ATBNG
-
Posts
685 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ATBNG
-
-
Coach Tuesday is right - Belichick does devour this kind of stuff. He read an extensive study of these types of decisions and what happened afterwards and incorporated it into his thinking. He goes for it more often than most coaches on 4th down, and it was that study that convinced him that teams try FG's and punts too often when they should be going for it - simply misestimation of risk versus reward in the end.
The idea that Belichick would go for it because he "has balls" is probably something Bill himself would refute given the quote below. He is all about playing the percentages based on the strengths and weaknesses that he perceives his team has.
Here's his famous quote on swagger from "Patriot Reign."
Belichick doesn't buy the canned and cliché stuff you hear in the press all the time. As the Patriots struggled trying to repeat as champs in 2002, he read in the paper one day that one of players said the team had to get its "swagger'' back. That day, in the team meeting, he said: "You know what? We didn't have a 'swagger' last year. What we had was a sense of urgency about playing well, being smart, and capitalizing on every opportunity and situation that came our way ... It wasn't about a f------- swagger. You can take that swagger and shove it right up your a--, OK?'' -
My gut tells me that Parcells would not go after Drew. You can always tell the players that Parcells really likes, and the glint that he has for Curtis Martin, Tedy Bruschi, and Richie Anderson never seemed to be there for Drew. On the other hand, he seemed to outright dislike Terry Glenn and he traded for him. Bill P. does like familiarity.
When Parcells drafted Drew and was asked why, he said it was because he could "make all the throws." I'll never forget that for some reason.
-
I guess one tries to load up on players that he thinks will be going to the Super Bowl. Indy players theoretically could put up huge numbers if they ever made it to the Bowl with 4 games worth of stats. I'm not expecting them to win both road games though.
I think McNabb should be the top pick, but I think it is close.
-
I'm doing a playoff fantasy league. 6 people, 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 D/ST. Usual points for TD's, yards, etc. Most points at the end wins.
What would be your strategy - who would you pick first? Keep in mind that in this league a guy like McNabb (who should play 3 games) is presumably superior to a Culpepper (who is likely to play only one).
-
The point spread tells me that Indy is going to pull back early. If they were preparing with their usual intensity, I would have expected that line to pull back after jumping up to 8.5-9 earlier in the week. It's remained steady. If it hasn't happened by now, that means they're going with the kindergarten gameplan.
If that game was two weeks ago (Indy at Denver), I'd have expected the line to be Indy -5 or so. A two touchdown swing in an NFL spread is astronomical. It tells you all you need to know. Compare that line to the Pats line - New England is still -13.5 so I think that they actually will be playing their starters (that line would have been 17 or so if NE hadn't lost to Miami and still had a chance at #1 seeding, but the drop is far less dramatic than this Indy/Denver game).
Peyton and Dungy's talk I suspect is just talk. It's not in anyone's interest for teams to outwardly admit that they're not giving 100% in a game when the Denver fans will be pumping a couple million bucks into their tickets tomorrow. On the other hand, it's not in Indy's interest to risk losing anyone vital to its team for the playoffs when they can't impact their position. Everyone knows this so there is the typical song and dance.
I'm sorry - I don't mean to throw cold water on Buffalo's chances. I think Buffalo very much deserves to get in at 10-6 with the heart they've shown down the stretch. I think though realistically they've gotten a very bad draw in the other two games that it needs to get in.
Same thing happened to the Pats in 2002 when they needed Green Bay to beat the Jets to get in at 4 and GB tanked very early on (and GB did however lose badly at home the next week for "lost edge" theorists). I will admit to laughing during that game when they showed the fireman leading the "P-A-T-S----PATS PATS PATS!" chant in the first quarter (NYJ needed the Pats to beat Miami at 1:00 to have their game mean something - I'm guessing that particular rooting interest never occurs again).
-
Indy has a great, great offensive line - maybe the best in football. It at the very least is a very nice fit for their offense. Saturday is a player. You're absolutely right that Peyton's hardly been touched all year, but the risk/reward for Dungy in this one is different than the previous 15 games.
-
I would guess he'll be getting the pro-Bowl max protect list of plays to work with in his short stint.
If some aggressive Denver safety comes careening into Peyton's legs during a meaningless game, Tony Dungy might get Lynched.
Buffalo would have been better off with a frisky team that's out of it in this one (KC, Houston, even Miami) than a team that has something to lose.
Best case scenario from here is Jake Plummer. Deep in his own territory. Early. Often. Historically, he has to be one of the worst first half QB's active in football.
-
Lost in Carolina's late season run has been the quiet one by New Orleans - two somewhat unlikely road victories at Dallas and Tampa have left them in position to perhaps make the playoffs with a win. They do own a head to head victory against the Rams. Under Brooks and Haslett, they have been a very streaky team for whatever reason.
-
It is actually very close between Pitt, NE and Philly when looking at the odds at most sports books. Most have these three teams somewhere between 5-2 and 4-1, and in different orders depending on where you look.
Obviously the above is for the Super Bowl, which isn't the same as the AFC.
Just saying Pitt and NE are a coin flip with the books right now. -
I think they're both great coaches. I believe their recent problems stem from trying to be GM's at the same time. I don't know if they could be great GM's while someone else coached, but I think the record is pretty clear they can't be successful while doing both jobs simultaneously.
I agree completely with Shanahan (but am not so sure about Holmgren). I think the coaching is still quite good, he has an above average ground game year in and year out almost despite his personnel, but for some reason they're not identifying talent like they used to. Still, even though they haven't won a playoff game since Elway retired, they've been in the playoff hunt most seasons. There's soemthing to be said for that in this league.
In my mind, Bill Walsh, Brett Favre and Ron Wolf made Holmgren though.
-
In my mind, the best experts are the ones who put their money where their mouth is. The point spreads in a lot of these games tell the story. I would expect that there are people that have info that Indy, Pittsburgh, SD, and Philly are laying down/playing backups/gameplanning simplistically because the lines are so outrageous compared to what one might expect in a normal week.
As for St. Louis, I still think the line should be higher than 3.5 based on their performance this year. That has to be good news for Buffalo fans - when a line is off kilter, it is off kilter for a reason. I'm still taking the NYJ, but I'd feel better if the line were 5 or 6.
-
-
Bulger is 18-2 at home. Martz is undefeated in the last month of the season at home. Pennington's arm is gimpy, John Abraham is out, and the Rams have every motivation in the world to play. I say they focus on shutting-down Martin and Jordan, force Pennington to beat them, and use a healthy dose of Jackson and throws to Bruce and Holt, and it's a Rams win.
The question was why the experts are high on the Jets. The fact that not once in ten tries this season has an NFC West team playing the Bills, Pats or Jets come within seven points of them (much less beat them) is my explanation. Pretty straightforward stuff.
This is a good example of "stats" that can be used to pursue either side of an argument. Ultimately the stat that is more relevant will be the determining factor. In this case, I'm guessing that the 2004 dominance by the AFC East is most relevant, and that Martz's record in December of 2000 is quite a ways down there on the list. I like the Jets a lot, but admittedly I have found ample reasons to bet against Martz on many occasions in the past five years.
On Sunday we'll know for sure.
-
AFC East is 12-2 against the NFC West this year, and has outscored them by more than two touchdowns on average in each game.
So far the Bills, Pats and Jets are 10-0 in these games.
Rams have two wins outside their division - home vs. TB and last week's home scrimmage.
-
Because they are the best teams, playing the worst survivors... though I don't think this influences the argument either direction.
CD I agree entirely with that - typically the better team wins the game, and what happened the Sunday before in terms of "losing one's edge" is of subminimal consequence.
-
I don't play pro football, so I don't really know how true this is, but at what point is this just making an excuse? I mean - whatever happened to "they were the better team" and "we didn't take advantage of our opportunities?" Peyton blaming 3 hours spent a week prior to his '99 playoff loss is very lame to me - they had all week to gameplan and prepare and get ready, and then they didn't execute. Case closed.
If this were really true - this lost edge thing - then why don't more teams lose when they play in week 2 of the playoffs after a bye? These teams still win at more than a 80% clip.
-
You are correct - the Seahawks are in, but can be seeded 4-6 at this point.
