OP
OP
you DO have a solid argument.
Meh... ef it... go ahead, I'll just make something up and say it is a quote of yours.
Meh... ef it... go ahead, I'll just make something up and say it is a quote of yours.
Obnoxious Football Trash Talk Thread
- Thread starter Cape Brewing
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
I don't even know how to handle the loss. I'm so used to the PLAYERS blowing the game, that I can't figure out how to feel when the rules do it.
But he really should have held on with both hands...
I was surprised at how awful Chicago's offense really was! I mean, cripes, they let the DETROIT DEFENSE stop them numerous times near the end zone, and 4 times within 1 yard! Damn!
Good thing for Chicago that Urlacher is back on the juice!
Double-posting because it's worth it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Boerderij_Kabouter
Well-Known Member
The ref's flags are going to be thread bare by the end of this game.
OP
OP
No kidding. Brutal.
Jets doing themselves in. They need some discipline. Rex Ryan's downfall is his lack of discipline.
OP
OP
His girth probably doesnt help either
OP
OP
Aaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!! LOL!!! He ran outta bounds a yard short!!!! Aaaaaaahhhhh hahahahaha!!!
Ohhhh man!!! Oh thats awesome.
A tough loss like that has to be a... hard knock... to the Jets' egos!!
Ohhhh man!!! Oh thats awesome.
A tough loss like that has to be a... hard knock... to the Jets' egos!!
Boerderij_Kabouter
Well-Known Member
Take the flags out of it and that would have been one of the best defensive games I have ever seen.
Jets offense was a joke though.
Jets offense was a joke though.
Boerderij_Kabouter
Well-Known Member
Whoa.... hit up that replay. Charles goes all the way.
dataz722
Well-Known Member
JETS WHO???????????????????????????????????????????????????? caps
Rex Ryan, for all of his bravado, is scared ****less of his own quarterback. Seriously, dude's supposed to be good enough to win you a Super Bowl, and he's dumping off eight yard passes in the middle of the field, with no time outs? Not even that they weren't going down the field - Sanchez was barely throwing passes that were past the line of scrimmage all night. Reminded me of the Pats QB play back when they sucked balls, I'm thinking Sanchez is the new Tommy Hodson.
And the running back, the dude with the dropsies? RR at the press conference afterwards, "I didn't take him out of the game!" Ef you, you didn't; you're riding the LT train as far as it will take you. Glad again I didn't draft the young guy when I could have in the FFB draft, kinda kicking myself for not taking a flyer on LT!
And the running back, the dude with the dropsies? RR at the press conference afterwards, "I didn't take him out of the game!" Ef you, you didn't; you're riding the LT train as far as it will take you. Glad again I didn't draft the young guy when I could have in the FFB draft, kinda kicking myself for not taking a flyer on LT!
LT looked great, but no matter what he proves this year, without a passing game, it will mean nothing.
We just took the whole schedule and picked wins/losses. My optimistic friend gave them 7 wins, I gave the, 6. It will be a cold day in hell if they beat us both and get 8.
We just took the whole schedule and picked wins/losses. My optimistic friend gave them 7 wins, I gave the, 6. It will be a cold day in hell if they beat us both and get 8.
OP
OP
Jesus... it's like Christmas morning...
Pats sh!tspanked the Bengals and then...
Jets LOST
Colts LOST
Chargers LOST
I'll take that for Week 1 results!!!
On a half serious note though... I'm not ready to toss in the towel and write the Jets off just yet. It's ONE freakin' game.
2003...
New England Patriots... Week 1...
I went to the game in Buffalo and saw the Pats lose one of the ugliest games I've ever seen them lose... 31-0
Brady threw for 123 yards
Faulk was the leading rusher with 62 yards
The Pats got absolutely SMOKED 31-0... and the game was way worse than the score let on.
(yes I just looked up those yards... but I remember the game vividly)
After that game the Pats went 14-1 in the regular season, marched through the playoffs and won the Super Bowl.
It's ONE game and I can't imagine the Jets playing like that again in Week 2 against the Pats. In the first half the freakin' Jets D looked like they were the greatest D to ever take the field. They were insane. I don't expect THAT to last. They'll be good but they won't maintain THAT level. And that offense won't be THAT bad going forward. They'll get it together. They're still a scary team.
Don't get me wrong, the Pats are going to absolutely blow them out in Week Two, that's a given... but I wouldn't start ripping up season tickets if I were a Jets fan just yet.
Pats sh!tspanked the Bengals and then...
Jets LOST
Colts LOST
Chargers LOST
I'll take that for Week 1 results!!!
On a half serious note though... I'm not ready to toss in the towel and write the Jets off just yet. It's ONE freakin' game.
