RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread

RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

KatyLied -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 1:31:57 PM)
quote: But I will get over it, and when I do..................................... Kisses......[:D]

happypervert -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 2:52:14 PM)
Kornheiser and Wilbon just spent 5 minutes talking to an Indy sportswriter. That guy said that a big problem is the Colts' D-line is small and just gets shoved around -- 2 DEs at about 240 and one DT at 275. Sounds funny to me -- there are plenty of HS seniors at those positions that are bigger than that!

Level -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 3:45:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot Hmmmph !! I am crushed by the unkind words expressed here by two of my football buddies. I have no quick witted retort, no snappy comeback. But I will get over it, and when I do..................................... mbmbn *hugs my friend and grins*

Level -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 3:55:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happypervert Kornheiser and Wilbon just spent 5 minutes talking to an Indy sportswriter. That guy said that a big problem is the Colts' D-line is small and just gets shoved around -- 2 DEs at about 240 and one DT at 275. Sounds funny to me -- there are plenty of HS seniors at those positions that are bigger than that! There's some truth there, happy. The Colts D (like the Bears, Bucs and Bengals) is a 4-3, one-gap system. The idea is to have lightning-quick linemen that attack from the snap. Shoot the gaps, and either meet the running back coming out, or hit the QB if it's a pass. The Colts have good DEs that run like hell (though they've slumped badly this year), but they've never had top-notch DTs (like the Bears). Add in very small LBs, and you have a defense susceptible to being over-powered. Dungy tried to address this by bringing in Corey Simon, who's been injury plagued, like cloudboy said, and Booger McFarland, who's over the hill, really, but he played for Dungy, so.... The team that ripped them, the Jags, have massive (and damn good) DTs in John Henderson and Marcus Stroud; put one or both of them in Indy, and watch things change pronto.

Level -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 3:59:39 PM)
Former Dallas Cowboys running back Ron Springs is awaiting a kidney transplant, and it appears he has found a match in ex-teammate Everson Walls, according to a report in The Washington Post. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6265272?FSO1&ATT=HMA

maybemaybenot -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 7:48:14 PM)
Kisses and hugs to Level and Katy. I'm all better now. [:D] Nice story, Level. Isn't it freaky how many times there are strange matches with transplants ? I remember a story a few years back about an older man who started dating and married< i think> a woman, later in life and it turned out he needed a kidney a few years later and she was compatable. Here's wishing them both a speedy recovery. As for the Colts Defense, letting Edge go was suppose to loosen up some of their cap money to improve the defense. Yet they spent huge cash on Adam V. My personal opinion is Polian calls the final shots and Dungy would draft or sign better FA on defence. Until they have a solid defence they will not go to the big dance. I can't remember the exact stat, but only one team ever went to a SB and won on strong offense/poor defence. Offense sells tickets, defense wins championships. mbmbn

cloudboy -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 9:29:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster If this were the first year that the Colts' defense was their Achilles heel, I'd be more sympathetic to the injury plea--but it's not. Their defense has ALWAYS been their Achilles heel. There's a certain pattern, year-in and year-out: the offense sparkles, and the defense sucks. The coach was brought in to address that, and he hasn't done it. The offense sparkled before he got there, remember? I thought their defense was pretty damn good last year, and losing the AFC championship game culimated in a very good season for them. The salary cap dicates a team choose its poison. The question is, has Marvin Lewis pulled CIN's defense together? For the last four games, the Bengals have been pretty damn good, and they have an excellent plus side turnover ratio going.

Lordandmaster -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/12/2006 10:11:27 PM)
Well, let's look into that. In 2005, the Colts allowed 4913 total yards, 11th-best in the NFL. But there's more to the story. Their rush defense was ranked 16th, at 1762 total yards. But, again, it wasn't really as good as it looks, because teams didn't often rush against them (they couldn't, because they were usually trailing). In terms of yards-per-carry, they were 28th, at 4.4. That's not good, but not as bad as their number this year. Their pass defense: 15th, 3151 total yards. As usual, the opposing passers' rating is more useful as an indicator, and there the Colts ranked 23rd, at 83.0. Not good. The main reason is that they allowed a monstrous 67.4 completion percentage. That's ridiculously bad, easily the worst in the league. They had a good pass rush though: 46 sacks, tied for 5th. Finally, total takeaways: 30, somewhere around 10th in the league. (For some reason, ESPN doesn't do total NFL rankings for giveaways and takeaways, only conference rankings.) So what do you have? A defense with a good pash rush, good number of takeaways, bad rush defense, bad pass defense. Final grade: in the C range. Certainly not "pretty damn good." In fact, if they HAD a pretty damn good defense, they would have won the Super Bowl. But they didn't--and they didn't. quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy I thought their defense was pretty damn good last year, and losing the AFC championship game culimated in a very good season for them.

LeMis -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 1:02:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: LeMis quote: ORIGINAL: Level I'm taking tomorrow off to try to finish my Christmas shopping. Don't forget my present! [:)] Yes, I'm going to pick up a paddle. [8D] [:'(]

LeMis -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 1:04:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happypervert quote: If he [Dungy] hasn't upgraded his defense by then, they're never going to win anything. uh huh. I think he did upgrade the defense from being pathetic to being mediocre, but everyone expected him to get it up where he had Tampa Bay. That makes me suspect that he got credit for that defense when it was Monte Kiffen who REALLY made it. It is still a surprise to me that Indy's defense hasn't gotten better, and if it hasn't happened by now I don't think it will. Exactly, it was Monte who made it!

cloudboy -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 10:23:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Well, let's look into that. In 2005, the Colts allowed 4913 total yards, 11th-best in the NFL. So what do you have? A defense with a good pash rush, good number of takeaways, bad rush defense, bad pass defense. Final grade: in the C range. Certainly not "pretty damn good." In fact, if they HAD a pretty damn good defense, they would have won the Super Bowl. But they didn't--and they didn't. Part of the reason the Colts 2005 defense looks so bad or mediocre on paper is that the offense is so high powered other teams are forced to play catch-up. Also, with a big lead, defenses go soft allowing the other team to amass yardarge and points which won't affect the outcome of the game. Its unrealistic to expect the Colts to field their current offense and then a defense that might in some way resemble that of the Super Bowl Champion Tampa Bay Bucs or Baltimore Ravens in terms of statistical brilliance or ranking. What the Colts 2005 defense aspired to do last year was bend and not break. As you can see, the Colt defense was #2 in points allowed, allowing just 15.4 points a game. In sum, your "mediocre" classification of the 2005 Colts defense is misplaced. What hurt the 2005 Colts Super Bowl Run was their success in the regular season and the associated distractions of maybe going 16-0. Dungy's team also lost its edge going into the playoffs having a "meaningless" string of the regular season games at the end. On top of that was the suicide of Dungy's son. Pitt then came in and stole the AFC Championship with a brilliantly executed game plan. I think the Colts would have been better served playing for the 16-0 record while throwing injury caution to the wind. Once you take your foot off the pedal, you can't always put it back down.

KatyLied -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 10:51:29 AM)
quote: Pitt then came in and stole the AFC Championship with a brilliantly executed game plan. Well sort of, I guess. So many things went wrong with that game, on both sides. I consider that win a gift to the Steelers.

