NFL NEWS

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/15/12 8:43 pm

My buddy said he thought the only team that could beat the Packers was the Giants.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/15/12 8:46 pm

gopheritall wrote:
Chris83 wrote:
Dances With Gophers wrote:Has any other one-loss team failed to make it to the Championship game? LOL!

Two, actually. The '98 Vikings of course and the 2004 Steelers...but I LIKE this one!

Didn't the 98 Vikings lose in the Championship game? I think he meant the conference championship not the Super Bowl which the NFL considers something otherworldly.

Oh....then, no! :dup:

by **dryfly** » Sun 1/15/12 8:49 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:My buddy said he thought the only team that could beat the Packers was the Giants.

Kudos to them that saw it. I am sure a few won big in Vegas today while most lost their ass. And not in a good way either.

by **Beauner** » Sun 1/15/12 9:05 pm

Is everybody still in favor of resting all your stars? The Packers looked absolutely out of sync to the level that they haven't looked that poorly all season. 2 weeks off will do that. Ask the Colts.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Sun 1/15/12 9:11 pm

Chris83 wrote:
Dances With Gophers wrote:Has any other one-loss team failed to make it to the Championship game? LOL!

Two, actually. The '98 Vikings of course and the 2004 Steelers...but I LIKE this one!

I meant NFC/AFC Championship game.

by **Don Adams Wheel of Justice** » Sun 1/15/12 9:30 pm

Like a lot of people, I thought the Saints and Packers were the 2 best teams in the playoffs. Boy, was I wrong. I'm predicting a Giants/Patriots rematch in the SB with the Patriots getting revenge.

/barfs

by **Dances With Gophers** » Sun 1/15/12 9:39 pm

Don Adams Wheel of Justice wrote:Like a lot of people, I thought the Saints and Packers were the 2 best teams in the playoffs. Boy, was I wrong. I'm predicting a Giants/Patriots rematch in the SB with the Patriots getting revenge.

/barfs

Does that mean we should now expect a 49ers-Ravens Super Bowl considering your past predictions?

I'd actually love to see that - sibling rivalry on the biggest stage in football!

by **Don Adams Wheel of Justice** » Sun 1/15/12 9:42 pm

Point well taken, Dances with Gophers.

Doesn't really matter to me who plays in the SB. I spend most of Superbowl Sunday in a bean dip and bacon wrapped water chesnut fueled food coma anyway.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/15/12 9:49 pm

Beauner wrote:Is everybody still in favor of resting all your stars? The Packers looked absolutely out of sync to the level that they haven't looked that poorly all season. 2 weeks off will do that. Ask the Colts.

It didn't seem to affect the Patriots. Or the Ravens. Or the 49'ers.

I know you're an extremely level-headed guy. I'm guessing you don't want to be on the 25% of generalizations in making your point. :wink:

by **gator** » Sun 1/15/12 9:54 pm

In my work pool since the start of the season I drafted San Fran. and New England and wrapped up first place yesterday. My closet co worker had the Packers and Cincy. I even said at the start of the season when we drafted our 2 teams that San Fran. and New England would be in the Super Bowl. I was serious about the Patriots and somewhat serious of 49ers, just because of the Division they were in.
Next weekend could be fun and I really don't care who goes and who wins. It's not the Packers :dup:

by **dryfly** » Sun 1/15/12 10:19 pm

Packers would have been fine today if only they had sold more stock. Maybe next year.

by **gator** » Sun 1/15/12 10:48 pm

dryfly wrote:Packers would have been fine today if only they had sold more stock. Maybe next year.

Talking about Packers stock...

by **Don Adams Wheel of Justice** » Sun 1/15/12 10:50 pm

My closet co worker had the Packers and Cincy

So, your co-worker is a homersexual? :wink:

by **Beauner** » Sun 1/15/12 10:52 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:
Beauner wrote:Is everybody still in favor of resting all your stars? The Packers looked absolutely out of sync to the level that they haven't looked that poorly all season. 2 weeks off will do that. Ask the Colts.

It didn't seem to affect the Patriots. Or the Ravens. Or the 49'ers.

I know you're an extremely level-headed guy. I'm guessing you don't want to be on the 25% of generalizations in making your point.

New England played all their starters in week 17 and thrashed Buffalo 49-21.
San Francisco played all their starters in week 17 and beat St. Louis 35-27.
Baltimore played all their starters in week 17 and beat Cincinnati 24-16.

