer, and under what circumstances. (For instance - can you roll hard enough to be making a "hit" under the current rules?)

Yes, I know you chose your wording to avoid saying the "lying on the ground" part. It weakens your case a whole bunch. That's reality.

by tuluse :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:37pm

I think the rules is that if you make contact with a QB below the knees it's a penalty. Unless it's outside of your control, like getting blocked into the QB.

by DGL :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:11pm

I wonder if we'll see a pass-rusher get a Roughing the Passer penalty for stepping on the QB's toes...

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:44pm

Let me fix this for you...it doesnt matter. He wasnt blocked into him, so he is not allowed to hit the QB at or below the knee. So, it doesnt weaken my case at all, but thanks for playing.

Do I agree that it should be a penalty? No, not really...but the "reality" is that it was a penalty. The only difference between this one and the one against Brady last week is that Orton didnt go crying to the refs afterward.

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:56pm

Since you obviously wont believe me.


"It's a player that's down and then he does that second act where he's getting up and intentionally rolling into the quarterback, or where he's getting up and he lunges at his legs," Fisher said.

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:24pm

The key phrase being "getting up". The phrase is important enough that it was repeated. The same quote immediately notes that if the player isn't getting up, even if he is crawling, it's not a potentially dangerous hit, and therefore not a penalty.

Thanks for the link. That makes the referee's non-call clear and correct, yes? I mean correct by the rule. We get that you don't like the Patriots.

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:36pm

"The clarification specifically prohibits a defender on the ground who hasn't been blocked or fouled directly into the quarterback from lunging or diving at the quarterback's lower legs"

"It's a player that's down and then he does that second act where he's getting up and intentionally ROLLING into the quarterback,"

Yeah, that clearly makes your point. Seriously, do you have brain damage?

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:42pm

Cool. Getting Up. Which he wasn't doing.

Nuff said.

by nat :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:11pm

Could you do this for us? Just post that the player who contacted Orton's lower leg was lying on the ground. Just so we know whether you might actually be interested in a reasonable discussion.

No ifs, ands, or buts. No additional excuses or arguments needed or wanted.

by Nate :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:27pm

There should be more than contact. It has to be a forcible hit at the knees or below. Personally, I don't think either the Brady RTP last week or what I think is the Orton hit were "forcible" hits. The Manning one from last night was, however, a forcible hit.

by steelberger (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:39pm

I agree. They are going too far trying to protect (some) QB's. However, by the letter of the law (as currently written) they are penalties.

by Nate :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:41pm

Well, that was kind of my point - I didn't think the Brady hit was a penalty by the letter of the law. The law requires a forcible hit. Brady's knee wasn't hit forcibly. Therefore, no penalty. But I'm sure this has been argued ad nauseum.

by bubqr :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:02pm

It was live, so I can't tell you exactly when it was. I think it was a DB blitzing.

On the "forward progress" rule : This rule has, and will create a lot of controversy. It's not a dumb one, but letting the referees judge when a play is "for sure over" will lead to blown calls.

by Dave Bernreuther :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:37pm

I read somewhere (but did not see) that Winter's crew had a pretty solid late QB hit involving helmet to helmet contact that was right in front of Winter that did NOT get called, which was quite a difference from last week.

Can anyone confirm or deny this?

by The Anti-Dave (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:37pm

Correct. The hit was by Tony Brown on David Garrard. Arguably helmet to helmet and driving QB to the ground, and he was subsequently fined $10,000.

by The Anti-Dave (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:37pm

Correct. The hit was by Tony Brown on David Garrard. Arguably helmet to helmet and driving QB to the ground, and he was subsequently fined $10,000.

by Tom Gower :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:05pm

That was Riveron's crew last week that did TEN-JAC (and yes, Brown should have been flagged). I think he was referring to a call this week.

by TomC :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:51am

It's typical of fnor/Mike's irrational Bears hatred that he neglected to mention that the Bears' defense did not give up a single yard this week.

by Dan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:11pm

I thought it was fair. When the team isn't winning the focus is going to be on what they aren't doing right. This week was sort of like week 1 against the Packers - the defense wasn't giving up a lot, but they also weren't generating turnovers. That'll keep things close, but they're not going to win games for you like they did a couple years ago.

by Hari-Kiri Bengals Fan (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:51am

Speaking in defense of Bengals RT Dennis Roland--in my view, he's incredible at run-blocking, but he's still on the learning curve of pass-blocking. He's 6'9 and basically a mauling god. He seems to have taken over for RT Anthony Collins, who's more of a LT in size and skillset, and was struggling in run-blocking.

