Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Sports Discussion Boards => Topic started by: body88 on March 12, 2010, 02:59:59 PM
-
TBD TBD vs Bengals :o
TBD TBD vs Bills
TBD TBD vs Colts :o
TBD TBD vs Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD vs Jets :o
TBD TBD vs Packers :o
TBD TBD vs Ravens :o
TBD TBD vs Vikings :o
TBD TBD @ Bears
TBD TBD @ Bills
TBD TBD @ Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD @ Lions
TBD TBD @ Steelers :o
TBD TBD @ Jets :o
TBD TBD @ Browns
TBD TBD @ Chargers :o
-
nope
2008 steeler schedule
afc south, nfc east, and games against the chargers and pats
E
-
Nah. I'm not a believer in "strenghth of schedule," till after the season. You never how teams are going to play during the upcoming season.
-
I agree. Strength of schedule really doesn't hold much weight in today's NFL. Every team has talent and every team can beat you on any given Sunday. It comes to down to play calling, execution, and luck with injuries over the course of the regular season. IMO.
-
TBD TBD vs Bengals :o
TBD TBD vs Bills
TBD TBD vs Colts :o
TBD TBD vs Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD vs Jets :o
TBD TBD vs Packers :o
TBD TBD vs Ravens :o
TBD TBD vs Vikings :o
TBD TBD @ Bears
TBD TBD @ Bills
TBD TBD @ Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD @ Lions
TBD TBD @ Steelers :o
TBD TBD @ Jets :o
TBD TBD @ Browns
TBD TBD @ Chargers :o
Too ez for Dallas!!!! We'd go 19-0
-
Too ez for Dallas!!!! We'd go 19-0
Or 10-6.
-
Nah. I'm not a believer in "strenghth of schedule," till after the season. You never how teams are going to play during the upcoming season.
You're right. Judging by the information we have in front of us right now, barring how things might play out, would you rank said schedule as the toughest you've ever seen? I would.
-
I agree. Strength of schedule really doesn't hold much weight in today's NFL. Every team has talent and every team can beat you on any given Sunday. It comes to down to play calling, execution, and luck with injuries over the course of the regular season. IMO.
Hey buddy. If it's not to much trouble, review the post above and let me know what you think.
-
No trouble at all.
It looks like a brutal schedule on paper. But any one of those teams could suffer a huge falloff in 2010. It's about time the Pats played a tougher schedule anyway. ;D
-
TBD TBD vs Bengals :o
TBD TBD vs Bills
TBD TBD vs Colts :o
TBD TBD vs Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD vs Jets :o
TBD TBD vs Packers :o
TBD TBD vs Ravens :o
TBD TBD vs Vikings :o
TBD TBD @ Bears
TBD TBD @ Bills
TBD TBD @ Dolphins >:(
TBD TBD @ Lions
TBD TBD @ Steelers :o
TBD TBD @ Jets :o
TBD TBD @ Browns
TBD TBD @ Chargers :o
Actually, this would be the toughest schedule I've ever seen:
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD vs Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
TBD @ Ravens
;D
-
You're right. Judging by the information we have in front of us right now, barring how things might play out, would you rank said schedule as the toughest you've ever seen? I would.
If we're basing it on last season's results, then yes it's a tough schedule. Not sure I'd say it is the toughest I've ever seen. I don't think the league is as good today as ten or twenty years ago. Parity sucks.
-
Or 10-6.
Or 12-4 Good enough
-
If we're basing it on last season's results, then yes it's a tough schedule. Not sure I'd say it is the toughest I've ever seen. I don't think the league is as good today as ten or twenty years ago. Parity sucks.
Strongly disagree, bro. The NFL is better than ever. The players today are light years ahead of the players in the 60's 70's, 80's, and 90's, athletically. 10-20 years ago the same 6 teams won the Superbowl every season. The NFL has no choice but to have parity, considering how much better the players are and with revenue sharing that even the small market teams receive. Free agency, too.
-
If we're basing it on last season's results, then yes it's a tough schedule. Not sure I'd say it is the toughest I've ever seen. I don't think the league is as good today as ten or twenty years ago. Parity sucks.
why?
because your 49ers were winning super bowls and contending every year?
E
-
why?
because your 49ers were winning super bowls and contending every year?
E
Bingo. From 1981 to 1998, the 49ers pretty much contended every season. That's a long stretch of time.
-
Bingo. From 1981 to 1998, the 49ers pretty much contended every season. That's a long stretch of time.
Yeah the 80's were pretty much Frisco and Washington. Dallas went dead and no where after losing the NFC's to the Eagles, 49ers and Wash.
-
Strongly disagree, bro. The NFL is better than ever. The players today are light years ahead of the players in the 60's 70's, 80's, and 90's, athletically. 10-20 years ago the same 6 teams won the Superbowl every season. The NFL has no choice but to have parity, considering how much better the players are and with revenue sharing that even the small market teams receive. Free agency, too.
You're talking about the advances in the athlete. I agree today's athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster. I'm talking about team quality and quality play. Like the NBA, I think the high quality teams and exceptional team play has declined. It's due in large part to free agency and the salary cap.
The fact more teams can compete doesn't mean they're playing better football. For example, there might be one or two teams from the past season that could compete with the Cowboys and Niners of the late 80s/early 90s. We won't see teams like that anymore.
-
why?
because your 49ers were winning super bowls and contending every year?
E
Partly. :)
-
why do people always think that teams from the past would beat teams from today?
for example how does jordan and pippen's bulls defend against a prime shaq or duncan? people always seemed to be biased towards the teams they grew up with, they almost seem offended when you go against the teams from "in my day", the bulls never faced teams as good as the lakers and spurs of this decade
why won't we see teams like that anymore? the pats won 3 super bowls and their best team went 18 -1, that 2007 team would beat anybody in history if both teams were at full strength
i don't see how anybody can think there was better football in the 80's and 90's, it was too predictable back then, not as bad as the nba but still i don't remember being surprised by any super bowl winner, aside from denver beating green bay
i don't know why anybody would want to see the same exact teams each year contending, unless it is your team and your 49ers were a contender every year hence your argument :)
E
-
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, I tend to believe what I see. The Celtics with Bird, McHale, the Chief, and DJ were as good or better as any team in the NBA today. Same is true of the Lakers with Magic, Kareem, and Worthy. They were more fundamentally sound. They played better team ball. And they had multiple Hall of Fame players on their teams. (I hate the Celtics.)
Regarding the NFL, it's not just about me being a Niner fan. I absolutely hate the Cowboys. Despite my hatred, I can see that Aikman, Smith, Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and the O-line is/was one of the greatest teams in NFL history. Better than most of what we see today.
-
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, I tend to believe what I see. The Celtics with Bird, McHale, the Chief, and DJ were as good or better as any team in the NBA today. Same is true of the Lakers with Magic, Kareem, and Worthy. They were more fundamentally sound. They played better team ball. And they have multiple Hall of Fame players on their teams. (I hate the Celtics.)
Regarding the NFL, it's about me being a Niner fan. I absolutely hate the Cowboys. Despite my hatred, I can see that Aikman, Smith, Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and the O-line is/was one of the greatest teams in NFL history. Better than most of what we see today.
so how does having one dominant team for a few years mean the entire league is better?
E
-
so how does having one dominant team for a few years mean the entire league is better?
E
I don't really think the entire league is better. Because of the salary cap and free agency, there are more "good" teams in the league. It's probably more accurate for me to say the upper echelon teams were better. They were also more entertaining.
But this is all a matter of opinion. Some fans like to see a lot of mediocre teams fighting it out. I like to see loaded teams playing at the highest levels. Doesn't have to be my favorite teams either. That's why I hate the salary cap.
-
I don't really think the entire league is better. Because of the salary cap and free agency, there are more "good" teams in the league. It's probably more accurate for me to say the upper echelon teams were better. They were also more entertaining.
But this is all a matter of opinion. Some fans like to see a lot of mediocre teams fighting it out. I like to see loaded teams playing at the highest levels. Doesn't have to be my favorite teams either. That's why I hate the salary cap.
more entertaining how? the ball is thrown much more today, you thought running the ball was more entertaining? you thought 50 - 10 super bowl scores were entertaining? more entertaining personalities?
how were there more "loaded" teams? two teams won multiple super bowls this decade, two teams won multiple super bowls in the 90's, i think 2 did in the 80's
i think there's a lot less bad teams nowadays, i don't see how that is a negative
i just think the 49ers lack of success today is clouding your judgment, you didn't notice that most teams and fans realized they had no chance when the season started in the 80's and 90's
people have this bad habit of thinking the past was the "good ol days" but as a 49ers fan it's understandable :)
E
-
more entertaining how? the ball is thrown much more today, you thought running the ball was more entertaining? you thought 50 - 10 super bowl scores were entertaining? more entertaining personalities?
how were there more "loaded" teams? two teams won multiple super bowls this decade, two teams won multiple super bowls in the 90's, i think 2 did in the 80's
i think there's a lot less bad teams nowadays, i don't see how that is a negative
i just think the 49ers lack of success today is clouding your judgment, you didn't notice that most teams and fans realized they had no chance when the season started in the 80's and 90's
people have this bad habit of thinking the past was the "good ol days" but as a 49ers fan it's understandable :)
E
lol. You really want it to be true. :) I can't help you there. All I can do is give you my opinion. Spin it however you choose.
Regarding your questions, throwing the ball doesn't make a game entertaining to me. Seeing terrific athletes perform as a team at the highest level is entertaining to me. That's why I could appreciate a fullback like Moose, even though I hated him. That's why watching Montana was so nice. He was the best QB to ever play the game IMO. Seeing him and the greatest WR to ever play (Rice) play together was incredibliy entertaining. Just like it was entertaining to watch the Dallas offense play at its highest level.
Like I said, I don't really care to see fewer bad teams, or more average teams battling each other. Just a personal preference.
-
I wish the schedule was out yet or at least the preseason schedule. The NFL spends all this time at some dumb meeting babbling about satuff and usually my owner or Al Davis says something to piss everyone off. All this takes place before they decide on :who plays who when? I need to know so I can make my travel plans early.
-
lol. You really want it to be true. :) I can't help you there. All I can do is give you my opinion. Spin it however you choose.
Regarding your questions, throwing the ball doesn't make a game entertaining to me. Seeing terrific athletes perform as a team at the highest level is entertaining to me. That's why I could appreciate a fullback like Moose, even though I hated him. That's why watching Montana was so nice. He was the best QB to ever play the game IMO. Seeing him and the greatest WR to ever play (Rice) play together was incredibliy entertaining. Just like it was entertaining to watch the Dallas offense play at its highest level.
Like I said, I don't really care to see fewer bad teams, or more average teams battling each other. Just a personal preference.
what was so special about moose, he would've been forgotten if not for playing on a super bowl team
there have been a few offenses better than those cowboys
the rams during their time, the 07 pats etc
stop dwelling on the past :P
E
-
what was so special about moose, he would've been forgotten if not for playing on a super bowl team
there have been a few offenses better than those cowboys
the rams during their time, the 07 pats etc
stop dwelling on the past :P
E
Moose was special because he was an outstanding fullback and contributed to a lot of Smith's and Aikman's production.
The greatest show on turf was pretty impressive for a couple years. The 07 Pats were awesome.
I'm not dwelling. Just talking about it. :)
-
Moose was special because he was an outstanding fullback and contributed to a lot of Smith's and Aikman's production.
The greatest show on turf was pretty impressive for a couple years. The 07 Pats were awesome.
I'm not dwelling. Just talking about it. :)
Yeah Dallas hasn't had a MOOSE in years. The current FB Deon Anderson usually misses blocks so Witten has to lead block.
-
Yeah Dallas hasn't had a MOOSE in years. The current FB Deon Anderson usually misses blocks so Witten has to lead block.
Yep. They don't make a lot of good fullbacks anymore. A dying breed, especially with the use of the spread so much.
-
Lorenzo Neal is the greatest FB off all time, if you ask me. He blocked for over 7 different 1000 yard rushers. A natural leader and a guy who could blow up a linebacker in the hole even as he entered his late 30's.
I really wish he could have gotten a Superbowl ring, because he deserved one. The closest he came was on the Ravens 2008 team.
Tony Richardson for the Jets is still playing at 38 and still kicking ass.
-
Lorenzo Neal is the greatest FB off all time, if you ask me. He blocked for over 7 different 1000 yard rushers. A natural leader and a guy who could blow up a linebacker in the hole even as he entered his late 30's.
I really wish he could have gotten a Superbowl ring, because he deserved one. The closest he came was on the Ravens 2008 team.
Tony Richardson for the Jets is still playing at 38 and still kicking ass.
They're definitely in the conversation. I'd put Moose, Rathman, and Strong up there too.
-
Wasn't Kevin Mack (Browns) a fullback, too?
-
Lorenzo Neal is the greatest FB off all time, if you ask me. He blocked for over 7 different 1000 yard rushers. A natural leader and a guy who could blow up a linebacker in the hole even as he entered his late 30's.
I really wish he could have gotten a Superbowl ring, because he deserved one. The closest he came was on the Ravens 2008 team.
Tony Richardson for the Jets is still playing at 38 and still kicking ass.
Weaver wasn't so bad either.
-
They're definitely in the conversation. I'd put Moose, Rathman, and Strong up there too.
Rathman was the best ever fullback even I'd put him an inch above Johnston