The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

davyjose · 06-01-2010 2:21pm

Looks like Mike Shanahan is very close to becoming the new Redskins coach Will we see a return to the Glory days in Washington, or is Shanahan overrated?

Mike Shanahan agreed to become the coach of the Washington Redskins on Tuesday, the latest step in a major overhaul of a troubled NFL team.

Shanahan's decision was confirmed to The Associated Press by an official within the NFL. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the team was not commenting on its coaching search.

The Redskins announced they would hold a news conference on Wednesday, although they did not say why.

The deal with Shanahan is for five years, the Denver Post reported on its Web site. The hire comes less than 48 hours after the Redskins fired Jim Zorn — and less than three weeks after front-office chief Vinny Cerrato resigned and quickly was replaced by general manager Bruce Allen.

Lirange · 06-01-2010 10:17pm

I don't think Shanny is some super genius or galactic guru. But he's proven he can win with talent. His men play hard for him. I don't think he's the type of guy that will come in and overachieve. But he's not going to be a liability or cause the team to perform way below it's potential either. He's a solid choice. Now if they'd only do something about that owner.

eagle eye · 06-01-2010 10:40pm

Well we will get to see how ruthless Mike is, imo he needs to hold onto DC Greg Blache as he has done a great job over the last two seasons. He needs to fire his son though, that offense has been horrendous. It will be funny to see what happens there with Kyle.

frostie500 · 06-01-2010 11:26pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Well we will get to see how ruthless Mike is, imo he needs to hold onto DC Greg Blache as he has done a great job over the last two seasons. He needs to fire his son though, that offense has been horrendous. It will be funny to see what happens there with Kyle.

Kyle Shanahan has been the OC at the Texans the last two years, they've been pretty good on offence. Matt Schuab had 4700 yards this year but the running game one of the least productive in the NFL after numerous ball security issues

tallaghtoutlaws · 06-01-2010 11:30pm

frostie500 wrote: »

Kyle Shanahan has been the OC at the Texans the last two years, they've been pretty good on offence. Matt Schuab had 4700 yards this year but the running game one of the least productive in the NFL after numerous ball security issues

He was the QB coach at the Texans 2 years previous to the being OC also. I like Kyle Shanahan. Will never be a Head Coach in my opinion but he will go on to be a solid OC the longer he goes on. As Frostie says he has done a good job with the Texans Offense.

Peyton Manning · 06-01-2010 11:35pm

Here's another one of the Sports Science segments, this time with Kris Jenkins testing how an average person would fare agains a lineman.

If you dont want to watch it, then at least fast forward to 4:20 to see complete ownage, hilarious in its brutality

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn2svE2Aw7A

Hynzie · 07-01-2010 12:53am

frostie500 wrote: »

Kyle Shanahan has been the OC at the Texans the last two years, they've been pretty good on offence. Matt Schuab had 4700 yards this year but the running game one of the least productive in the NFL after numerous ball security issues

I agree, the Texans have been red hot throwing the ball the past few seasons. I think if they can get Clinton Portis back health it will really help the run game. Don't forget Portis used to play for Shanahan in Denver and hes well suited to that style.

Hazys · 08-01-2010 8:35pm

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/everyone_at_hospital_already_hates

davyjose · 10-01-2010 2:41am

Did anyone try out their QB/Baseball skills with snowballs?

Just me then? Hmmm.....

Weird thing is, i have a baseball and a football

Hazys · 12-01-2010 3:08am

:eek::eek: WTF? :eek::eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA2B47_l9kg

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Footballers have way too much time on their hands...

eagle eye · 12-01-2010 11:42am

^^^^^^ Rofl, OMFG how bad is that:eek:

Si Conando · 12-01-2010 1:40pm

That is gold! He made it with Nike 2 years ago as a pisstake, strange time to release it

Hynzie · 12-01-2010 7:03pm

Poor poor stuff there!!! ''Challenge that call'' is the funniest line!!

Hynzie · 16-01-2010 7:50pm

Did anyone else see this? Its a really good magazine article about the Marvin Harrison shooting case. I cant believe more is not being made of this story.

http://www.gq.com/sports/profiles/201002/marvin-harrison?currentPage=7

tallaghtoutlaws · 16-01-2010 7:52pm

Hynzie wrote: »

Did anyone else see this? Its a really good magazine article about the Marvin Harrison shooting case. I cant believe more is not being made of this story.

http://www.gq.com/sports/profiles/201002/marvin-harrison?currentPage=7

Someone posted that awhile back. Mad mad article.

