Running 2006-07 NFL Playoffs Thread

[Oz]

I'm just waiting for Salisbury to go with the Ravens this week. You know he's going to.

 

[BYH]

I'm just waiting for Salisbury to go with the Ravens this week. You know he's going to.

hahaha he did.

****!!!!

 

[lantaur]

I wonder why the NFL has the Saints-Eagles on Saturday and the Seahawks-Bears on Sunday. Since Philly played Sunday and Seattle on Saturday, wouldn't it have made sense to have them play on the same day again next week ....(as they did with the AFC)? Just askin'.

 

[BYH]

Because Fox can go ape**** about N'awlins and how the Saints HAVE CURED A CITY (please ignore our skyhigh murder rate) in primetime.

 

[Oz]

Because Fox can go ape**** about N'awlins and how the Saints HAVE CURED A CITY (please ignore our skyhigh murder rate) in primetime.

Well, that simply goes along with N'awlins being its old self again.

 

[lantaur]

Because Fox can go ape**** about N'awlins and how the Saints HAVE CURED A CITY (please ignore our skyhigh murder rate) in primetime.

Do the networks set the dates/times or the league? I thought it was the league (although I'm guessing in conjunction with the networks).

 

[Angola!]

I don't think the Seahawks are a big TV draw and the fact is the Bears lack name talent, so I am sure they went with the Saints in Saturday night prime time because of the New Orleans angle and because of Brees and Bush.

 

[GB-Hack]

Because Fox can go ape**** about N'awlins and how the Saints HAVE CURED A CITY (please ignore our skyhigh murder rate) in primetime.

Do the networks set the dates/times or the league? I thought it was the league (although I'm guessing in conjunction with the networks).

I think both have a say, but the NFL wants the game that's going to do a big number to be in primetime because they can then point to it and the ad revenues when contract time comes.

 

[lono]

Salisburtardy just picked the Bears. Is that a plus or a minus?

Just stay far away if he asks to show you pictures on his phone.

 

[outofplace]

haha I don't dislike the Seahawks. Are you confusing me with SteelerSportsJournalists.com?

Edit: Dye makes a good point about the first game. But that was a LONG time ago. The Bears were pretty healthy and Grossman was bursting with confidence. And Alexander wasn't himself. Of course, he wasn't himself last night either.

I know last week's Packers game meant nothing, but geez, the Bears looked awful. Hopefully the two weeks off will right the ship, but I'm not convinced.

Honestly I was confusing you with SteelerSportsJournalists.com and BearSportsJournalists.com, oh well.

For some reason I thought Dye was talking about the first playoff game, but he is right the Seahawks played like absolute crap in that first game against the Bears. I just think this week will be different because of the time of year and the playoff experience the Seahawks have.
Seattle also should have Jackson and Hackett back on offense to go with hopefully Trufant on defense.

Once again, SeahawksSportsJournalists.com showing they can't keep things straight.

Signed,
SteelersSportsJournalists.com

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Your team is still on the sidelines, fanboy. Comparing across seasons won't change that.

Maybe if your team had drafted a good QB and developed him, or had drafted better than marginally for its defense, or not fired its coach every year for a 3-4-year stretch, or had signed any impact free agents, you might have something.

Fanboy #2 jumping in - this is absurd. First, they signed Henson when he was still considered by many a top QB prospect - it didn't work out. They gave Campo longer than I would have, he wasn't very good and seemed fine with mediocrity, and Parcells was a clear upgrade. Theire drafting on defense has been in the B/B- range, I'd give their drafting a similar grade.

 

[Columbo]

Revised picks:

Ravens-Colts: Ravens
Chargers-Pats: Chargers
Saints-Eagles: Saints
Bears-Seahawks: Seahawks

I'm down on the Bears as much as anyone, but what did you see from Seattle that makes you think they have a chance? Alexander doesn't look nearly as good as he did last year, Seattle struggled against a pretty bad Dallas D, and were it not for a lucky slip, the Cowboys are advancing.

Not to mention Seattle was at home. That o-line blows.

I just think Grossman finds a way to lose that game.

The hype machine is whirring away.

Maybe. But in addition to Grossman, that defense did nothing to inspire confidence in the last three weeks.

I hope the Bears win, I like Grossman, but I'd pick the Seahawks. And hey, I was 3-1 this weekend. Every dog has his day, howwwwl.

Good news for the Bears: The long-term forecast for Chicago shows sub-freezing temps and a "wintry mix" for next Sunday.

I saw the Seahawks win in the snow this year, but not the Bears.

