Aslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=4rpmddblr0qsa28id791kk1410&action=profile;u=6;area=showposts;start=690e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/indexd0e7-3.htmlslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=4rpmddblr0qsa28id791kk1410&action=profile;area=showposts;u=6e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/indexd0e7-3.html.zxݝh^0 OKtext/htmlISO-8859-1gzip8:Wed, 11 Mar 2020 08:30:46 GMT0 0Pݝh^> Show Posts - Deathlike2

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Deathlike2

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 »
691
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 21 (Super Bowl?!)
« on: February 06, 2011, 02:28:21 PM »
Packers, 24-21

 :edit:
Simply put, I think the Packers are the better overall team.

Offense:
Big Ben is definitely an offense threat by being the big playmaker.... however I think Mendenhall with be the bigger offensive threat in this game. The Packers running game is "good enough" to allow for play action, although I believe Rodgers is a better passer overall and has similar capabilities that Big Ben has (except he's simply not as big).

Defense:
The Steelers run d is very solid.. but their secondary is very suspect (primarily based on a Pats @ Steelers game). If Rodgers has anything resembling that game in Atlanta (especially when Cowboys Stadium is a dome), it might be a tough night for the secondary. The Packers run d is not as good statistically, but that can be somewhat attributed to injuries. I do believe that run d can be had (like the Steelers), but that Packers secondary is very much a playmaking bunch, so it might not be as easy to get someone as fast as the Steelers Mike Wallace to stay open.

Special Teams:
Both teams are not that good in that dept, but I'd give only a slight edge to the Packers as they have a slightly better return game. Additionally both Steelers kicker and punter are not those that started the season with... which can be somewhat problematic.

In sum, Leno is picking the Steelers because... it's the cheeseheads that still dominate the black and blue division (PRAY FOR NO MORE DOME LENO).  :tongue:

692
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 21 (Super Bowl?!)
« on: January 30, 2011, 06:19:19 PM »
Fisher hasn't had consistent winning seasons in his time with the Titans... it doesn't make him less of a coach, but it's not entirely surprising either.

In other news, I think a crazy idea would be to have the winning conference in the Pro Bowl should get the chance to make their pick of the coin toss in the SB of the following year. It doesn't really change much in the grand scheme of things, but it would make more sense IMO... unlike baseball where you have home field advantage... the SB is a neutral site and if we believe that the coin toss makes no difference in the grand scheme of things... then that's the best you can kinda hope for... I guess?

693
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 09:28:33 PM »
Quote from: assassin on January 23, 2011, 09:23:28 PM
Quote from: me
It's not so much that I think Cutler is a better cold weather quarterback than Rodgers, or that the Bears are a better cold weather team than the Packers.  Rather, I saw how Green Bay's offense really stretched its wings in a nice, warm dome game last week.  Unpleasant outdoor conditions are less amenable to a high-flying passing game.  Because Green Bay has more of an aerial attack than Chicago does to start with, they simply have more to lose in this category.

i don't think it's controversial to say that climate-controlled conditions and a playing surface that's avoided the elements is generally better for the passing game.

my commentary wasn't on Green Bay's location (i can look North on a map just fine :P), but on their team's offensive style, particular in its uber high-scoring outings in Atlanta, and last year in Arizona.

Sounds like giving away the Lombardi time, since Cowboys Stadium is another freaking dome.

It's obviously better to play in a dome.. but QBs that are built for the weather are usually able to up their game in a dome (I have not seen Ben's stats, but I know Brady has better stats in a dome) whereas the opposite is true.. dome teams playing outside (for the most part, perception-wise, see Peyton's stats being more notable)... it is simply tougher for a dome team to win it all IMO (Vikings need a new stadium, and no fucking domes this time)... and last years Saints+Colts don't count (outside in Miami, but they are both dome teams).

Oh well... my head is kinda out there.

