2017 NFL thread v. Patriots Dynasty

[Destiny Of Chaos]

the fans in LA have already shown their lack of interest in pro football over the long term.

How you figure??  Rams were 2nd in the NFL in home game attendance last year.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/attendance.htm

I think that's more of a stadium capacity thing...but still... one year is short term. Long term was the era of the Rams and Raiders sharing the city.

[CrimsonSunrise]

the fans in LA have already shown their lack of interest in pro football over the long term.

How you figure??  Rams were 2nd in the NFL in home game attendance last year.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/attendance.htm

I think that's more of a stadium capacity thing...but still... one year is short term. Long term was the era of the Rams and Raiders sharing the city.

Got it... I thought PS was talking about now, not then.  There are some factors that make it hard to compare now vs. then.  #1, NFL popularity has come a ways since 'the early 90's. I think folks are a little more hungry for the game after 20 years of no Local teams.  Now, at the end of the day I will concede that if you don't win in LA folks will find other shit to do with their entertainment dollars. 

[El Barto]

I'd also say that Dallas is very much in danger of the "sophomore slump", and they could easily miss the play-offs. Philly and NYG could present a serious challenge to them.

You know, this just seems like an anti Dallas comment without really knowing all the components they have in place to continue the success they had last year.  It wasn't just the Dak and Zeke show and they were no ordinary rookies.  They were surrounded by a cast of damn good players and the O-line will still be one of the best this year.  Not to mention some improvements defensively.  You know, a team.  That's what it takes to win.  So yeah, is there a possibility of a slump this year?  Maybe.  That's goes for just about any team.  But "very much in danger"?  That simply isn't true.  Even with Zeke out the first few games, they have plenty of running talent to back him up.

Last year Dallas actually played like a team, which is unusual for them. As a rule it's a team with no heart, and I think that's what they revert back to. There's just not a football culture here and hasn't been for a long time. It's possible that Dak is the sort of leader that brings them all together, but I'm not sure yet. If he's not then they're in trouble. My hunch is that Dallas isn't the dominant team in the NFC-E like last year and the entire division beats the hell out of each other leaving the standings a jumbled mess.

[PowerSlave]

the fans in LA have already shown their lack of interest in pro football over the long term.

How you figure??  Rams were 2nd in the NFL in home game attendance last year.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/attendance.htm

I'm basing my opinion on history and what many of the sports fans have shown over the years in that city.

To begin, the city had 2 NFL franchises at one time in the not so distant past. In fact, both the Rams and the Chargers were LA residents at one point in time, and both left for greener pastures. The Rams and Raiders were there when I was growing up and I remember the lack of fan support being an issue back in the 80's and 90's. In my opinion (which doesn't amount to shit, but that's what it is), the Rams and Chargers have a very short window to become successful franchises before the local fans turn their backs on them. For the most part, the Rams weren't a very good team during their last 10-15 years in LA(Anaheim) prior to their move to St. Louis, and the fans out there basically ignored them.

Over the years there's been a running joke in MLB that the fans at Dodger games don't show up until the 4th inning, and then they bolt for the exits in the 7th inning. It's a little bit of an exaggeration, but I remember watching a cubs broadcast on WGN and they showed fans exiting the parking lot en-mass while the game was still being played. I realize that the traffic in LA is notoriously terrible, but I can only guess that this will be the same fan-base that will be split between the Chargers and Rams. Seems a little fickle, and disinterested to me.

[PowerSlave]

I'd also say that Dallas is very much in danger of the "sophomore slump", and they could easily miss the play-offs. Philly and NYG could present a serious challenge to them.

You know, this just seems like an anti Dallas comment without really knowing all the components they have in place to continue the success they had last year.  It wasn't just the Dak and Zeke show and they were no ordinary rookies.  They were surrounded by a cast of damn good players and the O-line will still be one of the best this year.  Not to mention some improvements defensively.  You know, a team.  That's what it takes to win.  So yeah, is there a possibility of a slump this year?  Maybe.  That's goes for just about any team.  But "very much in danger"?  That simply isn't true.  Even with Zeke out the first few games, they have plenty of running talent to back him up.

