Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features


» 2018 Free Agency Cost-Benefit Analysis

Is Kirk Cousins the best free-agent quarterback in recent memory? Should Trumaine Johnson or Malcolm Butler have gotten the larger contract? And what makes a free-agent contract good or bad, anyway?

09 Sep 2013

Audibles at the Line: Week 1

compiled by Rivers McCown

This year, we have a new format for our Monday morning feature Audibles at the Line, combining our Twitter feeds with our email discussion. First, we're replacing our usual back-and-forth with some longer-form dissection of each game that at least one of us watches in depth. Second, every game that we find time for will also have a selection of tweets from us and a few reader tweets we found particularly insightful. To follow these tweets live on Sunday, or to contribute your own thoughts or a question for the FO staff, you can use hashtag #foaud. We discussed the new format in this post.

On Monday, we will compile a digest of tweets and e-mails to produce this feature. By its nature, it can be disjointed, not entirely grammatically correct, and dissimilar to the other articles on the site.

Audibles is still being written from our point of view, meaning 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 49ers or Patriots fan, you are probably in luck; if you are a Bills fan, not so much.) We have no intention of adding new authors to cover every game on a given Sunday, nor will we watch a different game from the ones that we're personally interested in watching, just to ensure that Audibles covers every game. Audibles is often written from a fan perspective as much as an analyst perspective; in order to properly accuse FO writers of bias, please check our FAQ.

Feel free to comment not only about Sunday's games but about this new Audibles format. It's still a bit of a work in progress.

Sunday, September 8

Tennessee 16 at Pittsburgh 9

FO Staff Tweets

Scott Kacsmar: And the award for most embarrassing start to a season in 94 years of NFL history goes to the 2013 Tennessee Titans.

Scott Kascmar: Titans show blitz, but rush four. Might want to actually bring that heat on third-and-long against the Steelers. #foaud

Tom Gower: As a fan of the opposing team, I applaud Todd Haley's affection for WR screens #foaud

Tom Gower: Jurrell Casey has given a #Steelers interior OL missing its best player fits today. #Titans #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Pittsburgh offense is challenging my ability to resist #nationaljumptoconclusionsweek #foaud

Scott Kacsmar: If the Steelers cannot get on the board against Tennessee, what will they do in Cincinnati? Negative points? #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@MulXEdgeGJJ: Interesting to see if that Polamalu sack beats Ronde Barber at wembley a couple years back for fastest sack #FOAUD


Scott Kacsmar: What kind of "hocus pocus" was that, Mike Tomlin? After starting the last two seasons on the road against teams who would win 12-plus games, it should have been a relief to get a home game with Tennessee this year. It had to be one of the most winnable games on the schedule and an important one to pick up for a team coming off a mediocre season. So what do we get? Only one of the most lifeless performances in the Ben Roethlisberger era. It started with one of the more ridiculous plays you will ever see when Darius Reynaud came out of the end zone and downed the ball for a touchback that was actually a safety. The Steelers led 2-0, they were driving, Roethlisberger was dealing on third-and long, and then disaster struck. David DeCastro cut and took out his own guy, center Maurkice Pouncey, who is now lost for the season with a torn ACL/MCL. The Steelers faced a third-and-inches situation, but instead of using their big quarterback on the sneak, they get cute with the inside handoff and fumble the ball. Everything about the game just went down the toilet from there. Instead of leading 9-0, they were nearly shut out until the final minutes.

Now I'm not a big Pouncey guy. I think his accolades are more "he was a first-round pick at center for the Steelers, so he must be good," than earned, but this is a problem an offensive line that flat out sucks regardless of all the draft picks they've finally put into it. Roethlisberger was sacked five times today. His passing outside of a bad interception was not a big problem, but the sacks killed this offense, and the line did not allow for any real deep shots. The few times they did, Tennessee had good coverage with Jason McCourty.

The complete lack of a running game (15 carries for 32 yards) did not help. Can someone explain why did Isaac Redman get the starting job and why did Jonathan Dwyer get cut? It makes no sense. This team does not have a back now and they do not have a tight end until Heath Miller gets back. By then, the season could be lost. Jake Locker had four completions midway through the third quarter, but then he started converting third-and-13 and third-and-15. Jackie Battle was grinding out tough yards against the defense. At that point it was over, regardless of Troy Polamalu having one of the best timed-snap counts you'll ever see.

Even when the game was 10-2 in the fourth quarter fans were leaving Heinz Field. The level of disgust for this team is pretty high right now. If this is how they are going to play at home against the Titans, then it is going to be a very long season. I really did not come away that impressed with what Tennessee was doing as they sitll look like a double-digit loss team with a bad quarterback to me. Just makes you wonder exactly where the Steelers are and now without Pouncey and Larry Foote going forward. Ryan Clark, Cortez Allen and LaRod Stephens-Howling were also injured during the game. Again, just an all-around clusterfrack.

The new season doesn't come with a 'reset' button, does it?

Tom Gower: I won't repeat too much of what Scott said, but this performance was about a listless Steelers offense and a Titans defense that was surprisingly non-porous. Once Pouncey went out, Jurrell Casey in particular was wrecking the middle of the offensive line all game. He finished with a couple sacks and a couple more hits. The Pittsburgh running game was completely non-existent. Emmanuel Sanders had a couple chances to make heroic downfield catches, but didn't.

Offensively, the Titans had one real drive all game, when Locker converted the third-and-longs. Their other three scoring drives all began in Pittsburgh territory. That's a real credit to the defense, while punter Brett Kern had a good day as well. The nicest thing I can say about the offense as they executed the preferred gameplan, finishing with twice as many runs as passes. They didn't move the ball well, as both Chris Johnson and Jackie Battle (subbing after Shonn Greene went out early) averaged under three yards per carry, but they did just enough for the win.

J.J. Cooper: I predicted before the season that the Steelers were an 8-8 team, which means they could end up 6-10 or they could end up 10-6. Apparently I was a little too optimistic about Pittsburgh. Until a garbage-time touchdown in the final two minutes, Pittsburgh was being shut out at home by a defense that ranked 25th in defensive efficiency last year. Without Mike Wallace, Pittsburgh's receivers struggled to get open, especially on an pass more than 10 yards downfield. That's not all that surprising when you consider that in passing situations, they were sending out David Paulson, a possession receiving tight end, Jerricho Cotchery, a possession receiver, Antonio Brown and Sanders. The Steelers, at least in Week 1, appeared to greatly miss Mike Wallace. You have to wonder how many weeks it will be before rookie Markus Wheaton plays a larger role because he would bring some needed speed to the receiving corps.

When Pouncey went down it killed the Steelers running game, but not necessarily in the way you may think. It's not because he's an All-Pro center. Like Scott, I believe Pouncey is a solid-but-unspectacular center. But when he went down, Kelvin Beachum, who had been lining up as the Steelers' hand-on-the-ground tight end (with Paulson flanked to his outside) had to move in to center. In case you're keeping track, Beachum (No. 68 in your program) is the only tight end Pittsburgh can feel comfortable using as a traditional blocking tight end. He's also the team's primary backup offensive lineman at all five positions. With Pouncey out, he becomes the center and Guy Whimper is ever so close to stepping onto the field. Without Beachum at tight end, Pittsburgh never found a replacement who could handle a defensive end or linebacker one-on-one on running plays.

Scott asked why Redman is starting and Jonathan Dwyer is on the street (and still looking for a job). It's a fair question, but I'll ask a broader one. WIth Le'veon Bell hurt, is there any other Steeler running back who would assuredly be picked up if waived? The other backs are Redman, Stephens-Howling, and Felix Jones. I honestly wonder if any of them would be claimed on waivers.

For Tennessee, it was a smart gameplan: run the ball in large doses while asking Locker to only make the occasional play. Greene left the game with an injury, but the way Jackie Battle ran may leave Titans fans wondering why exactly they needed to spend $10 million on Greene.

New England 23 at Buffalo 21

FO Staff Tweets

Aaron Schatz: It's hard to tell how well Manuel is playing because the OL isn't getting it done, esp. on the run plays. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Julian Edelman with 2 TD in the first half + Amendola hobbles off = Edelman challenges Julius Thomas for Frisman Jackson Award. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Mark your calendar. On September 8 at 2:30pm EDT Dan Dierdorf said something very smart. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Dierdorf pointed out that the problem with the no huddle in the last 2:00 is that when BUF went 3-out, NE got the ball with 1:11 left #foaud

Aaron Schatz: HOLY WOW. That's the first failed sneak by Tom Brady in ... I have no idea how long. Forever. #foaud

Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ASchatz Wait, what? Failed sneak by Brady? Dude, 56 IN A ROW! #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Remember in the preseason when beat reporters were all writing about how Brady and Thompkins had great timing together? Um, yeah. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: The catches Amendola is making today, constantly holding onto the ball when getting flipped in the air... astonishing. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@mikedrebot: Dan Dierdorf said the Bills have to punt because they are a young team with a fragile psyche @billbarnwell @MatthewWGR @FO_ASchatz #foaud

@claytoncargill: Leave my man Dan alone RT @FO_ASchatz: Mark your calendar. On September 8 at 2:30pm EDT Dan Dierdorf said something very smart. #foaud

@JoshuaOBrien80: @FO_ASchatz I know that was probably an autocorrect error but I LOVE Edge Manuel as a name. Thanks! #foaud

(Ed. Note: We've taken to calling him Edge because of the lack of punctuation in EJ -- Rivers)


Aaron Schatz: I think this one is going to get overblown a little bit in the press. The Patriots really dominated this thing for the first 28 minutes, they just got some bad bounces. Some of those will show up in DVOA -- the 75-yard fumble return for a touchdown by Da'Norris Searcy is definitely a non-predictive event -- and others won't. Since I don't adjust for dropped passes-turned-interceptions during the season, Tom Brady will get blamed for the pass that Zach Sudfeld let go off his hands and into the hands of a Bills defender. I certainly don't expect Tom Brady to be botching the snap on fourth-and-goal very often.

Anyway, the Bills offensive line looked poor, especially in those first 28 minutes. C.J. Spiller couldn't find any holes, and Edge Manuel was just a dumpoff machine because of the pressure. Then the Bills offense suddenly got it together. Buffalo had only three drives over 30 yards, but they came in the final 2:00 of the second quarter and the only two Buffalo drives of the third quarter. The Bills scored touchdowns on two of those. When he actually could get time to throw, Manuel looked really good. But the Bills running game couldn't take care of the clock in the fourth quarter. Certainly not the rookie quarterback's fault.

There were obviously timing issues between Brady and his receivers other than Danny Amendola and maybe Julian Edelman. The local press was talking all preseason about how good the timing was between Brady and Kenbrell Thompkins, but I guess that was just in practices with no actual defensive backs on the field or something. He went the wrong way when Brady was scrambling and needed to improvise at the start of the fourth quarter. He had trouble getting his feet down at the margins, both the sidelines and the back of the end zone. He went a step or two too far when Brady tried to throw him a back-shoulder throw. The good news for the Patriots is that Brady and his receivers should have their timing down a lot better when we get to December and January. They also will have Rob Gronkowski, who should be back in the next couple weeks. The Pats had only one catch by a tight end today. That will not be a common occurrence the rest of the season.

It's hard to tell how good the Bills pass defense really was given the timing issues on the Patriots' offense, but the run defense definitely looked better than last year, and Kiko Alonso looks like a good addition.

Atlanta 17 at New Orleans 23

FO Staff Tweets

Peter Koski: When it's 4th and Inches, Sean Payton has to give it to Mark Ingram, that's just the way the offense is built. #foaud

Rivers McCown: That the Saints seem to pull good low-round/UDFA running backs out of their butts just makes the Mark Ingram pick that much sillier. #FOAUD

Reader Tweets of Genius

@Walshmobile: NO had 2nd and goal from the 27 after back-to-back holding calls #foaud

@Walshmobile: 4th and 2 from ATL 5, up 3 with 3:16 left NO lines up.. tries to draw offside, calls TO after one hut and kicks FG to go up 6. go4it! #foaud


Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth writing about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.

Tampa Bay 17 at New York Jets 18

FO Staff Tweets

Tom Gower: If Schiano settles for this long FG, I'm going to scream. #foaud RT @FO_ScottKacsmar: Bucs shouldn't act like the FG is a given here.

Rivers McCown: Gary Kubiak likes Greg Schiano's thinking here in Tampa #FOAUD

Rivers McCown: My face when Geno Smith leads a game-winning drive here http://i.imgur.com/pFeqPHd.gif #FOAUD

Aaron Schatz: Lavonte David may have just taken the Keep Choppin Wood award away from Michael Huff. Dan Connelly tried, but failed. #foaud

Rivers McCown: This is why you go for the touchdown deep in Jets territory, by the way Mr. Schiano #FOAUD

Reader Tweets of Genius

@MilkmanDanimal: Geno Smith has looked kind of Josh Freeman-ish today. Not really a compliment; good throws, bad throws, horrible INT over the middle. #foaud

@bighairyandy: LeVonte David just stole KCW from Danny Trevathan: personal foul to get Jets into range for the game winning FG. Unbelievably stupid. #foaud

@MilkmanDanimal: The Jets last 13 points were all scored after Tampa defenders committed penalties resulting in first downs. #foaud #alsoincrediblystupid


Sean McCormick: While the Jets obviously caught an enormous break at the end with that unconscionable hit out of bounds to set up Nick Folk's winning field goal attempt, I would expect DVOA to show that they were the better team today. The defensive front four was dominant, with Muhammad Wilkerson, Sheldon Richardson, and Kenrick Ellis all controlling the line of scrimmage consistently throughout the game. The blitz packages brought pressure but also yielded most of Tampa's big passing plays, either due to miscommunications in the secondary or simply due to Vincent Jackson getting an angle on Antonio Cromartie. Tampa's amazing propensity for drawing offensive penalties in the first half certainly made it easier to dial up pressure.

Geno Smith had an up-and-down game, but clearly progressed as things went along. Early on he put several receivers in danger, making throws that got Jeff Cumberland knocked out of the game and Jeremy Kerley temporarily sidelined. Smith tended to throw the ball late, and to drift back in the pocket in response to pressure, which led to several damaging sacks. That said, he got it together after the interception and did a better job of throwing in rhythm. He also tucked the ball and ran when there was open space in front of him. Smith didn't look dynamic in the open field, but he was efficient with his runs, including the one that ended up being the game-winning play.

Kansas City 28 at Jacksonville 2

FO Staff Tweets

Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth Tweeting about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.

Reader Tweets of Genius

Sorry, no FO readers found this game worth Tweeting about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.


Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth writing about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.

