NFL 2007 Season - Discuss it all here

[GeorgeSteele]

Regarding Tomlinson, while I agree that running back is generally a more replaceable position than others, a Hall of Famer is a Hall of Famer, and those are never easy to replace.  See Dallas after Emmitt Smith, Chicago after Walter Payton, Detroit after Barry Sanders, etc., etc.  It took all those franchises years to rebound, though Detroit is still a mess. 

[tim_m]

Granted Brady wasn't spectacular against the Chargers.  In fact, it was probably his worst game of the season.  But how much of that could be attributed to his ankle?  It's tough to tell.  Ron Jaworski broke down on Sportscenter last night when he think the injury occurred (in the first quarter) and how he didn't look very sharp afterwards. BUT, watching the local sports shows they pointed out that in the FIRST play of the game Brady overthrew Kyle Brady by a good 15 yards.  So unless he was injured against Jacksonville and it just wasn't known it's tough to point out when he got injured and how/if it affected him.  I think overall you have to give a LOT of credit to the Chargers defense.  I mean they intercepted Peyton Manning 8 times this year, that's not by accident.  They've got a very solid secondary and rush the passer quite well.  The Giants can get to the QB, but their secondary is not the caliber of the Chargers, OR the Jaguars.

Agreed about the Giants secondary its definitely not the greatest. If they are able to get to brady regularly the secondary doesn't have to be great though. I wonder if their secondary will be compleely healthy for the superbowl. I know against the cowboys they were having to use a practice squad cornerback.

[faldor]

Granted Brady wasn't spectacular against the Chargers.  In fact, it was probably his worst game of the season.  But how much of that could be attributed to his ankle?  It's tough to tell.  Ron Jaworski broke down on Sportscenter last night when he think the injury occurred (in the first quarter) and how he didn't look very sharp afterwards. BUT, watching the local sports shows they pointed out that in the FIRST play of the game Brady overthrew Kyle Brady by a good 15 yards.  So unless he was injured against Jacksonville and it just wasn't known it's tough to point out when he got injured and how/if it affected him.  I think overall you have to give a LOT of credit to the Chargers defense.  I mean they intercepted Peyton Manning 8 times this year, that's not by accident.  They've got a very solid secondary and rush the passer quite well.  The Giants can get to the QB, but their secondary is not the caliber of the Chargers, OR the Jaguars.

Agreed about the Giants secondary its definitely not the greatest. If they are able to get to brady regularly the secondary doesn't have to be great though. I wonder if their secondary will be compleely healthy for the superbowl. I know against the cowboys they were having to use a practice squad cornerback.

Oh absolutely, a great pass rush can make a mediocre secondary look pretty darn good.  But, as good as the Giants are at getting to the QB, the Patriots O-Line is one of, if not THE best in the league.  They've got 3 pro-bowlers on that line, and allowed 21 sacks in the regular season, 3 in the playoffs, and ONE in the finale against the Giants.  It's not all about sacks though, so if they can at least pressure him and get some hits on him (which they did to an extent in that regular season game) they should be fine.  But the Pats O-Line is equally as good, if not better than the Giants D-Line, so may the best line win.

[Axl4Prez2004]

Regarding Tomlinson, while I agree that running back is generally a more replaceable position than others, a Hall of Famer is a Hall of Famer, and those are never easy to replace.  See Dallas after Emmitt Smith, Chicago after Walter Payton, Detroit after Barry Sanders, etc., etc.  It took all those franchises years to rebound, though Detroit is still a mess. 

Payton and Emmitt helped bring glory, and unfortunately, Jesus with a #32 on his jersey couldn't make the Lions a Super Bowl team in Sanders' era.    I think the point is part of the reason franchises like that can go downhill so fast is that they don't get anything in return for their stud.  It's like a stock situation, sell too early, miss out on the chance he runs you to a championship, sell too late, he's overpaid and will bring nothing in the form of a trade.  LT will be out to prove something next season.  His trade value is pretty darn high right now.  (yes I know they won't trade him.  he's synonymous with the Chargers' franchise and is a really good person from everything I've read)...but it is fun to speculate.