They absolutely have one of the best lines in the game. However, they(mostly talking about Dak in this instance) don't have the benefit of "sneaking up" on the rest of the league, anymore. There's a year's worth of tape for opposing defenses to study, and as EB mentioned, the rest of their division can be extremely competitive. In fact, I'm going to go along with EB's prediction and say that they beat the shit out of each other and leave a mess for the end of the season.

[KevShmev]

Dallas should still be good enough to win 10+ games, even in that division. When your offensive line is that good, it makes all the difference.

On the flip side, the Giants is the sexy pick this year, but I don't see it.  Yeah, their D is stellar, but their offensive line is trash and Eli cannot be trusted.  Like the Broncos, their D is good enough to possibly carry them to the playoffs, but that's about it.

[CrimsonSunrise]

I'm basing my opinion on history and what many of the sports fans have shown over the years in that city.

To begin, the city had 2 NFL franchises at one time in the not so distant past. In fact, both the Rams and the Chargers were LA residents at one point in time, and both left for greener pastures. The Rams and Raiders were there when I was growing up and I remember the lack of fan support being an issue back in the 80's and 90's. In my opinion (which doesn't amount to shit, but that's what it is), the Rams and Chargers have a very short window to become successful franchises before the local fans turn their backs on them. For the most part, the Rams weren't a very good team during their last 10-15 years in LA(Anaheim) prior to their move to St. Louis, and the fans out there basically ignored them.

Over the years there's been a running joke in MLB that the fans at Dodger games don't show up until the 4th inning, and then they bolt for the exits in the 7th inning. It's a little bit of an exaggeration, but I remember watching a cubs broadcast on WGN and they showed fans exiting the parking lot en-mass while the game was still being played. I realize that the traffic in LA is notoriously terrible, but I can only guess that this will be the same fan-base that will be split between the Chargers and Rams. Seems a little fickle, and disinterested to me.

Well, the Chargers were in LA for 1 year.  Hell, I believe the LA Dons of the All American Football Conference lasted longer than them...LOL. Like I mentioned earlier, winning is key.  Winning will draw folks in, except for the diehards like me who will be at every game.  There's just too many things to spend your entertainment dollars on here.  I've been a Rams fan since I was 6 in 1969, Coliseum, Big A, and back to the Coliseum.  As far as popularity back in the 80's people went to the games.  The Rams went to the playoffs 7 times in the 80's and the Super Bowl once (79-80).  The problems came mostly in the 90's with Georgia and John Shaw fucking the team up.  Add to that no viable stadium plan.  Most folks don't realize that the greater Los Angeles area has NEVER built an NFL Stadium, until now.  The Stadiums and deals the Rams and Raiders had in the early 90's sucked ass.  As far as the Dodgers yeah, If I'm a season ticket holder I'm not getting stuck in the parking lot every game for 1-2 hours, then dealing with FWY traffic. So yeah, if you want to call us "Fickle" because we don't want to deal with 3 hr's of travel after every game then I guess we're fickle  .  The Coliseum is actually not too bad.  Last year we would be out of the lot and on to the FWY in about 15-20 mins.

[Dublagent66]

I'd also say that Dallas is very much in danger of the "sophomore slump", and they could easily miss the play-offs. Philly and NYG could present a serious challenge to them.

You know, this just seems like an anti Dallas comment without really knowing all the components they have in place to continue the success they had last year.  It wasn't just the Dak and Zeke show and they were no ordinary rookies.  They were surrounded by a cast of damn good players and the O-line will still be one of the best this year.  Not to mention some improvements defensively.  You know, a team.  That's what it takes to win.  So yeah, is there a possibility of a slump this year?  Maybe.  That's goes for just about any team.  But "very much in danger"?  That simply isn't true.  Even with Zeke out the first few games, they have plenty of running talent to back him up.

