Official NFL Thread: 2014-2015 Season

[notahomer]

I used to work in market research and therefore have less faith in polls than many. (this coming from a guy who recently insisted on posting a poll on NFL overtime )

How a question is framed(worded)? IT MATTERS
Whose answering the question? Sometimes people will say what they think they should
When the poll is placed?

I like these questions just as dialogue starters. For example, an issue like passports. At one point, American citizens were in massive support of requiring all entrants INTO the USA, to have a passport. They missed the important logical point in that concept. IF EVERY PERSON ENTERING THE USA HAD TO HAVE A PASSPORT, that meant if they left the USA, THEY'd NEED A PASSPORT TOO. All of a sudden requiring a passport didn't quite matter so much.

I'm not picking on Americans here either. We'll try to deny it but humans often set higher standards for others to live by without realizing we don't maintain those standards ourselves.

IOW, if offered a chance to slag Goodell many would/will. But who'd be better? There is a better commissioner out there, IMO, somewhere but so what? The commissioner, IMO, is someone who only really needs to care about the owners. IMO, this particular commish, can show and make every effort to accomadate fans and society as a whole. In fact, when it comes down to it he'd better.

[sj-roc]

I used to work in market research and therefore have less faith in polls than many. (this coming from a guy who recently insisted on posting a poll on NFL overtime )

How a question is framed(worded)? IT MATTERS
Whose answering the question? Sometimes people will say what they think they should
When the poll is placed?

I like these questions just as dialogue starters. For example, an issue like passports. At one point, American citizens were in massive support of requiring all entrants INTO the USA, to have a passport. They missed the important logical point in that concept. IF EVERY PERSON ENTERING THE USA HAD TO HAVE A PASSPORT, that meant if they left the USA, THEY'd NEED A PASSPORT TOO. All of a sudden requiring a passport didn't quite matter so much.

I'm not picking on Americans here either. We'll try to deny it but humans often set higher standards for others to live by without realizing we don't maintain those standards ourselves.

IOW, if offered a chance to slag Goodell many would/will. But who'd be better? There is a better commissioner out there, IMO, somewhere but so what? The commissioner, IMO, is someone who only really needs to care about the owners. IMO, this particular commish, can show and make every effort to accomadate fans and society as a whole. In fact, when it comes down to it he'd better.

When I saw that last post from SP about Goodell's Q rating in the crapper, it got me to thinking, he and Bettman should switch jobs. Just for the hell of it. It would be a great change of pace for the beat reporters of both leagues and they'd probably still have plenty to write about.

You mention framing. That is precisely the point of the CFL-positive thread I started: I think our league's coverage could be much better framed.

[South Pender]

All good points, nota. The other thing that we don't know about this poll is who was polled and how many responses underlie the results. One would think that a market research firm hired by SI would be pretty solid, but I'd like to know more about the question posed, the number of people approached to respond, and the response-rate (proportion of those asked who responded). The typical response rate with polls is about 28%, and that can skew results in all kinds of ways.

As for Goodell, I think you're right again. He may look like crap at the moment, but who as Commissioner would have done it differently? Would Paul Tagliabue or Pete Rozelle have undercut the Ravens by suspending Rice for the season? The Commissioner's job is to help the league, the teams in the league, and ultimately the players, to make the whole enterprise a money-making success. Projecting high moral standards may be nice, but it's low on his priority list. I think Michael David Smith is right in noting that unless one of Goodell's actions costs the league and its teams money, they'll stick with him.

Here's Frank Deford's view of Goodell's future. I used to really like Deford's writing in SI, and loved his novel Everybody's All-American--made into a great movie. However, I think he's really off-base in this latest opinion:

Frank Deford says Goodell is now a “ghost”
Posted by Mike Florio on September 24, 2014, 1:51 PM EDT
Deford Getty Images

One of the biggest questions regarding the future of Commissioner Roger Goodell relates to his ability to continue to be the Commissioner. Not in title, but in the day-in, day-out realities of doing the job.

