2012/2013 NFL Thread (Fantasy Football Also)

Status
Not open for further replies.
No. I just feel bad about his injury. I'm a Bears fan. I used to like the Seahawks and the Giants, when Alexander and Barber were RBs.
 
Did someone say RG3? :giggle:

1772_4622963364837_1319771135_n.jpg
 
not cool man. shannahan is an absolute jerkoff for starting RG3. possibly ruined his career. ravens proved, once again, that ray lewis can motivate a corpse (joe flacco) to come alive.
vikes got jobbed w/ponder out (yeah. who knew?) b/c their coach kept calling pass plays for a running QB (gj bro).
i'd like to pick GB to come out of the NFC, simply based on rodgers beast ability at QB, but they have NO RUNNING GAME whatsoever.
i'm thinking the SB is denver's to lose this year.
 
mongoose221 said:
not cool man. shannahan is an absolute jerkoff for starting RG3. possibly ruined his career. ravens proved, once again, that ray lewis can motivate a corpse (joe flacco) to come alive.
vikes got jobbed w/ponder out (yeah. who knew?) b/c their coach kept calling pass plays for a running QB (gj bro).
i'd like to pick GB to come out of the NFC, simply based on rodgers beast ability at QB, but they have NO RUNNING GAME whatsoever.
i'm thinking the SB is denver's to lose this year.
Click to expand...
These last few weeks GB has established their running game.
 
This is Manning's time to shine!
 
mongoose221 said:
i actually LOL'd at this man. seriously?
Click to expand...

Seriously. Have you watched how green bays opponents have lined up and handled the play action? We're keeping them honest. Sure we don't have an Adrian Peterson, but we still have it.
 
2fast4u2 said:
Seriously. Have you watched how green bays opponents have lined up and handled the play action? We're keeping them honest. Sure we don't have an Adrian Peterson, but we still have it.
Click to expand...

seriously?
pack were 20th in the league, with about 106ypg rushing
your last few weeks since the bye opponents were:
vikings (playoffs and season finale) 11th in rush defense, allowing 105.5 ypg
titans 24th rush defense, 124.5 ypg
chicago 8th in rush defense, 101 ypg

aside from chicago, all those defenses are awful, MAYBE i can give the vikings a nod for being 11th, but still...
green bay's top rushers those games?

vikings (playoffs) 76 team yards, 2.6 ypc, and harris with 47 yards
vikings (finale) 72 team yards, 4.2 per rush, harris 70 yards
titans (season) 117 team, 3.3 per rush, grant 80 yards
chicago (season) 113 team, 3.5 per rush, green 35 yards


yes i've been watching the games, frankly, i have the packers in the super bowl against denver in my bracket at work (love aaron, dude is a gamer, so is matthews and charles woodson!)
but looking at those stats, i wouldn't call that an "established running game" overall, simply based on the YPC average... 2.6 vs vikings last week with a leader of 47 yards against the #11 run defense?
4.2 the previous week? 3.3 per rush and 117 overall against the 24th rush defense in titans?

i'd say that's not necessarily "keeping them honest" and i'd say that's not "we still have it"

green bay averages about 106 ypg rushing on the season, including some 150+ games padded against trash teams midway through the season... their running game is pretty much nonexistent in regards to a playoff team in my opinion,
but the fact that mr. rodgers is an absolute STUD makes up for that.

again, having said that, i think they are the team to beat in the NFC, because, frankly, rodgers is the best QB in the NFC, and when he's hot, nobody is better currently (except maybe manning)
they're going to have a tough time with SF because the 49ers run defense is so good that they can cheat on the pass. they'll also have a tough time with seattle for that very same reason, although i don't think wilson can get it done in green bay in a road game.
i see them steamrolling atlanta (but i don't see the falcons beating seattle, so thats a moot point)
honestly, as i said, i think if GB gets by SF (gonna be a great game) that they win the NFC, and lose to Denver in the super bowl.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top