Seattle 12 at Carolina 7

FO Staff Tweets

Vince Verhei: Seahawks hurting bad at pass rusher, but got a sack from O'Brien Schofield on second drive. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: O'Brien Schofield seems like the kind of player where a good coaching staff will hide his weaknesses and feature his strengths ... but a bad coaching staff will take a player like that and obsess over his weaknesses instead of finding ways to use him #foaud

Vince Verhei: Newton has struggled in red zone passing first 2 years. Just converted 3&7 inside 20, then hit S.Smith for go-ahead TD. #foaud

Vince Verhei: Panthers punt on 4&inches at their own 35. RIVERA!!!!!! #foaud

Vince Verhei: Seahawks ran at least three bootleg-FB passes on game-clinching drive. They all worked. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@zgeballe: This looks like the early-2012 Russell Wilson: inaccurate at times, questionable pocket presence #foaud

@Coboney: Carolina doing a great job of controlling rushing lanes. Making Russell Wilson really uncomfortable. He isn't a pocket QB yet clearly #foaud

@Coboney: Difference between Rivera and Caroll. Rivera won't go on fourth and an inch with all advantages. Caroll goes for 2 to go up by 7 #FOAud


Vince Verhei: Both teams, I think, looked like what we expected. Especially Carolina. The offense will move the ball well, but they still have no big-play threat besides Steve Smith, and they’re going to have to convert a lot of third downs to score. The front seven is fantastic, limiting Marshawn Lynch to 2.5 yards per carry. And Ron Rivera will choose to punt on a couple of short fourth downs when going for it seems at least a reasonable option. He also failed to make adjustments. On their clock-killing drive, Seattle, ran at least three bootleg passes to the fullback, and they all worked. One was to Golden Tate, whose presence in the backfield should have been a neon sign saying "THEY’RE THROWING TO ME."

If anything, Carolina looked better than expected in a few key areas. Cam Newton, a lousy red zone passer in his career, converted a third down inside the 20 and finished the drive with a touchdown pass. And the secondary held up well, save for a pair of back-to-back plays in the second half (Jermaine Kearse’s go-ahead touchdown, and the play right before it when Stephen Williams got open deep but dropped a pass) when Seattle receivers got behind their man down the right sideline. If anything, I’m more convinced now that this team can win the division.

Seattle’s offense had a lot of missteps early —- dropped passes, penalties, missed receivers —- and Russell Wilson had a bad red zone fumble right before halftime. The offensive line, as noted, was abused, and Wilson looked shellshocked and indecisive at times. He had a couple of blind throws to avoid pressure that turned into miracle receptions, including an amazing sideline catch by Doug Baldwin. (That was funny, because Seattle tried to hurry and run a play to prevent a challenge, but they failed -— then the play was upheld and Carolina lost a challenge and timeout.) Baldwin, by the way, finished with seven catches for 91 yards, both better than any game he had last year. I know next week’s game against San Francisco was going to be huge anyway, but now I’m looking forward to it just to compare San Francisco’s front seven to Carolina’s. I honestly think Carolina’s could be better when all is said and done.

Miami 23 at Cleveland 10

FO Staff Tweets

Danny Tuccitto: travis benjamin having an ugly first few minutes for CLE: 1) didn't break up INT, 2) muffed punt, 3) dropped 3rd-down pass. #FOAUD

Danny Tuccitto: we like to say that QBs make WRs more than vice versa, but CLE's really killed weeden in the first quarter; both INTs on them. #FOAUD

Reader Tweets of Genius

Sorry, no FO readers found this game worth Tweeting about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.


Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth writing about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.

Minnesota 24 at Detroit 34

FO Staff Tweets

Aaron Schatz: AP is awesome, but before you get excited about a second straight 2,000 yd season remember DET: 26th in run defense DVOA in 2012. #foaud

Mike Ridley: Nice wounded duck by Ponder straight to Tulloch. #takethesack #foaud

Rivers McCown: If Ndamukong Suh really wants to ruin this game for Detroit he needs to find a way to make Christian Ponder good. #FOAUD

Mike Ridley: Reggie Bush is looking like everything the Lions wanted. 166 yards on 19 touches and one highlight reel screen. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@tlloyd75: @FO_ASchatz Speaking of the Vikings, the Audibles hashtag reminds me of one #foaud Reveiz. Just sayin’


Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth writing about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants.

Oakland 17 at Indianapolis 21

FO Staff Tweets

Rivers McCown: "Being us didn’t work, being someone else didn’t work … maybe we’re just not supposed to be good at football." pic.twitter.com/ZIxN4cDwxV

Rivers McCown: "The penalties have been a problem in the past with Khalif Barnes." No Rich, the EVERYTHING has been a problem with Khalif Barnes. #FOAUD

Scott Kacsmar: Luck: 8/8 for 113 yards, 2 TD. Raiders are going to be like playing Madden on Rookie this year. #foaud

Rivers McCown: So you have 148 yards rushing in the third quarter, but you absolutely can't go for it on fourth-and-short as a road underdog. Hmm. #FOAUD

Rivers McCown: "Are you surprised by this poise from Pryor?" I'm surprised he has five seconds to throw on every play. #FOAUD

Reader Tweets of Genius

@Coboney: @FO_RiversMcCown Waiting for Erik Walden to become a player still. It(Colts pass rush) just doesn't exist - its a myth from the Manning era #foaud


Rivers McCown: Terrelle Pryor is not a savior, but against a defensive line that had no prayer of getting initial pressure, he managed to stretch the Colts to their limits. I don't think I remember hearing Robert Mathis' name for the duration of the contest, and there were several plays where Pryor was able to run around and garner more than four seconds of time behind the line. He had some, as Andy Benoit likes to say, callow moments. Throwing behind Denarius Moore on one key slant, and whipping a wobbler at Greg Toler in the end zone that ended a drive. He's not a quarterback that can really stretch the field vertically. He also was a sitting duck on the final few plays of the game, after he took a sack and wound up with second-and-goal and 24 yards to gain. That one ended with him throwing the ball at a zone and all three defenders being in position to pick the ball off. That said, he probably should have gotten a touchdown out of the pass to Darren McFadden. That was a nice one. I definitely felt it was Dennis Allen -- who opted to punt or kick field goals on a few key fourth-and-shorts with Pryor being able to buy time almost at will -- that damaged the Raiders chances in this game more than Pryor.

As for Indy, they spent a lot of this game being curiously conservative. Far be it for me, internet nerd and guy who watches football, to call out Pep Hamilton ... but I just don't think Vick Ballard and the Colts offensive line are the horses you want to ride to victory on a week-to-week basis. It didn't go too poorly this time because the Raiders have their own issues on defense. Andrew Luck's game is about what I expected to see from him this year, though the Raiders got a little more pressure than they probably should have. Luck did have his signature witchcraft play, where he was in the grasp of Kevin Burnett and shirked him aside to run for a first down. Reggie Wayne has eluded father time for another season. The Colts were a little off on their deep throws, which kept their point total down, but this collection of skill position talent should continue to overcome its offensive line.

Cincinnati 21 at Chicago 24

FO Staff Tweets

Ben Muth: Rey Maualuga got about 4 inches off the ground on that TD to Bennett. #foaud

Rob Weintraub: AJ Green--two tds, two long bombs, two picks that were on him (not Dalton), stripped for fumble after 20-yd gain (cincy kept it). #foaud

Ben Muth: Hate all you want but when Jay Cutler finally does succeed at throwing the ball through a defender it'll be amazing #foaud

Ben Muth: Kyle Long just threw one of the worst cut blocks I've ever seen on key 3rd & 2. His man makes the tackle short of the first. #foaud ... Should point out that Long has played pretty well overall today. Just a bad time for a no hitter. #foaud

Rob Weitnraub: The Bengals need more preseason games, not fewer. #foaud ... Ive said it many many times--the #bengals and high expectations simply do not mix. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@dbt: Adam Podlesh with an early candidate for punt of the year. #foaud

@TCBullfrog: #Bengals have been waiting for the #bears to move up so the deep stuff would open up. Just did. #FOAUD

@TCBullfrog: Cutler starts going to receivers besides Brandon Marshall. #Bears offense moving down the field. Coincidence? #FOAUD


Ben Muth: I thought this was a pretty well-played game between two good teams. The difference came down to the Bengals getting two moronic personal foul penalties (one by Dre' Kirkpatrick that led to a field goal at the end of the half and one by Rey Maualuga to let Chicago run out the clock in the fourth).

I really liked the game Trestman called for Chicago. He knew his offensive line would have trouble with the Bengals front four so he tried a lot of screens and quick passes to keep the pressure off his quarterback. I don't think Bears gave up a sack all day, which is a big one for them. Also, with the exception of a terrible pick to Vontaze Burfict, I thought Smokin Jay looked really good. Kyle Long wasn't the world beater he was in the preseason, but it was still a nice debut for the first rounder.

As far as the Bengals offense goes, I always seem to forget how good A.J. Green is. He had a huge day against a pair of really good corners and looked absolutely unguardable at times, particularly when he got five yards of separation on the two yard line on a gorgeous smash route.

Oh, and Giovani Bernard looked about 10 times better than BenJarvus Green-Ellis when carrying the ball, I imagine their workload will be flipped sooner rather than later.

Rob Weintraub: OK so the timeouts and the personal fouls are going to get all the attention, and rightfully so, but there were other issues from a Bengals perspective. There was also a block in the back that wiped out Pacman Jones' long punt return, and a facemask on a different punt, and a couple of crucial holding calls away from the play -- I could go on. The Bengals were very sloppy, and Chicago had some moments as well. The key to Chicago's comeback was several makeshift plays by Jay Cutler to avoid the rush and either scramble or find adjusting receivers for big plays. Given the dollars recently committed to the Bengals rushers, the fact they couldn't corral Cutler hurt.

On the other hand, Brandon Marshall made several spectacular catches, and the touchdown grab by Martellus Bennett made all of Chicago toast the fact they actually have a real tight end at last. What a catch in traffic. Andy Dalton's excellent game will be completely overlooked. For most of the game he looked very poised and made throws in small windows all over the field. He still occasionally settles for easy short reads, but Jermaine Gresham and Tyler Eifert are going to make him look good there over the long haul. They were much too physical for their respective defenders, and repeatedly ground out yards after contact.

Appropriately, the play of the game was a flukey mistake. After Burfict picked Cutler (and Vontaze was injured on the return, the gimp that led to the disastrous timeouts later on), the Bengals were going in for a score that would return the lead to 11. But as Mohamed Sanu maneuvered for a first down in the red zone, a Bears defender just happened to catch the ball with his helmet. Turnover, and the Bears dominated after that. A very first-half-of-2012 win for Chicago, and a very tough loss to swallow for the Bengals.

Arizona 24 at St. Louis 27

FO Staff Tweets

Tom Gower: Arians rightly runs his offense instead of John Fox'ing it at the end of the half, but Feely is wide from 50. Process W, Results L. #FOAUD

Ben Muth: Levi Brown is so bad. Have to send help his way every third down. #foaud

Ben Muth: This Levi Brown performance is the "Forgot about Dre" of terrible tackle play. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@shake1n1bake: Has anyone been so universally bashed for being terrible, but held their starting spot as long as Levi Brown has in AZ? #FOAUD

(Ed. Note: Aaron offers Robert Royal, I offer David Carr. -- Rivers)

@JP_Wright: Imagine what Fitz could have done with at least an average QB the last four years… #foaud

@RavenBerns: Scarecrow will have higher DVOA "@FO_wordofmuth: Replace Levi Brown with a scarecrow in a 75 jersey and see if anyone notices. #foaud"


Ben Muth: Levi Brown is so terrible that I just cannot talk about him anymore. The lunacy of people saying that getting him back after missing all last year with an injury would improve their offensive line would be funny if it wasn't so depressing. Bruce Arians calling him elite in the offseason is still incomprehensible. Arians had either never seen Brown play, is a complete buffoon, or a liar. There is no other option.

Carson Palmer looked good, and you can see how excited Larry Fitzgerald is to be playing with someone who isn't a camp arm that somehow found their way into a starting lineup. Andre Roberts also looked really good so the Cardinals should be able to at least move the ball when Palmer is upright, which will be such a nice change from recent years.

On the St. Louis side of things the obvious highlight is their defensive line. Sure they were matched up against a terrible unit, but they dominated as thoroughly and completely as could be expected. The biggest negative is that Brian Schottenheimer's creative plans to get Tavon Austin involved were a single screen and an end around. I do not have faith that he is the right offensive coordinator to get the most out of Austin's unique abilities. Jared Cook looked good though.

Tom Gower: Palmer is a professional quarterback. Arizona did not have a professional quarterback last year. The difference was apparent. As Ben noted, Arizona does not really have a professional offensive line. Palmer is a professional quarterback who needs a professional offensive line. When he got protection, he did things, a number of them with Roberts, who had a reasonable amount of success.

On the other side of the ball, it seemed like Sam Bradford spent a lot of time on his first read, with Daryl Richardson (who got the vast majority of the snaps) as the checkdown the other option. The Rams spread the ball around a fair amount, though Cook ended up with the most work. He did most of his damage in the middle of the field against Arizona's questionable (in my mind) linebackers and safeties; if the Cardinals missed Daryl Washington, I think it was in coverage.

Green Bay 28 at San Francisco 34

FO Staff Tweets

Danny Tuccitto: in the least surprising development ever, Vernon Davis is a focal point of the passing game in SF. #FOAUD

Rivers McCown: Am I being too spreadsheet-focused if I think coaches worry way too much about punishing fumbles? Take Lacy out for poor running. #FOAUD

Rivers McCown: Packers didn’t spike the ball. Homer Smith proud of them #foaud

Danny Tuccitto: asomugha and cox not helping SF's cause in this first half. missed tackles galore. #FOAUD

Aaron Schatz: Packers need to consider playing some kind of box-and-one on Boldin instead of pure zone because they can't keep him out of the holes #foaud

Vince Verhei: So why did Kaepernick slip out of first round, anyway? #foaud

Ben Muth: @FO_VVerhei Non-BCS conference guy that played in a "college" offense that had a funky throwing motion. #foaud

Scott Kacsmar: You don't know how happy I am for that penalty making this 3rd-and-goal happen in the 4th QT instead of a FG to start the quarter. #foaud

Danny Tuccitto: 49ers just used the type of play i've been talking about all preseason as their new wrinkle: play action off of read-option look. #FOAUD

Vince Verhei: 49ers go for it on fourth-and-2. Ron Rivera stares at screen, mouth agape. #FOAUD

Reader Tweets of Genius

@abevanderbent: Packers are really missing Burnett so far. Being devoid of pass rush doesn't help, either. #FOAUD

@pchicola: @FO_RiversMcCown Same w/ Belichick & Ridley. Why dont they punish the receivers that make possible an INT, like Finley or Sudfeld. #foaud

@abevanderbent: This Packers D is just not built to play zone, especially with the injuries at safety. McMillian/Jennings just a little late all game #FOAUD

@matthew_carley: Niners should be pleased with the win and also Eric Reid, who was outstanding. Less happy with those dratted jumbo sets, too obvious #foaud


Vince Verhei: One quarterback here might be the best in the game right now, and the other might be the best in the game in five years, so needless to say this was a pretty excellent football game. Both teams were hitting passes downfield regularly. Colin Kaepernick finished with the better numbers, but that’s largely because Aaron Rodgers threw an "interception" on a deflected pass that hit a receiver in the hands. Kaepernick didn’t do a ton of running, mostly taking pistol snaps, play-faking, and looking for men (and finding them, then throwing sharp accurate passes to them) downfield. The biggest hole in his game seems to be fine detail game management stuff —- the 49ers were often scrambling to get plays off before the play clock expired, and often unsuccessful. Not that it mattered in the end, obviously.

