NFL 2010 Season Wildcard Weekend Picks

	Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 01/03/2011 @ 03:24:19 PM
Some games		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/05/2011 @ 09:56:01 AM
In an article from Bob McGinn on the JSOnline insider, he breaks down the Packers-Eagles game like he does every other game every week. (he generally quotes sources that he chooses to keep anonymous). He starts off the article this way: As champions of the NFC East, the Eagles are seeded third. The Packers edged the Giants and Tampa Bay on a tiebreaker for the sixth seeding. Oddsmakers have established the Eagles as a 2 ½-point favorite. That might be all well and good, but three personnel men from teams that played the Eagles since December said Tuesday that the Eagles are in trouble. Pressed to predict a winner, they all picked the Packers by the scores of 27-21, 27-17 and 28-24. "And I'm being generous with that 24," said the scout who guessed 28-24.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/05/2011 @ 01:08:05 PM
Regarding the Rooney Rule, I have a few questions: 1) Does it apply if you are hiring from within 2) If you hire a black coach, do you have to interview a white coach as well Depending on the answer to either of these answers, I have a third question 3) Should the Cowboys just interview Leslie Frazier and should the Vikings just interview Jason Garrett?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/05/2011 @ 01:27:10 PM
Frazier was made the Vikings coach a few days ago. The rule does not apply if an assistant coach has language in his contract guaranteeing him the head coaching job in case of an opening. For example, this was the case when Mike Martz took over as head coach of the St. Louis Rams before the 2000 season. Also, the rule does not apply if the assistant coach taking over the head position is a minority, as was the case with Mike Singletary and the San Francisco 49ers in late 2008. I think 1)Yes, unless it was already decided. 2)No Edit: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/561770-rooney-rule-an-insult-to-minority-coaches-and-fair-competition		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this at 01/05/2011 1:35:54 pm

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/06/2011 @ 01:22:02 PM
Is everyone ready for the new playoff overtime rule that every seems to think is way more complicated than it actually is?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/06/2011 @ 04:08:24 PM
It's not not complicated, but I do think people are making too big of a deal out of it. I think it just boils down to: If the first team to be given a chance to possess the ball kicks a field goal on that first possession, the game continues, any other score wins, if you have the most points.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 01/06/2011 @ 04:13:51 PM
A lot of the talk I heard isn't that it's complicated, so much as it was about that it opens up interesting (possibly unforeseen) strategies that can really change things. For example the big one is onside kicking the opening kickoff. If they get it they can't just settle for a field goal to win. If you get it you can, because they had their chance at possession.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/06/2011 4:14:06 pm

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/06/2011 @ 04:19:07 PM
I sort of like Mike Greenberg's idea of just making overtime rules so that the first team to 6 points is the winner. This way the game isn't necessarily changed, and you can't just kick one field goal and win it. But two field goals is good.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this at 01/06/2011 4:20:42 pm

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/06/2011 @ 04:27:32 PM
Although I suppose the only complaint people have with the sudden death OT rules is that there is a bias to the team that wins the coin toss. The solution then was simply to give the kicking team a chance to touch the ball, and once both offenses touch the ball it's game on as usual.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/06/2011 @ 06:14:30 PM
Yeah, and if you're going to have a first to 6 rule that means you could get a stop, and kick a fg and not win, and it would take more time. You lose a lot of the sudden death-ness. At that point you may as well just make it a 5th, 6th, 7th quarter, and so on, and the team with the most points when the game is over wins.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/06/2011 @ 10:31:32 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 06:14:30 PM and the team with the most points when the game is over wins. yep		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	jthompto - 209 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 07:16:47 AM
Scott Wrote - 12/31/1969 @ 06:00:00 PM Is everyone ready for the new playoff overtime rule that every seems to think is way more complicated than it actually is? I don't mind it, I just don't understand why this is only going to be used during playoffs. I think sudden death is the way to go for the NFL, I think it would be fun to just eliminate field goals from OT all together so a TD has to win no what.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/07/2011 @ 07:32:38 AM
Well, you don't want to "change the game", and eliminating field goals altogether would definitely be a big change to the actual gameplay. The problem lies in the fact that it isn't really a fair shake. Interesting stats I found show that since 1994, teams that won the opening coin toss won almost 60% of the games, 35% of the time winning it on the very first possession. I think all the NFL was trying to combat was situations where one team never got a shot. Although, if 60% of the games are won by the team that won the coin toss, whether or not it was on the opening possession, it stands to reason that maybe there is a need to modify the rule further. Clearly, there is a bias in overtime to the team that wins the coin toss. On a related note, I'll look for statistics about the percentage of teams that win after winning the opening coin toss.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 01/07/2011 8:22:48 am

