NFL and College Football (American Football) Thread

[cyberdemon]

Originally Posted by Samari

Well I wasn't citing commentary of third parties into the discussion first. Even when I did, I used someone that actually played in the game, not someone who works for the press.

All of your "logical factors" are merely speculation and don't mean anything...especially since none of us have been in the situation. And especially since we're talking about behavior/psyche in a certain situation as a debating point. There is nothing logical about that at all. Even if you wanted to take a stab in the dark, which is that this is, a more plausible reason the 49ers had success to me is that they merely started executing like they had all year long. We live in a world where everyone wants to be a reality-television inspired narrative to every single thing. How about the team just started playing well and the blackout was a coincidence? Didn't help the Steelers (we'll make injury excuses for that though), but it helped San Francisco?

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

You're making it seem like divine intervention. That a blackout occurs and they just magically start play at their best without putting in the effort to get there. Ravens were cooled down as a result of the blackout and lost the momentum they had from the first half and the touchdown at the beginning of the second. The 49ers pulled their heads together during those 25 minutes and planned out what to do next during that time. That is the most logical argument. It's all about time management during the blackout.

I've played football before. There were times that a game would get delayed due to thunder or lightning. After that the game would end up being completely different than it was before. It affects the game a LOT. The Steelers probably didn't use the time to properly prepare and pull themselves together and it cost them. The Ravens probably did preparations since it IS the Super Bowl but the loss of momentum would still be very costly.

[Samari]

Originally Posted by Dilla

You're making it seem like we're claiming that the blackout was a divine intervention that let the Niners back in the game. We're not; we're just saying that the Niners came out looser and better prepared than the Ravens did after an unexpected 34 minute hiatus. The Steelers game against the Niners last keeps getting brought like it proves a point. It really doesn't. Did last year's Steelers roster switch with this year's Ravens' roster? Was that the Super Bowl last year? Your counteracting our magic blackout (as you say) logic with simulation football.

Honestly, it just sounds like you just take everything you perceive as a slight against SF and regard it as an insult. Nobody is trying to demean the Niners or what they did this year.

I understand what you're saying. I just don't agree with the established logic for it. I'm allowed to have an opinion right?

And before it seemed like it wasn't team specific regarding what the blackout can do for a team in regards to "momentum" or whatever mantra we can plug in here. We have one poster using other examples of delays being the reason for changing the course of any game and we have another that is being game and team specific in regards to the workings of a blackout (Super Bowl, not Steelers roster).

[Samari]

Originally Posted by cyberdemon

You're making it seem like divine intervention. That a blackout occurs and they just magically start play at their best without putting in the effort to get there. Ravens were cooled down as a result of the blackout and lost the momentum they had from the first half and the touchdown at the beginning of the second. The 49ers pulled their heads together during those 25 minutes and planned out what to do next during that time. That is the most logical argument. It's all about time management during the blackout.

I've played football before. There were times that a game would get delayed due to thunder or lightning. After that the game would end up being completely different than it was before. It affects the game a LOT. The Steelers probably didn't use the time to properly prepare and pull themselves together and it cost them. The Ravens probably did preparations since it IS the Super Bowl but the loss of momentum would still be very costly.

I played football when I was a little younger as well and had delays in games due to weather or maintenance issues. Nothing substantially different happened following the delay. I've seen other games, at least in the NFL, with weather delays. Nothing substantially different happened following the delay.

I've heard players on both sides say that the blackout didn't really change anything. Including the 49ers. Maybe they are lying though I don't know.

The question I still want answered is how did the blackout help Tarrell Brown force a fumble? Did he have an extra 34 minutes on the sideline to think about forcing fumbles? Did he do some stretch exercises to his arms that made him force fumbles better?

[Dilla]

What you are essentially saying is that the Niners could have taken naps and ate marshmallows while the Ravens had a light scrimmage during the break and it wouldn't have mattered. Players are going to say the blackout didn't matter because the Niners don't want to say that it took a blackout to get them back in the game, and the Ravens won, so they have no reason point fingers. You can bet your account that if the Ravens lost, many of them would have been pointing fingers at that blackout. Now, I guess if you want player thoughts otherwise, I have seen several Ravens say that it was important to "stay hungry" during the blackout and how important it was to stay loose.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Samari

The question I still want answered is how did the blackout help Tarrell Brown force a fumble? Did he have an extra 34 minutes on the sideline to think about forcing fumbles? Did he do some stretch exercises to his arms that made him force fumbles better?

