NFL: The Final Four

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 11, 2004
23,173
5,636
146
I was hoping for a SB1 rematch. It'll be a goddamn shame if we don't get a proper Mahomes/Rodgers matchup. I think people would have looked forward to that as much as the Elway/Favre 97 game.

I don't even know what to think of the Chiefs. For the talent they have, it seems like they should be better. Crazy to say when they win 38-24 against a very good if not great Buffalo team, but that's the thing, you see how good they can be in a single quarter, and it feels like we've never seen them play that way for an entire game, honestly even for more than a single quarter in an entire game (that's not to say they play bad multiple quarters a game, but they've repeatedly shown the ability to score 3-4 TDs in a quarter, regardless of conditions or opponent - hell they've done it more against better quality opponents than not).

This will be Mahomes chance to beat Tom for once.

Eh?


Oh I see someone already pointed it out.

You know, I forgot about that since the Pats won the SB.

On a side note, when was the last time a SB bound QB in his last contractual year didn't get said contract renewed after winning the SB? It is one thing to now renew a QB's contract if he failed miserably, repeatedly got into the playoffs and failed, or pulled a 1990-1993 Bills fiasco. But after winning the ring 6 times the franchise decides the QB on call ain't being called no more? And they really felt at the time that 'anyone' they could get was a better option? NE may be my team, but even I can recognize stupid when they fall off said tree.

I'm guessing you forgot about a lot since the Pats last won the Super Bowl. Yet you can't be bothered to remember how poorly Tom fit with the Pats in 2019?

I don't think the Pats thought they'd find someone better than Tom, just that shrewd Billy boy didn't want to pay Tom market value for such a QB given his age and the talent he'd have and was looking to rebuild while not dragging out a "will he or won't he" situation. Move on, let Tom move on.

Brady's not dogshit but he's also not the QB he once was (which is to be expected and isn't a knock no matter how some of you fucking pricks take it), but the Pats don't have nearly the offensive talent that the Bucs do, so acting like it would've been similar results if he'd stayed in New England is you just being delusional. If you're such a Tom fan you should be happy that Bill didn't squander the end of his career by trying to force him into that situation, while being happy that you still have Bill who is basically guaranteed to keep your team competitive as long as he's there.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,782
2,685
136
Tom Brady dashed my hopes of THE STATE FARM BOWL. It would have been meme spam on Twitter.

Burn Tom Bundchen, Burn.

Funny, but the American public(especially men) got "introduced" to Gisele far earlier than Tom because he was too busy playing the game to catch his future wife in those Victoria's Secret commercials that aired during the Super Bowl.
 

BUTCH1

Lifer
Jul 15, 2000
20,433
1,769
126
So close. Coincidentally, the Chiefs beat the Bills in the AFL Championship to get to that Super Bowl.
McDermott is a talented coach and he will make roster tweaks to help the Bills down the road, the lack of any running game hurt them last night, (outside of Allen's runs of course). I don't see anyone in the east having enough to seriously challenge the Bills in the immediate future.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,782
2,685
136
McDermott is a talented coach and he will make roster tweaks to help the Bills down the road, the lack of any running game hurt them last night, (outside of Allen's runs of course). I don't see anyone in the east having enough to seriously challenge the Bills in the immediate future.
Jets and Miami are no slouches. Jets are a consistent 6 win team that underperformed this year, possibly on purpose. Saleh got "fire" and they have assets.

Teams are going to film room Josh Allen extra tightly this offseason and try to "figure him out".

Belicheat is gonna "suck" but still rattle off 6-8 wins.

Oh, and that injury to Beasley? A prelude. He's got maybe one more truly good year in him.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
McDermott is a talented coach and he will make roster tweaks to help the Bills down the road, the lack of any running game hurt them last night, (outside of Allen's runs of course). I don't see anyone in the east having enough to seriously challenge the Bills in the immediate future.

You take it back...now.... Them Fins are coming for the division crown next season... <crossing fingers>
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
We'll see, I like the direction Flores has them heading, wonder if they'll keep Fitz?.

As a long time suffering Fins fan, I was very surprised to see how well Fins were doing this season. I am still "iffy" about Tua's size and endurance/injury. We will see next year, hero or zero on him.

I would keep Fitz if I am the team's management for another year or two for Tua to grow and just in case of emergency.
 