Anquan Boldin had almost half of San Francisco’s catches and yards. It’s hard to think what they would have looked like without him. That trade might have saved the season.

Danny Tuccitto: Kaepernick and Boldin will get all the headlines, but the player who really impressed me in this one was rookie free safety Eric Reid. Dashon Goldson was the "playmaker" in the 49ers secondary, for lack of a better term, so his departure had the potential to leave a huge void in that department this season. If nothing else, Reid's performance should end any concerns in that vein. Sure, he had the interception and made a couple of bone-jarring hits, but he also made San Francisco's first special teams tackle of the season. On the flip side, it sure seemed like Green Bay's game plan identified Nnamdi Asomugha as the weakest link, and he obliged.

For the Packers, Clay Matthews was a force at times on defense, but that was overshadowed by not "letting sleeping dogs lie." In the local postgame show, 49ers right guard Alex Boone made it clear that Matthews' cheap shot on Kaepernick in the second quarter coupled with his bluster during the week fired up the 49ers offensive line. But besides that, I'm still unclear as to why "hit the quarterback at all costs" seems to be how defenses are choosing to defend Kaepernick. Ignoring the fact that San Francisco uses read-option far less often then you would think (and have now added a play-action wrinkle when they do), it's worth pointing out that Kaepernick has accounted for 796 yards of offense in his last two games against teams admittedly employing said strategy.

Just a few other things I noticed, which probably provided clues to the future, are as follows:

1) Reading the offseason tea leaves, it was obvious, but this game seemed to confirm that San Francisco will have a much higher passing identity this year.
2) The 49ers have a ton of confidence in tight end Vance McDonald. Unlike Delanie Walker, he can catch, and his blocking performance was good enough to allow Vernon Davis to be more involved in the passing game than he has been the past two years.
3) Given the opponent, I don't put much stock in Eddie Lacy's underwhelming day.
4) Congrats and kudos to Johnny Jolly for getting his sh*t together and making Green Bay's roster. Seemed like the Packers' interior defensive line was much more formidable this time around.

New York Giants 31 at Dallas 36

FO Staff Tweets

Scott Kacsmar: Brandon Myers isn't used to catching passes early in a game that's still close. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Man, I just can't get enough of Tony Romo's receivers running the wrong option routes. #foaud

Ben Muth: Awful job by Murray letting that LB t-bone free. Have to be aggressive in pass pro, can't wait for rusher to come to you. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Come on, do we honestly believe that Monte Kiffin's coaching is the reason David Wilson has fumbled twice tonight? #foaud

Rivers McCown: If real birth control were as ineffective as David Wilson has been tonight, we’d be drowning in children #foaud ... That said, I stand by my earlier comment that coaches are way too quick to bench fumbling running backs. #foaud

Rivers McCown: Whatever badass stuff happened in Breaking Bad tonight pales in comparison to what Tom Coughlin does after this game #foaud

Aaron Schatz: The Dallas offensive line giving so much protection against the Giants' front four is... unexpected, certainly. #foaud

Mike Ridley: Witten with his second TD of the night. He didn't record his 2nd TD catch of 2012 until week 15. #foaud

Aaron Schatz: Are we going to blame Manning for that? Because it wasn't really his fault but if it had been Romo, everyone would have blamed him. #foaud

Vince Verhei: Eli's emotional reactions during, throughout, and after that pick-six were the comedic highlight of Week 1. #foaud

Reader Tweets of Genius

@CrookedNight: After that first quarter, I'm picturing Scooby and Shaggy pulling off Eli's helmet to reveal Old Man Kolb. #foaud

@CrookedNight: Welcome to Blown Coverage Theatre. I'm your host, 40 Yards Of Empty Space In Front Of Victor Cruz. #foaud

@Ticklemittens: @FO_RiversMcCown after this he'll be emotionally drained so he's just going to the library to watch twerking videos with jon voit #foaud


Rivers McCown: Is it necessarily a good sign that you were only able to win by five points with a plus-5 turnover differential? Especially given that two of the turnovers were immediate defensive touchdowns? Dallas should be glad to have this game in hand, of course, but I have to think a better team would have really blown out the Giants given these facts.

I was a big fan of Rueben Randle coming out of the 2012 draft and I think if Hakeem Nicks can stay healthy, the Giants have a very dangerous receiving corps that will make them tough to put away. If Nicks gets hurt again, I'll simply be content with all of those lovely fantasy points that Randle will be providing. Of course, it would help if their best running back was on the field for these catch-up situations, and Coughlin's refusal to go back to David Wilson came back to bite the Giants on that last pick-six.

As you no doubt heard Collinsworth say, the Cowboys offensive line looked pretty formidable in this one. I was kind of interested in how the secondary receiving options would sort themselves out, and the early returns are that Terrance Williams be a bigger factor than Gavin Escobar. Williams had a few drops, but he was able to find holes in zone coverage and handled all the parts of the offense outside of catching the ball well enough. Of course, this being the Cowboys, he will run the wrong option route at some point in a crucial game because that is how the Cowboys operate, but it wasn't a bad start.

Posted by: Rivers McCown on 09 Sep 2013

273 comments, Last at 27 Nov 2013, 4:11am by agen 338a


by Dean :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:28am

Did you mean Homer Jones instead of Homer Smith?

Also, what are the odds of the person who compiles this removing all the hashtags at the end of the statements? It would help a LOT with the readibility.

by DavidL :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:32am

I was going to ask the same thing (about the hashtags, not Homer Jones). The other tags add something to the post (usually), but #foaud just says "hey, this is part of Audibles." When we're reading the Audibles article, that part can be assumed.

by Kulko :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:37am

seconded, also remove the # from inner sentence hashtags like #steelers Offense.

by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:39am

I guess I'm not a dinosaur, since four other people made the same comment about the hashtags while I was reading the column and writing my response.

Also, Ben on Levi Brown is awesome. I'm so looking forward to this week's Word of Muth.

by wr (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:39am

It's too bad Ben isn't following the Cardinals closely this year. He'd probably
run out of X's of Great Shame for Levi.

by Box :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:50am

Homer Simpson?

by Dean :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 5:17pm

I guess we don't get clarification on Homer Jones vs Homer Smith?

by Theo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:36am

Yikes. All those hashtags don't make it any more readable. At least remove the #foaud as it is behind every single one.

by MarkV :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:11am

not saying you have to do this for me and not to threaten, but I have read every audibles column. If the hashtags stay this will be my last.

They are just brutal to read through.

by batesbruce :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:41pm

Absolutely, this is brutal reading. Dump the Twitter posts.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:28am

Hate the format. There are some decent tweets in there, but they get lost in the midst of all the other ones. And it's pointless to waste space telling people there were no comments or tweets about the game.

by armchair journe... :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 8:46am

Yes.. If we're going to include tweets, please please please reformat to english and embed chronologically.

Why can't they be treated as a short email??


by Dave Bernreuther :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 7:08pm

Agree. Easy search/replace for that. Twitter is annoying enough to read on twitter, but it's much worse when the tags don't stand out or link anywhere.

Otherwise, like most football fans, the more commentary the better, at least from good sources...

by Walshmobile :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:38am

It was too long to tweet, but I'm not sure how Mark Ingram ended up with positive yards, it felt like half of his runs ended behind the line of scrimmage especially with some he tried to bounce outside that he shouldn't have.
Edit: Pierre Thomas continued to look like the best back in NO to hand the ball off to

by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:38am

Well, I'd have to say that I like the new Audibles format. Snappy tweets, followed up by deeper analysis. The only thing I'd note is that I found reading that "#foaud" at the end of every tweet line rather annoying, but that might just be me being a dinosaur.

I also think "nothing" was the nicest thing that could have been said about the Jaguars.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:15pm

Agreed. Also my brain reads #foaud as "fraud", which sometimes confuses.

by Theo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:21pm

I keep combining the 'ou' and 'au', so I keep reading it as "fauaa...ah I don't need to read that"

by chelseayouth (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:40am

Gotta say, the #foaud tag at the end of tweets makes you guys look exceptionally angry at whoever's being discussed...

by An Onymous (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:41am

I don't think "irrevocably" is the word you're going for, there.

by Anonymous37 (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:42am

I second Dean's comment on removing hashtags to help make this readable.

I don't really care for the longform bits either honestly: they just come off as a kind of pseudo-analysis pretending to be the real thing. I'd rather have the shorter, pithy comments that aren't trying to pass for actual analysis right after the games have been played.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:32am

I see what you're saying, but the longer posts are the only things that stop my eye going down the page. I find this close to unreadable as a whole article. I found myself skimming to the games I cared about because nothing was locking me in. The tweets should be cut in half, imo.

by Art is rolling over (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:25pm

I don't mind the tags except for the one at the end.

The part that I don't like about the new format is that the sense of time is gone. The old format kept with the flow of the game. Earlier action was at the top and later at the bottom. Now we have one set of tweets, another set, and then comments. My brain keeps traveling back and forth in time.

Put things back in order, I don't care if it is a reader or FO staff.

Oh, and kill the sentence when you have nothing to say. It was cute the first time I read it, but it was really bad by the end.

by zenbitz :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:42pm

I like the new format - both with the tweets and long form. Tweets are mostly amusing, but having some kind of peudo-analysis blub on the game is fine with me.

Don't care about hashtags... but it's actual work to filter them.

by brysay :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:44am

As a lifelong KC fan, I'm a bit upset over the lack of coverage, but I'll happily contribute my takeaways from yesterday's least-watched game:

Blaine Gabbert is probably not a starting-caliber quarterback. Blaine Gabbert with a broken thumb is definitely not a starting-caliber quarterback.

by Passing Through (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:49am

The niner passing defense has looked bad now at least 4 games in a row.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:28am

Were they that bad yesterday? The Green Bay passing game is one of the best in the game. Some of those plays the pack made were incredible, such as that catch by Nelson, that's unstoppable.

I was more bothered by the missed tackles, that ain't niners defense.

by Passing Through (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:07pm

Last year the niners held Aaron Rodgers to 6 ny/a in both matchups. Yesterday they allowed 9. I think the pass rush was the weak link. We got a couple sacks, but Aaron didn't look too bothered most of the time.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:11pm

That sideline catch by Jordy Nelson looked like vintage Cris Carter, the guy I most associate with impossible-looking, toe-tapping sideline catches. That kind of catch is very hard to grab cleanly, and impossible to defend because of the location of the ball. I guess with the new rules, you could just try to force him out of bounds before he establishes possession.

by Passing Through (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:19pm

The beauty of that play was that the ball was coming at Jordy before he even made his cut (I think). And as you said, because of the ball placement, Jorday had to stretch to get the ball. There was no way with the timing and the ball placement that the niner DB had any chance of making a play.

by matu_72 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:35am

I agree with Karl on this one. We struggled with Cobb last year and a healthy Nelson was fully capable of doing what he did yesterday. The missed tackling bothered me more, but I think that will get cleaned up.

by DisplacedPackerFan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:06pm

I want to follow the missed tackles thing through the next couple of games. There was a fair bit of talk from GB camp about them doing things to make people miss or make it easier to break tackles. So if the Packers continue to have games were D's miss tackles and the 9ers tackle like I expect them too then maybe the Packers really did find a way to practice that. I had written it off as just talk, and it very well could have been because this was the first game and stuff like that can often tighten up.

by Thok :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 7:14pm

I suspect some of the missed tackles come from Asomugha being not particularly great at tackling. Sadly, there's not that much the Niners can do about that.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:49am

"I know next week's game against San Francisco was going to be huge anyway, but now I'm looking forward to it just to compare San Francisco's front seven to Carolina's. I honestly think Carolina's could be better when all is said and done."

I've been thinking the same thing (pending Beason's continued good health, of course), but it's nice to finally see someone else (not in NC/SC) say it.

As for the game itself, I summed it up with a tweet that I now wish I had tagged with "#FOAud", but did not. Mike Tanier did retweet it, though.

@Daniels_Ryan: @MikeTanier Olsen drops a long pass early, Deangelo fumbles near goal line late. Cam somehow at fault.

The Olsen drop up the left seam early in the game, and the late-game Deangelo Williams fumble absolutely killed two potential scoring drives. If either had been a touchdown or both had been field goals, they might have won the game.

by whckandrw (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:49am

One more thing about the Bears game: Trestman's playcalling got conservative at the end of the last Bears drive, running the clock down instead of going for a game clinching first down. I can't remember how many time outs Cincy had but there was a chance Trestman's last few Michael Bush runs into the pile were going to give Cincy the ball back with enough time to get into field goal position. With the way AJ Green was torching the Bears corners that was a huge risk. Of course the unnecessary roughness penalty kept the Bengals from getting the ball back, but without it there's a chance Trestman's otherwise great debut gets ruined in the closing seconds.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:16am

The Bungles (and this week that is definitely appropriate) would have gotten the ball back with approximately 20 seconds, 80+ yards of field to go needing a TD with no time outs.

It would have been one hell of a comeback.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:48am

As Jimmy noted, the Bengals would have had very little time. I had no problem with run-run-run at the end. And that was really only the last set of downs anyway; Cutler threw a few passes earlier on the same drive.

I really didn't like Trestman punting from the Bengals' 38 in the second quarter, though. I believe it was a fourth-and-five situation, so going for it isn't obvious, but there was a strong wind at the Bears' backs, so a field goal attempt wouldn't have been crazy (see Gould's 58-yarder later in the quarter, which would have been good from 70+).

by akn :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:53pm

AJ Green's first half was amazing, but in the 2nd half he had 3 catches/28 yards. The Bears had also just forced a 3 and out off of the lone sack of the game, which occurred because they could tee off with the Bengals having entirely abandoned the run. The chances of a comeback were not great.

by TomC :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:43pm

I respectfully disagree with my Bear-watching colleagues. Cincy only needed an FG to tie (not a TD as Jimmy implied), so, assuming a touchback on the punt, they would have had 20 seconds to move the ball ~40 yards. That's an eternity compared to the 8 seconds it took for the Bears to kick off, let a ball get caught on the sidelines, and watch the game-winning field goal go through the uprights in Atlanta 5 years ago.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:13pm

Cincinnati would have been kicking into a brutal wind.