The guy who missed the initial tackle on Ray Rice--WLB Brandon Johnson--is normally one of our best tacklers, ironically, and he's been great depth for us.

by E :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 11:55am

Like Aaron, I noticed Dierdorf's comment about Jacobs at the goal line (and also his "Uncle Tom" comment) but I remember him being more general about it than Aaron quoted. I think he said that at the goal line, you are better off being a shorter back because it's easier to find a hole, get lost beneath the pile and sneak into the end zone.

I have always thought that there was something to this, ever since the Giants used to use Tikiu to get down to the goal line and then Ron Dayne to fail to get in (he was notorious for running tall). I wonder if this wouldn't be a good piece to analyze for next year's book - what kind/size of backs are best in short yardage? Big backs are always used but my intuition is that short powerful backs are best.

by C (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 1:58pm

Ron Dayne was a "big back" but he ran so tall and was not effective. Everybody wanted him as a goal line back but unless he was going to change his style around the goal line, he'd be worthless.

The thing about Jacobs ( who does run tall), is he IS tall. Most RB's aren't over 6', nevermind 6'4 or 6'5. The reason why it's still ok, is because he runs like a bulldozer with enough power to negate the high pad level.

The thing that pissed me off more than anything is a couple of years ago when Coughlin would take Jacobs out in goal line packages for Reuben Droughns who at that point in his career had no business being on an NFL, CFL, or NFL Europe field.

Bradshaw is small and quick ( I don't know if I'd say fast), but he runs with alot of power and burst for his size.

by morganja :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:14pm

"Bill Barnwell: The ref clearly threw the flag before Merriweather started pointing and taunting at Royal. I'm guessing some will suggest that he wanted to make a call for a late hit, realized that he couldn't call that penalty because the ball had been tipped, and pretended it was for taunting instead."

Yup. The refs are constantly making up penalties to call against the Patriots.

Just to clarify, you can call a late hit on a tipped ball. You just can't call a pass interference. Are you really trying to suggest that Merriweather wasn't taunting?

"Roughing The Passer comment(s) :

I saw a big non-call late in the DEN-NE game, when 2 Patriots just went straight to Orton knees, and no flag. I don't mean to bring up any controversy, but I have m opinion about what would have happened if Brady was hit like that."

Thta's why it's called the Brady Rule.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:36pm

I think he was suggesting that a ref who throws a taunting flag thrown before the taunting takes place should have a good chance of winning the lottery.

by Eddo :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:10pm

Read Barnwell's comment again, morganja:

"Bill Barnwell: The ref clearly threw the flag before Merriweather started pointing and taunting at Royal. I'm guessing some will suggest that he wanted to make a call for a late hit, realized that he couldn't call that penalty because the ball had been tipped, and pretended it was for taunting instead."

He's saying that there will be whiners out there who do what you just accused him of doing. Barnwell didn't say the refs were wrong.

by C (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 2:00pm

The Ref that threw the flat picked it up ( Merriwether did hit him AFTER he threw the flag), but another ref not on the screen threw the flag that was enforced. They made it pretty clear on TV.

by Drew (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:27pm

You were WAY too hard on Derek Anderson. Yeah he was 2/17, but there were 8 drops. EIGHT!

by Chocolate City (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 3:30pm

Imagine how many there would have been had Edwards still been with the team.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:31pm

I actually think Josh Johnson shows promise, though my view of things may be colored by the fact that I had to sit through several Byron Leftwich games. He looked good against the blitz at the start of the game but, by the end, he was so rattled he started tossing the ball around. Assuming some vague competence by the receivers, the game is still close well into the 4th quarter. Of course, that would require Michael Clayton to have caught a perfect pass on 4th down (please suffer a horrible3 injury, Mr. Clayton, enough is enough), or require Johnson to be able to actually take the snap on another 4th down without fumbling it. Two 4th down conversions failed, both of which were quite makeable.

