2013 NFL (American Pro Football)


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:55 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:No not really. Why you would think so...???

You're the only person that I know of who not only thinks that it would have been possible for the Colts to keep Manning and Luck on their roster at the same time, but who also believes that it would have made good football sense to do so.


Where did I say it made good football sense? It would have totally sucked for everyone involved. I'm talking about what owners/honchos can do if they want, the power over the player is what I'm talking about. That wasn't obvious?

Obviously even under that adverse situation Luck would have learned from Manning just by watching him play.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:56 pm

Marlow wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:You care to give an example of my faulty judgement, would love to see this.

I've given you an example.

And we don't have to go back to the GUARANTEE of a Patriots Super Bowl win, do we? :wink:


One play away 8-)
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Mighty Favog » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:22 pm

As a Detroit Lions fan, I cannot determine which is a stranger feeling...
a) my team being in contention for the division title, or
b) my team winning tight games (like Sunday's shocker), or
c) getting the Lion's share of media attention this week

It's like I wandered into being a Packers or Patriots fan.
Mighty Favog
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:47 pm

Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:You're the only person that I know of who not only thinks that it would have been possible for the Colts to keep Manning and Luck on their roster at the same time, but who also believes that it would have made good football sense to do so.
Where did I say it made good football sense?

Well, let's see . . . . .

Dixon wrote:Peyton will show Indy they made a big mistake.

I guess Peyton really showed them, didn't he?

Dixon wrote:You don't treat a player on the level of a Peyton Manning like they did, you disagree?

This comment sure sounds like someone who thinks the Colts should have kept Manning.
Dixon wrote:Peyton was treated wrong and the Colts did make a mistake by going that low and he will make them pay.

:lol:
Dixon wrote:I'm saying ya draft Luck then let him do his Aaron Rodgers impersonation for awhile. Waiting didn't hurt him any.

Manning was totally disrespected and it was wrong

I wonder where I got the silly idea from that you thought it made good football sense to draft Luck and keep Manning. :?

Dixon wrote:What young QB wouldn't want a year or two learning from Peyton Manning?

I'm sorry Dixon. I guess I had you all wrong. :roll:
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:54 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:You're the only person that I know of who not only thinks that it would have been possible for the Colts to keep Manning and Luck on their roster at the same time, but who also believes that it would have made good football sense to do so.
Where did I say it made good football sense?

Well, let's see . . . . .

Dixon wrote:Peyton will show Indy they made a big mistake.

I guess Peyton really showed them, didn't he?

Dixon wrote:You don't treat a player on the level of a Peyton Manning like they did, you disagree?

This comment sure sounds like someone who thinks the Colts should have kept Manning.
Dixon wrote:Peyton was treated wrong and the Colts did make a mistake by going that low and he will make them pay.

:lol:
Dixon wrote:I'm saying ya draft Luck then let him do his Aaron Rodgers impersonation for awhile. Waiting didn't hurt him any.

Manning was totally disrespected and it was wrong

I wonder where I got the silly idea from that you thought it made good football sense to draft Luck and keep Manning. :?

Dixon wrote:What young QB wouldn't want a year or two learning from Peyton Manning?

I'm sorry Dixon. I guess I had you all wrong. :roll:


Jazz you work way too hard at trying to prove me/everyone wrong...why?

Anyway...

Where did I say anything about good football sense? I was talking about showing respect for a great player. And regardless of the situation any young QB will learn things being around a future HOFer.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Wed Oct 30, 2013 1:02 am

I look for the Chiefs to finally lose a game this week. They are heading into a bye and are on the road vs a team coming of a loss now at home in dire need of a win (Bills).

Sure the Chiefs are the better team, this is about the "spot" they are in.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:42 am

Dixon wrote:Jazz you work way too hard at trying to prove me/everyone wrong...why?

Anyway...

Actually, I don't have to work very hard at all to prove you wrong. I didn't even have to use the search function in this instance, all I had to do is look back on the previous page of this same thread.

Dixon wrote:Where did I say anything about good football sense? I was talking about showing respect for a great player..

And now that you've been proven wrong, you're resorting to parsing and silly arguments over semantics. Whether you actually used the phrase "good football sense" is besides the point. It's obvious to anyone who read your posts that you believed that the Colts erred by not keeping Manning and drafting Luck and keeping them both on the roster.

