NFL Thread

[merylinkid]

Hmmm.  Make the Super Bowl Presidents Day weekend. So Monday is a holiday for most people.

But 17 is an odd number when you have 32 teams.

[Lamb18]

I'd like them to match up NFC to AFC by record for the 17th game. For example, if the season was over right now, Kansas City would play Green Bay as #1 vs. #1.  Panthers would play Jets or Jaguars for #16 vs. #16. And if you were already scheduled to play that team during the season because of conference rotation, then you'd play them twice that season. So you could have a Super Bowl rematch. I think it would be fun.

[Johannah]

26 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

This article seems to think the game will come from out-of-conference and it could be a foreign game/neutral site game.  The vote will come soon and likely pass.  The season would just start a week earlier with one less pre-season game since this season seemed to do okay without a preseason.

I would have liked to see an addition bye week added into the season.

Thanks for the link to the article.  I like the idea that it could be a neutral site for all.  It's kind of unfair that certain teams have to give up a home game, even if that was negotiated when some teams joined the league (Jax?)

 

Also, like the suggestion that Superbowl be played on President's Day weekend.  Living on the east coast, going to a party made it a late night.

 

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Lamb18 said:

I'd like them to match up NFC to AFC by record for the 17th game. For example, if the season was over right now, Kansas City would play Green Bay as #1 vs. #1.  Panthers would play Jets or Jaguars for #16 vs. #16. And if you were already scheduled to play that team during the season because of conference rotation, then you'd play them twice that season. So you could have a Super Bowl rematch. I think it would be fun.

Hmmm.  That's an interesting take.  Just thought of something...  If they are going to have these be neutral site games in other countries, not sure I want to be the country to get #16 vs #16.  

Edited December 21, 2020 by Johann

[roamyn]

4 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

Poor trevor lawrence.   

Suddenly going to the jets doesn't look so bad.  

At least he'd be in new york rather than jax.  

Poor TL?  I have an abiding dislike for him.  Of course it wasn’t his fault that tOSU got robbed of two TDs in last year’s CFP, but there’s something abt him I dislike.

I’d say anyone who gets selected for the Jets is in a sucky position.  (Please don’t let it be Justin Fields).

Edited December 21, 2020 by roamyn

[Irlandesa]

16 minutes ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

They should add a bye week too I agree. Though this means the superbowl will now be mid Feb at earliest. 

They could get rid of another preseason game. 

9 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Hmmm.  Make the Super Bowl Presidents Day weekend. So Monday is a holiday for most people.

Fewer than 50% of people get Presidents' Day off.  I just Googled and it was 39% in 2019. 

Yesterday during the NFL Network games, I saw a promo that the Vikings and Saints will play Friday, on Christmas Day.  That will mean we've had a game on every day of the week at least once this season.  I'm happy about that because I'll be alone so why not watch football on Christmas  but I thought there was a gentleman's agreement between the NFL and NBA that the NFL would not have games on Christmas Day.  IIRC, there was one season when Christmas Day was on Sunday so all the NFL games were held on Saturday. 

Am I crazy?

[Carey]

The Steelers played on Christmas in 2016 and in 2017.  I'm not sure about any agreement that prohibits the league from scheduling NFL games opposite NBA games

[mojoween]

The Pats not making the playoffs for the first time since Job is not the big deal the media is making it out to be when Tampa Bay is still out there annoyingly sniffing around.

Not liking the 17th game for me is really a numbers thing.  32 teams playing 16 games is satisfyingly symmetrical.

Edited December 21, 2020 by mojoween

[cambridgeguy]

It seems fitting that the Jets would fail at failing.  I just wish the season ended with a Jaguars-Jets matchup because that would be a fitting way to end the 2020 season.  Set up a camera in Trevor Lawrence's house and show him curled up in a ball as he watches the travesty that would ensue. 

He's from Georgia, so maybe he'll prefer being in Jacksonville instead of moving to NY/NJ.

[Magog]

1 hour ago, cambridgeguy said:

It seems fitting that the Jets would fail at failing.  I just wish the season ended with a Jaguars-Jets matchup because that would be a fitting way to end the 2020 season.  Set up a camera in Trevor Lawrence's house and show him curled up in a ball as he watches the travesty that would ensue. 

He's from Georgia, so maybe he'll prefer being in Jacksonville instead of moving to NY/NJ.