Since Friday’s emergence from hiding via press conference, Goodell attended the Texans-Giants game on Sunday (saying nothing to reporters) and conducted a meeting on Tuesday with 11 former players and executive V.P. of football operations Troy Vincent. But with the Robert Mueller investigation, the Ray Rice appeal, and an NFLPA investigation pending, the full extent of any harm to Goodell’s image, reputation, and legacy won’t be known for a while.

In the opinion of veteran journalist and commentator Frank Deford, the damage already is done.

“I think he moral sway has absolutely evaporated,” Deford said on HBO’s Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel, via SportsBusiness Daily. “He’s a ghost now. I don’t know when he’ll leave but I don’t think he can continue to have any kind of real credibility. I think that the league needs is somebody from the outside. Remember, Goodell grew up in the league. He’s a lifer. He only sees it from a football point of view.”

In recent years, some league insiders have suggested that, as the NFL grows, it will become critical for the league office to search for outsiders with as much or more experience in big business than in football. Whenever the NFL hires a new Commissioner, that could be the strategy.

For now, though, it remains unclear whether a new Commissioner will be hired any time soon. With three different efforts to get to the truth about what the NFL knew and when the NFL knew it, it’s too early to know whether Goodell eventually will go.

It’s also too early to know whether he’ll stay, which makes it prudent for owners to refrain from making conclusive statements about Goodell’s job security until Robert Mueller’s conclusions have been issued.

[South Pender]

Ran across this short piece from USA Today Sports by Mike Foss. It's about Russell Wilson and why Foss thinks he's the best quarterback in the NFL:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/09/seattle ... ell-wilson

I have to admit that Wilson is pretty good for a short guy.

[notahomer]

Ran across this short piece from USA Today Sports by Mike Foss. It's about Russell Wilson and why Foss thinks he's the best quarterback in the NFL:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/09/seattle ... ell-wilson

I have to admit that Wilson is pretty good for a short guy.

HEY, I'm a short guy, IMO. No offence really taken , its why I have always loved the Fluties and Wilson's of QBing. The height thing kinda makes sense but it doesn't too as those two have shown.

i would add though that no one has figured out how to stop Wilson...YET. I love the guy and he's the QB of my favourite NFL team. I just think that someone will find a way to make his job a lot tougher. Part of the problem I feel they'll have doing that is part of the strength of his game, IMO, is being part of making other players better. Lynch is a purrfect example. IMO, that guy would do well regardless BUT having a QB like Wilson only helps his game thereby a strong Lynch makes the range of the things Wilson does effective too.

Its like Kaepernick. The Ravens pretty much said, screw the option, were gonna nail the QB. All of a sudden CK's 'thing' hasn't worked nearly as well as it did that first year, IMO.

However, if a team says 'okay we're taking _______ (insert Lynch or Wilson or passing) away, beat us with something else, IMO, the Seahawks can and will beat you with something else...... Then again, footballs been around long enough that if teams can find a way to at least LIMIT his strengths, Wilson will struggle more....

Thanks for posting that SOuth P, I was ignorant of his success versus the so-called elite QB's. Nice thing is he's got a long career ahead of him too. I mean Manning was a decade in and still hearing "Yah but even your younger brother has a RING, you don't". All of that is out of the way and Wilsons barely started......

[notahomer]

......You mention framing. That is precisely the point of the CFL-positive thread I started: I think our league's coverage could be much better framed.

I got that. I was surprised you'd heard of Frank Luntz. Its not that I agree with his politics (some yes, some no) but its hard to argue with his message about language/framing etc....

I do think you raised an important idea with the CFL -positive thread. I found after I read Luntz's work, I did start spotting examples of it (the Vikings presser being the most recent). I am going to listen a little more closely to what I see,hear and read in terms of CFL coverage and if anything jumps out, I'll share my perspective....

[sj-roc]

......You mention framing. That is precisely the point of the CFL-positive thread I started: I think our league's coverage could be much better framed.