Dixon wrote:And regardless of the situation any young QB will learn things being around a future HOFer.

FYI, Aaron Rodgers says that Brett Favre made a point not to teach him a damn thing, and whatever he learned he had to learn on his own.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Pego » Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:48 am

jazzcyclist wrote:FYI, Aaron Rodgers says that Brett Favre made a point not to teach him a damn thing, and whatever he learned he had to learn on his own.


After the Packers drafted Rodgers, there was an interview with Favre. He was asked if he is going to tutor his young teammate. His dour response was (paraphrased, it has been some time ago), "Why would I do that? That is what coaches are for." A total jerk.
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby gh » Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:49 am

time for Dixon & Jazz to take their pissing match offline.
gh
 
Posts: 46323
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Nov 04, 2013 12:32 am

I'm not having one of my better $$$$$$$$$$$ years. Currently at 16-11 playing three games a week.

How does a 0-8 Tampa Bay Bucs team take a solid Seahawks team into OT?

There were a half dozen solid trends favoring the Ravens, what happened?

One of the stranger NFL ATS seasons so far.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Pego » Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:07 am

Dixon wrote:I'm not having one of my better $$$$$$$$$$$ years. Currently at 16-11 playing three games a week.

How does a 0-8 Tampa Bay Bucs team take a solid Seahawks team into OT?

There were a half dozen solid trends favoring the Ravens, what happened?

One of the stranger NFL ATS seasons so far.


Totally unpredictable this year. I am doing pisspoor in our confidence pool, yet I am beating CBS Sportsline "expert" panel by a considerable margin.
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Marlow » Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:59 am

Pego wrote:Totally unpredictable this year. I am doing pisspoor in our confidence pool, yet I am beating CBS Sportsline "expert" panel by a considerable margin.

Back in the day (1978-1981 - my 'foolish years', as I now refer to them, well, now that I think about it, my whole life may be included in that), I was in a serious 10-man office pool - $20 buy-in every week, so some semi-serious cash at stake every week. It was simply to pick every NFL game win'lose (not spreads), Monday night score being the tie-breaker. It usually took (I forget how many teams were playing back then) something like a 12-4 record to win. I was DEEPLY into it, and came out slightly ahead at the end, but I certainly remember weeks going 7-9, despite all the 'expertise' I consulted. This year seems even more random.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:37 pm

Pego wrote:
Dixon wrote:I'm not having one of my better $$$$$$$$$$$ years. Currently at 16-11 playing three games a week.

How does a 0-8 Tampa Bay Bucs team take a solid Seahawks team into OT?

There were a half dozen solid trends favoring the Ravens, what happened?

One of the stranger NFL ATS seasons so far.


Totally unpredictable this year. I am doing pisspoor in our confidence pool, yet I am beating CBS Sportsline "expert" panel by a considerable margin.


I average 10-6 playing straight ups picks, pretty much have that figured out, it's the ATS aspect that has really been weird this season so many strong trends coming to an end. So many fundamentals simply not holding up.

I'll post my three plays (and the why) here, let me know whatcha think.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:47 pm

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:Totally unpredictable this year. I am doing pisspoor in our confidence pool, yet I am beating CBS Sportsline "expert" panel by a considerable margin.

Back in the day (1978-1981 - my 'foolish years', as I now refer to them, well, now that I think about it, my whole life may be included in that), I was in a serious 10-man office pool - $20 buy-in every week, so some semi-serious cash at stake every week. It was simply to pick every NFL game win'lose (not spreads), Monday night score being the tie-breaker. It usually took (I forget how many teams were playing back then) something like a 12-4 record to win. I was DEEPLY into it, and came out slightly ahead at the end, but I certainly remember weeks going 7-9, despite all the 'expertise' I consulted. This year seems even more random.


Every week there will be 4/5 obvious winners...Patriots vs Jags...type games. So you obviously go with the favorite. All the other games ya go with the home team. If we have two stud teams, go with the home team. Home/road is...huge!!! All you can hope to do is win 10-12, which that method will produce. Sure there will be that 7-9 week no matter what you do but it's all about that average since most pools pay off the overall winner.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby gh » Wed Nov 06, 2013 7:03 am

An surprisingly tough pool to play is "pick a winner."