694
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 09:13:07 PM »
If there was no major injury to Cutler, I don't think they would've had the answers in that game...

On the other hand, was it a forgone conclusion to go strictly to Hanie when you could've just asked Collins to hand the ball off and wait for the 4th? If there was no shot of either, then I guess that's OK, but it is deeply questionable unless Collins ineffectiveness or both QBs are injured to an extreme where you don't even give them a shot to come back because of the rule... I recall the emergency rule being very relevant when it came up.

695
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 09:01:35 PM »
Congrats to the Steelers for kicking the Jets in the ass.

Although, there are real issues with the Steelers going forward, but they scored early and enough to win the game. Despite the turnovers by the Steelers, the Jets simply could not cash in and in the end the defense did ultimately let them down by allowing Big Ben to run free outside the pocket for most of the game... especially with that super makeshift o-line that is devastated with another key injury.

Congrats to both Steelers and Packers.

Quote from: assassin
yes, i'm sparse on analysis here, but i'm lazy and tired.  besides, most of the stats would back up the opposite picks winning, and why should i undermine myself? :P

*fully prepared to go 0-2 this week*

Congrats, you've succeeded. Gil got 2-0 for this week.

696
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 05:20:36 PM »
Nice to see the Bears at least try to make it a game... when the Packers didn't quite seal the deal. The irony of having the 3rd QB become reasonably better than Cutler will probably spark some debate with Hanie over Cutler will probably be.... interesting. The pick six by the NT was pretty amusing (minus the dancing) as the defense of the Packers stepped up while Rodgers did not have such a great game.

697
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 03:59:47 PM »
Cutler is injured... again (wasn't it with him trying to run the ball again? :P )

Unless magic happens, Collins is not going to save the Bears team.

Also, I've also noticed my picks are totally opposite of Leno...

698
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 03:21:02 PM »
It is worth pointing out here that everyone (other than Poco Loco who's just rooting) has picked every possible combo... so only one person will get 2-0, and another will get into an 0fer.

699
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 23, 2011, 10:25:14 AM »
I'm kinda over the loss, but I'll survive. Any comments suggesting that a QB should be running when he's not known to (despite the injuries) is silly. Then again, I can mention how Rodgers was out because of a concussion and Cutler being out of the same thing... because they ran unnecessarily (of course, not all cases are simple, but we can also point to a Brett Favre Vikings NFC Championship game as the cue to remind some folks). Too many rushing QBs get injured... and often (McNabb and Vick aren't out of this list)... so don't go thinking this is a good idea all the time (tm).


Quote
(6) Packers @ (2) Bears: Sunday 4 est

Packers

The Packers are a better overall team than the Bears. The game will be close mind you, given the nature of divisional rivals and pretty much anything can happen. Rodgers probably won't have the awesome pwnage game like he did vs the Falcons, but having a legit running game will make it harder for the Bears since it allows play action. The Bears o-line is better now, but I think it can be had... However, if the Bears are to win, it will start with Devin Hester and special teams making it... I think that Bears defense can hold its end of the bargain, but I like the Packers d better in this scenario. I still think Cutler is a semi-Grossman like guy and he's either going to be very good or very bad...

Besides, who's cute idea was it to let the Seahawks back in the game... the HB pass is a TERRIBLE IDEA at this point.

 :edit:
If the Steelers win, Big Ben has made enough big plays when he's outside the pocket while the Jets defense may have broken down... and the Steelers defense with Polamalu gets a turnover (most likely from an INT). The Steelers defense is more than capable to stopping that Jets running game to force Sanchez to throw... but that fail of a run defense was a major issue the last time around.