I got that. I was surprised you'd heard of Frank Luntz. Its not that I agree with his politics (some yes, some no) but its hard to argue with his message about language/framing etc....

I do think you raised an important idea with the CFL -positive thread. I found after I read Luntz's work, I did start spotting examples of it (the Vikings presser being the most recent). I am going to listen a little more closely to what I see,hear and read in terms of CFL coverage and if anything jumps out, I'll share my perspective....

I became aware of him when the NHL hired him to spin their PR message during their last lockout and while I haven't read that book (It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear — I think that's the title) I've seen some of its themes discussed elsewhere in reviews and other discussions of his writings. Along with some of my other reading (check Dan Ariely who's written some interesting related stuff as well), it's definitely made me pay more attention to these framing issues. Applying it to the CFL, I think some of the examples from that thread that have gained traction were devised with no thought or care to how they would be received, and I tried to re-shape some of them accordingly. I can almost guarantee you that sometime in the next couple weeks if you watch every game you'll hear references to "small rosters", "only three downs" and "only need one foot in bounds"; constructs that I feel make implicit, almost apologetic comparisons to the NFL (perhaps unwittingly).

[South Pender]

Your talk of "framing" of issues got me to thinking about how language and choice of words can have far-reaching effects. This forum may not be the most appropriate place to raise this, but an article (might have been an editorial) recently in the National Post about how the effort towards gender-neutral writing was wrecking the English language got me thinking about this again (and strongly disagreeing with the author). A long time ago, I came to the realization that the effects on girls and women of masculine-oriented expressions and language were--in very subtle ways--damaging to their self-images and sense of worth. It probably helped to have a feminist wife and three daughters, but I made it a point to write in a gender-neutral way. I edited an academic journal years ago and sent manuscripts with sexist writing (that's how male-oriented language was labeled in my field) back to authors for revision before considering the articles for publication. This pissed off some of the authors, of course, but the gains to be realized from journal publication in a publish-or-perish culture clearly outweighed their qualms about changing a few phrases to gender-neutrality, and all complied. The point you made, sj-roc, about the insidious effect of Americanisms on the appreciation of the Canadian part of Canadian football has been true to a hugely greater extent with masculine-oriented writing and its ever-so-subtle effects on how girls and women have seen themselves in our culture.

Now you guys may well disagree with me on this. The National Post article certainly saw this differently, arguing that expressions like "his or her" "him or her," "s/he," etc., were just abominations that were fouling up the language. And it's true that such expressions are clumsy and less elegant than using the single male pronoun in each case (although often sentences can be recast, perhaps using plural pronouns, so that the flow and style are unaffected). But to me it gets at what we value the most (and this touches a little on your preference, sj-roc, for economy of expression). Is keeping the language pure (for lack of a better word) more important than allowing 50% of our population to feel equal? And to those who say that masculine-oriented language has no effect on the psyches of women, I have to say you're wrong. It's very subtle, but the effect is there.

This post is a long way from football, and for this I apologize. I was thinking of writing a letter to the editor of the National Post after reading this call for defense of the language, but was too busy. This post will have to do.

[notahomer]

I'd have to disagree South P but not based on your comments content. What I disagree with is you feel it may be far away from football. Look at the clusterbomb the NFL is going through, in small part due to these kinds of issues.

I work in a field (mental health care services) where there are a lot of these issues and an ever-evolving language/jargon. As a kid I thought changing the wording for the Alderman/Councillor thing sounded stupid but that was because a loud voice of complaints about change swayed me without realizing there are changes that need to be made. I think words like Police Officer (Police Man) etc... are proof of how far we have come but STILL HAVE SO FAR TO GO.

I grew up in a house with three sisters. I never learned how to leave the toilet seat up. A lot of the maleness in my friends houses just wasn't prevalent in my families house because I was the only male around most of the time (my step-dad strongly supported feminism and was at work 50+ hours a week). I wonder sometimes if thats why I enjoy football so much, simply because it was so male.