Edit: snippet of the one you posted was posted before.

Hynzie · 16-01-2010 8:23pm

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Someone posted that awhile back. Mad mad article.

Edit: snippet of the one you posted was posted before.

My bad didn't realize it was up already. I was just floored reading it. I knew there was something fishy about that case but the details in this article are crazy. Marvin Harrison is probably the last person in the NFL I thought would be involved in stuff like that.

tallaghtoutlaws · 16-01-2010 8:25pm

Hynzie wrote: »

My bad didn't realize it was up already. I was just floored reading it. I knew there was something fishy about that case but the details in this article are crazy. Marvin Harrison is probably the last person in the NFL I thought would be involved in stuff like that.

The article you put up is far superior with detail than the last. Holy crap on a stick Harrison has a dark background. Such a quiet dude and then you read that crap about him.

Hynzie · 16-01-2010 8:39pm

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

The article you put up is far superior with detail than the last. Holy crap on a stick Harrison has a dark background. Such a quiet dude and then you read that crap about him.

Ya the stuff about his half brothers and other family is rough stuff.

davyjose · 16-01-2010 11:25pm

Stumbled across this website by accident today - it's the best players in the NFL's history by player number. it's a couple of years but perhaps we could do our own version???

i expect some contention about #12 :cool:

http://www.bestbythenumbers.com/2007/11/nfl-athlete-number-1-warren-moon.html

tallaghtoutlaws · 16-01-2010 11:26pm

davyjose wrote: »

Stumbled across this website by accident today - it's the best players in the NFL's history by player number. it's a couple of years but perhaps we could do our own version???

i expect some contention about #12 :cool:

What website?

davyjose · 16-01-2010 11:33pm

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

What website?

Fcuking hell - long week in work lads

Edited...

ArmCandyBaby · 17-01-2010 5:23pm

I thought this was gas!

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-gameday/09000d5d815c4e6a/Mooch-does-Leno

Hynzie · 17-01-2010 6:05pm

Bears DE Gaines Adams passed away today in South Carolina.

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/news/story?id=4833908

Hazys · 17-01-2010 6:06pm

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-gameday/09000d5d815a2405/Plays-of-the-Year

Hazys · 18-01-2010 1:27am

This is more wtf than the LT video :eek::eek::eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-t4cxIuCBo

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

Definitly wacky nfl

Eire-Dearg · 18-01-2010 1:35am

The videos not buffering for me, but it sounds wacky alright. Who'd want to make a video about horse castration anyway!

cooker3 · 18-01-2010 6:07am

Incidentally the Jets are the winning-est teams of the decade

Hazys · 20-01-2010 3:15pm

A nice story from the nfl:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/20/nfls-haitian-push-generated-500000-per-hour/

Hazys · 27-01-2010 10:14pm

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/01/27/stafon-johnson/index.html?eref=sihp

Stafon Johnson, 4 months after 285lbs falls on his throat, nearly permanently losing his voice and life, he will be playing in the senior bowl and will take part in the combine...wow

Hazys · 29-01-2010 7:28pm

Not one Patriot on the offical NFL team of the decade yet and it doesnt look like there will be: http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2010/01/no_patriots_on.html

So i guess stats are more important than Superbowls according to the NFL. No player for the franchise of the decade makes the team...some joke!

_Buck Rogers · 29-01-2010 10:35pm

Lol another spark to set off the manning brady debate ><. Moss deserves a spot tbh. He was the best WR of the decade, not of the last 2 years of the decade in total he was. ( in my opinion of course)

eagle eye · 30-01-2010 2:03am

Yeah they love Peyton even though Brady has shone in the playoffs, has 3 rings and the best ever regular season by any Quarteback.

Imo there should be 3 at least, them being Brady, Vinatieri and Seymour. Moss also should be there.

_Buck Rogers · 30-01-2010 11:57am

eagle eye wrote: »

Yeah they love Peyton even though Brady has shone in the playoffs, has 3 rings and the best ever regular season by any Quarteback.

Imo there should be 3 at least, them being Brady, Vinatieri and Seymour. Moss also should be there.