Quote
(6) Jets @ (2) Steelers: Sunday 8 est (I think)

Jets

I don't like this pick as I want the Steelers to win. I like Big Ben (as the player, not the off field crap), but I feel that the Jets can reasonably contain Ben in the pocket like last time. Despite the biggest difference in this matchup is Polamalu being missing in the last game, the problem unfortunately is that the Steelers o-line is not that good... especially compared to the Jets o-line. More importantly, Jets special teams is still holding up its side of the deal... and similar to the earlier Jets @ Steelers matchup, the Steelers special teams is simply not that great. I think the Jets will do a lot more zone coverage despite the number of receivers that the Steelers feature... and I'm sure Santonio Holmes will at least attempt to make a statement against his former team.

I'm just surprised that no actual analysis has gone to this point.... but I guess we still watch the games on any given Sunday.  :tongue:

There's no real advantage to the Packers over the Bears when it comes to the weather.... Packers have played in Lambeau Field... that's fucking cold weather to me (not in this playoffs, but it almost sounds like you were making them some sort of dome team).

It's also worth pointing out that Lovie Smith didn't really want to face the Packers in the playoffs... and that was the effort that was shown in Week 17. I think it's fair to say it won't be as maddeningly low scoring, but it's still a potential omen. The Packers are playing their best football... and as my best comparison of them.. they do look like the Steelers of 06 when they won the SB. There's something to be said for that...

Also, I don't have any issues with the cheeseheads (except for the Vikings fans). I don't have any issue with the same team that used to have Brett Favre that beat the Pats more than a decade ago in a SB.

700
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 18, 2011, 07:38:08 AM »
Quote from: assassin on January 18, 2011, 04:08:55 AM
Quote
That is an irrational Pats fan. If you're expecting Brady to become Micheal Vick overnight, he's dreaming for another offseason.

well, there is a happy medium between Michael Vick and a statue with ice blocks on its feet.

QBs that don't normally run would be happy to get 1 or 2 rushing first downs if lucky. QBs that can run can get twice as many when the option is available. Any QB even including Micheal Vick who attempts to run out of the pocket as a result of the pressure and is contained properly tends to get sacked often. That was Micheal Vick in Packers @ Eagles playoff game. It only makes sense for a QB run when the defense does not properly contain a QB in the pocket. When the defense fails to contain a QB properly, QBs like Big Ben tend to get really huge plays with his arm, not his legs... which are what QBs are generally for. Of course the QB can run for the first down if the option is there when reasonable.

Besides, Vick tends to take a lot of punishment he needs not to take given his body.

701
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 17, 2011, 02:12:26 PM »
Quote from: assassin on January 17, 2011, 01:18:42 PM
Quote
To make that assessment, you'd have to have a semblance of a running ability for a QB. Last I checked "pocket passer" is not a description of a runner.

pocket passers don't have legs?  i already acknowledged "maybe it's not his style".  but when the game takes you away from what you do best, it's time to improvise ... or lose.  the Pats opted for the latter.

Brady doesn't have to be Usain Bolt, just be able to briskly move his left leg, then his right leg, then his left leg, then the right, etc.

You can't improvise if you're contained in the pocket.

Think of Micheal Vick for a second... or any other running QB. If the pocket is surrounded in a such a way that there's no clear path "out of it", then it makes absolutely zero sense to run regardless of your foot speed. It is very impractical to do it. Sometimes you can escape only if "the pocket is collapsing", but that's not a sure thing... but sometimes you have to be lucky to do it.


Quote
Quote
This was no different for Peyton... (Eli can run better than his brother). Additionally if you were paying attention to the in game commentary, they were containing Brady in the pocket (which one should do to any running QB like Big Ben and Vick), which does not allow for ANY QB to run out of it.

so the pocket is an ironclad, fully closed circle now?  it's really more of a semi-circle.  he could have run outside the edges of it and picked up a few yards, rather than repeatedly throwing the ball away or taking sacks.

It's a semi-circle somewhat, but the longer the pass rush is going, it extends to the back as some pass rushers and lineman can end up behind the QB as time progresses. I don't recall many opportunities to see "runs to the sidelines" as you think. There's nothing bad about throwing the ball away (sometimes the coverage is that good) and coverage sacks happen.