Last edited:

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,301
10,800
136


It would help if GB were to focus on building the REST of the team beyond Rogers & Crosby. I'm still not sure what the Packers were thinking with the poor lines they put together for the 2020 team.

And sorry Packers fans but I'm also not sure why anyone thought this team was good enough overall to win a Superbowl barring something weird like Mahomes going down in the 1st quarter. (and that might not have been enough)

Without solid line play on both sides of the ball AND a consistent running game you are not likely to win a championship in the NFL and the Packers don't have either one.
 
Last edited:

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,318
2,344
136
It would help if GB were to focus on building the REST of the team beyond Rogers & Crosby. I'm still not sure what the Packers were thinking with the poor lines they put together for the 2020 team.

And sorry Packers fans but I'm also not sure why anyone thought this team was good enough overall to win a Superbowl barring something weird like Mahomes going down in the 1st quarter. (and that might not have been enough)

Without solid line play on both sides of the ball AND a consistent running game you are not likely to win a championship in the NFL and the Packers don't have either one.
This is mostly wrong. Say what you will, but Green Bay's management put together a team that was clearly good enough to reach the Super Bowl. Whether they would get trounced by Mahomes' Chiefs is another story, so I'll concede you that point.

They were an offensive juggernaut with an All-Pro RB (and 2 good backup rushers), and a slightly above-average defense. The O-line has a top-flight center and someone regarded as the best LT in the game (unfortunately injured before the playoff run). In the salary cap era, it's hard as fuck to put together a SB winning team. For the Packers, this team is as well-constructed as they've had since 2011.

If you rewatch the game, there are a lot of different takeaways such as LeFleur and the puzzling FG decision (hint: this didn't matter much). What you seem to have missed is that the Bucs have the NFL's TOP rushing defense, and expectedly took away the rush. But most critically, Packers CB Kevin King LOST that fucken game all by himself. He was involved in play after play that ruined the team's chances, despite everything else that happened in the game. I don't know how well King played in the regular season, but he was listed as questionable before the NFC champ game. Unfortunately for the Packers, he played the whole game and was horrible (he gave up the first Evans TD, the awful pre-halftime Miller TD, and blatantly clutched on the game-sealing PI). I'm sure this is recency bias, but I don't ever recall an NFL CB getting torched so badly in a game and not being benched.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,782
2,685
136
GB lost their left tackle, which clearly put a limit to their O.

GB always looked fundamentally weak besides their O. They had a penchant for falling asleep for an entire quarter.

And since the organization already moved in the direction of divorce, they weren't really planning on competing for a Super Bowl....
 
Reactions: Captante

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,301
10,800
136
This is mostly wrong. Say what you will, but Green Bay's management put together a team that was clearly good enough to reach the Super Bowl. Whether they would get trounced by Mahomes' Chiefs is another story, so I'll concede you that point.

They were an offensive juggernaut with an All-Pro RB (and 2 good backup rushers), and a slightly above-average defense. The O-line has a top-flight center and someone regarded as the best LT in the game (unfortunately injured before the playoff run). In the salary cap era, it's hard as fuck to put together a SB winning team. For the Packers, this team is as well-constructed as they've had since 2011.

If you rewatch the game, there are a lot of different takeaways such as LeFleur and the puzzling FG decision (hint: this didn't matter much). What you seem to have missed is that the Bucs have the NFL's TOP rushing defense, and expectedly took away the rush. But most critically, Packers CB Kevin King LOST that fucken game all by himself. He was involved in play after play that ruined the team's chances, despite everything else that happened in the game. I don't know how well King played in the regular season, but he was listed as questionable before the NFC champ game. Unfortunately for the Packers, he played the whole game and was horrible (he gave up the first Evans TD, the awful pre-halftime Miller TD, and blatantly clutched on the game-sealing PI). I'm sure this is recency bias, but I don't ever recall an NFL CB getting torched so badly in a game and not being benched.


I picked Tampa in the NFC Championship and if you refer back to my posts, I've been saying the same stuff about the Packers all season. Thing is we really do have a weak NFC at the moment. This allows relative lightweight GB who would be 5-6th ranked in the AFC at best IMO to dominate.

This team is weak on both lines, has an all-time great QB and FG kicker, a fairly good bunch of receivers but no consistent ground-game. As a result the Bucs pretty good but NOT awesome D was able to dominate the line of scrimmage Sunday. Unless they address those issues it will just be more of the same next season too.

