Sports & Recreation

NFL Thread

  • Last Updated:
  • Mar 26th, 2024 12:45 pm
Tags:
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 4, 2006
2332 posts
514 upvotes
GVR
nineiron wrote: Here's Wilson's numbers from last year's super bowl:

He completed 18 of 25 passes for 206 yards and two touchdowns. He rushed three times for 26 yards.

these numbers would have landed a super bowl winning QB the MVP award every single time - unless he's black. sorry, i mean non-white.
WTF does race have to do with this?
Malcom Smith deserved it, he was one of the standout players of the game. They could have easily given it to a number of other defensive players, Harvin, or Wilson. Given that the Seattle defense dominated the game, it seemed appropriate that a defensive player should get the award.

This year there wasn't anyone you could point to that had an amazing game. Edelman had a great game, and I thought he deserved to be the MVP, but Brady was pretty good too. Butler made a great play, but that's not enough to say he was the best player on the field. Yes, if he doesn't make the pick they almost certainly lose. And if Edelman doesn't make a key catch, if Brady doesn't make a key throw, if the pats fail to convert a big 3rd down, they almost certainly lose that game.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 4, 2006
2332 posts
514 upvotes
GVR
Biff88 wrote: Question for the Montana backers in the debate.

One of the arguments on the Brady side is that he has taken his team to six Super Bowls. He won 4 and in the 2 that he lost, he had his team in the lead very, very late in both of those losses.
So there was no choke job on his part.

Hypothetical situation..lets say that the David Tyree miracle catch didn't happen and the Pats won one of those Super Bowls against the Giants, so he would be 5 of 6 in Super Bowls.

Would any of you Montana backers change your mind if Brady had 5 wins in 6 Super Bowls?
I'm not discounting Brady as one of the best QBs ever, but I'd really only give him credit for his play against Carolina. Aside from that, his Super Bowl performances are average. The game against Carolina was the only game that the Pats managed to go past 30 points. They only scored 14 and 17 in the two losses. I definitely think that being 4/6 in the Superbowl is more impressive than 4/4, but Montana played better in the big game.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: Here's Wilson's numbers from last year's super bowl:

He completed 18 of 25 passes for 206 yards and two touchdowns. He rushed three times for 26 yards.

these numbers would have landed a super bowl winning QB the MVP award every single time - unless he's black. sorry, i mean non-white.
You showed how weak your argument was when you brought race into this. This isn't the "Remember The Titans" era.

18/25 for 206 and 2 TDs is good but it's not spectacular. I listed Malcolm Smith's stats for the Super Bowl and although it's really incomparable since it's QB vs defensive player, you can tell it's more impressive than Wilsons. Those stats show how aggressive Smith was in that Super Bowl.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
Biff88 wrote: Question for the Montana backers in the debate.

One of the arguments on the Brady side is that he has taken his team to six Super Bowls. He won 4 and in the 2 that he lost, he had his team in the lead very, very late in both of those losses.
So there was no choke job on his part.

Hypothetical situation..lets say that the David Tyree miracle catch didn't happen and the Pats won one of those Super Bowls against the Giants, so he would be 5 of 6 in Super Bowls.

Would any of you Montana backers change your mind if Brady had 5 wins in 6 Super Bowls?
I dislike the debate of Brady vs Montana and I'm a Brady homer. Do I personally think Brady is better than Montana? Yes.

But the way I always lay it out, Montana is the GOAT in the non-salary cap era and Brady is the GOAT in the salary cap era. We cannot compare the 2 eras. Imagine if we still didn't have the salary cap how extremely different the league would be? Hell, the MLB would turn inside-out of there ever was a salary cap.

You can always go into debates about who's better and in the end, it becomes opinionated. For me, I think players have become more and more skilled as the NFL progressed, making the game the hardest that it's ever been.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
UnCeo wrote: WTF does race have to do with this?
Malcom Smith deserved it, he was one of the standout players of the game. They could have easily given it to a number of other defensive players, Harvin, or Wilson. Given that the Seattle defense dominated the game, it seemed appropriate that a defensive player should get the award.

