2007 NFL Regular Season

[JayP]

Originally Posted by troutman

I would disagree with that.

6-6 vs. 5-7.

The Cardinals are a few bounces away from being a 8-4 or 9-3 team.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by JayP

6-6 vs. 5-7.

The Cardinals are a few bounces away from being a 8-4 or 9-3 team.

Last year loses to the woeful Cards cost my 49ers a playoff spot. We tried to return the favour with a final play win and an OT win against the Cards this year.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Last year loses to the woeful Cards cost my 49ers a playoff spot. We tried to return the favour with a final play win and an OT win against the Cards this year.

The Cards really shot themselves in the foot in that last game. A delay of game penalty on a FG attempt. Missed FG. Then Warner thought he had all day to stand in the end zone in OT with the ball. That was an amazing win for the 9ers.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

The Cards really shot themselves in the foot in that last game. A delay of game penalty on a FG attempt. Missed FG. Then Warner thought he had all day to stand in the end zone in OT with the ball. That was an amazing win for the 9ers.

Neil Rackers sucks. He's cost the Cards countless times in the past 2 seasons.

Most notable this season is the pathetic 32-yard miss in OT. It's probably going to end up costing us a playoff spot as they'll likely finish tied with Minnesota (but lose on tiebreakers). I wouldn't call it an amazing win for the 49ers - I'd call it Neil Rackers choking.

Oh yeah, and a missed extra point cost them OT against Washington too (they lost 21-19, but that's only because they had to try for 2 and failed). The bum had a chance at redemption, but missed a 50-yarder as time expired.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by JayP

6-6 vs. 5-7.

The Cardinals are a few bounces away from being a 8-4 or 9-3 team.

There is no doubt in my mind DEN would beat ARI head-to-head. ARI's 6-6 is deceiving - they play in a crap division, and the Browns really should have beat them last Sunday. Stupid penalties and a blown call at the end of the game cost the Browns. ARI could play PITT again 100 times, and maybe win once.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by troutman

There is no doubt in my mind DEN would beat ARI head-to-head. ARI's 6-6 is deceiving - they play in a crap division, and the Browns really should have beat them last Sunday. Stupid penalties and a blown call at the end of the game cost the Browns. ARI could play PITT again 100 times, and maybe win once.

All baseless talk.

They play in a crap division, but they've lost twice to SF making your point irrelevant. Oh yeah, the AFC West isn't exactly the best division in the league either. It's easily in the bottom 3.

The Browns should have beat them? It's not the Cards fault that the Browns turned the ball over. A blown call is complete BS. Scroll back a few pages and you'll see the hold by Winslow just prior to ball arriving. And you conveniently forgot the blown call on the Edwards TD and a blown replay on an INT at the end of the first half. That more than evens out the blown call.

Plus, if you want to play the blown call card I can just bring up Baltimore (BS unnecessary roughness for hitting too hard on A. Wilson setting up a game-winning field goal) and Tampa Bay (Arizona down 7 and driving, Tampa player gets INT, but doesn't get both feet inbounds - Cards can't challenge because they just burned their timeouts to get the ball back).

And I'm sure those are likely odds for beating Pittsburgh again. Because, you know, the Cards didn't beat them convincingly or anything like that...

The Broncos and Cards have had two common opponents - the Steelers, who both beat, and the Lions, who beat down the the Broncos and lost to the Cards by 10 points.

Let's not forget that the Broncos should be 4-8 if not for one of those ridiculous 'call a time-out as the game-winning field goal is snapped' plays against Oakland in OT.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by JayP

6-6 vs. 5-7.

The Cardinals are a few bounces away from being a 8-4 or 9-3 team.

Thats the case for many NFL teams though. Hell I could argue the Cheifs are maybe 10 plays away all year from an 8-4 record instead of their pitiful 4-8. But thats how it works out. Good teams win those games, mediocre teams even out, and bad teams lose them. The Cardinals are much improved this year under Whisenhut but they won't be a playoff calibre team until next year. Although I agree that lumping them with the Jets is assinine. The Cards are a middle of the road type NFL team, whereas the Jets are just bad. I would say that they're probably pretty equal to Denver, Cards could probably beat them at home, but likely would lose the game in Denver.

This is a big week for Arizona, if they lose this week I think their playoff hopes are dashed. If they can pull off a win, they have an outside shot at their division and keep themselves right in the thick of the WC race. Those two losses to SF are real killers though for them. If Seattle wins this weekend I think it would clinch the NFC West for them as they'd have 9 wins and a 5-1 Division record as well as a split with Arizona on the season series, so I think that would give Seattle any tie breaker.

