2013 NFL regular season thread

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Strangely enough he really only sucks in that dome this year. He'll miss the routine 35 yarder in the dome, but hit a 45 yarder in a crazy cross wind with sleet in his face. Maybe it's a good thing that they lost to the Jets, you don't want Hartley trying to kick a game winner at home. Odd because in 2010 playoffs he made a couple of clutch kicks to beat the Vikings.

I know, it just drives me nuts when kickers miss.

[dirk diggler]

Originally Posted by Montana Moe

80 offensive plays, 40 1st downs.
625 total yards.

Craziest stat of the night - Mark Ingram - 14 carries 145 yards 1 TD - 10.4 YPC






MARK INGRAM!

Dallas defense has given up 4 400 yard passing games this year already and if Brees wasnt pulled early, it would have been 5... they are pathetic and cant stop anyone. i would be curious to see what the QB rating is for the QB's that play Dallas, must be around 100.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

No offense, but the Rams have as many Super Bowl wins in the last 15 years as the Colts (and same number of appearances) and they're actually ridiculously similar teams in that period. Both had HOF QBs (Manning, Warner), both had great RBs (Faulk, HOFer; Edgerin, not quite) and great WRs (Issac Bruce and Torry Holt; Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison). They've also both had embarrassing drunks (Leonard Little and Jim Irsay). Both always had incredible offense but lacking defense. Both had a HOF coach (Dungy and Vermeil)

The real difference between the two franchises the last 15 years is one fleeced another team for multiple first round picks (The Rams and the RGIII trade) while the other got fleeced in one of the worst trades in recent memory (Richardson trade). Advantage: Rams.

Record over the past 20 years:
St. Louis Rams: 130-190
Indianapolis Colts: 185-135

Playoff Appearances:
St. Louis Rams: 5
Indianapolis Colts: 13

Seasons at .500 or above:
St. Louis Rams: 5
Indianapolis Colts: 15

Advantage:
Rams

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Record over the past 20 years:
St. Louis Rams: 130-190
Indianapolis Colts: 185-135

Playoff Appearances:
St. Louis Rams: 5
Indianapolis Colts: 13

Seasons at .500 or above:
St. Louis Rams: 5
Indianapolis Colts: 15

Advantage:
Rams

Hows that humble pie tasting? Run your mouth about the "forgettable" Rams, yet they put the biggest ass kicking any team put on any other team this season on your Colts. I guess you'll probably remember them now. Or perhaps they think the Colts are "forgettable". With a 1 and done in the playoffs on deck, the Colts will be forgotten soon enough.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Hows that humble pie tasting? Run your mouth about the "forgettable" Rams, yet they put the biggest ass kicking any team put on any other team this season on your Colts. I guess you'll probably remember them now. Or perhaps they think the Colts are "forgettable". With a 1 and done in the playoffs on deck, the Colts will be forgotten soon enough.

Thanks for arguing my points about the Rams being the better team over the past 2 decades. At least you could admit that you were wrong. Um the Saints kicked the Cowboys ass harder than the Rams did the Colts yesterday. Colts put up a stinker of a game yesterday no one is denying that fact. Must be easy to talk smack with that 0-8 record! The "forgettable" Colts are the only team in the league to have defeated either the Seahawks or Broncos so when another team even beats one of those teams we can talk about the "forgettable" Colts with the best young qb in football. 1 and done in the playoffs is a whole lot better than no playoffs since 2007. I said the Rams were a forgettable team due to the lack of media coverage on them and the fact they play the team I follow once every 4 years and don't have a lot of stories based around them, unlike your Buccaneers.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Thanks for arguing my points about the Rams being the better team over the past 2 decades. At least you could admit that you were wrong. Um the Saints kicked the Cowboys ass harder than the Rams did the Colts yesterday. Colts put up a stinker of a game yesterday no one is denying that fact. Must be easy to talk smack with that 0-8 record! The "forgettable" Colts are the only team in the league to have defeated either the Seahawks or Broncos so when another team even beats one of those teams we can talk about the "forgettable" Colts with the best young qb in football. 1 and done in the playoffs is a whole lot better than no playoffs since 2007. I said the Rams were a forgettable team due to the lack of media coverage on them and the fact they play the team I follow once every 4 years and don't have a lot of stories based around them, unlike your Buccaneers.