Soljc - despite my personal house of horrors last weekend, my advice is either to always avoid ridiculous lines like this or take the ridiculous side (which is Buffalo -9 in this case). Someone always has inside info on what Pittsburgh (same goes for Indy, NE, GB, Philly, Atlanta, and SD) is going to do in terms of gameplanning and who will end up playing.
Watch late line moves as well - the Indy/Denver line has been bouncing around all week, but the money will follow the info at the end.
I like Cincy early if they remain a small favorite at Philly.
-
I like that Winterhook Ale an awful lot, but Sam is a fine choice.
All and all, this is by far my favorite time of year for beer.
-
It is unfair and untrue to claim that Belichecks success solely has to do with Brady starting or not starting. He is a head coach who, like all head coaches, learns on the job and adapts. Head coaches who dont no longer have jobs.
I am not making that claim in any way, shape or form. Belichick is a very bright man who gets better at his job as he has gained more experience. He's a terrific coach and GM. However, you cannot deny that that is his record. He doesn't have a prior history of being able to plug just anyone in at QB and be successful. So actual events contradict your claim that "anyone" would be successful with this coaching staff - the coaching staff had a chance to coach three or four others QB's
before Brady came along, and none of them were more than modestly successful in the system.
-
I definitely was most impressed by Buffalo's wins in Seattle and Cincinnati during this run. They went from being a team that could not win on the road to laying the smack down on other teams on the road, and two decent ones at that. Road wins in the NFL just aren't that easy, so to me that really is a sign of a team playing its heart out.
It's unfortunate that there is no control for them on Sunday, but certainly the team deserves a chance to play one more game having won seven in a row if they defeat Pittsburgh. I wish all of you luck for a winning scenario.
-
The basic problem with your analysis is that you anoint JP as a victory with no evidence whatsoever that he is so. Some 1st round QB's succeed and others don't - where JP falls on that list is entirely unknown right now.
As far as condemning Brady, the evidence is quite to the contrary.
Belichick's head coaching record before Brady: 41-57 Reg. , 1-1 playoffs
Belichick's record with Brady (also Brady's record): 47-14 Reg. , 6-0 (5-0 if you will) playoffs
Belichick himself has said several times that there is nobody he'd rather have at the quarterback position than Tom Brady.
-
A lot of teams will pick up QB's at this time of year who they think have specific comparable attributes to QB's they are likely to face in the playoffs, or who might have some useful insights. Brown would know something about the Bills, and if Denver were to make it Brown can probably throw picks just like Jake Plummer would.
-
No problem - hope it works out for you.
Can't speak for the food and the decor since I have never been in there Bill, but at long as they have beer and the Bills it should be all right. I also don't think the game can be "blacked out." I think the local broadcast will be 49ers/Pats - standard across the region when they play despite the game being essentially meaningless.
-
The above place advertises having NFL Sunday Ticket (I have never been there).
There is also a place called "Seven Barrel Brewery" that might be worth calling - also in West Lebanon (Exit 20).
49ers Have Contacted Pete Carroll...
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
There are those of us in New England who don't think that would be the worst thing in the world. Crennel and Weis have been terrific, but it is uncertain how much longer they can hold back superstar assistant coach Eric Mangini. How he's kept the secondary functioning this year I have no idea. They've lost every cornerback on their opening day depth chart as well as their two rookie safeties for significant stretches this year. Mangini at 32 might be a bigger loss than Romeo at 57. Belichick talked him into staying last year (the Raiders were interested and ended up hiring Rob Ryan), but after the job Mangini has done this year he has earned a promotion to defensive coordinator, and I'm thinking he will get it. Frankly, the entire staff deserves promotions - they haven't exactly gotten what is normally expected for a two time Super Bowl winning staff.
As for Carroll, Bobby Grier's three consecutive abysmal drafts during his time here (yielding one player on the active roster - Kevin Faulk - while six from '93 to '96 remain) may make his performance look better in retrospect. He wasn't a good fit here for whatever reason, but he's sure taking names now. I think he should stay at USC as well, but the competitor in him surely is longing to prove that he can succeed at the NFL level given the opportunity.