You only need make one pick a week, and there's no spread involved. If your team wins in week 1, you're still playing; if not, your buy-in is forfeited and you're out of the game.

Repeat in each successive week… but you can't pick the same team twice. Takes very few weeks to declare the winner, and then you start over with new buy-in.

I remember one year, even with about a dozen people playing, we were in our third sequence when the season ended.
gh
 
Posts: 46323
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:04 am

gh wrote:An surprisingly tough pool to play is "pick a winner."

You only need make one pick a week, and there's no spread involved. If your team wins in week 1, you're still playing; if not, your buy-in is forfeited and you're out of the game.

Repeat in each successive week… but you can't pick the same team twice. Takes very few weeks to declare the winner, and then you start over with new buy-in.

I remember one year, even with about a dozen people playing, we were in our third sequence when the season ended.


That would be tough.

Most people simply don't do the homework it takes to be good at picking these games. Things like..coming off a bye/heading into a bye, second road game. second home game are ignored. I look at ..spots...these teams are in. East coast teams flying out west and vice versa. All that stuff matters and has to be taken into consideration.

Lets try week 10 straight up.

Arizona at home coming off a bye over a reeling Houston team

Seattle too much for a 2-7 Falcons team

Pitt has covered seven in a row vs Buffalo, while this isn't about that...Steelers!

Niners at home coming off a bye will take down Carolina.

Lions vs Bear....hmmm?....Bears with a short week, Lions coming off a bye....Lions.

Baltimore has to have this one, Cinncy is banged up....Ravens!

Saints coming off a loss now at home vs a Dallas team that rarely wins two in a row...Saints.

Denver coming off a bye week ..in...Charger country, this could be the upset, but...Broncos.

Green Bay doesn't lose back to back at home and Philly doesn't win back to back on the road...Packers. They will figure out a way to hide Wallace.

Indy simply on another level than the Rams...Indy!

Tennessee beats the Jags, doesn't everyone?

Miami vs Tampa Bay....with all the stuff going down around these two, Miami I guess.

Washington tonight, Peterson can't do it alone.

Giants over the Raiders.
Last edited by Dixon on Fri Nov 08, 2013 12:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Fri Nov 08, 2013 12:12 pm

Real $$$ plays

Falcons + 5.5
Saints = 6.0
Ravens + 2
Niners = 6

I've done the homework, all those plays have tons of reasons/stats/trends backing the play, so I am on the right side.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:18 am

The scene in Philadelphia is absolutely surreal! It's tailor-made for classic prose of someone like Grantland Rice or another wordsmith of his caliber. Hopefully the game will live up the epic scene which I am sure really pleases Ed Rendell. Screw the Chinese! :lol:
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Marlow » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:49 am

jazzcyclist wrote:The scene in Philadelphia is absolutely surreal! It's tailor-made for classic prose of someone like Grantland Rice or another wordsmith of his caliber. Hopefully the game will live up the epic scene which I am sure really pleases Ed Rendell. Screw the Chinese! :lol:

The city of Philadelphia hosted the NFL's first Tuesday night game in 64 years, and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell couldn't be more upset about it.
"It goes against everything that football is all about," Rendell said.

Talk about a tempest in a teapot - get serious, man!!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:02 pm

Marlow wrote:Talk about a tempest in a teapot - get serious, man!!

You left out the best part.

"My biggest beef is that this is part of what's happened in this country," Rendell said.

"We've become a nation of wusses. The Chinese are kicking our butt in everything," he added. "If this was in China do you think the Chinese would have called off the game? People would have been marching down to the stadium, they would have walked and they would have been doing calculus on the way down."

:lol: :lol: :lol:
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:49 pm

The only thing missing from this Lions-Eagles game is the John Facenda narrative.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:16 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:The only thing missing from this Lions-Eagles game is the John Facenda narrative.


I've never played in the snow living here in central Cali. .... :( Couldn't believe the moves McCoy was making on that turf.