During halftime, Gould was kicking into the wind on that side of the field, and was consistently missing 45-yarders. The Bengals would have needed to go closer to 60 yards than 40 in order to get a reasonable attempt.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:01pm

Yeah you are right about the score, my bad. Moving 50 odd yards without timeouts in twenty seconds must have a very small chance of success. And they would still have needed to stop the clock.

by TomC :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:30pm

True, but the existence proof of the possibility of this happening is seared painfully into my brain. Or at least the possibility of a team moving 25 yards and stopping the clock in 6 seconds (then proceeding to kick a game-winning FG). And once you accept that, 40+ yards in 20 seconds plus stopping the clock doesn't seem so crazy.

Point taken about the wind, though.

by Marko :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:28pm

Gotta disagree with you on this (other than the part about Cincy needing only a FG to tie). Even if there would have been a touchback (and of course the Bengals could have been pinned deeper, as Podlesh had previously dropped several punts inside the 10 yard line), the Bengals would have needed to go a lot more than 40 yards in 20 seconds with no timeouts. The announcers talked about the direction of the wind several times during the game. I will defer to Eddo about how strong the wind was and how Gould couldn't hit from 45 yards in that direction at halftime, as he obviously was at the game. It surely would have been 50+ yards and the Bengals would have had to get out of bounds absent a DPI or Lavonte David-style dumb personal foul on the Bears for the Bengals to even get off a field goal attempt. But the Bengals were the poorly coached team committing those personal fouls yesterday, not the Bears.

I wasn't even thinking of the Atlanta game 5 years ago as that sequence unfolded yesterday, although I remember that all too well. There was a huge difference in field position when that drive started because Lovie stupidly had them do a very short squib kick, which also took up less time than a deep kick would have. Also, that game was in a dome, so wind and field surface were not negative factors.

The game I was thinking of was the Denver game two years ago, when Marion Barber's brain cramp of running out of bounds stopped the clock and led to a game-tying field goal (followed by Barber's careless fumble in OT when the Bears were in field goal position, followed by Denver's game-winning field goal as Tebowmania continued toward its zenith). I liked how the running plays called inside two minutes were nowhere near the sidelines and how Michael Bush protected the football. I had confidence that he wouldn't fumble. I thought the play calling was entirely correct in that sequence. And then I was very pleased by Jordan Mills' poise in not retaliating after Maualuga's dumb personal foul to allow the Bears to run out the clock.

Also, responding to this comment in the article: "There was also a block in the back that wiped out Pacman Jones' long punt return, and a facemask on a different punt, and a couple of crucial holding calls away from the play -- I could go on." The block in the back directly led to the long punt return, and on at least one of the crucial holding calls, the hold was not away from the play; it directly led to the 15 or so yard gain. On both plays, the defender was in perfect position to make the tackle, and the illegal block/holding penalties prevented them from making the play. Those gains wouldn't have happened but for the penalties. It was annoying when Phil Simms made a similar comment after the punt return was wiped out. This wasn't like Suh's penalty which didn't affect the play in question because it was well behind/away from the play.

by Andrew Potter :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:52am

I have to ask, is the feedback request a "we're going to be using Twitter now, so please suggest how to improve this rather than ask for the old system back" request, or is it okay to say this, as currently compiled, is significantly inferior to the old audibles?

Some feedback for the new method:
- Please remove the #foaud hashtags from the comments when cleaning up for the article. It's obvious, because of the system you're using, that all tweets contain that tag. They don't need to be included in the article.
- Please come up with another hashtag, ideally shorter. #foa would work, though I don't understand why you don't just invite tweets to the @fboutsiders account.
- I miss longer pieces of analysis within the game. It felt like too much context was missing from the tweets as they were recorded, whereas in the e-mail format often the play would be explained before it was commented on. It would be -great- to see those longer snippets during games, somehow.
- I'm not entirely keen on breaking the staffer and reader tweets into different sections, as a lot of continuity is lost - I saw a lot of reader responses to staffers' comments, and it'd be good to retain that dialogue's flow. To allow casual readers to differentiate between readers' and staffers' comments, staffers could be identified by names and readers by twitter handles or something.
- The longer post-game analysis is a welcome addition.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:38am

I'll add my $0.02. I like having few tweets because they can be very clever and it shows people who don't follow them on Twitter what they're missing. But large scale reposting of what is already available on Twitter seems backwards to me. People who want to follow them on Twitter will do so. Those who don't probably don't want 50% of the article to be the Twitter content.

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:39am

The problem with a shorter hashtag like #foa is that it's more likely to be used by a lot of other people talking about something completely different. For example, #foaud is just #fouad with two letters transposed. I saw at least two tweets yesterday concerning somebody named Fouad (a very common name in the Middle East) where the tweeter transposed the letters.

I imagine this problem with increase a hundredfold with a three-letter hash tag.

by Andrew Potter :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:48am

Fair point, though that was just an example. My preference would be either to invite tweets to @fboutsiders or set up a separate Audibles at the Line account ( @foaudibles? )to receive those tweets - with the added advantage of not having to follow a hashtag timeline as well as my own during the games.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:15pm

I like the idea to have an official @FOAudibles twitter account, so that everyone can just direct tweets to that account.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:37pm

I like this idea, as well.

by merlinofchaos :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:10pm

Yeah, I think I agree; the twitter format doesn't really work well here. You might do better with another service that isn't limited to 140 cha--

by Vincent Verhei :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:18pm

Well played.

by bravehoptoad :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:24pm

It felt like too much context was missing from the tweets as they were recorded, whereas in the e-mail format often the play would be explained before it was commented on.

Seconded. Not only context is missing, but there was an engaging dialog with the e-mails, back and forth, give and take, while the tweets sound like punchlines delivered on stage.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:33pm

This! It was more disjointed than ever.

by akn :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:56pm

Maybe it would be better to join the FO IRC channel and just post an edited log.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:04pm

I've tried that a few times and it's a bit dull, mostly not in sentences or making any real points.

by Andrew Potter :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:28pm

I gave up on the IRC channel pretty quickly - seemed mostly idle while I was there, with occasional mundane comment. I tried asking questions about some of the events in the game I was watching, but never got much of a response. I don't plan to return to it.

It might be different if the staff were using it for their own comments, but I'm not sure what they would gain from using that instead of Twitter. The visibility of Twitter makes it a very good choice, if they can work around the other limitations of the format.

by joe football (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:40pm

It can get slow during college football depending on who is playing/who is there, and obviously when there is no football, but I don't think it's ever idle during NFL sundays

by aga :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:20pm

agree completely

by whckandrw (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:50pm

Agreed. In the old format audibles the FO authors would generally give some context to the commentary that is absent in the twitter format.

by Guido Merkens :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:21pm

I disagree regarding the longer post-game analysis. There is already plenty of analysis out there summing up what happened, and I feel like the tweets have taken the place of the brief in-game analysis that made Audibles so great in the past. It can be a puzzle to glean any real insight or back-and-forth conversation from the in-game tweets, so I feel like the new format has ruined Audibles.

If I were king, I would maybe keep a few reader tweets for each game (the one about the Polamalu sack was interesting), but go back to the non-Twitter format for the FO writers.

by armchair journe... :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:09am

If we must include tweets, can we just stream Tanier's and delete the rest?


by matu_72 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:51am

In regards to Colin Kaepernick's clock management, I'm sure youth has something to do with it but I also think it has something to do with the playbook and offensive system that Harbaugh and Greg Roman employ. It's always seemed to me that there is a lot of verbiage to the play calls plus they require the QB to make a lot of pre-snap adjustments and calls almost every play. Kaepernick struggled with it last year and before that Alex Smith struggled for pretty much all of 2011 with the clock management as well.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:18am

Totally agree. The niners were constantly using timeouts and getting delay of game penalties before Kaep took over.

by Anonymous49 (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:37am

Harbaugh admitted this problem during his post-game presser. He blamed it on the playcall not getting to Kap in time.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:50am

Boy, does Kaepernick have physical tools! That said, he's still very raw at this point. It seems to me that he needs to learn when not to throw a laser and when to sometimes take a safer option; in a way, he reminds me of a more athletic young Jay Cutler.

by Chuck (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:25am

I agree. There were a few passes he just missed on, particularly the bomb to Kyle Williams. It makes me wonder what other people are thinking when they rave about his accuracy. I don't think it's there yet.

by Karl Cuba :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 4:10pm

That could well be a familiarity issue, Williams missed most of training camp rehabbing his knee. He looked pretty good throwing to Davis deep.

by johonny (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:54am

Odd play calling at end up Miami-Cleveland. Dolphins up ten gets the ball deep in Browns territory after a turnover on downs. They need probably 1 first down or a TD to ice the game. Miami precedes to run three straight times and kick a field goal. That is the normal conservative play calling thing to do but Miami's featured back was averaging 0.3 ypc at that point. They could have given Miller 32 carries and he still wouldn't have gotten the game ending first down.

by James-London :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:28am

Yeah. Miami's 'running game' was utterly abysmal; against teams that Miami can't dominate defensively, that's going to hurt.
On the plus side, the Miami D was tremendous. Wake (in particular), but also Starks & Soliai spent almost as much time in Cleveland's backfield as Richardson & Weeden did. Cleveland might just have a brutal RT/RG combo, but Miami's front seven were very good. I actually felt sorry for Weeden; not time whatever in the pocket, and receivers who just couldn't hold on to the ball (Cameron excepted).

Phil Simms is a Cretin.

by herewegobrowniesherewego (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:44pm

I am surprised to see the blame for Weeden be pinned more on the receivers this time around. I think this is largely right, although if Bridgewater falls into the Browns' laps it's pretty much expected they'll take him. Things will change for the better in the passing game when Gordon gets back.

The Browns' front 7 did a good job with pass rush early on but got tired late, and had great run stoppage. Haden did an almost perfect job on Wallace, but the other Miami receivers moved at will on the rest of the secondary.

And you are right about the RG and RT, although Schwartz has usually does better that he did yesterday.

by James-London :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:04pm

In fairness I don't suppose Schwartz see someone as good as Wake every week.

Cleveland's O looked a lot like Miami's last year (including Davone Bess). The difference for Miami in this game was that while Haden buried Wallace, Hartline was facing CB #2 and he's good enough to make that work.

Phil Simms is a Cretin.

by johonny (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:04pm

Don't forget Gibson. While one ex-ram has been getting a lot of press in New England for replacing Welker another in Miami replaced Welker's replacement and looked good doing it. While Wallace might not like the cloud coverage the fact was Hartline, Gibson and Clay were beating their men often due to it. The receiving staff is better than last year but is extremely shallow. Of course all those extra DBs on the roster made for a great coverage unit.

by herewegobrowniesherewego (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 8:55pm

The comparison to Miami's O last year sounds right to me (Bess, obviously, and last year the Fins had a very good LT.) Weeden and Tannehill were similar statistically on a lot of counts, and continued to be yesterday strictly on a yardage basis.

by Noah Arkadia :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:06pm

I think Miami's offense could be pretty good if they eliminated the kneel-downs from the game plan. Or what is it they call them? Running plays?

The man with no sig

by James-London :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:14pm

Miami- attempting to prove that running backs are not entirely fungible?
Or is the O-Line something to genuinely fear?

Phil Simms is a Cretin.

by johonny (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:59pm

I think that while everyone was focused on the tackles the guard position is and has been the real problem on the line. There is hope that now that their RG is healthy he might work himself into game shape. But the said RG has been a potential player for years now and eventually you either have to see that potential on the field or punt. To me the game showed the hallmark of a typical Jeff Ireland team. Lots of Defensive front 7 talent. Lots of question marks on the offensive line.

by FrontRunningPhinsFan :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 10:24am

That RG is John Jerry, and he is terrible. Every year I hope they find a replacement for him and he somehow keeps hanging around. I'd hoped someone would step up in preseason while he was injured, but neither G they signed did. He is far and away the worst player on the line.

It was extremely disconcerting that there weren't many holes opened for Miller. I want to just tell myself Cleveland's front 7 is good, and that had a lot to do with it, but still the O-line did not look like they could run block. Pass protection looked better, but there were still plenty of miscues.

I know Wallace was pissed after the game, but he had more targets that he should have gotten based on what the coverage dictated. He had 2 passes forced to him that never should have been thrown due to good double coverage. Another play he got open deep but the ball was underthrown. That single play he could be mad about because it could have been a TD with a good throw, and should have been a pick but the DB dropped it. Anytime they showed replays with the safeties in view, the safety to his side was nearly at the numbers he was so far outside and playing deep as well. It was obvious they were concerned about his speed; I don't think Haden "had a great day against him" I think they essentially had him double covered on every passing play.

The middle of the field was open quite a bit because of that which allowed Gibson to thrive. Both he and Hartline had a couple costly drops though. And not tough passes, throws that should have been caught and would have converted 3rd downs.

On defense the line looked fantastic. There was a lot of holding that went uncalled and they still got to Weeden consistently. One play Weeden ran to the flat and threw the ball away - and two different Dolphins were held in the backfield.

LBers were ok, but Trent Richarson was consistenly getting extra yards falling forward. There were a lot of plays where they had him bottled up a the line of scrimmage and he still managed to get 4 or 5 yards.

The DBs looked opportunistic. They made plays when they were presented, something the Dolphins secondary did not do at all last year (Stone Hands Sean Smith) which is good. I really, really want Will Davis to get healthy so he can replace Nolan Carroll in the slot.

by Nathan of Brainfertilizer Fame (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:58am

Well, it is good to have confirmation that the entire FO staff is irrevocably biased against the KC Chiefs (among other teams).

That explains the nature of editorial content I've seen here over the years.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:04am

They're not biased, they just don't care. The FO staff clearly states their team fandom; nobody who roots for KC happens to write for FO. You should also note that no FO readers sent anything into the #foaud hashtag regarding that game. It just didn't have much appeal.

That being said, I laughed pretty darn hard at the threepeat of "nobody gives a crap" for the Chiefs-Jags game.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:27pm

I also enjoyed the generic replacement text for non-commented games. It's better than not listing the game, which causes some to wonder if actual comments were lost. It should also encourage fans of those under-reported teams to participate in the Twitter discussion for their favorite team the following week. Maybe we can rate their comments based on their entertainment value over the replacement text (EVORT)?

I know I'll be tweeting something next week, when my favorite team (Carolina) is playing against Buffalo. I fully expect that no one from FO will be following that game, and I don't blame them. I would only expect an FO comment/tweet if there was some kind of gigantic play that would be shown as a highlight during other games (eg: AP's 78-yard TD run on his first carry).

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:44pm

Yeah, the fact that none of the reader's posted anything about the game takes the edge off of the charges of bias by FO.

It's actually a little unfortunate too, because I saw a factoid this morning that this was the first time ever than an NFL game ended with a score of 28-2. I wonder how often that happens, that you see a score that has never happened in 90+ years.

