Home Sports Talk

NFL - First Half Impressions

JHS5120JHS5120 Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭
The first half of the season is in the books. There have been a ton of surprises and a bunch of great story lines that can be talked about. Here are my first-half impressions.
    The Chip Kelly experiment is a failRomo can put up monster numbers (but struggles to win games).The Giants are only 2 games out of first with 8 games left in their season.The Chiefs are proving defense and good fundamentals win gamesBill Bellichek and Tom Brady can win with literally any surrounding playersMatt Stafford is awesome and only Calvin Johnson is awesomer.The Browns got a steal for Trent RichardsonGeno Smith is not a franchise quarterbackThe Jaguars will end their season without a win.
My eBay Store =)

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss

Comments



  • << <i>
      The Chip Kelly experiment is a failRomo can put up monster numbers (but struggles to win games).The Giants are only 2 games out of first with 8 games left in their season.The Chiefs are proving defense and good fundamentals win gamesBill Bellichek and Tom Brady can win with literally any surrounding playersMatt Stafford is awesome and only Calvin Johnson is awesomer.The Browns got a steal for Trent RichardsonGeno Smith is not a franchise quarterbackThe Jaguars will end their season without a win.
    >>



    Eagles high flying offense has 3 offensive points in last 2 games.
    Romo doesn't play defense.
    Stafford is nothing without Johnson. Megatron could make Tebow look good.
  • JHS5120JHS5120 Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Stafford is nothing without Johnson. Megatron could make Tebow look good. >>



    Calvin Johnson could make a sack of potatos look good. Stafford is awesome regardless image
    My eBay Store =)

    "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
  • jdip9jdip9 Posts: 1,895 ✭✭✭
    I'm not sure we can call Chip Kelly's offense a failure yet. When Matt Barkley is prominently involved, the offense looks terrible. In the previous 6 games in which Barkley did not make an appearance, they averaged almost 28 ppg, which would rank #6 in the NFL. Only the Chiefs held them under 20. Even with Barkley, they are still #5 in total offense in terms of YPG. With a healthy Vick or any other competent QB with even the slightest bit of mobility, I'd argue the Eagles would be a Top 3 offense.

    Agree with Sage about Romo/Stafford.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    It's far too early to call a system a failure.
    The Giants and Texans both contending for 'biggest disappointment'.
    Seahawks/Broncos super bowl would be amazing.
  • WTCGWTCG Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭
    It's still to early to call the Chip Kelly tenure a fail. It's even harder to win games when your only healthy option at QB is Matt Barkley.

    Despite their winless record so far I think the Jags will win a game this year. They show flashes of brilliance from time to time and so far they've played good teams. I'd say they're the better team of the witness teams.

    I agree the Texans are the biggest disappointment of the year. Most observers knew Matt Schaub was no elite QB but nobody thought he would be that awful. The Texans were literally three plays away from being 0-7 right now.
    Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup
    Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Most observers knew Matt Schaub was no elite QB but nobody thought he would be that awful. >>



    I can't speak about National observers but locals have known since the NE MNF game last year.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Most observers knew Matt Schaub was no elite QB but nobody thought he would be that awful. >>



    I can't speak about National observers but locals have known since the NE MNF game last year. >>



    Riiight.

    There's that patented stown 20-20 hindsight rearing it's ugly head again.

  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭
    Rather than rely on google, espn, and deadspin, read some local papers and maybe, just maybe, you'll get a clue for once.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Rather than rely on google, espn, and deadspin, read some local papers and maybe, just maybe, you'll get a clue for once. >>



    Yeah those local papers are full of keen, objective insight and top notch jounalism, and its always a good idea to get your data from ONE source as opposed to a variety. Good lord this is like shooting fish in a barrel!
  • DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭
    >>>The Chip Kelly experiment is a fail
    Romo can put up monster numbers (but struggles to win games).
    The Giants are only 2 games out of first with 8 games left in their season.
    The Chiefs are proving defense and good fundamentals win games
    Bill Bellichek and Tom Brady can win with literally any surrounding players
    Matt Stafford is awesome and only Calvin Johnson is awesomer.
    The Browns got a steal for Trent Richardson
    Geno Smith is not a franchise quarterback
    The Jaguars will end their season without a win.<<<

    Good to see that "one more" person see's Romo for what he is!