I'll point out that I was screaming for the Bucs to take Maclin when they wound up taking Josh Freeman instead. Hey, look, young WR talent, that's what that looks like.

by T. Diddy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:35pm

I have a suspicion we may need a Brady/Roughing The Passer Irrational Thread to supplant the Brady/Manning Irrational Thread at some point in the not-so-distant future.

by Yaguar :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:13pm

Because the Brady/Manning question is long over?

by T. Diddy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:41pm

Now that is a subtle way to try to get it started again. Well played, sir.

by Oldcat (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 8:17pm

The real question is whether Brady or Manning gets more key Roughing the Passer calls called on him, or more in clutch situations.

by TomC :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 9:06pm

Until Manning gets an RTP call in at least one more Super Bowl, I can't start to consider him among the greatest of all time.

by Oldcat (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:33am

And of course we can argue about who is more valuable to a team..ROBO-PUNTER or ROBO-ROUGHEE who can get a RTP penalty every play...

by young curmudgeon (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:36pm

" If my mirror reflection started to counsel me about erectile dysfunction, I think I would seriously consider suicide." That's extreme--counseling and medication should correct the problem...on the other hand, if your mirror reflection starts to CAUSE erectile dysfunction, your more drastic solution might be called for.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:42pm

On a serious note, and not making any attempt to presume to tell people how to grieve, it was very unsettling to me to see a guy coach an NFL game within five days of finding his wife dead.

by PerlStalker :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:03pm

Being home in where he spent so much time with his wife might have been harder on him.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:13pm

Yeah, like I said, I don't presume to tell people how to grieve. It just was unsettling to me.

by Still Alive (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:18pm

People die every day. It does not need to be treated with all the wailing and gnashing of teeth the media loves to heap onto it.

by BigCheese :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:11pm

I'll be sure to remind you of that fact the next time someone close to you passes away.

- Alvaro

by Anonymous908752345 (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 8:01pm

People have very different processes for grief. Sitting at home crying or putting the whole ordeal out of mind are neither better or worse than the other. It seems silly to even discuss whether or not the choice was in good virtue.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:58pm

I know what you mean, there was something ghoulish about the way the commentators seemed to be making a virtue out of his decision to coach in the game. Add in the ballyhooing about how they the Bengals were going to win it for their defensive coordinator and things got a little bizarre. I can't second guess his decision as I don't know the circumstances but I his actions seem more understandable for me if his wife had been ill for a while but I haven't read anything about it and as far as I am concerned that is how it should be. It is a very strange situation.

by Still Alive (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:26pm

I would be horribly upset if my wife died, it would basically be the worst possible thing that could happen to me (short of being caught up in some inquisition). Given that, I still think I would show up for my Wednesday/Sunday night hockey league if she died because:

A: It is mindless and one of the things I enjoy most and would perhaps provide distraction from the pain and sense of loss.

B: It would be one of the few things in my life that had absolutely nothing to do with her.

Not everyone needs to go into a depressive spiral into the abyss when a loved one dies. There are plenty of hours to cry in bed, while trying to soldier on through your regular life. in fact soldiering on is the only way to get through.

All that is completely ignoring the possibility he hated/was indifferent to his wife and doesn't much care that she is gone which is probably true 5-10% of the time...

As for the medias handling of the event? When have you known football commentators to handle any storyline with grace, intelligence, or perspective.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:57pm

I guess what I found odd was the perpetual references to the fact that his wife had just died. What if the Bengals had lost having gone on about how they were going to win it for Zimmer? It must be a very difficult time for Mike Zimmer and he has the right to deal with it however he wants but I tuned in to watch a football game between two NFL teams and that is what the commentators should have been talking about. It probably is due to the networks' desire to turn everthing into a storyline and add drama. It isn't family drama it is football.

Major media entities are generally crass and often suck is a summary of what I feel on the matter.

by Kellerman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:04pm

I don't think they mentioned it at all until the start of the 2nd half and then not again until very late in the game. I also heard nothing about the team "wanting to win it for him/her" until after it was all over. I DID hear that they wanted to perform well and I heard Zimmer say that "she was proud of you, win or lose."

It does seem weird to some, I guess, for him to immediately continue at work, but keep in mind that we know virtually nothing about the Zimmers' private relationship as it relates to what her desire would have been to have him do.

I feel like I have a little insight into this because I worked in the same company with my father everyday for 16 years and one day he just didn't come in because he had died over night. It sucked, but not only did my clients still need my representation, but so did his. Continuing to work helped ME a ton. I suspect the grief won't really hit him until after the season.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 7:50pm

I am pretty sure they mentioned it at the start of the game and again in the first half. I could be wrong I guess.

by Mike Kurtz :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:20pm

I would definitely have the same problem, minus the outlet. My wife is so involved or at least engaged with everything that I get the feeling I would have to completely change every aspect of my life to avoid being constantly reminded of her.

I guess that's a downside of codependence?