Team rallies. They get more focused and clear their heads. They start playing the way they should have the entire time. Isn't this what you've been arguing happened anyway? Only real difference is that we're saying they were able to do so because they had the extra 34 minutes from the blackout, whereas you're arguing that they just flipped some magic switch and magically stopped playing like the second stringers they had been for the previous half a game plus.

And, you know, the whole 84 real minutes the Ravens offense hadn't played a down or had any semblence of practice. That probably helped too.

[cyberdemon]

Originally Posted by GDB

Team rallies. They get more focused and clear their heads. They start playing the way they should have the entire time. Isn't this what you've been arguing happened anyway? Only real difference is that we're saying they were able to do so because they had the extra 34 minutes from the blackout, whereas you're arguing that they just flipped some magic switch and magically stopped playing like the second stringers they had been for the previous half a game plus.

And, you know, the whole 84 real minutes the Ravens offense hadn't played a down or had any semblence of practice. That probably helped too.

Those 84 minutes definitely helped the much struggling 49ers defense. All that time means the Ravens Offense was ice cold when they finally came out (and how it showed). They have some bad downs as a result and the 49ers D becomes empowered.

[Samari]

Originally Posted by Dilla

What you are essentially saying is that the Niners could have taken naps and ate marshmallows while the Ravens had a light scrimmage during the break and it wouldn't have mattered. Players are going to say the blackout didn't matter because the Niners don't want to say that it took a blackout to get them back in the game, and the Ravens won, so they have no reason point fingers. You can bet your account that if the Ravens lost, many of them would have been pointing fingers at that blackout. Now, I guess if you want player thoughts otherwise, I have seen several Ravens say that it was important to "stay hungry" during the blackout and how important it was to stay loose.

Oh alright so we'll just make up our minds about the matter regardless of what players have said.

I'm saying the blackout didn't matter as attested by players from both ball clubs. The 49ers didn't need the blackout to come back against Atlanta down 17 points and they didn't need it to come back against the Ravens. The team is in the Super Bowl for a reason.

[Samari]

Originally Posted by GDB

Team rallies. They get more focused and clear their heads. They start playing the way they should have the entire time. Isn't this what you've been arguing happened anyway? Only real difference is that we're saying they were able to do so because they had the extra 34 minutes from the blackout, whereas you're arguing that they just flipped some magic switch and magically stopped playing like the second stringers they had been for the previous half a game plus.

And, you know, the whole 84 real minutes the Ravens offense hadn't played a down or had any semblence of practice. That probably helped too.

No I've been arguing that the blackout didn't have anything to do with the 49ers storming back. I know what the team can do and having a blackout or delay of game is irrelevant. If the 49ers had a blackout in Seattle, I don't see them coming back. They weren't in the game the entire time from start to finish. San Francisco didn't need a blackout to come back against the Falcons. They just started making plays like they have all season long.

If the blackout was so beneficial, why didn't San Francisco convert the 3rd and 13 when the game resumed? They were well rested and had plenty of time to plan their next play. Yet it failed.

[Dilla]

I'm done after this, because I'm not going beyond two days in an argument I'm not going to change my mind in, but I will address this:

Originally Posted by Samari

Oh alright so we'll just make up our minds about the matter regardless of what players have said.

Because I would like to think that I have more sense than to yield after a sample of players had some lip service, intentionally narrowed to help your point, on a day where over 40 players suited up. For your benefit, though, I'll post some player reactions that go against what you claim.

Ravens running back Ray Rice: “Honestly, for myself, I was a little stiff when I got back out there. It was about an hour because if you think … halftime was 30 minutes. Then we got out there and Jacoby took one back. Then, the power goes out and that’s another 30 minutes. So the offense is sitting there for an hour.

“Was it tough getting back out there? It was pretty tough but I’m glad we were able to finish the game and be world champions.”

Ravens fullback Vonta Leach: “It got us off-track. We weathered the storm and came out of there with the victory.”

Ravens safety Ed Reed: “The bad part was, we started talking about it. That was mentioned. It was like they were trying to kill our momentum. It was like, ‘There are two teams on this field!’ Once we started talking, it happened. We had to refocus, and we did.”

Ravens offensive tackle Michael Oher: “It was crazy. We got cold on the sidelines. We started off cold in the second half. The defense came through for us and we got the win.”

Ravens safety Bernard Pollard: “That was crazy. That was my first. It slowed us down a little bit but at the same time we kept playing. They scored 17 straight points but we stayed together. We were upset, but we stayed together.”

Ravens tight end Dennis Pitta: “It seemed to come at the perfect time for the 49ers. We had a ton of momentum and the power went out just after we returned a kick. It felt like the power was out forever and it was hard to get going after that.

“We had just had a long halftime and it felt like our offense was off the field for hours between the second and third quarter.”

