The 2012 NFL Thread

[CrimsonSunrise]

I believe he and his father thought the Chargers were a bad organization to be a part of, and one which could not be successful.

I think the New York Market was a lot more attractive to them as well.

[black_biff_stadler]

Although this story could've easily made me nauseous with how dumb society is, I still found it quite funny.

[MetalJunkie]

Although this story could've easily made me nauseous with how dumb society is, I still found it quite funny.

If I had 1500 dollars to throw away and Aaron Rodgers drew a stupid doodle, I'd probably buy it.

[hefdaddy42]

Anyone else watching HBO's Hard Knocks?  I'm loving it.  That part of the NFL fascinates me.

[cramx3]

Anyone else watching HBO's Hard Knocks?  I'm loving it.  That part of the NFL fascinates me.

I haven't watched this season but I've seen the past few. Is there anything in particular that makes this different or better than previous years?

[black_biff_stadler]

It doesn't hold my attention. It seems like their pattern is to go for gimmicky flash-first results-never teams like the Cowboys, Bengals, and Jets and when that isn't available they just settle for the first sub-.500 to show up with a pen to sign on the dotted line. What would interest me is to see the inner workings of perennial contenders; what they do to foster good morale, how they keep key players hungry and avoid complacency, etc.

[cramx3]

It doesn't hold my attention. It seems like their pattern is to go for gimmicky flash-first results-never teams like the Cowboys, Bengals, and Jets and when that isn't available they just settle for the first sub-.500 to show up with a pen to sign on the dotted line. What would interest me is to see the inner workings of perennial contenders; what they do to foster good morale, how they keep key players hungry and avoid complacency, etc.

Those teams are smart enough to stay away from the distractions like hard knocks and also don't need to rely on a reality show to get people interested in the team.

[hefdaddy42]

True.

I just like that it is a new coach and therefore a new regime.  It's neat to see him bring his influence to the team.  And all the inner workings, coaches meetings, the GM, and all that stuff.  And I got to see Chad Johnson get let go.

[6sAllTheWay]

It doesn't hold my attention. It seems like their pattern is to go for gimmicky flash-first results-never teams like the Cowboys, Bengals, and Jets and when that isn't available they just settle for the first sub-.500 to show up with a pen to sign on the dotted line. What would interest me is to see the inner workings of perennial contenders; what they do to foster good morale, how they keep key players hungry and avoid complacency, etc.

Hmm, The Cowboys were on Hard Knocks in 2002, the Bengals in 09, The Jets in 2010..

I personally love it. But yes, every season follows the same pattern, so you see the drills, the rookies, the study sessions etc - That is what training camp is all about so HBO can't do that much differently. Training camp is the same all over the league.

But yes I would like to see big clubs participate in Hard Knocks but I think it is harder than we think for HBO to find teams willing to let cameras inside their facility and publicly display their team to everyone. I think they get a lot of turn downs. Many teams and coaches will find it a distraction that they don't want for their football team. So HBO gotta settle with whoever they can get.

[King Postwhore]

Anyone else watching HBO's Hard Knocks?  I'm loving it.  That part of the NFL fascinates me.

I watched the first episode.  Have the other 2 DVR'd and I can't wait to see the Chad debacle.

[Dublagent66]

I heard about the Chad thing from a co-worker and he said to check it out.  Still haven't.

[hefdaddy42]

Wow, Russell Wilson is looking great for the Seahawks.

[black_biff_stadler]

Fuck!

It's only preseason and I'm already beginning to think that our defense will be bad enough to negate our incredible offense

[splent]

:splent2: :splent3:

There's gotta be a Packers icon like seriously

[black_biff_stadler]

The fleur de lis is iconic though. Heck, y'all's "G" is identical to UGA.

[splent]

The fleur de lis is iconic though. Heck y'all's "G" is identical to UGA.

Except that UGA took the logo from the Packers!!!  Packers G was created in 1961.

The Packers hold the trademark on the "G" logo, and have granted limited permission to other organizations to utilize a similar logo, such as the University of Georgia and Grambling State University.[46] Adopted in 1964, the Georgia "G", though different in design and color, was similar to the Packers' "G". Then-Georgia head coach Vince Dooley thought it best to clear the use of Georgia's new emblem with the Packers.

[black_biff_stadler]

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070326034239AAoFjNK

Actually, the answer is both teams had it first. Green Bay used the oval "G" first while Georgia was using more of a block letter. Georgia redesigned theirs (with a commercial artist in charge of "branding" the emblem) and it was a close match for the Green Bay "G". They even got permission from Green Bay to use it. Then Green Bay redesigned theirs, and it shifted away from the oval "G". Later, Green Bay went back to the oval "G", and the few distinctions between the original Green Bay "G" and the sleek Georgia "G" of the 1960s were eliminated. So basically, Georgia came close to Green Bay's emblem with a slightly different "G", then Green Bay eventually switched to the same "G". Neither is generally considered a coy or rip-off. Both franchises seem to enjoy the emblem, though.

This is the article from the UGA website:

In 1963 after becoming the Bulldogs' Head Football Coach, Vince Dooley redesigned the football uniform choosing a red helmet with a black "G" on a white background as the dominant feature of the new uniform for the 1964 season.

