Dappa Dan

Amazing. Damn Phillies lose to the World series champs two years in a row... Well done STL... Grr.

I picked a good side to follow. Both the Giants and Cowgirls have huge history and animosity. Regularly play unbelievable game. And the Miracle at New Meadowlands last year, I was in a Hooters in the states for it. In the top3 things I've ever seen in sport. And changed my sport following life, for sure. This week? Or recent weeks? Stuff like that has been going on all year. Returned punts and kickoffs, picks, odd fumbles. OCs and DCs seem to be calling weird plays and setting up their lines in new and crafty ways instead of sticking to an old faithful scheme. Scores and yards are all up on average. not sure whether it's necessarily a good thing, but it's definitely not boring. Not true actually. They've been playing quality, but unlucky football. Vick is in the top five for all purpose yards. McCoy is the best RB in the league in most stats. The OL is coming together. The only really bad thing is defending the run. The guys to blame are the offensive and defensive coordinators. The schemes were awful up until two weeks ago when they FINALLY changed things and tightened up the OL. Since then Vick and Celek have been killing it, and everyone respects them again. They're now 1st in the league for offensive yards and rushing yards, and their D is somewhere in the middle. They were always gonna take 4-6 weeks to get it together with an interrupted off season and a LOT of new names in the side. What they've done though is make good honest hard work their main course of action, and right now many regard them as the team to beat in the NFC east, even though they're two games off the Giants. In fact, on form, if Philly beat the Bears (4-3) and Cards (1-6)... and the Giants lose to the Patriots (5-2) and 49ers (6-1)... then when these two sides face each other in 3 weeks it could VERY likely be for favouritism for the division. As well you should be. It's unbelievable. A few weeks ago everyone had them in the top 4 sides in the comp. At the time I thought, yeah right, but boy have they ever proven themselves. The next best side in their division is a full 4 games behind them. They are more or less ALREADY playing for a 1st or 2nd seed. Your coach is a nutcase, but just the right kind of nutcase for NFL footy. Colts not looking too far off it. :D Would be a nice thing, going from Manning who's about 73 years old, to Luck.

Pumped. If Eagles lose they're done for the year. So I hope they win, even if only to keep the division interesting. On the other hand, If they do win, that'll put the Giants up by 2 games, with a bye against Miami this week.

Holy freaking [censored].... That would have to be one of the great World Series games ever wouldn't it? Great call by Joe Buck. See you all tomorrow night.

What it the hell is going on in the NFL? Marino's 5086 yards in a season record not only looks like being broken, but it looks like being broken by 3 different guys? I keep expecting Brady and Brees to have a bad day somewhere along the line... but Rodgers, with 20 TDs through 7 games... nothing can stop that guy. Even the rookie Newton is averaging enough to get around the 4500 mark in a season, which is to say nothing of his running ability. Wow...

Good post. Colts and Miami. You would think both sides would stampede towards Luck. You might even find that one or the other might be offered a deal they can't refuse, though. Henne actually didn't look awful before he got hurt (though I saw him live last year, and he was deplorable)... And Manning is, well, Manning. Both sides might consider trading it on for a raft of picks and good players. I can. They've been relatively competitive here and there. Yup. There's a reason everyone had them coming back up the standings this year. It's all about that OL, isn't it... and by extension OC. When you first start watching the game it's about the big plays, QBs etc... then after a while you love pulling apart the line of scrimmage, and following the elephants on parade. The Rams will be ok next year, and will have a number of years where they look good. That's what's great about the NFL in any given season, the team is always a maximum of 3 years away from turning things around.

Check the stats. For some reason Luck had slightly better stats in all the major passing categories (he's continued his great form this season, hasn't dropped momentum at all) but lost the Heisman to Newton, who is an out and out phenom. Fins fans have started the "suck for luck" movement... :D Should send them our way for some advice. I couldn't help but think that, yeah. They're not as bad as they're showing though.