I hear ya, John Facenda, football and snow :D
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:33 pm

Today in Denver, the Broncos Matt Prater kicked a 64-yard field goal without an inch to spare, breaking Tom Dempsey's NFL record by one yard, but shouldn't his record have an "A" attached to it? After all, that kick would have only been good for 57-59 yards if it had been at 5 feet below sea level like Dempsey's kick was.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:47 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:Today in Denver, the Broncos Matt Prater kicked a 64-yard field goal without an inch to spare, breaking Tom Dempsey's NFL record by one yard, but shouldn't his record have an "A" attached to it? After all, that kick would have only been good for 57-59 yards if it had been at 5 feet below sea level like Dempsey's kick was.


Things don't need to be that precise/particular in football. If it were we'd have records for artifical turf, records for in a dome, on grass and outdoors and 12 game seasons etc etc etc.

Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:56 pm

Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Today in Denver, the Broncos Matt Prater kicked a 64-yard field goal without an inch to spare, breaking Tom Dempsey's NFL record by one yard, but shouldn't his record have an "A" attached to it? After all, that kick would have only been good for 57-59 yards if it had been at 5 feet below sea level like Dempsey's kick was.


Things don't need to be that precise/particular in football. If it were we'd have records for artifical turf, records for in a dome, on grass and outdoors and 12 game seasons etc etc etc.

Not so. In track and field, there aren't separate records for cinder, tartan and mondo, and that's why folks complain about Bob Hayes not being recognized as the fastest football player ever.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

Actually, O.J. Simpson's 1973 season, in which he rushed for yards in 14 games is superior to any season Jim Brown had in terms of yards per game.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:17 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Today in Denver, the Broncos Matt Prater kicked a 64-yard field goal without an inch to spare, breaking Tom Dempsey's NFL record by one yard, but shouldn't his record have an "A" attached to it? After all, that kick would have only been good for 57-59 yards if it had been at 5 feet below sea level like Dempsey's kick was.


Things don't need to be that precise/particular in football. If it were we'd have records for artifical turf, records for in a dome, on grass and outdoors and 12 game seasons etc etc etc.

Not so. In track and field, there aren't separate records for cinder, tartan and mondo, and that's why folks complain about Bob Hayes not being recognized as the fastest football player ever.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

Actually, O.J. Simpson's 1973 season, in which he rushed for yards in 14 games is superior to any season Jim Brown had in terms of yards per game.


Who doesn't recognize Bob Hayes as the fastest footballer? And in track we do see that...A..for altitude aided and that..W...for windy. And there are records for nations and age and male/female and conference, league, class.

Jim Brown had a better average per carry in his 1800 plus season than O.J.had in his 2000 plus season. He also scored more TD's in less games.

But....Brown didn't play long enought to be the all time leading rusher even if he'd had 16 game seasons.

If we go with era's, nobody dominated theirs like Jim Brown and with his 6-2 230 size and speed he could have played today.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:35 pm

I can't see anyone beating Seattle at their place or anyone taking down the Broncos in Denver. I do believe on a neutral site the Saints go hang with both of them but that's not going to happen so....

Seattle vs Denver in the biggie.

Young Russell Wilson the best two year QB ever.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:39 pm

Dixon wrote:Who doesn't recognize Bob Hayes as the fastest footballer?

The record books and all the football commentators who I've heard refer to Trindon Holliday as the fastest football player in history. I wish the IAAF would credit Hayes with a 10.06C but it doesn't. Instead the only thing we can do is compare his 10.06 to Holliday's 10.00.
Dixon wrote:And in track we do see that...A..for altitude aided and that..W...for windy. And there are records for nations and age and male/female and conference, league, class.

And I'm saying that football should also have an "A" for altitude for field goals since they are always attempted at a predetermined distance. And similar to track and field, there ARE high school, college and pro records. Of course there aren't any national records since our game isn't played anywhere else.

Dixon wrote:Jim Brown had a better average per carry in his 1800 plus season than O.J.had in his 2000 plus season. He also scored more TD's in less games.

As usual Dixon, you don't have your facts straight. Simpson had 2003 yards in 14 games and Brown had 1863 yards in 14 games. Brown only had 1527 yards in his best 12-game season. Do the math.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:46 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:Who doesn't recognize Bob Hayes as the fastest footballer?

The record books and all the football commentators who I've heard refer to Trindon Holliday as the fastest football player in history. I wish the IAAF would credit Hayes with a 10.06C but it doesn't. Instead the only thing we can do is compare his 10.06 to Holliday's 10.00.
Dixon wrote:And in track we do see that...A..for altitude aided and that..W...for windy. And there are records for nations and age and male/female and conference, league, class.