    He more than struggles......he sucks!
  • orioles93orioles93 Posts: 3,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You could also add in there,

    that RG3 was obviously not fully healthy to start the season like he said he was, and that the Redskins cant win a game unless he is completely healthy.
    What I Collect:

    PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)


    PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)


    PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,171 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vikings have been a huge disappointment as well. Made the playoffs last year and had THREE first round draft picks this year and they are a mess!
    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set


  • << <i>Vikings have been a huge disappointment as well. Made the playoffs last year and had THREE first round draft picks this year and they are a mess! >>



    I forgot where I saw it, but before the season I read an article about teams from last year that won a lot of close games and teams that lost a lot of close games that could have swung either way and their fans shouldn't expect the same results this year. The 3 I remember that they said would suck this year and probably miss the playoffs were the Vikings, Giants and Colts. Pretty close so far. Only one I remember that they expected to improve was Carolina who has looked much better last 3 games.
  • WhiteTornadoWhiteTornado Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭


    << <i>You could also add in there,

    that RG3 was obviously not fully healthy to start the season like he said he was, and that the Redskins cant win a game unless he is completely healthy. >>



    +1 on that

    Was it desperation or even wishful thinking on the part of Mike & Kyle Shanahan, playing RG3 right off the bat? I'm surprised their defense has looked so awful; I thought that part of the team was supposed to be decent.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    I'll revise my earlier point about the giants and texans contending for biggest disappointment. Texans taking this title in a runaway.
  • jeffcbayjeffcbay Posts: 8,948 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Bill Bellichek and Tom Brady can win with literally any surrounding players >>



    EDIT TO ADD: Tom Brady can also single-handedly make your fantasy football team lose on a weekly basis. Horrible...
  • galaxy27galaxy27 Posts: 7,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I don't have any figures to back this up, but it sure seems like catastrophic injuries are more prevalent than ever before. And that's with all of the added "safety measures" that are rendering NFL games virtually unwatchable at times. You have to be awfully deft to be a d-back in the NFL nowadays. Soon the combine is going to consist not only of the 40, bench, vertical, broad, 3 cone, and shuttle................but also the ability to anticipate every inch of movement from a receiver while simultaneously running full steam toward each other and adjusting one's body in a nanosecond (if necessary) to avoid catching a modicum of said receiver's helmet.

    I don't know what the answer to all of this is, but bigger, stronger and faster isn't going anywhere. What I do know, however, is that nothing pisses me off more and compels me to change the channel faster than watching a safety lay out a receiver legally and being penalized for doing so.

    Perhaps the National Tewbeleaux League is on the horizon.
  • Dave99BDave99B Posts: 8,332 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Seattle needs O-linemen. Experience not required.

    Send resumes to:

    Seattle Seahawks
    12 Seahawks Way
    Renton, WA 98056
    Always looking for original, better date VF20-VF35 Barber quarters and halves, and a quality beer.
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Denver is scoring in droves and unless manning gets injured it will continue to do so. It's defense has been allowing points in droves so far, but may tighten up in the second half. If so Denver may go deep into the playoffs.

    Kansas City is playing great defense and is probably the surprise story of the season thus far.
  • CNoteCNote Posts: 2,070


    << <i>Seattle needs O-linemen. Experience not required.

    Send resumes to:

    Seattle Seahawks
    12 Seahawks Way
    Renton, WA 98056 >>



    Really? I guess the TWO MEN still out won't be good enough when they return....right?