	Matt - 3941 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 11:14:59 AM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 04:19:07 PM I sort of like Mike Greenberg's idea of just making overtime rules so that the first team to 6 points is the winner. This way the game isn't necessarily changed, and you can't just kick one field goal and win it. But two field goals is good. I wouldn't mind this either, but it should be changed to 4 points. That way, safeties would actually mean something, while not changing the aspect that a TD wins it automatically, otherwise you need two "lesser" scores.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 12:17:21 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 07:32:38 AM Although, if 60% of the games are won by the team that won the coin toss, whether or not it was on the opening possession, it stands to reason that maybe there is a need to modify the rule further. Clearly, there is a bias in overtime to the team that wins the coin toss. Presumably this has to do with field position. I'm too lazy to look up any actual data, but lets say average starting position after a kickoff is your own 25. Let's say you get 20 yards (50 yard line) and have to punt, giving your opponent the ball somewhere inside the 20. Both teams have a had possession then, but the team winning the opening kickoff had the better field position, and will continue to if the teams trade short drives. The new rules even out the potential starting field position on first possession drives. jthompto Wrote - Today @ 07:16:47 AM Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 01:22:02 PM Is everyone ready for the new playoff overtime rule that every seems to think is way more complicated than it actually is? I don't mind it, I just don't understand why this is only going to be used during playoffs. I think sudden death is the way to go for the NFL, I think it would be fun to just eliminate field goals from OT all together so a TD has to win no what. Or just eliminate field goals period.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 02:24:03 PM
How do you know when the playoff seeding rules are foolish? When road team to home team picks are 40-24.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 02:53:08 PM
What rules are there to be foolish, the rule that says that division winners get a home game? Is that so ridiculous? Besides, there is a 16 point swing because of the fact that one of those home teams happened to be 7-9 this year, and no one things they will win their game. If instead of 16-0 in favor the saints it was 10-6, then the overall total would be 36-30, which isn't that out there. Although it does seem that the nutcan crew is leaning in favor of the road team this week. That still doesn't make the "division winners get a home game" rule foolish.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/07/2011 2:56:43 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/07/2011 @ 06:12:49 PM
Well, the reason everyone picked the Saints is because the Seahawks aren't any good, so why is a team that isn't any good getting a home playoff game?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	jthompto 01/08/2011 @ 08:48:33 AM
I think it's the first time all 4 road teams technically have better records than the teams hosting them. (the Packer beat the eagles in week 1, giving them the tie breaker). I believe in the NBA, home court advantage isbased on record and not seeding, so even though you may be a division winner, you will not have home court advantage if your record is worse than your first round opponent. http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/art_garcia/01/04/playoff-losers/index.html		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/08/2011 @ 10:10:36 PM
Alex Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:12:49 PM Well, the reason everyone picked the Saints is because the Seahawks aren't any good, so why is a team that isn't any good getting a home playoff game? Because they won their division. If division winners are not going to get home games, or if a division winner isn't guaranteed a playoff spot, then we might as well just have 2 completely open conferences with no divisions.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/08/2011 10:11:55 pm

