Re: The Official NFL Season Thread

by **Buscemi** Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:18 am

The Cowboys will not be a Super Bowl caliber team until they fire Phillips and get rid of Romo. Phillips is a bad coach heading a good team while Romo is a glorified ten-year-old boy who gets distracted too easily. Also, Romo isn't a born leader.

by W Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:00 am

Buscemi wrote:The Cowboys will not be a Super Bowl caliber team until they fire Phillips and get rid of Romo. Phillips is a bad coach heading a good team while Romo is a glorified ten-year-old boy who gets distracted too easily. Also, Romo isn't a born leader.

I don't really think that Romo is the problem. This team just doesn't really have "it". The Giants had a dominant defense plus a good all around offense, the Cardinals had a dominant offense, the Bears had a dominant defense plus a ground game, the Seahawks had a pretty good defense plus NFL MVP Shaun Alexander, the Eagles had a dominant defense and McNabb, the Panthers had a great D plus Steve Smith, the Bucs had a great defense...

See where I'm going? The Cowboys have a dominant... stadium? Romo isn't the problem, they have many. They don't have a great offensive weapon or a great defense. If they had an outstanding defense, Romo could take them to the promised land. If Romo were one of the two or three best QBs in the league or they had a Peterson/LT type running back, they could carry the Cowboys to the Super Bowl. Now if he stepped up and became an all-time GREAT QB (out of all of those listed, only Warner and McNabb apply), they'd have a shot. But I wouldn't put it all on him.

by transformers2 Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:43 pm

W 100% agree about the Cowboys.

by **geezer9687** Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:25 pm

Yeah there is no way the Cowboys are a super Bowl team this season. I also agree that Romo isn't the problem. They do have a pretty dominant ground game, but their defense is proving to be average. Wade Phillips is a horrible coach, as you say Boush, and I doubt very much he will be there next season. With McNabb getting hurt and now Westbrook re-aggravating his ankle injury, this division is becoming more and more wide open, so the Cowboys could still steal it, but don't expect them to do anything in the playoffs if they do make it. The Saints, Packers and Falcons (along with a healthy Eagles team) are the class of the NFC. We still don't know about the Vikings because they played two horrible teams. I can't wait til they play someone who can actually defend.

by W Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:18 am

It's been two games through the season and a 12-4 team that won the Super Bowl two years ago is 2-0 in the same division as the Eagles and Cowboys. They have also made the playoffs the past five or six years.

I do believe that the Giants deserve some props and that the division isn't "wide open" until they falter...

I would say that at this point in time, most of the teams you mentioned have question marks.

The Saints could go 13-3 and not really be the "class of the NFC" because they have an extremely weak schedule and, at this point, no defense. So far they have played the Lions at home and they gave up a ton of yards to a first time starting QB. If the D steps up, I'll agree.

The Packers got beat by the Bungles. Any team can have a bad game, but considering who they lost to, let's wait and see how they play in the next few weeks before putting them in the pantheon.

The Falcons seem solid again this year. I think they make the 'ship if Burner Turner gets moving... Or maybe even if he does.

The Cowboys got beat by the division leader. Let's wait on judgement for them as well.

Right now, my pantheon of top teams in the NFC are only the Falcons and the Giants. Other teams that can make it in the upcoming weeks are the Cowboys, Packers, Vikings, Saints, and Eagles.

by **geezer9687** Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:51 am

Did you watch the Giants/Cowboys game? What was overly impressive about the way the Giants played? I don't even think the Cowboys are very good and they had to get extremely lucky to sneak out a last second victory.

by W Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:38 pm

Your whole argument is that they didn't win impressively against a decent team and you have a team that lost one of its games to the Bengals as in your upper tier?

I would say as two years removed from a Super Bowl win that tied for the best record in the conference last year AND is 2-0 this year beating 2 division opponents already in the toughest division in the conference if not the whole NFL they probably deserve a mention. Until they lose a game, how aren't they one of the top couple of teams in the conference? They've proven more than any other NFC team sans the Falcons, so they're my top two teams at the moment.

by **geezer9687** Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:29 pm

My whole argument is that I watch games, see how teams play, how they win and how they lose. I don't worry about how well a team did last year or the year before. This is a new season, different personnel, young players get more mature, older players age to the point of uselessness. The Giants beat a bad Redskins team and struggled to do so, and they beat a mediocre Cowboys team on a last second field goal, with the only reason they were even in the game was because of a couple fluke turnovers and a miracle catch. If they play like they did against the Cowboys for much longer, this team is not going to get all those lucky bounces and they are going to start losing a lot of games, fast. Its also the third toughest division in the conference in my opinion, especially with McNabb out.

by W Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:52 pm

Yeah, we should tell the Giants that a miracle catch can NEVER win you a Super Bowl!