As for coaching decisions ... yeah LaFleur made some real head-scratchers no question about it. GB doesn't automatically win with different strategy but they would have had a much better chance!

Giving the ball back to Brady @ the end however was an ALL-TIME bone-head playoff decision ... could have turned it off right there.


EDIT:
The 2020 Packers remind me of Elways first round of successful Broncos teams who got crushed by the NFC except not quite as good.
 
Last edited:

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,318
2,344
136
I picked Tampa in the NFC Championship and if you refer back to my posts, I've been saying the same stuff about the Packers all season. Thing is we really do have a weak NFC at the moment. This allows relative lightweight GB who would be 5-6th ranked in the AFC at best IMO to dominate.

This team is weak on both lines, has an all-time great QB and kicker, a fairly good bunch of receivers but no consistent ground-game. As a result the Bucs pretty good but NOT awesome D was able to dominate the line of scrimmage Sunday. Unless they address those issues it will just be more of the same next season too.

As for coaching decisions ... yeah LaFleur made some real head-scratchers no question about it. GB doesn't automatically win with different strategy but they would have had a much better chance!

(Giving the ball back to Brady @ the end was an all-time bonehead playoff decision)
We'll never know how GB fares against the AFC because they don't play in that conference. Nevertheless, I feel that saying they're roughly the 7th best team in football doesn't grade out as an accurate assessment. As an aside, the Bills were considered by many computer models as nearly a coin-flip against KC. The Vegas spread was just 3 points, which means the teams are roughly equal on a neutral field. And yet the Bills were never in the game. I only mention this to say there's no reliable evidence to conclude GB is the 7th best team in the NFL. If the Chiefs win next week by 5 TDs, then maybe you can draw this conclusion. Maybe.

I will concede GB was beaten in the trenches by Tampa (on both sides of the ball) and besides Kevin King, that was a decisive factor. Nevertheless, you're misrepresenting the totality of evidence. GB has a very good trio of running backs, but they were foiled by Tampa's #1 rushing defense. As I've already mentioned, they have a really good O-line but their best O-lineman was out. The defense is arguably too weak to win a SB, but #10 overall isn't dog shit. Your assertion that GB is poorly constructed with just 2 good players is laughably incorrect. All else being equal, they were a competent #2 CB away from getting to the Super Bowl.

And despite all that, they still had chances to win the game. The late LaFleur decision was not a game-changer in and of itself, although it's easy to question from afar. Anytime you pick off Tom Brady 3 times, you should win the game. Period. Rodgers had a competent/good game, but was never locked in because of constant pressure.

All this aside, the main problem for the Packers is the building rumbling that Rodgers simply wants to play elsewhere. If he forces a trade, then yeah they're fucked. LOL
 

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,301
10,800
136
And despite all that, they still had chances to win the game


I agree ... and this tells you all you really need to know about GB.

Tampa is not by any means a great football team but despite making a bunch of straight-up bad plays, strategic errors AND Brady committing multiple turnovers they still came out on top.

This year wasn't reduced to the level of the 1990's NFC where most years you could flip a coin on Dallas or SF to win it all by any means, BUT as a league the AFC is head and shoulders above right now.

Let's hope "any given Sunday" fully applies and we get a decent game next week! (I have serious doubts)


And although I COULD allow the best team in the NFC 5th in the AFC that's the best I can do ... and it would be Tampa/NO not the packers so 6th/7th is the best GB can hope for in my 2020 rankings.

(1) Kansas City
(2) Buffalo
(3) Baltimore
(4) Tennessee
(5) Tampa/New Orleans (with Brees) /Indy (with Rivers)
(6-7) Seattle/GB


A healthy Seahawk team COULD have leap-frogged to 3 and been a legit SB contender due to Wilson.... they were literally a shell of an NFL team on both lines at the end of the season. (see the loss to my Giants)
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,802
29,553
146
I picked Tampa in the NFC Championship and if you refer back to my posts, I've been saying the same stuff about the Packers all season. Thing is we really do have a weak NFC at the moment. This allows relative lightweight GB who would be 5-6th ranked in the AFC at best IMO to dominate.

This team is weak on both lines, has an all-time great QB and FG kicker, a fairly good bunch of receivers but no consistent ground-game. As a result the Bucs pretty good but NOT awesome D was able to dominate the line of scrimmage Sunday. Unless they address those issues it will just be more of the same next season too.