But I'm glad its not so male anymore. Those football 101 and 202 clinics. Before the renovations (they moved after being at Empire) I sat near long time season ticket holders who go as group of friends (who happen to be females) to enjoy football. Its nice because sometimes they had questions but usually their football knowledge was bang on.

I do try to be careful about language. SOme may laugh but I have avoided the term 'dogfight' ever since I heard the Michael VIck contreversy. Dogfight was a word my friends and I have always used around football, but it was and REMAINS a term I am uncomfortable using based on what I heard about those issues. I have no problem that Vick is back in the NFL etc..., I just have trouble based on what occured......

[South Pender]

Could be a decent game tonight. Giants at Washington. Here's the preview:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409250 ... ab=preview; Odds: Washington by 3.5

It's surprising to see Washington favored given their performance in recent years, but this season's team seems to be fairly solid so far. Both teams come in at 1-2, but Washington has looked better. The Giants looked just awful in their first two games, but got it together last Sunday when they beat the Texans at MetLife. I think it will be interesting to see how Washington decides on their starting quarterback when RGIII is back and ready to play. RGIII played reasonably well in their first game (a loss to Houston), but Kirk Cousins has really stepped up and played very well, averaging 339 yards/game, with a passer rating of 105.8. A lot of Washington fans want Cousins to remain the starter, but that's hard to imagine, with all the hoopla surrounding the drafting of RGIII, his play in his first year, Dan Snyder's personal friendship, etc. Should be interesting times in D.C.

[South Pender]

Week 4 NFL Power Rankings:

1. NFL.com (Elliot Harrison): http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... kers-slide

2. SI.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... kers-slide

3. ESPN: http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings

4. CBS Sports (Pete Prisco): http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/powerrankings

5. Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fanc ... er-week-3/

6. SB Nation: http://www.sbnation.com/2014/9/23/68283 ... s-steelers

7. USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/rankings/

8. Bleacher Report (3 sources): http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2208 ... nd-the-web

9. Pro Football Talk: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ankings-5/
_________________________________________________________________

Considerable difference of opinion in these rankings. Different criteria, I guess, or just seeing the same thing differently. Most notable: Bengals now near or at the top in all rankings; Chargers near the top; Cardinals steadily rising. My own view is that the Bengals being a top-echelon team may be a mirage that will dissipate later in the season. Same with the Chargers. The Cardinals, though, may be for real. There will be a real fight for 1st and 2nd in the NFC-West.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Week 4 NFL Picks:

1. CBS Sports: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/features/w ... aight-up/4

2. ESPN: http://espn.go.com/nfl/picks

3, NFL.com (Elliot Harrison): http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... -get-to-22

4. SB Nation: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/9/24/6 ... gles-49ers

5. Bleacher Report: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2208 ... ed-spreads

6. USA Today Sports: http://q.usatoday.com/2014/09/25/week-4-nfl-picks/

7. Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fanc ... best-bets/

8. Pro Football Talk: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... r-picks-5/

[notahomer]

Could be a decent game tonight. Giants at Washington. Here's the preview:......

It wasn't, IMO. As someone who prefers the Giants, I quite enjoyed the drubbing that Washington team took. A lot of it will be laid upon the shoulders of Cousins. As Simms was saying on the telecast, it was a bit early to start planning RG3's exit considering the body of work shown by Cousins so far.

I think the other part, which really shouldn't matter, is the invested cost in RG3. I say it shouldn't matter because the Washington team needs to pick the best QB regardless of what they've invested. After tonight, a lot less people will be saying Cousins but again, as Simms noted, if he didn't deserve the job based on what he's done so far, does he deserve NOT TO EVER have the job based on ONE NIGHT?
_________________________________________________________
As a person who is not a big fan of Kaepernick (just being upfront) I am enjoying some of the questioning now whispering in the background. Do you blow a large percentage of your cap space on a QB thereby limiting your options for both him and his teammates to succeed? Now it hasn't happened yet. I, and Kaepernicks detractors have not seen him fail and/or not have the tools he needs, perhaps in part to over-paying him (which I feel the 49ers did and I'm glad they did). I don't HATE the guy, I just think players like him (RG3, Wilson for e.g.) have brought a new wrinkle to defences that teams are still struggling with. When defences adapt, with Kaepernick be playing in the NFL at the rate he's being paid now? IMO, Wilson will turn out to be the best of these guys long-term but if I have to eat some crow on that one down the road, okay.....