Brady will carve up the Giants secondary and Maroney will benefit greatly.  The Patriots will pour it on.  Huge cover for the Pats (keep in mind I've said the Giants would lose against TB, DAL, and GB  )

[tim_m]

Granted Brady wasn't spectacular against the Chargers.  In fact, it was probably his worst game of the season.  But how much of that could be attributed to his ankle?  It's tough to tell.  Ron Jaworski broke down on Sportscenter last night when he think the injury occurred (in the first quarter) and how he didn't look very sharp afterwards. BUT, watching the local sports shows they pointed out that in the FIRST play of the game Brady overthrew Kyle Brady by a good 15 yards.  So unless he was injured against Jacksonville and it just wasn't known it's tough to point out when he got injured and how/if it affected him.  I think overall you have to give a LOT of credit to the Chargers defense.  I mean they intercepted Peyton Manning 8 times this year, that's not by accident.  They've got a very solid secondary and rush the passer quite well.  The Giants can get to the QB, but their secondary is not the caliber of the Chargers, OR the Jaguars.

Agreed about the Giants secondary its definitely not the greatest. If they are able to get to brady regularly the secondary doesn't have to be great though. I wonder if their secondary will be compleely healthy for the superbowl. I know against the cowboys they were having to use a practice squad cornerback.

Oh absolutely, a great pass rush can make a mediocre secondary look pretty darn good.  But, as good as the Giants are at getting to the QB, the Patriots O-Line is one of, if not THE best in the league.  They've got 3 pro-bowlers on that line, and allowed 21 sacks in the regular season, 3 in the playoffs, and ONE in the finale against the Giants.  It's not all about sacks though, so if they can at least pressure him and get some hits on him (which they did to an extent in that regular season game) they should be fine.  But the Pats O-Line is equally as good, if not better than the Giants D-Line, so may the best line win.

I'm just hoping for a good game that is equal to or better then the seaon finale. I just have to hope for a different outcome nothing personal just have to root for the team from my home state.

[freedom78]

It just occurred to me that, by doing so well in the playoffs, the Giants went from about pick #21 in the draft, to pick #31. 

So, if they lose (as the vast majority of people seem to expect) all they've done is to hurt their draft.

Not trying to be cynical, and I think it's great for the Giants and their fans, but why is draft order based, for picks #21-32, on playoff performance?  Just because they Giants get hot at the right time, they get punished?  They should change this system.  If a wildcard team makes it to the Super Bowl, it shouldn't have such a large impact on their draft position. 

Keep the wildcard teams drafting #21-24, and order them based on playoff performance.  Then put the 3/4 seeds in spots #25-28, ordered by playoff performance.  Et cetera.

In other words, playoff performance won't cost you more than a couple of spots, rather than the ten it's cost NYG.

[Axl4Prez2004]

A couple years back, the Patriots were even bigger underdogs against the Rams...and they won!  Anything's possible.

Here's one way you can prove it's a very good system.  Allow any team in the NFL to offer their 2008 1st round draft pick for the Giants #31 as long as they are allowed to play in the Super Bowl.  I can guarantee you they'd get 30 offers.  All teams would gladly sacrifice a 1st round pick to have a chance to play for the Super Bowl Championship. 
That leads me to believe it's a fair system.

[sandman]

A couple years back, the Patriots were even bigger underdogs against the Rams...and they won!  Anything's possible.

Here's one way you can prove it's a very good system.  Allow any team in the NFL to offer their 2008 1st round draft pick for the Giants #31 as long as they are allowed to play in the Super Bowl.  I can guarantee you they'd get 30 offers.  All teams would gladly sacrifice a 1st round pick to have a chance to play for the Super Bowl Championship. 
That leads me to believe it's a fair system.

agreed.

also, look at the steelers from 2 years ago. i believe they were 10-6, so at the end of the regular season they were probably in the 22-24 range. why should a team that won a SB pick before 10 other teams? it would make no sense.

also, any 9-7 team that makes the SB is actually better than their record indicates. and the giants are a perfect example of that. they started off slow, it took half the season for spagnuolo to start to make a difference, and they have webster back playing out of his mind.

[freedom78]

Here's one way you can prove it's a very good system.  Allow any team in the NFL to offer their 2008 1st round draft pick for the Giants #31 as long as they are allowed to play in the Super Bowl.  I can guarantee you they'd get 30 offers.  All teams would gladly sacrifice a 1st round pick to have a chance to play for the Super Bowl Championship. 
That leads me to believe it's a fair system.

I'm not sure that proves anything.  You're framing it as a choice, which it isn't.  I don't see why a team has to make a sacrifice, just because they get hot at the right time (or get a positive bump because after a great season, they play shitty in the playoffs). 

Or, let me put it this way:  because the Pats lost their first round pick, the Giants will have the last pick in round 1, in 2008.  The last pick supposedly goes to the best team.  So there you have it.  The New York Giants...best team in the NFL.

Super Bowl losers are rarely the second best team, as is evidenced by the fact that they suck it up the year after their losses, which I'm sure the Giants will do, as well, and Coughlin will be back on the hot seat.  And pick #31 won't be as helpful as pick #21 in cauterizing that wound.

[Axl4Prez2004]

^ You got me.    Yes, I was framing it as a choice.  I've been watching too much political crap...I'm becoming just as devious as all the candidates! 

Seriously though, I think it's a great system the way it is.  If the NY Giants win 2 Sundays from today, yes, they will have proven they are the best team in football.  If they lose, they will have the 31st pick in the draft.  Honestly, we should go back and look at the #21 picks and #31 picks in the last 10 or 15 drafts and see the difference in talent levels.  Yes, I think there's probably a slight edge in talent, but again, I think the NFL puts an emphasis on making it to the Super Bowl. 

I think the bigger issue for the NFL is with the worst teams at the top of the draft board possibly tanking games (they have to be subtle about it) to get the #1 pick.  I know for damn sure if I was one of three 2-13 teams going into the last week, I'm letting my 4 year old son call the plays.  I don't know what the answer is...maybe it's keeping people like me who would tank the meaningless game out of the NFL.    Any ideas out there to fix that problem?   

[faldor]

A couple years back, the Patriots were even bigger underdogs against the Rams...and they won!  Anything's possible.

Here's one way you can prove it's a very good system.  Allow any team in the NFL to offer their 2008 1st round draft pick for the Giants #31 as long as they are allowed to play in the Super Bowl.  I can guarantee you they'd get 30 offers.  All teams would gladly sacrifice a 1st round pick to have a chance to play for the Super Bowl Championship. 
That leads me to believe it's a fair system.

This years Giants team is actually quite comparable to the 2001 Pats team, but I think THIS years Pats team is far better than the "greatest show on turf."  Especially in the head coaching department.  So even though they may have been bigger underdogs point-wise, I would consider this to be a much larger upset.  I seriously don't understand how so many people are picking the Giants to win the game.  I mean, we've got an 18-0 team going against a 13-6 team.  They played a month ago at Giants Stadium, Pats down 12 in the 3rd calmly scored 3 TD's to go up 10.  Giants scored a meaningless TD to make the game appear closer at the end.  The Giants played arguably their best game of the season on that day, with absolutely nothing to lose.  It was the Pats who were going for history that day, they had all the pressure.  Now the pressure's off, this is what they've played the whole season for.  The weather will be warm, the track will be fast, yet many people are still picking the Giants.  I just don't get it.

Anyhow, about the draft, I think it's a great system.  Besides, what's the difference between the 21st and 31st picks anyway?  I'm sure if you checked previous years drafts you wouldn't see a vast difference between the 2 picks.

[C0ma]

This years Giants team is actually quite comparable to the 2001 Pats team, but I think THIS years Pats team is far better than the "greatest show on turf."  Especially in the head coaching department.  So even though they may have been bigger underdogs point-wise, I would consider this to be a much larger upset.  I seriously don't understand how so many people are picking the Giants to win the game.  I mean, we've got an 18-0 team going against a 13-6 team.  They played a month ago at Giants Stadium, Pats down 12 in the 3rd calmly scored 3 TD's to go up 10.  Giants scored a meaningless TD to make the game appear closer at the end.  The Giants played arguably their best game of the season on that day, with absolutely nothing to lose.  It was the Pats who were going for history that day, they had all the pressure.  Now the pressure's off, this is what they've played the whole season for.  The weather will be warm, the track will be fast, yet many people are still picking the Giants.  I just don't get it.

Anyhow, about the draft, I think it's a great system.  Besides, what's the difference between the 21st and 31st picks anyway?  I'm sure if you checked previous years drafts you wouldn't see a vast difference between the 2 picks.

I think you pointed out the biggest difference between the 01 Rams and the 07 Pats, Head Coach... Bill Bellicheck is arguably one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game (can't wait to be flamed for that) and Mike Martz is a nothing more than a Offensive Coordinator. Also Kurt Warner was pretty much a flash in the pan, Tom Brady has been at the top of the league since he took his first snap in Game 2 of the 2001 season.