Green Bay sat Aaron Rodgers and a couple others despite having a 1st round bye. Some of our fellow GPLers were applauding teams that sit their starters in meaningless games.
The three teams that played everyone won. The one team that sat their stars (giving them 2 weeks without game action) lost.
That's 75% of the generalization making my point, and the 1 "best team in the league" with the probable league MVP and supposed best QB in the NFL looking extremely sloppy after 2 weeks of rest. But at least he stayed healthy by not playing in a meaningless game! :mrgreen:

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Mon 1/16/12 12:05 am

Beauner wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:
Beauner wrote:Is everybody still in favor of resting all your stars? The Packers looked absolutely out of sync to the level that they haven't looked that poorly all season. 2 weeks off will do that. Ask the Colts.

It didn't seem to affect the Patriots. Or the Ravens. Or the 49'ers.

I know you're an extremely level-headed guy. I'm guessing you don't want to be on the 25% of generalizations in making your point.

New England played all their starters in week 17 and thrashed Buffalo 49-21.
San Francisco played all their starters in week 17 and beat St. Louis 35-27.
Baltimore played all their starters in week 17 and beat Cincinnati 24-16.

Green Bay sat Aaron Rodgers and a couple others despite having a 1st round bye. Some of our fellow GPLers were applauding teams that sit their starters in meaningless games.
The three teams that played everyone won. The one team that sat their stars (giving them 2 weeks without game action) lost.
That's 75% of the generalization making my point, and the 1 "best team in the league" with the probable league MVP and supposed best QB in the NFL looking extremely sloppy after 2 weeks of rest. But at least he stayed healthy by not playing in a meaningless game!

All solid points. I conflated having byes with resting starters which is an obvious mistake on my part and not at all what you said.

For the record, I never advocated resting healthy guys (others did, yes) in the whole AP debate. My issue was 100% to do with a guy coming off an injury. I think a case can be made for resting some of the healthy key personnel, but you made a very strong case why it's better not to. Though I don't think it's...quite accurate to state that Rodgers was sloppy. He was outplayed by Eli for sure, but look at how many Green Bay receivers dropped passes. Jermichael Finley himself dropped 3 or 4 balls. In the second half, Jennings dropped a td pass down the sidelines that was perfectly thrown. The only really bad pass that I remember Rodgers throwing was a ball in the first half where Jennings was wide open around the 5 yard line, and Rodgers threw it high and to the wrong shoulder. Other than that, I think the GB wide receivers collectively were pretty poor.

by **Slap Shot** » Mon 1/16/12 12:17 am

by **psych** » Mon 1/16/12 12:22 am

Slap Shot wrote:

by **Beauner** » Mon 1/16/12 12:24 am

Bushwood Gopher wrote:
Beauner wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:
Beauner wrote:Is everybody still in favor of resting all your stars? The Packers looked absolutely out of sync to the level that they haven't looked that poorly all season. 2 weeks off will do that. Ask the Colts.

It didn't seem to affect the Patriots. Or the Ravens. Or the 49'ers.

I know you're an extremely level-headed guy. I'm guessing you don't want to be on the 25% of generalizations in making your point.

New England played all their starters in week 17 and thrashed Buffalo 49-21.
San Francisco played all their starters in week 17 and beat St. Louis 35-27.
Baltimore played all their starters in week 17 and beat Cincinnati 24-16.

Green Bay sat Aaron Rodgers and a couple others despite having a 1st round bye. Some of our fellow GPLers were applauding teams that sit their starters in meaningless games.
The three teams that played everyone won. The one team that sat their stars (giving them 2 weeks without game action) lost.
That's 75% of the generalization making my point, and the 1 "best team in the league" with the probable league MVP and supposed best QB in the NFL looking extremely sloppy after 2 weeks of rest. But at least he stayed healthy by not playing in a meaningless game!

All solid points. I conflated having byes with resting starters which is an obvious mistake on my part and not at all what you said.