I don't want to see the Seahawks lose Wilson but hopefully the Flacco deal and others like it will remind teams that although QB is a CRUCIAL position, that doesn't mean you need to tie up a large part of your cap on one player. A LOT of money is going to be spent on the QB position anyways but I hope its not to the detriment of the rest of the team........
____________________________________________________
Lots of chatter regarding the Mega-Man of Madison aka Richard Sherman. Certainly can't complain he's not getting his share of attention and sponsorships now. I've seen lots of advertisements starring the 'greatest'. Since he's on a bye this week he's going to be in-studio on CBS's pre-game stuff on Sunday. I know its happened before, but as a Seahawks fan its nice to see their players getting their time in the big lights. Some QB's have gotten that kind of attention simply because they play in New York or Dallas.

[South Pender]

Yeah, it was a debacle. Cousins absolutely stank: 4 interceptions and 1 lost fumble. Can't get much worse than that. Eli Manning, on the other hand, looked like a polished, elite quarterback out there, passing for 300 yards and 4 TDs and completing 72% of his passes. I was really surprised--thought it would be the other way around. The clamoring for Cousins as starting QB in Washington has suddenly really quieted down. There was talk this past week that the starting QB job was Cousins' to lose. He may have lost it. But, as you say, nota, the decision shouldn't center on one game. Fun times ahead in D. C. Couldn't happen to a nicer team.

Here's the recap:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409250 ... e=boxscore

Also, this about Washington fans irate at Phil Simms for pledging not to use the Washington team name (although he did slip up once tonight):

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/09/re ... ts-10.html

[notahomer]

Also, this about Washington fans irate at Phil Simms for pledging not to use the Washington team name (although he did slip up once tonight):

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/09/re ... ts-10.html

Well I did mention how it sounded from my point of view in the Washington team name thread

I admire him. I think he was tactful and didn't bring too much attention. Yes, he did slip up but still just backtracked and restated his point. Of the parts of the game I heard, he did fine, IMO. At the same time I'm sure he's used to getting flack from Washinton fans, as an ex-NFC-east QB.

For the Washington (I had to retype that I started RE... ) fans, Simms used the other name lots in a preview of the game I watched this morning on the NFL network......

[South Pender]

Previews of Week 4 NFL games with odds:

Sunday, Sept. 28, 10:00 a.m. PDT:

Dolphins vs. Raiders (in London): http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=analyze; Odds: Dolphins by 3.5

Packers at Bears: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Packers by 2

Bills at Texans: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Texans by 3

Titans at Colts: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview: Colts by 8

Panthers at Ravens: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Ravens by 3.5

Lions at Jets: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Lions by 1.5

Buccaneers at Steelers: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Steelers by 7.5

Sunday, Sept. 28, 1:05 or 1:25 p.m. PDT:

Jaguars at Chargers: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Chargers by 13

Eagles at 49ers: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; 49ers by 5

Falcons at Vikings: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409280 ... ab=preview; Falcons by 3

Sunday, Sept. 28, 5:30 p.m. PDT:

Saints at Cowboys: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409281 ... ab=preview; Saints by 3

Monday, Sept. 29, 5:30 p.m. PDT:

Patriots at Chiefs: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201409290 ... ab=preview; Patriots by 3.5

Byes: Cardinals, Bengals, Browns, Broncos, Seahawks, Rams

In my opinion, the best games should be the Packers at Bears (early) and Eagles at 49ers (afternoon). Both should be doozies.