As far as the draft goes, there are so many piss poor GM's in the leauge that you can get a HOFer anywhere in the Draft... Also there are so many college players that get overhyped and never make a successful transition to the Pro game. As it is the NFL has probably the best drafting system in the 4 major sports, what would you rather? The NBA lottery?

[freedom78]

^ You got me.    Yes, I was framing it as a choice.  I've been watching too much political crap...I'm becoming just as devious as all the candidates! 

Seriously though, I think it's a great system the way it is.  If the NY Giants win 2 Sundays from today, yes, they will have proven they are the best team in football.  If they lose, they will have the 31st pick in the draft.  Honestly, we should go back and look at the #21 picks and #31 picks in the last 10 or 15 drafts and see the difference in talent levels.  Yes, I think there's probably a slight edge in talent, but again, I think the NFL puts an emphasis on making it to the Super Bowl. 

I think the bigger issue for the NFL is with the worst teams at the top of the draft board possibly tanking games (they have to be subtle about it) to get the #1 pick.  I know for damn sure if I was one of three 2-13 teams going into the last week, I'm letting my 4 year old son call the plays.  I don't know what the answer is...maybe it's keeping people like me who would tank the meaningless game out of the NFL.    Any ideas out there to fix that problem?   

Should the Giants win, I would have no problem giving them the last pick.  But as a 6th seed that's likely to lose...

Not that you can't get great players at those picks.  They can.  But despite this year's playoff performance, I doubt many (outside NY) will think the Giants have become perennial contenders.

[faldor]

Oh I don't know about the Giants not becoming perennial contenders.  They've got a pretty good and young nucleus.  Eli seems to have come into his own.  They've got 3 very good young backs, good on both lines.  I think they have a pretty bright future.  Then again, a lot can change from year to year.  Look no further than the New Orleans Saints.

[freedom78]

Oh I don't know about the Giants not becoming perennial contenders.  They've got a pretty good and young nucleus.  Eli seems to have come into his own.  They've got 3 very good young backs, good on both lines.  I think they have a pretty bright future.  Then again, a lot can change from year to year.  Look no further than the New Orleans Saints.

I suppose it depends on how you define "contender," really.

Add da Bears to that list.

[Axl4Prez2004]

Oh I don't know about the Giants not becoming perennial contenders.  They've got a pretty good and young nucleus.  Eli seems to have come into his own.  They've got 3 very good young backs, good on both lines.  I think they have a pretty bright future.  Then again, a lot can change from year to year.  Look no further than the New Orleans Saints.

I suppose it depends on how you define "contender," really.

Add da Bears to that list.

Freedom, seriously, stop reading my friggin brain!!! It's uncanny!  Yes, the Bears will be amazing next year.  They will have lots of guys returning from injury on d. 

[Axl4Prez2004]

I really think the Pats will win by a lot next week.  A dude I work with is willing to agree to 11 points.  Since I think the final will be 34-17, I'd be crazy not to take it, huh?   

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

A friend of mine is going to Las Vegas this weekend.

I have a few bills to pay, so I was wondering.....how does this "betting" thing work?

You have the lines.  You have your over/under.

What should I do to ensure a healthy profit?

[Axl4Prez2004]

Here ya go Tongue.  I'll let ya in on something.  Seriously, the only people who make money in Vegas are the casinos.
The house always wins. 

The best way to wager is with a friend or co-worker...and just use the spread.  Over time, betting with a spread involved will always be 50-50...but casinos or gambling services always take their % usually around 10%. 

I usually don't gamble because over time, it's a losing proposition.  (and my Lock of the Year bet would have been that Giants-Eagles game toward the end of the season  )  For some reason though (probably because the Vegas line is 12 1/2 and the dude is willing to bet with a spread of 11) I'm itching to pull the trigger.

Wish me luck folks.

Yup, that's my advice.  Only bet when you get better odds than Vegas is giving.   

[sandman]

I have a few bills to pay,

What should I do to ensure a healthy profit?

invest in an aggressive mutual fund for the long term.

seriously, don't bet.

i gamble quite a bit, but it's for fun. it's to make the games more interesting. if there was a way to "ensure a healthy profit," i wouldn't be typing this from boring-ass Branchville, NJ right now.