2003...
New England Patriots... Week 1...
I went to the game in Buffalo and saw the Pats lose one of the ugliest games I've ever seen them lose... 31-0
Brady threw for 123 yards
Faulk was the leading rusher with 62 yards
The Pats got absolutely SMOKED 31-0... and the game was way worse than the score let on.
(yes I just looked up those yards... but I remember the game vividly)
After that game the Pats went 14-1 in the regular season, marched through the playoffs and won the Super Bowl.
It's ONE game and I can't imagine the Jets playing like that again in Week 2 against the Pats. In the first half the freakin' Jets D looked like they were the greatest D to ever take the field. They were insane. I don't expect THAT to last. They'll be good but they won't maintain THAT level. And that offense won't be THAT bad going forward. They'll get it together. They're still a scary team.
Don't get me wrong, the Pats are going to absolutely blow them out in Week Two, that's a given... but I wouldn't start ripping up season tickets if I were a Jets fan just yet.
Thankfully I didn't renew mine, so I'll never have to make that decision!
Agreed. Remember, first game of a 2nd yr QB, who's had a ton of pressure put on him by OTHER PEOPLE'S hyped up sh*t talking.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
with the amount of penalty yards and turnovers by the jets, the fact that Baltimore only scored 10 points is a tribute to the Jets' D.
i mean, when's the last game you remember where the winner won with 10 points? 10-9? what is this, baseball?
i mean, when's the last game you remember where the winner won with 10 points? 10-9? what is this, baseball?
dataz722
Well-Known Member
What about the fact that the ravens turned the ball over in the other teams red zone twice and still didn't allow a touchdown!
Look at Sanchez' game log from last year, add on a crappy preseason (pretty sure the JETS first-team offense didn't score a single touchdown), add on last night's debacle, and tell me he ain't getting worse.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/9269/gamelog;_ylt=AmUqlwmWsJd_o7C1mo3YGHr.uLYF?year=2009
Through the bye week last year, he looked really, really good. Two horrible games - 5 picks (against Buffalo, of all teams), and 3 picks against New Orleans, but in the other six games he all had a QB rating above 80, wasn't throwing a lot but only had two picks in those games against 8 TDs, pretty solid overall.
Second half of the season, he's OK against Carolina but that's about it. Very good against Cinci in the playoffs. Also seems that they're losing confidence in him - he's going from throwing twenty-five or thirty times a game to about twenty.
LT looks better than I expected, but are you REALLY going to ride him deep into the playoffs? 'Cause unless he gets better, soon, Sanchez isn't even playing at a Trent Dilfer-like level.
JETS D looks outstanding, but they need better QB play if they're going to do anything at all. Otherwise, as good as LT looks, as good as that other young RB might be, it'll be eight-in-the-box all season.
OP
OP
And now Jenkins is gone for the year... and probably ever. Torn ACL again.
Maroney to the Broncos!!! Don't let that door hit you in the a$$ Laurence. God knows you can't take the three steps quick enough to get outta the effin way!
Maroney to the Broncos!!! Don't let that door hit you in the a$$ Laurence. God knows you can't take the three steps quick enough to get outta the effin way!
Huh, surprised they were able to get ANY value for Mauroney. Figured he was a 50/50 shot to get cut coming out of camp. I feel better even with Law Firm in the game, at least he hits the hole hard and fast and takes what's there. Freddie Taylor looked pretty good out there, too.
Still leaves the team vulnerable, reliant on old guys, but I'd rather have the draft pick than wait another season and just see Mauroney walk (they weren't going to re-sign him, that's for sure).
Still leaves the team vulnerable, reliant on old guys, but I'd rather have the draft pick than wait another season and just see Mauroney walk (they weren't going to re-sign him, that's for sure).
madbaldman
Well-Known Member
I guess you don't bother checking the polls before you post. The Gators dropped from 4th to 10th after the dismal start. At the start of the season I figured they'd lose 2-4 games. I was hoping for 2, but 4 is looking more likely.
Not magically superior, just plain superior. Whether you love or hate the SEC, the plain fact is they have been dominant in the national championships for the last decade. This does not mean that any SEC team is better than any other team. But is does mean that a team that has a winning record in the SEC is a formidable team and the rankings will reflect that.
cimirie
Well-Known Member
I did check the polls and yes I was very surprised to see UF fall. The past didn't repeat- that week. But I'll look into my crystal ball and see it's the last time we'll see that bit of honesty until they lose.