Lordandmaster -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 11:16:44 AM)
You misunderstood the whole point of what I said. If what you're saying were really the case--in other words, if their defense was basically good but the numbers were skewed because other teams had to play catch-up all the time--then they would have allowed lots of YARDAGE, but at a high yards-per-play cost to their opponents. In fact, as I emphasized, they allowed relatively little yardage, but their opponents accumulated that yardage very efficiently. Obviously that was because their opponents didn't have as many plays from scrimmage as they did (because Indy's offense hogged the ball): Indy's plays from scrimmage: pass attempts, 516; sacks, 20, rushes, 465. Total: 1001. Opponents' plays from scrimmage: pass attempts, 509; sacks, 46; rushes, 398. Total: 953. Over the course of the 16-game season, the Colts accumulated nearly an entire game's worth of extra plays compared to their opponents! What does this mean? If the Colts' offense hadn't been so spectacular in 2005, their defense would have given up a ton of yards. The only reason why they didn't was that their offense didn't allow the other teams' offenses on the field. Measured by yardage allowed, the Colts' defense didn't appear so bad in 2005; but measured by the cost that their opponents incurred in gaining those yards, the Colts' defense was in the bottom third of the league. quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Part of the reason the Colts 2005 defense looks so bad or mediocre on paper is that the offense is so high powered other teams are forced to play catch-up. Also, with a big lead, defenses go soft allowing the other team to amass yardarge and points which won't affect the outcome of the game.

cloudboy -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 1:46:52 PM)
quote: If the Colts' offense hadn't been so spectacular in 2005, their defense would have given up a ton of yards. The only reason why they didn't was that their offense didn't allow the other teams' offenses on the field. Measured by yardage allowed, the Colts' defense didn't appear so bad in 2005; but measured by the cost that their opponents incurred in gaining those yards, the Colts' defense was in the bottom third of the league. The Colts time of possession statistics don't really support your claim. As you can see, the Colts Offense had the ball about 44 seconds more a game than their opponents. That translates into about a whopping 12 minutes more TOS for the season, which ain't helping or hurting the defense that much at all. Fifteen other teams actually had better TOS stats than the Colts. The reason the Colts ran so many more plays than their opponents was their liberal use of the no huddle offense. Still, the stat of only allowing 15.4 points a game is a very good measure of how good a defense is, and in the 2005 season the Colts were second only to Chicago. The Colts were were better than: Pitt, DEN, CAR, JAX, SEA, TB, WASH, and Balto. The 2005 Colts defense did not cost that team its Super Bowl run. Now injuries have the 2006 unit behind the 8-ball.

LaTigresse -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 2:03:16 PM)
All I have to say is GO BEARS!!![:D]

caitlyn -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 2:10:05 PM)
Where are they going? [;)]

cloudboy -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 2:38:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied Well sort of, I guess. So many things went wrong with that game, on both sides. I consider that win a gift to the Steelers. The Steelers won because Cowher abandoned being conservative and game planned to take the lead right away. Roethlisberger was hot and the Steelers went up 14-0 in the first half and then 21-3 in the third quarter. He had the Colts playing from behind when they had already lost their edge from resting out the final regular season schedule. It was a brilliant knockout blow strategy to beat a decisively favored team on their home field. Correction: The Colts lost in the first round of the playoffs, not the AFC Championship game as I misstated earlier.

KatyLied -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 2:57:07 PM)
quote: All I have to say is GO BEARS!!! I will never get over this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbTUUmH2gqQ It still makes me laugh.

Lordandmaster -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 3:20:02 PM)
Time of possession is a much less useful statistic, for calculating the efficiency of an offense or defense, than plays from scrimmage. There are many factors that go into time of possession, and they don't translate into how well a defense stops plays. Yards allowed per play tells you how well a defense stops plays. Points allowed is not a direct measure of a defense, either, but it doesn't sound like you're going to be convinced of any view other than that the 2005 Colts had a great defense. quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy The Colts time of possession statistics don't really support your claim. As you can see, the Colts Offense had the ball about 44 seconds more a game than their opponents. That translates into about a whopping 12 minutes more TOS for the season, which ain't helping or hurting the defense that much at all. Fifteen other teams actually had better TOS stats than the Colts. The reason the Colts ran so many more plays than their opponents was their liberal use of the no huddle offense.

Level -> RE: NFL Sob (or Brag) Thread (12/13/2006 4:10:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied quote: All I have to say is GO BEARS!!! I will never get over this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbTUUmH2gqQ It still makes me laugh. They are what we thought they are, Katy!! They are!!!! [sm=ugh.gif]

Page: << < prev 24 25 [26] 27 28 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625