Yeah what the hell happened to that guy? I thought that wasn't a bad signing given you have the best RB in the league. McNabb can hustle, when in doubt. Give him a bit more time, he's not nearly as bad as he's shown. My Eagles have been a disgrace though. This Wide 9s malarkey, can't stop the run, Mick the [censored] Vick throwing picks... Can't believe the Lions and Bills... And the Pack are miles ahead of everyone.

I cant get into the link... Am I too late?

Iggles did ok... but meh... you don't learn too much. Vick barely played... Jackson wasn't sighted, and Maclin wasn't around. We didn't even start our main running back. Why? OOOOOH!!!! Can I come? You stay the hell away from me DL7...

I love the idea, considering we have the blue-chip midfield we've always wanted as demons fans since... well... since I've been alive... I don't hate the Sydney model whete they just keep recruiting big forwards as they peter out in their careers... but they pick them up from clubs that are having trouble with delivery from their midfields. I like the White one. Though I'm not sure he has as much upside as we would perhaps need. The Fev one I'm warming to, and I'll tell you why. I really think that the AFL, over the space of the next 20-30 years will get more and more like the NFL. In their game, they recruit players from absolutely anywhere, and at older ages than you would think. They're certainly not as youth obsessed as we are. If you had told me about a player who had great form in the VFL, had developed late, kicked big bags regularly, and had found improvement you didn't know was there.... I'd have given serious thought to giving him a rookie spot. If you told me he'd won a couple of Colemans I'd be jumping at it. It's really only the peanut factor that makes me question it, as it is with everyone. I think all in all if you plan to use him for 15 games in the year at least, and you're SURE he'll behave, then go for it. But if he's only on the list as a get-out clause, like what Campbell is now... then forget it. Not worth poisoning the list if you're not going to get 30 goals from him. The main aspect I like about recruiting players for 1-2 years is that you don't get left with a Newton situation. We keep going for these massively speculative picks... because that's how you recruit young KP players. If you want a good one, you have to use a first round pick. And with recruiting being as it is, usually they end up in the first few picks. All in all, I'd rather us offer a couple of years to an out of contract free agent-type player, while allowing Jack to stay in his spot, than to go for some NQR youngster that asks for WAY more money than he's worth.

Mick the [censored] is the reason I follow the NFL now. Watching him from a Hooters in Miami monster the redskins, and then create the miracle at the new meadowlands... One of the most amazing things I've seen in sports. Maybe not quite the best footballer in the NFL, but I reckon the best overall athlete.

Phillies looking dominant. A lazy 9 in the 8th...

That's awesome. Hence this year where we play Chicago Bears, Atlanta Falcons and Seattle Seahawks as all won their divisions, as did the Iggles... So we play both our division rivals twice (6 games), then everyone from the NFC West once (4 games), everyone from AFC East once (4 games) and then, as you say, the winners of the two remaining divisions of our own conference (NFC division champions Bears and Falcons = 2 games)... I like it. Makes my head hurt, but I like it. Kind of like a complicated seeding program there, where the best play the best every year. The more I see it, the more it makes our own scheduling look amateur.

I don;t watch so much of it... I catch up over the net though.

Alright yank sports fans... Is there going to be a season this year? Tentative word is, yes...

As with the NFL, I follow Philly... I can't believe we landed Lee in the off season. Makes no sense at all. The more I think about it, the more it seems they're like the Collingwood of American sports. Small place to the north of the most important city... Parochialism and love of the common man has turned them into a powerhouse in football. And the Phillies have had little success for many, many years, but are now one of the favourites for the world series, and have been for the last 3-4 years. Love me the big 4, Doc Halladay, Hamels, Lee and Oswalt. Not bad closers and set-up guys in Madson and Lidge. But it's our offence that has me worried. When you don't address your issues, they multiply... and we've had injuries, and can't hit to save ourselves. We only have the second best record in the MLB because of our league-best pitching rotation. 45, what are the big 4 sports? NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL? NFL has now probably taken over Cricket as my second favourite sport. Baseball's a fair way down the list though. Ok sport, lots to think about, but the inequity is frustrating, and the length of the season, while not something they'll ever change, is just too much. I only start really thinking about it after the all-star game. Maybe when they get to the last 3-40 games of the season, when magic numbers start appearing on the standings.

