MikesVikes Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) 49'ers beat the Saints. Tebow Giants beat the Pack. Tebow Edited January 16, 2012 by MikesVikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 49'ers beat the Saints.Tebow Giants beat the Pack. Tebow Huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolly Rodgers Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 49'ers beat the Saints.Tebow Giants beat the Pack. Tebow Tebow got exposed for the pile he is yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 What does that have to do with passing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Huh? Sort of a puzzler there, isn't it. Passing is apparently dead in the NFL because a guy who can't pass for chight and his team got run off the field by a guy who just set the NFL record for passing TDs in a half and tied the NFL record passing TDs in a game. How can you not follow the rock-solid logic there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) My take from the weekend wasn't that passing was dead - it was that DEFENSE actually matters. Come January, it doesn't matter if your QB puts up 5TD passes a game indoors, or in October. If your defense is a liability and you can't consistently run, you will be exposed. Patriots were the anomaly but Denver was in way over its head. Edited January 16, 2012 by stethant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Winning QBs from this weekend: A Smith 299 yds 3 TDs passing E Manning 330 yds 3 TDs passing T Brady 363 yds 6 TDs passing Flacco 176 yds 2 TDs Looks passing still sort of matters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 49'ers beat the Saints.Tebow Giants beat the Pack. Tebow Worst Haiku evah !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Worst Haiku evah !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 My take from the weekend wasn't that passing was dead - it was that DEFENSE actually matters. Come January, it doesn't matter if your QB puts up 5TD passes a game indoors, or in October. If your defense is a liability and you can't consistently run, you will be exposed. Patriots were the anomaly but Denver was in way over its head. My take on the weekend is that you can't win if you turn the ball over: see NO, see GB, see HOU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) My take from the weekend wasn't that passing was dead - it was that DEFENSE actually matters. Come January, it doesn't matter if your QB puts up 5TD passes a game indoors, or in October. If your defense is a liability and you can't consistently run, you will be exposed. Patriots were the anomaly but Denver was in way over its head. I disagree. Other than the Bronocs, I don't think that you could say that any of the losing team's defense was a liability. And the only team than ran the ball well - Houston - lost. What matters? Turnovers and superior QB play: Winning QBs from this weekend:A Smith 299 yds 3 TDs passing E Manning 330 yds 3 TDs passing T Brady 363 yds 6 TDs passing Flacco 176 yds 2 TDs Flacco is fortunate. His team squeaked out a win despite playing a team playing its 3rd string QB that committed four turnovers. A Brees led offense almost led NO back despite the multiple turnovers. Edit: I forgot about GB. Thanks to the above post. I understand that one can debate which side of the ball is responsible for the turnovers. But you can't give a defense credit for all or even most of them, particularly last weekend. You're not going to win a Superbowl with a game manager at QB. Edited January 16, 2012 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I disagree. Other than the Bronocs, I don't think that you could say that any of the losing team's defense was a liability. And the only team than ran the ball well - Houston - lost. What matters? Turnovers and superior QB play: Flacco is fortunate. His team squeaked out a win despite playing a team playing its 3rd string QB that committed four turnovers. A Brees led offense almost led NO back despite the multiple turnovers. I understand that one can debate which side of the ball is responsible for the turnovers. But you can't give a defense credit for all or even most of them, particularly last weekend. You're not going to win a Superbowl with a game manager at QB. I was pointing out that there was really no shortage of passing among winning QBs. Flacco was way behind the rest in terms of numbers and even he had 2 TDs. You're right, it's going to take some QB play to win this thing. As many things that had to happen for the Niners to win that did, it still wouldn't have been enough had they not been getting 3s all game like they usually did. It took Smith being more than the "manager" that he's been most of the year to win that game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I understand that one can debate which side of the ball is responsible for the turnovers. I would argue that the Baltimore defense had nothing to do with any of the Houston turnovers -- the Jones fumble had zero to do with Baltimore, and all 3 of Yates' picks were passes thrown into double/triple coverage and never should have been thrown -- my flag football team would have secured those turnovers. In the NO-SF game, some of the turnovers were on NO and some were on the SF defense. But the reality is that NO likely wins that game if they have even an average game on ball control. Didn't see enough of the GB-NY game to comment on those. My takeaway from the weekend is "Turnovers lose", not "Defense wins" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I would argue that the Baltimore defense had nothing to do with any of the Houston turnovers -- the Jones fumble had zero to do with Baltimore, and all 3 of Yates' picks were passes thrown into double/triple coverage and never should have been thrown -- my flag football team would have secured those turnovers. In the NO-SF game, some of the turnovers were on NO and some were on the SF defense. But the reality is that NO likely wins that game if they have even an average game on ball control. Didn't see enough of the GB-NY game to comment on those. My takeaway from the weekend is "Turnovers lose", not "Defense wins" While those may have been bad passes that even your flag football team could pick off, they're still a result of defensive play. The fumble on the punt, agree had NOTHING to do with defense. But the picks by the DEFENSE cannot be dismissed as easily. Unless we're going to have new stats in football for "unforced errrors (turnovers, fumbles, interceptions)". Otherwise, not