2019-20 NFL Season Thread

[Gridiron Ernie]

Yes, that is what I've felt too, so far... i.e. the Seahawks' 6-2 record flatters them. Russell Wilson is amazing of course, and a lot of the roster plays real hard, and I've enjoyed the backs (Carson and company) and the receivers (Lockett, Metcalf, et al), but the games tend to be close, and often it's Wilson's heroics that win the day. If, as you indicate, the upcoming schedule sees them up against stiffer opponents, I can see where they might not be in the mix for the playoffs, and if they are lucky to make it that far, I wonder about their defense holding up against whichever top teams are fielding their best against them. There's some formidable teams, as you say, in the NFC, and even in their own NFC West. Thankfully, I can easily transfer my allegiance (such as it is) to Drew Brees and the Saints who will surely be making a noise through January.

[Ballistic Bob]

If not Seattle any NFC team will do in the Super Bowl vs ABTPATS

[Gridiron Ernie]

Interesting development over in Seattle, with them claiming WR Josh Gordon off waivers -- even though the Seahawks were 28th in line. What does that say about a fairly big name player like Mr. Gordon when 27 teams take a pass on him? I suppose it says that he's not consistently ever really lived up to his big name, although he has (or at least had) extraordinary talent . Not even with a stellar team like the Patriots did he shine. His own stellar year was a while ago already though he's still only 28 years old. But I hear tell that Seahawks QB Russell Wilson was lobbying to get him. Heard someone suggest he's not likely seen as being in Seattle to challenge WRs Lockett and Metcalf as primary targets, but more so as a third option time to time when all three are on the field, thereby stretching the field. One has to wonder though if anything much will come of it. If Brady and Belichek can't get him going, can Carroll and Wilson?

[South Pender]

Interesting development over in Seattle, with them claiming WR Josh Gordon off waivers -- even though the Seahawks were 28th in line. What does that say about a fairly big name player like Mr. Gordon when 27 teams take a pass on him? I suppose it says that he's not consistently ever really lived up to his big name, although he has (or at least had) extraordinary talent . Not even with a stellar team like the Patriots did he shine. His own stellar year was a while ago already though he's still only 28 years old. But I hear tell that Seahawks QB Russell Wilson was lobbying to get him. Heard someone suggest he's not likely seen as being in Seattle to challenge WRs Lockett and Metcalf as primary targets, but more so as a third option time to time when all three are on the field, thereby stretching the field. One has to wonder though if anything much will come of it. If Brady and Belichek can't get him going, can Carroll and Wilson?

I think that the decision to claim Gordon off waivers was an easy one for John Schneider and Peter Carroll. They won't have to pay him much for the rest of this season, and if he plays well, they are likely to improve their chances to make the playoffs. If he plays poorly, becomes a problem in the locker room, or goes back to drugs and a suspension, the Seahawks can jettison him with little cost. It's surprising that he wasn't claimed before the Seahawks' turn, but, given the situation that the 'Hawks found themselves in--with him still available--I think picking him up was pretty much a no-brainer. Pete Carroll's coaching methods, as well as his relationships with the players, are very different from Bill Belichick's, so he might just be the coach that can get Gordon playing up to his considerable potential. We'll see. He won't be in the game today, but might suit up next week for the Monday Nighter against the 49ers. After that, the Seahawks have their bye week, and this will give them some time to get Gordon up-to-speed on the offense.

One thing that suggests that Gordon might have some success with the Seahawks is the fact that Russell Wilson is probably the best deep-ball QB in the NFL. This matches up well with Gordon's skill set: he's a big-bodied (6-3, 225) guy with terrific speed (4.40 40), and can be another deep threat alongside D.K. Metcalf. I agree with the view that he's not likely to disrupt Lockett's and Metcalf's positions in the receiving corps, but he's a much better route-runner than Metcalf (who still has a lot to learn and needs to expand his route tree), and if the Seahawks can get the two of them going well together, it should create some real panic in opposing CBs and safeties.

[Robbie]

Nail-biting win by the Seahawks who were probably way too overconfident thinking that they could easily dispatch the 2-5 Tampa Bay Buccaneers at home. But the Seahawks defence allowed the Buccaneers to get a 21-7 lead forcing Russell Wilson to play catch-up football again, and also allowed them to make the game-tying TD late in the fourth quarter. Jason Myers job might be on the line soon by missing two field goals including a game winning one in regulation, and a point after as well. Luckily, the Seahawks won the coin toss to gain first possession in overtime as had the Buccaneers got possession first, they would very likely have scored a TD on their own given the still relatively week defence.

