Most bizarre thing I've ever seen in a game...Even beats the Viking guy who ran the wrong way with a fumble recovery to score a touchback!
Most bizarre thing I've ever seen in a game...Even beats the Viking guy who ran the wrong way with a fumble recovery to score a touchback!
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
Yeah the Raiders are far from a good team but their D isn't too bad. They got the vets hanging on and a bunch of young guys - some of whom will probably learn that discipline and develop to become good players. I agree with PB that Sparano wouldn't be my guy (though if he'd be willing to step back into the DC position I think he's good there.) If an offensive/QB guru like Holmgren would be looking to get back into coaching, I think it could be a good landing spot where you have a young QB with a lot of tools but needs an Obi Wan to show him the way - and you're likely looking at drafting very near the top of the draft each round for the next couple years, and assuming Reggie can hang on with you, you have a football guy you can work with to build an offense who has now pretty much completed all the roster cleansing from the brutal cap position he inherited... With that football tradition I think it could be a good opportunity for someone. Maybe Holmgren's time has passed but I'd be watching more Raider games next year and thinking more bullish about them if something like that happened this offseason.
Also, regarding Woodson... He's slowed down and doesn't cover in space like he used to but he's still effective in crowds and around the line of scrimmage. They're starting to move him up a lot more and getting him around the line of scrimmage and his football instincts and experience are beginning to show more. I didn't see a lot of the game last night but he made some plays around and behind the line of scrimmage ala the old Woodson. I think he's got another year in him after this one yet to help usher the transition before he rides off into the sunset and directly to the Packer, Raider (if they have one) and Pro Football Halls of Fame. College too but he may already be in that one for all I know.
They have some good building blocks on defense. Justin Ellis. Sio Moore. Khalil Mack. DJ Hayden.Tyvon Branch (IR). On offense, things don't look as good. But Carr looks like he could develop and that Latavius Murray kid looks pretty promising...
FiveThirtyEight @FiveThirtyEight 4h4 hours ago
As of last Sunday, Green Bay held the NFL’s best historical margin of victory by 358 points. http://53eig.ht/1xXvgB6
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Is the vertical axis on the left the North coast of the Gulf of Mexico?
If so, it looks like the hurricane tracks are zeroed in on my house. I think I'm going to evacuate immediately!
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
I wonder who that is down at -3800 pts. They have a long history... have to think it's the Browns, yeah?
I'm guessing the Cardinals...they've been around forever and have been losers almost the entire time.
This graph really shows how horrific the Packers were in the years immediately before Lombardi. To drop 1000 points in differential in just over 10 years...playing far fewer games per season than the modern era. YUCK! Then Lombardi comes in and completely reverses that in less than a decade.
It appears the Cowboys tried to overtake the Bears in the 70s...fell just short. Then I'm guessing the Niners took the next shot with back-to-back HOF QBs...again just short. It took the next pair of back to back HOF QBs in Green Bay to finally topple those damn Bears.
It's such a GOOD feeling...13 TIME WORLD CHAMPIONS!!
--
Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...
Not sure...but wouldn't the Lions have looked a little more impressive than that bottom line shows during the Barry Sanders era? Even more recently they have been a solid team and I would think should show a more sizeable uptick in recent years. The Lions may be the second lowest line on the graph during the past 2 decades or so.
The bottom line plummets in both the 90s and 00s...which IMO represents a Cardinals team that first had to face the epic Cowboys teams of the 90s and then got moved over into the NFC West and had to face the ridiculous Rams teams of the early 00s.
It's such a GOOD feeling...13 TIME WORLD CHAMPIONS!!
Perry, D Jones, Elliot, and Bush all questionable for the game this week. We are one groin or hamstring away from having no depth on defense.
Cardinals (since 1920) - 22,310 scored 26,086 allowed -3,776 differential
Lions (1930) - 22,612 scored 23,463 allowed -851
Browns (1946) - 19,911 scored 18,659 allowed +1,252
http://www.pro-football-reference.com
Here is the chart so you can see the team by putting the cursor over it (have to go to website as its interactive):
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...ry-of-the-nfl/
Worst three are:
30. Bucs
31. Falcons
32. Cardinals
Historically, Saints were 3rd worst soon after their arrival but Jim Mora, little bit of Haslett/McCarthy and mostly Brees/Peyton have lifted them in the last 20 years.
Browns were challenging Bears/Packers/Giants through the 90s, but Browns 2.0 is pulling a reverse Walsh 49ers on this stat. They are declining at an impressive rate.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
I'm not sure there is so much to learn there. The Packers and Bears are way ahead of everybody because they were really good before modern football. Why would you even compare their graphs with expansion teams? Is there anything interesting to learn in weighting margin of victory equally across a very long time frame, then adding the numbers up?
That graph suggests the Steelers are a mediocre franchise.
A graph of yearly jersey sales would tell you more.
I agree expansion makes the graph harder, though not impossible, to interpret because of expansion. But comparing the relative success of the Cowboys and Vikings to the Saints and Falcons struggles is right there. All the AFL totals are in there so the Patriots, Oilers and Chargers, etc. can be compared.
But it gives you a very good sense of who has sustained success (Bears and Packers) who has been mediocre for a LONG time (Bears then Giants-even with 5 Super Bowl wins between them) and the expansion teams who rise above all others, the Browns, and the single biggest era jump in the chart, Walsh's 49ers. Unless you want to give full credence to the AAFC, in which case I think the Browns increased their overall margin nearly by nearly 3,000 points in slightly less time than Walsh and the 49ers did.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
I'm afraid those graphs have got me very cranky indeed. I'm all for integration, but this is ridiculous. It is NOT useful for looking at eras. Slopes at left end of plot are less significant than changes at right. A more interesting graph would just show margin of victory, with maybe a smoothing filter (moving average) to show era trends clearer.
Very disturbing. I'm inconsolable - don't talk to me about this again.