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:45pm

One of my favorite moments on Sunday was when I flipped over to the Raiders-Giants game. Some Raider fumbled, a Giant picked it up and ran it back something like 80 yards for an apparent TD (it was ruled down, so the ball came back), and it showed one Raider chasing him down--#12, Darius Heyward-Bey. He was clearly much faster than the defender, but ran way to the outside and appeared to actually slow down so that another Giant could catch up to him and block him, rather than having to actually go up and make the tackle.

The play was called back, but it was pretty funny--here was a guy totally avoiding contact, just running along the side, rather than jumping in and preventing a TD. Great pick there at #7, Al.

by T. Diddy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:39pm

At least he didn't fall down.

by LukeM :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:09pm

I didn't notice that he was avoiding contact, but I did think it was funny how much faster he was than the Giants player.

by armchair journe... :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:05pm

That part was amusing.

The part where the head zebra announced the runner "down by contact" and then changed his ruling to "forward progress" after coughlin threw the challenge flag, not so amusing.

Nothing that really mattered to the game, but thoroughly annoying to logical consistency.

armchair journeyman quarterback

by The Anti-Dave (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 12:57pm

Tra Thomas started at LT for Jacksonville. Monroe came in later, then Thomas again. Both were useless.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:03pm

Here's the pathetic aspect, Danimal; can you really fault ol' Darius the Undaunted? Hell, the coaching staff clearly has communicated that they don't intend to try to win the game, that this is a contest as athletically serious, as opposed to simply a check cashing exercise, as Florida vs. The Citadel; why the hell should the labor force give a damn if management doesn't?

What I can't figure out is how Cable ever summoned enough concern to break an assistant coach's job....

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:11pm

The spirit of the Raiders has affected my typing skills! "Jaw", not "job", of course!

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:15pm

Blame, not really. The whole "Randy Moss doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame because he didn't try in Oakland" thing lasted about five minutes. I actually watched a healthy chunk of the utterly godawful Bills-Browns game just for bad football humor value, but I'm incapable of watching more than a few plays of any Raiders game. It's like they all met five minutes ago and don't have a coach at all. I can't imagine how any free agent would willingly go to Oakland; it's ridiculous. I'd say the team has utterly given up, but that assumes they ever cared at all in the first place.

Not to go all Singletary on this thread (I assure you, my pants will, in all likelihood, stay on), but a "real football player" would have at least attempted a tackle. I think back to Don Beebe chasing Leon Lett down in that Superbowl when the Bills were getting stomped. I mean, it's WEEK FIVE OF THE GUY'S CAREER and he already doesn't care enough to make a tackle?

When Cable winds up getting suspended from the NFL (and it looks very possible that he will), who in the hell is going to take over this team? Who would do that to themselves?

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:40pm

Well, the Bed and Breakfast industry is probably hurting in this economy, so it isn't completely hopeless!

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:53pm

I see a reality TV show in the future for a bead-and-breakfast staffed entirely by ex-Raider coaches. Tom Cable as the bouncer! Norv Turner as the desk clerk, who always seems to give you the wrong key! Art Shell as the cook--"Art, the stove's on fire! Art! Art! If you understand everything is going horribly wrong, change your facial expression at least a little bit! Art!"

Episode one, Lane Kiffin stops by as a guest, and Norv gives both he and Al Davis the same room. Wackiness ensues.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:17pm

Damnit, Danimal, I just spewed coffee all over my desk!

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:03pm

I managed to stifle the spit-take...barely.

I bet the old Newhart writers are available. The endless stream of 1st round busts as celebrity guest stars is awsome. And then throw in a bunch of mistaken identity episodes in which Ryan Leaf is given Manning's room and vice versa. (Kind of like the spot before the SB or maybe pro bowl about 5-7 years ago which had the Barber brothers separately checking in to the hotel and getting the key for the same room, then Shawn Alexander, bald and smiling, checking in right after them with a totally confused desk clerk giving him the same key again.)

by Kevin from Philly :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:57pm

Always fun when Larry, Darryl and his other brother Darryll Lamonica show up.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:00pm

"Since when is the Oakland Raiders Fight Song played on banjos?"

by tornadot :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:05pm

Why is Brady like 1-6 against Denver? Is it the scheme, the altitude...or what? I know Denver has had NE's number for a bit (There are exceptions of course) but I'm just curious.