Awww..... What could of been. That would of been very entertaining for me. I wouldn't have to take a 3 hr nap on the early games like I'm gonna have to do now thanks to the Jets winning yesterday. I'm still very sad about it 12 hrs later. There is nothing positive about them winning their first game yesterday. Again, thanks for nothing Rams. I find them now as even more unrootable like the Cowboys & Falcons.

Speaking of losers, is anybody even remotely surprised that Falcons choked another big lead yesterday (17-0) & lost again (to Tom Brady (AGAIN) Buccaneers)? 

 

10 hours ago, Johann said:

21 hours ago, mojoween said:

When the vote comes up the owners are highly likely to vote for the 17 game season and if so, it will start in 2021.

A 17 game season is SO STUPID.  As is 7 teams per conference in the playoffs, but that ship has sailed.

So, why do you think it's stupid?  Because it's different?  I haven't decided how I feel about it, so maybe you can convince me.  I am interested in where they are getting that extra game from.  I'm thinking besides the entire division in the other conference that your division plays on a rotating basis, your division plays a different division in the other conference, each team only playing the team that placed as they did...much like you do with the two divisions in your own conference that your not playing each team in.  Kind of hard for me to explain, so let me know if I'm not making sense.

To me, having another playoff team in each conference is the possibility of a repulsive team (like the Cowboys, Rams, Falcons, Chargers) finding another way to get in the Playoffs. Other than for TV purposes, I don't see the need of having to deal with yet another Playoff team.

 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Magog

[Carey]

Personally, I'm glad that the Jets won.  Sure it was dumb for them to do so, but I'm a fan of winning, not losing.  I think it's a major problem that NFL teams full of professional football players have recently taken these measures to best draft the top prospect.  The fact that someone has to lose each one of their 16 games too draft their future franchise QB is messed up.

Speaking of 16 games, I agree that it's working given the fact that the league hasn't made much, if any effort to add new teams to the league.  Because they need to collect, the NFL will hurry to have a 17th game with the same number of teams but then botch it when trying to figure out how to handle that 17th game.  Sounds like it will be out of conference, but I'll believe it when I see it.

The way Lamb18 described it works, but I think you wouldn't have to face a team from the other conference more than once.  This is not easy to explain right now, but if you went with the preceding season's rankings, before you match the placement of one team from the AFC with the placement of the NFC team, I would remove the division you're scheduled to play, and then after that, match the AFC/NFC teams from a list of the 12 teams per conference that isn't part of the 4-year out-of-conference rotation.

I think I have to display an example of what I'm talking about from past seasons.  However, I don't think you need to face a team more than once from a difference conference.  That would mess with the tiebreakers if and when it came to that

 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Carey
Edited for tags

[DoctorAtomic]

11 hours ago, Johann said:

Also, like the suggestion that Superbowl be played on President's Day weekend.  Living on the east coast, going to a party made it a late night.

I've always been in a state where it's a holiday. 

I 'suffered' through the same problem when I lived there. And, to add even more complication, we had to get the keg on *Saturday* and not crack it till like 4 or 5 ish on Sunday because the kickoff wasn't till 6.30. (pro-tip - put it in a garbage can, load it with snow, and cover with a garbage bag. Ice cold for gameday.)

A 17th game with no bye week, is strictly a cash grab by the owners and will further degrade the quality of the product. I'd rather see them add the game and delete the Thursday night. What about better health care for the inevitable injury rise due to the additional week. I know it's not going to happen, but I'd love to see the players just strike on the next cba and lose the season. 

[Fukui San]

Working on the idea that the league would have the 17th game match up teams with similar records the previous year (I don't think they can go into the season not knowing one of the game matchups by matching up similar records at that time), if we were to apply 2019 records to the 2020 season, this is what the 17th game matchups would be in 2020:

1. Niners vs. Ravens
2. Packers vs. Chiefs
3. Saints vs. Patriots
4. Eagles vs. Texans
5. Seahawks vs. Bills*
6. Vikings vs. Titans*
7. Rams vs. Steelers
8. Bears vs. Broncos
9. Cowboys vs. Raiders
10. Falcons vs. Colts
11. Bucs vs. Jets
12. Cardinals vs. Jags
13. Panthers vs. Browns
14. Giants vs. Chargers
15. Lions vs. Dolphins
16. Football Team vs. Bengals*

If I counted correctly, 3 of them are repeat matchups. Statistically around 4 of these matchups should be repeat matchups every year if you do it by matching up records.

You can see a lot of volatility this year at least based on which teams were good last year vs. this year.

[xaxat]

Does anyone know if the neutral games will be played at existing NFL stadiums? 

[Johannah]

5 minutes ago, xaxat said:

Does anyone know if the neutral games will be played at existing NFL stadiums? 

I believe the article above said they were thinking of having them in different countries to promote the NFL internationally, so I would say no.

[Carey]

The problem is the Pandemic is far from over.  I don't know if they can commit right away toward playing in another country.  At least for the next season.

Just thought of how they could avoid repeating teams from opposing conferences, and I don't believe that would work properly.  I guess we'll leave the records and tiebreakers for the league to figure out.  Though I'd rather see an annual game between former rivals (i.e. Seahawks/Broncos, Steelers/Cowboys)

[Irlandesa]

9 hours ago, Carey said:

Personally, I'm glad that the Jets won.  Sure it was dumb for them to do so, but I'm a fan of winning, not losing.  I think it's a major problem that NFL teams full of professional football players have recently taken these measures to best draft the top prospect.  The fact that someone has to lose each one of their 16 games too draft their future franchise QB is messed up.

I don't think the professional NFL teams do this.  Fans might want it but there's very little incentive for the GM or coach who will be on the hot seat if a season is bad enough.  There's no incentive for players whose value depends on how well they play.  There's no incentive for a team because if they can convince coaches and players to tank their seasons, then you have a team made out of players with a rather weak competitive spirit.

And once you have that, a potentially elite QB won't fix the issues.

Edited December 21, 2020 by Irlandesa

[Bastet]

Sorry, all, it's my fault the Jets won.  My friend couldn't do our usual Friday night phone call, and I couldn't reschedule for Saturday, so I said that since the Rams were playing the Jets, it would be fine if she called me at 3:30 Sunday - with that game well in hand, that would give me plenty of time to talk before getting ready for the Giants game and dinner at my parents' house (we're a two-house bubble).

Yes, I know better than to look past a game.  But, I mean ... it was the Jets.  Sorry!

[Carey]

RIP, Kevin Greene.

[Popples]

6 minutes ago, Carey said:

RIP, Kevin Greene.

58! Way too young. RIP

[Irlandesa]

That's so sad.  I remember his "it is time" speech to Clay Matthews when he was a defensive coach for Green Bay. Matthews then went out and caused a fumble which helped Green Bay win.

 

[merylinkid]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think the professional NFL teams do this.  Fans might want it but there's very little incentive for the GM or coach who will be on the hot seat if a season is bad enough.  There's no incentive for players whose value depends on how well they play.  There's no incentive for a team because if can convince coaches and players to tank their seasons, then you have a team made out of players with a rather weak competitive spirit.

And once you have that, a potentially elite QB won't fix the issues.

THIS.   A billion times this.   First, these guys are competitors, they are not going to deliberately lose to try to get some guy who MAY flame out in the NFL.   Second, the coach and/or GM are not going to lose so the NEXT Coach/GM can draft the dream guy  and win with him.    Not to mention even in the salary cap/rookie wage scale era, the first pick ties up a LOT of money that could be spent elsewhere on building the rest of the team.   

Tanking for a player is a media creation.   It's not something teams actively do.

[DrSpaceman73]

Number of preseason games does not affect when the superbowl is played unless the nfl decides to change their mind and start regular season games before labor day.  In the past they have stated there are no plans for regular season games before that date regardless of number of preseason games.  

 

[DrSpaceman73]

18 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

They could get rid of another preseason game. 

Fewer than 50% of people get Presidents' Day off.  I just Googled and it was 39% in 2019. 

Yesterday during the NFL Network games, I saw a promo that the Vikings and Saints will play Friday, on Christmas Day.  That will mean we've had a game on every day of the week at least once this season.  I'm happy about that because I'll be alone so why not watch football on Christmas  but I thought there was a gentleman's agreement between the NFL and NBA that the NFL would not have games on Christmas Day.  IIRC, there was one season when Christmas Day was on Sunday so all the NFL games were held on Saturday. 

Am I crazy?

I'm also not aware of such an agreement.  I think the nfl plays Saturday Sunday games late in december on a regular basis.  Most of the time that won't fall on Christmas or Christmas Eve but I'm sure it's happened before. 

Friday games on Christmas I don't recall though.  

[Carey]

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

3 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think the professional NFL teams do this.  Fans might want it but there's very little incentive for the GM or coach who will be on the hot seat if a season is bad enough.  There's no incentive for players whose value depends on how well they play.  There's no incentive for a team because if can convince coaches and players to tank their seasons, then you have a team made out of players with a rather weak competitive spirit.

And once you have that, a potentially elite QB won't fix the issues.

THIS.   A billion times this.   First, these guys are competitors, they are not going to deliberately lose to try to get some guy who MAY flame out in the NFL.   Second, the coach and/or GM are not going to lose so the NEXT Coach/GM can draft the dream guy  and win with him.    Not to mention even in the salary cap/rookie wage scale era, the first pick ties up a LOT of money that could be spent elsewhere on building the rest of the team.   

Tanking for a player is a media creation.   It's not something teams actively do.

Total agreement, and this is why I was actually happy for the Jets while many people joked about the Jets losing by winning or not losing right.  The fact that several people in the media kept mentioning how the Jets are tanking and then they would fire Adam Gase.  The only people that would sign up for that "myth" are the owners.

I don't think Adam Gase is any good as it relates to being a head coach, and the Jets aren't great either, but I don't think they are bad enough to lose 16 games within a season.  They had a tough schedule, but while they were bad last year, it was a .438 record and third in the AFC East.  I don't think he was given any signs of returning.  Good on him for winning, I guess.  Looks like Gregg Williams boot wasn't scapegoating.

As mentioned, the team needs a lot more than a QB to be effective.  If there was ever an example, Cincinnati is just that

[roamyn]

What the heck is going on with Pissburgh?  Do they not realize that Cleveland - CLEVELAND - is on their heels, and we (the Browns) play them in Cleveland in two weeks?
 

Now, I don’t think the Squealers will lose the North, but lately they’re ice cold, and the Browns are hot.

Edited December 22, 2020 by roamyn

[Carey]

15 minutes ago, roamyn said:

What the heck is going on with Pissburgh?  Do they not realize that Cleveland - CLEVELAND - is on their heels, and we (the Browns) play them in Cleveland in two weeks?
 

Now, I don’t think the Squealers will lose the North, but lately they’re ice cold, and the Browns are hot.

The Steelers could very well lose the North.  The problem is any chance of turning things around has gone out the window, if not heading into that direction.  They are losing several players, more on defense and now on offense.  They are too afraid to make adjustments, though that is who they've been for a long time.

 

It was upsetting given what happened with them and their schedule getting changed several times.  It was without much, if any warning.  I don't know whether Baltimore got or received word on the league's plans to postpone that Week 12 game three times.  However, the fact is both teams had irregular schedules.  The Ravens haven't really dealt with a major injury bug due to disruption.  As a result, I will not point to that as a reason.  By the way, unless I'm mistaken, Baltimore played 4 games, separated by a short week three times in a row.  So that's 5 days rest after the Steelers game, then the Cowboys game, followed by the Browns game, and then the Jaguars game.  Their result was a 112-73 margin post Steelers including two blowouts and two 40-point games.

 

Even if the Browns don't get the AFC North this year, it really doesn't matter.  The Steelers are punting to what's next, and it might be more of the same, if they're lucky.  Meanwhile, The Browns are playing some awesome football.  I may have dissed them before & referenced a weak schedule, but I wouldn't want to face Cleveland.  They have the assets to win anywhere against anybody, or keep it close at the worst.  Pittsburgh, despite a nice start, have only one positive thing going for them: they haven't cancelled their future games yet

[Lamb18]

10 hours ago, Fukui San said:

Working on the idea that the league would have the 17th game match up teams with similar records the previous year (I don't think they can go into the season not knowing one of the game matchups by matching up similar records at that time), if we were to apply 2019 records to the 2020 season, this is what the 17th game matchups would be in 2020:

But don't they already schedule the next season according to the records of the current season for the division games? For example, if Vikings end up being third in the NFC North in 2020, they would play the 2020 third place teams from the West and South divisions. (Next year we play all the East teams.) The schedule does not come out until spring. I guess I don't see why they couldn't use the 2020 season for a placement matchup between NFC and AFC in 2021, especially if you don't take the playoffs into account and just match teams up according to regular season placements. 

I have the game on and I think those three interceptions are what made the difference for the Cincinnati lead. (Go Bengals!)

@roamyn, I've been cheering for Cleveland all season. The Browns management made a smart move when they picked Stefanski for head coach. He was the Vikings' offensive coordinator and is a real good guy. You probably already know that. Anyhow I'm happy he's doing so well in his first season. Fun times next year, Vikings will be scheduled to play the AFC North teams.

