So we’ve got Cincy and KC for the AFC and SF vs the high-flying Eagles for the NFC.

Any surprises so far? Picks for this week?

I have been completely delighted by the Niners so far, every time the OL takes a beating, the defense steps things up. And every time the secondary has an off day, Purdy has kept pace with clutch 2nd half play. The Cowboys looked defeated the last 10 minutes today even as they had several good opportunities.

Niners are a good team, no doubt, but it was only a one TD (and PA) difference. If Prescott hadn’t thrown those interceptions the game could have easily gone the other way. Purdy’s had a Cinderella several games but you can’t rule out a rookie mistake at a critical moment. So I’ll take Hurts’ experience and pick the Eagles, who were dominant over the Giants.

Burrows is playing very well and Mahomes’ ankle is a big question so I pick Cincy in that game.

The Mahomes injury does change Cinci/KC, but I think KC's defensive front and homefield advantage will weigh heavily in that game.

My preference for a Super Bowl is Cinci/San Fran with San Fran winning, but I think Philly will roll San Fran; they're playing too well and their own homefield advantage will be problematic. Purdy has been good, but Philly is too good right now. I think San Fran lucked out a bit with how bad Dallas' offense was last night (largely due to Prescott and then losing Pollard).

Incidentally, Scooter Macgruder's Cowboys-fans-during-the-game video this week will be epic.

QF7 wrote:

Niners are a good team, no doubt, but it was only a one TD (and PA) difference. If Prescott hadn’t thrown those interceptions the game could have easily gone the other way. Purdy’s had a Cinderella several games but you can’t rule out a rookie mistake at a critical moment. So I’ll take Hurts’ experience and pick the Eagles, who were dominant over the Giants.

Burrows is playing very well and Mahomes’ ankle is a big question so I pick Cincy in that game.

This San Fran team is one of the best teams I have seen in my lifetime watching football. I don't remember the 1985 Bears on the account of being 1 at the time but it looks just as good as those dominant Patriot teams of the last 20 years and even with a 3rd string QB have a good shot to win it all. The Eagles might be ballin' but they haven't faced this defense. I think the Niners win and go to the SB. Line is Philly -2.5

For the AFC I see this as a Pick'em and Vegas agrees opening the line at Chiefs -1.5 which upon checking further is now KC -1.0. I am taking Cinci here especially considering Mahomes's health and how they went into the snow in Buffalo and dominated the game.

So I see Cinci and SF in the superbowl.

StarAC17 wrote:

QF7 wrote:

Niners are a good team, no doubt, but it was only a one TD (and PA) difference. If Prescott hadn’t thrown those interceptions the game could have easily gone the other way. Purdy’s had a Cinderella several games but you can’t rule out a rookie mistake at a critical moment. So I’ll take Hurts’ experience and pick the Eagles, who were dominant over the Giants.

Burrows is playing very well and Mahomes’ ankle is a big question so I pick Cincy in that game.

This San Fran team is one of the best teams I have seen in my lifetime watching football. I don't remember the 1985 Bears on the account of being 1 at the time but it looks just as good as those dominant Patriot teams of the last 20 years and even with a 3rd string QB have a good shot to win it all. The Eagles might be ballin' but they haven't faced this defense. I think the Niners win and go to the SB. Line is Philly -2.5

For the AFC I see this as a Pick'em and Vegas agrees opening the line at Chiefs -1.5 which upon checking further is now KC -1.0. I am taking Cinci here especially considering Mahomes's health and how they went into the snow in Buffalo and dominated the game.

So I see Cinci and SF in the superbowl.

Niners fans have a long memory...the 1986-1990 teams were just incredible to watch. The 1993-95 teams weren't bad either.

As much as I detest the Cowboys, I think if Pollard didn't get hurt, they probably win that game, even with Dak's two picks. Very happy they lost though. Bengals looked awfully good, they just steamrolled the Bills.
I have to go with the Eagles next week in the NFC, they were just so dominant Saturday and playing at home will be a boost. 49'ers have had a really good run but I think it ends next Sunday.
For the AFC, it's a toss-up. If Mahomes isn't 100%, that would tip the balance towards the Bengals. I'm rooting for Cincy, but if I had to wager, I'd probably go with the Chiefs.
Super Bowl......If the Eagles get there I think they win, if it's the 49'ers, then I think whoever the AFC champ is will win.

Aaron747 wrote:

I have been completely delighted by the Niners so far, every time the OL takes a beating, the defense steps things up. And every time the secondary has an off day, Purdy has kept pace with clutch 2nd half play. The Cowboys looked defeated the last 10 minutes today even as they had several good opportunities.

I agree, the epic late 7 minute drive sucked the life out of the Cowboys. The only reason it was interesting at the end was the guy (Mitchell?) who made the 1st down without staying in-bounds. Then the Cowboys showed total malpractice when it mattered the most, the 2 minute drill. Why keep going for 9 yard out-routes? That just ate the clock. If anyone on their sideline did a bit of mental math they would have found there simply wasn't enough clock to score a TD with the time they had to work with doing that. The last play was irrelevant by the time it happened, but even that was botched, even after having a time out SF called to call their best play.

Overall, the 9ers could pretty much run at will on the Cowboys, which is not what most fans expected. I think if the 9ers had run a bit more it would have been a blowout by the 4th quarter.

It is amazing how many examples we've seen this season of teams/coaches who can't run a 2 minute drill, while every dork at home who's ever played Madden is screaming at their TV.

QF7 wrote:

Niners are a good team, no doubt, but it was only a one TD (and PA) difference. If Prescott hadn’t thrown those interceptions the game could have easily gone the other way. Purdy’s had a Cinderella several games but you can’t rule out a rookie mistake at a critical moment. So I’ll take Hurts’ experience and pick the Eagles, who were dominant over the Giants.

Burrows is playing very well and Mahomes’ ankle is a big question so I pick Cincy in that game.

I think winning 8 straight with 2 in the playoffs goes beyond Cinderella. Granted, he is surrounded by top-notch talent, but Purdy is making quick decisions, delivering the ball where it needs to go, and throwing it away when the play isn't there. IMO he's showing remarkable field vision. He also has room for growth.

I've read at least one report out of SF that they've already decided he will start for them next season.

I like your game picks, but both games will be close.

cjg225 wrote:

The Mahomes injury does change Cinci/KC, but I think KC's defensive front and homefield advantage will weigh heavily in that game.

My preference for a Super Bowl is Cinci/San Fran with San Fran winning, but I think Philly will roll San Fran; they're playing too well and their own homefield advantage will be problematic. Purdy has been good, but Philly is too good right now. I think San Fran lucked out a bit with how bad Dallas' offense was last night (largely due to Prescott and then losing Pollard).

I like your picks as well.

I would suggest Dallas's offense has been overrated all season long and is known to choke in the big spots.

Their defense should be called out for not being able to stop the run and dropping a couple of potential INTs as well.

As they say in Texas, they're all hat, no cattle.

QF7 wrote:

Niners are a good team, no doubt, but it was only a one TD (and PA) difference. If Prescott hadn’t thrown those interceptions the game could have easily gone the other way. Purdy’s had a Cinderella several games but you can’t rule out a rookie mistake at a critical moment. So I’ll take Hurts’ experience and pick the Eagles, who were dominant over the Giants.

Burrows is playing very well and Mahomes’ ankle is a big question so I pick Cincy in that game.

That's football though. If a certain player hadn't done this or that then we would have won. You did or didn't and that's why you lost, that's all sports.

We grill some players for errors and not others. Allen threw 2 against Miami and kept the Dolphins in that game. We ridicule Dak and let Allen get a pass, he really shouldn't have got it in their win last week.

Revelation wrote:

Overall, the 9ers could pretty much run at will on the Cowboys, which is not what most fans expected. I think if the 9ers had run a bit more it would have been a blowout by the 4th quarter.

It is amazing how many examples we've seen this season of teams/coaches who can't run a 2 minute drill, while every dork at home who's ever played Madden is screaming at their TV.

This is where I think they have a shot against Philly. A team that can run can control the clock and the ball and make Philly play under pressure.

As for the two minute drill. It's hard to pull off and really only the marquis QB's can pull it off with relative success. Dallas doesn't have a Marquis QB and an average coach at best and like usual Dallas does Dallas things. Miami bungled it last week getting a delay of game on 4th down and missing a wide open Tyreek Hill, but that is was with a 3rd string QB not their starter.

For any Cowboy fans you aren't getting any better until Jerry and his son stop being the GM, bring in football people and shut up and sign the cheques.

Aaron747 wrote:

Niners fans have a long memory...the 1986-1990 teams were just incredible to watch. The 1993-95 teams weren't bad either.

The Bay area and Boston have had the most success in the last 30 years in professional sports for their fans.

StarAC17 wrote:

For any Cowboy fans you aren't getting any better until Jerry and his son stop being the GM, bring in football people and shut up and sign the cheques.
.

This right here. Truer words were never spoken. Jerry needs to step back but his ego won't let him be out of the spotlight.

StarAC17 wrote:

This San Fran team is one of the best teams I have seen in my lifetime watching football. I don't remember the 1985 Bears on the account of being 1 at the time but it looks just as good as those dominant Patriot teams of the last 20 years and even with a 3rd string QB have a good shot to win it all. The Eagles might be ballin' but they haven't faced this defense. I think the Niners win and go to the SB. Line is Philly -2.5

For the AFC I see this as a Pick'em and Vegas agrees opening the line at Chiefs -1.5 which upon checking further is now KC -1.0. I am taking Cinci here especially considering Mahomes's health and how they went into the snow in Buffalo and dominated the game.

So I see Cinci and SF in the superbowl.

Niners are good but are in no way as good as you are saying. They will struggle to beat the Eagles. Cincy is red hot but beating Mahomes is always a chore at home.

If I had to pick I would say Eagles-KC

StarAC17 wrote:

As for the two minute drill. It's hard to pull off and really only the marquis QB's can pull it off with relative success. Dallas doesn't have a Marquis QB and an average coach at best and like usual Dallas does Dallas things. Miami bungled it last week getting a delay of game on 4th down and missing a wide open Tyreek Hill, but that is was with a 3rd string QB not their starter.

I think it's a phenomena of the times that many coaches get the job without being able to do what was once considered a core skill. Brandon Staley is another one who has shown he can't manage it, IMO.

An interesting counter-example: In 2001 Tom Brady had started less than a season when he led the Patriots to their first SB win over "the greatest show on turf" Rams. He certainly was no GOAT back then. He was known to most people as a game manager, a dink-and-dunk guy. Yet if you watch that final game winning drive, the one John Madden said should not have been attempted, he just keeps the pressure on one play at a time with very little wasted time. Not working with elite talent, either. JR Redmond, Troy Brown, Jermaine Wiggins weren't thought of as elite, although IMO Brown should have been at least in the conversation. Granted, they only needed a FG instead of a TD, but the point is, they knew how to execute a 2 minute drill. Their coach made sure they knew exactly what to do since he made them practice it all the time. I know they don't get as much padded practice time these days, but that's no excuse, IMO. You can teach the key skills QB/WR/TE/RB need in five-on-five non-padded drills.

I know I sound like a grumpy old man, but time after time these are shown to be core skills that make huge differences in the critical moments of critical games. If you hire a guy who can't coach and execute this successfully, you're admitting you're not trying to be a Super Bowl caliber team.

And yes, I'm a spoiled Boston sports fan, lol. At least I can say I was a fan long before the Patriots won a SB or the Sox won a WS. I was all in on the 1975 World Series Red Sox team, and they broke my heart. As an adult I can say it's no shame taking the Big Red Machine team with players like Griffey Sr, Bench, Morgan, Rose and Conception to seven games, but as a kid I was heartbroken.

ER757 wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

For any Cowboy fans you aren't getting any better until Jerry and his son stop being the GM, bring in football people and shut up and sign the cheques.
.

This right here. Truer words were never spoken. Jerry needs to step back but his ego won't let him be out of the spotlight.

Dallas is the NFL equivalent to Scuderia Ferrari for anyone who also likes F1.

Jerry hires a yes man as a coach because a talented football mind is going to want autonomy which Jerry never gave to Jimmy Johnson or Bill Parcells. We knew from GB days that McCarthy was a mediocre coach and he couldn't win with Aaron Rodgers and you expect him to win with Dak Prescott?

People actually think that Sean Payton is going to to go to Dallas. Please, he will go to a team that gives him the ability to do what he could do in New Orleans.

Revelation wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

As for the two minute drill. It's hard to pull off and really only the marquis QB's can pull it off with relative success. Dallas doesn't have a Marquis QB and an average coach at best and like usual Dallas does Dallas things. Miami bungled it last week getting a delay of game on 4th down and missing a wide open Tyreek Hill, but that is was with a 3rd string QB not their starter.

I think it's a phenomena of the times that many coaches get the job without being able to do what was once considered a core skill. Brandon Staley is another one who has shown he can't manage it, IMO.

An interesting counter-example: In 2001 Tom Brady had started less than a season when he led the Patriots to their first SB win over "the greatest show on turf" Rams. He certainly was no GOAT back then. He was known to most people as a game manager, a dink-and-dunk guy. Yet if you watch that final game winning drive, the one John Madden said should not have been attempted, he just keeps the pressure on one play at a time with very little wasted time. Not working with elite talent, either. JR Redmond, Troy Brown, Jermaine Wiggins weren't thought of as elite, although IMO Brown should have been at least in the conversation. Granted, they only needed a FG instead of a TD, but the point is, they knew how to execute a 2 minute drill. Their coach made sure they knew exactly what to do since he made them practice it all the time. I know they don't get as much padded practice time these days, but that's no excuse, IMO. You can teach the key skills QB/WR/TE/RB need in five-on-five non-padded drills.

I know I sound like a grumpy old man, but time after time these are shown to be core skills that make huge differences in the critical moments of critical games. If you hire a guy who can't coach and execute this successfully, you're admitting you're not trying to be a Super Bowl caliber team.

And yes, I'm a spoiled Boston sports fan, lol. At least I can say I was a fan long before the Patriots won a SB or the Sox won a WS. I was all in on the 1975 World Series Red Sox team, and they broke my heart. As an adult I can say it's no shame taking the Big Red Machine team with players like Griffey Sr, Bench, Morgan, Rose and Conception to seven games, but as a kid I was heartbroken.

I think with the 2 minute drill the coach has to back the heck off actually. It's the QB's team and he calls the plays and reads the defenses. When its works its similar to friends playing on the field, its very improvised and the best QB's can take it on their shoulders and still fail a lot at it.

When Dallas and My Dolphins messed it up it was the coach doing dumb things and not necessarily the QB messing it up. The rules are simple, don't get sacked and if you are going to throw it inbetween the hashmarks make it a big play. Other than that sidelines only.

Revelation wrote:

I think it's a phenomena of the times that many coaches get the job without being able to do what was once considered a core skill. Brandon Staley is another one who has shown he can't manage it, IMO.

I don't know how on Earth Staley keeps his job. That jabrone has cost his team several games in the past two years with his awful coaching decisions. And yet it was a couple assistant coaches that got fired after this season...makes you question the GM's IQ.

The Bengals have beaten the Chiefs twice now in the past year and wouldn't bet against them this year, especially now seeing how they rolled the Bills. Would be great to see Philly advance to the Super Bowl to play the Bengals, but 49ers game has been strong this year. I am biased, but hope to see the Bengals take it all the way this time for their long-awaited Super Bowl W. Who Dey!

StarAC17 wrote:

I think with the 2 minute drill the coach has to back the heck off actually. It's the QB's team and he calls the plays and reads the defenses. When its works its similar to friends playing on the field, its very improvised and the best QB's can take it on their shoulders and still fail a lot at it.

When Dallas and My Dolphins messed it up it was the coach doing dumb things and not necessarily the QB messing it up. The rules are simple, don't get sacked and if you are going to throw it inbetween the hashmarks make it a big play. Other than that sidelines only.

Yes, the QB has to be the kind that can call the plays, read the defenses, and remain calm under pressure.

Yet also there are other players that need to do the right thing under pressure.

We saw SF make the last two minutes dramatic because Elijah Mitchell didn't stay in bounds. All he had to do was fall down once he got past the first down marker and his team would have had the ball till there were only seven seconds on the clock, but, nope, he ran out of bounds. All Dalton Schultz had to do was to be moving forward and make a bit of contact as he went out of bounds to stop the clock, but nope, he ran straight out of bounds to avoid contact.

I get it, these are mistakes made by the players, but IMO a lot of these happen because the coaches don't practice the end of game scenario enough or don't coach it well enough when they do practice it. I think this because the same teams seem to either excel at it or no excel at it as a unit, so IMO it's not primarily about the QB, it's about the coaching.

I also can say on the Patriots fan forum a lot of the same debate rages on and on: was the Patriots dynasty due to Brady or to Belichick? Those that favor the Brady angle say Belichick makes none of the plays, it has to be Brady. Those who favor Belichick say Brady isn't on the field during defense or special teams and doesn't pick the other players or the coaches nor does he coach them, so it has to be Belichick. Both sides are dug in deep, neither seem to look at the actual interviews where both men are very complimentary about the other man's role.

So, in short, we're probably going to not agree on their roles, but it's OK to have a respectful disagreement.

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

cjg225 wrote:

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

I think a lot of it is about having a winning tradition, and that would give the edge to KC over Cinci.

cjg225 wrote:

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

The NFL really doesn't have a regional draw when the playoffs come around, the other big sports do but not the NFL. Certain rivalries will draw better ratings than the other but the Super Bowl will destroy everything in the ratings regardless of who plays in it.

The only things that might be affected is that people turn the game off if it isn't close but again that is dependent on the games and not the teams.

The matchups that might have brought higher ratings aren't happening as those teams lost yesterday. Those would be KC-BUF and DAL-PHI.

StarAC17 wrote:

ER757 wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

For any Cowboy fans you aren't getting any better until Jerry and his son stop being the GM, bring in football people and shut up and sign the cheques.
.

This right here. Truer words were never spoken. Jerry needs to step back but his ego won't let him be out of the spotlight.

Dallas is the NFL equivalent to Scuderia Ferrari for anyone who also likes F1.

Jerry hires a yes man as a coach because a talented football mind is going to want autonomy which Jerry never gave to Jimmy Johnson or Bill Parcells. We knew from GB days that McCarthy was a mediocre coach and he couldn't win with Aaron Rodgers and you expect him to win with Dak Prescott?

People actually think that Sean Payton is going to to go to Dallas. Please, he will go to a team that gives him the ability to do what he could do in New Orleans.

Revelation wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

As for the two minute drill. It's hard to pull off and really only the marquis QB's can pull it off with relative success. Dallas doesn't have a Marquis QB and an average coach at best and like usual Dallas does Dallas things. Miami bungled it last week getting a delay of game on 4th down and missing a wide open Tyreek Hill, but that is was with a 3rd string QB not their starter.

I think it's a phenomena of the times that many coaches get the job without being able to do what was once considered a core skill. Brandon Staley is another one who has shown he can't manage it, IMO.

An interesting counter-example: In 2001 Tom Brady had started less than a season when he led the Patriots to their first SB win over "the greatest show on turf" Rams. He certainly was no GOAT back then. He was known to most people as a game manager, a dink-and-dunk guy. Yet if you watch that final game winning drive, the one John Madden said should not have been attempted, he just keeps the pressure on one play at a time with very little wasted time. Not working with elite talent, either. JR Redmond, Troy Brown, Jermaine Wiggins weren't thought of as elite, although IMO Brown should have been at least in the conversation. Granted, they only needed a FG instead of a TD, but the point is, they knew how to execute a 2 minute drill. Their coach made sure they knew exactly what to do since he made them practice it all the time. I know they don't get as much padded practice time these days, but that's no excuse, IMO. You can teach the key skills QB/WR/TE/RB need in five-on-five non-padded drills.

I know I sound like a grumpy old man, but time after time these are shown to be core skills that make huge differences in the critical moments of critical games. If you hire a guy who can't coach and execute this successfully, you're admitting you're not trying to be a Super Bowl caliber team.

And yes, I'm a spoiled Boston sports fan, lol. At least I can say I was a fan long before the Patriots won a SB or the Sox won a WS. I was all in on the 1975 World Series Red Sox team, and they broke my heart. As an adult I can say it's no shame taking the Big Red Machine team with players like Griffey Sr, Bench, Morgan, Rose and Conception to seven games, but as a kid I was heartbroken.

I think with the 2 minute drill the coach has to back the heck off actually. It's the QB's team and he calls the plays and reads the defenses. When its works its similar to friends playing on the field, its very improvised and the best QB's can take it on their shoulders and still fail a lot at it.

When Dallas and My Dolphins messed it up it was the coach doing dumb things and not necessarily the QB messing it up. The rules are simple, don't get sacked and if you are going to throw it inbetween the hashmarks make it a big play. Other than that sidelines only.

You are completely correct - if the QB can play the clock and take charge of the drive, that makes all the difference.

Here's the original 2-minute drill by Joe Montana to win Super Bowl XXIII:

https://youtu.be/m7B4JZAiG6c?t=5906

Aaron747 wrote:

You are completely correct - if the QB can play the clock and take charge of the drive, that makes all the difference.

Here's the original 2-minute drill by Joe Montana to win Super Bowl XXIII:

https://youtu.be/m7B4JZAiG6c?t=5906

The ghost of Bill Walsh is mighty pissed off at you right now.

Revelation wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

You are completely correct - if the QB can play the clock and take charge of the drive, that makes all the difference.

Here's the original 2-minute drill by Joe Montana to win Super Bowl XXIII:

https://youtu.be/m7B4JZAiG6c?t=5906

The ghost of Bill Walsh is mighty pissed off at you right now.

Because his team was busy talking about John Candy during the drive? Great fun fact here by Joe Cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMfSKJz6aPM

cjg225 wrote:

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

Niners and Philly are both Big draws. I mean its always Dallas, NY and GB but there are the stats

https://247wallst.com/media/2022/01/20/ ... -and-jets/

cjg225 wrote:

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

Except for Philadelphia is the 4th largest media market in the U.S. What are you talking about. SF ranks like 8th or 9th...
Internationally that's a different story.

PHLspecial wrote:

cjg225 wrote:

I kinda wonder if the NFL would prefer San Fran instead of Philly from the NFC.

If it's a Cinci/Philly Super Bowl that is a very regional game. Neither are big draws beyond their home markets. Obviously, people will watch the game regardless, but there is an element of who's playing that matters. I'd hazard a guess that the Niners are a bigger draw than the Eagles. I think Cinci/KC is a bit of a wash in that respect. Maybe edge to the Chiefs.

Except for Philadelphia is the 4th largest media market in the U.S. What are you talking about. SF ranks like 8th or 9th...
Internationally that's a different story.

The Niners have fans in several states. Hard to say the same for the Eagles.

Aaron747 wrote:

The Niners have fans in several states. Hard to say the same for the Eagles.

Exactly. The Niners have a large appeal across the US because of their history.

The Eagles... not so much.

Teams that have dynastic runs tend to develop fans well outside their home markets.

cjg225 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

The Niners have fans in several states. Hard to say the same for the Eagles.

Exactly. The Niners have a large appeal across the US because of their history.

The Eagles... not so much.

Teams that have dynastic runs tend to develop fans well outside their home markets.

Exactly...when traveling it has been rare to hear ‘I HATE the Niners’ in a bar. Usually it was more like ‘dude that’s awesome, you saw some killer games growing up!’

PHLspecial wrote:

Except for Philadelphia is the 4th largest media market in the U.S. What are you talking about. SF ranks like 8th or 9th...

Counter point: Green Bay is the 69th media market ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... dia_market ), but look at how many Packers fans there are.

It turns out prolonged success attracts fans, regardless of geography.

That created a lot of 9ers fans back in their earlier runs of success (Montana, Steve Young) who became fans when they were young, as adults had kids who often inherited their parent's fandom regardless of geography, etc.

It will become even more pronounced as we finally get rid of Dish TV and Sunday Ticket gets delivered via streaming. In my day it was really hard to be a fan of any team outside the local market. Now it's easy.

The world is simply going to have to cope with all the fans 20 years of success and six rings created for the Patriots. You will be stumbling across people wearing Patriots garb in pretty much every corner of the world for decades to come.

I went to UConn before JC (Jim Calhoun, not Jesus Christ) coached there. I left the state just as the basketball team began to get good. Now, I've seen UConn garb in the strangest of places. When I went to UConn the place was an under-funded state institution, most everyone's "Plan B" school, a school only alumni were proud of. It still startles me when I see some random dude wearing UConn garb.

Fandom is a weird thing.

Revelation wrote:

Fandom is a weird thing.

Which is amongst the many things that makes sports so fascinating.

We were watching something and a commercial for the KC-Cincinnati game came on. It looks like Patrick Mahomes has a different shaped helmet than the other quarterbacks. Like it seems more stretched out over the crown of the head. Has anyone else noticed this?

seb146 wrote:

We were watching something and a commercial for the KC-Cincinnati game came on. It looks like Patrick Mahomes has a different shaped helmet than the other quarterbacks. Like it seems more stretched out over the crown of the head. Has anyone else noticed this?

Yeah. There are a variety of different helmet types out there now. A lot of it comes down to player preference. The design differences are largely different approaches to concussion prevention.

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I gotta say, I think it goes chalk.

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

Revelation wrote:

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I gotta say, I think it goes chalk.

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

I'm not a gambler, so this may be a silly question. The numbers you have in parentheses, what do they mean? I've see those types of numbers when I am watching something on ESPN News and they have betting lines on the scroll.

ER757 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I'm not a gambler, so this may be a silly question. The numbers you have in parentheses, what do they mean? I've see those types of numbers when I am watching something on ESPN News and they have betting lines on the scroll.

I'm not a gambler, I just look at odds to get some idea of public sentiment.

The parenthesis are all about the "money line" bet as opposed to the "point spread" bet.

Here's a good explainer: https://www.wsn.com/betting-guide/how-bet-nfl -- it explains a number of scenarios. Some quotes:

NFL money line bets are one of the simplest form of NFL bets which makes it a great option for beginners. All you have to do is pick which team you think will win a specific game. That’s it. If they win, you get paid. If they lose, so do you. A tie game is called a “push” and you get your money back.
...
Betting the money line on a big favorite isn’t likely to return much profit. On the flip side, a successful money line bet on a big underdog can lead to a big payday.

And:

Here are the most important things to remember when reading American odds on an NFL money line bet:

• The minus sign indicates which team is the favorite.
• The plus sign tells you which team is the underdog.
• The minus sign tells you how much you must bet to win $100 in profit.
• The plus sign tells you how much profit you will win if you bet $100.

The minuses are confusing. All they are saying is the team with the minus is 'giving' to the other team i.e. the team with the minus is favored, a team with the plus is the underdog because they are 'getting' from the other team.

So, "Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)" means if you bet $100 on PHI on the money line and they win you lose $20, or, conversely, if you bet $100 on SFO and they win, you'll win $120. Of course, the betting site takes a commission / 'transaction fee' either way.

It'd be easier if they just listed things with positive numbers, but I think it was all about how table formats were defined at some point in time, so all the odds line up in a column. I think in NFL the home team is always listed first whereas in MLB the home team is second. I could be wrong about this.

As the linked site says, you can bet any number you want, $100 is just used as for convenience, you scale up or down proportionally.

The -2.5 is for the point spread bet. PHI is 'giving' 2.5 to SFO, If you bet that $100 on PHI they need to win by 3 for you to win $100 from the house, and if they win by 2 or less or lose, you lose that $100 you put down. It's an all or nothing scenario, whereas the money line is a percentage scenario. Commissions of course apply in both scenarios.

The house moves the money line and the point spread around to get the same amount of money on each team. If they do this well, the bets cancel out and they keep the commission. Of course anything can happen so the house could lose big or win big. Note that you rarely see any gambling houses go out of business, in essence they always win. This is the main reason I don't gamble, lol.

Sorry if I got any of the above wrong.

Revelation wrote:

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I gotta say, I think it goes chalk.

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

Even as a devout Philly hater, I unfortunately agree. I think Purdy's dream run the last few games ends very, very poorly tomorrow. The Niners have a great defense, but Philly is just trucking teams right now. Philly offense vs. Niners defense will be interesting. Niners offense vs. Philly defense will be pretty one-sided.

The more I think about KC/Cinci the more I think Cinci actually beats KC handily. I had been thinking KC most of the last week, but something tells me Cinci is going to come out strong and keep the pressure on all game.

Revelation wrote:

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I gotta say, I think it goes chalk.

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

Remains to be seen if Mahomes has that breakaway speed after his ankle injury and can get those yards after he is flushed from the pocket. If not Cincy has a chance.

NIKV69 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Picking one site at random, BetMGM, gives us the odds for this weekend's playoffs:

Philadelphia Eagles vs. San Francisco 49ers PHI -2.5 (-120)
Kansas City Chiefs vs. Cincinnati Bengals KC -1.5 (-110)

I gotta say, I think it goes chalk.

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

Remains to be seen if Mahomes has that breakaway speed after his ankle injury and can get those yards after he is flushed from the pocket. If not Cincy has a chance.

My main concern about the Bengals is their O-line. It wasn't great to begin with and now three of the starters are hurt. Hard to believe that Burrow won't be running for his life almost every time he drops back. I don't think Mahomes will be 100% so his scrambling may be limited. Kelce supposedly has a bad back so may not be up to full speed either. This one could be down to which team can limp to the finish line first. My heart is with the Bengals, but if I had money on the game it would be with the Chiefs

Revelation wrote:

I think PHL will beat SFO, perhaps in a rout.

I think KC will beat CIN (and the spread), but there is a decent chance for an upset.

I didn't want to jinx anything, but you were right the birds were gonna be hard to beat. Early injuries suck too. Tough day for Niner fans.

Just to clarify, the -120 means you would need to bet $120 to win $100

Rough day for San Fran, playing without a qb that could throw the ball meant the Eagles had an advantage that even I could have played for them and won.

ER757 wrote:

My main concern about the Bengals is their O-line. It wasn't great to begin with and now three of the starters are hurt. Hard to believe that Burrow won't be running for his life almost every time he drops back. I don't think Mahomes will be 100% so his scrambling may be limited. Kelce supposedly has a bad back so may not be up to full speed either. This one could be down to which team can limp to the finish line first. My heart is with the Bengals, but if I had money on the game it would be with the Chiefs

4 sacks on Burrow in his first 9 drop backs definitely qualifies as running for his life, but cleaned it up since then.

That throw to Higgins just now was filthy.

What a finish. Stupid penalty by Bengals puts KC in field goal range with eight seconds left. Brain-dead play.

scbriml wrote:

What a finish. Stupid penalty by Bengals puts KC in field goal range with eight seconds left. Brain-dead play.

How about Mahomes and Kelce playing hurt and through pain! That was some performance. I still think Philly wins the SB.

NIKV69 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

What a finish. Stupid penalty by Bengals puts KC in field goal range with eight seconds left. Brain-dead play.

How about Mahomes and Kelce playing hurt and through pain! That was some performance. I still think Philly wins the SB.

Yeah, it’s funny how getting paid millions and millions to do your job works like that!

NIKV69 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How about Mahomes and Kelce playing hurt and through pain! That was some performance. I still think Philly wins the SB.

My worst-case scenario these Playoffs... Eagles/Chiefs. Ugh.

And, yeah, I think the Eagles roll KC. They're on fire right now.

I think the 9ers situation was most unfortunate. The injury to Purdy was pretty much the end of their day. It's too much to expect to put in your backup at the conference championship level and gain a victory.

I am presuming Purdy's injury will heal, and if so, it looks like they've found a good starting QB for next season. There was a lot of talk on Patriots fan boards about Brady (finally) becoming a 49er, but IMO it isn't in the cards. I just think his ego and Shanny's would collide. If they won it all together, Shanny would not want the perception to be that he needed Brady to get over the hump, IMO. Since they already went with "the other mf'er" once before, I don't see it happening now.

I think the Chiefs win is tainted. The refs gave KC most of the benefit of the doubt, the Bengals very little. On Twitter #NFLRigged is now trending. When you have two teams well matched at the conference championship level, just a bit of a tailwind makes a huge difference, and KC got that tailwind. On top of that, Romo's relentless ball-washing of Mahomes was disgusting. It's pretty clear who NFL, Inc wanted to win.

I'll have to pick the best of two evils and support the damn Eagles going forward.

scbriml wrote:

What a finish. Stupid penalty by Bengals puts KC in field goal range with eight seconds left. Brain-dead play.

It looks boneheaded in hindsight however if you don't push Mahomes he runs 25 yards down the field and the game is over in the same manner.

Unfortunately for the Ossai Mahomes was already out of bounds and we see the replay a dozens times slowed down and rush to blame the defender. At full speed you are committed to the tackle before he goes out of bounds.

Yes the flag was warranted but the Bengals shouldn't blame Ossai for that hit. When Patrick Mahomes is your opponent you need to play him like that.

Revelation wrote:

I think the Chiefs win is tainted. The refs gave KC most of the benefit of the doubt, the Bengals very little. On Twitter #NFLRigged is now trending. When you have two teams well matched at the conference championship level, just a bit of a tailwind makes a huge difference, and KC got that tailwind. On top of that, Romo's relentless ball-washing of Mahomes was disgusting. It's pretty clear who NFL, Inc wanted to win.

I'll have to pick the best of two evils and support the damn Eagles going forward.

Fly Eagles Fly in 2 weeks!! If any of you watch Nick Wright or listen to him he is going to be insufferable this week even though KC eeked this out he is going to act like they won by 21.

As for the refs they missed a block in the back on the punt return just before the final drive that would have backed up KC much further. However if one call costs you the game then you weren't in position to win regardless. Furthermore 4 years ago Brady got the lamest rushing the passer call I have ever seen and that lets to NE winning in Arrowhead on a similar manner that KC did

From this game I would make a few rules changed.

- 5 yard defensive penalties do not yield a 1st down unless the yards awarded gets you one. I am sick of these 5 yard holding or illegal contact penalties (which you can call on every play) on 3rd and 15 yielding 1st downs. Replay the down at 3rd and 10. No penalties should yield automatic 1st downs
- They need to call intentional grounding more. I don't like QB's throwing at the feet of their TE's and RB's (who are blocking) in the pocket to escape a sack, you need to get out of the pocket to earn the right to throw the ball away. The called one of these against Burrow but they could have called multiple ones on both QB's

StarAC17 wrote:

As for the refs they missed a block in the back on the punt return just before the final drive that would have backed up KC much further. However if one call costs you the game then you weren't in position to win regardless.