He discussed with his staff that a forward-looking "G" would be an appropriate emblem for the helmet of the Georgia team. Dooley had just hired John Donaldson, former Georgia player from 1945 to 1948, as backfield coach. John was keen on the idea of a new image and volunteered his wife, Anne, who had a BFA in commercial art from UGA to design a logo for the new Georgia helmet with the general specifications Dooley had outlined. Dooley accepted Anne's original "G" which fit his vision for a forward look to Georgia's new emblem.

Since the Georgia "G"- though different in design and color- was similar to Green Bay's "G", Coach Dooley thought it best to clear the use of Georgia's new emblem with the NFL team. Athletic Director Joel Eaves called for permission which was granted. However, since its inception in 1961, the Green Bay "G" has been redesigned several times and now looks like Georgia's original 1964 "G." Georgia is proud that the Packers apparently liked the special nuances of the Bulldogs' forward-looking "G."

Georgia's oval "G", eventually replacing Georgia's old block "G" as the official UGA symbol, has stood the test of time. It made its first appearance in the opening game in 1964 and was an immediate hit with the Georgia fans, especially after Dooley's first three teams were so successful--highlighted by the 1966 SEC Championship.

[splent]

However, Green Bay has the trademark, but gave Georgia permission to use it.  Grambling State uses it too but I'm not sure on their status on permission.

https://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2071363

[black_biff_stadler]

However, since its inception in 1961, the Green Bay "G" has been redesigned several times and now looks like Georgia's original 1964 "G." Georgia is proud that the Packers apparently liked the special nuances of the Bulldogs' forward-looking "G."

[splent]

However, since its inception in 1961, the Green Bay "G" has been redesigned several times and now looks like Georgia's original 1964 "G." Georgia is proud that the Packers apparently liked the special nuances of the Bulldogs' forward-looking "G."

The Packers basically had the first logo, which was very very similar except that it was more of a football shape than the oval shape.  However the difference is very subtle.  The way Georgia designed it was more of the oval shape, but basically the same other than that.  So the Packers had it first, Georgia perfected it, and the Packers adopted Georgia's perfections.

Regardless, the Packers still hold the trademark for the G logo.  And, unless you are from Georgia, you see the G and think Packers, not Bulldogs.

[DebraKadabra]

Good game against the Saints tonight - first Texans preseason game I was able to watch.  Wanted the Texans to win, but this is just making me want the regular season to just go ahead and start already.

[bosk1]

Alright.  I'm calling the '9ers season @ 12-4.  That is all.

[Dublagent66]

The final week of preseason, TG.

[hefdaddy42]

The final week of preseason, TG.

Yes.

Opening Sunday is on my (and lonestar's) birthday!

[Dublagent66]

Right on, good way to start the season.  The big 4 0 huh?  Welcome to the next phase of getting old.   

[jcmistat]

Alright.  I'm calling the '9ers season @ 12-4.  That is all.

I'm going with 11-5. I think 10-6 will be good enough for postseason too.

[black_biff_stadler]

8-8 can probably win that division for the 9ers considering the Seahawks are easily the 9ers' stiffest competition this year when you look at the <5-wins-a-year holding pattern the Rams can't seem to break out of coupled with the Cards' complete inability to catch a break at starting QB.

[yorost]

...and only six teams in the last ten seasons have missed the playoffs with at least 10-6 record, not exactly going out on a limb.   During that same time frame 21 teams have made it with a worse record.

[black_biff_stadler]

It'd be funny if the 9ers unexpectedly fell off the face of the earth this year and someone from the NFC West snuck in at 6-10. Tell me the NFL wouldn't alter it's playoff format then.

[yorost]

They wouldn't.

[KevShmev]

Seattle seems to be the popular sleeper pick these days for surprise playoff team, but I am not sure I see it, and I think many are forgetting that Pete Carroll isn't nearly as good of an NFL head coach as he is a college coach (47-49 in six NFL seasons as a head coach).

[black_biff_stadler]

They wouldn't.

You have no way of knowing that.

[yorost]

No, I don't, but you asked me to tell you that.

...and I don't honestly think they would change it even if some division pulled off the miraculous 3-13 4-way tie.  This format is popular and provides many small races against rivals.  A fluke team with a losing record every now and then is hardly worth going to a playoff system even more reliant on unbalanced schedules.

[black_biff_stadler]

While we're discussing playoff scenario anomalies, I wonder what's the best possible record someone could miss the playoffs with. It's obviously mathematically possible for all four teams in a division to go 3-3 in the division and run the table for the rest of their schedule leaving all four teams at 13-3 with the team that fell to the bottom of the tiebreaking shuffle left on the outside looking in. I just wonder if the scheduling format is balanced in a way that prevents a 14-2 team from missing out under any circumstances whatsoever.

[yorost]

It should be possible to have 8 14-2 teams in a conference, although it depends on the 2 floating games each team has.  I don't know the specific details on those.

Scenario:

NFC always beats AFC, so each NFC team goes 4-0.
Top two teams in each NFC division go 5-1, splitting the games against each other.
Top two teams in each NFC division got 3-1 against the matched NFC division, losing their game to one of the top two opposite divisions teams. A1 > B1, B1 > A2, A2> B2, B2 > A1

That puts 8 teams at 12-2 with the two floating games left.  If no floating game matched two of the 12-2 teams each of them could go 2-0.  That's certainly possible if there are no interrelated restrictions on the floating games, namely no odd cycles, A vs B, B vs C, C vs A.  I don't remember the scheduling rules well enough to say.