NFL 2006 Season Week 8 Picks

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/26/2006 @ 08:40:10 AM
Wow, Jeremy's picking the Packers. This even throws off MY strategy a little bit:)		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Jeremy - Super Chocolate Bear 10/26/2006 @ 08:41:25 AM
You shouldn't have a "strategy", you should pick who you think will win.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist 10/26/2006 @ 08:45:16 AM
The Packers WERE who we THOUGHT they were....and we let 'em off the hook!		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.

	craig - Get up! Get up! Get out of here! Gone! For Robbie Deer. 10/27/2006 @ 10:49:53 AM
Jeremy, clearly your nonsense deserves a single 'nutty' and no more. Time to start that auto-rate-jeremys-comments-one-nutty.cgi script again. :) I'll only be shocked if Jeremy doesn't pick the Vikings, now that's big news.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 3 times.

	Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?" 10/29/2006 @ 12:10:52 PM
Worst fake ever.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 10/29/2006 @ 01:29:49 PM
Did Favre injure himself on a kneel down?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 10/29/2006 1:30:10 pm

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/29/2006 @ 03:23:08 PM
Here's a grip about negative points in fantasy football. If a QB kneels down, that's 2 or 3 yards lost on rushing. If a QB kneels down 3 times at the end of the game, that could be almost an entire point lost simply because the team was winning. That's half of an INT. Basically, the fantasy football creators/Yahoo people should factor in yards lost on kneel down when calculating the points.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Jeremy - Robots don't say 'ye' 10/29/2006 @ 04:09:19 PM
If the opposing teams defense scores a touchdown the extra point counts against your defense/special teams (I lost a shutout last season because my defense "gave up" the extra point following a TD they had nothing to do with.) They either have to cherry pick which extra points they actually "gave up" or give you credit for extra points (and maybe field goals) you score. That's a bigger deal then the kneel down. I lost 7 points because my D "allowed" 1.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/29/2006 @ 04:39:00 PM
that is true. In fact, I've been in other leagues in other website's (not yahoo) where 0 or 1 point was the same point value, for that very scenario.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/29/2006 @ 04:53:10 PM
Well, your special teams squad was on the field for the extra point and they didn't stop them from converting, so they should be charged with the point.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.

	Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist 10/29/2006 @ 10:21:06 PM
My special teams squad was on the field when they kicked an extra point themselves too. Obviously I understand you can stop extra points and therefor you "gave it up." I think extra points get blocked like once or twice a season, they are all but automatic. Plus I only brought it up because if I were to change one small thing it might be that, and not losing .8 points from your victorious QB kneeling out the clock.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/30/2006 @ 08:10:23 AM
I agree with Jeremy. Losing a shutout because your offense gave up a touchdown is dumb.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 10/30/2006 @ 08:18:59 AM
Here's the crazy thing about the Bears. I still think of them as "the Bears" who have never been a formidable team in my lifetime, except for one or two seasons that seemed more like flukes. Anyway, almost halfway through this season, the Bears have scored the most points in the NFL and have given up the fewest points. That is very disagreeable with my current perception of the Bears as an organization.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 10/30/2006 @ 12:37:51 PM
They've really only been down for 10 years which as Brewers fan doesn't seem to bad. From 96 thru 04 they only had 2 winning seasons and only made the playoffs once. That's not even a bad decade for some teams. Out of the 11 seasons before that (84 thru 94) they had 8 winning seasons, 8 playoff appearances, 7 times to the divisional round, 3 times to the conferance round, and 1 superbowl win. Bears season records		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Alex perfected this 2 times, last at 10/30/2006 12:41:56 pm