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 01/08/2011 @ 10:15:10 PM
Thanks a lot, Peyton Manning, now we have to listen to Rex Ryan blab on and on all week long. Way to go.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/08/2011 @ 11:12:24 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:10:36 PM Alex Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:12:49 PM Well, the reason everyone picked the Saints is because the Seahawks aren't any good, so why is a team that isn't any good getting a home playoff game? Because they won their division. If division winners are not going to get home games, or if a division winner isn't guaranteed a playoff spot, then we might as well just have 2 completely open conferences with no divisions. Maybe we should. Why did they go from 3 divisions to 4?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 01:53:04 PM
I think they went to four divisions because they added the Texans, which put 16 teams in each conference. 16 didn't divide well into 3. You would have had 2 divisions with 5 teams and 1 division with 6 teams in each conference. I think the current divisional system they have in place works pretty well. And, the Seahawks won yesterday, so clearly they are worthy of the playoffs. This isn't like the NCAA tournament where a team is chosen by a group of voters and there is speculation about whether the team was good enough to warrant such placement. The Seahawks played an NFL schedule and got into the playoffs the same way that every team has gotten into the playoffs under the same playoff structure. If anything, we should just be complaining that the Wild Card cheapens the playoffs and only let division winners in.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - Ignorance is bliss to those uneducated 01/09/2011 @ 03:04:47 PM
Good point about 16 teams. They could have gone with 2 divisions. Seahawks winning yesterday only underscores the point. We all picked them to lose even though they were at home, which actually made me pause for a second on my pick, but on the road where they belonged they would have had half of a half of a chance of winning. But because they beat up on 3 of the other worst teams in football (well if you call 4-2 beating up), they got a home playoff game. Although the thought of Clay chasing down Hasselbeck in the NFC Championship game could persuade me to quit complaining...you Vikings fans better check into that conspiracy right away (or maybe not until after this game when some of sort Reid clock mismanagement inevitably hands the Packers the game, unless McCarthy beats him to the punch, the suspense is killing me already).		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 03:20:54 PM
Ha, this is going to be a battle between two teams that still haven't really figured out that there is a clock involved in football.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - I hate our freedoms 01/09/2011 @ 03:24:25 PM
Bill Simmons has been talking about how there's like a 95% chance we're talking about one clock management meltdown or the other after the game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/09/2011 @ 03:47:02 PM
Well, start the game with one of the worst calls of the season. He was blocked into the ball and it looked like the eagles player was trying to block him into the ball. That was a load of crap.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 03:48:13 PM
Moot point I guess, because they still stopped 'em. Well, if that's the crap call that the eagles get in their favor for the game, I would say that they just wasted it.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/09/2011 3:49:11 pm

	Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read. 01/09/2011 @ 03:58:10 PM
To be fair, they never said he wasn't blocked into it. You can be blocked into it if you're engaged in a block, which he was, you just can't be pushed into it.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/09/2011 @ 04:02:27 PM
What if you are trying to avoid that block? It looked like he was being pushed right into where the ball was. But alas, no points resulted.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - On your mark...get set...Terrible! 01/09/2011 @ 04:06:40 PM
And Desean Jackson is hurt. That helps the Packers.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 01/09/2011 @ 04:14:14 PM
You could actually hear "Kuuuuhn" coming from the stands.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/09/2011 4:14:35 pm

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 01/09/2011 @ 04:17:42 PM
Packers dangled Kuhn out there, and the eagles bit. Touchdown.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?" 01/09/2011 @ 04:34:31 PM
The 2010 Green Bay Packers: We can fumble the ball into the laps of the opposition and turn it into a first down.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/09/2011 @ 04:40:11 PM
Bitter....but true today anyway. Still, you need some luck to win sometimes.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 04:59:58 PM
Did you know JJ would be the best receiver ever on most teams?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 05:01:47 PM
I don't think we should assume that would have been a TD, though it would probably have led to points of some form. No idea what the Eagles were doing there. Why do teams do that? The only thing that kills us is something big, so lets put no one deep.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this at 01/09/2011 5:02:44 pm

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 01/09/2011 @ 05:06:26 PM
Well, Jones had more than a full step, but still. They say Jones actually has good hands, but that he lacks concentration. Well, as Aikman said, he's gotta start concentrating. He is a big freaking headache. He's nab a catch that looks spectacular, but then he'll drop a ball that couldn't have been laid in his hands more perfectly.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 05:16:36 PM
Headache might be a bit overkill, he's no Ferguson. If the announcers hadn't been signing his praises all season he'd be the least of my worries. Edit: I guess "least" is a bit overkill as well, but he wouldn't annoy as much anyway.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Alex perfected this at 01/09/2011 5:18:25 pm

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 01/09/2011 @ 05:20:29 PM
fumblerooskie today...geez		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 01/09/2011 @ 05:21:23 PM
aaaaaand.....momentum shift.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/09/2011 @ 05:33:42 PM
momentum shifted again.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 05:34:48 PM
Worst 3rd down defense in the history of the league on display.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 01/09/2011 @ 05:38:21 PM
I didn't think the Packers had a screen play in the playbook anymore. Not that it mattered, but if you have a horrible red zone defense, you should consider declining the penalty there so you only have to get a 1 play stop instead of a 2 play stop.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Robots don't say 'ye' 01/09/2011 @ 05:59:59 PM
He missed it, what a shocking turn of events.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:01:51 PM
I can hear it now: "the packers only won because blah blah blah luck blah blah blah".		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 01/09/2011 @ 06:04:11 PM
3rd and 3, no one within 15 yards of Donald Driver....worst 3rd down d I've ever seen. For reals.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 01/09/2011 @ 06:06:04 PM
Holy crap, a stop. Time for a fake punt.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:07:20 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqMVjsaGEZo		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:18:47 PM
Worst QB sneak play call, or execution?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 01/09/2011 @ 06:20:47 PM
Good lord.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 01/09/2011 @ 06:29:29 PM
3:48 left and only 2 combined timeouts left		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Alex screwed with this at 01/09/2011 6:30:24 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:31:47 PM
Can't run out the clock if you don't get first downs idiots		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read. 01/09/2011 @ 06:33:13 PM
Yeah, teams always fall victim of playing not to lose there. They fail to realize that even a turnover there wouldn't be as killer as a first down is a helper.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:36:01 PM
They grossly miscalculate the risk vs reward. One first down and the game is almost over (barring a long punt return), now the Eagles have the ball with 1:45.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:36:40 PM
Nice d zebra		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:40:00 PM
Alex Wrote - Today @ 06:36:01 PM They grossly miscalculate the risk vs reward. One first down and the game is almost over (barring a long punt return), now the Eagles have the ball with 1:45. They sure do. And they do it often. It's mainly an emotional thing really. Even if such an approach benefited you over all the one time it backfired there would be hell to pay.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/09/2011 @ 06:41:32 PM
ballgame!		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:41:52 PM
Jesus Christ.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:42:27 PM
Jump ball to the great white hope? Yes please.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:44:03 PM
Bring on the next bird team. I'm hoping that the seahawks beat the bears so that the Packers can beat three consecutive bird teams to get to the super bowl.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:46:21 PM
then the ravens		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2011 @ 06:47:21 PM
That'd be a future trivia question someday, if that happened.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 01/09/2011 @ 06:56:26 PM
and last year they played the Cardinals. So if that scenario plays out, that's 5 consecutive different bird teams in the playoffs.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	JDUB316 01/09/2011 @ 08:43:52 PM
Sorry, the Packers won't beat the Falcons......and the packers only won today because blah,blah,blah........lol, lol		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/10/2011 @ 07:14:18 AM
Stupid Eagles. They were my last chance for a win this week in my picks, and they had to go and stinkin' lose.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 01/10/2011 @ 07:33:34 AM
He didn't make the pro bowl even though his counterpart teammate did, but Tramon Williams is the best cornerback in Green Bay. He has been much better than Charles Woodson this season.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 01/10/2011 @ 10:07:07 AM
Based on what though? Usually your worse corner gets the picks and whatnot because they're avoiding the other guy altogether.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - Ignorance is bliss to those uneducated 01/10/2011 @ 01:46:23 PM