As a Colts fan, the first thing that popped into my mind was 62-7 from a couple years ago. Surely that's never happened before, I figured. Wrong. Not only has it happened, it happened in the playoffs, and I watched the game on TV. Dolphin fans know what I'm talking about.

by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:04pm

We do, and we like to think that it is the voodoo curse we paid for after that game which is responsible for the existence of Blaine Gabbert. And possibly those new helmets.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:02am

Like the new format, participating in the #foaud hashtag makes games more fun. Also, it's hard to describe how hard Tampa tried to lose that game. On their first drive, they get a couple plays, then a nice third-down slant to Vincent Jackson. A play, then it's 2nd and 10. Headset problems, so timeout. Then a false start. Then ANOTHER false start. Yes, not only did Tampa commit the boneheaded move of burning a timeout and then a false start, they did it twice. Then, of course, a sack. Then, another false start. 3rd and 35. That was before the next drive, when the ball got snapped out of the end zone. Tampa played about as bad of a ten-minute stretch to open a season as I'd ever seen. Well, at least until the Giants started playing.

I realize the Jets front seven is good, but Tampa's line was an utter sieve all day. I have an ugly suspicion that Nicks' toe injury plus the staph infection is going to make this a season-ending injury, if not potentially career-ending, and they actually started Gabe Carimi at RG to replace him, and the resultant drop in player quality is likely to scream downward so violently that you could hear it breaking the sound barrier.

Geno Smith did remind me quite a bit of a younger Freeman; used his OK mobility to escape bad situations, had issues with short-range accuracy, threw one of those "I'm panicking in pressure, I'm going to loft it high over the middle" INTs that have become such a Freeman trademark that I expect Smith is going to have to pay him some licensing fees. Really, outside of the Jets' front seven looking great, they were just sort of there. Tampa simply committed stupid penalty after stupid penalty. The Jets' first-half TD resulted when Goldson decapitated his 2nd receiver of the day on 3rd down. The first FG in the 2nd half resulted after a 3rd down defensive holding call to keep it alive, and we all know what happened when LaVonte David did that horrible thing that may or may not have resulted in me actually throwing a folding chair across my basement.

Suffice to say, if Tampa doesn't improve on the offensive line, this year is going to be awful. I'm hoping the Jets' defensive line is really that spectacularly good, and the Bucs won't get utterly steamrolled like that every year.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:20am

Suffice to say, if Tampa doesn't improve on the offensive line, this year is going to be awful

But but but.....Gabe Carimi!

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:26am

If your post were re-written to include the words "has spontaneously combusted" prior the exclamation point, it would probably improve the offensive line.

by TomC :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:41pm

I can't believe TB actually gave up a draft pick for Carimi. I know he was a 1st-round pick not long ago, but what was left of his psyche was permanently destroyed by Aldon Smith on MNF last year.

by bucko (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:02am

Really enjoyed the comments.

Though I mildly dispute terming Matthew's comments as 'bluster'. He was answering a question honestly. If there was any 'bluster' it was Jim Harbaugh in response to CM's comments.

by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:03am

"Ben Muth: Kyle Long just threw one of the worst cut blocks I've ever seen on key 3rd & 2."

I guarantee DeCastro's was worse.

by Noah Arkadia :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:08pm

DeCastro's was ...nope, I'm speechless.

The man with no sig

by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:04pm

I felt bad for Pouncey, then realized that DeCastro hurt him while attempting to chop a defensive lineman. He accomplished exactly what he set out to do (cause a knee injury), just got the wrong guy. Karma was satisfied, I suppose.

Ben -- do you disagree? Was that not an attempted chop block? The guy he was going for was engaged up high by Pouncey as DeCastro went low at the knees.

by BigNachos :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:05am

No comments about Bellichick's ultra-conservative running out the clock when down by a point to kick a 35 yard field goal at the end? I guess I could understand it if the game were tied, but settling for a 60-70% chance of winning the game when the flip side is a loss seems like a really bad decision.

by Mike B. In Va :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:17am

They were basically kicking an extra point, so it was safe. Buffalo has enough guys with big-play speed that burning the clock seemed to me tobe the best bet. I can't fault his decision-making there, especially in light of all the fluky turnovers.

Buffalo played better than I expected, and the issues they had were definitely not with Manuel.

by BigNachos :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:47am

A 35 yard field goal is certainly no extra point kick, and has a MUCH lower odds of being successfully kicked.

by Mike B. In Va :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:46pm

Not *that* much lower, with the kicker in question and the conditions.

Besides, scoring a TD would upset the symmetry of Buffalo playing well enough to win and imploding and allowing a winning FG. (See the Dallas Monday night game, for one...)

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:47am

I'm always happy to criticize Belichick, but I don't think this situation warrants it. It may have been slightly conservative, but I wouldn't call it "ultra-conservative". If it had been a 50-yarder, then yeah. A 35-yarder under those conditions has a much better than 60-70% chance of converting. It's probably closer to 85-90%.

That said, IF the field goal had been missed, I suspect there'd be a lot more second guessing going on this morning. That's just the nature of the beast.

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:52am

Well I thought, based on their success running the ball, that they should have tried at least one rush.

But let's get the odds correct. Over his career Gostkowski is 88% on FGs between 30 and 39 yards. And 3 of his 9 misses were as a rookie. I agree with the general sentiment that coaches shouldn't think that simply getting into FG range is sufficient. But this was a 35 yarder. The weather was good, Gostkowski was kicking well and had already drilled two FGs yesterday. It was a very high probably kick.

OTOH, their rushing game had already had two unforced fumbles.

by RoninX (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:08pm

Unless it was particularly windy 35 yard field goals have a much high success rate than 60-70%.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:05am

I like the new format, very new media. Is it supposed to be #FOAUD or #foaud?

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:53am

Twitter isn't case sensitive.

by Mike B. In Va :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:08am

Too bad no one watched the NO/ATL game - it was one of the better early ones. The only insightful comment I could have on it, though, was that Sean Payton's rep as a play caller is well-deserved - this was a much better looking offense than last year.

ATL actually looked pretty good - the pass rush, especially in the 1st half, was better than I suspected it would be.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:46am

It was also one of the better matchups. Weird nobody watched it.

Both teams looked quite good. Only observation I had is I don't know how long the Saints will be able to justify taking touches from Sproles and Thomas if Ingram isn't going to be any more effective than 1 yard per carry. Plus, he's not a part of the passing game like the other two guys.

by Walshmobile :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:34pm

I think the issue was there were 10 games or so at the 1 pm eastern time slot so writers were probably watching their favorite teams and/or without knowing the Sunday Ticket or viewing locations of the writers, didn't have it as a broadcast.

by BJR :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:45pm

Yes the Saints offence looked right back to its best, with simply too many good options for the defence to cover, and Breese as accurate as ever. Rookie Kenny Stills has clearly earned Brees' trust as he was targeted several times in the old Devery Henderson role. It's hardly news, but this is clearly a top 5 offence again. Any sort of defensive improvement should see them featuring prominently in January.

by Peregrine :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:54pm

As a Falcons fan, my foremost hope is that Matt Ryan survives the season. He only got sacked three times yesterday but he was pressured far too much (saw a note from PFF that he was pressured on 21 of 42 pass plays). I don't ever want to see Tony Gonzalez try to pass block against an NFL DE ever again. Because of the protection issues, the offense fell apart for long stretches of the last three quarters. Roddy being slowed by a preseason injury doesn't help either.

Defense was better than I expected, in the sense that the Saints had to kick three field goals. The rookie CBs were a pleasant surprise.

Really weird clock management by Mike Smith at the end of the game too. If we'd scored a touchdown, the Saints would have had about 40 seconds and a timeout to get a field goal.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:49pm

I noticed the clock management, too. They picked up a first down right around the 1:00 mark down pretty deep and I thought they'd run some clock, but instead they stayed in a hurry up mode.

by Will Allen :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:14am

Eh, other than some commentary about 28 when warranted, there isn't much reason to say anything about the Vikings; there are only so many ways to write, "Ponder kills the Vikings chances of getting to 8 wins". I don't think I will watch the Vikings very closely, because I intend to watch the Niners and Seahawks a fair amount, and it'll be annoying to reflect upon a qb taken in the first half of the first round playing so much worse than the qbs for the latter two teams.

I think that 28's chance of rushing for 2000 yards again is better than Ponder's chance of becoming an average NFL starting qb.

by jimm (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:39am

Even beyond Ponder I thought the Vikings were really weak. They got man handled in the lines.

The only up note - the receivers actually looked good.

by Will Allen :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:00pm

Opening day on the road, in a dome, against d linemen with talent, your offensive line is likely going to have some problems, which is why you need better than average play from your qb. It's why I thought the Vikings were very unlikely to win.

by peterplaysbass :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 12:31pm

But Will, the Vikings D-line looked terrible too. Minnesota's saving grace has often been the ability to out-muscle opponents in the trenches. The Vikings are in for a long season if both lines don't start looking a little more like last year's lines.

by Will Allen :: Wed, 09/11/2013 - 12:25am

Yes, if everyone stinks all season, they will have along season. I don't think Jared Allen, Griffin, and Robison, all playing for contracts, will stink all season.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:51am

Will, what did the Lions do to stop Peterson? I assume, based on his line, that he really had a poor game (outside of the initial long run).

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:58am

It's weird how RedZone can skew one's perspective. My initial reaction was "what do you mean? He scored three TDs!" But then I look at the numbers: after the first run, he gained only 15 yards on 17 rushes and had 18 yards receiving on 4 targets.

DVOA is going to hate those numbers, even though he was clearly the superstar of fantasy football.

by witless chum :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:51pm

Eight in the box all day long/run blitzes/Dlinemen winning a lot of battles over the oline. They were shooting the gaps and hitting him in the backfield on a lot of plays. At half time, Peterson had gained negative yards since his opening drive touchdown. Receivers made a few plays with Ponder just throwing it up with one on one coverage, but not enough.

The Lions really upgraded their DEs as far as run stopping ability over last year. Replaced Kyle Vandenbosch/Cliff Avril/Lawrence Jackson with Jason Jones/Ziggy Ansah/Israel Odonije, so they got bigger and stronger at DE, plus Suh and Fairly are still hard to block at DT.

by Jin (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:30pm

The Vikings OLine weakness is the guards, the Lions strength is the DTs, so naturally the Vikings ran it up the middle most of the time.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:19am

Ben Muth: Hate all you want but when Jay Cutler finally does succeed at throwing the ball through a defender it'll be amazing

LOL Quantum Tunnelling Jay Cutler (he'd still pull a pouty face though).

by Billster (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:21am

1) Love new format!

2) Agree with desire to whack hashtags.

by Costa :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:26am

I get the reasoning for the change, but my god the hashtags. A little sed 's/#[A-Za-z]+//g' would be nice.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:27am

Sorry, but not a fan of this format. I like the occasional funny Twitter post, but not in this large a volume. And it's a huge waste of space noting every time that there's not comments or tweets to display.

by Anger...rising :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:18pm

How else do you expect them to meet their smug assholery quota?

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:56pm

If you dislike the people this much, why are you even at the site?

by Jeremy Billones :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:40am


Not sure we really want to ask the editor to start editing the tweets. Already enough work just compiling and sorting everything.

Don't want to just whack all the hashtags, either, since some are intentional gags.

I just treat #foaud as punctuation and skip over it, and I'm on the wrong side of 40 so if a dino like me can do it y'all can too :)

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:57am

Yes, I'll second not really being bothered by the hashtags. I honestly hadn't noticed the hashtags until every other comment was about getting rid of them.

I guess my eye naturally skips over them too. It's a good skill on the internet these days, where even a good site (like FO) has a whole lot of garbage on any given page.

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:59am


It's really easy to do, even with editors from 20 years ago.

by Jon Goldman (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:41am

"Of course, it would help if their best running back was on the field for these catch-up situations, and Coughlin's refusal to go back to David Wilson came back to bite the Giants on that last pick-six."

This is the same running back who was abysmal in pass protection (which was the playcalling the Giants were using almost exclusively by the end,) and who had already fumbled 2 times. The Giants were horrendous for the first 2 1/2 quarters, but the Cowboys were extremely lucky to pull this one out.

Would not be surprised to see Wilson's role in the offense be limited thanks to his inability to block.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:50am

Can't argue with that assessment. And his role might become so limited he doesn't play much again for the rest of the year. If he gets lucky, they give him one more chance. But two fumbles in 7 carries? You can't put the ball on the ground.

And if Coughlin had put him back in there and he'd fumbled again, the lines would have been on how that decision came back to bite them.

by are-tee :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:17pm

Has anyone even criticized Coughlin for using his #2 back, Andre Brown in the 2nd quarter of the 4th pre-season game, when he got injured?

by wr (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:44am

"Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth Tweeting about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants"

To underscore the depth of your bias, this should become progessively more insulting each week. :)

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:51pm

I love this idea! It should go from being snarky and funny (which it was this week) to being just downright brutal by the end of the season. Imagine watching a fan getting very drunk in a bar, watching his favorite team blow a huge late-game lead, and how his attitude might change along the way. Mike Tanier would be perfect for this. By week 17, it should read something like this:

"No one watched and commented on this craptastic disasterpiece, because it "featured" two teams that would have been more successful trying to put out a tire-fire with gasoline. Even if this was the only game on TV this week, we would have instead considered running a marathon with the sole goal of making sure that Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid covered the entire race distance in clean, dry clothing.

Also, we hate your team. But, you already knew that."

My odds-on favorite for that game in week 17 looks like Cleveland at Pittsburgh.

by herewegobrowniesherewego (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 9:04pm

That W17 matchup was up there the last 2 years in terms of both teams mailing it in. Last year had Josh Johnson taking some snaps for the 5-10 Browns, no Richardson, and no Wallace for a 7-8 Pitt team.

The year before, it was 4-11 Browns against a Steelers team that, while 11-4, was limping into the playoffs to get Tebowed, having just lost 20-3 to SF; Pitt won 13-9 with Seneca Wallace missing a last-play heave.

by Ryan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:51am

I do miss the old AATL format. It was a nice respite from the quick-twitch snark (or context-free observations) of Twitter.

by Ryan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:52am

Also it can be a little redundant for those of us that already follow all the FO writers on Twitter.

by Passing Through (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:10pm

I agree. One thing I don't like about the twitter comments is that there's not enough room to provide context. In the old Audibles, I thought that the authors usually wrote context, then their observation. I think there was also more back and forth.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:55am

I kind of like the new format. One thing I don't like is "Reader Tweets of Genius". I'd prefer it to just be "Reader Tweets"; the "of Genius" strikes me as trying to be too whimsical.

