NFL Week 4 thread

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

RecoveringJournalist

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
6,055
Some pretty good ones this week.

Philly and Chicago can do some serious damage to two of the NFC second tier of favorites.
 
Maybe Bears-Packers will be what everyone expected of Packers-Lions, even though neither team can run or has put together a complete game on offense.
 
Denver, Seattle, Arizona, Cincy are off.

Terrible slate of games. CAR-BAL is slightly intriguing. Maybe PHI-SF.

Will be happy to spend the afternoon at Nationals Park.
 
I'm surprised how bad the Bears and Packers are at running the ball so far.

I'm even more surprised to see the Steelers leading the league in rushing, though that is obviously skewed by the big game Sunday night.
 
In defense of the Bears and Packers, they've each had three matchups against really good run defenses. Matchups are much better for Forte and Lacy moving forward. Starting this week.
 
JackReacher said:
Denver, Seattle, Arizona, Cincy are off.

Terrible slate of games. CAR-BAL is slightly intriguing. Maybe PHI-SF.

Will be happy to spend the afternoon at Nationals Park.

It will be fun to watch Smith against his old team.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RecoveringJournalist said:
Mr. Sunshine said:
I remember the short-lived double byes.

Oh, that was awful. They had some that started incredibly early in the season, maybe Week 2? It was just idiotic.

I look for that idea to come around again. They'll say it's an allowance to all the carnage of the Thursday games, but really it will just be to squeeze out another week of TV revenue.
 
LongTimeListener said:
RecoveringJournalist said:
Mr. Sunshine said:
I remember the short-lived double byes.

Oh, that was awful. They had some that started incredibly early in the season, maybe Week 2? It was just idiotic.

I look for that idea to come around again. They'll say it's an allowance to all the carnage of the Thursday games, but really it will just be to squeeze out another week of TV revenue.

If they go to 18 games, I think they'll have to do that. We'll see if that ever happens though.
 
No I think the 18 games is pretty much dead, but I think an 18-week regular season would be a way to get more from the networks.
 
LongTimeListener said:
RecoveringJournalist said:
Mr. Sunshine said:
I remember the short-lived double byes.

Oh, that was awful. They had some that started incredibly early in the season, maybe Week 2? It was just idiotic.

I look for that idea to come around again. They'll say it's an allowance to all the carnage of the Thursday games, but really it will just be to squeeze out another week of TV revenue.

Those two years when the Browns came back and before the Texans were born, one team actually had a bye in Week 1.
 
Steak Snabler said:
Those two years when the Browns came back and before the Texans were born, one team actually had a bye in Week 1.

I do not remember that. Great nugget.
 
If I'm remembering right, Texans-Bengals were forced to take an early bye a few years back after Reliant Stadium was damaged. Week 2 maybe.
 
poindexter said:
Steak Snabler said:
Those two years when the Browns came back and before the Texans were born, one team actually had a bye in Week 1.

I do not remember that. Great nugget.

Three years, actually (99-01). And some team had a bye every week (obviously). For their first two years back, the Browns had the bye in Week 17. Must have been the league giving it to a team they were pretty sure wouldn't also have one in the first round of the playoffs.
 
Sea Bass said:
poindexter said:
Steak Snabler said:
Those two years when the Browns came back and before the Texans were born, one team actually had a bye in Week 1.

I do not remember that. Great nugget.

Three years, actually (99-01). And some team had a bye every week (obviously). For their first two years back, the Browns had the bye in Week 17. Must have been the league giving it to a team they were pretty sure wouldn't also have one in the first round of the playoffs.

Ah, you're right. I was thinking the Texans were born in 2001, but it was 2002.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top