Really? At the start of the season Woodson had a grade of 85 from Scouts Inc. and Williams was a 66. I think it's fair to say William's grade has gone up, but I don't really see any reason why Woodson's would have gone down. TOT SOLO AST PD SACK FF REC INT YDS TD 92 76 16 13 2.0 5 0 2 48 1 - Woodson 57 50 7 20 1.0 1 5 6 87 0 - Williams If you want to try and convince me that Williams can cover 1-on-1 as well as Woodson I'm listening, but overall I don't see how you can make a case that Williams is better. Much less "much better".		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/10/2011 @ 09:14:30 PM
JSOnline writer Bob McGinn has stated a few times that Williams has been outplaying Woodson pretty much all year. I can't find the article right now, but Woodson has been burned on long plays more, and is getting thrown to more than Williams. Also, the Packers are trying to find ways to match Woodson up against the non-deep threat receivers. On second hand, I found it, but it's an insider column, so I can't post the link. Here are some excerpts from the column written on December 18: Today, as Woodson completes his fifth season for the Green Bay Packers and 13th in the National Football League, he's become a cornerback that his defensive coordinator must try to hide. ... Because of his reputation, Woodson has received the benefit of every doubt from the network television people and the national press. The Pro Bowl is a reputation-based honor, and Woodson probably stands a good chance to be selected for the third straight year even though his unheralded teammate, Tramon Williams, has outplayed him almost without fail for 13 games. ... Before the Baltimore Ravens played at Lambeau Field last December, veteran wide receiver Derrick Mason was asked about Woodson. "He's one of those corners that can play a guy man-to-man and not need any help and pretty much shut down that side of the field," Mason said. "He's playing tremendous right now." This year, since early in the season, opponents have been attacking Woodson wherever he's lined up, trying to take advantage of his decline in one-on-one matchups. ... Last Sunday, the Detroit Lions kept waiting and waiting for an opportunity in which Calvin Johnson would be matched outside against Woodson. Dom Capers was able to prevent that from happening by matching Williams on Johnson in all nickel situations, which was the entire game save seven snaps in base. Finally, late in the third quarter, Lions offensive coordinator Scott Linehan caught Capers in a 3-4 with man coverage outside and Nick Collins in a single-safety shell. When Woodson guessed wrong on what route Johnson would run, Johnson released outside and burned him deep for 44 yards. ... Three weeks ago in Atlanta, the Falcons sent out three wide receivers on third and 3. It isn't often that an opponent is able to isolate Woodson deep against a slot receiver in nickel, but because of down and distance Capers brought Collins into the box. From the left slot, No. 3 receiver Harry Douglas beat Woodson badly on a deep corner route that would have been a 35-yard gain if not a 65-yard touchdown. This time, Matt Ryan overthrew him. Sometimes stats don't tell the whole story. Here's a guy who documents specific plays and patterns and trends and then comes to conclusions based on them. An interesting take from the most credible of all the Packers' writers.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/10/2011 9:19:14 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/11/2011 @ 12:02:49 AM
Like I said, I'm willing to concede on 1-on-1 coverage, but you can't just ignore the fact that Woodson has almost twice as many tackles and 5 forced fumbles. Calvin Johnson can burn anyone deep with no safety help, plus it adds that Woodson guessed wrong, it happens. If you want to rank them based solely on coverage skills you can make a case for Tramon. Overall though I think Woodson is still a better player because of his versatility. Tramon is lining up against #1 WRs more, but part of that could be to free up Woodson for run support or blitzing. Tramon is the #1 cover corner, Woodson is playing more of a rover position.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/11/2011 @ 10:04:42 AM
I suppose I should qualify that a little. Tramon has outperformed Woodson as a cover corner. Woodson definitely is effective in other ways, but like McGinn suggests, Capers has to find ways to not use Woodson in strictly man-to-man situations, especially against a teams number 1 receiver.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 01/11/2011 @ 07:40:04 PM
My wife just referred to NutCan as Page3.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 01/11/2011 @ 08:09:21 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 07:40:04 PM My wife just referred to NutCan as Page3. Sorry, we no longer accept Page 3 coupons.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 01/11/2011 @ 10:22:27 PM
Melissa does earn herself a handful of cool points though. Unfortunately they're worth about as much as Page 3 coupons.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this at 01/11/2011 10:22:59 pm

	Jon - 1 bajillion posts 01/23/2011 @ 12:34:56 AM
Scott Wrote - 01/11/2011 @ 07:40:04 PM My wife just referred to NutCan as Page3. I actually do this all the time. Then again, I also use the term "horseless carriage," so maybe I'm not a great example.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.