Page 1 of 2
Pro Bowl Results
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:47 am
by Cosmo Kramer
Any surprises On or Off of the Roster?
I think that Charles Woodson and Greg Jennings should have made it.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d ... nfirm=true
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:34 am
by jiminphilly
Surprise selections:
Al Harris
Donald Driver
Surprised not selected:
Trent Cole
Mike Patterson
Marques Colston
** Jennings had a great year but didn't rank in the top 10 in yards or receptions.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:31 am
by RevLimiter
Should be IN
Mario Williams
Fred Taylor
Joe Thomas
Trent Cole
Should be OUT
Jason Taylor (1-13, hello???)
Joseph Addai
Jonathan Ogden
Troy Polamalu
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:44 am
by BSmack
Nice to see James Harrison getting some Pro Bowl love. Joey who?
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:21 am
by Jack
Pro Bowl Surprise:Sean Taylor as a Starter
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:43 pm
by Rack Fu
I wonder if Chad Johnson was a bit humbled yesterday when he saw TJ on the roster and not himself.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:13 pm
by Shoalzie
No Lions
If any Lion should've been there, I would've picked Ernie Sims...second to Patrick Willis in tackles. He's the only guy on this team maybe other than the kicker and the punter that I'm not embarrassed by.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:46 pm
by poptart
Oakland has a good punter.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:58 pm
by trev
Drew Brees should be there. Matt Hasselbeck, not so much.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:00 pm
by BSmack
Rack Fu wrote:I wonder if Chad Johnson was a bit humbled yesterday when he saw TJ on the roster and not himself.
Ocho is too busy packing his bags to notice.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:19 pm
by RevLimiter
poptart wrote:Oakland has a good punter.
But KC's is better:
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats? ... onType=REG
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:22 pm
by jiminphilly
trev wrote:Drew Brees should be there. Matt Hasselbeck, not so much.
He had a strong 2nd half of the season and finishes with some nice stats but Hasselbeck was consistent all season and has 5 less ints. I think the correct player was selected there.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:23 pm
by trev
But San Diego's is better than both.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:26 pm
by jiminphilly
Dear baby Jesus,
Make this beating go swift.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:26 pm
by poptart
Lechler has the highest net average in the conference, and his gross average is so far ahead of everyone else that it looks like it must be a typo.
Lechler is tops.PERIOD. .
BALEE DAT!
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:28 pm
by trev
jiminphilly wrote:trev wrote:Drew Brees should be there. Matt Hasselbeck, not so much.
He had a strong 2nd half of the season and finishes with some nice stats but Hasselbeck was consistent all season and has 5 less ints. I think the correct player was selected there.
You would be wrong, of course, but it doesn't matter. Drew thrives on being snubbed.
Rack Tart
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:34 pm
by jiminphilly
trev wrote:jiminphilly wrote:trev wrote:Drew Brees should be there. Matt Hasselbeck, not so much.
He had a strong 2nd half of the season and finishes with some nice stats but Hasselbeck was consistent all season and has 5 less ints. I think the correct player was selected there.
You would be wrong, of course, but it doesn't matter. Drew thrives on being snubbed.
How am I wrong?
Rack Tart
Agreed.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:18 pm
by trev
jiminphilly wrote:
How am I wrong?
1. Seattle played more shit teams
2. Drew had more yards
3. Drew had more completions
4. Drew had less INT's than Romo
5. Drew had a better QB rating than Matt
All in all, Drew above Hasselbeck.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:37 pm
by jiminphilly
mvscal wrote:jiminphilly wrote:
** Jennings had a great year but didn't rank in the top 10 in yards or receptions.
How about touchdowns?
2nd.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:43 pm
by See You Next Wednesday
Please tell me you guys are not going to start a pissing contest over who has the best freaking punter?
Garrard over Rothlisberger. I mean the Jags are 10-4 and they have exactly zero Pro Bowlers?
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:45 pm
by jiminphilly
trev wrote:jiminphilly wrote:
How am I wrong?
1. Seattle played more shit teams -
without even checking this is irrevelant.
2. Drew had more yards -
less than 200. Not a huge difference.
3. Drew had more completions-
and Hasselbeck had more yards per completion.
4. Drew had less INT's than Romo-
and Romo pretty much kills Brees in every other category.. Besides we're debating Hasselbeck and Brees, remember?
5. Drew had a better QB rating than Matt-
by .1 which is a fart in the wind.
All in all, Drew above Hasselbeck.
All in all I'd say you have no idea what the fuck your talking about but carry on.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:49 pm
by Goober McTuber
Not to mention the fact that Hasselbeck also led his team to a division title.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:55 pm
by jiminphilly
mvscal wrote:jiminphilly wrote:mvscal wrote:
How about touchdowns?
2nd.
12 TDs is nothing to sneeze at. He was also 2nd in 1st down percentage among receivers with 50 or more receptions. Sounds like a legitimate pro bowler to me.
Driver has no business going but I'd replace him with Coulston before Jennings but I'd put Jennings as the 5th best receiver.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:05 pm
by trev
jimy, it's not my style to argue over silly pro bowl selections. You can have the last word. I don't know what criteria you find relevant since stats obviously aren't your criteria. Brees is top three, hence the comparison to Romo. You can "win" this one. Let's talk in a couple weeks though.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:14 pm
by See You Next Wednesday
mvscal wrote:jiminphilly wrote:mvscal wrote:
12 TDs is nothing to sneeze at. He was also 2nd in 1st down percentage among receivers with 50 or more receptions. Sounds like a legitimate pro bowler to me.
