NFL 2013-14 Week 12: Brady-Manning-Pocalypse Now

[Jabronius Maximus]

Eh, not so sure after tonight's contest. The Falcons tepid defense held NO under 20, and they only posted 23 against the Niners last week. Seems like the Seachickens should eat 'em for lunch.

Well of course that's the conventional wisdom, and it'll more than likely happen. It's just that the last time Seattle faced a vertically inclined QB, the defense got shredded. So I wouldn't write off the Saints like that.

[Kalbear]

I guess it was a shredding. But it was still a very close game that was lost mostly by their offense sucking.

[Jabronius Maximus]

Well shredding was a poor word. But they had a big problem stopping the deep pass from Luck, as he burned them repeatedly with it.

And they put up 423 yds of offense and 28 points. What more could you ask for?

[Reposado]

Eh, not so sure after tonight's contest. The Falcons tepid defense held NO under 20, and they only posted 23 against the Niners last week. Seems like the Seachickens should eat 'em for lunch.

yeah but i figured last night as one of those road division games where it doesnt mean too much to the saints. a lot of times the home dog just holds their own in those and it doesnt indicate anything long term about the favorite.

[DanteGabriel]

yeah but i figured last night as one of those road division games where it doesnt mean too much to the saints. a lot of times the home dog just holds their own in those and it doesnt indicate anything long term about the favorite.

"I almost wish we'd let them win that, but the damn Seahawks …" Saints quarterback Drew Brees said while shaking his head. When asked why he would possibly want to lose a divisional battle in the heat of the playoff race, Brees suddenly clammed up, but the wind whispered, "Clowney," as a shudder ran down his spine.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/83539/about-last-night-saints-too-much-for-falcons

Heh.

[Rhom]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/83539/about-last-night-saints-too-much-for-falcons

Heh.

:lol:

[sperry]

Any road win in the NFL is a good one. Are the Seahawks not contenders because they barely scraped one out against the Rams a few weeks ago? Saints-Seahawks would be a great game.

[Rhom]

Any road win in the NFL is a good one. Are the Seahawks not contenders because they barely scraped one out against the Rams a few weeks ago? Saints-Seahawks would be a great game.

The Saints will show a lot in the next four weeks. They play the Seahawks in Seattle and the Panthers (twice).

[Jaime L]

I'm on the fence on Mike Shanahan, but I largely don't want him fired because I doubt we could get someone better at least from a pure coaching x's and o's standpoint.

One definite exception I would make would be Art Briles. Not so much because of the RGIII/Baylor connection, though that helps, but because the man is a football genius. This article reminds me of all the reasons why.

The difference between your run-of-the-mill wunderkind football coach—say, Texas Tech coach Kliff Kingsbury or Clemson offensive coordinator Chad Morris—and Briles is largely a matter of what we'll call Football Things.Everyone involved in the sport in any way has to negotiate a certain amount of cognitive dissonance between long-held football shibboleths and the underlying truths of the game. The arguments can be simple: "Establishing the run is important if you want to win a football game." (The truth is that teams run because they're winning). Or complex: "Does the fact that this team with a terrible running game is good at play-action passes mean that the skill of the running game actually doesn't matter?" (Inconclusive. Anecdotally? No, it doesn't matter. )

...

Art Briles's success is based in part on a large inheritance—he didn't invent every concept he's using, though what coach ever did?—but the chief reason behind it is his willingness to push the successful trends of the day to their logical extremes, to take chances well outside the scope of accepted football protocol. To put it simply: He doesn't believe in Football Things.

If you want to maximize the talent of your offensive roster, there is no one better in football than Art Briles.

Make the Godfather offer, Danny. Just do it.

[sperry]

I'm on the fence on Mike Shanahan, but I largely don't want him fired because I doubt we could get someone better at least from a pure coaching x's and o's standpoint.

One definite exception I would make would be Art Briles. Not so much because of the RGIII/Baylor connection, though that helps, but because the man is a football genius. This article reminds me of all the reasons why.

If you want to maximize the talent of your offensive roster, there is no one better in football than Art Briles.

Make the Godfather offer, Danny. Just do it.

