| NFL Report Card |
|
FThe Arizona Cardinals Defense The St. Louis Rams D The Dallas Cowboys Offensive Coaches The Seattle Seahawks The Cincinnati Bengals B
The New Orleans Saints
A+ Vinny Testaverde
Devin Hester
Tony Gonzalez Trackback(0)
Comments (20)
GB1998
said:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
by Gibby McCaleb - AccuScore Analyst
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed |
Ok, what gets me is: how did the rams fall so far?Yeah, they lost Faulk, and Warner but they still got "Big Game" Tory Holt, and Bulger isn't...that awful but it's sad to see a franchise that was outstanding not to long ago drop to an 0-6 shitwhole of a team. Hate to say, but i wouldn't be surprised if they Rams won 3 games at the most. |
PackBrew42
said:
|
Seahawks get another chance to give another 0 for _ team their first W of the season. Go Rams! |
gibby
said:
 |
I can;t stress this enough: great comments. You definately have some excellent insight. My point, which is pretty similar to yours, is the Packers did not play for the kill but to me, the kill was not the game but the Bears season. If the Pack had walked away 5-0 with the Bears at 1-4, the Vikes at 1-3 and the Lions being, well, the Lions, I think Green Bay couold have owned the division the rest of the way. I personally believe in momentum and that winning teams find ways to win and losing teams find ways to lose and that letting the Bears back in the divisiion race was a big mistake. It remains to be seen whether the Bears use this to turn around thier season or they continue to struggle. Great comments! You should start a blog here (hint hint). |
PackBrew42
said:
|
Sorry, misread and just thought he was under F. I'm skeptical about the Bears having any renewed confidence...maybe they have it in themselves but I doubt any other team in the NFL does. Look at the 34 points given up in the 4th qtr against the Lions and the 341 yards in the 1st half by the Pack. I think most fans & teams in the NFL saw the 2nd half of that game as moreso the Packers not playing for the kill than the Bears actually holding them on defense. The Packer playcalling was ultra-conservative in the 2nd half (partially to the field position situation but if I remember the Jennings TD catch was on a drive starting at or behind their own 20) to the point of predictability. |
gibby
said:
|
For the record, I only gave Favre a C not an F and the grade probably should have gone to the Packers, not Favre by himself. This was a must win game for the Bears and a Packers victory would have come close to knocking the defending NFC Champs out of the playoffs entirely, putting them 4 games back after five played and mentally reeling. Now the Packers only have a two game lead, the Bears have renewed confidence and Green Bay lost a valuable home game against a division rival which hurts twice. Don't get me wring, Favre is still great and I love watching him play. Thanks for the comment! |
PackBrew42
said:
|
I wouldn't say Favre is guilty of an F. Yeah, he did have 1 stupid interception but can one really fault him for his 2nd pick? It was on the last offensive (unless you count the Bears victory formation) play of the game where if caught (which it almost was) would've tied up the game. Take that 2nd pick away and he had 1 TD to match his 1 INT and had a pretty good completion percentage & a QB rating in the mid 80s. |
gibby
said:
|
Hey Cowboys-4-Life, I agree with you about Norv Turner and that is the problem to me. The Charegrs were built to run Marty-ball, not a wide open passing attack. As a coach, you have to coach the players you have on your team, not design an offense that is best run by different personell. I'd understand that approach for a head coach taking over a regular team but this is a team coming off a 14-2 season with Suoer Bowl aspirations. If you look at history, both George Siefert and Barry Switzer found themselves in the same situation and both coaches made minimal changes and instead just kept the 49ers and Cowboys on the same path and same playbook and both coaches won Super Bowls. Someone somewhere must have a copy of the Charger's playbook from last season. Might be time to dust that off. Thanks for reading and for your great comments. |
Cowboy-4-Life
said:
|
Also, Norv Turner is without the benefit of the Cowboys WRs that he had in the 90's. Alvin Harper and Kevin Williams were not superstars in their own rights, but they were excellent #2 receivers. I'm sure SD's O-line is good, but compared to the Mid-90's Cowboys, I'm sure they're not even close. |
gibby
said:
|
From what I can see, Norv may be getting a little too fancy for Rivers. LT is not putting up the numbers he was last year but it also seems like the Chargers go to the pass too quickly. I don't see Rivers checking down on his recievers, focusing totally on his hot read. Greenbay has a good defense so I think this week will be a good test to see where the Chargers really are this year. They should stick with the run and toss in some play action and high % passes rather than try and run the Dallas Cowboys offense of the 90's. Rivers is not Aikman. Thanks for reading and great comment! |
MD2020
said:
|
Norv Turner is purported to be a nice guy and all,but it seems his teams consistently lose whereever he goes-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norv_Turner.Some guys just aren't cut-out to be head coaches in the NFL(or whatever major sports league you may be speaking of  Some make great assistants(like Joe Bugel,for example),but just can't get it done as the head man. To be fair,we'll have to see how the chargers fare this season.But the way they've started....makes ya wonder.If ya can't get it done with players like LT & Co.,then I guess that speaks for itself  So I'd say yes,I agree that the "jury is still out on SD". Cheers |
gibby
said:
|