 

[Columbo]

I wonder why the NFL has the Saints-Eagles on Saturday and the Seahawks-Bears on Sunday. Since Philly played Sunday and Seattle on Saturday, wouldn't it have made sense to have them play on the same day again next week ....(as they did with the AFC)? Just askin'.

NFL had Dolphins play the late Sunday game in Seattle in 2000. Then the NFL had them play the early Saturday game in Jacksonville.

That record for playoff travel combined with shortness of prep time will never be matched.

 

[Trey Beamon]

Just because I love to post pad...

Ravens-Colts: Ravens
Chargers-Pats: Pats
Saints-Eagles: Saints
Bears-Seahawks: Seahawks

 

[Angola!]

haha I don't dislike the Seahawks. Are you confusing me with SteelerSportsJournalists.com?

Edit: Dye makes a good point about the first game. But that was a LONG time ago. The Bears were pretty healthy and Grossman was bursting with confidence. And Alexander wasn't himself. Of course, he wasn't himself last night either.

I know last week's Packers game meant nothing, but geez, the Bears looked awful. Hopefully the two weeks off will right the ship, but I'm not convinced.

Honestly I was confusing you with SteelerSportsJournalists.com and BearSportsJournalists.com, oh well.

For some reason I thought Dye was talking about the first playoff game, but he is right the Seahawks played like absolute crap in that first game against the Bears. I just think this week will be different because of the time of year and the playoff experience the Seahawks have.
Seattle also should have Jackson and Hackett back on offense to go with hopefully Trufant on defense.

Once again, SeahawksSportsJournalists.com showing they can't keep things straight.

Signed,
SteelersSportsJournalists.com

I blame the refs.
Seriously, there are only two of us so it is hard to get SeahawksSportsJournalists.com confused.

 

[cougargirl]

Just because I love to post pad...

Ravens-Colts: Ravens
Chargers-Pats: Pats
Saints-Eagles: Saints
Bears-Seahawks: Seahawks

Ravens-Colts: Colts
Chargers-Pats: Chargers
Saints-Eagles: Saints (and not just for sentimental reasons.)
Bears-Seahawks: Seahawks

 

[DyePack]

Revised picks:

Ravens-Colts: Ravens
Chargers-Pats: Chargers
Saints-Eagles: Saints
Bears-Seahawks: Seahawks

I'm down on the Bears as much as anyone, but what did you see from Seattle that makes you think they have a chance? Alexander doesn't look nearly as good as he did last year, Seattle struggled against a pretty bad Dallas D, and were it not for a lucky slip, the Cowboys are advancing.

Not to mention Seattle was at home. That o-line blows.

I just think Grossman finds a way to lose that game.

The hype machine is whirring away.

Maybe. But in addition to Grossman, that defense did nothing to inspire confidence in the last three weeks.

I hope the Bears win, I like Grossman, but I'd pick the Seahawks. And hey, I was 3-1 this weekend. Every dog has his day, howwwwl.

Good news for the Bears: The long-term forecast for Chicago shows sub-freezing temps and a "wintry mix" for next Sunday.

I saw the Seahawks win in the snow this year, but not the Bears.

I saw Daughtry's CD on the shelves.

 

[Angola!]

Is it supposed to snow in Chicago on Sunday?

 

[Angola!]

To answer my own question, weather.com says 36 for a high and 18 for a low with rain. Looks like it will snow west of Chicago, but not in Chicago.
Plus, I would be a lot more concerned with Grossman attempting to throw in the the snow than Hasselback.

 

[DyePack]

Your team is still on the sidelines, fanboy. Comparing across seasons won't change that.

Maybe if your team had drafted a good QB and developed him, or had drafted better than marginally for its defense, or not fired its coach every year for a 3-4-year stretch, or had signed any impact free agents, you might have something.

Fanboy #2 jumping in - this is absurd. First, they signed Henson when he was still considered by many a top QB prospect - it didn't work out. They gave Campo longer than I would have, he wasn't very good and seemed fine with mediocrity, and Parcells was a clear upgrade. Theire drafting on defense has been in the B/B- range, I'd give their drafting a similar grade.

Then they rode with Henson far longer than they should have. He couldn't even beat out Vinny. Then they tried to force him into a game with a short half-week of preparation against a strong defense.

For a stretch, they changed a coach whenever the snow flew in north Texas.

The drafting for the defense has failed to shore up weaknesses, allowing teams to throw nearly at will and to run at opportunistic times.

Oh, and they could have taken Stephen Jackson instead of Julius Jones.