I think Art Briles is a great coach, but he's doing this with a roster full of unbelievable offensive talent. He's put more WRs in the league than anyone over the past few years, and they're good ones. His two starters this year will both play in the league. They have multiple extremely talented running backs and an offensive line with future NFL guys on it. So basically the difference between him and these "wunderkinds" is that using his ties as a former HS coach in Texas he's been able to recruit unbelievable talent to Baylor, which is incredibly impressive considering the heavy hitters he's sniping these guys out from under. Baylor has more NFL talent on offense than any team in the country, aside from perhaps FSU, whose offense happens to be just as good as Baylor's. Baylor has also been fortunate enough to play, in succession, some of the most atrocious defenses and offenses in the country, allowing them to further rack up the points and yards.

[Jaime L]

I think Art Briles is a great coach, but he's doing this with a roster full of unbelievable offensive talent. He's put more WRs in the league than anyone over the past few years, and they're good ones. His two starters this year will both play in the league. They have multiple extremely talented running backs and an offensive line with future NFL guys on it. So basically the difference between him and these "wunderkinds" is that using his ties as a former HS coach in Texas he's been able to recruit unbelievable talent to Baylor, which is incredibly impressive considering the heavy hitters he's sniping these guys out from under. Baylor has more NFL talent on offense than any team in the country, aside from perhaps FSU, whose offense happens to be just as good as Baylor's. Baylor has also been fortunate enough to play, in succession, some of the most atrocious defenses and offenses in the country, allowing them to further rack up the points and yards.

What you say about skill position guys may be true, but the difference between FSU and Baylor is the former is starting the #1 prospect in the nation out of high school at QB, basically an Andrew Luck level prospect, whereas Baylor is starting just a guy. Considering that since Baylor lost RGIII to the draft it hasn't missed a beat offensively and has arguably gotten better with non-NFL prospects at QB, it's testament to what Briles' scheme has made possible.

[trickster]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/83573/pass-atlas-tom-brady-vs-peyton-manning

Interesting article on Brady-Manning in terms of passing efficiency/completion. Quite surprised to see how bad Brady's downfield passing looks compared to Mr Noodle Armed master of Wobbly Duck. The data is between 2006-2013, so includes Moss-Gronk-Hernandez. Mind you, Brady's game is not based on downfield passing and he does play outdoors in NE.

Wish they had done a similar analysis on Brees and Rodgers.

[Kalbear]

Yeah, it's good to see this in this kind of format, but it's not that surprising. Brady has never been about the deep ball. Brady/Welker was so lethal because Welker was a perfect match for Brady's style of methodical, accurate short throws. His long throws have basically been good in exactly one season.

Manning doesn't have a lot of mustard on his throws any more (it's good but not great) but he puts it where his receivers need to get it. HIs long passes are a lot more catchable. Clearly, given the above data.

[Maithanet]

The ref that cursed out Redskins OT Trent Williams during last week's Eagles game has been suspended one game.

I don't imagine anyone here supports refs swearing back at players, so I support this move. Didn't really expect it, but I suppose the refs union has never been as strong as the players.

[sperry]

What you say about skill position guys may be true, but the difference between FSU and Baylor is the former is starting the #1 prospect in the nation out of high school at QB, basically an Andrew Luck level prospect, whereas Baylor is starting just a guy. Considering that since Baylor lost RGIII to the draft it hasn't missed a beat offensively and has arguably gotten better with non-NFL prospects at QB, it's testament to what Briles' scheme has made possible.

Petty is a fantastic college QB. He's accurate and has nice touch on the deep ball which is what you need. There aren't the athletes in CFB secondaries that demand a super strong arm.

Don't get me wrong that Briles has done a fantastic job and is a great coach. I just think he's a really good talent evaluator and recruiter, not some mad genius that is revolutionizing the game.

[Jace, Extat]

Being tall helps, the rest is all timing

That was funny.

Touching the goalpost in 'celebration' should be a penalty/fine.

I am vastly entertained.

I never saw Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Wes Welker, Tony Gonzalez, Heinz Ward, or Donald Driver pull shit like that in the endzone. They're supposed to be professionals, and as such should not pull petty stunts to look cool.

[Daeric]

I don't know, disguise that goalpost as someone from the other side and Hines would try to hit it it hard.

[Jace, Extat]

At least Hines wouldn't make an ass out of himself when he scored.

I'd like to draw everyone's attention to something very serious. Today is the 1 year anniversary of the ButtFumble, may it live in infamy. And here is Mark 'ButtFumble' Sanchez's new hair style.