Great game, and great win by the Pack. They deserved it on the day... though probably not through the season. Can't wait for next season. Jeez what a tough comp eh?

Bah... watch out for the Eagles in Philly... And the whole team has just had a lovely week off too...

Wouldn't be difficult though, would it?

Naah.... The tie -breaking procedure is like 12 steps long, and ends (with identical records) in a coin toss... The only steps that really matter are, in order: 1: Head-to-head (win-loss-tie record between the two teams) 2: Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division. 3: Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games (games played against the same opponents) 4: Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference. After that it gets into complicated things like percentage in victories, and amounts of touchdowns. The first ones are the ones to keep an eye on. In the Rams/Seahawks one, both teams are on 3-2 in their division. If the Rams win they'll be 8-8, and Seahawks will be 7-9... easy. But if the Seahawks win, both sides would end up 8-8... both teams will have won once each against each other (Rams earlier this season, Seahawks this week), and their division records would be: Rams 3-3, Seahawks 4-2... That last stat being the tiebreaker. Exciting stuff.

Actually they'll be on .500, since they have to beat the Seahawks to get in. It's amazing though. If that doesn't usher in some change, I don't know what will. Imagine if they somehow beat the Saints/Falcons in week one?!

My worst fear came true in the first play. The OL has been going really well all season, but in recent weeks has been overwhelmed by the Giant's amazing pass rush, and now the Vikings who have a respectable defence. The league now has the information they need to get at Vick. I worry... especially with defenders dropping like flies. He's an amazing football player, Mick the [censored], but if they don't go nuts recruiting guards and tackles next season I'll be worried. Reid came out and said that if he had to play today he couldn't and that he's unlikely to play on the weekend. Which is good. That is essentially our bye now. So if we want to get to a superbowl, we'll have to beat one of the Packers, Giants or Buccaneers at home... then go on to beat probably Bears then Atlanta away... Tough call.

Yeah, but there really isn't a system to fix this. At the heart of the problem is the fact that the worst sides NEED the picks the most... You can fiddle with the system all you like, but it'll always be exploited. The closest thing I've seen to a fix is the lottery system in the NBA. And even that is HORRIBLY unfair when the team who came last doesn't get the #1 pick. IMO, having gone as badly as we have the last 3 years, I think a draft system with compensation pick etc is actually working a lot better than people claim. I don't think we tanked, by definition. We certainly did everything within the rules to get those first picks, but it's not like the players ever kicked the ball backwards deliberately. I'm almost certainly in the minority, but the fact we've had something to cheer for for the last 3 years (the draft, ie the future) is what's kept me sane. It's not perfect, and no system will be no matter how complicated you make it... but this is doing it's job. Look at our list. :D

The Wildcard part is actually the GOOD part. The conference system itself (Wild Cards aside) is what's messed up. I can't believe one team that's 6-8 will get there. It's actually an embarrassment. It did? That'd be a first. So the season is 16... that's 6 games between you and your division rivals... then you'll play all the teams from 2 different divisions... and those two divisions are selected from both conferences. After that, there's two more games selected, though I don't know how they're selected. So for example, for the Eagles who are in... 6 vs NFC East teams. These are the big ones. 4 X NFC North teams. That's a Division in the Eagles' own conference. 4 X AFC South teams. That's a division OUTSIDE the NFC's conference. These are SLIGHTLY less important, as you're unlikely to need a tie breaker where your record against these teams matters. 2 X games against one team from the remaining two divisions. So the only two divisions in the Eagles' conference they haven't played are NFC South (Falcons) and West (49ers). As with most of these suggestions for fixture changes, there's an immediate merit to it. But then, a season isn't 11 games long. It's a marathon. If, say, we won our first 6 games... then went badly at the end of the year, I'd feel jibbed. Also... if you think it'll make the end of the season better, it'll almost certainly make the start of the season less important. Teams will be trying harder at the end of the year when their situation becomes clearer, and taking their foot off the gas at the start of the year. As with most of these suggestions, the league will only change them when MADE to... Like when new clubs come in. I love the idea that it'll stay a final 8, even though that's less than half of the teams in the league.