NFL 2012 Divisional Week Thread

Stele wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

But to your point, there was lots of ugly taunting on Hawks boards yesterday from Falcons and 49er fans that included lots of "limp wristed Seattle [email protected]##t comments." So overall I like that GWJ doesn't stoop to that cesspool.

No doubt. I saw a lot of the same comments from Seattle fans on the 49ers board where I hang out. They crash our game thread, trolling with all kinds of stuff. Especially in the first few min when Colin threw the pick-6.

I know you're not one of those jerks, and I don't think anyone around here is. My hate for a division rival has bled through in a lot of my posts lately. I hope I haven't crossed a line.

It's very hard to know where that line is when you grow up in the Louisville-Kentucky basketball rivalry. There's nothing like it in any other sport. It goes way beyond basketball. It's red vs blue, city vs rural, black vs white, and a whole lot of other things tied in, and it was pretty ugly growing up in the middle of that mess. Still is, in a lot of places, even in this century. My perception of right vs wrong in sports fandom is probably pretty skewed thanks to those Wildcat nuts. You wouldn't believe some of the sh*t I heard growing up. Could probably have pages and pages of P&C discussion about it.

Anyway, I may take joy in your team losing, but I shouldn't take joy in your suffering for that loss. Sorry.

ROFL I'm laughing my butt off because my family moved to Louisville when I was in high school, and my brother stayed around and graduated from UL. So while we may be rivals at the NFL level, we have sympathies in common at the college level. And yeah people don't believe me out here that UK vs UL is a far bigger rivalry than Washington vs Oregon.

And for the record I also hate the Seahawks fans who have gotten really conceited because their team has had some success in the past few years. They're like the Colts fans I know back home, except the Hawks haven't won a SB. I have nothing against San Fran when we're not playing you, and your city is certainly a great place to visit. I stand by my comment about CLINK, it really is something to behold if you get a chance to visit Seattle.

Anyhow, things are good on my end and if it hadn't been such a nail biter I don't think I would have cared.

Thin_J wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

It sucks that Gronk is out but a Patriots - Ravens game is always a messy but still mostly entertaining one.

Based on all the ones I've watched :P

I'm not going to argue with that. They do always play close and it usually comes down to the last 30 seconds.

I want Joe Flacco's agent.

Maybe he can convince my bosses that the one decent story I wrote last week makes me one of the best 5 journalists in the country.

Enix wrote:

I want Joe Flacco's agent.

Maybe he can convince my bosses that the one decent story I wrote last week makes me one of the best 5 journalists in the country.

My friends at work are now legitimately concerned about Joe Flacco. I asked them if they really believed Joe Flacco could have 3 good games in a row, but they just brushed it off. It's as though everyone has forgotten how he gets these cold stretches and loses his touch on the ball.

I turned on the radio in traffic last night and the ESPN talking heads were talking up his ability to play on the road. I think anyone that plays fantasy football knows that Joe Flacco has only been close to a trustworthy start when he's at home. Joe Flacco's agent will still make both of them a killing this off-season, barring a sanchtastic game against the patriots this weekend.

I turned on the radio in traffic last night and the ESPN talking heads were talking up his ability to play on the road.

Ugh. I hate when ESPN starts saying great things about the team I want to win. That usually means they will lose.

S0LIDARITY wrote:
Enix wrote:

I want Joe Flacco's agent.

Maybe he can convince my bosses that the one decent story I wrote last week makes me one of the best 5 journalists in the country.

My friends at work are now legitimately concerned about Joe Flacco. I asked them if they really believed Joe Flacco could have 3 good games in a row, but they just brushed it off. It's as though everyone has forgotten how he gets these cold stretches and loses his touch on the ball.

I turned on the radio in traffic last night and the ESPN talking heads were talking up his ability to play on the road. I think anyone that plays fantasy football knows that Joe Flacco has only been close to a trustworthy start when he's at home. Joe Flacco's agent will still make both of them a killing this off-season, barring a sanchtastic game against the patriots this weekend.

Hes most likely going to get franchised...

and after further reading yea I was way off on the Capers stuff. Will be interesting to see how the Packers draft again this year but theres a worrying trend that the first round picks for the last 3 years have been having a rough time staying healthy. All 3 were on the IR going into the playoffs this year.

So . . . Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers . . . and Flacco?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Mike Lombardi was on the BS report last night and Simmons asked him about who he would take if he could pick any QB to have 5 years to build a team around. He had
1. Rodgers
2. Luck
3-6 Was a virtual tie for Kaepernick, Wilson, RGIII, and Matt Ryan.
He said Flacco would be in the top 10 and then Simmons switched topics. I don't think I'd have Flacco that high, but I've also never ran a football team outside of Madden. I guess I forgot that Flacco's turning 28 tomorrow, feels like he's been around longer than that.

EDIT: Cam Newton might have been in that 3-6 mix too. I'm not sure.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

So . . . Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers . . . and Flacco?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

QBs I'd would rather have on my team other than Flacco in no particular order (OK, in order of division from AFC East to NFC West):

Brady, Sanchez, Roethlisberger, Luck, P.Manning, E.Manning, a healthy RG3, Rodgers, Brees, Kaepernick, Wilson

I compare him to Romo, Cutler and Ryan, good enough to compete, but probably not good enough to win the big one. There might be hope for Matty Ice though.

So naturally, I've just jinxed us all into a Baltimore/Atlanta Super Bowl.

PS- Just kidding about Sanchez, wanted to see if you all were paying attention.

S0LIDARITY wrote:

Mike Lombardi was on the BS report last night and Simmons asked him about who he would take if he could pick any QB to have 5 years to build a team around. He had
1. Rodgers
2. Luck
3-6 Was a virtual tie for Kaepernick, Wilson, RGIII, and Matt Ryan.
He said Flacco would be in the top 10 and then Simmons switched topics. I don't think I'd have Flacco that high, but I've also never ran a football team outside of Madden. I guess I forgot that Flacco's turning 28 tomorrow, feels like he's been around longer than that.

EDIT: Cam Newton might have been in that 3-6 mix too. I'm not sure.

Just listened to that and was surprised that he rated Matt Ryan so highly....

The one thing that Flacco cant be knocked on is he does have a cannon arm.

In the rankings of QBs you could win a SB with but you really don't want to be relying on them I would have.

1. Flacco
then Ryan or Schaub.... and be pulling my hair out.

Could be an interesting offseason for QB shuffling. Vick? Romo? Rivers?

Strange mix of QBs in the NFL now with the sudden success of the young guys.

jowner wrote:

Could be an interesting offseason for QB shuffling. Vick? Romo? Rivers?

Strange mix of QBs in the NFL now with the sudden success of the young guys.

I was thinking about that. Seems like the only guys I feel good about are the entrenched veterans and the promising youngsters. Seems like the guys in-between are stale or something. Too many flaws, recollections of bad games dampen my hope for the Matt Ryans and Joe Flaccos of the NFL.

I don't have hope for Vick, I expect that he'll be a back-up somewhere next year.

I expect that Rivers won't be as bad as he was this year, he should have better WR's this season if Alexander and Brown are healthy and I hope that his line can't get any worse.

I feel like Tony Romo deserves a shot without Jason Garrett as a coach, but that may never coincide. I don't know who else the Cowboys could get that would be any better.

I think I would take Rodgers, Luck, Wilson/Kaepernick, Newton, Ryan respectively if I were building a team. I know Ryan hasn't been particularly inspiring, but he's still 27. I wouldn't take RGIII at the moment due to injury concerns, if healthy I'd put him at 3. I'd feel most nervous about building around Newton because of his attitude.

Kush15 wrote:

PS- Just kidding about Sanchez, wanted to see if you all were paying attention. 8-)

I was staring at the monitor jaw open, wondering what the f*ck... then finished reading.

As a fan of a team with no QB's anyone would even want as a third string guy, I'd say teams ought to be very careful about being too picky about their non-star QB's, at least for this year.

The draft looks horrible. And the FA and potential trade market is filled with nothing but those guys no one wants. The cream of the crop will be Alex Smith, who will command way more compensation than he is actually worth because of the high demand and low supply.

I think the Chiefs best option is to grab another guy off the trash heap and hope they strike gold. Cassel has to go because the team and fans have lost all confidence in him, so he is a distraction. But I have serious doubts that they will replace him with anyone that will do much better.

So guys like Schaub and Flacco seem expendable, but there isn't really anyone to replace them with. QB's are like OL this year.

Kirk Cousins looked pretty good in RG3 relief this year. I expect someone to be after him as soon as they can be.

I think Washington would be insane to let him go with the durability issues I thin we can expect RGIII to have, even after he recovers.

Interesting that no one mentioned Matt Stafford. His level of play regressed a bit this year on a bad team, but he's 24 and has a lot of talent to develop.

I wouldn't hesitate to choose Stafford to build a team around over Flacco.

Forgot about him. I'd pick him over Newton and Ryan. Although his numbers are drastically boosted by his terrible defense and lack of a run game without Best.

S0LIDARITY wrote:

Forgot about him. I'd pick him over Newton and Ryan. Although his numbers are drastically boosted by his terrible defense and lack of a run game without Best.

and some guy named Megatron!

While Megatron is a big boon, he really hasn't had a quality #2 option since he's been in Detroit. Having megatron is a bigger positive than the lack of a real #2 as a negative.

Stafford's big issue is scattershot accuracy. Also, as for not having a viable #2, when you have Megatron, everybody pretty much becomes a viable #2.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

Stafford's big issue is scattershot accuracy.

Which I think may be slightly unfair reputation at this point. He completed 63.5% last year, and even this year, he was just the slightest hair below 60%. Considering the insane volume of passes he's throwing, that's not awful. He's not the 53% passer he was as a rookie anymore.

His INT total is high as an absolute value, but in terms of INT percentage, he's actually nice and low - 2.3% this year, 10th best.

Is Stafford actually going to be moved, though? I would assume that Reid would jump all over him.

I don't get a good read on what he will do for QB, though. The latest word on Dorsey is that he is taking the best player available at #1 or trading down. But I don't think there is going to be a high demand to move up this year. I don't think a QB can be reasonably taken at #1 this year.

Jayhawker wrote:

Is Stafford actually going to be moved, though?

No, this is just a continuation of the "listing QBs I would build a team around" discussion. I think Stafford comes into play right after the consensus-ish top 6.

Bill Simmons keeps saying that the Chiefs need to just declare that they're drafting Clowney and let the consequences be damned. I want it to happen, if only for the ensuing hilarity.

EDIT:
Here's my off the top list of moveable QB's with a return value. Diminishing return value. Not a strict order.
1. Alex Smith
2. Matt Flynn
3. Kyle Orton
4. Mike Vick
5. Chad Henne
6. Jason Campbell
7. Dan Orlovsky
8. Colt McCoy (7th rounder is probably too much)

I don't expect that the Redskins let Cousins go at this point.

No mentions of Dalton eh? Maybe it is just because I am in Cincinnati and see him play a lot, but I think he has a higher ceiling than guys like Schaub, but I could be wrong. It is hard to say how good he is vs how much AJ Green makes him look better.

LeapingGnome wrote:

It is hard to say how good he is vs how much AJ Green makes him look better.

Yeah. I don't think it's hard to say.

I haven't watched him as much as the others, but Dalton has been pretty lousy two play-off games in a row. I'm not sure he has the arm-strength right now to be a top 10 QB. It gets really tough for me to start ranking after Flacco, at that point it starts to feel grim.

Dalton at this point of his career is a serviceable starter, and little more.

He is pretty much what he was thought of as a draft prospect: a guy who could get on the field very quickly, but one who would hit his ceiling pretty quickly as well.

S0LIDARITY wrote:

Bill Simmons keeps saying that the Chiefs need to just declare that they're drafting Clowney and let the consequences be damned. I want it to happen, if only for the ensuing hilarity.

EDIT:
Here's my off the top list of moveable QB's with a return value. Diminishing return value. Not a strict order.
1. Alex Smith
2. Matt Flynn
3. Kyle Orton
4. Mike Vick
5. Chad Henne
6. Jason Campbell
7. Dan Orlovsky
8. Colt McCoy (7th rounder is probably too much)

I don't expect that the Redskins let Cousins go at this point.

Pretty sad list coupled with this years draft might be making certain teams suicidal.

Also makes you wonder if a guy like Rivers might actually be available. Romo not so much because hes good enough to fool Mr.Jones into thinking he has a 'shot' at winning especially compared to whats out there. Or Michael Vick could be a Cowboy next year one could only hope.

Rivers on the other hand if a decent enough package is floated SD could just say f*ck it... blow whatever semblance of a team they have up and start over with whatever young talent they have.

The team that might fool themselves into thinking they are just a QB away is the Cardinals. Problem is they are somehow already right up against the cap to fill holes elsewhere and specifically the OL.

As for the which QBs to build around? Poor Bradford and Freeman end up lost in the shuffle down the list and could honestly be pretty good.