Not that I'm complaining (Wish we had that record against say Indy/Pitt/SD too)

by Independent George :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 1:24pm

Historically, I think it was because Brady's receivers were never very good, and they had trouble breaking man coverage. Bailey would shut down his man one-on-one, then they would shade help over to the other receivers, and that left Brady to dump it off to the RB or TE. Before the arrival of Moss & Welker, Brady seemed to relish picking apart zones, but his receivers could get taken out of the game against good man coverage. Since very few teams run man coverage effectively, you didn't see it very often, but Denver was a tough matchup even when their defense wasn't very good as a whole.

IND would crush DEN because its #2 & #3 receivers were way better than DEN's #2 & #3 corners, and Peyton would just pick them apart (I remember one game where Manning finished with something like 300 yards 4 TDs just throwing away from Champ Bailey). NE & PIT would succeed against IND because they could disguise their coverages & pass rush out with their linebackers, taking away Manning's biggest strength. Thus, the rock-paper-scissors matchups of the mid-2000s.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 2:04pm

I bitched (and whined) last week so I guess credit where it is due. Fair play Mr Kurtz, fair play.

by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:24pm

Aaron: Well, the Eagles are starting a 97-year-old middle linebacker today

Oh, come on. Trotter's 32. The 'out of football for a year' criticism is valid. His age really isn't. He's younger than a lot of other teams' middle linebackers. I mean, geez, the Redskins start a 34-year old linebacker, the Patriots have had 30+ ILBs for forever, etc.

by tuluse :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:38pm

I think Trotter seems older than he is because he bounces around so much.

I mean how many players get have 3 stints with the same team? It leads to a perception of age.

by Tarrant :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:52pm

Derek Anderson's passer rating was 15.

15! If the passer rating formula was allowed to go negative, rather than putting a lower limit on each of the rated categories at zero, he would have had a -7.

If all you did was snap the ball and immediately spike it, on every passing down, for an entire game, you'd end up with a 39.6 (because you didn't throw any interceptions) in the process. Derek Anderson managed to be worse than that.

That said, a win is a win. But wow, how can Brady Quinn not be able to beat him out? He threw three interceptions two weeks ago, and was 2 for 17 for 23 yards and an interception this week...his QB rating for the season as a whole is less than the magic 39.6, and you still aren't considered a viable option?. I'd like to think I might be a viable option at that point - I could probably managed that 39.6 at least.

And Quinn's passer rating so far this season is about 63. Nothing to write home about...but it's at least higher than 39.6.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:08pm

December 27. The Raiders not come to Cleveland. Bizarro say this best QB competition in not ever!

by M :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:16pm

I'm hoping for a 23-14 Cleveland Victory where:

1st Quarter:
Each team has a safety due to intentional grounding in the end zone.

2nd Quarter:
69 yard punt return for touchdown by Josh Cribbs.
Interception return for a touchdown by Nmandi Asonugha - because Derek Anderson insisted that Mohamed Massaquoi was "wide open".
68 yard field goal yard field goal by Janikowski with the wind at the end of the first half.

3rd Quarter:
A 55 yard field goal attempted INTO THE WIND by Janikowski is blocked by Shaun Rogers and returned for a touchdown in the 3rd quarter.
58 yard punt return for touchdown by Josh Cribbs.

4th Quarter:
Safety taken by Browns punter to avoid blocked kick or long return.

Total Offense:
Browns - 85 yds rushing, 29 net yds passing
Raiders - 58 yds rushing, 1 net yds passing

Derek Anderson - 2 of 9 for 36 yds, 1 interception, 1 sack for 7 yds
JaMarcus Russell - 1 of 7 for 12 yds, 0 interceptions, 2 sacks for 11 yds

Jamal Lewis - 28 rushes for 35 yds
Josh Cribbs - 1 rush for 45 yds
Derek Anderson - 4 rushes for 5 yds

Michael Bush - 12 rushes for 18 yds
Justin Fargas - 17 rushes for 60 yds
Darren McFadden - 4 rushes for -10 yds
JaMarcus Russell - 5 rushes for 0 yds

by tuluse :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:50pm

Greatest. Game. Ever.

by M :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:16pm

I was hoping more people would comment on this; it took me a while to think of a game scenario filled with completely absurd highlights...until one thinks about just how bad these two teams are at passing the ball. These teams bring passing back to the single-wing era.

by jebmak :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 1:31pm

I have nothing clever to say, but I enjoyed it.