Very debateable at best.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Thanks for arguing my points about the Rams being the better team over the past 2 decades. At least you could admit that you were wrong. Um the Saints kicked the Cowboys ass harder than the Rams did the Colts yesterday. Colts put up a stinker of a game yesterday no one is denying that fact. Must be easy to talk smack with that 0-8 record! The "forgettable" Colts are the only team in the league to have defeated either the Seahawks or Broncos so when another team even beats one of those teams we can talk about the "forgettable" Colts with the best young qb in football. 1 and done in the playoffs is a whole lot better than no playoffs since 2007. I said the Rams were a forgettable team due to the lack of media coverage on them and the fact they play the team I follow once every 4 years and don't have a lot of stories based around them, unlike your Buccaneers.

If you wanna say the Colts are the better regular season team, sure no doubt on that one. But sorry, in the last 15 years the Giants, Steelers, Ravens and Patriots are all better than the Colts, and teams like the Rams, Saints and Bucs are just as good for the only reason that matters: rings. The game is played to win, so while the Colts have been masterful in the regular season, they are massive chokers in the playoffs.

The Giants 2 Super Bowls came on the backs of a combined 19-13 regular season record. The Colts won 23 straight regular season games with...0 Super Bowls to show for that stretch. The regular season, to put it lightly, doesn't mean ####. So if you're happy to have 15 great regular seasons in a row and 1 Super Bowl to show for it, congrats I guess.

I'd also add that while the wins of the Seahawks and Broncos are nice, those early wins also mean nothing because as evidence from the last two weeks the Colts are in trouble without Reggie Wayne. Probably would have lost two in a row if not for Kubiak's mini-storke. You dismissed the Rams as an easy win yesterday and lo and behold you're eating some crow right now. The Colts are in deep trouble with no running game and no Reggie to open up the passing game. If not for their division being horrible the Colts might actually be in danger of missing the playoffs, but the pathetic AFC South ensures they'll get in.

And best young QB is very debatable when Russell Wilson is beating him in every statistical category (except passing yards) and has more playoff wins.

[moon]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Very debateable at best.

I think the only debate would be who to consider young because I can't think of a QB 25 and under that is close (maybe Stafford but that is likely a homer pick) and that is from a guy who has found the Colts and their fans have become incredibly obnoxious lately so I don't want to give them any more credit than I have to.

[OILFAN #81]

Titans QB Jake Locker is out for the year with a foot injury. Ryan Fitzpatrick will take over at QB for the remainder of the year.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/99...nville-jaguars

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

If you wanna say the Colts are the better regular season team, sure no doubt on that one. But sorry, in the last 15 years the Giants, Steelers, Ravens and Patriots are all better than the Colts, and teams like the Rams, Saints and Bucs are just as good for the only reason that matters: rings. The game is played to win, so while the Colts have been masterful in the regular season, they are massive chokers in the playoffs.

The Giants 2 Super Bowls came on the backs of a combined 19-13 regular season record. The Colts won 23 straight regular season games with...0 Super Bowls to show for that stretch. The regular season, to put it lightly, doesn't mean ####. So if you're happy to have 15 great regular seasons in a row and 1 Super Bowl to show for it, congrats I guess.

I'd also add that while the wins of the Seahawks and Broncos are nice, those early wins also mean nothing because as evidence from the last two weeks the Colts are in trouble without Reggie Wayne. Probably would have lost two in a row if not for Kubiak's mini-storke. You dismissed the Rams as an easy win yesterday and lo and behold you're eating some crow right now. The Colts are in deep trouble with no running game and no Reggie to open up the passing game. If not for their division being horrible the Colts might actually be in danger of missing the playoffs, but the pathetic AFC South ensures they'll get in.

And best young QB is very debatable when Russell Wilson is beating him in every statistical category (except passing yards) and has more playoff wins.

Wow you must think Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are better than Dan Marino if you think rings are the only thing that matters. It cannot be argued that the Colts are a top 10 team over the past 10 years (probably top 5) and the rams are probably in the bottom 10.

Yeah and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. The colts won that game and whether Kubiak's mini stroke played a part in that or not can be debated, even with Kubiak on the sidelines the Texans were an awful second half team. The colts are not as good a team without Reggie as they are with and that cannot be debated. But I believe Pep Hamilton and Luck will be able to get the offense back on track.

It's almost unanimous between NFL experts such as Steve Young that Luck is the better QB and no offense but personally I think his opinion carries slightly more weight than yours. If you just go on head to head record luck comes out ahead, and you said it yourself the Colts have no running game. If Luck played with Lynch & and the Seahawks line he would be in much better shape.