Russell Wilson was outstanding as usual with 5 touchdown passes with no interceptions.

[Ballistic Bob]

Announcers just cant help themseves. Ray Lewis is at the Baltimore game. They forgot he was involved in a double homicide. He paid off the mothers of the young men. I guess that mean hes not guilty. But they keep lauding his football career. Only in America. BB

[TheLionKing]

New England no longer unbeaten

[South Pender]

A win for the Seahawks, but really substandard defensive play. The Seahawks' offense is good, with Russell Wilson having an MVP season, a good ground game with Chris Carson grinding out solid yardage, and a good passing game with Tyler Lockett and D.K. Metcalf racking up big yards--this all happening with an at-best average offensive line, particularly now with Justin Britt lost at center.

The defense, however, is another matter. They are strong at linebacker, with three of the best in Bobby Wagner, K.J. Wright, and Mychal Kendricks, but weak in pass-rushing and particularly at the back end. The 'Hawks are pretty solid against the run, with good inside D-linemen--Jarran Reed, Poona Ford, and Al Woods, and Jadeveon Clowney helping out here too--and excellent 'backers, but are really very poor against the pass. They are not getting the pass rush they'd hoped for from Clowney and particularly Ziggy Ansah, and opposing QBs are having all day to find their receivers. This problem is compounded by (or partly caused by) terrible secondary play, particularly at the safety position. I don't think that this is entirely a personnel issue, but instead partly one of scheme. I'm starting to have doubts that DC Ken Norton Jr. is up to the task of deploying the Seahawks' defensive talent effectively. I think that the Seahawks would be better to have Norton as their LB coach and a more innovative guy as DC. (Maybe they can get Dan Quinn back once he's dumped--seemingly a fairly likely possibility--in Atlanta at the end of the season. This would have to be regarded as a longshot though.)

This weak pass defense was really apparent yesterday, with the Bucs' excellent big WR Mike Evans (6-5, 231 lbs.) running wild in the Seahawks' secondary for 12 receptions and 180 yards receiving. There was just so much open, unchallenged space between the Seahawks' linebackers and secondary that Jameis Winston (definitely not an elite QB) was able to pass for 335 yards. The Seahawks were playing a soft zone defense a lot, particularly early in the game, allowing completions that went unchallenged. I'm somewhat at a loss as to why the Seahawks stay away from man coverages so much (although they went to man more later in the game) in obvious passing situations, and why they leave their base 3 linebackers in so much, without a slot corner nickel back on obvious passing plays. I wonder whether DC Norton is favoring a linebacker-focused D because of his own past as a LB and his previous stints as a linebackers coach with the Seahawks in 2010-2014 and the Raiders in 2015-2017. Or maybe he thinks that a combination of 3 very good LBs and a weak secondary is more effective in passing situations than one with 2 very good LBs and some help for the secondary. In any case, it's not working.

I guess another explanation is that Norton (and Carroll) just don't fully trust their corners, Shaquill Griffin and Tre Flowers, to cover man-to-man a lot (and, let's face it, neither is able to cover the way Richard Sherman did), or their safeties to challenge receivers more, instead lining up the FS back in a single high Cover 1 alignment 10 yards from the LOS . I didn't see much press coverage on the LOS from the corners yesterday, and, although Griffin played reasonably well, Flowers seemed lost on several plays, with Evans yards away from any secondary player and free to make catches on countless plays.

This is surprising on a Pete Carroll team, with Carroll being a specialist re secondary play. I guess there's a chance that the addition of the newly-acquired Quandre Diggs at one of the safety positions will improve the back end, but this may not be enough, and there's no further opportunity to upgrade the secondary via player acquisition.

At this point of the season, 9 games in, I would rate the Seahawks as an above-average, but definitely not great, team. I think that their 7-2 record is very misleading. They might make the playoffs, but it doesn't look like a certainty at this point. They have some really tough games ahead, and a 10-6 or even 9-7 season looks like a distinct possibility, and possibly insufficient to get them in as a wild-card. Carroll and Norton need to revise their defensive schemes and find a way to get to opposing QBs while devising defensive plays that help to overcome their vulnerabilities in the secondary.