I also love the "bias" line as to why there are no comments. Now that is funny!

by Lance :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:57pm

More like Aaron and his FO gang STILL smarting over the Hernandez fiasco of the summer.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:16pm

Um, what?

by Lance :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:03pm

Long story.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:30pm

I recall the story (FO was accused of bias for not adding an Aaron Hernandez Extra Point for a while), and I don't care to voice an opinion on that bit of history.

What I don't get is how either "Reader Tweets of Genius" or the boilerplate "no one watched this game" message applies to the Hernandez XP issue.

by Lance :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 8:12am

Because the "no one watched the game" concludes with "because they are irrevocably biased against the participants." And it seems like recently, Aaron and others have been a little heavy with the sarcastic "because we're biased" line in a sort of "doth protest too much methinks" way (and I realize that the original meaning of that line is different than how it is used now, but that's how great Shakespeare was-- you can use his stuff even when word meanings change).

by Independent George :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 10:43am

Even the sex jokes. Especially the sex jokes!

by bernie (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:01pm

The Colts coaching staff is not going to last beyond the next 2 years. They insist on running schemes they do not have the personnel to run.

The brilliance of a guy like Belicheck manifests itself by being fluid, by constantly changing his play style based off the players he has at his disposal. He tailors game plans to their strengths, and puts them in positions to succeed.

So far, Pagano is fitting square pegs in round holes. His o-line is awful, yet he wants a power rushing attack. He has a plethora of passing weapons at his disposal, yet he insists on a straight drop back approach, that doesn't give Luck enough time to find them.

And let's commit all our defensive efforts to stopping the run, when no one in the league runs the ball anymore, and let's use a bunch of defensive ends converted to line backer to do it. Werner looked absolutely lost yesterday....IN his first season, this guy should be used purely as a missile directed at the QB. Give him a chance to learn the rest as the seaosn goes on.

My hope is that Greg Manusky is fired at the end of the year, and they pick up Rex Ryan after he's fired.

by mehllageman56 (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:19pm

Rex Ryan would be a great pickup for D coordinator; my hope as a Jets fan is that he doesn't get fired.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:47pm

I could not agree more, I think Rexy and Love Smith are two guys that could really help transform most defenses if they are available next offseason.

by Led :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:28pm

The Rex-as-dead-man-walking narrative seems to be entirely a creation of the media. Sure he may get fired if the team stinks up the joint or if he loses the team, but there is no actual evidence for the idea that they have to win a particular number of games for him to keep his job. The owner declined to GUARANTEE that he'll be the coach next year (why would he?), but he he was otherwise very complimentary. As has the GM. If the defense plays well and the team is competitive but loses a bunch of games because the offense lacks the talent to score consistently, why fire the architect of the defense rather than try to improve the offense? It makes no sense.

by bernie (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 1:01pm

Your head coach is supposed to get the whole team in a successful situation. There's really no point having the best defense in football of your offense has special teams are the worst, or any other combination thereof. A loss is a loss, and your head coach is in charge of winning. If your team repeatedly fails then either your coach (through poor game day decisions, play calling) or your front office (bad personnel acquisitions) is to blame for failing to rectify that.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:02pm

re: the Bears -

On the whole, I liked Trestman's playcalling debut. He got a little conservative at times (punting from the Bengals' 38!) and called a few too many first-and-second-down runs early, but he seemed to learn from the latter.

And the offense could have looked better in the first half, for sure; Bennett and Jeffery each dropped their first pass (Bennett's was worse), and Forte dropped an easy one later. What's encouraging is that Cutler targeted both Bennett and Jeffery on the immediate following drive.

And outside of the interception, which looked like a physical mistake, Cutler was very sharp. The long pass to Marshall down the right sideline was a thing of beauty, and the touchdown to Marshall was a dart. He also made some nice plays with his scrambling ability, hitting Bennett for a big gain and reversing direction in the pocket to find Forte for a first down.

The rookies on the right side looked good to me, too. I'm glad Ben agrees (for the most part) on Long. I'm interested in what he thinks of Jordan Mills, who I thought did a good job sustaining his blocks.

I have mixed feelings on the defense. They looked awful in the first half, particularly Tillman (despite two lucky interceptions), when they were playing a lot of man coverage. Some of this might just be that A.J. Green is a complete monster, of course. In the second half, after the initial touchdown drive, they switched to more zone and the defense tightened up. That actually brings up another encouraging sign - the new coaching staff made some very nice in-game adjustments.

by TomC :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:38pm

As a Bears fan, the most discouraging thing for me was the pass rush (or lack thereof). McClellin had a couple of nice rushes, but Peppers was matched up against a 2nd-string LT all day and was completely invisible (and he was getting single-blocked on many plays). It makes me very worried that his age has finally caught up with him. Wootton was also a non-factor.

by tuluse :: Thu, 09/12/2013 - 4:08pm

I only got to see the 2nd half, but wow, was not ready for that kind of offensive competence.

I noticed something that I think might be almost wholly overlooked in football commentary these past couple years. Matching quarterbacks' and receivers' skill sets. When Cutler first got to Chicago we had all fast skinny guys and he was pretty bad. Now we have big physical guys, and he looks pretty good. I'm curious if other QBs have synergistic tendencies like that. It's clear that Brady likes the shifty slot receiver archetype.

by Independent George :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:23pm

Whatever badass stuff happened in Breaking Bad tonight pales in comparison to what Tom Coughlin does after this game

Obviously written before watching the show. Holy crap.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:11pm

Can I just ask for folks to not reveal anything happening in breaking bad, please? I'm not saying you did but some of us have to wait to see it.


by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:08pm

Walt was actually a man.
Walt was Jesse's father.
Walt was Keyser Soze.
Walt hit the iceberg and sank.
Walt fell off the Empire State Building.
Breaking Bad is an autistic kid's dream.
Albuquerque is actually purgatory.
Walt got shot and the screen went bla

by JIPanick :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:30pm

Walt killed Dumbeldore

by merlinofchaos :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:46pm

And just like that...he's gone.

by Independent George :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 10:42am

Forget it Jake. It's Albuquerque.

by Sakic (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:11am

And don't forget that Walt was actually dead the entire time.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:31pm

Under discussed subject: What the hell happened to Nnamdi? From no-brainer all pro and arguable DMVP to a bad slot-corner.

In Philly I assumed it was the system and the way he was used. But now he's with one of the best coaches in the game, and he still struggles.

We're at an empass: Either Harbaugh (and the Philly staff) is bad at maximizing the production of his players, or the way we evaluate CBs is flawed to the point of confusing AllPros for replacement players.

by Independent George :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:39pm

The short answer is age. Nnamdi was an aggressive bump & run guy whose skillset does not translate once he starts to slow down; he's just not fast enough to recover after the initial bump anymore.

Ronde Barber's career was extended by being a Cover-2 zone corner with different responsibilities; Charles Woodson became more of a 'heavy' nickel guy in the slot. At 6-3 and 215 pounds, he should have transitioned to safety by now, but he's terrible in zones. So Nnamdi's still trying to play the way he always played, but physically can't.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:49pm

All good points, but...

He's 32. I know man-CB is one of the most athletically challenging position, but this is a guy who absolutely fell of a cliff. He can't even look competent on one of the best defenses in the league. I mean Champ Bailey is still making pro bowls left and right.

Also: How hard can it be to sit in a zone? Is it really that different!?

by Andrew Potter :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:22pm

How hard can it be to sit in a zone? Is it really that different!?

I'm a soccer player who's only dabbled in organised gridiron football - though when I played, I played cornerback - but if soccer's anything to go by then the answer is yes. The fundamental decision making process is completely different between zone and man defense, and takes place in a different overall context. In zone, you have a place in a scheme rather than a specific opponent, and are reacting to several different things going on around you rather than what your opponent does. It's not that one's inherently easier or harder, but they're significantly different processes and skillsets.

by Independent George :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 1:42pm

Having never played, I can't tell you how hard the transition is, but I can make two points about Bailey:

1. He's about 25 pounds lighter than Asomugha. Asomugha's body type is more like Jason Sehorn, and seems to be aging just as well - I would guess that Bailey has gone from 'fast' to 'fast enough', while Asomugha went from 'fast enough' to 'ohshit'.
2. Bailey's still good, but as we saw last season, he probably shouldn't still be making Pro Bowls.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Wed, 09/11/2013 - 4:02am

Regarding 2: I don't watch him on every play or anything, but it seems to me that that pleyoff game was the only time last year he looked like non-probowler in a very thin AFC. Granted in that game he looked like a replacement, but it was still one game.

by matu_72 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:04pm

I think he had an up and down game. I think he covered well on some plays, but on plays where the receiver catches it in front of him, he's done because he is just such a horrible tackler. I think he is going to have some good moments and bad moments all year. Crazy to say, but he looks like a small downgrade from Chris Culliver.

Side note: He doesn't play in the slot. When the Niners go nickel, they slide Carlos Rogers to the slot and Nnamdi plays the outside defensive left.

by matu_72 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:10pm

Now that makes me wonder if Nnamdi has always been such a bad tackler. All of those years in Oakland no QB was ever willing or had much reason to throw his direction, so he was involved in very few plays.

by tay (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:34pm

Great stuff, instead of getting rid of hashtags how about providing analysis for all of the games :)

by akn :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:35pm

#PleaseStop RT @FOcommenters: You lose a lot of #gravitas with 140 character limits and random punctuation. #FOAUD

by Paul R :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:03pm

Re: Steelers/Titans

Hard to believe that no one commented on the NFL's new "Safety First" policy.

I don't have one of those Twitter machines, so maybe I missed it.

by Subrata Sircar :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:43pm

Like the rest of the commenters, I would like you to lose the #foaud hashtag - it's just taking up space.

I enjoyed the "we didn't watch" placeholders ... this week. Not sure how I'll feel about them by the end of the year.

I like the long-form comments - I like getting off-the-cuff commentary and won't treat it as carefully reasoned analysis.

by bucko (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:51pm

After a really odd cut block attempt the Packers rookie left tackle seemed to hold up most of the day and without a ton of help. Same for Barclay at right tackle. If anyone was the weak link it was the center Smith and after that Sitton who got stuck dealing with Justin Smith all day and Smith had the upper hand most downs.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:17pm

I though he got away with a few grabs and they did help him when they were going to be holding the ball but he was pretty good. It's a tough matchup and he did pretty well.

by theslothook :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:37pm

I specifically watched A Smith for most of this game. On his sack, he used his patented violent hands to really knock the crap out of Bahkiari. He had a few other good plays, but I really thought he was neutralized for most of the game, even when he was 1 on 1. A friend mentioned this to me, I'm not quite sure I agree, but he thinks once aldon gets caught in traffic, he just can't disengage or fight through it much.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:03pm

I think you are doing Aldon down a little. He got 1.5 sacks, a couple of hits and a few pressures. That is an elite game for a pass rusher, especially when he was chipped and doubled with the qb mostly getting the ball out quickly.

Most rushers struggle when the blocker gets into their pads and Bhaktiari does seem to have very good hand strength. (I think I saw the pack GM say as much)

by theslothook :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:20pm

Karl, I agree he did a good job on his 2 sacks and a few other plays. Dr.Z famously mentioned this : A sack is one play. Aldon will likely log close to 800 pass rushing snaps, so sack totals are a fraction of the plays he will make. I watched him the entire game. Maybe Bhaktiari is very good and this will adjust the context, but he wasn't doubled the whole game and I just thought he wasn't that effective. I'm not jumping to say hes overrated or he sucks. I just thought he wasn't that effective and in general, the 49ers rush wasn't that effective.

by Dan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:32pm

Smith was involved in 2 sacks, 2 QB hits, and 4 hurries on 39 pass rushing snaps, according to PFF. In other words, he got to the quarterback 20% of the time. That is damn good for any pass rusher, and better than any pass rusher did last season (min. 250 snaps), just a shade ahead of Von Miller.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:52pm

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. If a pass rusher impacts more than 10% of the passing plays then he's doing very well. Especially in a scheme that mostly uses a four man rush and especially especially when dealing with a mobile qb like Rodgers where the rush has to stay in lanes.

by theslothook :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 2:09am

Yeah, PFf says he did really well too. Idk why my impression of him wasn't that good. I was probably biased by his opponent, so I did some crazy opponent adjustment against him. I'll have to rewatch the game.

by Boston Dan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 12:58pm

"@claytoncargill: Leave my man Dan alone RT @FO_ASchatz: Mark your calendar. On September 8 at 2:30pm EDT Dan Dierdorf said something very smart. #foaud"

This is a "reader tweet of genius"? Please tell me this was a failed cut and paste.

I agree with the others, please "find and remove" the hashtags.

by DGL :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:13pm

I know correlation != causation and all that, but perhaps the Steelers giving up five sacks and getting 32 yards rushing on 15 carries after Pouncy goes off might cause Scott to re-evaluate his prior that "his accolades are more 'he was a first-round pick at center for the Steelers, so he must be good,' than earned."

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:16pm

Did I see somebody mention that #foaud was top-ten trending nationally or some such at one point during the games? If so, that's ridiculously great exposure for this site, and stopping something that successful after one week because you aren't used to just auto-filtering hashtags out (I use Twitter a lot, so I don't even see them anymore) would be crazy.

by JIPanick :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:40pm

I think the consensus isn't "stop twitter participation" but rather "when you post audibles on the main site, do a find and replace to remove '#foaud'".

At the very least, that's my position.

by Lance :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:53pm

You can hashtag all you like. But a blog post with #whatever isn't going to help any tending thing on Twitter so there's no reason to include them in Audibles. I don't use Twitter at all (and have no desire to) but seeing #foaud after all of these comments is incredibly annoying.

by Myk (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:17pm

Good sign that Russell Wilson apparently was indecisive and basically average and threw for 320 yards?

Also, I don't get why people are blaming Carolina for missing on those roll out throws by Seattle to the FB and TE. That play has about a 100% conversion rate since the preseason. That is what happens when you worry about the running game.

by zenbitz :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:48pm

How did they throw for 320 and score 12 points?

by Perfundle :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:40pm

More than 100 yards of penalties (mostly on the offense) was the main reason. The fumble in the red zone was pretty bad too.

by Insancipitory :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:49pm

FG, lots of penalties, another FG, strip sack inside the Panthers 20 to end the half, more penalties, some clutch plays QBR will love, a 40 dropped bomb to Williams, a 43 TD strike to Kearse, a failed 2 point conversion up by 5, some more penalties, another DeAngelo Williams 'clutch' fumble, some luck, some beast mode, some rollout passes to the New Mike Rob (I still prefer Mike Rob classic), some kneel-downs in FG range. Game. Blouses.

by EricL :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:00pm

How you go 25 for 33, 320 yards, yet score only 12 points:

First two drives: combined 1 for 5 for 1 yard, two three-and-outs, 5 pen. yards.
Third drive: ended on a 9 yard pass play on 3rd and 17. Field Goal. (7 for 8, 72 yards, 10 pen. yards)
Fourth drive: Sack/Fumble on the Carolina 18. (3 for 3, 49 yards)
Fifth drive: ended on a 16-yard pass play on 3rd and 19. (2 for 3, 22 yards, 15 pen. yards)
Sixth drive: three and out (0 for 1)
Seventh drive: field goal (5 for 5, 52 yards, 21 pen. yards - grounding)
Eighth drive: touchdown (missed 2-pt conv.) (3 for 4, 60 yards)
Ninth drive: end of game (4 for 4, 54 yards)

by zenbitz :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:46pm

I guess the only had about 20 EPA passing, take away 10 for penalties.

by Wren (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:16pm

Wilson looked decisive and elusive for most of the game despite the Carolina front seven spending nearly every play camped in the Seattle backfield. He started off with a few rough throws--their OL was simply dominated--but soon adjusted.