For the record, I never advocated resting healthy guys (others did, yes) in the whole AP debate. My issue was 100% to do with a guy coming off an injury. I think a case can be made for resting some of the healthy key personnel, but you made a very strong case why it's better not to. Though I don't think it's...quite accurate to state that Rodgers was sloppy. He was outplayed by Eli for sure, but look at how many Green Bay receivers dropped passes. Jermichael Finley himself dropped 3 or 4 balls. In the second half, Jennings dropped a td pass down the sidelines that was perfectly thrown. The only really bad pass that I remember Rodgers throwing was a ball in the first half where Jennings was wide open around the 5 yard line, and Rodgers threw it high and to the wrong shoulder. Other than that, I think the GB wide receivers collectively were pretty poor.

I believe the official number of drops was 6 (their season high :lol:

) but nobody had more than 1. I'm not sure exactly how they qualify a drop because I think there were more than 6 that hit the hands that didn't get caught, but I think it has to be in a certain "catch window" and the defense can't be credited with breaking the pass up.

Rodgers was only 2/8 on throws of 15 yards or more, his 2nd worst percentage of the season. The only one worse? Their loss to KC when he was 2/12. He completed less than half of his passes outside the numbers today. In their previous game vs NYG, he was 21/25 on such throws. For the season he completed 67.8%.
That would be why I considered him sloppy.

by **The Rube** » Mon 1/16/12 12:29 am

While ARodg wasn't at his best, I'd lay more blame on his receivers this game, for drops and TOs. Trrrrble. It was like watching Antonio Freeman (aka Stone Hands) all over again.

by **trixR4kids** » Mon 1/16/12 12:47 am

dxmnkd316 wrote:the only team that could beat the Packers was the Packers.

Fixed. Though I gotta give credit to the Giants they played very well. Their secondary did a great job covering and their D-line handled our broken O-line. And yeah the Packers weren't going to win it all with that secondary and lack of pass rush.

And as Beauner said the drops and fumbles really hurt. But the offense really never gave the team a chance to win. Even the saints with their five turnovers yesterday put up 32 on maybe the best defense.

by **sunbone** » Mon 1/16/12 11:51 am

What a fun weekend of football. That Niners game was one of the most exciting playoff games in years. Then I got to see the Tebows absolutely schooled by a good team and a quarterback that is actually worthy of his hype. Then to see the Pack lose, since the Vikings will never be winners I guess that is as good as it gets for me. The only bad thing was the team that beat the Pack has Eli Manning on it. One of my top 5 least favorite players in the league. Hopefully the Niners drill him about 80 times next week.

by **Hobey Baker** » Mon 1/16/12 12:07 pm

The Packers 15-1 reminded me of the Vikes15-1. I was happy the Green and Gold were knocked out but, i couldn't help think of '98. So mch hype and expectation flushed so quickly.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Mon 1/16/12 3:36 pm

Hobey Baker wrote:The Packers 15-1 reminded me of the Vikes15-1. I was happy the Green and Gold were knocked out but, i couldn't help think of '98. So mch hype and expectation flushed so quickly.

But at least the Vikes won a playoff game! :lol:

by **sec 16 row16 seat 16 17** » Mon 1/16/12 5:25 pm

HARBAUGH VS HARBAUGH super bowl would be kinda cool.

by **rowshkex** » Mon 1/16/12 6:21 pm

sec 16 row16 seat 16 17 wrote:HARBAUGH VS HARBAUGH super bowl would be kinda cool.

Oh man, I never thought about that... That's actually a good angle! I think I will adopt that one, since I hate the Patriots, and am neutrally oriented toward the Giants and 49ers.

Have brothers ever coached against each other in the Superbowl before?

by **sec 16 row16 seat 16 17** » Mon 1/16/12 6:29 pm

for fantasy rubes i heard some one say they heard CHARCHIAN say. he wouldn't be surprised if GRONKOWSKI was picked in the first round next year.

by **gopherguy13** » Mon 1/16/12 6:39 pm

I would love to see 9er's-Ravens in the SB. Mainly because I dislike New England and New York, and I like the Harbaugh's!

by **bonesaw** » Mon 1/16/12 9:50 pm

The truth comes out.

by **Chris83** » Tue 1/17/12 12:55 pm

bonesaw wrote:The truth comes out.

by **Chris Eckes** » Tue 1/17/12 1:41 pm

can't wait for the PUPPY BOWL revenge time for SPOT he'll be all over the field

by **gopherguy13** » Tue 1/17/12 1:52 pm

The X Factor wrote:can't wait for the PUPPY BOWL revenge time for SPOT he'll be all over the field

The puppy bowl :lol:

We watched that for a solid half hour before the Super Bowl last year and couldn't stop laughing. The referee, that guy must hate his life.

One line of his: "15 yard penalty for intentional ruff-ruff-roughness!"

:lol:

by **Chris Eckes** » Tue 1/17/12 2:23 pm

The puppy bowl is HANDS DOWN the best part of super bowl sunday. I watch it all day long that day.

by **Dolphin275** » Tue 1/17/12 2:35 pm

The X Factor wrote:The puppy bowl is HANDS DOWN the best part of super bowl sunday. I watch it all day long that day.

Ironic, I was thinking about that this Morning, Hey, the Puppy Bowl is coming, low and behold were talking about it here. I love watching it

by **Dances With Gophers** » Tue 1/17/12 3:31 pm

by **ScoobyDoo** » Tue 1/17/12 3:34 pm

What in the hell was that?

by **Armadillo** » Tue 1/17/12 3:36 pm

by **g_manpucker** » Tue 1/17/12 4:29 pm

Dances With Gophers wrote:

A friend posted this on his FB, it too funny!!! From now on all my packer fan friends will be named "Sparkles"! :lol:

by **gopher6** » Tue 1/17/12 5:16 pm

Dances With Gophers wrote:

nothing better then seeing a packer fan ,becky fan crying after there team falls apart!! :mrgreen:

by **sec 16 row16 seat 16 17** » Tue 1/17/12 5:19 pm

BECKY needs to get a life.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Tue 1/17/12 5:36 pm

Alabama corner Dre Kirkpatrick is the first one to slide down the Big Board...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/f ... &eref=sihp

by **Snowcool08** » Tue 1/17/12 6:02 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:Alabama corner Dre Kirkpatrick is the first one to slide down the Big Board...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/f ... &eref=sihp

Hopefully he slides to the third pick in the 2nd round.

by **rowshkex** » Tue 1/17/12 6:31 pm

Colts head coach Jim Caldwell fired today.

As a Colts fan, I'm not surprised, and not all that upset... He didn't really make any progress after Dungy left, although I understand that a significant portion of this may be related to poor draft picks.

by **gator** » Fri 1/20/12 3:49 pm

Interesting stat, the NFC has had 10 different champions in the past 10 years. If San Fransico wins on Sunday, it would be 11 different champions in the past 11 years. As for the AFC, they have only had 4 champions (New England, Pittsburgh, Indy and Oakland. Baltimore was the AFC Champions 11 years ago.) in the past 10 years.

by **gopher6** » Fri 1/20/12 4:37 pm

gator wrote:Interesting stat, the NFC has had 10 different champions in the past 10 years. If San Fransico wins on Sunday, it would be 11 different champions in the past 11 years. As for the AFC, they have only had 4 champions (New England, Pittsburgh, Indy and Oakland. Baltimore was the AFC Champions 11 years ago.) in the past 10 years.

I was hearing last week on ESPN that every time the 49ers and Giants played for the NFC title the winner went on to the Superbowl and won the Trophy!! :dup:

by **sec 16 row16 seat 16 17** » Fri 1/20/12 7:06 pm

CHILLY talking to indy are they nuts.

by **The Rube** » Fri 1/20/12 7:10 pm

Joe Philbin (GB) to be the next coach of the Dolphins.

by **rowshkex** » Sat 1/21/12 3:32 am

sec 16 row16 seat 16 17 wrote:CHILLY talking to indy are they nuts.

If they hire Brad Childress, I will be beyond angry...

by **gator** » Sat 1/21/12 7:37 am

gopher6 wrote:
Dances With Gophers wrote:

nothing better then seeing a packer fan ,becky fan crying after there team falls apart!!

And the sister who is driving blows past a stop sign at 0:22.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/22/12 2:35 pm

I'm gonna go with New England and New York in the Conference championship games today.

by **Snowcool08** » Sun 1/22/12 2:54 pm

I want the opposite. I'd rather hear 2 weeks of the Harbowl than the four letter network kissing Brady or Manning's ass.

by **Bigbeer** » Sun 1/22/12 3:04 pm

I'm thinking Mr. Tyler should stay behind the judges table.

by **Greyeagle** » Sun 1/22/12 3:08 pm

Bigbeer wrote:I'm thinking Mr. Tyler should stay behind the judges table.