They absolutely have one of the best lines in the game. However, they(mostly talking about Dak in this instance) don't have the benefit of "sneaking up" on the rest of the league, anymore. There's a year's worth of tape for opposing defenses to study, and as EB mentioned, the rest of their division can be extremely competitive. In fact, I'm going to go along with EB's prediction and say that they beat the shit out of each other and leave a mess for the end of the season.

Dallas should still be good enough to win 10+ games, even in that division. When your offensive line is that good, it makes all the difference.

[KevShmev]

Dallas' defense is obviously their weak spot, but their offense's ability to grind out long drives and dominate time of possession goes a long way in aiding the defense and making their job less difficult. 

Plus, I think Dak Prescott is the real deal and will be better this year than last.

[PowerSlave]

Dallas' defense is obviously their weak spot, but their offense's ability to grind out long drives and dominate time of possession goes a long way in aiding the defense and making their job less difficult. 

Plus, I think Dak Prescott is the real deal and will be better this year than last.

I'm not quite sold on Dak, yet. I can't really even say why I feel that way, to be honest. I do have a little bit of "anti-cowboy" bias, and that might be coloring how I see the situation. It's not really even against the players. I seriously dislike Jerry Jones. I'm usually neutral when it comes to NFL team owners, but the NFC East has two owners that bug the shit out of me as a fan in general. Jerry Jones and Dan Snider tend to raise my blood psi at the mere mention of their names.

It should be interesting to see how they do. No doubt that they do have a talented roster on the offensive side of the ball.

[Stadler]

Dallas' defense is obviously their weak spot, but their offense's ability to grind out long drives and dominate time of possession goes a long way in aiding the defense and making their job less difficult. 

Plus, I think Dak Prescott is the real deal and will be better this year than last.

I'm not quite sold on Dak, yet. I can't really even say why I feel that way, to be honest. I do have a little bit of "anti-cowboy" bias, and that might be coloring how I see the situation. It's not really even against the players. I seriously dislike Jerry Jones. I'm usually neutral when it comes to NFL team owners, but the NFC East has two owners that bug the shit out of me as a fan in general. Jerry Jones and Dan Snider tend to raise my blood psi at the mere mention of their names.

It should be interesting to see how they do. No doubt that they do have a talented roster on the offensive side of the ball.

What exactly has Dak Prescott won?   He's still in "potential to be the real deal" land unless and until he wins something.   The history of the NFL is positively LITTERED with guys who were the "real deal" and who won exactly naught.   Frankly, I'm a "clubhouse" guy.  I think there are organizations/peple that are winners and there are those that are not.  I long said that "Tony Romo was NEVER going to win a Super Bowl in the NFL" and - at least so far - I was right.    Jim Kelly.  Cam Newton (so far). 

The league is hard, and it is unforgiving.  We haven't yet seen the league react to the Cowboys, and they will.  believe you me, they will.  I don't see Jerry Jones and Jason The Coach (blanking on his name...) being the guys to push him over the - GARRETT! I thought of it - edge.   

[KevShmev]

So, if Scott Norwood makes that FG against the Giants, Jim Kelly suddenly becomes a winner.  I love that kind of thinking.

[King Postwhore]

Kev, you are treading on coming to the dark side.  You don't have to win a Superbowl to be ........

[Stadler]

So, if Scott Norwood makes that FG against the Giants, Jim Kelly suddenly becomes a winner.  I love that kind of thinking.

Didn't at all say that.  He had three other opportunities that he didn't capitalize on.  But he's absolutely not one until at least one of them goes through.   