[troutman]

Say what you will - the Browns beat themselves. ARI did not impress me at all - and I would actually like to see them do well.

Dr. Z. though rates them one spot higher than DEN:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...rt2/index.html

Does a good team lose to SF twice?

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Thats the case for many NFL teams though. Hell I could argue the Cheifs are maybe 10 plays away all year from an 8-4 record instead of their pitiful 4-8. But thats how it works out. Good teams win those games, mediocre teams even out, and bad teams lose them. The Cardinals are much improved this year under Whisenhut but they won't be a playoff calibre team until next year. Although I agree that lumping them with the Jets is assinine. The Cards are a middle of the road type NFL team, whereas the Jets are just bad. I would say that they're probably pretty equal to Denver, Cards could probably beat them at home, but likely would lose the game in Denver.

I understand what you're saying, but the Cards are a exceptional case compared to most teams.

The Chiefs have 8 losses - 2 of which were under 7 points.

The Cardinals have 6 losses - 5 of which were under 7 points. The only one that wasn't had third stringer Tim Rattay starting.

Let's look a little deeper at the Card's losses:
SF: Eric Green has a chance a fumble recovery in the end-zone to seal a win, but the ball takes a bad hop and the 49ers recover and eventually win.

BAL: Cards take a late lead and the Ravens are driving. A terrible call on Wilson for hitting Heap too hard puts the Ravens in easy position for a field goal.

WASH: A missed extra point earlier in the game forces the Cards to go for 2 with under a minute left. Missed extra point fails, but the Cards get an offside kick and Rackers eventually misses a 50+ yarder as time expires.

TB: Cards stop TB for a 3-and-out and get the ball back with about 2:20. First play from scrimmage is intercepted, but the TB clearly doesn't get both feet inbounds. The Cards had just used their timeouts to kill the clock on TB's last possession so they can't challenge and since it's 15 seconds away from the two minute warning the booth can't review.

SF: Neil Rackers misses a 32-yarder in OT.

It's easy to say that the Chiefs are 10 plays away from being 8-4, but the Cards are different. In nearly all of their losses the game was decided in the final minutes and several times on bad calls and bad bounces. These aren't turning point plays - these are game winning (or losing) plays.

I'm not saying the Cards are an elite team, but there's no reason to lump with terrible teams like the Jets. I'd agree that they're a middle of the road team, but they're definitely amongst the tops of that group. Let's not forget that they're playing with their back-up QB (who has one arm), Boldin has missed nearly 1/2 of the season, and Adrian Wilson is done for the year.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by troutman

Say what you will - the Browns beat themselves. ARI did not impress me at all - and I would actually like to see them do well.

Dr. Z. though rates them one spot higher than DEN:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...rt2/index.html

Does a good team lose to SF twice?

If the Cardinals had Boldin and Fitzgerald the Browns game would've been ugly. The Cardinals played one of their ugliest games of the seasons, but that's in large part due to missing two of the best recievers in football. How many other Cards games have you seen because they're a much better team than they looked like last week?

I don't see how the Broncos are any better losing to Oakland by 14 points and getting lucky by calling a timeout as the ball is snapped on the game-winning kick.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by JayP

Neil Rackers sucks. He's cost the Cards countless times in the past 2 seasons.

Most notable this season is the pathetic 32-yard miss in OT. It's probably going to end up costing us a playoff spot as they'll likely finish tied with Minnesota (but lose on tiebreakers). I wouldn't call it an amazing win for the 49ers - I'd call it Neil Rackers choking.

Oh yeah, and a missed extra point cost them OT against Washington too (they lost 21-19, but that's only because they had to try for 2 and failed). The bum had a chance at redemption, but missed a 50-yarder as time expired.

I meant an amazing win because it looked to be over. Very rarely does a team get another chance like the 9ers got that day.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I meant an amazing win because it looked to be over. Very rarely does a team get another chance like the 9ers got that day.

That's what a kicker like Neil Rackers will do for you.

[Sainters7]

On a side note, since there seems to be a couple Cards fans in here, let me ask you a Q and tell me if this seems fair. My cousin's a big Cards fan, and judging by my name I'm sure you can tell who I'm a fan of. Anyways, we got to talkin a little football a couple of weeks back, and mentioned how the Cards and Saints are playin near the end of the year(Week 15 I believe). So we decided to put a friendly wager on it(nothin major, just like a pitcher of beer or somethin).