This.
He is brutal....no more overrated group than Aerosmith.
I don't really care who wins either game as my two favorite teams are out of it: The Vikes and whomever the slackers play.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 3:22 pm

Bigbeer wrote:I'm thinking Mr. Tyler should stay behind the judges table.

I made it through about 10 seconds before I had to change the channel.

by **Beauner** » Sun 1/22/12 5:48 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Bigbeer wrote:I'm thinking Mr. Tyler should stay behind the judges table.

I made it through about 10 seconds before I had to change the channel.

Here is an article with a video.
Warning: NSFW. It will make your co-workers drill into their own heads to remove their brain to block it from their memory.

Worst Anthem Ever?

Now for my personal bias: Aerosmith has approximately 3 songs that I enjoy. Tyler has a terrible voice and it is getting worse with age. Why would ANYBODY think this was a good idea? Absolutely the worst National Anthem I've ever heard for somebody who didn't forget the words.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 6:10 pm

Oh snap.

by **Bigbeer** » Sun 1/22/12 6:11 pm

"Billy Cundiff seemed a bit rattled" - Ed Reed

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/22/12 6:12 pm

I wasn't rooting for the Ravens but I feel sick for Billy Cundiff.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 6:15 pm

Bigbeer wrote:"Billy Cundiff seemed a bit rattled" - Ed Reed

What's a battle?

by **gator** » Sun 1/22/12 6:15 pm

Baltimore rushed the kick. The kicker came on late to the field and there was no need. They had a timeout.

by **trixR4kids** » Sun 1/22/12 6:19 pm

I blame the popcorn box alum.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/22/12 6:22 pm

trixR4kids wrote:I blame the popcorn box alum.

That was extremely close to being a touchdown. I'd like to see a replay on that again.

by **sec 16 row16 seat 16 17** » Sun 1/22/12 6:28 pm

i would cut the long snapper.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 6:36 pm

Who the hell is Kristin Chenoweth?

Edit: Apparently awesome.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 6:38 pm

You stay classy San Francisco. How about keeping the booing and cheering of the players to a minimum during the National Anthem...

by **gator** » Sun 1/22/12 6:38 pm

Kristin Chenoweth > Steven Tyler

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 6:57 pm

Gotta love that Niner running around like a complete douche with his hand in the air instead of attempting to recover a live ball within four feet of him.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/22/12 6:58 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:Gotta love that Niner running around like a complete douche with his hand in the air instead of attempting to recover a live ball within four feet of him.

This absolutely cracked me up. Hilarious! :lol:

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 7:01 pm

THAT WAS NOT EXCESSIVE. PUT THAT FLAG BACK IN YOUR POCKET!!!!

by **Snowcool08** » Sun 1/22/12 7:05 pm

Vernon Davis is a freak and that should not be a penalty. Ridiculous.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 7:10 pm

Facebook is exploding with people asking how this was any different than a Lambeau leap. I have to agree.

by **Snowcool08** » Sun 1/22/12 7:11 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:Facebook is exploding with people asking how this was any different than a Lambeau leap. I have to agree.

They just explained it in the kickoff. The Lambeau Leap is "grandfathered in." What a joke.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/22/12 7:14 pm

Snowcool08 wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:Facebook is exploding with people asking how this was any different than a Lambeau leap. I have to agree.

They just explained it in the kickoff. The Lambeau Leap is "grandfathered in." What a joke.

Yes. The Lambeau Leap is grandfathered in, as are blatantly obvious reviews that get called wrong. All for the love of "tradition."

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 7:16 pm

Snowcool08 wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:Facebook is exploding with people asking how this was any different than a Lambeau leap. I have to agree.

They just explained it in the kickoff. The Lambeau Leap is "grandfathered in." What a joke.

What a load of horsesh*t. Pure, unrefined, horsesh*t. This is why I f*king HATE the NFL.

by **gator** » Sun 1/22/12 7:16 pm

Snowcool08 wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:Facebook is exploding with people asking how this was any different than a Lambeau leap. I have to agree.

They just explained it in the kickoff. The Lambeau Leap is "grandfathered in." What a joke.

What a joke is right. The Lambeau Leap is kinda creepy anyways. The way some of those Packer fans act in touching the players is pure creepy.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/22/12 7:17 pm

I can understand grandfathering in the city-owned part but not the lambeau leap. That's just BS.

Who is online