I think if you watch the entirety of the game you see the Bengals get called for stuff KC doesn't get called for and KC not being called for lots of things like that block in the back and plenty of offensive holding calls. it wasn't about that one play. I was in an online chat session for the game and so many things were being called out the entire game.

- 5 yard defensive penalties do not yield a 1st down unless the yards awarded gets you one. I am sick of these 5 yard holding or illegal contact penalties (which you can call on every play) on 3rd and 15 yielding 1st downs. Replay the down at 3rd and 10. No penalties should yield automatic 1st downs

The problem is in many cases the defense will have more than five yards to give and will try to get away with holding even more than it already does. If they do get called, so what, they have five yards to give, but chances are they will get away with it more often than not and get off the field.

- They need to call intentional grounding more. I don't like QB's throwing at the feet of their TE's and RB's (who are blocking) in the pocket to escape a sack, you need to get out of the pocket to earn the right to throw the ball away. The called one of these against Burrow but they could have called multiple ones on both QB's

The problem is the lack of consistency. They say they are trying to protect the QB more, this is why they don't call it more, but in a big spot they call it on Burrow. I don't know exactly how the rule is written, but clearly the receiver was in the vicinity, and as you say, this is routinely not called as grounding. And if we're calling everything, how come Clark didn't get roughing for taking three steps at Burrow after he threw the ball and making contact with him?

On a different tangent, I dislike the way PI is being called these days. The defender can have contact with the receiver. The idea is that this lets him both watch for the ball, and know where the receiver is by keeping a hand on him. Yet they are all coached to use that hand to grab the receiver's arm and restrict their ability to move just as the ball is arriving. This often means the receiver can't jump, or he can't rotate into a favorable position. If the receiver does anything to get free of that hold, he gets called for OPI. Basically, almost every close "jump ball" goes to the defense these days. And since PI/OPI cannot be reviewed, they get away with it.

The no call on Mahomes grounding the ball vs the call on Burrow is what really gets me the most. The last Out of bounds hit was so close that if they are going to call it like that, then Mohomes should have been called for grounding earlier.

Oh well. I predict the Eagles win it all.

Revelation wrote:

The problem is in many cases the defense will have more than five yards to give and will try to get away with holding even more than it already does. If they do get called, so what, they have five yards to give, but chances are they will get away with it more often than not and get off the field.

You can call holding on every play if you wanted to.
My gripe is small defensive penalties always yield 1st downs even a 2 yard PI will yield a 1st down. My take is that if the yards gained is not enough to get to the line to gain its not a first down. If that means making defensive holding or illegal contact 10 yards so be it but I am sick of defense being legislated out of the game and a 3rd and 25 becomes a first down for an incidental jersey grab.

Revelation wrote:

The problem is the lack of consistency. They say they are trying to protect the QB more, this is why they don't call it more, but in a big spot they call it on Burrow. I don't know exactly how the rule is written, but clearly the receiver was in the vicinity, and as you say, this is routinely not called as grounding. And if we're calling everything, how come Clark didn't get roughing for taking three steps at Burrow after he threw the ball and making contact with him?

Bingo!!

The biggest problem is the lack of consistency in all sports. An umpire can have a wide or narrow strike zone as long as its consistent, some things in F1 are racing incidents and some are 5 to 10 second penalties (Brazil 2021, cough cough) . If you are going to let them play then be consistent. The problem is that the marquis players always get the calls and the average to good players don't.

I was happy they called in on Burrow and my take is the ball has to be catchable and throwing at the feet is not catchable. From this link below at 30 seconds in the video, This should be a penalty as the receiver had no realistic chance at catching the ball. I saw this many times yesterday.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nf ... grounding/

Revelation wrote:

On a different tangent, I dislike the way PI is being called these days. The defender can have contact with the receiver. The idea is that this lets him both watch for the ball, and know where the receiver is by keeping a hand on him. Yet they are all coached to use that hand to grab the receiver's arm and restrict their ability to move just as the ball is arriving. This often means the receiver can't jump, or he can't rotate into a favorable position. If the receiver does anything to get free of that hold, he gets called for OPI. Basically, almost every close "jump ball" goes to the defense these days. And since PI/OPI cannot be reviewed, they get away with it.

I hardly see OPI being called in games I watch but since you mentioned PI I would have two calls for it.

Incidental contact is 15 yards like it is in college such as grabbing the arm etc. Egregious contact such as hauling down a receiver before the ball gets there or not playing the ball is a spot foul.

Comments on posts above

I agree that 5 yard defensive penalties should not include the automatic first down. I too am sick of seeing a team with 3rd and 20 get a first down for an illegal hands to the face by one of the pass rushers who just happened to have his hand up a little high when engaging the offensive lineman. Give the offense the five yards, replay the down and let them try get get the rest on their own.

The penalty at the end was a bonehead move by the defender, plain and simple. Mahomes was clearly headed out of bounds before that guy got close to hitting him. Who knows, KC might have ended up winning in OT anyhow but we'll never know. Crappy way to have your season end if you're a Bengals fan.

Agree with the poster lamenting Romo's fawning over Mahomes. He has a serious man-crush on him. It does get tiring.

My fearless prediction for the Super Bowl - Eagles by 7