ETA:

Did you know Don Cheadle is not only a big NFL fan, but he's also more knowledgeable about the game than 80% of the commentators/analysts for CBS, FOX, NFL NETWORK, or ESPN? If you've got 6 minutes to waste, that video's worth it. Cheadle doesn't give any groundbreaking analysis (just solid, reasonable observation), but it gets really funny at the end during Darren Sharper's first acting gig.

I'd also like to mention something disturbing I saw today. I think it was on ESPN (I'm not entirely sure, it was on a TV in the waiting room at my work), I saw a segment where four people competed in commentary for 'points', with the person with the lowest points being eliminated every 'round' of discussion.

There was a 30-ish white host, a 30-ish black man, a 50-ish white man, a 30-ish Asian featured man, and a 50/60-ish woman. At one point, the woman was discussing Tony Romo and the Cowboys. She was making some kind of reference (which seemed completely valid) about Romo's stats this year when she stumbled over saying his name. She stuttered for a moment and said "Rhom-o" (which I've seen happen before, sometimes our mouths get dumb), it was a completely random thing, and like I've said, people stumble over their words/pronunciation all the time. But whereas I've watched men do this without incident dozens or hundreds of times and just continue their thought, the host and fellow analysts immediately began laughing and talking over her, refusing to let her finish the thought or express that it was an isolated 'goof' if you will.

The host even went so far as to completely cut her off and say 'well, you don't get any points for THAT one!' She 'survived' that round, and attempted to make another comment (I don't recall what about), but while she was speaking the rest of the analysts and the host either looked bored and disinterested, or again talked over her before she was 'eliminated' and a hideously shaded picture of her was put over her face.

I suppose that it's completely possible that I missed something about this show (as I was only passing through and stopped for a few minutes to watch), but this really bothered me. The only time I see women involved with NFL analysis is when they're a pretty host in a dress and heels (a few weeks ago the NFL did a 'midseason MVP' show and when the female host questioned Heath Evans' selection of Tom Brady he snapped "you're just here to host!") or on the sideline serving literally no purpose other than getting hit in the face with a football.

This makes me angry.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Brady has never been about the deep ball. Brady/Welker was so lethal because Welker was a perfect match for Brady's style of methodical, accurate short throws. His long throws have basically been good in exactly one season.

Yeah, how the Pats could justify letting that guy go is beyond me. As far as I'm concerned, Welker was every bit the integral part of the Patsy's offense as Brady is.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I'd also like to mention something disturbing I saw today. I think it was on ESPN (I'm not entirely sure, it was on a TV in the waiting room at my work), I saw a segment where four people competed in commentary for 'points', with the person with the lowest points being eliminated every 'round' of discussion.

There was a 30-ish white host, a 30-ish black man, a 50-ish white man, a 30-ish Asian featured man, and a 50/60-ish woman. At one point, the woman was discussing Tony Romo and the Cowboys. She was making some kind of reference (which seemed completely valid) about Romo's stats this year when she stumbled over saying his name. She stuttered for a moment and said "Rhom-o" (which I've seen happen before, sometimes our mouths get dumb), it was a completely random thing, and like I've said, people stumble over their words/pronunciation all the time. But whereas I've watched men do this without incident dozens or hundreds of times and just continue their thought, the host and fellow analysts immediately began laughing and talking over her, refusing to let her finish the thought or express that it was an isolated 'goof' if you will.

The host even went so far as to completely cut her off and say 'well, you don't get any points for THAT one!' She 'survived' that round, and attempted to make another comment (I don't recall what about), but while she was speaking the rest of the analysts and the host either looked bored and disinterested, or again talked over her before she was 'eliminated' and a hideously shaded picture of her was put over her face.

I suppose that it's completely possible that I missed something about this show (as I was only passing through and stopped for a few minutes to watch), but this really bothered me. The only time I see women involved with NFL analysis is when they're a pretty host in a dress and heels (a few weeks ago the NFL did a 'midseason MVP' show and when the female host questioned Heath Evans' selection of Tom Brady he snapped "you're just here to host!") or on the sideline serving literally no purpose other than getting hit in the face with a football.

This makes me angry.

Around the Horn. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villiany. Let's face it, ESPN has become the MTV of Sports Entertainment. PTI, Rome is Burning, Mike and Mike, The Herd, etc, etc. The only network that can compete with ESPN for absolute shiat programming is MTV or maybe The Disney Channel.