But then he tells me he wants a point spread! He thinks he should get 3.5 points because apparently he seems to think the Saints are alot better than AZ. I started laughing and said how in the hell can you expect me to give you odds when both our teams are playing similar ball(and now the Cards have a better record than New Orleans). Plus on top of that, why put spreads on a game at all? Its a friendly wager between cousins, not Vegas! Anyways, do you think I should accept? Do you think thats fair that the Cards should be given 3.5 points against the Saints? I think it's BS but maybe I'm just not looking at it clearly enough, I'm interested to hear what a Cards fan has to say about it.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by JayP

If the Cardinals had Boldin and Fitzgerald the Browns game would've been ugly. The Cardinals played one of their ugliest games of the seasons, but that's in large part due to missing two of the best recievers in football. How many other Cards games have you seen because they're a much better team than they looked like last week?

That's fair. The last game was my closest look at them. I hope you are right, and that they can play better. I like the ARI uniforms - I always like to see a new team break into the playoffs.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by JayP

That's what a kicker like Neil Rackers will do for you.

I'd take him over the bums the Chiefs have paraded out on the field this year.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

On a side note, since there seems to be a couple Cards fans in here, let me ask you a Q and tell me if this seems fair. My cousin's a big Cards fan, and judging by my name I'm sure you can tell who I'm a fan of. Anyways, we got to talkin a little football a couple of weeks back, and mentioned how the Cards and Saints are playin near the end of the year(Week 15 I believe). So we decided to put a friendly wager on it(nothin major, just like a pitcher of beer or somethin).

But then he tells me he wants a point spread! He thinks he should get 3.5 points because apparently he seems to think the Saints are alot better than AZ. I started laughing and said how in the hell can you expect me to give you odds when both our teams are playing similar ball(and now the Cards have a better record than New Orleans). Plus on top of that, why put spreads on a game at all? Its a friendly wager between cousins, not Vegas! Anyways, do you think I should accept? Do you think thats fair that the Cards should be given 3.5 points against the Saints? I think it's BS but maybe I'm just not looking at it clearly enough, I'm interested to hear what a Cards fan has to say about it.

On a freindly bet you never have odds. One person will say "wanna bet?". The other either agree's or disagree's. Besides if the Cards cover and lose. They still lose. Isn't the bet supposed to be who wins? Not who can cover.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

On a freindly bet you never have odds. One person will say "wanna bet?". The other either agree's or disagree's. Besides if the Cards cover and lose. They still lose. Isn't the bet supposed to be who wins? Not who can cover.

You've been listening to Herm again haven't you

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

On a freindly bet you never have odds. One person will say "wanna bet?". The other either agree's or disagree's. Besides if the Cards cover and lose. They still lose. Isn't the bet supposed to be who wins? Not who can cover.

Thank you. He went to school at ASU for the past five years so I'm thinkin he took one too many trips to Vegas in that time. Haha I was absolutely blown away when he said he wanted odds, and how stubborn he was being about it too. Plus the way it is now, if anything I should be getting odds.

Good to hear its not just me...

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

On a side note, since there seems to be a couple Cards fans in here, let me ask you a Q and tell me if this seems fair. My cousin's a big Cards fan, and judging by my name I'm sure you can tell who I'm a fan of. Anyways, we got to talkin a little football a couple of weeks back, and mentioned how the Cards and Saints are playin near the end of the year(Week 15 I believe). So we decided to put a friendly wager on it(nothin major, just like a pitcher of beer or somethin).

But then he tells me he wants a point spread! He thinks he should get 3.5 points because apparently he seems to think the Saints are alot better than AZ. I started laughing and said how in the hell can you expect me to give you odds when both our teams are playing similar ball(and now the Cards have a better record than New Orleans). Plus on top of that, why put spreads on a game at all? Its a friendly wager between cousins, not Vegas! Anyways, do you think I should accept? Do you think thats fair that the Cards should be given 3.5 points against the Saints? I think it's BS but maybe I'm just not looking at it clearly enough, I'm interested to hear what a Cards fan has to say about it.

I would say it's a pick 'em if anything and that's primarily because the game is in New Orleans.

The two teams are very similar, but the Cards just seem to have a bit better pass defense.

The biggest thing to consider is probably injuries. Boldin's and Fitzgerald's injuries are both up in the air right now for this week. I wouldn't make the bet until after the Cards/Seahawks game to see if/how they're playing. If both are out or doubtful then I'd take a -3.5 line.

I would try and stay away from a -3.5 line in favor of the Saints though. I'd consider a -2.5 if he'd take it. The Cards have 5 games under 7 points this year so chances are a game between two relatively equal teams could easily come down to a late field goal.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by JayP

Oh yeah, and a missed extra point cost them OT against Washington too (they lost 21-19, but that's only because they had to try for 2 and failed). The bum had a chance at redemption, but missed a 50-yarder as time expired.

If he can't get the extra point, who really expects hit to hit a 50 yard FG?