    Gah. Between the garbage of bandwagon fans ( not YOU, please understand) I hear on 710ESPN when I get a rare chance to listen, and all the nonsense on different boards, it's almost as if a) people forget that a pro bowler on the left and a VERY good tackle on the right are still out, and b) "fans" think this is the 2005 offensive line.

    Geezus, sorry for venting, but COME ON. If you are a Seattle fan, you must understand the predicament this team is in and is STILL SEVEN AND FREAKIN' ONE. We as fans have been blessed, and no, Rice being out for the year isn't going to be a big deal.
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I don't know what the answer to all of this is, but bigger, stronger and faster isn't going anywhere. What I do know, however, is that nothing pisses me off more and compels me to change the channel faster than watching a safety lay out a receiver legally and being penalized for doing so. >>



    Remember when fans looked down on kickers that flopped?

    What use to be considered incidental contact is now a personal foul and a 15-yard penalty:

    image

    It has begun and will only get worse from here on out. Just say no to Sarcastaball.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    Really? You're calling that incidental contact? An obvious attempt by Vickerson to run into the QB? He made to attempt to slow up even though the ball was clearly gone, and then to suggest it a flop? I would LOVE for you or any other wannabe tough guys whining about the 'wussification' of the sport take a blind side shot like that, completely unaware it's coming, and with the ball gone not expect it, and then not go crying to your mommy.

    There was NO justification for this hit, it was NOT incidental contact - it was a blatant cheap shot and well deserved of that 15 yard penalty. Don't sit there and suggest this play has any place in any sport, let alone football.
  • gosteelersgosteelers Posts: 2,668 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I don't have any figures to back this up, but it sure seems like catastrophic injuries are more prevalent than ever before. And that's with all of the added "safety measures" that are rendering NFL games virtually unwatchable at times. You have to be awfully deft to be a d-back in the NFL nowadays. Soon the combine is going to consist not only of the 40, bench, vertical, broad, 3 cone, and shuttle................but also the ability to anticipate every inch of movement from a receiver while simultaneously running full steam toward each other and adjusting one's body in a nanosecond (if necessary) to avoid catching a modicum of said receiver's helmet.

    I don't know what the answer to all of this is, but bigger, stronger and faster isn't going anywhere. What I do know, however, is that nothing pisses me off more and compels me to change the channel faster than watching a safety lay out a receiver legally and being penalized for doing so.

    Perhaps the National Tewbeleaux League is on the horizon. >>



    This was a great response. The NFL has been unwatchable for me for about 2-3 years now. Many factors go into this, but, primarily it's the ridiculous pass interference and perceived head shot penalties...also, many games taking 3.5 hours or more due to the 120 combined pass attempts doesn't help. Very boring sport for me these days...it sucks, I used to really enjoy the NFL.
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭
    Wouldn't say it sucks, at least not yet, but I definitely don't have the same enthusiasm. It simply isn't the same sport when I last played it 20 years ago.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Wouldn't say it sucks, at least not yet, but I definitely don't have the same enthusiasm. It simply isn't the same sport when I last played it 20 years ago. >>



    The families of Junior Seau, Dave Duerson, and countless others are thankful it's not the same game.
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,479 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have no problem with rule changes to protect players, especially quarterbacks, as players today are much bigger and much faster than they were twenty years ago and by extension collisions are that much more violent. The sport imo is as poipular as ever and is even more so now than it was when I was a kid, due in part to marketing, but also to fantasy football and gambling, among other factors. Don't know if any of you guys have heard about what's happening to Jim McMahon as a result of concussions he sustained during his plaing career--his wife has to remind him 15 minutes after meeting someone what that person's name is, or what he said, as he is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's disease. Really sad story.


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • CNoteCNote Posts: 2,070
    Wait, something thinks that Denver DE ramming his belly into Luck was incidental contact? Not exactly roughing the passer, but in no way was that NOT intentional. He changes his path to knock him down. Anyways...
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Wait, something thinks that Denver DE ramming his belly into Luck was incidental contact? Not exactly roughing the passer, but in no way was that NOT intentional. He changes his path to knock him down. Anyways... >>



    This is getting in the way of stown's ill-conceived effort to try to make out today's football out to be somehow less 'manly' than it was back in the day. This play was definitely intentional, and anyone suggesting it wasn't is being willingly blind to facts.
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Wait, something thinks that Denver DE ramming his belly into Luck was incidental contact? Not exactly roughing the passer, but in no way was that NOT intentional. He changes his path to knock him down. Anyways... >>



    That's not what I said, cnote.

    Luck flopped and maybe 5, definitely 10, years ago would have been considered incidental contact. Just like with kickers, quarterbacks are now taught to oversell any type of contact with hopes to get a personal foul, comparable to soccer. If the defender lead with his head or struck Luck's head, then yes, totally justified 15-yard penalty for roughing the passer.

    But ramming his belly into Luck? Think about that for a sec... Too much pearl clutching by keyboard warriors in a violent sport.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I have no problem with rule changes to protect players, especially quarterbacks, as players today are much bigger and much faster than they were twenty years ago and by extension collisions are that much more violent. The sport imo is as poipular as ever and is even more so now than it was when I was a kid, due in part to marketing, but also to fantasy football and gambling, among other factors. Don't know if any of you guys have heard about what's happening to Jim McMahon as a result of concussions he sustained during his plaing career--his wife has to remind him 15 minutes after meeting someone what that person's name is, or what he said, as he is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's disease. Really sad story. >>



    It is a sad story and is not a laughing matter. We (as in everyone from fans to NFL executives) know more about long term damage brain damage due to concussions today than we did 30 years ago. While rules can be imposed to make the game safer, it will never be safe. The play that Finley got injured was a clean hit, yet his career may be in jeopardy due to spinal bruising. No rule change or added protection would have prevented it.

    It's an extremely violent sport and the players are well aware of the inherent risks. They take said risks for the opportunity of a huge payday (ie risk versus reward). I got blindsided, which ruined my knee, but I knew that was a possibility every time I put on the pads. I cherished those years and I'm still good friends with many of my teammates from 20+ years ago. It's a bond that I cannot eloquently put into words but even in hindsight, I'd do again without even thinking twice. And that was without getting one penny.

    Long story short, if people are truly *that* concerned with player safety, then they should be a vocal advocate to completely ban the sport. Instead, they pick and choose what they believe to be important for "safety" to feel warm and fuzzy inside, even though they've never put on pads, and then sit back and enjoy the entertainment.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • gosteelersgosteelers Posts: 2,668 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I have no problem with rule changes to protect players, especially quarterbacks, as players today are much bigger and much faster than they were twenty years ago and by extension collisions are that much more violent. The sport imo is as poipular as ever and is even more so now than it was when I was a kid, due in part to marketing, but also to fantasy football and gambling, among other factors. Don't know if any of you guys have heard about what's happening to Jim McMahon as a result of concussions he sustained during his plaing career--his wife has to remind him 15 minutes after meeting someone what that person's name is, or what he said, as he is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's disease. Really sad story. >>



    Hi Tim,
    In regard to the popularity right now, you are correct, the NFL is still on the top of the mainstream sports heap (in the US), but I have to think that will slowly change over the course of the next 10-15 years. Of course, that is just my opinion. Popularity in sports is cyclical, I believe. In the early to mid-80s, the NFL was a dog compared to the NBA and MLB. As a parent with young kids and one that plays football, I can definitely see a drop off in registrations on a year by year basis. This is over the last five years and is obviously a minuscule sample size, but I have to think that in many areas across the U.S., interest and registrations are down from a decade ago.
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭
    I obviously agree with gosteelers. Growing up, we played dodgeball and tackle-the-man-with-the-football almost daily during PE. Today, both activities are banned at schools, youth camps, etc. My godson is in the 1st grade and it's the first time he's experienced winning and losing playing sports. The previous two years were essentially timed innings and interchangeable teams.

    Kids don't have a choice because it's simply not allowed, which makes wanting to participate less likely.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,479 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would agree that fewer kids are playing football today but imo the primary factors for the popularity of pro football today (gambling and fantasy football) have litlle to do with that. If fewer kids are playing football, we should ultimately see a dropoff in the skill level of pro football but that certainly has not been the case thus far.


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    Too many football 'fans' are fans of the sport like the same NASCAR 'fans' are fans of the crashes. Bemoaning the removal of cheap shots on a QB as somehow ruining the integrity of the game simply reinforces this.

    Look, everyone agrees its a violent sport. Taking steps to get rid of headshots, especially in light of how quick and strong these players have become, is only trying to manage that risk. Sitting there and suggesting that its somehow less 'manly' or 'wussified' because guys aren't allowed to go head hunting or spear players is moronic, ignorant, and is proof you're not a fan of the game but a fan of the violence.
  • galaxy27galaxy27 Posts: 7,113 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Less than a week ago I caught a discussion on the radio about an NFL player who was confronted with the exact scenario I presented in my previous post. I wish I could provide a name, but I caught the tail end of what was being discussed and missed it. The bigger point is what happened to him when he made a conscious effort to try and avoid any semblance of helmet-to-helmet contact. Anyone care to take a guess?

    He injured himself. He tilted his head slightly, hit the receiver at an awkward angle and severely pinched a nerve in his neck.

    This is an inherently barbaric sport. Absolutely nothing is going to come remotely close to mitigating that. Once again, I will postulate that there are more injuries now than ever before. If someone would like to provide the calculus and prove me wrong, by all means do so. I personally contend that the long-term effect of these added "safety measures" will be the gradual dilution of the product itself; the term defenseless will very soon apply to the guys on the other side of the ball. This has become a passing league in part because of the restrictions placed on the defense, and until the NFL sets aside its own self-interests (i.e. saving its financial backside from lawsuits that are unavoidable), the game is ultimately going to become a shell of its former self.

    In my opinion, if a player intentionally leads with the crown of his helmet, he should definitely be flagged. But if he makes a clean play on the football that ultimately results in incidental helmet-to-helmet contact, you must let that go. If you don't, the end result is not only going to be more 400-yard days than ever before, but a historical number of ACLs being blown out due to the mid-to-lower half of bodies being targeted.



  • CNoteCNote Posts: 2,070


    << <i>

    << <i>Wait, something thinks that Denver DE ramming his belly into Luck was incidental contact? Not exactly roughing the passer, but in no way was that NOT intentional. He changes his path to knock him down. Anyways... >>



    That's not what I said, cnote.

    Luck flopped and maybe 5, definitely 10, years ago would have been considered incidental contact. Just like with kickers, quarterbacks are now taught to oversell any type of contact with hopes to get a personal foul, comparable to soccer. If the defender lead with his head or struck Luck's head, then yes, totally justified 15-yard penalty for roughing the passer.

    But ramming his belly into Luck? Think about that for a sec... Too much pearl clutching by keyboard warriors in a violent sport. >>



    I got you on the flopping part- Luck's arms flail around like he's an ice skater that broke a nail.

    But, I DO stand by my, albeit goofy sounding, comment of ramming of the belly (heh) into Luck.
  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>But, I DO stand by my, albeit goofy sounding, comment of ramming of the belly (heh) into Luck. >>



    I should have elaborated (blame the lack of coffee) and said that wouldn't have been a penalty 10 years ago. Today, it's considered no different than any other personal foul, like clipping or a facemask. Back then, the ref would have laughed at his poor acting job.

    And as side note for the record, no one has even remotely implied malicious hits to the helmet should be tolerated. Zero, not one, nobody, period.
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Sign In or Register to comment.