Look, personally, I believe you are not a "winner" - or "elite", I'll say it.  it's not like it's Volde... STOP IT! - at a MINIMUM until you win the big prize.  It doesn't work the other way, which is why Kev missed it, since winning the big prize doesn't make you a winner or elite, but it's the cover charge at the door to get into that club.   Dan Marino is a prime example.  Great skills, great numbers, but I can remember watching him and saying to my dad "Why does he always yell at his teammates when they're losing?"    Did you see Tom Brady yell at ANYONE when it was 28-3?   One of the things I loved most about that Super Bowl was me standing up with my hands on my head wondering how it could be so bad, my daughter checked out, disappointed in her TB jersey and ready to cry, and you look at Bill and Tom, and it was the exact same facial expression as you see during a pre-season game.  Business as usual.  Why?  BECAUSE THEY KNOW HOW TO WIN.  Jimmy Johnson (and the hair!) same thing.   Lou the Guy From Alabama, same thing.   You have these maniacs that THINK they know how to win - I'm putting Jim Harbaugh here - but flake when the rock actually hits the hard surface, and that tells me they don't know how to win.

I think Trent Dilfer - or it might have been Steve Young, but it was that show - said that "Cam Newton doesn't know what he doesn't know, so he will never be a winner. He doesn't know what he needs to work on, and part of that is his demeanor and his temperament".  And this was BEFORE they collapsed like a house made of Hoyle against the undermatched, inferior (talent-wise), but far better coached and far more mature Broncos. 

[axeman90210]

Tom just has Gisele fight his battles for him

[KevShmev]

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

[Stadler]

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

No, he was a missed field goal away from winning a Super Bowl, which is an element of being a winner.   He wins that, and he's Trent Dilfer and/or Phil Simms.   Are they "winners"?  "Elite"?

(For the record, I like Jim Kelly, and think he was a very good, if not great QB.  He had FOUR TRIES to bring home the hardware, though, and didn't.   That is important information.  Remember, my original post was also talking about "organizations".  It's not JUST Jim Kelly.   Another good example is the Broncos.   They lost four, and as much as I like the guy, Dan Reeves didn't know how to close the deal either.   Elway learned how, because he later won two as a player and what, one as an Exec?  I'm not suggesting this is a set formula.)

[black_biff_stadler]

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

No, he was a missed field goal away from winning a Super Bowl, which is an element of being a winner.   He wins that, and he's Trent Dilfer and/or Phil Simms.   Are they "winners"?  "Elite"?

Did you not watch football in the 80s/90s? Even mentioning Dilfer in the same breath as Kelly is absurd. Simms is way below Kelly's level too but at least had stretches of consistent play. Kelly was regarded as a top tier QB not far behind Montana, Marino, and Elway for at least half of his career. I think you're scoffing at the dude's accomplishments because you're trying to support your argument.

[King Postwhore]

Tom just has Gisele fight his battles for him

In private you know he told her to STFU.

[El Barto]

Tom just has Gisele fight his battles for him

In private you know he told her to STFU.

I'm not sure. If she threatened to cut off his allowance that could sting quite a bit.

[King Postwhore]

Nah, you can tell she's worried and that's why she let it slip out.  I think we all know the risk one take in playing his game.

[Dream Team]

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

No, he was a missed field goal away from winning a Super Bowl, which is an element of being a winner.   He wins that, and he's Trent Dilfer and/or Phil Simms.   Are they "winners"?  "Elite"?

(For the record, I like Jim Kelly, and think he was a very good, if not great QB.  He had FOUR TRIES to bring home the hardware, though, and didn't.   That is important information.  Remember, my original post was also talking about "organizations".  It's not JUST Jim Kelly.   Another good example is the Broncos.   They lost four, and as much as I like the guy, Dan Reeves didn't know how to close the deal either.   Elway learned how, because he later won two as a player and what, one as an Exec?  I'm not suggesting this is a set formula.)

Jim Kelly is a loser for giving up 37, 52, and 30 points to his opponents and leading his team into game-winning field goal position in the other.

[Cable]

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

No, he was a missed field goal away from winning a Super Bowl, which is an element of being a winner.   He wins that, and he's Trent Dilfer and/or Phil Simms.   Are they "winners"?  "Elite"?