sure I follow the purpose of the thread, passing is alive and well in the NFL. Defense is still important too. And running the ball even has its place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 While those may have been bad passes that even your flag football team could pick off, they're still a result of defensive play. A competent QB should never have thrown those passes. That's why I put those on Yates, not Baltimore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadDawg Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Opps ... posted in wrong thread. Edited January 16, 2012 by BadDawg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 A competent QB should never have thrown those passes. That's why I put those on Yates, not Baltimore. That's fine, but it isn't the same as a runner just dropping the ball and the defense only being lucky enough to recover it. The defense had to first put themselves in the position, and second had to catch the ball (how many easy picks were dropped by defense players just this past weekend). I'm ot saying they are not Yates fault, but saying the Baltimore D doesn't get any credit for them is totally unfair to them. (And trust me I am no Baltimore fan.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Its funny you say that. When Alex Smith scored on that bootleg, I said to my wife "they scored too fast, there is too much time left on the clock. He might have been better to step out at the 5, then they take knees and kick a FG with ~30 seconds left". It's ironic that NO then also left SF time to have another drive. EDIT: for BadDawg Edited January 16, 2012 by nelsosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Stevegrab -- I hear ya man. We're arguing semantics here. All I'm saying is that the implication that the "Defense wins" argument is back as a result of this weekend bothers me a bit -- because we saw some really terrible ball security by offenses this weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 While those may have been bad passes that even your flag football team could pick off, they're still a result of defensive play. The fumble on the punt, agree had NOTHING to do with defense. But the picks by the DEFENSE cannot be dismissed as easily. Unless we're going to have new stats in football for "unforced errrors (turnovers, fumbles, interceptions)". Otherwise, not sure I follow the purpose of the thread, passing is alive and well in the NFL. Defense is still important too. And running the ball even has its place. What about coaching, the "trenches", winning the turnover battle, playing 4 quarters with discipline, half-time adjustments, etc? I think that's what the OP is saying though... It's not that passing hasn't become even more important and prevalent with the new rules, but it's still not the only way to win.... If the Bronco's D had been able to contain Brady, then we might have been talking about the way NE's D "stepped up" to help win it for them.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I would argue that the Baltimore defense had nothing to do with any of the Houston turnovers -- the Jones fumble had zero to do with Baltimore, and all 3 of Yates' picks were passes thrown into double/triple coverage and never should have been thrown -- my flag football team would have secured those turnovers. In the NO-SF game, some of the turnovers were on NO and some were on the SF defense. But the reality is that NO likely wins that game if they have even an average game on ball control. Didn't see enough of the GB-NY game to comment on those. My takeaway from the weekend is "Turnovers lose", not "Defense wins" No doubt. Imagine how different that game would have turned out had PT not been KOed on that first drive. Not only would they have scored there (TD or FG), but also Roby would have never been back to field a kickoff and that fumble never would have happened either. I know it's a cliche', but it truly is a game of inches. It's beautiful and sickening at the same time. I would agree with the argument too. San Francisco couldn't stop Drew all day. They capitalized on some great turnover play and I really can't attribute that to just their defense. Turnovers are just as much the offenses fault as the defense IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I would argue that the Baltimore defense had nothing to do with any of the Houston turnovers -- the Jones fumble had zero to do with Baltimore, and all 3 of Yates' picks were passes thrown into double/triple coverage and never should have been thrown -- my flag football team would have secured those turnovers. I know where you're going with this and agree to a point. But before you say they had nothing to do with those turnovers, go take a look at that last INT by Reed. Sure, that ball should not have been thrown, but it also should not have been caught by anyone. That was an amazing grab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted January 16, 2012 Author Share Posted January 16, 2012 I don't think that the passing offense is over in the NFL. I know that Tebow had his arse handed to him this weekend. But his team won many more games than expected after he took over for them. The Packers and Saints were both top passing offenses this year and they both failed to advance past this weekend. The 49'ers and Ravens can hardly be considered proficient as passing offenses and the're both playing in championship games next weekend. Most of all, this topic was started in frustration over the season the Vikings had this year. I heard local radio guys all year say that teams with stud running backs can't succeed in the league anymore. Would Adrian Peterson on a Packers or Saints team bring them down to a below .500 record? Of course not. Would any team that needs a running back pass on the opportunity to take a player like AP if he were available to them? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Tebow got exposed for the pile he is yesterday. ummm , and he is a pile why exactly ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 ummm , and he is a pile why exactly ?? Because there are only two active settings on the "Tebow Machine." Setting one - "Amazing comeback guy" (Must be used very sparingly. Has only been seen over a full game one time) Setting two - "Suckiest suck that ever sucked" (This is the default setting) There are no settings in between. If you want consistency, please browse our catalog for another model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.