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:30am

It's easy, really. Refuse to throw the football more than 7 yards beyond the line-of-scrimmage, regardless of down-and-distance. Demonstrate you are completely incapable of throwing a deep out, a mid-range out, a post, a post-corner, or any number of other bread-and-butter throws required of an NFL quarterback. Strut about the campus with an air of superiority because you used to watch film while Charlie Weiss ate butter straight from the tub.

Brady Quinn has the ego of Brett Favre and the talent of Kent Graham. Browns fans, you're screwed. You have two inadequate quarterbacks, both highly compensated, and both representing a significant obstacle in the progress of your franchise. Your head coach excised two cancers and still lost the locker room in a matter of weeks. Its gotta get better from here.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 9:27am

"Refuse to throw the football more than 7 yards beyond the line-of-scrimmage, regardless of down-and-distance. Demonstrate you are completely incapable of throwing a deep out, a mid-range out, a post, a post-corner, or any number of other bread-and-butter throws required of an NFL quarterback."

Kyle Orton?

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 1:33pm

While I think Orton is a far more accomplished quarterback, you do make a good point. There have been several moments watching the Broncos when I have thought "man, this offense could be really dynamic if they just had a quarterback who could make more throws. Like last year."

by MJK :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 4:45pm

True. Put Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, or Drew Brees behind that Broncos line, with Denver's decent receivers and good running game, let McDaniels draw up the plays, and you'd have an almost unstoppable offense. However, QB's like Brady, Manning, and Brees don't grow on trees...only about three to six teams have a QB that good in any given year, so the best most teams hope for is someone who has strengths they can scheme about and doesn't completely suck.

I don't agree that Cutler is in the "elite" QB category, and I never have. I do think he is maybe better than Orton...although we'll have a better idea of that after this season. (Actually, even that is debatable. Orton technically has a higher passer rating than Cutler through five games, according to Peter King. And Orton's DVOA through five games is +26%, whereas Cutler's DVOA with essentially the same personnel in Denver last year was only +22%). I do agree that the Broncos offense would be more explosive with Cutler than with Orton...but I think Cutler has some very serious flaws in his game that defense could scheme against.

What I do think is obvious is that Cutler is a bit of an idiot for pouting his way out of Denver. Given how good the re-tooled Denver defense is playing, that Josh McDaniels and the surrounding offensive talent are collectively better than their counterparts in Chicago (as indicated by Orton's improvement), and going on the assumption that Cutler is at least as good as Orton, it seems like Cutler bullied his way out of playing QB for a strong SB contender with a coach known for designing offenses that play to a QB's strengths because his feelings were hurt.

by tuluse :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 5:12pm

I do think he is maybe better than Orton...although we'll have a better idea of that after this season. (Actually, even that is debatable. Orton technically has a higher passer rating than Cutler through five games, according to Peter King. And Orton's DVOA through five games is +26%, whereas Cutler's DVOA with essentially the same personnel in Denver last year was only +22%

This statement blows my mind. Especially when I argued until I was blue in the face that Orton was an average quarterback last year. I am surprised to see Orton's DVOA quite that high, and I don't think it's going to last.

I will point out a couple things. 1) Denver's rushing offense was over 3 times as good last year as it is this year. I would attribute that almost 100% to Cutler's arm. 2) A really bad defense drags a QB's play down as he has to take more risks to win games.

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:12pm

Another reason for the decline in rushing offense is scheme. The Broncos have all but abandoned the zone-blocking approach that this offensive line was built to execute and clearly executed well. Instead, they are almost exclusively one-on-one now, which turns this into a rather ordinary run-blocking line.

by Eddo :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 5:30pm

You know you can support McDaniels without claiming that Orton may be better than Cutler, right? It's not like it was a one-for-one trade, and Cutler being a better overall quarterback proves McDaniels made a mistake.

by MJK :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 2:19am

I'm not actually claiming that Orton is better than Cutler. Based on what I know now, I would say that Cutler is better than Orton. And I don't think that's exactly a shocking thing to claim...I would bet most folks would agree with me. However, I do think it falls into the "too early to be sure" category...It's entirely possible that Cutler's career could end up looking like Drew Bledsoe's--electrifying at times, but just above average over all, not HoF worthy--and Orton's could be just as good. And I do think that the McDaniels detractors that were claiming, before the season, that Cutler was the next Peyton Manning and would be their top pick if they could choose any QB in the league because of his youth and skill were going a bit overboard.