Quote
Quote
A QB is not able to scramble effectively in the first place (even if the QB is a statue in terms of mobility) if a team is running zone coverage, which is one of the things the Jets were running. In zone (I'm not even sure why I have to explain such a fundamental concept here),

again, pissy pissy.  which zones are close enough to the line of scrimmage that the defenders could stop the QB from picking up some yardage?  if the defenders have receivers fully covered, then by definition they're not available to go after the quarterback -- for the simple reason that they cannot be in two places at once.  i'm amazed i have to explain such a simple concept here.

It doesn't work the way you're describing it. It depends on where the zones are placed (sometimes there are mixed zone+man coverages, of which I am not a coach to explain how everything works). Just because all the receivers are covered (minimum running a nickel defense), there's still enough LBs that are available (assuming that the d-line is sent to rush the passer). Receivers being covered usually imply man coverage (but combination of man+zone can apply). So, what you will have is 6 players (possibly less when running dime packages) and that's still enough to account for all 5 offensive lineman and the QB... then again that assumes so many other things.

In any case... when the pocket is contained in such a way, you can't really just "walk out of it". There has to be opportunities to do so. I remember a game in 06 where Brady "outwitted" Urlacher (Bears @ Pats) because there was an opportunity to run with the ball because every WR was covered. I also recall the pocket opening up for Brady to run the ball.. so that at least made sense to do so.


Quote
EDIT: this is a good article from a levelheaded Patriots fan:

http://isportsweb.com/2011/01/17/brady-could-have-done-more-to-ground-jets/

i'm sure more such articles will emerge as the sudden postseason exit is studied.

That is an irrational Pats fan. If you're expecting Brady to become Micheal Vick overnight, he's dreaming for another offseason. I've seen more intelligent thoughts from players who play the game or at least sites that diagram some of the issues that occurred.

 :edit:

BTW, here's a better example of times where it makes sense to run the ball as a QB.

This comes from the Bears game...

On the 2 TD runs that the Cutler ran, I recall the one where the ball was MEANT to goto him (it was a QB draw I think, or a decision to run it himself because the receivers were covered). The play was designed to goto the right side, but seeing how the there was a hole in the left side, he ran it in towards that direction and scored. If the openings are not there, you are not going to get much done. There are a lot of things about running the ball that QBs still have to follow despite the limited number of times a QB gets to do it in the first place.

702
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 20 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 17, 2011, 10:21:03 AM »
Quote from: assassin on January 17, 2011, 02:55:38 AM
there were at least a few plays where Brady had all sorts of time to throw, but couldn't find anybody open down field, and after seeing Cutler's performance earlier in the day, i'm thinking "Why doesn't he just run the ball?!".  Brady only had two rushes, compared to how many long, frustrated looks down the field?  10, 15?  it's hard to believe that with the Patriots receivers so well-covered, the Jets would also have the personnel to simultaneously stop a quarterback from rushing for some yards.

maybe it's not his style, especially in the last two seasons, but sometimes you have to go with what's available.

That makes absolutely no sense. To make that assessment, you'd have to have a semblance of a running ability for a QB. Last I checked "pocket passer" is not a description of a runner. This was no different for Peyton... (Eli can run better than his brother). Additionally if you were paying attention to the in game commentary, they were containing Brady in the pocket (which one should do to any running QB like Big Ben and Vick), which does not allow for ANY QB to run out of it.

A QB is not able to scramble effectively in the first place (even if the QB is a statue in terms of mobility) if a team is running zone coverage, which is one of the things the Jets were running. In zone (I'm not even sure why I have to explain such a fundamental concept here), the defense behind the d-line trend to "sit" in a zone and react to the QB's eyes or the receivers that come into that zone. Many teams run such a system, like the Pats, Jets (as of late), and definitely the Bears. If a QB and the receivers understand where they need to be in the "holes" of said zone, you can slowly pick a team apart. The "Tampa 2" defense is a modified version of the Cover 2 defense (zone) which was created by Tony Dungy (formerly of the Colts and Tampa Bay Bucs). There are plenty of variations of it...