This year there wasn't anyone you could point to that had an amazing game. Edelman had a great game, and I thought he deserved to be the MVP, but Brady was pretty good too. Butler made a great play, but that's not enough to say he was the best player on the field. Yes, if he doesn't make the pick they almost certainly lose. And if Edelman doesn't make a key catch, if Brady doesn't make a key throw, if the pats fail to convert a big 3rd down, they almost certainly lose that game.
oh ok, let's pretend there's no racism in the world. :facepalm:

Seattle won last year 43-8. the game was more offensive than defensive for Seattle. they scored 43 points. 43 points. that's 15 more points than the Patriots scored last sunday. how the f was it the "defense" that won Seattle that game?

like i said, Wilson's numbers were more than good enough to get super bowl mvp last year. the nfl isn't ready to give out any mvp trophies to non-white QBs.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: You showed how weak your argument was when you brought race into this. This isn't the "Remember The Titans" era.

18/25 for 206 and 2 TDs is good but it's not spectacular. I listed Malcolm Smith's stats for the Super Bowl and although it's really incomparable since it's QB vs defensive player, you can tell it's more impressive than Wilsons. Those stats show how aggressive Smith was in that Super Bowl.
Seahawks won that game 43-8. how many of those 43 points was Malcolm Smith responsible for?

what game winning play did Smith make in a game that ended up 43-8?

Butler made a GAME WINNING PLAY and if Brady was not white, Butler would have won the super bowl mvp and you know it.
Deal Guru
User avatar
May 9, 2006
12805 posts
3477 upvotes
nineiron wrote: oh ok, let's pretend there's no racism in the world. :facepalm:

Seattle won last year 43-8. the game was more offensive than defensive for Seattle. they scored 43 points. 43 points. that's 15 more points than the Patriots scored last sunday. how the f was it the "defense" that won Seattle that game?

like i said, Wilson's numbers were more than good enough to get super bowl mvp last year. the nfl isn't ready to give out any mvp trophies to non-white QBs.
I've been trying to avoid all these troll posts, but...

Defense and special teams accounted for 16 of the 43 points where out of 11 Bronco (the best offense that year and possibly one of the best ever) drives, they stopped 10 of them with with 2 interceptions, 2 fumble recoveries, 2 by downs, 1 safety, and 2 punts. Bronco's offense got stuffed so badly, the average starting position of the Seahawks' offense was on their own 40. You are expected to score more when you only need to go 60 yards. Seattle's 3 offensive TDs where when they started at Denver's 37, Seattle's 42, and Denver's 48 yard lines. The rest of the game the offense still had a starting advantage, but posted rather mediocre results. Seattle's defense was the star of that game, so they gave it to the best performing defensive player.

But forget all that, what you are arguing is just absolutely stupid. First, there has only been 2 black QB to even win a Superbowl. Second, that other black QB (Doug Williams) did win the MVP because he threw for 4 TDs and 340 yards. Superbowl XXII (coincidentally, Broncos got spanked in that one as well).
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: Seahawks won that game 43-8. how many of those 43 points was Malcolm Smith responsible for?

what game winning play did Smith make in a game that ended up 43-8?

Butler made a GAME WINNING PLAY and if Brady was not white, Butler would have won the super bowl mvp and you know it.
Smith was responsible for 7 of those points. Smith scored HALF the amount of TDs that Wilson threw for.

Here's the difference, Smith's job is NOT to score TD's, it's to stop the defense (Which they absolutely did considering the Broncos scored 8 points). It's Wilson's job to SCORE TDs. Which he did in the end of the 3rd/4th quarter. It rarely had much of an impact on the game at that point.

I want you to focus on the word "Game winning". Why were the Patriots put in this position? Because the defense got 24 points scored on them. You don't award someone the MVP when they technically aren't doing their job. Now only allowing 8 points against the Broncos offense, that's MVP stuff.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: Smith was responsible for 7 of those points. Smith scored HALF the amount of TDs that Wilson threw for.

Here's the difference, Smith's job is NOT to score TD's, it's to stop the defense (Which they absolutely did considering the Broncos scored 8 points). It's Wilson's job to SCORE TDs. Which he did in the end of the 3rd/4th quarter. It rarely had much of an impact on the game at that point.

I want you to focus on the word "Game winning". Why were the Patriots put in this position? Because the defense got 24 points scored on them. You don't award someone the MVP when they technically aren't doing their job. Now only allowing 8 points against the Broncos offense, that's MVP stuff.
Patriots were put in that position because Brady threw 2 interceptions.

think back to last year's super bowl. if the team and the game were exactly the same but it was Andrew Luck instead of Russell Wilson who was the winning QB (with the same stats), you don't think the mvp would have went to Luck? (be honest with yourself)
Deal Guru
Apr 8, 2013
10205 posts
753 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: Akira makes extremely valid points and you are only on the "it's a wrong call side" because the media is feeding it to you.

Football is a game of strategy, Lockette vs Butler, Lockette comes out winning most of the time. Butler was getting consistently burned on defense because of his size. He's too small against Seahawks WR corps. This is why the long balls up in the air killed him. He can barely jump and tip the ball.

So going to Lockette again against Butler makes sense if it worked all game. Except that Carroll and the OC had no idea Bulter knew his football skills and absolutely jumped the route. You have to give 100% credit to Butler. If it was any other CB, you would be surprised how many times that play works. THIS is where strategy and football IQ comes into play.

Also, stacked receiver play is not clear cut. There is a purpose. Look at Kearse vs Browner. Kearse got jammed by Browner. If Kearse beats Browner, then he blocks Butler and Lockette gets the TD and no one ever talks about this being a bad play calling. Kearse did NOT do his job. Browner should be praised on how well he defended in that situation as well.

The media has a quick reaction on why that play was made, look out over the days for a proper breakdown like Akira made and you'll see why it's not a stupid of a play calling as it sounds.
LOL, the media?.

When hall of famers and most people are saying its a bad call. Its most likely a bad call. Unless you are saying that most of these people are conspiring with the media. :lol:

Again. No one is saying that the rookie didnt make a big play. Im gonna repeat it again. That play was made from a terrible play and a terrible decision not the run when you have LYNCH and the goal line is right there.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: Patriots were put in that position because Brady threw 2 interceptions.

think back to last year's super bowl. if the team and the game were exactly the same but it was Andrew Luck instead of Russell Wilson who was the winning QB (with the same stats), you don't think the mvp would have went to Luck? (be honest with yourself)
Regardless if he threw 2 interceptions, he countered for being absolutely perfect on those 2nd half drives. 37/50 for 328 yards and 4 TDs. 8/14 on 3rd downs. He was even 8/8 on one of the TD drives.

You're hilarious, honestly. I don't care if it was Katy Perry playing QB with the same stats. Smith deserved it. You're really ignoring full blown stats.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
kevindurant1 wrote: LOL, the media?.

When hall of famers and most people are saying its a bad call. Its most likely a bad call. Unless you are saying that most of these people are conspiring with the media. :lol:

Again. No one is saying that the rookie didnt make a big play. Im gonna repeat it again. That play was made from a terrible play and a terrible decision not the run when you have LYNCH and the goal line is right there.
I don't care if HOF'ers are saying it's a ball call. Some of these HOF'ers are just QB's, WR's, DB's, etc. They're not coaches. Bill Belichick, arguably the best coach of all time, defended the play calling and even called out the critics saying most of them are not qualified to be commenting on that.

Everyone ignores that Lynch is terrible against a goal line formation. His succession rate is 1/5. It's easier to run through a defense when you only have 3-4 D-linesmen and the rest in the back field. Completely different game when you 7-8 lined up in the box.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. If that was a TD, no one ever questions that play calling.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: Regardless if he threw 2 interceptions, he countered for being absolutely perfect on those 2nd half drives. 37/50 for 328 yards and 4 TDs. 8/14 on 3rd downs. He was even 8/8 on one of the TD drives.

You're hilarious, honestly. I don't care if it was Katy Perry playing QB with the same stats. Smith deserved it. You're really ignoring full blown stats.
Wilson deserved it. you're ignoring the fact that the mvp ALMOST ALWAYS goes to the QB by DEFAULT, unless the QB has a horrible game - which Wilson didn't.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: I don't care if HOF'ers are saying it's a ball call. Some of these HOF'ers are just QB's, WR's, DB's, etc. They're not coaches. Bill Belichick, arguably the best coach of all time, defended the play calling and even called out the critics saying most of them are not qualified to be commenting on that.

Everyone ignores that Lynch is terrible against a goal line formation. His succession rate is 1/5. It's easier to run through a defense when you only have 3-4 D-linesmen and the rest in the back field. Completely different game when you 7-8 lined up in the box.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. If that was a TD, no one ever questions that play calling.
of course Belichek is going to defend the Seattle play call, THE PATRIOTS WON. Belichek wants credit. he doesn't want ppl thinking that the Patriots won because the Seahawks messed up.

Lynch's success rate is 1/5? how many downs did they have to try to run it in again?

from 1/2 yard out you don't try fancy $hit. from a 1/2 yard out you're EXPECTED TO SCORE. just like Brady thought the Seahawks were going to score. everyone watching the game thought the Seahawks were going to score. from a 1/2 yard out, you minimize your chances of losing the ball. they had timeouts - there was NO REASON to throw the ball.

