2012 NFL playoff thread

[PeteLFan]

Also think sitting Rodgers was a huge mistake, when your qb is having a season for ages and in a zone like that you don't kill his rhythm by sitting him.

[Joborule]

I never understand the concept of resting a QB for more than one week. Too much risk in having them out of sync to start the game since they haven't had game action for a longer period of time than normal.

[transplant99]

Yeah that was the worst game i have seen them play at home since the beginning of last season....ugly in almost every facet. The defesne was what worried me and for sure they were a massive problem yesterday. But when i saw the way the offense was playing as well....the drops, fumbles, missed throws, it became apparent they simply were not prepared to play a playoff game. I honestly wonder how the death of young Philbin last weekend affected them mentally this week....so hard to quantify it, but they certaianly seemed like a team distracted from what they have done for the better part of 2 years.

Full credit to the G men though, they did everything they needed to in order to get out of there with a win and Eli was really really good.

It sure was a great ride while it lasted though...23-2 since last December...not a whole lot to complain about, and certainly have everything they need to be elite once again next year.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

No word from tranny yet? Maybe he's on suey watch. I know the feeling.

Nope....was over at a friends house for the game and didnt come home til this morning.

In all honesty, i was not overly surprised at all by yesterdays result...though the way it went down was a bit of a shock...particularly the drops and the hail mary....inexcusable.

[PeteLFan]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I never understand the concept of resting a QB for more than one week. Too much risk in having them out of sync to start the game since they haven't had game action for a longer period of time than normal.

It's damned if you damned if you don't type of thing. My belief is you don't sit a qb, he is the biggest part of your team. That's 2 weeks of inactivity, he will be sluggish.

That's why if you are a wild card team on a streak with a hot qb, that team is probably the most dangerous.

[rubecube]

The NFC is going to be pretty good for next couple years I think. A couple of teams that should've finished better than they did in the Eagles and Bears to go along with all the strong teams that made the playoffs this year should make for a pretty tough conference. You also have some pretty good defenses showing up in Washington, Seattle, and Arizona, plus a budding superstar in Carolina. The only teams that I would say probably won't compete for the next couple years are the rams and vikings, but it will really depend on how quickly they fix their offensive lines.

[cross16]

Originally Posted by PeteLFan

It's damned if you damned if you don't type of thing. My belief is you don't sit a qb, he is the biggest part of your team. That's 2 weeks of inactivity, he will be sluggish.

That's why if you are a wild card team on a streak with a hot qb, that team is probably the most dangerous.

I would have to agree, I didn't like the decision either. I dont' believe it played a part because I didnt' think Rodgers was that bad yesterday, but I would have played him for at least a half against Detroit. i dont like the concept of taking an entrie game off even if he did call the plays. To me he should have played the first half, and then called the game in the 2nd half to stay fuly invovled.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by rubecube

The NFC is going to be pretty good for next couple years I think. A couple of teams that should've finished better than they did in the Eagles and Bears to go along with all the strong teams that made the playoffs this year should make for a pretty tough conference. You also have some pretty good defenses showing up in Washington, Seattle, and Arizona, plus a budding superstar in Carolina. The only teams that I would say probably won't compete for the next couple years are the rams and vikings, but it will really depend on how quickly they fix their offensive lines.

Agreed, and even St. Louis already has their franchise QB along with an arguably top 5 (but aging) back, as well as 2 studs in their defence to build around.

After most of the last decade of being the "easy" conference, it seems the past couple years the NFC is finally back to being the stronger conference again. Not at the level the AFC was the first half of the last decade or anything, but I'd say it appears to be the stronger of the 2 right now.

Pretty amazing how even its been too. If San Fran wins, that will be 11 different NFC representatives in the Super Bowl in the past 11 seasons.

[PeteLFan]

Originally Posted by cross16

I would have to agree, I didn't like the decision either. I dont' believe it played a part because I didnt' think Rodgers was that bad yesterday, but I would have played him for at least a half against Detroit. i dont like the concept of taking an entrie game off even if he did call the plays. To me he should have played the first half, and then called the game in the 2nd half to stay fuly invovled.