Also, his downfield vision is extraordinary--hopefully at some point, people will stop calling his completions "miracles", considering the frequency with which he makes them.

by Mungo (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:28pm

"Sorry, no FO staff writers found this game worth writing about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants."

It's always amazed me that a website with so much original commentary to offer wastes so much space on whiny, over-defensive sarcasm. Seriously, we get the point of Audibles at the Line by now.

Not a fan of the hashtags but I've begun to accept that I'm hopelessly behind the times on this one.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:38pm

And yet, people still complain about no comments for (insert favorite team here) EVERY SINGLE WEEK. I found the placeholder comment to be snarky and funny, but that's probably only because I've been reading FO since their first year or so. I also find smug and/or dry sarcasm to be funny. If you're taking the comment that seriously, the joke is on you.

by Independent George :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:50pm

That's just it - I think I'd have the same reaction if it weren't for the fact that people still complain about it. And it's not always newcomers under guest accounts - I see registered users complain on occasion.

Waaay back in the day, I posted a mock comment complaining about how almost 25% of their playoff Audibles was spent on the Pats game. Most people got the joke, but quite a few either chimed in agreeing with me, or ripping me for complaining. Good times.

by MdM (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:45pm

New Format: Hated it
Hashtags: Please remove!
Snarky Comment: Was funny the first time, not-so funny the 2nd, rather annoying by the third, please just put a boilerplate mad-lib style thing if possible.
Recurrent snarky "biased" comments in comments: yes, lame....

by Jakob S (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:46am

What MdM said.

by Ryan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:40pm

Seems like all football writers on the daily are required to retweet readers' dumb complaints ("your a hater" or "Tebow rulez" or something), paired with a "see what I have to deal with" type whine.

by Deelron :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:52pm

"It's always amazed me that a website with so much original commentary to offer wastes so much space on whiny, over-defensive sarcasm. Seriously, we get the point of Audibles at the Line by now."

We may, but an audience is always a moving target, some move in and some go out. Newer people don't automatically get the point.

by Anger...rising :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:56pm

That's what the disclaimer at the top of the page is for. Reiterating it seven separate times within the body is just Dick Head Honcho and Dick Editor being their typical dick selves.

by justanothersteve :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:14pm

I found the KC-Jax and Miami-Cleveland "Sorry, no FO readers found this game worth Tweeting about because they are irrevocably biased against the participants" even funnier.

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:01pm

Always find it weird to combine insults with the accusation that a party is "over-defensive."

by Independent George :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:36pm

Can we get Raiderjoe a twitter account?

by Ryan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:41pm

This exists: @raiderjoe_FO

A must follow.

by batbatt :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:31pm

I fully support changing the Redskins name to Magpies if it comes to that...

by JIPanick :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 1:41pm

We can (and should) but then we'd also have to all follow the tags
and so forth.

by Theo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:26pm

Don't forget #loins #raideds #Riethslisbters

by Mike B. In Va :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:31pm

Oh, come on, you absolutely cannot forget #clots.

by Marko :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:42pm


by Vincent Verhei :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:22pm

On the game-watching thing: I'm a guy who likes to go to the sports bar with multiple TVs and focus on one or two games at once. I moved this year and thought I had found a new place. Then when I went in on Sunday, six of the eight TVs in the room were showing SEA-CAR. The only other games on were CIN-CHI and NE-BUF, both of which I knew would be well represented here, so I hardly paid attention to anything besides scoring plays. At that point it was too late to go anywhere else, but I won't be back there next week.

by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:22pm

On a more content-based question:

"Of course, it would help if their best running back was on the field for these catch-up situations, and Coughlin's refusal to go back to David Wilson came back to bite the Giants on that last pick-six."

This reminds me of the in-game commentary, where Collinsworth basically ripped Scott a new one for not looking back for the ball immediately following the play.

But is it really all his fault? I mean, yes, it was presumably his responsibility to be ready for a screen/flat pass, but at the same time, why was Eli throwing the ball to a guy who was facing the other way? If Eli takes a sack or throws it away because Scott wasn't doing his job, that's one thing, but doesn't the QB bear some responsibility for knowing he's got a rookie third-stringer (counting the injured Brown as second-string) and making sure the guy is looking back? It's not like a downfield pass where the ball is thrown well before the receiver makes his break and so the QB has to trust that the receiver is going to do what he's supposed to do when he's supposed to do it...

by JasonK :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:32pm

Da'Rel Scott is in his 3rd year with the Giants. (He was a 7th-round pick in 2011.) He actually has more experience in the offense than David Wilson does.

And, yes, Eli does bear some responsibility in that he should've been a little more sure where he was throwing on both of the screen pass attempts that ended up in INTs. He was a bit too focused on his eye-discipline (screens are, of course, misdirection plays, and the QB's head turned the other way is one of the false signals that you want to send to the defense) and not focused enough on ensuring that his intended receiver was in a position to make a catch.

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:06pm

Collinsworth always blames receivers and never blames QBs.

Exactly the same criticism was made on some Cowboy WR on Romo's pick. If a receiver makes one read and the QB makes another, then it's the WRs fault.

Now I can go along with this to some extent when the receiver is a rookie and the QB is a veteran. But I really think bias is playing a role here. Collinsworth thinks every WR should be as smart as he was as a WR.

by fb29 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:19pm

It's also not like it was in his breadbasket or anything. As I remember he was barely able to get a hand on it, hence the tip to the defender.

To me, I feel like everyone has been hyping Wilson so much that they can't accept that he could be pretty easily replaced by Scott. Is it a step down talent-wise? Not if he holds onto the ball.

by Dan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:37pm

It'd be pretty harsh to give Lavonte David the KCW on a clean hit - he pushed Geno Smith before Smith set foot out of bounds.

I'd nominate Decastro, for his chop block on an offensive lineman who was already engaged with a defender. Disastrous results, and nowhere close to being a legitimate block.

by DEW (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:46pm

Smith's foot hasn't landed out of bounds yet but his body is already well across the chalk stripe. You just don't make contact with the quarterback in that situation, and it directly lead to the opponent winning the game.

DeCastro's got to get honorable mention, though, for taking out the best offensive lineman on his team for the season while attempting an illegal block.

by Dan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:10pm

You would like defenders to be extra-cautious in that situation so that they don't have to worry about overzealous officiating, but I'm not going to be too hard on a guy who drew a penalty for a hit that was not against the rules.

And in fact, Smith's body was not well across the stripe when the contact started.

by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:13pm

Thing is -- I think David's play was technically legal. It's never adjudicated that way -- like the unicorn that is offensive spearing -- but is statutorily a legal play.

Dumb, but defensible.

DeCastro's was epic-levels of poor decision-making.

by MilkmanDanimal :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:34pm

Whether or not Smith's foot had hit out of bounds, his body was completely over the line, and I began screaming the moment David hit him; it was absolutely clear that was going to draw a flag, and it's going to draw a flag in every situation. In my mind, it wasn't even close.

The DeCastro block was a cheap play that wound up damaging his own team by hurting Pouncey, but that's more of a bad result than pure stupidity. The David hid on Smith was pure stupidity, and thereby KCW fodder for the ages.

by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:56pm

He attempted an illegal block, and injured his own guy. How much dumber can you get?

That's like the Gus Ferrotte Auto-Concussion dumb.

by Independent George :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:12pm

Look back at the photo linked in 177 again - Smith's body was not over the line. He got flagged for a technically legal hit. It was stupid based on how we know the refs call it, but I have a hard time faulting someone for a legal hit inbounds which was called otherwise.

by dbostedo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 8:28pm

I don't believe it's the initial contact that matters. I.e. just because you initiate contact in bounds doesn't make what happens out of bounds legal. The fact that he gave the extra push once Smith had stepped out of bounds is what got the call. If he appeared to be trying to hold back or just keep a hand on Smith, I don't think they call it.

Here's how the rule is written in Rule 12, Article 6 of the NFL rule book :

(b) contacting a runner when he is out of bounds;
Note: Defensive players must make an effort to avoid contact. Players on defense are responsible for knowing when a runner has crossed the boundary line, except in doubtful cases where he might step on a boundary line and continue parallel with

That definitely puts the onus on the defender to pull up when the runner has crossed the sideline. If David has just "guided" Smith out, rather than push him, there likely would have been no call.

by nat :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 2:53pm

I'm all for experimentation. Sometimes experiments fail. Sometimes they fail very quickly and obviously.

Tweets: FAIL
These fail because they are forced to be non-insightful and context-free. I don't think any amount of practice will help. It's just what tweets do.

Long form: FAIL
These come off as quickly dashed off shallow post-game analysis. Because they are obviously written after the fact, they lose all the immediacy of the old Audibles. But they aren't deep enough to be worth reading. I can get simple game summaries elsewhere.

The great thing about the old Audibles format was that it captured the interplay of your thoughts while the game was unfolding. It was interesting precisely because you risked being overtaken by later events. It was often a striking picture of the flow of the game's fortunes, seen through the lens of FO-style theories of football.

If at all possible, ditch this new format as soon as humanly possible.

by Ryan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:02pm

This touches on another problem I have. The new format is a bit like Season 4 of Arrested Development. You're still getting a taste of your favorite characters, but they're all in silos. It's the interplay that makes the experience rewarding.

by Marko :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:32pm

Agreed on all points.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:52pm

I originally liked the new system, but I've changed my mind. I miss the old audibles which commented as the game developed.

Maybe just do the old system with some reader tweets if someone tweets something you think is interesting.

by tuluse :: Thu, 09/12/2013 - 4:12pm

Agreed. I miss the old audibles already,

by stc23 (not verified) :: Tue, 09/17/2013 - 12:14am

Was going to post something similar, but I don't think I could have said it any better.

Audibles in its previous format was probably my favorite read on this site every week. I'm not sure I'd even bother if they stick with this format.

Twitter and recaps both have their place, but this just isn't it.

by Alec Hartzler (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:11pm

Goodness, there are a lot of complaints about hashtags. Are all of the commenters on this site 85 years old? #hashtags #welcometoamerica

by RickD :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:12pm

Don't make me shake my cane at a cloud!

Seriously, I personally don't understand the hostility, esp. the people saying that they're going to take their ball home if things don't meet with their approval next week. I find the hash tags easy to ignore. But they're also easy to remove if a lot of people are going to be irrationally upset at them. #shakesCane

A different point is that the tweets are shorter than what we're used to from Audibles, and that's certainly valid. And while there are longer commentaries, what are missing are the Baby Bear comments in between.

I also like the inclusion of reader tweets. And the space holders for games w/o comments might inspire people to chime in themselves.

by Dean :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:12pm

More likely, we're sufficiently literate that we pick up on the subtleties of language that come from using appropriate grammar and puctuation, and as such we can read more than 140 characters without losing our train of thought. Hashtags are the equivalent of bumper stickers - an insult to our intelligence and a poor substitute for an actual thought.

by CaffeineMan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:48pm

I dunno about 85, but I'm old enough that I still think of it as a pound sign.



by JMM* (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:11pm

"WIth Le'veon Bell hurt, is there any other Steeler running back who would assuredly be picked up if waived? The other backs are Redman, Stephens-Howling, and Felix Jones. I honestly wonder if any of them would be claimed on waivers."

Does this mean we should reconsider the whole "running backs can be found anywhere" meme?

Also,DGL's post #107 offers another valid topic for reconsideration.

by TomC :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:24pm

I'm fine with the new format---in fact, just about anything that ensures the continuing presence of Audibles is OK with me. If I were to change anything, it would be the "irrevocably biased" joke. I found it mildly amusing the first time and kind of grating by the end of today's Audibles, which I think means I will really dislike it by week 17.

by Ryan D. :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:28pm

This is National Jump-to-conclusions week, so let's all assume that this format can never work, under any circumstances! This is the trial run for something different. I applaud them for trying something different, even if it isn't universally hailed as brilliant after the first week. Give them a chance to try it, get constructive feedback, refine it, and see if there isn't a way to please everyone a few weeks from now.

I think everyone wants the #FOAud stricken from the record. That's probably an easy fix that they can accomodate next week.

As for how much FO content should come from Twitter, how much FO content should come from long emails, and how much fan content should come from Twitter, there is probably no single balance that will please everyone. But, this was already true under the old Audibles format, when people complained that no FO writer bothered to watch the game between Team Y and Team Z.

The FO writers and editor probably really like being able to just copy/paste their Twitter comments into the article, as it's presumably a lot quicker and easier than copy/pasting out of multiple emails. Plus, composing the tweets is a lot shorter, and much easier to do from a smartphone than writing long emails, especially if they are in a sports bar and don't have access to their favorite PC or tablet.

I like that Aaron gives the FO staff "Sundays off" so they can watch what they want to watch, and enjoy it in the way that they see fit. I really like that they have a roundtable discussion during the games, and then share their thoughts with us later. I would really like it if they would continue to do so. If that means more tweets than long emails to read, so be it.

Plus, I also like being able to take an active part in the discussions using Twitter. That would have never been an option before under the old Audibles format, as copying hundreds of people in email chains wouldn't have been practical.

by Norm Norm (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:27pm

Audibles has been my favorite thing to peruse on monday mornings for years. What i liked best about it was the real time exchanges, criticisms, and questions exchanged amongst you all.

All of that is eliminated by replacing it with 1-2 paragraph recaps and twitter posts that simply say X thing happened.

