PDA

View Full Version : DI's NFL Truths and Thoughts for 2008


DI
09-04-2008, 05:34 PM
Figured since everyone else was giving it a whirl, why not me. Here we go.

Don't Understand the Lack of Love for Brett Favre and the Jets
- This is something that is really bothering me that I feel I need to address. Brett Favre had an MVP caliber season last year and has yet to miss a game in his Hall of Fame career and now that he is on a new team, I'm hearing concerns about if he can stay healthy and if he can succeed in a new system. People, don't kid yourselves. This is Brett Favre. He'll play in every game. He'll learn the playbook just fine and the Jets will smart enough to adjust certain things to make it easier for the Hall of Fame quarterback. He also has a significantly upgraded offensive line with the additions of Alan Faneca and Damien Woody to a line already consisting of D'Brickashaw Ferguson and Nick Mangold. He has plenty of weapons on offense in Thomas Jones, Jerricho Cotchery, Lavaerneus Coles, Dustin Keller, Chris Baker, Leon Washington, etc. Favre will be fine. So will the Jets and they'll be in the playoffs. Believe it.

Don't Understand the Love that the Eagles are Getting...
- This is another thing that makes me scratch my head. A team with a quarterback who can't stay healthy, no receivers capable of being more than a #3, a tight end who can't stay healthy, a coach with more problems off the field than he has on and a pro bowl offensive guard who was AWOL for a significant part of camp because he was battling depression. And for everything I just mentioned, people have the Eagles penciled in as the 2nd best team in the NFC East and some even have them in the Super Bowl! Are you kidding me? They're a good team, I'll give you that. But to the Super Bowl? The legs and hands of Brian Westbrook can only take this team so far and that is to a 9-7 season and a battle for the final playoff spot. Oh, and that is only if that certain quarterback can stay healthy.

And the Vikings too for that Matter
- AP is a stud. The offensive and defensive lines are probably the best respectively in the league and they have great potential at the receiver spot. All that being said, Tavaris Jackson is still the quarterback and I'm sorry Viking fans, but as long as he is quarterbacking your team, you will not be winning any division titles. You won't be making the playoffs. And to those who are ridiculously high on the Vikes and have them making a Super Bowl push, well, you are going to be incredibly dissapointed this season.

The Packers won't miss a beat with Aaron Rodgers
- Packer fans. I know seeing #4 in another shade of green will be incredibly difficult for you but don't worry. #12 is your quarterback now and I'm telling, you'll be just fine. Aaron Rodgers sat for 3 years, watching and studying every move that Brett Favre did on and off the field. He has showed this off-season that he can handle himself incredibly when it comes to on and off the field pressure. He has demonstrated flashes during the preseason and I believe all the waiting will pay off and Aaron Rodgers will lead Green Bay to another NFC North Championship and will be the 1st step in helping Packer fans move on from the Favre Era.

Oh What a Year for Rookie Running Backs
- Darren McFadden. Jonathan Stewart. Kevin Smith. Matt Forte. Ray Rice. Chris Johnson. Felix Jones. Rashard Mendenhall. Steve Slaton. Ryan Torain. That is 10 rookie running backs that all have a chance to have a fairly significant impact on their team this year and in the future. Run DMC has Adrian Peterson written all over him. Stewart, Smith, Forte, Mendenhall, Slaton and Johnson all have fairly good chances at being the starting running back by the end of the season. Felix Jones is a bona fide home run hitter. Ryan Torain could flourish when healthy in Denver and Ray Rice will get his fair share while backing up Willis McGahee and he will be absolutely huge if and when McGahee goes down with an injury. Attention fantasy owners: All of these guys are ownable and you'll reap benefits by the end of the season.

And the Predictions for the 2008 Season are as follows...
AFC East: Patriots
AFC North: Steelers
AFC South: Colts
AFC West: Chargers
Wild Card: Jaguars
Wild Card: Jets

Colts over Jets
Jaguars over Steelers

Patriots over Jaguars
Chargers over Colts

Patriots over Chargers

NFC East: Cowboys
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Seahawks
Wild Card: Giants
Wild Card: Panthers

Packers over Panthers
Giants over Seahawks

Giants over Cowboys
Saints over Packers

Saints over Giants

Super Bowl 43
Patriots over Saints

And the Award goes to...
MVP: Drew Brees, QB, Saints
OPOY: Tom Brady, QB, Patriots
DPOY: Jon Beason, MLB, Panthers
OROY: Chris Johnson, RB, Titans (Next Maurice Jones-Drew)
DROY: Kenny Phillips, S, Giants
COTY: Mike McCarthy, Packers

MetSox17
09-04-2008, 05:40 PM
So let me get this straight, you think a guy with one career touchdown pass can perform for his team better than one that has already a year of starting under his belt? Hmm.

The Vikings are loaded, and they don't need Jackson to be Peyton Manning back there. Plenty of teams have proven that you don't need spectacular quarterback play to win games and make the playoffs. They're great at running and defending the run. If their pass defense can be somewhere in the middle of the road (14-18th in the league) they'll easily be a playoff team. They were one game away last year in a division that still had Brett Favre, and they've improved dramatically.

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 05:47 PM
And the Vikings too for that Matter
- AP is a stud. The offensive and defensive lines are probably the best respectively in the league and they have great potential at the receiver spot. All that being said, Tavaris Jackson is still the quarterback and I'm sorry Viking fans, but as long as he is quarterbacking your team, you will not be winning any division titles. You won't be making the playoffs. And to those who are ridiculously high on the Vikes and have them making a Super Bowl push, well, you are going to be incredibly dissapointed this season.


Enter, Trent Dilfer.

yo123
09-04-2008, 05:49 PM
Enter, Trent Dilfer.


I was about to say the exact same thing. Obviously this Vikes D isn't as good as the Ravens D was, but if Jackson can do the same thing Dilfer did, I don't see why we can't at least make the playoffs.

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 05:51 PM
I was about to say the exact same thing. Obviously this Vikes D isn't as good as the Ravens D was, but if Jackson can do the same thing Dilfer did, I don't see why we can't at least make the playoffs.

Its lazy but I will just assume that Jackson's o-line will be much better than Dilfer's was. So that can offset the rest of the defense.

Gay Ork Wang
09-04-2008, 06:18 PM
I agree on the Eagles thats pretty much it

awfullyquiet
09-04-2008, 06:31 PM
Its lazy but I will just assume that Jackson's o-line will be much better than Dilfer's was. So that can offset the rest of the defense.

It's not phenomenally better, but, between the tackles is lightyears better.

I mean, You do have jon ogden

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 06:33 PM
It's not phenomenally better, but, between the tackles is lightyears better.

I mean, You do have jon ogden

That's what I was thinking. Trent wasn't automatically drifting to his right after the snaps or anything like that.

GB12
09-04-2008, 08:40 PM
So let me get this straight, you think a guy with one career touchdown pass can perform for his team better than one that has already a year of starting under his belt? Hmm.
That's an incredibly stupid thing to say.

PalmerToCJ
09-04-2008, 09:57 PM
The Vikings are one of the rare teams that are built to win without a QB doing a whole lot. I wasn't a believer at all last year but I can't help but love their chances this year. They're only getting better, I'm not sure what to expect out of GB.

CC.SD
09-04-2008, 11:28 PM
I'm so sick of these threads. No offense.

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 11:34 PM
I'm so sick of these threads. No offense.
Are you kidding me?
The insight is incredible.

CC.SD
09-04-2008, 11:37 PM
Are you kidding me?
The insight is incredible.

I learn something new every time...

holt_bruce81
09-04-2008, 11:46 PM
Eagles are getting so much love because Mcnabb is 100% healthy, their last 4 games last year they went 3-1 and you could see that Mcnabb was healthy. He was making things happen with his legs.

They have a very good secondary, the best safety in football and a young and talented Defensive Line led by pro bowler Trent Cole at end, Broderick Bunkley and Trevor Laws in the inside who are man-beast.

A top 3-5 runningback depending on who you talk to. Westbrook is a complete back, he has great hands and is just now getting the recognition he deserves. 2000 total yards isn't to much to ask from him.

If the Receivers just play up to their potential this team is going to be very good, Their my pick to win the NFC East with a 12-4 record. Not really sure what you see from this team to give you the idea their not going to be that good.

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 11:47 PM
the best safety in football

To avoid an imminent thread jacking, I suggest an edit.

holt_bruce81
09-04-2008, 11:50 PM
To avoid an imminent thread jacking, I suggest an edit.

Nope, because he is.

Bruce Banner
09-04-2008, 11:52 PM
Nope, because he is.

Not disagreeing or agreeing, just sayin'.....

CC.SD
09-04-2008, 11:59 PM
On any given day I'd float between Dawkins and Reed, and I know there's something going on with Reed's neck right now. B-Dawk is a champ.

Bengalsrocket
09-05-2008, 12:55 AM
Here's an NFL Truth:

The more people bring up Trent Dilfer as an excuse as to why you don't need a QB to win the Superbowl the more people argue against themselves. If he's the only QB you can come up with then he is more of an exception to the rule (the rule that you need a solid QB to win a Superbowl), rather than an exception that proves the rule.

Now obviously I'm not suggestion Trent Dilfer is the only guy in the history of the NFL to ever do it. I just think its a pretty small sample size and it completely throws your argument off when you can only come up with 1 situation in which something was possible.

I mean if you don't think Tarvaris Jackson is going to be a problem for your team (assuming he doesn't have some break out year) then you're kidding yourselves. The team will have to overcome any QB's short comings, most importantly when he throws INTS and doesn't convert on 3rd down.

On the other hand though, the team is built to do exactly that. If the defense can keep the game close (and it does look like a good defense), then maybe they can just run all day and let AP carry that offense into the play offs and hope Tarvaris doesn't ruin it for them.

Bruce Banner
09-05-2008, 01:01 AM
Here's an NFL Truth:

The more people bring up Trent Dilfer as an excuse as to why you don't need a QB to win the Superbowl the more people argue against themselves. If he's the only QB you can come up with then he is more of an exception to the rule (the rule that you need a solid QB to win a Superbowl), rather than an exception that proves the rule.

Now obviously I'm not suggestion Trent Dilfer is the only guy in the history of the NFL to ever do it. I just think its a pretty small sample size and it completely throws your argument off when you can only come up with 1 situation in which something was possible.

I mean if you don't think Tarvaris Jackson is going to be a problem for your team (assuming he doesn't have some break out year) then you're kidding yourselves. The team will have to overcome any QB's short comings, most importantly when he throws INTS and doesn't convert on 3rd down.

On the other hand though, the team is built to do exactly that. If the defense can keep the game close (and it does look like a good defense), then maybe they can just run all day and let AP carry that offense into the play offs and hope Tarvaris doesn't ruin it for them.

If your insinuating that Trent Dilfer is any good then I'm going to have to disagree. The reason that people use Dilfer as an example is because he proved that the rest of the team can compensate for average to below average QB play. Not saying that it happens a lot but it CAN be done.

You also make our point by explaining why the right pieces are in place for Jackson to pull a "Dilfer".

CC.SD
09-05-2008, 01:23 AM
If your insinuating that Trent Dilfer is any good then I'm going to have to disagree. The reason that people use Dilfer as an example is because he proved that the rest of the team can compensate for average to below average QB play. Not saying that it happens a lot but it CAN be done.

You also make our point by explaining why the right pieces are in place for Jackson to pull a "Dilfer".

IMO the only thing Dilfer proves is that if you have arguably the best defense of all time, a very solid run game and decent to great players at the skill positions, your QB doesn't matter. That is not a scenario we are likely to see again for a long, long time.

Bruce Banner
09-05-2008, 01:28 AM
IMO the only thing Dilfer proves is that if you have arguably the best defense of all time, a very solid run game and decent to great players at the skill positions, your QB doesn't matter. That is not a scenario we are likely to see again for a long, long time.

Well. Lets assume that Tavaris is better than 12-11, with an amazing running game and a defense that is top 8.

They could do it.

Bengalsrocket
09-05-2008, 01:30 AM
If your insinuating that Trent Dilfer is any good then I'm going to have to disagree. The reason that people use Dilfer as an example is because he proved that the rest of the team can compensate for average to below average QB play. Not saying that it happens a lot but it CAN be done.

You also make our point by explaining why the right pieces are in place for Jackson to pull a "Dilfer".

I'm not saying Dilfer is good, I'm saying the Ravens had a tough D and compensated in other places. One significant injury to that Ravens D (say, if Ray Lewis had gone down) could have thrown that team way off. But it took a whole lot of compensating to make up for Trent Dilfer. They had a historically great defense that year, and still managed to lose some games. Are we in some way saying that the vikings are going to make up for their lack of QB with a defense as good as the 01 Superbowl Champion Ravens?

And yes, I purposely made the point that is possible the vikings could win with Tarvaris Jackson. That kind of has been my point this whole time. They may, or may not be a play off team with him. They certainly are a well built team. But hey, there is usually 8-12 well built teams every year, and only one of them wins the super bowl.

But again, it kind of relies on Jackson not screwing the game up for them. Here is a little stat that Jackson may have to replicate for the vikings to win the Superbowl: zero interceptions on January 28th, 2001 when the Ravens played the Giants. Are you positive Jackson can do that? because he's averaging an INT a game right now, so the stats are stacked against him.

Bruce Banner
09-05-2008, 01:36 AM
But again, it kind of relies on Jackson not screwing the game up for them. Here is a little stat that Jackson may have to replicate for the vikings to win the Superbowl: zero interceptions on January 28th, 2001 when the Ravens played the Giants. Are you positive Jackson can do that? because he's averaging an INT a game right now, so the stats are stacked against him.

I think Jackson's performance is dictated by the rest of the team, not the other way around, at least initially.
If they can establish a run game and force the opposing D to stack the box a bit then I could see Jackson being a good game manager.
If the run game fails and the defense is given bad field position and gives up the lead....I'm not sure Jackson can be successful when he is forced to throw the ball.
Basically, I think the run game and D will decide if Jackson has a good year, not the other way around. He just isn't "good" enough to take a game into his own hands.

TitleTown088
09-05-2008, 01:37 AM
I was about to say the exact same thing. Obviously this Vikes D isn't as good as the Ravens D was, but if Jackson can do the same thing Dilfer did, I don't see why we can't at least make the playoffs.

If your plan for the superbowl involves Difler, your chances are not looking so great. In the post season Qb should ideally be a stength, not a weakness.

Bengalsrocket
09-05-2008, 01:41 AM
I think Jackson's performance is dictated by the rest of the team, not the other way around, at least initially.
If they can establish a run game and force the opposing D to stack the box a bit then I could see Jackson being a good game manager.
If the run game fails and the defense is given bad field position and gives up the lead....I'm not sure Jackson can be successful when he is forced to throw the ball.
I think the run game and D will decide if Jackson has a good year, not the other way around. He just isn't "good" enough to take a game into his own hands.

I basically agree. its more of a gray area for me I guess. No matter how good your running game is, 3rd and long is just as hard for every team / QB. I think his team will keep him out of those situations enough that it won't effect their play off chances, but I think it has the potential to cause the vikings to lose at one point or another in the season. I guess for the Vikings sake lets just hope its not a play off game when it happens.

BlindSite
09-05-2008, 01:47 AM
Don't Understand the Lack of Love for Brett Favre and the Jets
- This is something that is really bothering me that I feel I need to address. Brett Favre had an MVP caliber season last year and has yet to miss a game in his Hall of Fame career and now that he is on a new team, I'm hearing concerns about if he can stay healthy and if he can succeed in a new system. People, don't kid yourselves. This is Brett Favre. He'll play in every game. He'll learn the playbook just fine and the Jets will smart enough to adjust certain things to make it easier for the Hall of Fame quarterback. He also has a significantly upgraded offensive line with the additions of Alan Faneca and Damien Woody to a line already consisting of D'Brickashaw Ferguson and Nick Mangold. He has plenty of weapons on offense in Thomas Jones, Jerricho Cotchery, Lavaerneus Coles, Dustin Keller, Chris Baker, Leon Washington, etc. Favre will be fine. So will the Jets and they'll be in the playoffs. Believe it.

Ferguson, gave up 23.5 sacks in the last two seasons combined. So he's not really that good of an offensive lineman. He's just a big body, Cotchery and Coles are good weapons but none of the TE's or RBs are either proven or productive enough to match the supporting cast he had in greenbay. Favre's ceiling is competitive in new york jets.


And the Vikings too for that Matter
- AP is a stud. The offensive and defensive lines are probably the best respectively in the league and they have great potential at the receiver spot. All that being said, Tavaris Jackson is still the quarterback and I'm sorry Viking fans, but as long as he is quarterbacking your team, you will not be winning any division titles. You won't be making the playoffs. And to those who are ridiculously high on the Vikes and have them making a Super Bowl push, well, you are going to be incredibly dissapointed this season.

I am not a fan, at all of Jackson, but if AD and Taylor can reach their potential as a tandem Jackson will face a lot of 8 man fronts. While I agree I don't think they'll make the superbowl or get too far in the playoffs I do think that once McKinnie returns they'll be able to win at least 9 games.

MetSox17
09-05-2008, 09:50 AM
Did everyone forget about Brad Johnson? Was Wrecks Grossman a stud? Ben Roethlisberger wasn't amazing (17 and 9). Jake Delhomme? Of course Trent Dilfer. Why do people think it's impossible?

That's an incredibly stupid thing to say.

On whose behalf, mine or his?

Bruce Banner
09-05-2008, 12:34 PM
Did everyone forget about Brad Johnson? Was Wrecks Grossman a stud? Ben Roethlisberger wasn't amazing (17 and 9). Jake Delhomme? Of course Trent Dilfer. Why do people think it's impossible?



On whose behalf, mine or his?

Brad Johnson led the NFC in pass efficiency and had franchise records in TDs, completion percentage, passes without an INT, and lowest INT rate.

More than a game manager I'm afraid.

DragonFireKai
09-05-2008, 12:39 PM
Brad Johnson led the league in pass effieciency and had franchise records in TDs, completion percentage, passes without an INT, and lowest INT rate.

More than a game manager I'm afraid.

That really says more about the sad state of Bucs QBs than it does about Brad Johnson. Also, Brad Johnson never led the league in passer rating.

Bruce Banner
09-05-2008, 12:42 PM
That really says more about the sad state of Bucs QBs than it does about Brad Johnson. Also, Brad Johnson never led the league in passer rating.

He led the NFC not the league, sorry.

MetSox17
09-05-2008, 01:31 PM
Like Dragonfire said, that just goes to show how crappy the Bucs were for so long.

That 92 qb rating was one of only two times he ever sniffed anything above a 90 in the past 14 years. He was a game manager.

CC.SD
09-05-2008, 01:33 PM
Like Dragonfire said, that just goes to show how crappy the Bucs were for so long.

That 92 qb rating was one of only two times he ever sniffed anything above a 90 in the past 14 years. He was a game manager.

Come on man, Brad Johnson was good that season; he did what he needed to do knowing he had a dominant defense backing him up and turned in a fine performance in the Super Bowl.

Not saying he wasn't a game manager, but I don't put him in the same class as Dilfer; Johnson was efficient and a leader.

Burns336
09-05-2008, 01:37 PM
Ferguson, gave up 23.5 sacks in the last two seasons combined. So he's not really that good of an offensive lineman. He's just a big body, Cotchery and Coles are good weapons but none of the TE's or RBs are either proven or productive enough to match the supporting cast he had in greenbay. Favre's ceiling is competitive in new york jets.


I am not a fan, at all of Jackson, but if AD and Taylor can reach their potential as a tandem Jackson will face a lot of 8 man fronts. While I agree I don't think they'll make the superbowl or get too far in the playoffs I do think that once McKinnie returns they'll be able to win at least 9 games.

Not saying Dbrick is good or anything because I don't even see Jets games, but 23.5 seems ridiculously high. That would easily be bottom 3 worst in the league over the past 2 years and I fail to see how any decent starter could give up that many sacks.

MetSox17
09-05-2008, 01:37 PM
Come on man, Brad Johnson was good that season; he did what he needed to do knowing he had a dominant defense backing him up and turned in a fine performance in the Super Bowl.

Not saying he wasn't a game manager, but I don't put him in the same class as Dilfer; Johnson was efficient and a leader.

He was good for his team, but he wasn't anything great, which was the argument all along. You don't need to be amazing to lead a team to wins.

DragonFireKai
09-05-2008, 02:29 PM
Come on man, Brad Johnson was good that season; he did what he needed to do knowing he had a dominant defense backing him up and turned in a fine performance in the Super Bowl.

Not saying he wasn't a game manager, but I don't put him in the same class as Dilfer; Johnson was efficient and a leader.

It's possible to be a game managing QB and still post a high efficiency rate. In fact, that's kind of the whole idea of a game managing QB. Think early Ben Roethlisberger. Throw the ball 15-20 times, and don't turn it over.

GB12
09-05-2008, 10:08 PM
On whose behalf, mine or his?
Your's. Saying that Jackson will be better simply because he has a year of starting under his belt.

MetSox17
09-06-2008, 10:40 AM
Your's. Saying that Jackson will be better simply because he has a year of starting under his belt.

Um, why don't you go back and re-read the post, since you've obviously had some trouble with it.

I said So let me get this straight, you think a guy with one career touchdown pass can perform for his team better than one that has already a year of starting under his belt? Hmm.

Did i ever mention in my post that Jackson was going to perform better? I simply questioned his logic on how exactly a guy that has never started a regular season game will be this stud that leads his team into the playoffs. Don't jump all over my posts with your Packers goggles on before you actually read them.

BeerBaron
09-06-2008, 10:53 AM
patriots over the saints was actually my superbowl prediction from a little while ago. so i agree with that but a lot of the other stuff.........i'm not seeing.

I think the Jets will still be better with Favre, but not anything great.

I think the Vikes will be beastly. Jackson could hold them back quite a bit but they will run like crazy, stop the run like crazy and, if Allen stays true to form, should get after the passer. All depends on how bad Jackson is....

GB12
09-06-2008, 01:02 PM
Um, why don't you go back and re-read the post, since you've obviously had some trouble with it.

I said

Did i ever mention in my post that Jackson was going to perform better? I simply questioned his logic on how exactly a guy that has never started a regular season game will be this stud that leads his team into the playoffs. Don't jump all over my posts with your Packers goggles on before you actually read them.
And I questioned your logic of how Jackson simply having "already a year of starting under his belt" will make him perform better.

Did i ever mention in my post that Jackson was going to perform better?You didn't flat out say it, but you can't possibly deny that that's what you meant.

MetSox17
09-06-2008, 01:17 PM
And I questioned your logic of how Jackson simply having "already a year of starting under his belt" will make him perform better.

You didn't flat out say it, but you can't possibly deny that that's what you meant.

Okay, i'm going to ignore your first sentence because after two posts you've yet to understand what i said.

I did not intend to say Jackson was going to perform better. I thought it was funny that he felt someone with no experience was just gonna out perform the rest of the division. Especially a team with superior talent and a more experienced quarterback.