• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

NFL Week #7

...we have cancelled our membership in that club. Thanks though...

:smug:
On the radio here the other day they were talking about how for some franchises it's a mistake to be successful, because fans expect that every year.

If San Diego started 2-4 in the late 90s or early 2000s we'd be looking at a possibly successful season. Since the Martyball era (and now the Norv era) anything less than winning the AFC Worst is a total failure.
 
On the radio here the other day they were talking about how for some franchises it's a mistake to be successful, because fans expect that every year.

If San Diego started 2-4 in the late 90s or early 2000s we'd be looking at a possibly successful season. Since the Martyball era (and now the Norv era) anything less than winning the AFC Worst is a total failure.

Yup, same as New England. Even when Brady went down in game 1 we had Matt Cassell; they finished at 11/5 and didn't make the playoffs- fans felt cheated.Besides that year, we fans just presume they will win the AFC East, or if not grab the Wild Card.
Both the Pats and Red Sox are expected to make the playoffs each and every year or it is considered a failure.

I still really feel for Detroit Lions fans- I hope they can achieve some success for the fans and especially the city; 9/7 would be great for them and I doubt fans would expect more the next year.:atoz:
 
On the radio here the other day they were talking about how for some franchises it's a mistake to be successful, because fans expect that every year.

If San Diego started 2-4 in the late 90s or early 2000s we'd be looking at a possibly successful season. Since the Martyball era (and now the Norv era) anything less than winning the AFC Worst is a total failure.

I happened with the Preds a few years ago. We went into the blackout (or came out of it) fresh of a like 115, 120 point season, I think tops in the league. Sponsor money and ticket sales were through the roof. Lost out in the first round and started sub-par the next few seasons after the team went through a few suitors and potential owners.

Support for the team virtually halted with the "big scares," but now that we know they are here to stay, everything is back to our normal playoff making selfs.
 
Yes, I was a starting MLB for 3 years in HS, I know the game well.

Better than you apparantly:

The "offensive" fumble that was recovered and carried into the endzone by the Cards offense is NOT an offensive score. It is a turnover, and by definition CANNOT be an offensive score, AND is officially not credited by the NFL as an offensive score - check the official stats for the game, you will see there are NO offensive scores for the Cards in that game.

Bottom line, Cards offense did NOT play well (under 200 yards), their defense did to a point.

Gift.

Did they score when the offensive squad was on the field and after the QB ran with the ball towards the goal line?

All that matters to me.
 
The play was over and he could have came over and used his shoulder or just made sure that Cribbs was pinned down and go back to work on the next play.

Over? Not even. Cribbs was hit low, and turned up field to try and break free. His forward progress was most certainly not stopped. Harrison did something any LB in the game would do, come in and finish the play. He dove at Cribbs and that is when they banged helmets.

If you don't believe me, look it up and you will see that Cribbs said the same thing.....Harrison was coming in to finish the play.

This happens 20-30 times a game when a second defender comes in to make a hit so as to stop forward progress.

I'm less comfortable with the Mo hit. Those hits are all about timing, and on that one, Harrison timed it wrong and was overly aggressive. Two seconds later, or if Mo had not gone down the way he did, it's an awesome play to break up a catch. Sometimes you get what we had with Mo.

Yes, I am a Steeler fan, but I would have defended any other LB on both of those hits.

-Mike
 
Call it my own ignorance (having never played the game in H. S. or college, or even wore shoulder pads for that matter), but is getting whacked with a helmet THAT much worse than taking all of a shoulder to the head???

Yes. There's no "flex" in the helmet, whereas the shoulder pads are hinged and designed to diffuse impact by moving; the same hinges also allow the player to move his arms in any direction, but especially upward. The other two dangers are the ground (this is common) and getting a knee jammed into the helmet, which is usually accidental.

I've only ever been concussed once in my life, and it was from being taken backward on a tackle and falling awkwardly straight back so that my head whiplashed into the ground. My friends said I was out for about 20 seconds. I don't remember much about the after effects, though, and I was just a kid at the time.

Secondary to that, It seems to me the tackler is at just as much risk for injury going helmet to helmet as his target, no?

As others have mentioned, when it's just a head shot, the defensive player has time to set his head and neck for impact, which is kind of an instinct. The offensive player's head is usually the one that whips around from the impact. In the case of the Robinson hit, that kind of full body impact can't be braced for. That was ugly and scary, but looked legal.