I hope you change it back.


by Damon Rutherford is getting upset! (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:06pm

Agreed. Please return Audibles to its previous excellent form! Screw Twitter, hashtags, and the illogical 140-character limit.

by Insancipitory :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:12pm

I think what we all need to do is learn Chinese. We do that, not only will we be able to share the glory of the NFL with a billion more people, 140 characters will be plenty.

by Noah Arkadia :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 9:51pm


The man with no sig

by Guest789 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:22pm



“Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.”

by theslothook :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:44pm

You know what the packers' Defensive strategy reminded me of? That Mavericks Suns series in 2006(i believe). After getting roasted by the pick N roll a game earlier, their defense talked about making nash a SCORER and not a passer. Then they do just that and get roasted again. I remember Charles Barkley commenting afterwards, "Whoever thinks that a sound strategy is letting someone score is just idiotic. That's not a strategy, that's just bad defense." Essentially, I thought the packers made a decision that at all costs, they were not going to let Kaep kill them with his running. Instead, I saw so many WIDE open receivers streaking down the field. I just felt like, ok, so you don't give up the 300 yards rushing, but is giving up 400 yards passing much better? I was actually fuming from all the crow I had to eat watching boldin rip apart the packers after I had proclaimed him toast all offseason. I still stand by my explanation that when receivers get that wide open so often, its more about defensive breakdowns than it is about the receivers themselves. Oh and credit the 49ers innovative coaching staff. One of the third down conversions on the final drive featured vernon in the backfield matched up against a linebacker in the flat. Total mismatch that went for 15 yards.

by zenbitz :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:54pm

This is generally a flawed strategy. The more predictable your strategy is, the easier it is to exploit. That being said - it was a close game. If Kaep throws a pick or two (like most QBs in their 11th NFL game) you look like a genius.

Another thing that might have worked for the Packers is if they get an early lead, they might be able to back off on the run defense. Probably have to keep the spy or whatever anti-scramble shenanigans they had up.

by theslothook :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:58pm

If you're trying to judge defenses in a vacuum, being in a close game doesn't change the fact that it was a terrible strategy. Sure, the 49ers got lucky with some things, the fumbles, the ints, the penalty giving them more downs, etc etc. I get it. Even still, once the 49ers were onto the packers strategy, everything crumbled from there.

by Sakic (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:34am

I think the Packers strategy on Sunday was sound but they just lacked the horses to pull it off. Without Casey Hayward (slot defender) and Morgan Burnett the Packer secondary looked a bit clueless out there...McMillian and Jennings are good players (and will only get better, I think) but they weren't ready to be quarterbacking a zone defense especially when the Packers typically play man.

by BroncFan07 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 3:51pm

If nobody commented on KC-JAX or CLE-MIA, does that mean you're irrevocably biased, or that you just don't hate yourselves?

by Dean :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:18pm

I must admit, I was curious about the KC/JAX game, if only to see a first look at Alex Smith trying to run Andy Reid's offense. Having said that, I wasn't so curious as to actually watch the game myself or anything, so I can't really rip the FO guys for ignoring it either.

by Dad2sca :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:18pm

Every year I continue to be amazed at the arrogance of the 3rd paragraph.

by sundown (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:21pm

Question for anybody with a take on it: Getting lost in the Clay Matthews late hit story is the fact it could have been 4th and short on that play except the Pack accepted a 5 yard penalty on the play before and let the Niners try again. Any clue what they were thinking on that? It didn't appear 5 yards would have made a difference on the field goal.

by Perfundle :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:31pm

I assume McCarthy was afraid that if it was 4th and 1, Harbaugh might go for it.

by Karl Cuba :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:55pm


by matu_72 :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:02pm

I 100% agree with this. It was going to be 4th and inches and I fully believe that Harbaugh would have gone for it in that situation. I don't blame McCarthy for accepting the penalty.

by Kyle D. (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:33pm

It wasn't going to be 4th and inches. It was a solid yard. Sort of a damned if you do damned if you don't for the Packers.

by justanothersteve :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:52pm

I think if it was 4th and 1 regardless if it were inches or feet, SF would have gone for it. With SF's defense and the Packers line, there would even be a good chance of picking up a safety if they didn't convert.

by JasonB (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 4:46pm

Maybe I'm person 165 to say this, but I like reading the Audibles and this is horrid. All these @s and #s make it really hard to read, and really rub me the wrong way. I didn't finish this weeks edition, maybe next week if you guys tone it down I'll be able to get through it, but why are you ruining a good thing?


by Boots Day :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 5:45pm

Well, if anyone's counting, you can put me down as a "yuck." I realize this is the first time out, and things will improve - like the obvious necessity of clearing the hashtags and other tweet-speak ugliness - but the problem is there's just no room for the kind of explanations and instant analysis we used to get. If you look at the first Audibles that Aaron linked to, maybe a quarter of the comments were short enough to fit into a tweet.

I used to look for Audibles first thing every Monday morning, but this... I don't know if I'll even bother next week. There's just not enough meat there to make it worth my while. And the snarky comment on not watching some of the games ceased to be funny about halfway through the first such comment.

by chasehas :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:20pm

While there were some good ideas here in the new format, overall the thing just felt poorly executed. (Maybe you guys need to do preseason Audibles to work out the kinks!) :)

Nthing removing the #foaud, or at least subtly changing the font/color so it's easier to separate hashtags from text.

I like including the tweets, but I'd drop the artifical separation between FO/reader tweets, and limit it to the best ones per game (curation is what makes TWIQ so consistently good, after all).

As for the longform commentary: It's interesting, yes, but I can go to SI or ESPN or a bunch of other places for "reaction" pieces by a single writer. Audibles' killer feature was the interplay between a bunch of smart guys all watching the same game, and this is losing that.

Overall, I'd do best of both worlds and mix e-mail/Twitter together, but I understand that's a lot of work to do.

by Eddo :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:28pm

One thing everyone needs to consider - FO staff and commenters - is that Twitter is pretty particular about how you reprint Tweets. You're supposed to preserve links, hashtags, "@" signs, etc. In fact, you're also supposed to use Twitter branding, which isn't the case.

So to the crowd: give them a little break. Legally, they might not be able to remove hashtags.

And to the FO staff: you might want to look at Twitter's terms and conditions. That might affect how you present Audibles moving forward.

by Buck B (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 6:48pm

I appreciate your admission of bias against some of the teams, but given the tone and tenor of Audibles, maybe you should refrain from commenting on the teams you are biased toward. I mean, the point is comedy, right? Good luck not commenting on the Chiefs defense this year. Yeah, it was the Jags, but the last time I watched a game where the offense probably should be punting on 2nd and 10 or more was against the 85 Bears. Go Chiefs!

by Andrew Potter :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 7:11pm

Really? Cos the last time I watched a game where the offense probably should be punting on 2nd and 10 or more was last year's Chiefs.

(Admittedly, last year's Jaguars probably qualify too.)

by Buck B (not verified) :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 8:25pm

True. But, that was generic ineptitude. You got that against any defense. We'll see where that embarrassment ranks for Jags. The numbers on this site will tell the tale. Sure was fun though.

by Jimmy :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 7:22pm

I like that you are experimenting, and being open minded about how it will end up. This is wise. Remember that people come here because it isn't like the other crappy websites you find on the interwebs. Editorial control and decision making - whether directly or in the choices you make in hiring good staff and trusting them - are good things too. Having said this I would say the overall site content is as good as it has ever been, so keep going.

by Raiderjoe :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 8:22pm

Legals game vs Redskins pretyv good game right nos

by zlionsfan :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 9:45pm

I imagine the new format is a bit easier to compile, so I support that aspect of it - I expect that means it's easiest to keep the tweets in their original form (and for space reasons, to not use a plugin that displays the formatted version complete with links). Plus it means we get comments about games that would, in the past, have gone electronically unnoticed. While I'm really not a fan of tweets themselves (if possible, I would send long-form tweets myself), it pairs nicely with the long-form version and saves interns (for now?) from spending time compiling a bunch of emails.

I do like the long-form comments - sometimes it's nice to have something a little longer from several games - and I suspect we'll have to deal with this for the time being if time is driving the new format. I'd actually like long-form comments on all games ... maybe someday you'll have enough people around to handle that!

by Phoenix of Fury :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:28pm

Great content as usual, but I much prefered the old format.

by IAmJoe :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 10:47pm

I'm gonna go ahead and say that I don't like the new format either. I probably would not have finished it if it weren't for all the blank games.

The twitter integration reeks of the kind of sports TV where a pretty girl reads things off of twitter, and that's horrible TV. Plus, with three separate "threads" for an individual game, you lose all context. When you get a twitter thought of "What was with that call?" I have no idea what call you're talking about because you lose all context. If you're going to integrate twitter into Audibles, it needs to remain in one big "thread" for a game, and it should be fairly limited. If someone makes a great one-liner or brings up a legitimate question via twitter, sure, stick it in there. Otherwise, leave it out. And when it is stuck in there, kill the hashtags and fix the links to things like twitpic.whocares, etc.

An extremely important thing I think to keep in mind here is that if people want to read Twitter, they will go read Twitter. If you're into Twitter, you've already read most of the Twitter stuff that's going into this column, and you don't want to read it twice. If you didn't read all the Twitter stuff before this column, then you probably don't care for Twitter, so why would you want to read it in this column? I think this is the most important thing to consider.

The people who come to a website and read FO and Audibles are people who tend to like more long form reading. Give me long form reading, and I'm in. This ended up being neither long form reading nor the sort of snippet reading that Twitter provides, and ended up just not being anything in particular.

by Duke :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:43pm

An extremely important thing I think to keep in mind here is that if people want to read Twitter, they will go read Twitter. If you're into Twitter, you've already read most of the Twitter stuff that's going into this column, and you don't want to read it twice. If you didn't read all the Twitter stuff before this column, then you probably don't care for Twitter, so why would you want to read it in this column? I think this is the most important thing to consider.

The problem with THIS is that it means that the staff doesn't know where to post thoughts in the game now. Go to twitter? That's good for immediate thoughts, with the ability to interact with FO fans and other writers and experts outside the FO field. But now it's not in Audibles the next morning. And Audibles suffers from missing a lot of great stuff.

So, send it to the Audibles mailing list? Now it's in Audibles, but you're getting less commentary and interaction on it. So you get less of a perspective on the game while its happening. That's what makes twitter so great during sporting events (try it some time, if you can get a dialogue with people also watching the game it's great).

Send it to both? Now you have to continually switch between Twitter (which is your news source on all the games and what is awesome) and your mail client just to see what's going on. You also have to copy your thought before you send it out, and maybe you have to do some editing to fit it into one or more tweets. All while you're trying to pay attention to one (or more) football game. Bleah.

I'm not sure what the answer is here. I agree with a lot of people that I enjoyed the old Audibles' ability to weave opinions from lots of writers, with a back-and-forth that was interesting to read. I also agree that an explanation of what was being discussed was very helpful (knowing which play it was where Kyle Long whiffed, for example, is helpful). I'm optimistic that further weeks will improve the format, and I liked the longform discussion, but I agree that this article is missing something. That said, as someone who has followed most of the writers on twitter for awhile I can see the impetus--there's a lot of commentary, good commentary, that they put up during the games that just never made it into Audibles. It's easy to see why they want to try to bring that in.

As a final note, if you keep rewarding people for using the #foaud hashtag, they'll keep doing it. I thought I overdid it with my #foaud tweets yesterday, but now I see that some got used. You can expect me to double that amount next week. :P

by armchair journe... :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 9:40am

Sure, but if the long form intertwined commentary isn't happening anymore, then there's no reason to have audibles. I'd rather kill it than replace it with a twitter feed.


by DavidL :: Mon, 09/09/2013 - 11:53pm

There's nothing inherent about Twitter stopping people from talking to each other or compiling two- or three-post thoughts that mitigate the constraints of the format. Those are issues the writers can fix just by adapting their style.

by Kal :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 3:26am

I miss the conversations. Really, that was what was fun. It read like Scramble for the Ball with more funny and humanity. The tweets are close to that, but not close enough. The longform analysis is meh, largely.

by nat :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 8:36am

Twitter Audibles?
It's fucking close to water.
Can it be saved? Haiku!

by Steve Miller (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 12:06pm

Virtually no commentary for the most entertaining game on Sunday (Min/Det? You can do better. I absolutely hate the new format btw. Get back to making intelligent analysis..and that usually takes more than a twitter comment can provide.

by BJR :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 2:05pm

Anybody got any clue what was going on last night with the roughness call on the Chargers that negated the Texans field goal and gave them 1st and goal? It was late so I wasn't concentrating particularly hard but it looked like utter BS from the replays.

by Insancipitory :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 2:39pm

Because of the injuries to longsnappers, and the typical build of a longsnapper, teams aren't allowed to just overwhelm them with a DT anymore. The Chargers defender lined up off his shoulder, but crossed his face/went through him on the way to defending the kick. He got called for it just as if he'd lined up directly over him. It was a little bit of a surprising call, but why didn't he just attack the gap in front of him, or line up in the other gap?

by liquidmuse3 (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 3:31pm

Hey, like Kaepernick, Timmy Tebow played in a "college" offense with a funky throwing motion...but he played in the best conference by far & beat everybody twice. & he made it to only 2 rounds less of playoffs than Kaepernick with a worse team (running, ducking out of FO ;o) . FINE...enjoy Weeden & Gabbert, Tebow needs to stay unemployed clearly. ;oP

by Dean :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 5:14pm

OK. I'll take the bait.

As bad as they are, Weeden and Gabbert are bad STARTING Quarterbacks. St Timmy The Pius is still cover-your-eyes-awful when compared to BACKUP Quarterbacks.

If you put a gun to my head and told me I could have 2 of those 3 to QB my team I assure you, your messiah would still be looking for a job.

by Bnonymous (not verified) :: Tue, 09/10/2013 - 5:52pm

Tebow sucks. if he was such a great QB why won't anybody give him a jobZ? they offered him a chance to change positions n he turned it down that means he don't care about football an if he was such a great catholic then why is he so full of pride? if he loves football he swallows his pride an takes the positon change or sings with the LA KISS!!!!1

by nat :: Wed, 09/11/2013 - 9:11am

It's probably too late to ask, but did anyone who reads this get anything out of the tweets when they were happening? Did they add to your enjoyment of the game you were watching, or alert you to interesting stuff in other games?

I have a suspicion that people who like the tweeting and people who want to read Audibles are nearly disjoint sets. I wonder if I'm right.

by Boots Day :: Wed, 09/11/2013 - 1:32pm

I scrolled through the Twitter feed Sunday night after reading about the #foaud hashtag and thought, "This is pretty meh... not nearly as good as Audibles." Little did I know that what I was reading WAS Audibles.

I can understand the desire to be on Twitter, but I don't see any purpose to doing both Twitter and the new format of Audibles. Just tell anyone who wants to read some semblance of the old Audibles to follow the Twitter feed - and you can read through it as easily Monday morning as you could have at any time on Sunday - and don't waste time collecting it into a separate column on Monday.

by agen bola (not verified) :: Wed, 11/27/2013 - 4:10am

I just couldn't depart your site before suggesting that I actually enjoyed the usual information an individual provide on your guests? Is going to be back regularly to check out new posts.

by agen 338a (not verified) :: Wed, 11/27/2013 - 4:11am

hello!,I love your writing so a lot! proportion we be in contact extra approximately your post on AOL? I require a specialist in this house to resolve my problem. Maybe that's you! Having a look forward to look you.