Vinatieri yes, moss yes, seymour maybe, brady no:P. Its team of the decade. So we dont want players who had one outstanding year and then only 2nd best every other season:P

Hazys · 31-01-2010 4:44pm

_Buck Rogers wrote: »

Vinatieri yes, moss yes, seymour maybe, brady no:P. Its team of the decade. So we dont want players who had one outstanding year and then only 2nd best every other season:P

2nd best?...damn

3 superbowls is second best i guess :rolleyes:

frostie500 · 31-01-2010 5:06pm

Its a team of the decade, Manning hasnt missed a game all decade and Brady didnt play in 2000 or last season. Thats sixteen games missed, can you knock Manning down from the All-Decade team? I dont think so to be honest. I'm a big fan of Brady but Manning is the right pick for this team. Also to detract from Brady is that when Cassel started he was pretty damn productive for his season and his numbers werent really too dissimiler to Brady's averages with the exception of the 2007 season.

I expect a backlash from Pats fans for this.....;)

tallaghtoutlaws · 31-01-2010 5:19pm

frostie500 wrote: »

Its a team of the decade, Manning hasnt missed a game all decade and Brady didnt play in 2000 or last season. Thats sixteen games missed, can you knock Manning down from the All-Decade team? I dont think so to be honest. I'm a big fan of Brady but Manning is the right pick for this team. Also to detract from Brady is that when Cassel started he was pretty damn productive for his season and his numbers werent really too dissimiler to Brady's averages with the exception of the 2007 season.

I expect a backlash from Pats fans for this.....;)

Not that I care about these teams of the decades things too much. Another argument for Brady based on what you said Frostie is that Brady has won 3 Superbowls in 8 seasons and Manning 1 Superbowl in 10 seasons

Eire-Dearg · 31-01-2010 6:24pm

Evening all, haven't popped in in a while. Looking forward to next Sunday!?

themont85 · 31-01-2010 6:37pm

Away from the QB position, the Kick returner position is one which could be questioned. Although Cribbs has been great the last couple of years and very consistant, Hester's 2006 and 2007 were to use their commentator's words 'ridiculous'. His impact on their team was the major factor in them getting to and keeping up in the SB with a mediocre offence. But they'll go for consistancy with Cribbs who is quality too, but Hester would walk onto this team if he had kept at KR and not gone to wide out IMO.

Chucky the tree · 31-01-2010 7:49pm

frostie500 wrote: »

Its a team of the decade, Manning hasnt missed a game all decade and Brady didnt play in 2000 or last season. Thats sixteen games missed, can you knock Manning down from the All-Decade team? I dont think so to be honest. I'm a big fan of Brady but Manning is the right pick for this team. Also to detract from Brady is that when Cassel started he was pretty damn productive for his season and his numbers werent really too dissimiler to Brady's averages with the exception of the 2007 season.

I expect a backlash from Pats fans for this.....;)

I feel disgusted with myself that I'm going to defend Brady and the Patriots here so I'll make this quick. :pac: Look at the offensive talent Brady had for most of his years with the Patriots compared to what Manning had at Colts. If Brady could have had Moss and Welker on his team for the decade imagine how good his numbers would have been. Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clarke, edgerin James and Joseph Addai were all first round picks where as the only 1st round pick used a "skill" position player the Patriots have used has been Maroney(Open to correction on that though).

tallaghtoutlaws · 31-01-2010 7:54pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

where as the only 1st round pick used a "skill" position player the Patriots have used has been Maroney(Open to correction on that though).

Yup you are right. And I never thought Id see the day you defend a Patriots player

:D

Pats Drafts:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/nwe.htm

DonkeyPokerTour · 31-01-2010 8:31pm

I don't usually get involved in manning vs Brady debates since imho there is no debate, manning is better.

But here is some interesting things to think about.
Manning Wins 2000 & 2008 seasons since brady did not play.
Manning Wins 2006 season since Colts won superbowl
Brady Wins 2001, 2003 & 2005 season since Pats won superbowl
Brady Wins 2007 season because of 18-1 (go on you giants:D) and amazing stats.

So that leaves Brady 4 - Manning 3.

So the other seasons are 2002, 2005 and 2009.

I think we will agree than Manning Wins 2009, he's in superbowl, was league MVP and had the best stats. Leaving it 4seasons all.

Now Here are the 2002 stats:
Brady 3764Yards, 28TD's, 9-7
Manning 4200Yards, 27TD's, 10-6

IMHO thats a win for manning, more wins & More yards. However if you want to call it for Brady because of more Td's then ok.

Now Here are the 2005 stats:
Brady 4110Yards, 26TD's, 10-6
Manning 3747Yards, 28TD's, 14-2

IMHO thats another win for manning, more TD's and More Wins. However if you want to call it for Brady for more yards then Brady has to lose 2002, and if you go by TD's Brady wins one and loses one.

So IMHO in 6 of the 10 season are won by Manning, and 4 by Brady, or you can argue 5 and 5, but then you give the edge to the guy who won more MVP's which is Manning.

I genuinely cant see the argument for Brady as being better than Manning "Oh he's better under pressure", i just don't think that stacks up, and certainly it doesn't outweigh the much more impressive stats. Its like arguing that (up until last season) Brian O'Driscoll was not the best center in the world because he had not won anything significant. Where as Rua Topoki would have been because he had won significant trophies.

Again its my opinion and no amount of reasonable argument will convince me otherwise. Consider this me sticking my fingers in my ears and saying "Nah Nah Nah I Cant Hear Your"

:):D

tallaghtoutlaws · 31-01-2010 8:42pm

But again like Frostie's example you have left holes in your argument due to the fact Brady played in 2 less seasons so you can hardly compare them in the argument.

By default the 2 more seasons may have given Manning the team of the decade spot. But if you match both QBs on a Level playing field you get a conclusion of very similar QBs and both the best in their own rights.

This is why I hate Brady Vs Manning threads. Neither is better than each other. Both are by far the best QBs in the NFL today and out there on their own. And there is a very fine thread between them.

Why can't people accept for once that maybe both QBs are fooking awesome in their own rights and shouldn't be compared but both looked at with great awe. When people leave their dislike for the Colts or Pats a side and open their eyes to the football both QBs have created over the past decade for me the football makes them both phenomenal

Hazys · 31-01-2010 9:04pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I feel disgusted with myself that I'm going to defend Brady and the Patriots here so I'll make this quick. :pac: Look at the offensive talent Brady had for most of his years with the Patriots compared to what Manning had at Colts. If Brady could have had Moss and Welker on his team for the decade imagine how good his numbers would have been. Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clarke, edgerin James and Joseph Addai were all first round picks where as the only 1st round pick used a "skill" position player the Patriots have used has been Maroney(Open to correction on that though).

And to add to that, the one season Brady had WR talent comparable to the talent Manning has had all his career...Brady broke all his records!!!!

DonkeyPokerTour · 31-01-2010 9:12pm

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

But again like Frostie's example you have left holes in your argument due to the fact Brady played in 2 less seasons so you can hardly compare them in the argument.

By default the 2 more seasons may have given Manning the team of the decade spot. But if you match both QBs on a Level playing field you get a conclusion of very similar QBs and both the best in their own rights.

This is why I hate Brady Vs Manning threads. Neither is better than each other. Both are by far the best QBs in the NFL today and out there on their own. And there is a very fine thread between them.

Why can't people accept for once that maybe both QBs are fooking awesome in their own rights and shouldn't be compared but both looked at with great awe. When people leave their dislike for the Colts or Pats a side and open their eyes to the football both QBs have created over the past decade for me the football makes them both phenomenal

Tallaght did you not read my post at all?

DonkeyPokerTour wrote: »

Again its my opinion and no amount of reasonable argument will convince me otherwise. Consider this me sticking my fingers in my ears and saying "Nah Nah Nah I Cant Hear Your" :):D

Only Kidding

, I was not trying to argue who was better overall as a QB (i'm very closed minded on that) but the QB of the decade has to go to Manning because he played all 10 years, where as Brady only played 8. In those 10years Manning was league MVP 4 times. Its a little like arguing that say in 2010-2014 Brees puts up ridiculous numbers 50TD's every season, 4500+ Yards every season 13+ wins each year. 2 superbowls. Then he retires. Meanwhile Rivers throws 10 4000+ yard season and approximately 30 Td's each year. 1 superbowl. Come time for the team of the decade I would say it would have to go to Rivers because he was good for 10years, where as Brees was only good for 4 years. I know thats a lot more extreme than the case for Brady vs Manning but you get my drift.

BTW I appreciate both as elite quarterbacks however I disagree that they are head and shoulders about everyone else. Brees is right up there with them, so imho is Rivers and Warner was. Now below that there is a bit of a gap down to your Jay Cutlers, Aaron Rodgers, Eli Mannings etc.

frostie500 · 31-01-2010 9:17pm

Ive said before and I'll say it again I dont think theres anything to choose between these two(and we're all damn lucky to be able to watch two of the best QBs of all time playing each week) but saying that in a team of the decade a call has to be made between the two. The only negative I have for Brady in relation to Manning is that he missed two season and in one of those seasons Matt Cassel came in and won 11 of 15 games and performed at a very high level.

Leaving emotion at the door does anyone believe any backup QB can come in and play at a level to win 11 or 12 games a season like Manning has in Indy? Honestly I dont feel that to be the case. When Jim Sorgi has come in this decade the Colts looked crap, I'm not going to include Painter this year because he was a rookie.

Manning's longevity and his personal accolades(MVPs, TDs etc) are what gives him the edge for me. Add in that he is the only player in the NFL that still calls his own plays and he shades it by my book

themont85 · 01-02-2010 1:33am

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

But again like Frostie's example you have left holes in your argument due to the fact Brady played in 2 less seasons so you can hardly compare them in the argument.

By default the 2 more seasons may have given Manning the team of the decade spot. But if you match both QBs on a Level playing field you get a conclusion of very similar QBs and both the best in their own rights.
l

I agree with your sentiments as regards when Brady was injured that it is unfair in some respects. But Brady and Manning were both active in 2000 and its unfair to not take into account Manning's 2000 season just because Brady wasn't considered good enough to start that year should make Manning's contribution that year worthless in an 'All Decade' team.

eagle eye · 01-02-2010 1:36am

If you bring postseason stats into play it changes everything.

tallaghtoutlaws · 01-02-2010 1:48am

themont85 wrote: »

I agree with your sentiments as regards when Brady was injured that it is unfair in some respects. But Brady and Manning were both active in 2000 and its unfair to not take into account Manning's 2000 season just because Brady wasn't considered good enough to start that year should make Manning's contribution that year worthless in an 'All Decade' team.

Wait you are clearly misunderstand what I am talking about. If you are comparing the 2 together on the merits of years played you cannot possibly count in 2000. In my opinion the 2 extra years in the NFL puts Manning into the All Team of Decade by default it seems. As other than that you cannot compare 10 years against 8. But as I said I really dont care about the team of the decade.

I have already made my feelings clear on the issue of actually comparing the 2 together.

themont85 · 01-02-2010 2:02am

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Wait you are clearly misunderstand what I am talking about. If you are comparing the 2 together on the merits of years played you cannot possibly count in 2000. In my opinion the 2 extra years in the NFL puts Manning into the All Team of Decade by default it seems. As other than that you cannot compare 10 years against 8. But as I said I really dont care about the team of the decade.

I have already made my feelings clear on the issue of actually comparing the 2 together.

Nah but the 2000 year can't be considered by 'default'. My point is Brady could have played in 2000 but didn't because he wasn't deemed good enough, Manning did because he was, so saying it is default is a poor choice of words imo.

tallaghtoutlaws · 01-02-2010 2:11am

themont85 wrote: »

Nah but the 2000 year can't be considered by 'default'. My point is Brady could have played in 2000 but didn't because he wasn't deemed good enough, Manning did because he was, so saying it is default is a poor choice of words imo.

How can you compare a full season of games against 0 games. To say just because a player had the option to play and use that against him when comparing merit is silly. Let me put it this way a player who did not play cannot have a good or bad season if they do not play. But to add to that whether he could physically play or not it was not his decision so you are holding that against him.

As for the default thing firstly you are misunderstanding the way im using it, Manning has played 2 more seasons of games than Brady and therefore been consistent for 100% of the decade. That is my opinion and the way I see it. If you don't agree fair enough. Each to their own.

Edit: Im leaving it there before this turns into a Manning/Brady thread. And before anyone goes down that road let it be known I see them both in the same light. Incomparable because they are both legends in their own right.

The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

Comments