	Jeremy - 9563 Posts 10/30/2006 @ 12:51:58 PM
When a team shifts in one direction or another it always takes a couple seasons to set in. That's why everyone thinks Miami will "turn it on" at some point and that "the Other shoe will drop" regarding the "surprise" teams. It's always a season or two before it sets in on everyone that maybe teams aren't "worse" or "better" then their record indictates, maybe they actually are a really good, or really bad, team.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jon - 3463 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 01:22:38 AM
A few Monday Night thoughts Disappointment. I am disappointed. But not just with the outcome of the game. First, I'm disappointed with the announcing. Tony Kornheiser started the broadcast with what I think he called "the case for Tom Brady". You know, telling us why Brady is good. He wins. Then, between the drooling over him that followed for the rest of the night, Tony explained that Tom Brady isn't out there getting attention and doing commercials like Manning and McNabb and he seemed to imply that Brady was under the radar. Kornheiser obviously was speaking to the poeple of Sub-Saharan Africa, because everyone in this country who watches football on any sort of level knows who Tom Brady is and has heard his resume repeated about a million times. Thanks for introducing us to this guy who won three of the highest rated television sporting events in the last five years. What was his name again, Brady Thomas? Along those lines, this has been bothering me for a while now, but do you ever notice how every announcer acts like they are doing the first game ever televised of whatever teams are playing that day? Whatever game it is, what ever teams are playing, whether it's national or local, the announcers repeat the same facts and opinions of the players and teams as every other one does. Obviously, it may be the first time they have done a game with these teams, but have some awareness. Everyone knows who Tom Brady is, and that he was drafted late in the draft, everyone knows Brad Johnson is old and has been around and is underrated and has won a lot (We know that one because we were told that the first week on Monday night football when the same announcers told us the same thing.) Everyone knows Brett Favre has played a ton of games in a row, and that he's a gamer, everyone knows Peyton Manning audibles. Can someone please tell me something about Vinitieri other than the same "He's the most clutch kicker ever" sentence that is repeated every time I see him play? It's like every game is a video game at this point, there is a finite collection of sound bytes that just need the right trigger. No wonder video game analysts sound like they're actually watching the game you're playing. Maybe you think I'm not right on this, but maybe you've noticed the same thing. Anyone? I'm also disappointed in the officiating. Troy Williamson got his arm held, and a call would have placed us at about the five. No call. Wiggins caught a ball, fumbled and the correct call was made. Then Bellichick and the other refs put their two cents in and the call is reversed on the field to incomplete. Well, at least it can be reviewed. It was, and the ref apparently didn't bother watching the review and just decided to agree with the original, wait no not original, rather the second call. So it was incomplete, no first down and therefore the Vikings drive stalls after the next play. Aside from those, the Vikings were twice called for penalties that were basically "touching" the other player. Technically you could make the case for both of the calls, but they were pretty suspect. Now, before you cry about sour grapes, I obviously wanted the Vikings and so obviously I'm not neutral on the issue. But I'm pretty sure at least the first two cases I metnioned were calls taht should have gone the Vikings way. Also, I know it probably wouldn't have changed the win/loss part of the game outcome, but it could have changed a lot of other stuff, and who knows what else. Third, I'm not trying to say the refs intentionally gave the game to the Patriots. I just think they blew the calls. It just broke against the Vikings. Sometimes you flip a coin multiple times and it comes up heads 4 times in a row. Also, the Williamson one was tough to see. I only noticed it on replay. Third of all, I'm disappointed with the Vikings. First, apparently if you want to beat the number one rushing defense, just don't rush. Throw a pass every play. It's that simple. Second, let's get off this idea that choosing Brad Johnson over Culpepper was some great decision just because the Vikings are playing moderately successfully this season. Johnson can't throw the deep ball worth anything. And by deep ball I mean anything over ten yards. It's been this way all year, so don't think I'm just complaining because of the loss. When Johnson throws a deep ball he launches it high up in the air and it ends up looking like an airplane that just stalls and plummets. You can tell me Culpepper has played like crap lately and that he's not as good of a passer if you want, but you know what? Culpepper is a decade younger and twice as athletic and he can throw to all parts of the field. How many more years does Brad Johnson have left? One? a half? And would this offense really be any worse off with Culpepper in there even now? Is it possible we traded away the one missing piece of this team? The one thing keeping us from competing? Maybe it's a stretch, but even if Culpepper and his bad leg helped us get two more touchdowns this year we could be 6-1. Aside from all of that, back to Tony K., my new whipping boy, (who I actually like on PTI). Tony again brought up the sex boat scandal, which he does basically EVERY time the Vikings are ever mentioned on his show. Look the thing happened, it was news, I'm not trying to say it should never be mentioned again. But he brought it up because he wanted to mention how Childress was trying to change the culture of the team. Of course he brought that up because they explained that Childress was trying to get the guys from various parts of the teams to mix with each other. My thoughts were this: Childress may very well have been doing this as part of the "change", but its connection to the boat scandal is weak. First of all, there were offensive and defensive players on the boat so they already were mingling and hanging out together last season, it obviously didn't stop the whole thing from happening. Besides, as detrimental to their personal lives and images and the team image as that scandal may have been, the Vikings were 8-4 after the bye week last year, and had a winning record overall, so obviously all the millions of scandals the media talks about from last year didn't have too huge of an effect on the football field.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 5 times.
Jon edited this 3 times, last at 10/31/2006 1:31:07 am

	Jon - 3463 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 01:29:37 AM
Also, just for the record, I think Mike Torico is a good play by play announcer, so at least they had that going for them.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Alex - Ignorance is bliss to those uneducated 10/31/2006 @ 02:52:31 AM
The Vikings were not who I thought they were and I'll never let myself off the hook for picking them to win this game. That being said, I agree with most of Jon's rant. The announcers now-a-days are terrible and terribly predictable. That's why I've actually come to like Madden the most, because while he repeats his own pet sayings plenty, he also actually speaks his mind and is original every now and then. The best baseball commentary I heard this year was when some like 80 year old ex(?)-Tigers announcer was in the booth for a few innings of one of the playoff games. He was great, made actual intellect and funny conversation. He pwned the other guys in the booth. Getting back to football, the current Monday night crew is horrible. I didn't watch much of the game because it was so thoroughly embarrassing to the NFC North, but I did see the one Williamson play and it easily could have been pass interferance. Instead, I played Madden 05 for the first time in a year. I had a franchise (1st season) going and was 8-5 on All-Madden. Seeing's as how I hadn't played in forever I figured I should set it back to Rookie for a game. I was up 21-0 at the end of first thinking, "wow this could get to 84-0". And it did, when I ran back the opening kickoff of the second half for a TD. Final score 161-0. I guess video games are like riding a bike. Now to make the comment that has to do with me still being up...		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Pie Racist 10/31/2006 @ 08:57:49 AM
Now that's a 5 nut comment if I've ever seen one. You forgot about the biggest "jobbing" by the refs all night. Moore got "hooked" by Tedy Bruschi on the play that ended up being the INT that Brad Johnson threw right to the defender near the end zone. That would have made the game 10-7 if I'm not mistaken. I think you are dead on as far as annoucers re:video games. I never really thought about it like that. There was some behind the scenes monday night thing last season and I was very disappointed to find out that they actually have like a "script" to follow. They come up with (or invent) storylines for the evening. They pick out one or 2 players they are going to "follow" throughout the night. (AKA beat every little detail of their lives into the ground for the 56332nd time) So in other words they go into the game with about 90% of what is going to come out of their mouth already decided, regardless of what actually happens in the game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 10/31/2006 8:59:32 am

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 09:40:32 AM
I have only seen one Monday night game all year (I have cable for 22 years of my life, and the one year that I don't they take Monday Night Football off of ABC), and I was basically just annoyed with TK, for most of the same reasons as Jon, and apparently Alex and Jeremy. Secondly, would you put Tom Brady in the Hall of Fame at this point? I heard guys on ESPN radio talking about this, and it made me thinkg: Is Brady really that good, or were his teams some of the best all-around teams with no superstars ever to take the field? The Packers are now only 1 game behind the Vikings. That seems hard to believe. The teams that the Packers have defeated have a combined 3 wins. How about that.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 10/31/2006 @ 09:41:04 AM
Oh, and I am now in first place for Picking Games!!! Go Me!!!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?" 10/31/2006 @ 09:48:08 AM
Alex and Matt continue to duke it out over who can be the most consistently bad.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/31/2006 @ 10:38:04 AM
Not that anyone even cares, but I'm pretty sure the old Tigers announcer that Alex was talking about was Ernie Harwell.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Matt edited this at 10/31/2006 10:38:27 am

	Jeremy - 9563 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 10:46:28 AM
I cant believe it hasn't been brought up yet, and maybe it's because it didn't happen last night: Every time they bring a celebrity into the MNF announcers booth for some lame/fake conversation and shameless cross promotion I wish television was never invented. Charles Barkley brought something to the table. The rest of them were just painful.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/31/2006 @ 10:49:39 AM
One interesting thing about Ernie Harwell is that before he became the radio guy for the Tigers, Harwell announced for the Orioles along with the then future voice of the Twins, Herb Carneal (who moved to the Twins in 1962 and is still announcing their games part-time).		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Matt edited this at 10/31/2006 10:50:06 am

	Matt - 3961 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 10:52:56 AM
Jeremy - Jon's comment would have been a 5 nutter except he had a "taht" in there instead of "that", which drops it to only a 4.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read. 10/31/2006 @ 10:57:13 AM
Firefox 2 has spell checking built into the form. It's pretty cool, I'd recommend it.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Washington Bureau Chief 10/31/2006 @ 10:58:32 AM
And while I'm at it, Jon singles out Mike Tirico for praise in a separate comment, and then spells his name wrong.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 12:02:39 PM
Only on this website can a team lose 31-7 and it is then debated if the refs cost them the game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?" 10/31/2006 @ 12:29:38 PM
First of all I don't really think there is much of a debate. Pointing out blunders in officiating doesn't mean we think that singlehandedly cost us the game. Secondly the Williamson play Jon talked about and the Moore play I talked about would have put the Vikings 1st and goal from the 5 and 3 respectively. Instead the Vikings' drive ended there. The call Jon goes into the most detail about, the inexplicable get the call right, get the call wrong after the Patriots ask you to change your mind, go watch the replay and still get it wrong Wiggins sequence also ended a drive. The Patriots also had a scoring drive extended after Darren Sharper came within 5 yards of a guy on a 3rd down pass that sailed into the tunnel. I'm also not saying those 3 drives would have all ended in touchdowns for 21 more points. Those are however pretty egregious things. A potential 28 point swing isn't nit picky in my opinion. Besides if anything to argue one or two insignificant things happening can't cascade into a landslide is moronic. Let alone a few things that are big to begin with. So in summation no one was blaming the refs...but since you brought it up...		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 10/31/2006 12:30:39 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 01:09:24 PM
Yes it was Ernie Harwell, I wasn't going to look that up at 3 in the morning. In my opinion the game was over when the Pats marched down the field on their opening drive. I was 99% sure that whatever the course of the rest of the game was they would somehow come out on top. So penalties or no I don't think it would have mattered. And the Moore play as we are calling it was the worst pass I've seen thrown in a long time.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9563 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 01:19:58 PM
Yeah, even though it was a "throw to a spot" pass and Moore got held up it was still bad. If I hadn't watched Tony Romo's debut I'd agree with you, but Tony threw an INT right to a guy literally 3 feet away from him on a screen. Also I'm not sure it was the worst even of Johnsons INT's. It was a broken play that should have drawn a flag. The I'm falling down I'll just throw it up and the deep "ball just got knocked halfway out of my hands and I cant throw that far anyway" passes were much worse.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/31/2006 @ 05:38:45 PM
This is off topic, but I miss the old Page 3 holiday themes.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jon - 3463 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 08:41:08 PM
I think I went out of my way to say that the outcome would have most likely been the same even if the refs got the calls right. If you're looking for me to say it would surely have all been the same, I'm not going to. I just don't have that kind of information to say for sure. In my eyes, none of us can make that kind of claim. And if we are the only website that brings THAT up, I'm fine with it.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 09:11:28 PM
I can make that claim.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 10:39:26 PM
I guess that was directed more towards Jeremy's comments than yours Jon. You simply stated that you thought the officiating was poor, whilst Jeremy implicitly if not explicitly conveyed the feeling that he thought the refs actually cost the Vikings the game. So I'll give you 5 nuts for any misdiscretion on my part.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Robots don't say 'ye' 10/31/2006 @ 11:14:10 PM
Because I used the word "jobbed" to describe one play I was implying the refs were singlehandedly responsible? I think not.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 10/31/2006 @ 11:42:00 PM
Micah started it.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 11/01/2006 @ 08:15:15 AM
Jeremy: "A potential 28 point swing isn't nit picky in my opinion." Explain yourself, ref hater.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 11/01/2006 @ 09:07:47 AM
Congrats also to Brooks Bollinger for getting some PT!!!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist 11/01/2006 @ 09:24:29 AM
Scott: I think I did explain it. 3 drives were directly stopped for the Vikings and one scoring drive for the Pats was extended on an inexplicable penalty on Darren Sharper.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 11/01/2006 @ 09:34:24 AM
I know, I just wanted to call you a ref hater.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 11/01/2006 @ 09:45:06 AM
Well, a ref did kill my family.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9563 Posts 11/01/2006 @ 10:38:51 PM
By the way if you want holiday themes just make me some header graphics.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.