Also, we should tell the Colt, Pats, and Steelers that even though they win consistently every year with the same group of players... that the last five years can be no prediction on how well you're going to do.

The fact is that they're 2-0 with both wins in divisional play.

by transformers2 Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:21 am

The NFL is a shitshow so far this year I mean there is no real domaint team should be intresting year for sure.

by **Buscemi** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:04 am

And all hell breaks loose. The Lions actually win a game.

by A_Roode Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:16 pm

Loved that win by the Vikings! Same situation last year they wouldn't have had a prayer.

by IPKI$$ Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:35 pm

Fuck Brett Favre...but damn was that a nice fucking play.

by transformers2 Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:55 pm

IPKI$$ wrote:Fuck Brett Favre...but damn was that a nice fucking play.

100% agree hate Farve so much but it was an absolutely fantastic play. Also happy to see my Bears pull out another victory. Lastly how bout those Colts fucking up the Cardinals?

by IPKI$$ Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:20 pm

I still don't see why everyone thought Arizona would win.

by Donte77 Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:29 pm

Buscemi wrote:And all hell breaks loose. The Lions actually win a game.

I think the only thing worse than being 0-19 is being the team that loses to the 0-19 team. LOL

by **geezer9687** Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:57 pm

I picked the Lions to win that game. They aren't even one of the 5 worst teams in the league anymore. That offense can actually move the ball. The Redskins are definitely worse.

by W Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:01 pm

IPKI$$ wrote:I still don't see why everyone thought Arizona would win.

This is basically the gist of why the people were saying Indy was going to lose (I thought they were going to win): Indy's defense had been on the field so long in the game against Miami that they were bound to be tired and it was a 6 day week since they had the Monday game and they would be tired. There was also something about playing in back to back prime time games (Monday Night Football, then Sunday Night Football).

I basically thought that A) a tired Indy D is better than a fresh Arizona D. B) Peyton Manning is fresh. C) At its best, Arizona's offense is as good as Indy's best, but if neither are clicking on all cylinders, Indy's O is better.

by **geezer9687** Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:22 pm

Which is why I made money on that game Smile

by Donte77 Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:37 pm

Not quite thread related (NCAA football) but I bet on games with our UPS driver. At the beginning of the season he wanted to put 20 bucks on EVERY Arkansas game. He decided against it and now I am wishing he had. Smile

I would love to bet against a defense that gives up 87 points in two games. Better yet was week 2 stats. The Arkansas QB breaks 2 school records in throwing yards and throwing TDs (408 and 5 respectively) and they still lose?!?! Doesn't matter if your offense can score 40+ points if your opponent scores 50 against your sieve, err, I mean defense.

by W Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:08 pm

Rush Limbaugh may own part of the Rams and co-operate them.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4535583

At least we know that the quarterback will be a white guy since he thinks none of them are overrated. Smile

by **Buscemi** Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:15 pm

Just when you thought the Rams ownership couldn't get any worse.

It has been said that the only saving grace of the team would be if Stan Kroneke bought out Rosenbloom's portion of the team and assumed full ownership. However, he would have to sell the Nuggets and Avs for that to happen.

by Donte77 Wed Oct 07, 2009 2:44 am

I thought I could avoid that fat disgusting sack of shit by not listening to his elitist propaganda on his shitty ass "news" talk show. Now I may have to see him and hear his name while watching football. Another reason to but him on the short list of people I jettison into space when I assume control of the world. Fat fucking asshole. Also another reason to hate St. Louis.

by W Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:05 am

New NFL team logos:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=snibbe1/091006&sportCat=nfl

by **Buscemi** Thu Oct 08, 2009 4:30 am

My full opinion on Limbaugh possibly buying the Rams:

It won't happen. The NFL does not want another PR nightmare with him after his much-malinged run at ESPN. Also, he would obviously use the team to get his politics across and the NFL doesn't want that either. Another problem: Dave Checketts. Though I admire what he has done with the Blues (in fact, why was the Rams losing another game a bigger story than the Blues beating the Red Wings in back-to-back games this weekend?), he strikes me as the type who buys a toy but abandons it when he gets a bigger toy. If he gets involved with the Rams, he'll stop putting money into the Blues. I'd rather have him helping a hockey team continue to improve rather than taking orders from a fat sack of shit on a loser.

My suggestion: either change the rules to let Kroenke buy the remaining 60% of the team or simply just move to Los Angeles. At this point, no one in St. Louis cares about the Rams. Even the people who pretend to care don't.

by Sponsored content