[Carey]

5 hours ago, Popples said:

5 hours ago, Carey said:

RIP, Kevin Greene.

58! Way too young. RIP

I'm glad he got into Canton.  And and Superbowl ring with Green Bay.  Definitely a legend with several teams, including Pittsburgh along with Greg Lloyd and company.  Not as great as the 1970s Steelers but a unit to be respected.

[Lamb18]

There's a good chance the AFC North title will be decided at the last game, Cleveland vs. Pittsburgh. Cleveland plays Jets next week and Pittsburgh plays Indiana. Of course the Jets may now be on a streak and win two in a row.

[roamyn]

Just now, Lamb18 said:

There's a good chance the AFC North title will be decided at the last game, Cleveland vs. Pittsburgh. Cleveland plays Jets next week and Pittsburgh plays Indiana. Of course the Jets may now be on a streak and win two in a row.

I don’t know that I would bet on the Jets.  They won mainly because the Rams played a terrible, sloppy game.  And Stefanski seems to have this team well grounded.  Plus Baker is playing at an Aaron Rodgers level (not that he is Aaron Rodgers), with a 112.5 QBR the second half of the season.  Hopefully Sheldon Richardson is okay and can play, we don’t need to lose more on that line.

[Irlandesa]

I'm a little stunned at how the Steelers have kept sliding.   And this goes back to the point I mentioned earlier about not wanting to mess with the competitive spirit.  I'd argue it'll be harder to get the 12th win after a three loss streak than it was to get the 11th win.

[geauxaway]

I’m baking and cooking and celebrating!!!!  The Chiefs helped the Packers and we are all decked out on green and gold and red and gold.  Praise Be!  And MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!! 💚💛❤️💛.  

[mojoween]

Players may hate their ownership and stop caring, but I can’t picture a one of them actively trying to tank for a guy who if he’s good, is going to make an exponentially amount of millions more than they are.

Ok so NOW is it time for Daniel Snyder to go?  No?

[merylinkid]

It's been time for Daniel Snyder to go for a while.

 

I for one am extremely happy with the outcome of Sunday's game for Dallas.   

[Kip Hackman]

I have to take issue with the people saying that tanking doesn't happen.  Sure, coaches and players don't tank, but GM's do assemble crappy rosters in the hopes of a high draft pick. And you've got to be BAD, because they're no draft lottery.  Hell, this year 1-15 might not get it done.

The Panthers absolutely tanked for Andrew Luck in 2010.  In fact, they did such a great job of being terrible, that they convinced him to stay at Stanford for another year. 😟

 

[DrSpaceman73]

10 minutes ago, Kip Hackman said:

I have to take issue with the people saying that tanking doesn't happen.  Sure, coaches and players don't tank, but GM's do assemble crappy rosters in the hopes of a high draft pick. And you've got to be BAD, because they're no draft lottery.  Hell, this year 1-15 might not get it done.

The Panthers absolutely tanked for Andrew Luck in 2010.  In fact, they did such a great job of being terrible, that they convinced him to stay at Stanford for another year. 😟

 

I dont think it was purposely for luck but the panthers owner absolutely tanked the team that year.   

[DoctorAtomic]

Not that I'm a pro athlete or even played closed to that level, but I'm sure we've all played sports competitively. I was on just bad teams that lost a lot. It's not fun knowing going into the game you've got a slim chance to win. I can't imagine knowing that your organization is purposefully putting you out there to lose. It's got to be insulting. I'd rather go 0-16 swinging for the fences than death by 1000 cuts. Of course, the problem is teams tanking aren't going to get better anyway. 

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, Kip Hackman said:

I have to take issue with the people saying that tanking doesn't happen.  Sure, coaches and players don't tank, but GM's do assemble crappy rosters in the hopes of a high draft pick. And you've got to be BAD, because they're no draft lottery.  Hell, this year 1-15 might not get it done.

I don't think that's tanking.  That's restructuring to rebuild.

Edited December 22, 2020 by Irlandesa

[Kip Hackman]

16 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think that's tanking.  That's restructuring to rebuild.

Tomato, tomahto

[Kip Hackman]

24 minutes ago, icemiser69 said:

They are not going to tank unless they know they are going to have a job next season.  It doesn't do any good to tank, and destroy their own resume if they are out at the end of the season. 

True. There's gotta be some job security there. In Charlotte, the GM who oversaw their 2-14 season is the same guy who drafted Cam Newton and Luke Kuechly.

If the owner wants to tank, all he's got to do is close the purse strings.

Players and coaches don't tank, but they can be set up to fail.

Edited December 22, 2020 by Kip Hackman

[JTMacc99]

6 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

I dont think it was purposely for luck but the panthers owner absolutely tanked the team that year.   

The owner is the only person who would ever intentionally set up his or her team to fail. GMs and Coaches are living on borrowed time. If a GM wanted to make some moves that were in the best interest of the team long term, but not for the current season, he would absolutely need to run that plan by ownership first. 

[JTMacc99]

19 hours ago, roamyn said:

What the heck is going on with Pittsburgh?

The injuries on defense have changed them just enough that they're easier to deal with for opposing offenses. The loss of Dupree tipped the scale. 

Hard to say what the heck is wrong with the offense. They are SO sloppy right now. Drops, fumbles, bad decisions. I have no idea what could cause a team to lose focus like this. They came out of the gate really sharp, and they're the complete opposite of sharp right now.

[mojoween]

I know he’s probably not going to get it, but I hope with all the absolute shit he has had to put up with since getting hired that Riverboat Ron gets some serious consideration for Coach of the Year.

[roamyn]

55 minutes ago, mojoween said:

I know he’s probably not going to get it, but I hope with all the absolute shit he has had to put up with since getting hired that Riverboat Ron gets some serious consideration for Coach of the Year.

IMO it’s between him & Stefanski. Stefanski has the edge of a better record, but Ron has the empathy vote for his perservering as a coach during chemo.

[DrSpaceman73]

2 hours ago, JTMacc99 said:

The owner is the only person who would ever intentionally set up his or her team to fail. GMs and Coaches are living on borrowed time. If a GM wanted to make some moves that were in the best interest of the team long term, but not for the current season, he would absolutely need to run that plan by ownership first. 

John fox that year I believe was on the last year of a contract and it was obvious he was not coming back for another season.  He wasn't clear completely tanking the games because he still needed to coach for another job but he also had little incentive otherwise to work that hard to win games for the panthers.  I doubt he was giving it his all that year.  

Players you are right they are playing to win.  If you okay half assed in the nfl you can easily get hurt and also they are constantly playing for their job.  

But yes it comes from the ownership mostly. B

[KHenry14]

2 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

There are some teams that no matter how many times are put in the position of building a team for the future epically fail at it.  Even if they do draft the right talent, that doesn't mean much.  How many times has it been said long before the Chargers left San Diego, that they had the most talent, and yet they have done nothing with it from 79-81 and then again in the later Marty years? 

They didn't have a chance in that one SB they did play in, in 1995.   Horribly over-matched.

Granted, I am not a fan of the team since they moved, but I still know enough about them to know that their problems go far beyond talent.  In game decision making has always been an issue with that team.

The Jets are now in the position of drafting whoever the heck they want, and I seriously doubt many Jets' fans think they will get it right.

You didn't mention it, but the common denominator of those Charger team is Spanos ownership. Same thing in Detroit with Ford ownership. 

[xaxat]

I see that the Cowboys have zero Pro Bowlers this year. 

Maybe they should think about firing their GM.

[Kip Hackman]

2 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

John fox that year I believe was on the last year of a contract and it was obvious he was not coming back for another season.  He wasn't clear completely tanking the games because he still needed to coach for another job but he also had little incentive otherwise to work that hard to win games for the panthers.  I doubt he was giving it his all that year.  

Fox was clearly in IDGAF mode, and I don't think anyone blamed him. 

Ownership had turned on him, but was too cheap to pay two coaches.  So he had to coach the last year of a contract that clearly wasn't gonna be extended.  And with Jimmy Clausen as his QB, who he didn't have a high opinion of. (Rightly so, in retrospect).

Fox' tenure had run its course, but he deserved better from Panthers' ownership.  

 

 

 

[merylinkid]

Speaking of the Chargers.   Old Jack Murphy Stadium is being torn down.    My dad lived down the street from it for a few years.   Made coming home from work challenging sometimes.   But I'm kinda nostalgic she is going.   I felt the same way when they imploded the old SilverDome (you know the second time -- when it actually worked)

[xaxat]

Dan Snyder says he's being extorted by minority owner of Washington Football Team

I don't know why he's worried. It's not like he's given them a ton to work with.