Next Monday night against the high-flying 8-0 49ers in Santa Clara will be a very stiff challenge.

[Robbie]

Back at the start of the 2014 NFL season, on another thread I posted this map on the most popular NFL jersey sales by state for the first three weeks of that season.

If NFL jersey sales are representative of the number of fans for that NFL team, then it answered two questions:

1. In the case of a U.S. State not having an NFL team, then we know which NFL team that state roots for.
2. In the case of a U.S. State having two or more NFL teams, then we know which team is the most popular one in that state.

I got quite a few responses, and sj-roc (where is he now?) mentioned that it would be interesting to see the fan distribution within each state. Well, here are some maps created at the start of the 2018 NFL season that shows a much more granular map that shows the NFL fans by U.S. county within each state. It looks like several conclusions can be made from these maps:



In the large state of Texas, there are a lot more Dallas Cowboys fans than there are Houston Texans fans. Outside of the Greater Houston area, most other counties are Cowboys fans. Most of Oklahoma and Arkansas Cowboys fans, and over half of New Mexico are Cowboys fans as well. The Cowboys have the most amount of fans by U.S. County.
------


In the northwest, Oregon is split between mostly Seahawks with a few 49ers fans in the southern counties. Idaho has mostly Seahawks fans, and the western part of Montana are Seahawks fans as well. Not seen in this map, Alaska has mostly Seahawks fans as well. Whereas all of Wyoming and most Utah and central Montana are all fans of the Denver Broncos.
-------


Near the midwest, or most of both Missouri and Kansas, the Kansas City Chiefs are by far the most popular. I suppose after the departure of the St. Louis Rams to LA., the Chiefs took the top spot as it has a lot of fans from Nebraska, Iowa, and even Illinois as well.
--------


In California, the San Francisco 49ers claim the top spot for most counties, with only a few Northern Counties choosing the Oakland Raiders. Only a few counties in Southern California are fans of the LA Rams. And it looks like there's still a lot of affinity from those in San Diego as that's the only county that roots for the LA Chargers. Even a SE county in California roots for the Arizona Cardinals.
In Nevada, it looks like it's split four ways among 49ers, Raiders, Rams, and Cardinals fans.
---------

seatgeek_map_with_logo.png

Finally, the attachment shows the entire map of the lower 48 states and a few more conclusions can be made:

1. The two Dakotas along with parts of Northern Iowa and Eastern Montana have mostly Minnesota Vikings fans.
2. Florida is split evenly between the Dolphins, Buccaneers, and Jaguars with a small exception for the panhandle which roots for the Saints.
3. Mississippi and southern Alabama roots for the Saints.
4. Alabama has more Falcons fans compared to Saints and Titans fans.
5. Kentucky is evenly split between the Titans and Bengals.
6. Ohio is evenly split between the Bengals and the Browns.
7. Illinois is clearly NOT dominated by the Bears fans as there are a fair amount of Colts and Chiefs fans.
8. Virginia is dominated by the Redskins fans while West Virginia is dominated by the Steelers fans.
9. Pennsylvania is split evenly with west by the Steelers and east by the Eagles.
10. New York State shows that most counties have Buffalo Bills fans, and new New York City most of they are New York Jets fans which is very surprising. There appears to be only New York Giants fans in a few counties in northeast New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.
11. Maryland is not dominated by Baltimore Ravens fans as there are a lot of counties that root for the Washington Redskins.
12. Finally not surprisingly, Maine and the other Northeastern States root for the Patriots.

So if there's any general conclusion, it looks like closeness in geography with the home city has the biggest influence with a few outliers.

[South Pender]

Terrific analysis, Robbie. And one that obviously took a lot of effort on your part. As you note, geographical closeness to the home city does seem to be the overriding factor. And I guess that's not surprising, but it is interesting.

After all that work on your part, I hesitate to suggest any more for you, but I wonder whether the geographical closeness to the home city also applies to the distribution of NFL fans by Canadian province. I'm guessing it does, although things might be more complicated. For example, with B.C. fans and so many west-coast NFL teams, are the Seahawks the dominant favorite? And with the geographical size of our provinces compared with that of the US states, there is probably quite a range of favored NFL teams within each province.

Feel free to pass on this analysis, though, as it might be hard to carry out with NFL jersey sales probably pretty sparse in Canada.

[Robbie]

Terrific analysis, Robbie. And one that obviously took a lot of effort on your part. As you note, geographical closeness to the home city does seem to be the overriding factor. And I guess that's not surprising, but it is interesting.

Sure, anytime South Pender.

When it comes to Canada supporting American teams, it may not be as clear cut as there are notable examples. And it could also be different depending on the sports leagues in question in that it's possible to like a team from a particular city, but dislike another team from the same city without any home team biases and I'll provide some good examples.

For example, with B.C. fans and so many west-coast NFL teams, are the Seahawks the dominant favorite?

I think in Greater Vancouver, it's geographical closeness closely followed by the dominance of the team which can override the closeness in certain cases. In the 1980's and early 1990's, the most popular NFL team in Vancouver was the second closest geographical team, the San Francisco 49ers as that team was a dominant powerhouse during that era, while the Seahawks had many pitiful seasons. But with the emergence of the Seahawks around 2005, it looks like they have reclaimed the #1 spot in terms of popularity in Vancouver.

Feel free to pass on this analysis, though, as it might be hard to carry out with NFL jersey sales probably pretty sparse in Canada.

One time, I created a thread about whether wearing sports team apparel is a fan or fashion statement (viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12699). And one notable case of the latter would be the wearing of the then-Los Angeles Raiders jackets in the 1980's and 1990's including in Vancouver. Despite winning Super Bowl XVIII, the Raiders were not nearly as dominant as several other NFL teams but their jackets appeared to be the most popular in Vancouver. Obviously in this case, it was not because they were true fans of the team but rather, it was a macho thing because for the longest time, Raiders team apparel was associated with street gang associations.

After all that work on your part, I hesitate to suggest any more for you, but I wonder whether the geographical closeness to the home city also applies to the distribution of NFL fans by Canadian province. I'm guessing it does, although things might be more complicated. And with the geographical size of our provinces compared with that of the US states, there is probably quite a range of favored NFL teams within each province.

Okay, I'll take you up on that offer and challenge, South Pender. These are just my general thoughts and others are welcome to disagree. For those who have friends and family living in other parts of Canada, perhaps you can ask them which NFL team they root for. Let's see about Canadian provinces and if there's any association with bordering U.S. states in that:

1. If the province borders a U.S. state with an NFL team, do they support that team?
2. If the province borders a U.S. state that does not have an NFL team, then do they share the same preferences on supporting the NFL team that the non-NFL state roots for?

Let's go through the provinces:

1. I've already said that Vancouver and likely Canada supports the Seahawks the most since Washington State borders them in south.

2. Alberta borders Montana which does not have an NFL team. I cannot answer this - are those in Alberta split three ways like those in Montana in that they support either the Seahawks, Broncos, or Vikings?

3. Saskatchewan borders North Dakota and likely have their same preferences, and Manitoba and Western Ontario border Minnesota, so all three areas support Vikings. There are likely a lot of similarities culturally in that they all have extremely cold winters and European ancestry.

4. Both Toronto and Hamilton are just a few hours drive from Buffalo. So are most of them fans of the Bills? Somehow, I don't have that feeling and if they attend Bills games, it's just to see an NFL game and not necessarily to root for the Bills or instead, root for their favourite NFL team who are visiting Buffalo, or perhaps to see an particular individual such as Doug Flutie when he joined the Bills.

5. I cannot answer on the other cities in Ontario so I can only speculate. Those in Sault Ste. Marie may root for nearby Green Bay Packers. And I wonder if it's fair to say that those in Windsor support for all the sports teams in Detroit given the very close proximity separated only by the Detroit River.

6. I believe the Maritimes and Atlantic Canada have the same preferences as neighbouring Maine in that they support the New England Patriots.

7. I'm not sure if I can say the same thing about Montreal and Quebec with regards to the Patriots. One possible team they may root for are the New Orleans Saints given the city's French heritage. One thing I can say for certain is that they don't immediately support the Baltimore Ravens even though their Alouettes franchise has origins from Baltimore - similar to how Montreal didn't seem to be too ecstatic over the Expos legacy when the Nationals won the World Series.

---------

Just a few more thoughts:

1. For Vancouver and NBA teams, I can say for sure that Vancouver supports the Toronto Raptors much more than the closest team Portland Trail Blazers and their legacy Memphis Grizzlies.

2. While Portland and northern Oregon support the Seattle Seahawks according to the map and may support the Seattle Mariners as well, it is certainly not reciprocal as I don't see Seattle supporting the Portland Trail Blazers. Perhaps only the nearby Vancouver, Washington supports the Trail Blazers. I don't see any support the legacy of the Sonics as I don't see fans of Oklahoma City Thunder in Seattle.

3. With all this talk about relocation, can you think of cases in which after a team has relocated to another city the residents of the original city still have a lot of fan support for the team after the move?

Looking at the map, it looks like San Diego still love and support the Chargers after they moved to Los Angeles. But of course, is alleviated over the fact the relocation wasn't too far geographically as San Diego is still relatively close to Los Angeles and fans there can still easily travel there to attend Chargers games. And maybe to a lesser extent San Diego still really like the Clippers after their move Los Angeles in 1984 because that team has always played second fiddle to the Lakers.

[Robbie]

With regards to football of the other kind, for this Sunday's 2019 MLS Cup Final it will be between Seattle Sounders vs. Toronto FC for the third time in four years, with each time winning one but unlike the two previous matches, this one will be held in Seattle.

And as such, I will pose this question for at least the third time.

Vancouver has rooted for Toronto teams especially for the Toronto Raptors in their recent 2019 NBA championships, and have supported the Blue Jays as well when they are in the World Series.

Vancouver has rooted for Seattle teams as well in terms of the Seahawks.

As such, where does Vancouver have their loyalties with if those two cities go head to head? Do you support your Canadian brothers in Toronto or your next door neighbours in Seattle?

[KnowItAll]

With regards to football of the other kind, for this Sunday's 2019 MLS Cup Final it will be between Seattle Sounders vs. Toronto FC for the third time in four years, with each time winning one but unlike the two previous matches, this one will be held in Seattle.

And as such, I will pose this question for at least the third time.

Vancouver has rooted for Toronto teams especially for the Toronto Raptors in their recent 2019 NBA championships, and have supported the Blue Jays as well when they are in the World Series.

Vancouver has rooted for Seattle teams as well in terms of the Seahawks.

As such, where does Vancouver have their loyalties with if those two cities go head to head? Do you support your Canadian brothers in Toronto or your next door neighbours in Seattle?

I never support Toronto in any thing but the CFL

[Robbie]

A relatively older map from 2015 listing the favourite MLS team by Province/State.

It looks like Western Canada including Manitoba chose the Whitecaps.


Very surprisingly the state of Idaho also rooted for the Whitecaps. Perhaps it's because all the Canadians living in Idaho chose the Whitecaps, while the Americans living in that state are split three ways with the teams from the neighboring states of Real Salt Lake, Portland Timbers, and Seattle Sounders.

[Robbie]

Yet, two more fan maps.

This map from late 2016 shows the Most Popular NFL Teams In States That Don't Have One.

https___blogs-images.forbes.com_maurybrown_files_2016_12_nfl-teams-in-states-that-dont-have-them.png

Surprisingly, Maine shows the Pittsburgh Steelers and others in northeast USA show NY Giants, and NOT the Patriots. And the other anomaly shows Nevada shows the Steelers as well. So in this case, it's certainly NOT geographical closeness.

And how about a 2017 map on Mexican States the most popular NFL team?

98k0r81pkmk11.jpg

It looks like geographical closeness only has very a minimal impact and 8 teams were chosen.

It's expected that the Dallas Cowboys are popular given that there's a large border between Mexico and Texas. However, Houston is closer to the border than Dallas is yet no state chose the Houston Texans.

Baja California Norte borders California in the north so as expected, they root the LA Chargers especially when they were based out of San Diego.

Very surprisingly, the state of Sonora borders Arizona in the north but actually support the Patriots and not the Cardinals. At one state chose the 49ers, Broncos, Raiders, and Packers.

And the most obvious anomaly is that many Mexican states chose the Pittsburgh Steelers even though they are not close at all to Mexico. Exactly what is it about the Steelers that has attracted such a huge international Mexican liking? The team is relatively good but so are many teams not listed. Is it because there was an outstanding Steelers player from Mexico? I read that the Steelers have established a contract with a Mexico media company Grupo Imagen, but I'm sure other NFL teams have also contracts with Mexican stations as well.