(For the record, I like Jim Kelly, and think he was a very good, if not great QB.  He had FOUR TRIES to bring home the hardware, though, and didn't.   That is important information.  Remember, my original post was also talking about "organizations".  It's not JUST Jim Kelly.   Another good example is the Broncos.   They lost four, and as much as I like the guy, Dan Reeves didn't know how to close the deal either.   Elway learned how, because he later won two as a player and what, one as an Exec?  I'm not suggesting this is a set formula.)

Jim Kelly is a loser for giving up 37, 52, and 30 points to his opponents and leading his team into game-winning field goal position in the other.

And here is a cliche for Kelly's situation; 60 minutes of football. There were other chances he could have capitalized on in wide right I'm sure. Or other things the rest of the 21 primary players on his team could have done.

All of Brady's SBs pretty much could have gone either way. One of Montana's could have also. I'm sure Brady's poise and leadership had a lot to do with it, as Stadler hit on. Marino would have ripped the team a new one, and that's the end of that game. QBs naturally have a lot of influence. But let's not discount the entire team here for a QB and Brady; his first win was mostly due to the defense stopping a juggernaut. And Law had a pick-six, so there is 7 points. His last win had a top rated defense in points that let up 21 points to the top rated offense (taking out the pick-six). They locked it down after the 21 points, and didn't look back allowing Brady to do his thing.

[hefdaddy42]

Excited for the start of the season.

[King Postwhore]

And Edelman comes up limping.  Wonderful.

[TAC]

And Edelman comes up limping.  Wonderful.

Just read your post and realized the game does NOT start at 8:00!

And it's 13-0!!

EDIT: I see Gronk spent the off season watching the NBA. That was a hell of a flop on the PI.

[KevShmev]

And it's preseason!!

[TAC]

And it's preseason!!

Meaning I missed a lot of the Pats starters making plays, not boasting the score.  Gonna be watching scrubs for next game..

[El Barto]

And Edelman comes up limping.  Wonderful.

That didn't look good. Non-contact knee injuries rarely are. As we're seeing, no team could weather the loss of a number 1 WR better than NE, but his presence in that group means a huge deal.

And Detroit looks like they showed up to play in a volleyball game. This doesn't look like a football team.

[PowerSlave]

And Detroit looks like they showed up to play in a volleyball game. This doesn't look like a football team.

I can't remember the last time that they did...

[KevShmev]

Last year when they made the playoffs?

[Cable]

And Edelman comes up limping.  Wonderful.

That didn't look good. Non-contact knee injuries rarely are. As we're seeing, no team could weather the loss of a number 1 WR better than NE, but his presence in that group means a huge deal.

And Detroit looks like they showed up to play in a volleyball game. This doesn't look like a football team.

He's likely done.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20460082/new-england-patriots-wide-receiver-julian-edelman-carted-field-right-leg-injury

Doesn't honestly concern me a lot, they have enough guys to fill that role. They did fine from Welker to Edleman, and can do the same for him. Considering the stable of RBs, Gonk, Hogan, Mitchell, Amendola and Cooks. More worried about the defensive front.

[KevShmev]

Yep, Edelman is easily replaceable. They are loaded at the skill positions this year; losing him won't matter.

[King Postwhore]

Yep, Edelman is easily replaceable. They are loaded at the skill positions this year; losing him won't matter.

Let's not go overboard that he is replaceable.

2016
98 Receptions

2015
62 Receptions

2014
92 Receptions

2013
105 Receptions

It will be an adjustment period. This is your go to guy for 1st downs and was always open.

[KevShmev]

The Patriots have two big play threats at WR (Cooks and Hogan), THE best TE in football (Gronk), a really good number 2 TE and a handful of RBs who can all catch the ball. Oh yeah, and they have that Tom Brady fella, who was pretty good long before Julian freaking Edelman became their go-to possession receiver (thats all he is).  They will be just fine.