And I'm saying that football should also have an "A" for altitude for field goals since they are always attempted at a predetermined distance. And similar to track and field, there ARE high school, college and pro records. Of course there aren't any national records since our game isn't played anywhere else.

Dixon wrote:Jim Brown had a better average per carry in his 1800 plus season than O.J.had in his 2000 plus season. He also scored more TD's in less games.

As usual Dixon, you don't have your facts straight. Simpson had 2003 yards in 14 games and Brown had 1863 yards in 14 games. Brown only had 1527 yards in his best 12-game season. Do the math.


Those same announcers call everyone who ran track...world class sprinters...RGIII a great example. Those who saw both Hayes and Holliday know who the fastest footballer is and Hayes is who ESPN has as the fastest footballer ever. Google....fastest NFLer ever..and see what you find. Simple common sense tells us that a 10.0 anything some 50 years ago on dirt is superior to anything 10.00 ran recently.

I don't have my facts straight? I didn't say that Brown had the better average per carry? Which he did. Which tells us what? Speaking of math....Brown averaged 5.2 yards a carry for a career, O.J 4.7. Brown never had a season where he averaged less than 4.3, 0.J.had six season s where he averaged less than 4.3. So what does that tell us?

In his nine season career Brown gained over 12, 000 yards, in his first nine seasons O.J had less than 11,000 and far less TD's.

Trust me jazz, I don't post anything that isn't factual, ok? I have all the facts so I use them.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:33 am

Let me remind you of your own words.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

As I've already pointed out, Brown wouldn't be the single-season yardage leader if he had played 16-game seasons because that would be O.J. Simpson who average 143.1 yards per game in 1973 when he rushed for 2003 yards which is superior to Brown's 133.1 yards per game in 1963 when he rushed for 1863 yards. Nor would Brown be the career yardage leader. If Brown had played 16 games in all of he nine seasons, he would have played a total of 144 games. If you multiply 144 times his career yards-per-game of 104.3, you end up with 15019 yards for his career which would have landed him fourth on the all-time list behind Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders. Either you don't know you facts or you're not very good at math. You decide.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:26 am

jazzcyclist wrote:Let me remind you of your own words.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

As I've already pointed out, Brown wouldn't be the single-season yardage leader if he had played 16-game seasons because that would be O.J. Simpson who average 143.1 yards per game in 1973 when he rushed for 2003 yards which is superior to Brown's 133.1 yards per game in 1963 when he rushed for 1863 yards. Nor would Brown be the career yardage leader. If Brown had played 16 games in all of he nine seasons, he would have played a total of 144 games. If you multiply 144 times his career yards-per-game of 104.3, you end up with 15019 yards for his career which would have landed him fourth on the all-time list behind Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders. Either you don't know you facts or you're not very good at math. You decide.


Paste

But....Brown didn't play long enought to be the all time leading rusher even if he'd had 16 game seasons.

You must have missed that.

Jim Brown averaged 5.2 yards a carry, speaking of math if he'd carried the ball as many times as any of the top 10 backs he's gaining more yardage, love math :D

Bottom line jazz is that Brown was the greatest ever. Give him the same amount of carries as Emitt he's the leading all time rusher. Average per carry is always the key, always!
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby user4 » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:42 am

Dixon wrote:Real $$$ plays

Falcons + 5.5
Saints = 6.0
Ravens + 2
Niners = 6

I've done the homework, all those plays have tons of reasons/stats/trends backing the play, so I am on the right side.


Betting is a gamble. Enjoy it for the entertainment value it gives you.
user4
 
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:54 am

user4 wrote:
Dixon wrote:Real $$$ plays

Falcons + 5.5
Saints = 6.0
Ravens + 2
Niners = 6

I've done the homework, all those plays have tons of reasons/stats/trends backing the play, so I am on the right side.


Betting is a gamble. Enjoy it for the entertainment value it gives you.


You start searching during the Monday night game for the best $$$$ plays the following Sunday. It's a process of elimanation, you're looking for the 3-5 best plays. I won 1000 last night on the Saints (can prove it by copy paste if I need to) it was an easy play using a basic fundamental.....good team back at home coming off a loss laying a small number (3).