Thanks Prarieguy. I appreciate the positive feedback! |
prairieguy
said:
|
Great stuff Gibby -- keep it going! |
prairieguy
said:
|
O.k., the Foxborough visit has passed and now we know. Speak, Aaron! |
Cowboy-4-Life
said:
|
It is a brand new system. While it is still a 3-4, it will be a totally different system than that of Bill Parcells. Also, the last 3 years we had a 4-3 Defensive Coordinator (Mike Zimmer) attempting to coach a 3-4 and Zimmer was simply not a 3-4 coach. As I said I don't disagree with your assessment, but their defense did what they should do against a lesser team. Ronnie Brown got 33 yards rushing, so that is a plus. Our secondary is a question mark, so pressure on the QB is paramount. Also, in years past, the Cowboys have not been able to consistently move the ball effectively. This year, barring any injuries, they should be able to do that. Also, from the Preseason forward, it appears that Jason Garrett is a ball-control type of Offensive Coordinator. This should keep us relatively healthy and not exhausted come December. The Dallas D has a ways to go, but I see them getting there soon. Especially with Terrance Newman coming back soon. |
gibby
said:
|
Well, it's not really a brand new system. That's one of the reasons Wade Phillips was selected because he's a 3-4 defensive guy so not many changes would be needed to take over what Parcells had put in place. I give the Dallas defense a D because they have a lot of talent and the Cowboys have a solid chance at playing in the Super Bowl this year if they can get their D together. Certainly, Terrence Newman will be a big help when he's healthy and word on the street has Dallas picking up Tank Johnson after his suspension. But back to your point, the Dolphins are not exactly an offensive juggernaut and the Cowboys will be in big trouble when facing a team with a great passing offense. For example, Dallas' first interception had a wide open Chris Chambers and Green flat out over threw him. Trent hits that pass and Chambers picks up big yardage. While Dallas will win the division, they won't go to the Super Bowl with defensive play like this so they get the D because I am holding them to a higher standard than a team in a rebuilding phase and they also selected a defensive guru who runs a 3-4 as a head coach to improve the defense and I'm not seeing any improvement over last year where they got burned by the deep ball far too often. |
Cowboy-4-Life
said:
|
I agree with your assessment of our Defense, but it is a brand new system and I did see some improvement from week 1. The Jacque Reeves interception was indicative of this. Reeves, who is a nickel or dime CB at best, was in perfect position as Miami tried to burn Dallas deep as had happened against the Giants. We gave up fewer big plays and kept everything in front of us. We also didn't allow Green a lot of time to get set. With that being said, there are still lots of improvements to be made. One thing you will not be able to do is run against Dallas this year. Before giving Dallas a D, how many yards did Ronnie Brown have? As far as the play of the game, I would say that the play that Tony Romo make Jason Taylor look silly would be the play. NFL Defensive Player of the Year one-on-one with a QB and was left grasping for air. Even after the play Jason Taylor was laughing at how stupid it made him look. |
gibby
said:
|
"Who Dat" was widely used in New Orleans public schools as early as 1961, 7 years before the Bengals became a team. According to even die hard Bengals web sites, you started using the chant in 1981. For those of you that are mathematically challenged, that would be 20 years. You can read more about it here: http://bengalsjungle.com/whodeyorigin.html There is Saints merchandise from a local burger chain with the "Who Dat" slogan that predate 1981. Any time you need straightening out, feel free to contact me. Next.... |
redsbengalsbucks
said:
|
Get your facts right the Who-Dey cheer has been around longer than the Who-Dat chant of the Saints. |
gibby
said:
|
The question was, is San Diego one of the elite AFC teams or did the massive coaching overhaul in the off-season hurt them and I can't see how the game against the Bears said anything about the Chargers, one way or another. The Chargers were losing the game to the Bears late in the third quarter until a freak short punt bounced off a Bears blocker setting up an LT touchdown pass. Yes, they won the game and yes they are a great team but are they still up in the same level as the Colts and Patriots? I can't say yes or no. I guess we'll find out this Sunday when they travel to Foxborough. |
aaron gordon
said:
|
hey gibster, since i wrote on mr. oh's blog, thought I would drop you a note. don't know much about your site or how the 1000's of games predictions are doing, but, I gotta say, you must be having fun with the articles. wax poetic all night my friend! quick note, as a SD fan, are you serious? "jury is still out on SD"...all they did was level the best team in the NFC and you still think there are questions. what about the bad call on the 1yard line that cost the bolts a TD? how about the fact that we kneeled down on the bears 5-yard line at the end of the game. SD dominated on defense and simply waited for an opening that was bound to come offensively. with that aforementioned TD on the goal line, the missed FG and a score at the end of the game, SD could easily have come out on top 24-3. not that a dominating D and a 14-3 game is bad, especially when LT hasn't run a yard since the Shot's awfully coached game snapped defeat out of the hands of victory in last year's playoffs. the fact is, the team was great, even when mediocre and you, laughably say the jury is out. come on, give us a little better comentary than that! i'm sure you said some brilliant things, but i didn't bother looking. have fun writing your analysis...yeah! Aaron |