When a QB actually does scramble... it's because every receiver in man coverage are covered... and a pass rush that is contained and there would have to be open running "lanes" for a QB to go through. That was not an option.

Quote from: Lenophis on January 17, 2011, 06:46:25 AM
Quote
Brady only had two rushes, compared to how many long, frustrated looks down the field?  10, 15?  it's hard to believe that with the Patriots receivers so well-covered, the Jets would also have the personnel to simultaneously stop a quarterback from rushing for some yards.
Rex changed up his defense to shut Brady down, and Brady didn't adjust to try and shut Rex down. Despite the stats saying the Patriots mostly dominated, the Patriots looked a bit confused out there.

It's hard to adjust if you don't exactly know when and what the opposing defense is doing. I'm sure Peyton was saying the same thing for the most part. I did say in a post earlier.. the numbers don't always tell the story. Sometimes a game is set by the tempo of a team... in both Pats+Colts games, it was run at the Jets pace.

I get the feeling that part of the problem with this version of the Pats defense is primarily that there's not enough veteran leadership... the defense didn't really respond in the sense that they were too passive... hoping for stuff to just happen instead of forcing the issue. Getting all the turnovers had a direct correlation with scoring first and early and I'm willing to bet that the turnover battle wasn't there when the defense had to step up (I'm sure someone will churn the numbers).

Anyways... I think the Steelers will have many issues going forward... since that patchwork o-line and a semi-healthy Polamalu is not really going to scare anyone.

703
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 19 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 16, 2011, 07:02:47 PM »
To start off, give the Jets credit for winning pretty much every key thing a football team needs to win with... offense, defense, special teams. The Jets not showing up in the earlier matchup obviously wasn't a proper indication of anything (nor it should've been). A team that can beat the Colts+Peyton and Pats+Brady deserves the credit.

I was really bored with the Bears kicking the ass of the Seahawks (although part of the latter half was kinda disturbing, starting with the halfback pass for an INT).

704
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 19 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 16, 2011, 07:42:12 AM »
Quote from: Lenophis on January 16, 2011, 06:44:34 AM
Quote from: Deathlike2 on January 15, 2011, 10:10:38 PM
Leno, did you pick against the Packers just to hate on them (being in the same division as the Vikings)?
Not entirely. I thought the Falcons were ready to take that next step, and they way they played this year I thought they would've at least made the NFC championship.

I was already convinced the Packers would win in a rematch... that is the team that made the next step IMO. I watched the pain Packers @ Falcons the first time around and also the Packers @ Pats game.

assassin... in fooball they say stats are for losers and in a number of cases, this is true. One of the things worth analyzing is the context of how a team wins a game. It is somewhat difficult to look over the numbers and draw the proper conclusions... although things like garbage TDs are usually around affecting such stats as point differential and the progression of a defense (like the Pats godawful 3rd down stat, which still scares me). Then again... it is still difficult to get the proper context of a lot of stuff in football w/o understanding the underlying logic of a gameplan or execution...

I guess we could sum it all up in one coach's words... we (viewers) don't know what they (coaches) know.

705
General Discussion / Re: NFL season (2010-2011) week 19 (playoffs?!)
« on: January 15, 2011, 10:10:38 PM »
Leno, did you pick against the Packers just to hate on them (being in the same division as the Vikings)?

By virtue of Leno's differing Saturday picks, Leno has lost for the week (though having a chance to hold even for the week).

Postgame analysis:

As I said before... Big Ben is better than Flacco in the very end (although Steelers special teams nearly coughed it up).

Falcons look like a better version of this years version of the Chiefs... and the Packers look like the Steelers of their 06 run. This is something worth watching going forward.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 »