I do find Orton's good performance (by DVOA) thus far a bit surprising, although other posters have made some valid points as to why that might be. However, one possible explanation is that playing behind Denver's line really does help that much, and playing with Chicago's receivers really does hurt that much.

by BroncosGuy (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:38pm

However, one possible explanation is that playing behind Denver's line really does help that much, and playing with Chicago's receivers really does hurt that much.

A bit over-simplified, but basically on target. DVOA is not a pure measure of individual ability because such a thing is simply not possible. The individual circumstances of teammates, scheme, coaches, etc. profoundly impacts the success of a given player.

All I really said in my earlier post is that Jay Cutler can make throws that Kyle Orton can't. To echo your words, I don't think many people would argue with that.

Nowhere in the post did I mention Canton. What frustrated rational Broncos fans (if there is such a thing) about McJayGate was that Cutler at least has the physical tools that he could have a HOF career and, as you said, guys like that don't grow on trees. So squandering that kind of a resource was a mistake.

To be clear, I have never held Cutler blameless for the divorce. I think it is obvious his over-sensitivity and lack of maturity were huge factors in reaching the Irreconcilable Differences stage. Nor do I hold McDaniels blameless and I accept the idea the McDaniels is capable of making mistakes (though I'm not sure you do).

by Kibbles :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 3:54pm

Minor correction: it should be Chicago *vs.* Bye Week, because the Bears were at home.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 4:01pm

With a late steal, Kibbles wins the thread...

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:02pm

Any other niners fans out there or have they all decided to take a leap of the Golden Gate Bridge? All thoughts that we had made progress have been gunned down and left for dead in the middle of the Sahara. The 49ers were woeful. The refs might have screwed us with some really bad calls, especially the Delanie Walker fumble but that would only have meant that we would have lost by 20 points instead.

It turns out that Michael Lewis and Mark Roman haven't get any faster and are liabilities in any deep zone defense. Hill and the O-line were garbage too. Euge!

by tunesmith (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:20pm

Speaking of the golden gate bridge, I was there this weekend, and looked up trivia. It has a 98% fatality rate (when jumping). A few people jump from it every month, less than once a week. That's depressing. Also, there's this sidewalk along the bridge, between the road and the water. It really struck me that the railing on the road side is more of a barrier than the railing on the edge. It's as if they don't want you to jump, but they *really* don't want you to cause traffic problems.

by Bobman :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:07pm

Your final observation was awesome. Hey, if someone is determined to kill themselves, it's gonna happen somehow, eventually, sadly. Maybe a railing can keep those just contemplating it from taking the final plunge.

But suicidal or just momentarily depressed, there's no need to add three hours to everyone's evening commute.

I suppose if they *really* were determined to avoid both, they could seal off the sidewalk...?

by SteveNC (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 6:35pm

They could make the barrier higher or better, but this would probably obstruct the view and reduce tourism.

by Gruntled (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 8:41pm

I wouldn't want to be among the 2 percent (for a number of reasons).

by John (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 9:08pm

It has a 98% fatality rate (when jumping). A few people jump from it every month, less than once a week.

I'm sorry, I know it's awful, but this made me laugh. Your second sentence almost made me think that the 2% survival rate is one or two guys who jump less than once a week then come back to try again. (I think the clause would be properly stated "fewer than one per week".)

NPR interviewed a pair of guys who have done maintenance on the bridge for decades now; they occasionally are called upon to try to talk someone out of jumping. Quite a job.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 5:37pm

Well, as a re-minted 49ers fan, I was distressed as well, but don't let one hideous tackling game overly influence your view. They sure didn't miss those tackles against the Vikings or Cardinals, two teams with some guys who are hard to tackle. Yes, they are very limited on offense, but I think the previous defensive efforts are more likely closer to the norm for this group than what we saw yesterday. They can still win this division.

by bravehoptoad :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 7:36pm

I'm so depressed about it I can hardly type.

I don't think it'd be so bad if we were coming off a few 10-6 seasons, but I'm having amygdala-level flashbacks to the 2007 season, when we stared 2-0 and then collapsed.

Where did I read -- the 49ers have designed their team around a powerful, dominating offensive line, and they've certainly invested the draft picks there. Staley, #1, Rachal, high #2, Baas, first pick in #2 (I still recall bitterly the Patriots stole Mankins from us with the last pick of round 1). But our offensive line is terrible. It's bad in the run game; it's bad in the pass game. McCloughan has to be blamed for that. The guy has shown that he can't judge offensive linemen in the draft.

In fact, I'm suspecting McCloughan is our biggest problem. Our defense is pretty good, but with a few exceptions (Willis, Haralson) the best players on the defense are free agents (Smith, Clements, Aubrayo, Spikes, etc.) I suspect Barnwell's analysis in the FO almanac is correct -- that SF simply doesn't have the talent to compete. No part of our game looked good yesterday -- it looked like everyone in Atlanta was faster than any of our guys.

Ugh. Times like this I'm glad I have a fallback team that's usually pretty decent.

by David :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 7:04am

Whoa, calm down there

Niners are not a good team, but they're in a weak division

I agree with you (and Barnwell) that the talent level is lacking. However, they play hard, and are (mostly) well-coached. Because of the low talent level, it does mean that they are occasionally going to get destroyed

I'm still reasonably heartened for the season. This is the same team that was within 12 seconds of beating the Vikes. If they can keep the game close, they can steal a couple of big plays, and beat anyone. If they start out cold, they can get blown out by the elite.

If I was going to worry, I'd be more concerned about the first half against the Rams last week - one score, and that on a muffed punt. That's the concern, that the niners could easily have lost to the Rams.

Next week is the bye, followed by what is probably going to be a shellacking against the Colts, and we'll be back in the dogfight in the division

by C (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 2:15pm

So here's my question.

We know the FO don't like Jack Del Rio, and the pop media loves Mike Singeltary. These guys are a lot more similar than people realize... Why so much hatred for Jack, and so much love for Singeltary? Jack was popular at first, but now people are sick of calling guys out, "tough guy", "win old fashioned", make my team in my image etc.

Will Singeltary suffer the same fate? In a couple of years when he's calling Patrick Willis or somebody else out on a 6-10 team, will he still be as popular?

by tuluse :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 2:41pm

I think Singletary is doing more propping up then tearing down, which it seems Jack Del Rio does more of. Now maybe all those blood and guts stories will lose effectiveness, but I think Singletary is doing more than yelling.

by C (not verified) :: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:37pm

but the key word is "think". You "think" Mike Singeltary is more "positive" where as Del Rio is more "negative", but who really knows? Was Singeltary positive when he was publicly calling out Vernon Davis? I mean who knows what really goes on behind closed doors.

Even if you are right, is it always better for a coach to be positive? Bill Parcells was the ultimate "negative guy" and how'd that work out?

Could the positive/negative thing been due to the 49ers wins and the Jaguars losses? It just seems funny to me when the coach that Singeltary most reminds me of is Jack Del Rio, and the same people that hate Jack Del Rio love Singeltary. Are they clones, no, are they similar yes.

by afootballfan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 7:50pm

Kurtz said

The Steelers' offense seems to be the opposite of last year. Last year, they were disciplined executed cleanly and fell apart in the end zone. This year, they seem more disjointed and sloppy

Huh? First off, saying last years offense excuted cleanly and were disciplined has to be a misprint. And the Steelers are averaging 6.1 Yards per play. Roethlisberger is completing 73% of his passes at 8.5 YPA this season. That isn't disjointed and sloppy.

by PatsFan :: Mon, 10/12/2009 - 8:11pm

It's pretty clear that Brady has totally lost his touch on the long ball. Look at that wide open Moss with Brady firing the ball 10 feet over his head when Brady had all day to throw it.

I wonder if the Haynesworth preseason hit was more damaging than they're letting on.

by Bobman :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 1:27am

I wouldn't worry too much. Last year, Colts fans dissected every Manning pass and Marvin Harrison fans hated hearing "he's lost a step" etc when in more than just a few cases, Manning's throw was just off. He ended up okay after a handful of games to settle his feet under him (despite the crappy OL) and this season looks even better.

I know Brady had a whole summer to work with his receivers, but maybe it's a game reps kind of thing. This year might be disappointing, but next year at the very least things should be back to normal.

Bigger worry: The 2 a.m. poopy diaper changes wrecking his sleep patterns, even if he's not the one doing the changing. (No idea when the baby is due, but in my experience, 4 solid hours of sleep are preferable to even 8 hours broken up a handful of times. And I'm no top athlete... really.)

by Kurt Klein (not verified) :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 12:37am

Yes, the ref threw the flag before the pointing. But taunting is more about what the player is *saying*, and the ref was certainly within earshot of what the defender said before he began pointing.

by bubqr :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 8:03am

Hole-in-Schedule has a top defense. The Bears are not the first team unable to score on them. I don't have the exact record, but they are on quite a no TD allowed streak.

by armchair journe... :: Tue, 10/13/2009 - 2:29pm

nice work.