Driver has no business going but I'd replace him with Coulston before Jennings but I'd put Jennings as the 5th best receiver.
Are fucking kidding? Colston? What the fuck has he ever done? Receptions and yardage are the most overblown meaningless stats there are. The only stats that matter for receivers are per catch average, touchdowns and first down percentage.
That is how you determine whether or not a receiver is an impact player.
Receptions are a joke. Unless, of course, you're prepared to try and argue that TJ Douchemenzadeh, Wes Welker and Derrick Mason are the three best receivers in the league.
I'd throw YAC in there as well.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:32 pm
by RumpleForeskin
Mario Williams and Fred Taylor definitely should be in. Unfortunately, the voting is over by week 14 or some shit like that, so this last game kind of doesn't count. Should Mario Williams take over Kearny #1 in sacks, then the system should be changed. Hell, it should be changed anyway. Williams is #1 in sacks in the fucking AFC. Bullshit.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:34 pm
by RumpleForeskin
Based on 'Dre Johnson's games he has played in, one could argue he was the league's best receiver not named Randy Moss this year.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:12 pm
by BSmack
RumpleForeskin wrote:Mario Williams and Fred Taylor definitely should be in. Unfortunately, the voting is over by week 14 or some shit like that, so this last game kind of doesn't count. Should Mario Williams take over Kearny #1 in sacks, then the system should be changed. Hell, it should be changed anyway. Williams is #1 in sacks in the fucking AFC. Bullshit.
Fear not. Mario will get his trip to Hawaii as soon as one of the starters bails out because of "injury".
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:14 pm
by RevLimiter
BSmack wrote:RumpleForeskin wrote:Mario Williams and Fred Taylor definitely should be in. Unfortunately, the voting is over by week 14 or some shit like that, so this last game kind of doesn't count. Should Mario Williams take over Kearny #1 in sacks, then the system should be changed. Hell, it should be changed anyway. Williams is #1 in sacks in the fucking AFC. Bullshit.
Fear not. Mario will get his trip to Hawaii as soon as one of the starters bails out because of "injury".
$$$
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:28 pm
by Sirfindafold
Nnamdi Asomugha should definitely be in.
He didn't have the INT's that he had last year, but nobody threw at him this year. He allowed a grand total of NINE catches in 14 games.
Fuck the popularity contest that is the Pro Bowl.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:42 pm
by War Wagon
See You Next Wednesday wrote:Please tell me you guys are not going to start a pissing contest over who has the best freaking punter?
Hey, the punter is the most valuable player on every team I've ever coached. BIG chunks of yardage in one snap, BOOYAH!
Sin,
Herm Edwards
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:03 pm
by Dinsdale
Goober McTuber wrote:Not to mention the fact that Hasselbeck also led his team to a division title.
While Jon-Boy(wait... is it Jon Boy or Drew... the mole always confuses me) "led" his team from the NFC Championship Game to mediocrity.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:34 pm
by RumpleForeskin
Dinsdale wrote:While Jon-Boy(wait... is it Jon Boy or Drew... the mole always confuses me) "led" his team from the NFC Championship Game to mediocrity.
You are a fucking retard.
Try leading a team back to prominence with absolutely NO running game while the other side the ball has been beat more often than Tina Turner. Brees has done a fan-fucking-tastic job considering what he was up against when Deuce went down.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:48 pm
by Dinsdale
Pro Bowl voters want results...
Not facial growths.
Besides, NO had a running game for awhile... hell, Cheater Bush got his per-carry average up to a lofty 3.7 this year while he was in... a huge improvement over last year. Now, if that isn't running the ball effectively, I don't know what is.
Rumps -- you, of all people, should never use the words "running game" and "retard" in the same sentence.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:57 pm
by RumpleForeskin
Dinsdale wrote:Pro Bowl voters want results...
Mario Williams?
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:20 pm
by See You Next Wednesday
RumpleForeskin wrote:Dinsdale wrote:While Jon-Boy(wait... is it Jon Boy or Drew... the mole always confuses me) "led" his team from the NFC Championship Game to mediocrity.
You are a fucking retard.
Try leading a team back to prominence with absolutely NO running game while the other side the ball has been beat more often than Tina Turner. Brees has done a fan-fucking-tastic job considering what he was up against when Deuce went down.
Seattle has a running game?
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:25 pm
by RumpleForeskin
See You Next Wednesday wrote:Seattle has a running game?
Good point, but their defense has played solid ball the past 5 games.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:25 pm
by jiminphilly
RumpleForeskin wrote:with absolutely NO running game .
Aaron Stecker would disagree. I would not be in my ff finals without him. Face it- Bush is a stiff and a career backup in Stecker has shown what happens when you run North-South.
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:29 pm
by RumpleForeskin
jiminphilly wrote:Aaron Stecker would disagree. I would not be in my ff finals without him. Face it- Bush is a stiff and a career backup in Stecker has shown what happens when you run North-South.
I agree with that. Peyton should have been splitting duties all along ever since Deuce went down, but you know he would have been crucified by the public had he not given Bush the opportunity to be
THE guy. Although, Bush and Young have been victims of the sophmore slump and I am a Mario guy, I really do hope these two guys bounce back next year. Especially Vince.
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:26 pm
by DamnTheCowboys
Goober McTuber wrote:Not to mention the fact that Hasselbeck also led his team to a division title.
7-9 is literally going to be enough to win that shit division eventually. Must be nice having 7 bye weeks.