Also please don't put words in my mouth. I never dismissed the Rams as an easy win, or dismissed them. I never said they were a bad team.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Wow you must think Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are better than Dan Marino if you think rings are the only thing that matters. It cannot be argued that the Colts are a top 10 team over the past 10 years (probably top 5) and the rams are probably in the bottom 10.

Comparing teams and players is apple and oranges. Players can get stuck on bad teams. It's completely up to the team to win a Super Bowl, it is not completely up to the player. Although Super Bowl wins does have some effect on ranking players against each other, it is not the be all end all. Teams it is all that matters.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Wow you must think Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are better than Dan Marino if you think rings are the only thing that matters. It cannot be argued that the Colts are a top 10 team over the past 10 years (probably top 5) and the rams are probably in the bottom 10.

Yeah and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. The colts won that game and whether Kubiak's mini stroke played a part in that or not can be debated, even with Kubiak on the sidelines the Texans were an awful second half team. The colts are not as good a team without Reggie as they are with and that cannot be debated. But I believe Pep Hamilton and Luck will be able to get the offense back on track.

It's almost unanimous between NFL experts such as Steve Young that Luck is the better QB and no offense but personally I think his opinion carries slightly more weight than yours. If you just go on head to head record luck comes out ahead, and you said it yourself the Colts have no running game. If Luck played with Lynch & and the Seahawks line he would be in much better shape.

Also please don't put words in my mouth. I never dismissed the Rams as an easy win, or dismissed them. I never said they were a bad team.

Yeah being a top 10 franchise when you accomplished all the Colts did (in the meaningless season) has to hurt. With what they did they should have been at worst the undisputed #2 after New England. Instead they are behind at least New England, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and the Giants, and probably behind the Packers and Saints. I wouldn't be too thrilled with that when you put everything into context.

Steve Young, well, his opinion means the same as mine: jack####. The results matter. Lets see how it goes on the field. To date, Russell Wilson has put up better results than Andrew Luck, whether you like it or not. Does Andrew Luck have a higher ceiling? Sure, but potential is exactly that, potential. Remember when JaMarcus was going to be a superstar? Its true, many did. Results are what matters, and Russell Wilson is outperforming Andrew Luck. Russell Wilson doesn't have Reggie Wayne, and if he did his numbers would be even better. He has a bunch of #2 guys and guys who are always hurt. Hasn't effected him cause great QBs overcome those things. And the Colts do have a running game, just feed Donald Brown and cut Trent Richardson. Brown is averaging almost 6 yards a carry. Richardson is under 3.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Manning's MRI negative. Amazing to me how little respect the Broncos are getting early in the week as we approach this huge game.

[KelVarnsen]

So how about that game tonight?

[OILFAN #81]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

So how about that game tonight?

I wonder if they talk at all about Incognito/Martin?

[browna]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

I wonder if they talk at all about Incognito/Martin?

Usually, you'd say that's all they'd talk about...especially with non playoff teams and wanting to take advantage of the soapbox, this being the first Dolphins game since.

But Tampa has probably thanked the Dolphins from taking the NFL spotlight off of their disaster of a season off the field. With Schiano/Freeman and the disease ridden practice facility that has claimed a couple players' seasons, there's plenty of material when they shift to the Bucs too.

[Sylvanfan]

I think Martin's life would have been a lot more miserable in Tampa Bay than it was in Miami.

[OILFAN #81]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Manning's MRI negative. Amazing to me how little respect the Broncos are getting early in the week as we approach this huge game.

Don't worry, they should still be the Superbowl favorite and at worst a top 2 team in the NFL.

[OILFAN #81]

Bucs win their 1st game of the year after the Jags won their 1st game of the year yesterday. Dolphins fall to 4-5 and look to be a mess.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by moon

I think the only debate would be who to consider young because I can't think of a QB 25 and under that is close (maybe Stafford but that is likely a homer pick) and that is from a guy who has found the Colts and their fans have become incredibly obnoxious lately so I don't want to give them any more credit than I have to.

I would not have considered Stafford, as I would have assumed a 5th year pro QB to be 27 or so. But he is only 1 year older than Andrew Luck is. Can't imagine too many QB's have thrown for more yards before turning 26 than Stafford has. If he stays healthy he should have 15,000 over the past three seasons. Stafford is really having a good season that seems to be a bit unnoticed thus far.

But I do agree that if you remove Stafford, Luck is the thouroughbred of that group. Put Wilson on the Colts and that team has 10-11 wins in the past year and a half instead of the 17 it has with Luck.