"If that was a TD, no one ever questions that play calling." << how do you know? i bet a lot of analysts would have questioned the play call and thought it was odd. probably along the lines of "gutsy, but it worked".
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: Wilson deserved it. you're ignoring the fact that the mvp ALMOST ALWAYS goes to the QB by DEFAULT, unless the QB has a horrible game - which Wilson didn't.
You are right. The QB always get MVP by default, unless the QB has a horrible game OR someone on his team had a better game. Want to take a guess which name I'm going to say next? ;)
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: of course Belichek is going to defend the Seattle play call, THE PATRIOTS WON. Belichek wants credit. he doesn't want ppl thinking that the Patriots won because the Seahawks messed up.

Lynch's success rate is 1/5? how many downs did they have to try to run it in again?

from 1/2 yard out you don't try fancy $hit. from a 1/2 yard out you're EXPECTED TO SCORE. just like Brady thought the Seahawks were going to score. everyone watching the game thought the Seahawks were going to score. from a 1/2 yard out, you minimize your chances of losing the ball. they had timeouts - there was NO REASON to throw the ball.

"If that was a TD, no one ever questions that play calling." << how do you know? i bet a lot of analysts would have questioned the play call and thought it was odd. probably along the lines of "gutsy, but it worked".
You want to know why no one ever questions that play calling? Because I'm going to present you some stats.
Before the interception play, there were 108 passes from the 1 yard line in the 2014-2015 season. How many resulted in an interception? Zero of course.
For those who were shocked about the Seahawks choosing to pass from the 1 yard line should consider: Marshawn Lynch scored on only one of five carries from the 1-yard line this season. His career totals are 14-for-31 in regular-season games (45%) and 1-for-4 in postseason games.
Numbers NEVER lie.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: You are right. The QB always get MVP by default, unless the QB has a horrible game OR someone on his team had a better game. Want to take a guess which name I'm going to say next? ;)
Edelman had a better game than Brady.
Temp. Banned
Feb 8, 2005
2335 posts
247 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: You want to know why no one ever questions that play calling? Because I'm going to present you some stats. Numbers NEVER lie.
you're missing the point. how many plays TOTAL (run + pass) were there from the 1 yard in the 2014-2015 season? if 108 were passing plays, how many do you think were non-passing plays?

i'm willing to bet there were WAY more non-passing plays than passing plays. do you know why?

and please state the source of your 'stats'
Deal Guru
Apr 8, 2013
10205 posts
753 upvotes
ADRiiAN` wrote: I don't care if HOF'ers are saying it's a ball call. Some of these HOF'ers are just QB's, WR's, DB's, etc. They're not coaches. Bill Belichick, arguably the best coach of all time, defended the play calling and even called out the critics saying most of them are not qualified to be commenting on that.

Everyone ignores that Lynch is terrible against a goal line formation. His succession rate is 1/5. It's easier to run through a defense when you only have 3-4 D-linesmen and the rest in the back field. Completely different game when you 7-8 lined up in the box.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. If that was a TD, no one ever questions that play calling.
Bill Belichick the best coach of all time?. Tom Coughlin beat him twice in the superbowl. No cheating involve too. He needs to undo those losses before you can say he is the best. Even if he does win against him twice, it would be a tie. :lol:

If you do not believe what Hall Of famers are saying then this conversation is over. That means, you really believe you are smarter than people who have actually played the game. LOL.

I just think its funny that people believe most people are colluding with the media to make up this bad call.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 7, 2007
4795 posts
3847 upvotes
GTA
nineiron wrote: you're missing the point. how many plays TOTAL (run + pass) were there from the 1 yard in the 2014-2015 season? if 108 were passing plays, how many do you think were non-passing plays?

i'm willing to bet there were WAY more non-passing plays than passing plays. do you know why?

and please state the source of your 'stats'
Here are more stats with facts. You can easily google "108 passes from the 1 yard line" and find this information. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super ... -seahawks/

Here's the answer to your questions...
NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles.
You mix in Lynch's 1/5 failure and the numbers are all there. Passing in that situation is not as dumb as you think it is.
nineiron wrote: Edelman had a better game than Brady.
This is something that is up for debate as well. Edelman did have a hell of a game. Brady's stats were so high and threw touchdowns to 4 different receivers. You can make a case for both. Look back when Deion Branch won Super Bowl MVP, Brady's stats were basically half of this game. Branch was 11 catches for 133 yards. Edelman was 9 for 109 yards with 1 TD. That's why Branch got the MVP. If Brady had the same stats as 2004, Edelman would be an MVP zero doubt.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)