NFL 2011 Season Week 9 Picks
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2024 Season Week 12 Picks.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Dolphins 31 @ Chiefs 3 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Chiefs
 |
Chiefs
|
Chiefs
|
Chiefs
|
||||
| 49ers 19 @ Commanders 11 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
49ers
 |
49ers
|
49ers
|
49ers
|
||||
| Buccaneers 16 @ Saints 27 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Saints
 |
Saints
|
Saints
|
Saints
|
||||
| Falcons 31 @ Colts 7 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Falcons
 |
Falcons
|
Falcons
|
Falcons
|
||||
| Seahawks 13 @ Cowboys 23 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Cowboys
 |
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
||||
| Browns 12 @ Texans 30 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Texans
 |
Texans
|
Texans
|
Texans
|
||||
| Jets 27 @ Bills 11 Final Sun, 11/6/11 12:00pm
|
Bills
 |
Bills
|
Bills
|
Bills
|
||||
| Broncos 38 @ Raiders 24 Final Sun, 11/6/11 3:05pm
|
Raiders
 |
Raiders
|
Raiders
|
Raiders
|
||||
| Bengals 24 @ Titans 17 Final Sun, 11/6/11 3:05pm
|
Bengals
 |
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
||||
| Giants 24 @ Patriots 20 Final Sun, 11/6/11 3:15pm
|
Patriots
 |
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
||||
| Packers 45 @ Chargers 38 Final Sun, 11/6/11 3:15pm
|
Packers
 |
Chargers
 |
Packers
|
Packers
|
||||
| Rams 13 @ Cardinals 19 final overtime Sun, 11/6/11 3:15pm
|
Rams
 |
Rams
|
Cardinals
 |
Cardinals
|
||||
| Ravens 23 @ Steelers 20 Final Sun, 11/6/11 7:20pm
|
Steelers
 |
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
||||
| Bears 30 @ Eagles 24 Final Mon, 11/7/11 7:30pm
|
Eagles
 |
Bears
 |
Eagles
|
Bears
|
||||
| Week Record | 7 - 7 0.500  | 7 - 7 0.500 | 8 - 6 0.571 | 9 - 5 0.643 | ||||
| Season Record | 84 - 46 0.646 | 74 - 56 0.569 | 78 - 52 0.600 | 89 - 41 0.685 | ||||
| Scotttime Record | 913 - 551 0.624 | 881 - 583 0.602 | 905 - 559 0.618 | 923 - 541 0.630 | ||||
| No-Pack-Vike Record | 3376 - 1964 0.632 | 3291 - 2049 0.616 | 3398 - 1942 0.636 | 3292 - 2048 0.617 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 1590 - 941 0.628 | 1492 - 1039 0.590 | 1575 - 956 0.622 | 1582 - 949 0.625 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 85 - 45 0.654 |
| Lifetime: | 925 - 534 0.634 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Bears
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 82 - 48 0.631 |
| Lifetime: | 902 - 560 0.617 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Jets
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 81 - 48 0.628 |
| Lifetime: | 805 - 525 0.605 |
SF @ WAS - No Pick
TB @ NO - No Pick
ATL @ IND - No Pick
SEA @ DAL - No Pick
CLE @ HOU - No Pick
NYJ @ BUF - No Pick
Broncos
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 4 - 3 0.571 |
| Season: | 18 - 10 0.643 |
| Lifetime: | 299 - 199 0.600 |
49ers
Buccaneers
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Giants
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 64 - 52 0.552 |
| Lifetime: | 513 - 327 0.611 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Jets
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 9 - 5 0.643 |
| Season: | 89 - 41 0.685 |
| Lifetime: | 694 - 431 0.617 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 82 - 47 0.636 |
| Lifetime: | 503 - 291 0.633 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Seahawks
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 5 - 9 0.357 |
| Season: | 83 - 47 0.638 |
| Lifetime: | 466 - 309 0.601 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Jets
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 82 - 48 0.631 |
| Lifetime: | 574 - 319 0.643 |
49ers
Buccaneers
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 6 - 8 0.429 |
| Season: | 79 - 51 0.608 |
| Lifetime: | 407 - 256 0.614 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 6 - 8 0.429 |
| Season: | 59 - 42 0.584 |
| Lifetime: | 344 - 213 0.618 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 75 - 42 0.641 |
| Lifetime: | 388 - 211 0.648 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 62 - 31 0.667 |
| Lifetime: | 200 - 130 0.606 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Cardinals
Ravens
Bears
| Week: | 10 - 4 0.714 |
| Season: | 59 - 38 0.608 |
| Lifetime: | 155 - 111 0.583 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 86 - 44 0.661 |
| Lifetime: | 253 - 144 0.637 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Giants
Packers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 9 - 5 0.643 |
| Season: | 82 - 48 0.631 |
| Lifetime: | 177 - 117 0.602 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Bears
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 86 - 44 0.661 |
| Lifetime: | 165 - 87 0.655 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Chargers
Cardinals
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 6 - 8 0.429 |
| Season: | 70 - 59 0.543 |
| Lifetime: | 70 - 59 0.543 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Bears
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 54 - 46 0.540 |
| Lifetime: | 54 - 46 0.540 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Jets
Broncos
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Bears
| Week: | 10 - 4 0.714 |
| Season: | 64 - 35 0.646 |
| Lifetime: | 64 - 35 0.646 |
49ers
Saints
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Titans
Patriots
Packers
Rams
Ravens
Bears
| Week: | 8 - 6 0.571 |
| Season: | 68 - 46 0.597 |
| Lifetime: | 68 - 46 0.597 |
49ers
Buccaneers
Falcons
Cowboys
Texans
Bills
Raiders
Bengals
Giants
Packers
Rams
Steelers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 7 0.500 |
| Season: | 49 - 21 0.700 |
| Lifetime: | 49 - 21 0.700 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
 | Ravens 23 @ Steelers 20 | |
 | SarahAFC.... who knows? |
 | JonThese teams have both had a pretty good run the last decade or so. |
| Bears 30 @ Eagles 24 | |
| SarahBoo to both teams. |
| JonHave the Eagles "figured it out" like people say they have? Maybe. But one game is hardly enough to tell. You know, Andy Reid has now famously done really well after bye weeks. And I was thinking, "wow, he must really use that extra week for some brilliant game planning." And that may be so, but I think it'd be a lot funnier if he just slept in late, played some video games, and caught up on his dvr'd shows on his week off. Something tells me that might make you a pretty good coach too. |
  | Scott - 6225 Posts 11/03/2011 @ 07:45:01 PM |
 |
|---|---|---|
| Interesting observation about the Redskins: In their last 4 games, they have been getting exponentially worse. Their last 4 games have gone as such: win by 7, lose by 7, lose by 13, lose by 23. Ok, so it's not exactly exponential, but it is worse and worse each week. |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Jfk10intex - 229 Posts 11/04/2011 @ 09:35:42 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Maybe it's a computer glitch, but why is Sarah's face on my profile pic? Does anyone else see this? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 11/06/2011 @ 08:26:02 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The Packers have not been defeated in the last 13 games. In the last 13 games, the Packers have been unbeatable. Neither of those statements can be disproved. I don't care how close the games have been (some have been close, some have been blowouts). But the fact is that no team has had in answer for the Packers in what has now become almost an entire season worth of games. Whatever criteria you want to use for how dominating a team is or isn't, that's fine. At the end of the day, the Packers have found a way to defeat their last 13 opponents. That leaves coaches and analysts scratching their heads as to how do you defeat the Packers. Since no one has found an answer yet, I would say it is accurate to classify them as unbeatable. Do you have any examples to prove that they are beatable? |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 2 times. |
|
 | Sarah - 4671 Posts 11/06/2011 @ 08:54:25 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jfk10intex Wrote - 11/04/2011 @ 09:35:42 PM Maybe it's a computer glitch, but why is Sarah's face on my profile pic? Does anyone else see this? I do for obvious reasons. All part of my plan for world domination. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Sarah - How do you use these things? 11/06/2011 @ 06:39:26 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Wow, that game I could do without, but a win is a win, keep it goin' Pack! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | haters gonna hate (Guest) 11/06/2011 @ 09:42:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The packers are the best and have beaten every other team by a million points. Other teams are even trying backups to backups to try to beat them but they just can't. When the Pack beats a team, they are beaten so bad they can't ever win again. There is no one out there who's gonna beat them. The packers are perfect and every player is a role model every other NFL team should take notice. I think the media hasn't praised them enough. Why should they even bother talking about any other team because any other team would lose to the packers. The packers not only haven't been beaten, they are unbeatable. GO PACK!! |
Yours:
Total: Rated 4 times. |
|
  | Jeremy - Robots don't say 'ye' 11/06/2011 @ 09:49:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| lol |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | JDUB316 11/07/2011 @ 12:11:55 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I know I will get alot of s**t for saying this but the Eagles could beat the Packers......in my opinion. Not to say that what NFL Network says is written is stone or anything like that, but when asked the other day what team do they think could possibly come in and beat the Packers they answered the Eagles. Their reasons were that the Eagles offence could match the Packers point for point and also that our defence is starting to come together and slow down the offence of other teams, and if we could do that to the Packers the Eagles come out on top with the W. Too bad we won't get to see this game in the regular season, I guess we will have to wait untill the playoffs and it hurts me deeply to say this but thats assumeing the Eagles make it, although I think we will seeing as how under the coaching of Andy Reid we have only missed the playoffs once.......... And I'm still bitter about being put out last year by the Packers so this year I'm hopeing for a shot at a little revenge. On another note I hope Andy Reid sticks with letting LeSean McCoy run the ball more often like we did against Dallas, plus I kind of liked it, we ran the ball almost as much as we passed it and it seemed to work pretty well in my opinion. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 2 times. |
|
|
| Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 11/07/2011 @ 07:40:18 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The Packers have arguably the toughest stretch of games coming up in their next 3 weeks. They play 3 games in a total of 11 days, starting with a monday night game, a sunday game, and then a thursday game. Thankfully two of these games are at home. It will also mark the first time this season that the Packers play back to back games at home. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 4671 Posts 11/07/2011 @ 05:48:09 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The Packers may be 8-0 but are far from perfect. Our defense is a gigantic concern, especially our secondary. I wouldn't be surprised if we lost a game, but as long as they win the Super Bowl, I'm ok with it. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - How do you use these things? 11/07/2011 @ 05:48:51 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 11/07/2011 @ 06:49:40 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sarah Wrote - Today @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? I just don't think the media is overplaying a 14-0 team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 4671 Posts 11/07/2011 @ 07:18:30 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Today @ 06:49:40 PM Sarah Wrote - Today @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? I just don't think the media is overplaying a 14-0 team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. I believe the comment said something about the Packers beating everyone by a million points and those who were beaten were never able to win again. That's just illogical. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 11/07/2011 @ 09:26:28 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sarah Wrote - Today @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? its up to 3 |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - How do you use these things? 11/07/2011 @ 10:44:22 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 09:26:28 PM Sarah Wrote - Today @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? its up to 3 Lame |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 9543 Posts 11/08/2011 @ 12:24:23 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:49:40 PM Sarah Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? I just don't think the media is overplaying a 14-0 team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. That might have something to do with there being no 14-0 team. JDUB316 Wrote - Yesterday @ 12:11:55 AM I know I will get alot of s**t for saying this but the Eagles could beat the Packers......in my opinion. That's because almost anyone could, and not even in the "any given Sunday" sense. They survived a goal line play opening day, 2 rookie QBs, and again this week, despite being spotted 14 points. Their only defense of any kind is the fact that Charles Woodson is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to the other teams wideout on a weekly basis, but I flipped to the game just in time to see him draw a flag in a situation that kind of mattered, so maybe someone's finally paying attention. Ironically their biggest obstacles for 16-0 might be the fact that they're a finesse team, not really suited all that well for cold weather. But, I'm sure it will happen. May as well get used to every person finding someway to work a jab about the 19-0 Packers into every conversation I have. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 11/08/2011 12:31:02 am | ||
|
| Sarah - So's your face 11/08/2011 @ 06:41:23 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 12:24:23 AM Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:49:40 PM Sarah Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:48:51 PM Oh and who were the 2 geniuses that rated "haters gonna hate" 5 nuts? I just don't think the media is overplaying a 14-0 team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. That might have something to do with there being no 14-0 team. JDUB316 Wrote - Yesterday @ 12:11:55 AM I know I will get alot of s**t for saying this but the Eagles could beat the Packers......in my opinion. That's because almost anyone could, and not even in the "any given Sunday" sense. They survived a goal line play opening day, 2 rookie QBs, and again this week, despite being spotted 14 points. Their only defense of any kind is the fact that Charles Woodson is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to the other teams wideout on a weekly basis, but I flipped to the game just in time to see him draw a flag in a situation that kind of mattered, so maybe someone's finally paying attention. Ironically their biggest obstacles for 16-0 might be the fact that they're a finesse team, not really suited all that well for cold weather. But, I'm sure it will happen. May as well get used to every person finding someway to work a jab about the 19-0 Packers into every conversation I have. Awesome and by awesome I mean hush. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - How do you use these things? 11/08/2011 @ 07:07:40 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| On another note, still tied... |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | RUFiO1984 - 219 Posts 11/08/2011 @ 07:20:00 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
DANG IT! I thought after starting 7-0 I would pull away a little... Stupid Eagles ;( Also wanted the Bears to lose... Now the Lions HAVE to win this Sunday to keep ahead of the Bears... :( Lions have a tough 8 games ahead of them... Heres to hopefully making the playoffs!  |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Carlos44ec - Tater Salad? 11/08/2011 @ 09:27:30 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