As far as SEC dominance... I wholeheartedly disagree. What you actually have had is one or two very talented teams from the SEC, and the rest are good to bad - just like you see in every conference. (USC/Ore/Cal Pac10, OSU/PSU Big10, UT/OKla Big12). The bowl record for the SEC is far from dominating. Yes the SEC has produced the strongest team in the country the past few years. But a great team doesn't make a conference "magically" superior - as most pollsters and too many fans seem to believe.
Agreed. Not to mention that every conference except the PAC10 stacks their schedules to their advantage, as it's the only one required to play round-robin. All conferences should have all their teams play each other every season to find the true dominator.
cimirie
Well-Known Member
Come on now. Let's not pretend the Pac10 doesn't stack schedules. Oregon and ASU both play Portland St. Oregon plays Nevada. Cal plays UC-Davis. Stanford plays Sacramento State and Wake Forest... You can't tell me that doesn't stink of "stacking schedules." And truth be told, Pac10 teams only play one more conference game than any of the big leagues. And frankly, the only reason the Pac10 has that rule is that they haven't had enough teams to warrant not having that. Once the new "Pac10" starts their 12 team regime, there will be no round robin requirement.
I'm not knocking stacking schedules. It is the way of big time college football (an unfortunate casualty of eliminating the strength of schedule from the rankings). It's pretty much a level playing field.
Dwain
Well-Known Member
How ‘bout dem cowboys?
Did they suck it up or what? Everyone except Wade knows they need some O linemen. I was happy when they got rid of Flozell, and he is only #2 in penalty yardage in the NFL.
Did they suck it up or what? Everyone except Wade knows they need some O linemen. I was happy when they got rid of Flozell, and he is only #2 in penalty yardage in the NFL.
What the ****'s up with all this talk about the SEC and Pac-10 and all that college football BS? College football - is that the game where they just PRETEND that the players aren't all getting paid? College football is just like the NFL, only without 1099s being issued at year-end.
and...you only need ONE foot in bounds for a completetion...terrible.
cimirie
Well-Known Member
Yep, that's what we're talking about. It the football that's actually fun to watch. True the players are all getting a payday of some sort. However it's not usually enough to totally jade the players to the point where they feel they're bigger than their team or the game.
Much more passion, much more intensity, much more widely spread fan support.
True, there are far more mistakes on defense. This leads to more scoring. So much more fun. NFL = nap time.
dataz722
Well-Known Member
Yeah, because it is so great when your QB is your entire team. 1 player should never lead a team in rushing yards, rushing attempts, passing yards, passing TDs, and rushing TDs. Whats next they are going to be kicking and returning punts too?
And how is more scoring better? I would rather watch a 10-9 game than 62-3.
And how is more scoring better? I would rather watch a 10-9 game than 62-3.
but a 72-75 game would be even better, that is if you like offense
cimirie
Well-Known Member
I smell some Denard Robinson jealousy...
And I'm not such a fan of the 62-3 games, but rather the 37-28 type games. Watching anybody run up the score in any sport isn't typically fun. But, a 10-9 defensive slugfest is like watching paint dry. Sure I can appreciate the skill and scheming it takes to reach a result like that - it doesn't mean it entertaining. It's less back and forth and more like hitting a tennis ball against a wall.
And who's to say a player shouldn't lead a team in rushing an passing. Sure the team is screwed if that player goes down, but until then, there's nothing more exciting than a player that can do it all. I hate Mike Vick with every fiber of my being, but I'd much rather watch him than Peyton Manning, Phillip Rivers, or Tom Brady as he's far more electrifying.
dataz722
Well-Known Member
I have to disagree with you 100% on every single point you made.
What is it with people anymore and not being able to enjoy a defensive game? And a qbs job is to throw the damn ball. Any qb that has more rushing yards than passing isn't a ****ing a qb. He is just the guy that takes the snap.
So, why **** around with college football, if scoring is the only thing that makes a game interesting? Why not just watch arena football? I mean, if there's nothing better to watch teams score 50, 60 points a game?
I'll take a hard-fought defensive match, any day. ****, I watched the Ravens-Jets all the way through (and I don't like EITHER of those teams). It sure as **** wasn't to watch Mark Effin Sanchez.
I'll take a hard-fought defensive match, any day. ****, I watched the Ravens-Jets all the way through (and I don't like EITHER of those teams). It sure as **** wasn't to watch Mark Effin Sanchez.
Bernie Brewer
Grouchy Old Fart
There are lots of ways the college game is better. First of all, I like their overtime system better. Plus, you don't have overpaid egomaniac clubhouse cancers pulling out sharpies after touchdowns and changing their names to some bastardized Spanish version of their jersey number. That crap is what is wrong with the NFL.
cimirie
Well-Known Member
Its not really that I can't enjoy a defensive game, but since you mentioned 10-9 I'll assume you're at least partially referencing the Ravens/Jets game the other night. Despite what you may think, that score wasn't reflective of a good defensive game. It was a showcase of offensive ineptitude. The playcalling was awful. The blocking was terrible. The passing was just plain bad and the running was uninspired. The defenses didn't so much makes plays as the offenses just didn't show up. That isn't fun.
And I know the difference between the two. A good defensive game doesn't end in 10-9 wins. This is a passing league with rules designed to favor the offense. If at least one team doesn't score at least 2 touchdowns, it has little to do with the defense. Heck, even the Lions (who I think we can all agree have been offensively awful for years) averaged over 15 points a game last year.
Again, Ive got a huge appreciation for a defense outworking and outscheming an offense. It doesn't mean it holds my attention on a passive level. It's like watching a chess match.
And a QB who can torch you equally with his legs AND his arm is far more valuable and interesting than a pocket passer who isn't a threat past the line of scrimmage. Even NFL teams are recognizing this more and more as the wildcat becomes more used.
And I know the difference between the two. A good defensive game doesn't end in 10-9 wins. This is a passing league with rules designed to favor the offense. If at least one team doesn't score at least 2 touchdowns, it has little to do with the defense. Heck, even the Lions (who I think we can all agree have been offensively awful for years) averaged over 15 points a game last year.
Again, Ive got a huge appreciation for a defense outworking and outscheming an offense. It doesn't mean it holds my attention on a passive level. It's like watching a chess match.
And a QB who can torch you equally with his legs AND his arm is far more valuable and interesting than a pocket passer who isn't a threat past the line of scrimmage. Even NFL teams are recognizing this more and more as the wildcat becomes more used.
dataz722
Well-Known Member
So instead you get guys that are still getting into just as much if not more trouble with the law which is even worse than the locker room.
But thank god they don't have a sense of humor, right?
Really? Really? Are you serious?
First of all there was a reason that running was uninspired. Maybe to you it was because the qb wasn't taking off with the ball every damn time, but more than likely it was because the other D was that damn good. If you are watching a game only for the offense then of course you are going to think it is bad. Bad running, bad blocking, bad route running, bad everything else, but in all actuality if you paid attention to what was going on on the other side of the ball you would notice that the D is just that good. A good D can make an offense look like ****.
A good defensive game is still scoring 2 touchdowns? Now that doesn't even make any sense. You're right I guess the 85 bears and the 2000 ravens were actually terrible defenses but just got lucky and the other teams didn't score.
And yes, the NFL has TRIED the wildcat but that only lasted about 6 weeks before it became a waste of a down. It is very rare that a running qb succeeds in the NFL.
dataz722
Well-Known Member
And don't get me wrong. I enjoy watching college football, but not for the reasons why everyone always claims that it is so much better.
cimirie
Well-Known Member
"A good defensive game is still scoring 2 touchdowns?" Best defense in the NFL last year was the Jets. They gave up over 2 touchdowns a game (14.8 points). So, yeah, a good defensive team (last year's best) gives up over 2 touchdowns a game. It does make sense. The NFL writes rules specifically to eliminate the possibility of low-scoring games. Giving up ONLY two a game shows remarkable defensive prowess.
I pay far more attention than you give me credit for. I watch a game for fundamentals. Blocking, running, and passing sure. But also tackling, taking good angles, shedding blocks, forcing the ball where it doesn't want to go. There is a BIG difference between the defense making plays and the offense being lackluster. If you watched carefully, you would have seen that on Monday night. The O line knows the snap count. They should get off the ball first. If the D line beats the O line off the ball, it's a great play. If the entire D line routinely beats the O line off the ball, it says way more about the O line than the D because that just doesn't happen on a regular basis for an O line that is paying attention.
The running: I don't need the QB to take off like a mad man every time the ball goes to him. But in that game, none of the featured RB (Greene, LT, McGehee, Rice) showed any patience in following blocks. Greene's fumble highlighted this. He was paying so little attention to his blockers that he ran into one and coughed up the ball. The defense hit the line well, but did nothing to cause that fumble.
And the 2000 Ravens were a remarkable defense. The earned every accolade they had piled on them. They broke the mold and averaged just over 10 points per game allowed. That simply isn't the standard in the NFL, however. And for the record, I loved the 2002 Bucs who were also a defense first type team. Good defense is great. But a low score doesn't neccessarily indicate that the defense was the reason for it.
And the 85 bears... They were also awesome. However, they played in an era where the rules weren't written to favor the offense. AND in an era where offenses weren't all that complex. If you were physically imposing defense, you would win because an offense couldn't out-scheme power. These days, that type of defense would get smoked.
Similar threads