Detroit would have prepared him for a good pass rush, they could have also installed more run plays as well. Rodgers was not terrible, but he missed throws that he hits with ease. Super sloppy all around, and not taking the ball right off the bat was strange for a team that is as aggressive as the packers.

That's why I like when bill keeps Tom in games, he keeps his starters going.

[PeteLFan]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

Agreed, and even St. Louis already has their franchise QB along with an arguably top 5 (but aging) back, as well as 2 studs in their defence to build around.

After most of the last decade of being the "easy" conference, it seems the past couple years the NFC is finally back to being the stronger conference again. Not at the level the AFC was the first half of the last decade or anything, but I'd say it appears to be the stronger of the 2 right now.

Pretty amazing how even its been too. If San Fran wins, that will be 11 different NFC representatives in the Super Bowl in the past 11 seasons.

I think this season showed the rams are still not good enough. It's going too take a really good draft class and some good free agent signings to get us going again. Continued flop picks in the first round with guys like Ty hill Adam carikker, and Jason smith has too end.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by transplant99

It sure was a great ride while it lasted though...23-2 since last December...not a whole lot to complain about, and certainly have everything they need to be elite once again next year.

Yeah thats exactly how I felt last year after the Seattle debacle. It sucked, but I wasn't really that bothered by it coming off a Super Bowl, kinda gave my team a one year reprieve. All the pieces were still there.

This year though, that stung. With the expectations, the 9 game winning streak, all the records, the LONG awaited rematch at GB right around the corner, and how the game finished, that's the most painful loss as a sports fan I've absorbed in my adult life I think...going back to 94's combined Stampeders choke to the Lions in the WF (Darren Flutie catch), and Bure's game 7 OT goal the same year. Good times.

Only today am I finally starting to get over it, though the thought of hosting the Giants next weekend on Sunday night makes me sick...

[Sylvanfan]

I would agree that the NFC is vastly superior to the AFC right now, and it's largely due to the QB position. Really it's AFC teams who are doing the run the ball and play defence with a limited passing game for the most part. Whereas NFC teams are building up their offences with big time QB's. Guys like Matt Ryan, and Tony Romo would easily have been pro bowl players in the AFC this year. In the NFC, they're considered garbage.

[KelVarnsen]

That is because Tony Romo is a garbage QB.

[Spuds_Buckley]

Well, I got 3/4 predictions right this past weekend. As for next week

Who I want to win:
Ravens
Niners

Who I think will win:
Pats
Giants

Either way it would be a very entertaining Superbowl... Harbowl part 2 or a rematch of that classic Superbowl XLII in 2008.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

That is because Tony Romo is a garbage QB.

Which tells you what type of QB play most of the AFC is getting.

Houston with Matt Schaub could be a very good team. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning is obviously better. Phillip Rivers can be better. Andy Daulton may be okay, but I think he'll be more of a care taker, not the go to I'm the man type.

Other than thos guys plus Brady/Roethlisberger...AFC teams for the most part are not very good at the position.

[troutman]

Jim Rome's guest host made an interesting point today - in the last 20 years, only two Superbowl winners did not have a "star" QB.

Do you hear that Cleveland? Do whatever it takes to get Luck.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by troutman

Jim Rome's guest host made an interesting point today - in the last 20 years, only two Superbowl winners did not have a "star" QB.

Do you hear that Cleveland? Do whatever it takes to get Luck.

I think it depends on what your criteria is. I wouldn't have called Brady a star during his first win. Ditto for Roethlisberger and Eli. So I guess I'd count it as 5. And let's be honest, we were one botched kickoff away from seeing Jake Delhomme put on a ring.

[KelVarnsen]

The Browns can try to get RG3.

[troutman]

Early lines:

NE -7.5
SF -3.0

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think it depends on what your criteria is. I wouldn't have called Brady a star during his first win. Ditto for Roethlisberger and Eli. So I guess I'd count it as 5. And let's be honest, we were one botched kickoff away from seeing Jake Delhomme put on a ring.

And he didn't go back more than 20 years because then you have Hostettler, McMahon, Williams, Rypien, and I would argue even Simms.