Next week I've already seen that situation again....Carolina at home vs a weak Jets team. Now I don't know the line yet so...? Another one is the Colts who haven't lost two in a row in two years at home vs a bad bad Houston team.

Right now teams looking for playoff postioning are solid plays because you're getting 100% effort. If you can find those teams playing teams with no playoffs....possible play.

To sit there and watch it play out just as you knew it would while winning some $$$$$$, pretty cool~~~~~~
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:05 am

Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Let me remind you of your own words.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

As I've already pointed out, Brown wouldn't be the single-season yardage leader if he had played 16-game seasons because that would be O.J. Simpson who average 143.1 yards per game in 1973 when he rushed for 2003 yards which is superior to Brown's 133.1 yards per game in 1963 when he rushed for 1863 yards. Nor would Brown be the career yardage leader. If Brown had played 16 games in all of he nine seasons, he would have played a total of 144 games. If you multiply 144 times his career yards-per-game of 104.3, you end up with 15019 yards for his career which would have landed him fourth on the all-time list behind Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders. Either you don't know you facts or you're not very good at math. You decide.


Paste

But....Brown didn't play long enought to be the all time leading rusher even if he'd had 16 game seasons.

But you didn't say he would be the leader if he had played longer, you only said he would be the leader if he had played 16-game seasons, which is not true. I suggest you think before you post Dixon.

Dixon wrote:Bottom line jazz is that Brown was the greatest ever. Give him the same amount of carries as Emitt he's the leading all time rusher. Average per carry is always the key, always!

I agree with you that he's the greatest ever, not that either of our opinions matter. Yards per carry is important but it must be tempered with the length of a player's career. Had Brown played as long as Emmitt did, his average would have no doubt declined in his later years. Among runner backs with at least 1000 carries, Jamaal Charles is the NFL's all-time leader at 5.6 yards per carry, but this number will surely drop as his career winds down. Bo Jackson averaged 5.4 yards per carry but he only had 515 carries during his entire career.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:18 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Let me remind you of your own words.

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.

As I've already pointed out, Brown wouldn't be the single-season yardage leader if he had played 16-game seasons because that would be O.J. Simpson who average 143.1 yards per game in 1973 when he rushed for 2003 yards which is superior to Brown's 133.1 yards per game in 1963 when he rushed for 1863 yards. Nor would Brown be the career yardage leader. If Brown had played 16 games in all of he nine seasons, he would have played a total of 144 games. If you multiply 144 times his career yards-per-game of 104.3, you end up with 15019 yards for his career which would have landed him fourth on the all-time list behind Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders. Either you don't know you facts or you're not very good at math. You decide.


Paste

But....Brown didn't play long enought to be the all time leading rusher even if he'd had 16 game seasons.

But you didn't say he would be the leader if he had played longer, you only said he would be the leader if he had played 16-game seasons, which is not true. I suggest you think before you post Dixon.

Dixon wrote:Bottom line jazz is that Brown was the greatest ever. Give him the same amount of carries as Emitt he's the leading all time rusher. Average per carry is always the key, always!

I agree with you that he's the greatest ever, not that either of our opinions matter. Yards per carry is important but it must be tempered with the length of a player's career. Had Brown played as long as Emmitt did, his average would have no doubt declined in his later years. Among runner backs with at least 1000 carries, Jamaal Charles is the NFL's all-time leader at 5.6 yards per carry, but this number will surely drop as his career winds down. Bo Jackson averaged 5.4 yards per carry but he only had 515 carries during his entire career.


I have a bad habit of assuming things are obvious, I assumed it was understood ....all things being equal....Brown is the all time leading rusher. Yes, will be careful with that.

Give Brown nine 16 game seasons and he would only needed to play a few more years to be the all time leading rusher, he was still young when he retired. Give Brown that monster line and a fullback (Brown was the fullback) like Emmitt had and it probably could have done it back then.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:23 am

Dixon wrote:I have a bad habit of assuming things are obvious, I assumed it was understood ....all things being equal....Brown is the all time leading rusher. Yes, will be careful with that.

Yes, please be careful and then we can avoid the confusion. Words do have meaning.

Dixon wrote:Give Brown nine 16 game seasons and he would only needed to play a few more years to be the all time leading rusher, he was still young when he retired. Give Brown that monster line and a fullback (Brown was the fullback) like Emmitt had and it probably could have done it back then.

