Vanden Bosch is such trash. He has always been overrated, kind of like Kevin Carter was when he was in TN. I would have much rather kept Travis Laboy or Antwan Odom.
I just wanted to reinforce it. As a Titans fan, I get so tired of analysts lauding him with praise for his high motor. I'd bench him for Jacob Ford right now.
That was so sick!!! He literally long-jumped 18 feet with helmet, pads, defender in the way and most impressively off his left foot.
Thank you that just validated my point, the Viking the 2nd best team in the NFC is according to you is at best ranked no higher than 6th even with a 6-0 record. Proof the NFC is the cupcake conference. I don't know where you got that 16th rank on the Pats, I check NFL.com, they're 6th in total yards, 5th in passing, 3rd in ppg allowed. Anyway not here to defend the Patriots but still their defense has been pretty good so far typical Billicheck stuff. The reason I put the Pats at 5 is because the have lost some close games like Steelers, could easily be 6-1 each. Both teams have healthy players back in to mid season shape (Brady, Welker and Polomalu). I still believe the AFC top 4 Colts, Steelers, Broncos and Patriots are better than the top 4 in the NFC. What exactly have the Saints done? beat the Eagles who just bombed against the Raiders? Or the Giants who got beat again by a high power offense in the Cardinals? As for the teams you mentioned the "disgrace" of the AFC, yeah most of them suck but then again the cupcake NFC is even worse go through their list. You have TWO 0-7 teams Rams and Bucs, Lions (1-5), Redskins (2-4) who ought to just end their season now and fire the coach, followed by the Panthers and worst offense in the league with perhaps the worse starting QB too. Seattle at 2-4 looks terrible to say the least. So yeah when you go through the AFC bottom teams and NFC, the former has one winless team the Titans and 3 terrible teams (Chiefs, Browns and Raiders) thats its. Everyone after that is decent to good starting with Buffalo (3-4) who looks decent after 2 straight wins then followed by Miami who just pounded the best team in the NFC the Saints for 3 TDs on the ground and 2 ints and fumble by Brees the best QB in the NFC. So in short if a bottom feeder in the AFC can give the NFC's best team a run for their money then I have no doubt the the top 4 are going to whoop the Saints at the first chance. NFC is the cupcake no arguing that.
This is for Pun <a href="http://giftube.com/"><img src="http://www.videobeta.net/gifs/12576.gif" alt=""></a><br/><a style="padding:3px;background: transparent;color:#00ADEF;font-family:tahoma;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;" href="http://giftube.com/" target="_blank">Gifs at Giftube.com </a>
When did I say that say the Vikings were the second best NFC team? They are 16th in total yards allowed and one could only expect them to move up after facing the likes of Tampa Bay. You ask this question then ignore what exactly have the Steelers done? Out of the teams that the Steelers have beaten, which ones would you are better than the Giants or Eagles? Who cares about the Raiders game, I'll admit it was a bad loss but I can go back in history and show that one game where a good team bombs against a poor team has no relevance at all. So, who are these juggernauts that the Steelers keep beating? Yes, the NFC has its share of bad teams but.... The Seahawks for being such a terrible team destroyed what you call a decent team, Jacksonville, 41-0. Buffalo looks decent after two straight wins, one of those being against a team you call terrible in Carolina. So the Dolphins just pounded the Saints yet they couldn't put them away. A loss is a loss no matter how you try to shape it. To top it off, the AFC's record vs. the NFC this year is 16-15 so far. If that's dominance to you, maybe you need to go checkout the definition.
They stomped a mudhole in the Cardinals in Arizona on a Sunday night game. That was pretty impressive to me. This stretch will be interesting, for sure.
Raising a question here.... You're the Vikings, and you're down 3 with about 3 minutes left. You throw a pass to Adrian Peterson, who bowls over a Pittsburgh defender, and gets you to Pitt's 30 (give or take). So, you're now within field goal range, running the clock down, you have the best running back in the league, and a pretty good back-up. Wouldn't you give the ball to your workhorse running backs, run some clock, and eat some yards? If you get somewhere near the ten, then I say throw for the endzone. But, why would you start passing? I was watching that game yesterday, and as Minny huddled after the Peterson catch, I turned to the folks in the room, and said, "They need to stop passing the ball. You have the best running back in the league, give him the ball, let him go to work. They're gonna throw an interception." Sure enough, they break huddle, march out and throw a screen pass (admittedly, if I threw a pass, it would be a screen) to Chester Taylor, who whiffs at it, and Pittsburgh returns it to ice the game. I posed this question on a local sports radio show (not Houston local...), and the host said that "Minny was going for the win, yada, yada"). Yes, Minny was going for the win, but you have over 2 minutes left (not sure how much exactly), which is plenty of time to run the ball. At worst, you go to overtime. So, I pose the question to the smarter BBS pool. Agree or disagree?
I think there are several things here: 1. Favre had thrown all over the field against the Steelers (300+ yards) 2. Peterson had been held in check most of the day 3. Most importantly, Favre hasn't been making as many dumb decisions this year - only 2 INTs going into yesterday And the Steelers weren't doing much against the Vikings defense, so trying to run down clock wouldn't be as much of a priority. I think you absolutely have to try to win it there, and the best way to do that was throwing just because that's what was working all day.
It's not yada yada. You have a legendary QB who's been on fire and you have the defending champs against the wall. You have the momentum because AP just ran over a defender and took it 30+ yards. Sure they could've ran the ball, get stuffed a few times and kick a field goal but I wouldn't of done that. I would've gone for the kill. What happened when the Bengals attacked the Pittsburg Defense? They won the game on a last second PASSING TD. Now I wouldn't of done a screen pass on FIRST down, but I wouldn't force feed Peterson all 3 downs and rely on Longwell to kick a 40+ yarder. Chestor Taylor just did not catch an easy pass. **** happens.
How is that one better? Reggie Bush leaped 6 yards while Buckhalter leaped 4 yards. I dislike Bush as much as anyone but that was one crazy play
Those are three valid points, and you're right. It's just that watching the game(I guess I didn't realize Favre had thrown for that many yards), the Steelers (especially in the 4th quarter) had tons of pressure on Favre. He fumbled the drive previous (I believe) to the one in question. The only reason the Vikes were still in it is because Harvin returned the kickoff for a touchdown. Anyways, I just got the feeling that a draw or two would have done the trick, with the way the Steelers were blitzing. P.S. There were at least three absolutely bogus calls on the Vikings that made that game tough to win for them. It was very poor (and seemingly lop-sided) officiating. The "tripping" call that negated the game-winning touchdown was one, for starters. And I am in no way a Vikings fan.
Well if you count where Buckhalter actually landed it's more than 4 yds and he hurdled someone trying to hit him directly in front of him. Bush hurdled a guy coming from the side.