There. Satisfied?

Edit: And since you have used the Pittsburgh game as a frame of reference:

San Francisco tackle Joe Staley: “It was definitely unique. We had a similar situation in our stadium when we played last year against Pittsburgh on Monday Night Football. That was my first thought. I immediately thought, ‘We had a power outage against Pittsburgh last year and came out on fire. I was excited.

So Staley felt that since SF came out on fire against Pittsburgh last year, he figured that they would be hot again? Interesting.

[Yye1]

Of course the Blackout had something to do with the 49ers storming back, the Ravens had just returned a kickoff 109 yards and sacked Kaepernick, they had all the momentum in the world, but lost it during the power outage, while the 49ers had time to adjust. As for the 3rd and 13, it was one play, and they forced a three and out during the ensuing Ravens possession. If the power outage had not occured, the 49ers would have been totally destroyed

[Samari]

Originally Posted by Dilla

Edit: And since you have used the Pittsburgh game as a frame of reference:

So Staley felt that since SF came out on fire against Pittsburgh last year, he figured that they would be hot again? Interesting.

Except the 49ers were dominating that game from start to finish. They were "on fire" the entire game.

Originally Posted by Yye1

Of course the Blackout had something to do with the 49ers storming back, the Ravens had just returned a kickoff 109 yards and sacked Kaepernick, they had all the momentum in the world, but lost it during the power outage, while the 49ers had time to adjust. As for the 3rd and 13, it was one play, and they forced a three and out during the ensuing Ravens possession. If the power outage had not occured, the 49ers would have been totally destroyed

Speculation. Maybe the 49ers call a different play on that 3rd and 13 before they get back with limited time instead of extended time because of the blackout and they convert. Maybe they score on that drive and score on every other consecutive drive. Impossible to tell.

[Yye1]

^ look at the 49ers body language during the blackout. for the first 15 mins they were just sitting there. Blackout shifted the momentum and gave the 49ers time to readjust. Ever hear of that word, momentum?

[Last Sinner]

So what do people think of Chip Kelly being Philadelphia's new head coach?

[VTHokiePride]

The Eagles offense should be alright if they can correct their line because they allowed the QB to be sacked 48 times. I'm still worried about their defense. They've got a couple big names on their roster, but they haven't really performed. They allowed 27.8 points per game, tied for 29th in the league and are ranked 23 against the run, tied for 25th with 30 sacks, and were -24 in the takeaway differential.

[GuidoHunter_Toki]

Originally Posted by Last Sinner

So what do people think of Chip Kelly being Philadelphia's new head coach?

As an Eagles fan I'm pretty stoked, but at the same time the defense needs work. Also I hope this year the orginization actually realizes how much of a problem our OL is having. We've had a weak OL since the final two years of McNabb being there and I think is playing a role in the QB struggles. A QB can only do so much when he is constantly under pressure.

Hopefully the change in coach helps breath some life/change into this team.

[sky black swordman]

^ That's true, but do you think that Michael Vick was worth that 6-year, $100 million contract with almost $40 million in guaranteed money ?

Philadelphia Eagles restructuring his contract was a great move. He IMO was not worth all that money.
Another player who's contract they need to restructure is Nnamdi Asomugha. He was once a shutdown cornerback, but not any more.

[GuidoHunter_Toki]

Originally Posted by sky black swordman

^ That's true, but do you think that Michael Vick was worth that 6-year, $100 million contract with almost $40 million in guaranteed money ?

Philadelphia Eagles restructuring his contract was a great move. He IMO was not worth all that money.
Another player who's contract they need to restructure is Nnamdi Asomugha. He was once a shutdown cornerback, but not any more.

Yeah I was not really a huge fan of the big contract they give Vick. There was too much overconfidence in us being a "super" team that managment just meated up that contract, without giving him another year or two to prove that he could be a long term help to us. Gambling so much money on a bunch of 30-year-old players is always a risk, especially putting a lot of them( many being defenders) into a system with a first-time defensive coordinator. Unfortunately for us it didn't work out.

[Dilla]

http://www.nfl.com/runrichrun

[ReaperxKingx]

The NFL Scouting Combine is coming soon, any thoughts on the draft pool?

[Dilla]

WR and DL positions are really deep. I see some projected 4th round WRs that could produce 1st-2nd round numbers their rookie year.

QBs are in for a down year before another good class next year. There is an outside chance that no QB will be selected. Any QB drafted early (except for maybe Geno Smith) will be a reach. It's the worst one in years.

The trend of the de-valued RB position is really noticeable. No RB projected in the first round (Eddie Lacy or Gio Bernard may sneak in).