This also assumes that Brown would have remained healthy. All those extra games would have take a toll on him, and who knows how long he would have lasted in a day and age when doctors couldn't do for Gale Sayers what they did for Adrian Peterson.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:29 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:I have a bad habit of assuming things are obvious, I assumed it was understood ....all things being equal....Brown is the all time leading rusher. Yes, will be careful with that.

Yes, please be careful and then we can avoid the confusion. Words do have meaning.

Dixon wrote:Give Brown nine 16 game seasons and he would only needed to play a few more years to be the all time leading rusher, he was still young when he retired. Give Brown that monster line and a fullback (Brown was the fullback) like Emmitt had and it probably could have done it back then.

This also assumes that Brown would have remained healthy. All those extra games would have take a toll on him, and who knows how long he would have lasted in a day and age when doctors couldn't do for Gale Sayers what they did for Adrian Peterson.


Once again....all things being equal.....which means Brown plays as long as Emmitt. We can't talk....what if he gets hurt....that can be said about every athlete. Keep in mind Brown was bigger/stronger vs his level of oppostion than Emmitt was, so it's safe to say he could have played just as long. D linemen weren't nearly as big/strong in the 60's and neither were backers.

Brown average over 100 yards a game for his career, that is amazing.

While here....

Just how great was Gale Sayers? We won't find his name on any all time list because he didn't play long enought. Yet in his short career he was so totally amazing nobody cares about his place in statsvile. To this day only Barry Sanders rivalled him with the....did I just see that?

Sayers is still the greatest long distance runner ever because he also returned kicks.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:30 am

Dixon wrote:Once again....all things being equal.....which means Brown plays as long as Emmitt. We can't talk....what if he gets hurt....that can be said about every athlete. Keep in mind Brown was bigger/stronger vs his level of oppostion than Emmitt was, so it's safe to say he could have played just as long. D linemen weren't nearly as big/strong in the 60's and neither were backers.

Again, I was just going by your original comment which didn't have all these qualifiers in it:

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.


Think before you post.

Dixon wrote:Just how great was Gale Sayers? We won't find his name on any all time list because he didn't play long enought. Yet in his short career he was so totally amazing nobody cares about his place in statsvile. To this day only Barry Sanders rivalled him with the....did I just see that?

Sayers is still the greatest long distance runner ever because he also returned kicks.

He's the youngest person ever inducted into the NFL Hall of Fame. Sandy Koufax had a similar baseball career. They were both stars that burned very, very bright but only for a short time.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10859
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 2013 NFL (American Pro Football)

Postby Dixon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:36 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Dixon wrote:Once again....all things being equal.....which means Brown plays as long as Emmitt. We can't talk....what if he gets hurt....that can be said about every athlete. Keep in mind Brown was bigger/stronger vs his level of oppostion than Emmitt was, so it's safe to say he could have played just as long. D linemen weren't nearly as big/strong in the 60's and neither were backers.

Again, I was just going by your original comment which didn't have all these qualifiers in it:

Dixon wrote:Give Jim Brown 16 game seasons and he's still the yardage leader.


Think before you post.

Dixon wrote:Just how great was Gale Sayers? We won't find his name on any all time list because he didn't play long enought. Yet in his short career he was so totally amazing nobody cares about his place in statsvile. To this day only Barry Sanders rivalled him with the....did I just see that?

Sayers is still the greatest long distance runner ever because he also returned kicks.

He's the youngest person ever inducted into the NFL Hall of Fame. Sandy Koufax had a similar baseball career. They were both stars that burned very, very bright but only for a short time.


When I deal with guys who really understand this stuff like you do, I get lazy with trying to pin point things, thinking ....he knows. I can see you hang on words so I'll be really careful to make things real clear for you...not trying to be a smart ass...ok? I did think it was very obvious I was talking about ...all things being equal. And it's also pretty obvious a 6-2 230 pound back vs 1960's defenses is far more awe inspiring than Emmitts situation. Hell, we'd see him 4/5 yards down the field before seeing a tackler.

i don't think anyone in the Hall of Fame in any sport got there playing as few a games as Gale Sayers did, no haven't looked into it, just a thought.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests