The Everything NFL Thread - 2012 Season (Up til 2013 Draft)

[Nozizaki]

Fuck you NFL. Fuck you, and your confusing as fuck teams.

What's so confusing? There is no dominant team. Each team has an exploitable weakness, meaning that each team has to show up and play motivated each and every week, or else they will lose. You can't just out talent even some of the worst teams.

Edit: GODDAMN BUCS.

 

[CaptKirby]

Fuck you NFL. Fuck you, and your confusing as fuck teams.

Yeah the NFL sure is confusing. Must explain why I accurately called Dolphins +4 and 5-2 am ATS today so far ~____________~

and in a horrible twist in the two games left I am on Giants +2 and Bears +3 help, come on Giants, cover that +2! rah rah rah goooo Eli I always loved you no really!!

Can anyone explain Bengals 1.5 against the fucking Jaguarsbecause I think NFL oddsmakers might be as confused as Valkyries actually...weirdest line I have seen in my first 3 years of paying attention to NFL spreads.

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

You know, after thinking it, the Dolphins played an amazing game. I seriously didn't see this Tannehill/Hartline combo coming, but boy I'm excited about. I personally think this proves that Tannehill can be a NFL QB, and I hope everyone sees that now. Also, if Miami can work on their secondary, they could have one of the best defenses in the league. So, even though they lost, I'm glad they as competitive as they did.

 

[Dubby]

I was also honestly surprised that the Lions had a 4.5 spread over the Vikings..I guess oddsmakers (and me) are still underestimating the Vikings.

 

[CaptKirby]

I was also honestly surprised that the Lions had a 4.5 spread over the Vikings..I guess oddsmakers (and me) are still underestimating the Vikings.

That one was not the same though, that one was predicated on the mistaken beliefs that
a) the Lions have an unstoppable high powered offense
b) that the Lions were a legitimately powerful team last season (they were terrible, a mirage playoff team, they lost every time they faced a good team after their 5-0 start and face almost nothing but good teams this season the rest of the way...headed to 5-11 to 6-10)
c) that the Vikings were bad because last season they were bad, and only lucky so far not in any way legitimate

It was nowhere nearly as weird as Bengals +1.5 though. I thought Andy Dalton or A.J. Green had 100% broken a leg because otherwise that line was the craziest line in the last 3 seasons.

 

[Wikey]

The Redskins we all know and love really showed up in that second half. Game shouldn't even have been close. Billy fucking Cundiff.

I just don't understand how Kyle Shannahan comes out after half-time and lets the Bucs shut our offense down so hard.

RGIII looks LETHAL so far this season in the 2-minute drill. Both losses it was a huge mistake by someone else that ended the drive after he marched down the field.

 

[CaptKirby]

After today the Houston Texans are getting very historic.

teams who started with 4 wins of at least 4 points each and scored more than 20 each game:
1995 Cowboys (35-0, 31-21, 23-17, 34-20) - super bowl champs)
1998 Broncos (27-21, 42-23, 34-17, 38-16) - super bowl champs)
2002 Chargers (34-6, 24-3, 23-15, 21-14) - not even a playoff team
2003 Vikings (30-25, 24-13, 23-13, 35-7) - not even a playoff team
2007 Patriots (38-14, 38-14, 38-7, 34-13) - super bowl losers, but the greatest team ever
2007 Cowboys (45-35, 37-20, 34-10, 35-7) - losers in playoffs to the dickhole giants
2011 Packers (42-34, 30-23, 27-17, 49-23) - losers in one game

teams who started with 4 wins of any points and scored more than 25 points a game:
1991 Redskins (45-0, 33-31, 34-0, 34-27) - super bowl champs
1992 Bills (40-7, 34-31, 38-0, 41-7) - super bowl losers
1998 Broncos (27-21, 42-23, 34-17, 38-16) - super bowl champs)
1998 Vikings (31-7, 38-31, 29-6, 31-28) - 15-1, but losers in a heartbreaking NFC championship game OT loss
2000 Rams (41-36, 37-34, 41-24, 41-20) - in between super bowl seasons
2007 Patriots (38-14, 38-14, 38-7, 34-13) - super bowl losers, but the greatest team ever
2007 Cowboys (45-35, 37-20, 34-10, 35-7) - losers in playoffs to the dickhole giants
2009 Vikings (34-20, 27-13, 27-24, 30-23) - losers in a ridiculously volatile NFC championship game that ended in overtime lol
2011 Packers (42-34, 30-23, 27-17, 49-23) - losers in one game
2011 Lions (27-20, 48-3, 26-23, 34-30) - fool's gold

So out of 13 teams going back through the 1989 season they really only compare to:
3 Super Bowl winners
2 Super Bowl losers
2 conference championship losers
4 first game playoff losers (one in between a super bowl win and a super bowl loss, one just off a super bowl win)
2 teams who did not make the playoffs but managed to pull off amazing starts to the seasons

but since the Texans have opened the season winning 30-10, 27-7, 31-25, and 38-14 you can see by the other team's season opening that the only teams that really have outdone them are the super bowl caliber teams, the first round playoff teams all mostly much demonstrated worse defense than the caliber the Texans have been playing at, and only the 2007 Patriots and 1992 Bills played at a level that was convincingly better to this point in the season.

 

[Dubby]

And at the end of the day, the Texans will not win or make the Super Bowl because of their one and only weakness: injuries. Just telling you all now.

 

[Byrne]

And at the end of the day, the Texans will not win or make the Super Bowl because of their one and only weakness: injuries. Just telling you all now.

No one's gotten hurt yet.

If they stay healthy, they win the Super Bowl. You heard it here first.

Actually, you've probably heard it from someone else too, but I'm just making it known that this is my prediction.

 

[WaterBomb]

Eh, I see the Texans as a little like the Falcons of previous years. Solid all around, but they aren't terribly explosive. They definitely win their division and win a playoff game, but I see them going down in the championship game to a more experienced team like the Pats or Ravens.

 

[Byrne]

Eh, I see the Texans as a little like the Falcons of previous years. Solid all around, but they aren't terribly explosive. They definitely win their division and win a playoff game, but I see them going down in the championship game to a more experienced team like the Pats or Ravens.

They're certainly above solid at running back and on defense and they have one of the best receivers in the NFL <_<

I think the Falcons are the same way this season. I could see both of them in the Super Bowl.

 

[phoopes]

Two pass interference penalties on this drive by the Giants... I'm ready to kill these cornerbacks. Even though the second one was a bit of BS.

EDIT: But one on the Giants' offense? Score!

EDIT2: Icing the kicker is one of the stupidest things... Thank "Tebus" it worked out, haha.

 

[CaptKirby]

If you think these Texans compare to any any of the Falcons teams in recent years then I really do not know how many ways I can say you honestly do not understand football and should probably watch the sport a lot more and try to do a much better job of watching how teams perform. I am not saying that as a petty put down, you cannot have properly watched any playoff games last season if you can claim what you just claimed. I do not even need to think about statistics for a second to contextualize why the Texans you saw in rounds 1 & 2 of the playoffs last year operating without a real NFL quarterback were beating teams better than any Falcons team ever has with the season on the line (they were better than every team).

2002 Falcons 9-6-1 : +201 yards, 5th/8th in points
2004 Falcons 11-5: -123 yards, 16th/14th in points
2008 Falcons 11-5: +213 yards, 10th/11th in points
2009 Falcons 9-7: -135 yards, 13th/14th in points
2010 Falcons 13-3: +139 yards, 5th/5th in points
2011 Falcons 10-6: +688 yards, 7th/18th in points

2011 Texans 10-6 and lost their first and second QBs (at the time they were something like 2nd/5th in points? I forget exactly): +1383 yards, 10th/4th in points

The Falcons never finished under 5200 yards allowed in this entire period, the Texans only allowed 4571. The Falcons only finished over 5900 one season, the same as Texans - last season.

The Ravens put up 227 yards against the Texans with three Yates interceptions and then put up a mere 398 against the Patriots. If you watched that game, then you saw the best defense of the season in action for the second week in a row...they ripped up the Bengals, but they mauled the Ravens every play for an entire game. The Fortyniners and Steelers were never close to having that good of a defensive game against a playoff caliber opponent at full health all season, and the Texans had it twice in a row in the playoffs!

Texans yards conceded in playoffs: 300, 227; points conceded: 10 (admittedly Bengals blow), 20
Saints yards conceded in playoffs: 412, 407; points conceded: 28, 36
Broncos yards conceded in playoffs: 400, 509; points conceded: 23, 45
Giants yards conceded in playoffs: 247, 388, 328, 349; points conceded: 2, 20, 17, 17
Lions yards conceded in playoffs: 626; points conceded: 45
Bengals yards conceded in playoffs: 340; points conceded: 31
Steelers yards conceded in playoffs ("#1" defense): 447; points conceded: 29
Falcons yards conceded in playoffs: 442; points conceded: 24
Niners yards conceded in playoffs: 472, 352; points conceded: 32, 20
Patriots yards conceded in playoffs: 252 (against awful Broncos), 398, 396; points conceded: 10 (against awful Broncos), 20, 21
Ravens yards conceded in playoffs: 315, 330; points conceded: 13 (against a 3rd string rookie QB in over his head), 23
Packers yards conceded in playoffs: 420 ; points conceded: 37

In terms of recent years the Texans compare best to the Steelers, Jets, and Ravens and they have a better offense than any of those teams have had (funny how these are all AFC). They throw less interceptions than almost anybody and they have a more potent running scheme than any of those teams have ever had (and statistics of course back that up). Last season the Ravens and Texans were the best two teams in the AFC...I think the Patriots squeaked by on luck and maybe because the Ravens were beaten up so badly by the Texans.

 

[Byrne]

I would quote CK's post to agree with it but it's really long so I'll just say "hell yeah!"

Eli is the "master of the 4th" lol that drive was pitiful. The refs were gifting pass interference calls to try and help the "master" get the win but nope lolzz

 

[some hero]

He is the master, but even he can't do it without Nicks.

Anyways, does anyone want me to rant about my thoughts on the game? In short, Reid proved that he can gameplan and use a QB. The Giants pass attack was focused the whole game on the big play. This is fine with teams with real defenses, but doesn't work with a team that can't stop the run and requires the offense to maintain long drives. They have Cruz but refuse to build an actual passing offense. This works when Nicks is playing, but without him it is pathetic. The Giants were outcoached and did nothing to help the defense and Eli.

Saying that, i loved how they went for it on 4th and 1, a small step towards becoming as aggressive as Sean Payton without the stupid 20+ yard passes every other attempt.

 

[Killah]

I do not even need to think about statistics for a second to contextualize why the Texans you saw in rounds 1 & 2 of the playoffs last year operating without a real NFL quarterback were beating teams better than any Falcons team ever has with the season on the line (they were better than every team).

rude :(


The only thing marginally comparable about the Texans-Falcons is their offenses the past couple of years. Both were run first teams with only one big threat on the outside (until Julio came along) with good but not fantastic quarterbacks. Defensively the Texans were awful pre-2010 but absolutely amazing last year and so far this year.

I still think Houston's numbers so far this year have been a factor of who they've played. The Jags, Dolphins, and Titans all have below average offenses, and the only "good" offense they've played thus far this season went for 375 yards and 25 points on them. They are still the class of the AFC - and the NFL - but will they be able to stop the Packers in week 6? Will they be able to stop the Patriots in week 14 and probably in the playoffs? I'm not convinced yet that they will be able to do either.

For anyone who's high on Arian Foster - he's averaging less than 3.7 yards per carry and is on pace for over 440 touches. That does not bode well for a deep playoff run. Andre Johnson has caught a bit of a bad rep as an injury magnet, and while that may or may not be true if he gets injured again they'll have trouble passing the ball. Luckily for them the offense does not have to be elite to win games, but it will have to be good to win a championship.

 

[CaptKirby]

I admit to only really remembering the missed FG and Vikings dominance from that game, I was a little too young. I was obviously speaking to recent history since that is the only thing you could compare (I consider about 2002-on to be the only sane place to go when thinking about how modern offense operates, and that might have to shift up to a new year soon). The Vick win in GB was huge, but that was ages ago...in recent years all the Falcons have done is lose lose lose. The Texans got to the playoffs with no experience and mashed dudes up so badly TWICE that it looked like every member of their defense was actively injecting adrenaline.

The Dolphins have put up 35, 21, and 20 when not facing the Texans. The Broncos have put up 31, 21, and 37 when not facing the Texans. The Titans well yeah that one truly sucked. Analyzing strength of schedule is useless, the Patriots never faced anyone, made it to the Super Bowl (because the Texans got lucked out of all their QBs), and then barely lost. They never won like this.

teams with 3 19+ point victories by the finish of week 6
2010: Titans [incredibly 6-10, VY WINS THE GAMES and he only played half]
2009: Saints, Eagles [won super bowl, lost round 1]
2007: Patriots, Steelers [lost super bowl, lost to the Jags because they got cocky]
2006: Bears, Chargers [lost super bowl, lost round 1]
2003: Broncos [lost round 1]
2001: Packers [lost round 2]
1999: Rams [won the super bowl duh!]
1998: Broncos, Cowboys [won super bowl, lost round 1]
1997: Broncos, Patriots [won super bowl, lost round 2]
1996: Packers [won super bowl]
1995: Raiders [8-8]
1992: Bills [lost super bowl]
1991: Oilers, Redskins [lost round 2, won super bowl]
1990: Bears [lost round 2]

so wrap up:
20 teams
6 super bowl winners
3 super bowl winners

the most interesting thing to me is there have been a great amount of frauds there, nobody made a conference championship win! I might have mixed up some round 2s and round 3s since I did this in a super hurry, but I do not think I mixed up any losers because I know these games pretty well

just to clarify, since I did give room for error and extend to week 6 finishes, only 5 teams hit 4 of these games instead of 3:
1996 Packers [win SB]
1999 Rams [win SB]
2006 Bears [lose SB]
2007 Patriots & Steelers [lose SB, lose round 1 in one of the most underrated upsets ever and then immediately go to the Super Bowl next year]

so if the Texans win again like this, regardless of strength of opponent [Jets or Packers], then they are 100% historically (as far back as my data goes) a SB team through and through

Even given all the examples of misses of these teams (although anything that gets you a near 50% super bowl attendance rate and over a 25% win rate is fantastic), I just think the Texans are better than every team but the Patriots or Rams going back to the end of the 90s...I was too young to remember the any season before the Rams '99 season so I am not going to try to compare to teams older than that. I really do not think I am remotely exaggerating the case for the Texans, no one has looked this good this last 14 years except the Rams twice and Patriots twice...those teams obviously looked better on offense because they had better QBs, but the Texans look better on defense than all but the 2004 version of the Patriots there.

 

[WaterBomb]

Yes, I think I was a bit half-assed in my comparison, as I didn't even look at the defenses. The Texans, after they hired Wade Phillips, have become one of the top defenses in the NFL. What's even better about them is that they are extremely well-rounded, being strong against the run AND the pass. Texans D puts them at a level way above the Falcons of previous years, but this year with the improvement of the Falcons defense under Mike Nolan they have become closer again. I stand by my statement about their offense though, I think most people fail to realize that their entire offensive success is predicated on the fact that they have the best Offensive Line in the NFL, combined with a brilliantly executed zone blocking scheme and play action. Matt Schaub is not an elite QB, and Arian Foster is not really an elite RB (he's good, he's just no AP). Andre Johnson is definitely in the top 3 WRs in the game so I won't argue that point, but he has less to do with the team's success than the O-Line. This line they have can carry them to the Super Bowl if they stay healthy, but I still believe they will be upset by another team in the championship game. Also, one injury to one of their linemen would be a drastic difference in performance of the team as a whole, I would wager.

We'll see how this season plays out. The Texans are the obvious favorite and best team in the AFC, but the best team does not always go all the way.

 

[Deschain]

just gonna leave this here.

 

[CaptKirby]

shitttttttttttttttttt

get basically every other talking point and prediction I make right all season long, 21-11 ATS (including this game ._.) and then Romo goes for 5 interceptions

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

IT'S ORTON TIME!!!!

My friend, who is a die hard Cowboys fan, was shouting profanities throughout the entire game, it was funny.

 

[Byrne]

soooooo


the cowboys are EXTREMELY terrible

 

[Dubby]

This was honestly expected, just look at how terrible Dallas was last week against Tampa Bay. Too often in the NFL the home team are considered the favorites, when in reality the Bears should have been the favorite to win this game, and its a good thing I picked them to win too.

 

[some hero]

This was honestly expected, just look at how terrible Dallas was last week against Tampa Bay. Too often in the NFL the home team are considered the favorites, when in reality the Bears should have been the favorite to win this game, and its a good thing I picked them to win too.

o

Just look at the Seattle game. Those are the 2012 Cowboys. I said it after they humiliated the Giants. The Cowboys earned the win, but only because of the stupidity of the Giants offensive coordinator. They took advantage of piss poor playcalling and deserve the win, but they looked average at best and all they did was drive home the message that the Giants can't run the ball. Let's hope Philly sends the message that there is something called a "short pass".

 

[CaptKirby]

Okay so I did what I do and only one two individual QBing performances back to 1989 have compared to this.

specifications: 65%+ completion, 250+ yards, 5 or more interceptions
1996 Jeff George & Bobby Hebert combine for 33/49 366 yards 2 TD 5 INT
1996 Mark Brunell 37/52 421 yards 0 TD 5 INT
2005 Favre, 26/39 279 yards 1 TD 5 INT

at least back to 1989, Romo is the highest completion % to have 5 or more interceptions...if you threw in Orton's completion this actually becomes way crazier than any QBing performance involving 5 INTs too by jumping everything to 75%, way crazier than that combined 366 yards game