RUFiO1984 Wrote - Today @ 07:20:00 AM DANG IT! I thought after starting 7-0 I would pull away a little... Stupid Eagles ;( Also wanted the Bears to lose... Now the Lions HAVE to win this Sunday to keep ahead of the Bears... :( Lions have a tough 8 games ahead of them... Heres to hopefully making the playoffs! fk the lions. and the bears. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Carlos44ec messed with this at 11/08/2011 9:27:43 pm | ||
|
| RUFiO1984 - 219 Posts 11/09/2011 @ 08:28:53 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| such hate |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 11/09/2011 @ 11:45:26 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Fine I just don't think the media is overplaying a team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 12:24:23 AM Their only defense of any kind is the fact that Charles Woodson is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to the other teams wideout on a weekly basis Child, please. Woodson gets called for a lot of holdings and PIs, so you obviously are not ever watching or just choose to ignore every play where he actually does get called. And the one you actually did see shouldn't have been called anyway. The receiver stopped on a dime as the ball was thrown 6 yards ahead of him--uncatchable balls are not supposed to qualify for pass interference. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott messed with this 4 times, last at 11/09/2011 11:54:17 am | ||
 | Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel 11/09/2011 @ 01:51:09 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sorry, we're out of children. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children. 11/09/2011 @ 02:39:55 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:45:26 AM Fine I just don't think the media is overplaying a team that outlandishly. But I guess that's just me. Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 12:24:23 AM Their only defense of any kind is the fact that Charles Woodson is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to the other teams wideout on a weekly basis Child, please. Woodson gets called for a lot of holdings and PIs, so you obviously are not ever watching or just choose to ignore every play where he actually does get called. And the one you actually did see shouldn't have been called anyway. The receiver stopped on a dime as the ball was thrown 6 yards ahead of him--uncatchable balls are not supposed to qualify for pass interference. Even if that were true, and I don't think it is, that doesn't make that false. Woodson could get called for 3 PI/holding penalties a game, but since he earns about 3 on every play, that would still be getting away with it 98% of the time. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 11/09/2011 @ 03:07:42 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I'm not sure which part you think is untrue, but woodson is no worse than the majority of every other cornerback in the league this year (at least in terms of "getting away" with things). And they are even calling PI/holding a lot in general this year, not to mention inconsistently. I'm not sure what you're complaining about. I'm trying to find actual individual penalty stats, but they are hard to find. I'm pretty sure Woodson gets called the most among the Packers for PI/holding/illegal contact. Which I guess wouldn't prove my point at all anyway, since you think that Woodson is guilty every time, he should be called for 247 pentalties and not the 24* that he's been flagged already. *or whatever number it actually is. as a note, I was almost going to write the "jeremy will say that just because he gets called a lot doesn't mean that the other [enter chosen hyperbole of the day] times shouldn't be called as well" note, but I didn't want to put words in your mouth. Turns out I could have saved you the typing.  |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 11/09/2011 3:10:32 pm | ||
 | Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 11/13/2011 @ 06:20:25 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jeremy Wrote - 11/08/2011 @ 12:24:23 AM Their only defense of any kind is the fact that Charles Woodson is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to the other teams wideout on a weekly basis, but I flipped to the game just in time to see him draw a flag in a situation that kind of mattered, so maybe someone's finally paying attention. I too am annoyed by the lack of penalty data on the internet, so I'm making it myself. There aren't any pages or anything yet, cause the data is too raw, but preliminary queries show going into this game (San Diego) Woodson was called for 2 penalties all season. An illegal hands to the face vs Carolina, and his unnecessary roughness penalty vs the Saints that should have got him tossed. (He was nailed 3 times in this game for pass related things. Maybe someone is finally paying attention.) Clearly, however, the sentiment that one of the most, if not the most, physical corners in the league, during a period of time when disrupting passing is a major focus, or, as someone once said, "they are even calling PI/holding a lot in general," was getting away with a lot has some merit. Edit: If you know of anything I missed, find it and let me know. My assumptions about NFL.com's data might be wrong. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy edited this 3 times, last at 11/13/2011 6:24:13 pm | ||
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 11/13/2011 @ 08:15:17 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I actually counted 7 penalties total counting the SD game called against Woodson. I used ESPN's play-by-play pages, selected "all" quarters, and went game by game. I ctrl-f'd the word "penalty" and tallied woodson's penalties. ESPN included declined penalties, which may be why NFL.com shows only 2. His breakdown is as follows: Chargers (3): holding, PI (2) Bears: Holding Panthers (2): illegal contact, illegal use of hands Saints: Unnecessary Roughness For what it's worth, that accounts for 16% of the packers total team penalties for the season (he accounts for 1/22 or about 5% of the players on the field). I did feel like he got called a lot last year, but I could be wrong because I thought he got called a lot this year too, and I could go through last year's games but I dont' feel like it at this time. Although, to be fair, I have no idea how that stacks up against every other cornerback in the league, so there I have nothing to compare it to. 7 penalties on one player could be a lot for all we know. The entire quote that you cherry picked* was that they have called these penalties "a lot in general this year, not to mention inconsistently". You left out the best part! Another thought. Woodson is definitely an aggressive defender, as we both seem to acknowledge. One of the things that has burned him recently is that he goes for the interception a lot. Since the defender is not supposed to get flagged if he is going for the ball, since the defender has every right to the ball that the receiver does, refs might be more inclined to let that kind of thing go as opposed to a defender who seems to be just trying to "break up the play". If you look like you know where the ball is or something, it can work in your favor. At least that's what Chris Collinsworth seems to say when he sees a more obvious looking PI infraction. I have no hardened explanation for it, other than to say that in the era of fantasy football where stats are like a drug, why does the NFL make me invent the wheel to count penalties. * |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott edited this 2 times, last at 11/13/2011 8:17:50 pm | ||
|
| Jeremy - 9543 Posts 11/13/2011 @ 08:58:09 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Thanks for that. Declined penalties were listed differently. (Also, there are plays with more than one penalty called) |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy screwed with this at 11/13/2011 9:03:55 pm | ||
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 11/13/2011 @ 10:26:19 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Through 8 games in 2010, Woodson was called for 7 penalties as well; 4 PIs, holding, illegal use of hands, and illegal contact. (it was actually through the first 5 game, he had no penalties in weeks 6-8). He had 10 penalties for the whole year. In fact, he only was called for 3 penalties after week 5 last year, and none for PI. So either refs just stopped calling it, he got better as the year went on, or perhaps a combination of the two. It could have something to do with Dom Capers. The Packers defense been better in each of the last 3 season in the 2nd half of the season. Maybe the defensive scheme has taken pressure off of guys like Woodson. It should be noted for both this year and last, that as of right now, I'm assuming neither of us have any numbers for any other players besides Woodson to compare to. And I'll also assume that Woodson is probably the one player that either of us has really looked at closely this year to be concluding that he is/isn't getting away with a lot. For all we know, lots of CBs are playing the same way woodson is, but they play for the bengals and we don't watch any of their games. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott screwed with this at 11/13/2011 10:33:09 pm | ||
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 11/13/2011 @ 10:29:38 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Interesting note. I had actually tallied up Woodson's 2011 penalties on a break at work last week and wrote it on a piece of paper. Then today, Melissa was cleaning up the kitchen and asked "what's this." "Oh, it's just the number of penalties Woodson has been called for this year." She threw it away, and then Jeremy posted his (ultimately incorrect) total, so I went digging through the recyclables and found my research to post my findings. #dedicationfortheuseless Is it week 10 yet? I hope my picks do well in week 10. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott screwed with this at 11/13/2011 10:30:55 pm | ||
Leave a Comment of your very own
| Name: | |||
| Comment: | |||
| |||
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.
Fetching Nutcan Content....
Packers 45 @ Chargers 38
Sarah
I really hope the Packers play the way they're supposed to against a crappy team. Seriously, fumbling that ball Phillip Rivers??? WTH?Jeremy
If all you had was the ridiculously over exaggerated coverage of this season, you'd swear the Packers had beaten every other top team in the league by 200, rather than surviving 2 1 score games against rookie qbs playing in their second games ever, en route to beating teams that are a combined 18-27. I'm not saying there's anyone out there obviously better than them, obviously they can only play the teams they're scheduled, and I know the media loves to talk about their beloved can-do-no-wrong darlings. Let's just take it down a notch or 11, shall we? There's a vast difference between haven't been beaten, and unbeatable, and thus far the Packers have decidedly fallen in the former category.Jon
I'd like to be in San Diego right now.