NFL Week 3 Gameday Live Discussions

There are a lot of intriguing match-ups this week. It could be another crazy week in the NFL.

Gotta get to the bar, but here goes -

Bills 13
Patriots 27

WE BEAT THE SPREAD!

Oh my God, what the hell are the Eagles wearing?! Oh, well, at least they're playing well.

the Eagles Jersey's are horrid, but the steelers jersey's were worst last week

You know what is ridiculous? one person can jump into the stands to celebrate, but two can't.

I dont know. Those eagles jerseys are pretty damn bad. I think we should set up a poll on that one.

Yea but the steelers would have been fine had they not had yellow helmets. those yellow helmets were god awful. While the eagles were bad, they just reminded me of old rams jearsey's

I don't mind these Redskins one so much.

The eagles jerseys look like something the Ukrainian national women's gymnastics team would wear.

Dear Chuck Bresnihan,

I wish I could hate you to death right now.

You and whatever idiot decided to go for a two-point conversion instead of taking the guaranteed XP at that point in the game. That sort of desperation play rarely works.

Love,

Whodeygal

The NFL is starting off wierd. KC beating Minnesota, Seattle, a pathetic nfc team, beat Cinci, Oakland beat the browns(granted on a nother b.s call the t.o while the kicker is kicking), Giants beat the skins, Chargers loose to the Packs, Rams 0-3.

"What the hell is going on out there!!!"

Seattle is a pathetic NFC team? Did I miss something?

ok so i'm generalizing the NFC. Seattle is one of the better teams. They did impress me the way they played against Cinci. But for the most part I expected Cinci to win. It was still a crazy weekedn

whodeygal wrote:

Dear Chuck Bresnihan,
You and whatever idiot decided to go for a two-point conversion instead of taking the guaranteed XP at that point in the game. That sort of desperation play rarely works.

I think it was the right call. There were only a few minutes left in the game. Being ahead by 4 or 5 is a meaningless difference at that point. A 6 point lead would have been more meaningful as it would have given them an opportunity to block a PAT to preserve a tie. Either way, if you give up a TD (as they did), you are going to need to score again to tie or win. I wouldn't call that play "desperation". Made sense to me.

And besides, who the heck is Bresnahan? If Marvin is delegating that kind of decision to an assistant, he needs to find another line of work. Seems like if you believe a bad decision was made, there is only one person to blame.. the hapless Marvin himself.

KC, Seattle and Oakland were favored and another home team (Packers) won. The Skins are no more than a .500 team, so their losing can't be a surprise, can it? I saw nothing today that surprised me.

Coast2Coast wrote:

I think it was the right call. There were only a few minutes left in the game. Being ahead by 4 or 5 is a meaningless difference at that point. A 6 point lead would have been more meaningful as it would have given them an opportunity to block a PAT to preserve a tie. Either way, if you give up a TD (as they did), you are going to need to score again to tie or win. I wouldn't call that play "desperation". Made sense to me.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. It was an obvious 2-point conversion call that Seattle was more than ready for, and was executed poorly. The Cincinnati offense does many things well; two-point conversion isn't one of them. It never was. As far as the strengths of the offense go, and how successful plays of that nature tend to be for them, I feel that it was a desperation call. Considering the nature of the Cincinnati defense, even a 6-point lead wouldn't have meant jack because they wouldn't have been able to preserve it.

Coast2Coast wrote:

And besides, who the heck is Bresnahan? If Marvin is delegating that kind of decision to an assistant, he needs to find another line of work. Seems like if you believe a bad decision was made, there is only one person to blame.. the hapless Marvin himself.

My annoyance with the conversion call and my annoyance with Bresnihan are two separate things. Chuck Bresnihan is the defensive coordinator, and I find him to be a poor one. As I've said on numerous occasions, I don't think that the issues with the defense are primarily player-related. Our defense shows too many flashes of brilliance to fall into the "happy accident" realm, which leads me to believe it's not all their glaring ineptitude like some folks think. I feel that a large portion of the issue lies with Bres. He doesn't seem to understand the strengths and weaknesses of his unit, and as such, tends to fail at turning them into something cohesive that works well. It's not the talent; if the D was stacked end to end with pro bowlers, he'd still find a way to screw it up. He's just not that good, and I hope that he will be replaced soon.

Anyone else think there are more injuries this year then normal??? I mean the list goes on and on.

Quote :

The Cincinnati offense does many things well; two-point conversion isn't one of them. It never was.

Reminds me for years when this was also a mystery for the Colts.

Not to be too cynical, but it could be a lot of people are cycling off of certain supplements lately in preparation for testing. Thus making them more susceptible to injury.

supermanox wrote:

Not to be too cynical, but it could be a lot of people are cycling off of certain supplements lately in preparation for testing. Thus making them more susceptible to injury.

are you kidding? too cynical? with the way professional sports has been in the last 20 years, there's no reason NOT to be too cynical.

I got confused for a second and thought someone was calling this thread too cyclical.

But all of our threads are cyclical...

And cynical, come to think of it.

I don't know whether injuries are any worse now or not. That's life in the NFL. Some years, injuries are the major factor in which teams win and which teams lose. I think that every running back in the NFL will have a major injury at least once every three years. If a guy has avoided that, he's living on borrowed time. I remember one year, in the 80s, I think, when every Fantasy player in our league had lost almost every RB that had been drafted. Roger Craig of the 49ers might have been the only starting RB in the NFL to go through that season injury free. SI did a major piece on him examining his training regimen to try to figure out what he was doing that the other RBs were not. The Monday waiver wires were wild.

whodeygal wrote:

But all of our threads are cyclical...

And cynical, come to think of it.

Wait a minute... this isn't the Floyd Landis thread. I was lost. Cyclical is no longer funny.