As for coaching decisions ... yeah LaFleur made some real head-scratchers no question about it. GB doesn't automatically win with different strategy but they would have had a much better chance!

Giving the ball back to Brady @ the end however was an ALL-TIME bone-head playoff decision ... could have turned it off right there.


EDIT:
The 2020 Packers remind me of Elways first round of successful Broncos teams who got crushed by the NFC except not quite as good.

I actually did stop watching that game in the final minutes of the first half. Decided that going outside and building a fire in my back yard, sitting in the frigid cold and drinking beers was a better use of my time.
 
Reactions: Captante

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,802
29,553
146
We'll never know how GB fares against the AFC because they don't play in that conference. Nevertheless, I feel that saying they're roughly the 7th best team in football doesn't grade out as an accurate assessment. As an aside, the Bills were considered by many computer models as nearly a coin-flip against KC. The Vegas spread was just 3 points, which means the teams are roughly equal on a neutral field. And yet the Bills were never in the game. I only mention this to say there's no reliable evidence to conclude GB is the 7th best team in the NFL. If the Chiefs win next week by 5 TDs, then maybe you can draw this conclusion. Maybe.

I will concede GB was beaten in the trenches by Tampa (on both sides of the ball) and besides Kevin King, that was a decisive factor. Nevertheless, you're misrepresenting the totality of evidence. GB has a very good trio of running backs, but they were foiled by Tampa's #1 rushing defense. As I've already mentioned, they have a really good O-line but their best O-lineman was out. The defense is arguably too weak to win a SB, but #10 overall isn't dog shit. Your assertion that GB is poorly constructed with just 2 good players is laughably incorrect. All else being equal, they were a competent #2 CB away from getting to the Super Bowl.

And despite all that, they still had chances to win the game. The late LaFleur decision was not a game-changer in and of itself, although it's easy to question from afar. Anytime you pick off Tom Brady 3 times, you should win the game. Period. Rodgers had a competent/good game, but was never locked in because of constant pressure.

All this aside, the main problem for the Packers is the building rumbling that Rodgers simply wants to play elsewhere. If he forces a trade, then yeah they're fucked. LOL

tbh, the Bills removed themselves from the game when they chose FGs/punt on two straight ~4-1 in KC territory in teh first half. Even if they didn't convert, and were still out of the game because of that, at least they would have been competing in the same game.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,318
2,344
136
I agree ... and this tells you all you really need to know about GB.

Tampa is not by any means a great football team but despite making a bunch of straight-up bad plays, strategic errors AND Brady committing multiple turnovers they still came out on top.

This year wasn't reduced to the level of the 1990's NFC where most years you could flip a coin on Dallas or SF to win it all by any means, BUT as a league the AFC is head and shoulders above right now.

Let's hope "any given Sunday" fully applies and we get a decent game next week! (I have serious doubts)


And although I COULD allow the best team in the NFC 5th in the AFC that's the best I can do ... and it would be Tampa/NO not the packers so 6th/7th is the best GB can hope for in my 2020 rankings.

(1) Kansas City
(2) Buffalo
(3) Baltimore
(4) Tennessee
(5) Tampa/New Orleans (with Brees) /Indy (with Rivers)
(6-7) Seattle/GB


A healthy Seahawk team COULD have leap-frogged to 3 and been a legit SB contender due to Wilson.... they were literally a shell of an NFL team on both lines at the end of the season. (see the loss to my Giants)
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't have either the Titans or Saints above the Packers. For one, look at the week 16 game between TN & GB. As for the Saints, they're just terrible on the road in the elements and the Packers wouldn't have messed up that chance. Drew Brees is a shadow of his former self and just can't drive the ball with any authority anymore.
It's a bit weird to say the Seahawks were almost a legit contender; they started the season hot and lost a home playoff game AFTER knocking out the Rams QB.
Are the Ravens the 3rd best team in the NFL? That's debatable too, as we know from the other NFL thread here where half the people think Lamar Jackson is destined to be hurt or mediocre. What we know about the Ravens is that they aren't built to come back in playoff games.

Finally, although I feel you've underrated the Packers, you're also selling the Bucs short. No, I don't think they'll win the Super Bowl but they are awfully talented on offense (hence why Brady picked Tampa). 538 gives Tampa Bay more than a puncher's chance of winning:
 
Reactions: Captante
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |