Official American Football Thread

Wasted CLV said:
I dunno, man.  I hate to dog your team, but Berrian is your top WR at the moment.  He will do really well, and with AP, their ground game will be just fine.  The defense is always rock solid, so that won't be a problem (specially with that 'gift' the Chiefs gave you a few years back ;))

However, that being said, the Saints offense looks like its full bore, ready to go.  Their D has seemed to improve some, so I'd hate to bet against them. 

It will be an interesting weekend in football!
Click to expand...
Yes, it will be! And yes, it will be a very tough game for The Vikes. Especially with 2 VERY major players out from injury and migraines. LET'S GET IT ON! :okok:
 
Wasted CLV said:
Canadian Football?  Don't they have something wrong with their field that far north?  :smartarse:
Click to expand...

The big differences are that the field is 10 yards longer and 12 yards wider to match with a soccer field, there is an extra player (two slotbacks instead of a tight end), and there are only three downs. Canadian football is much more of a running game. Our offensive and defensive lines tend to be far more mobile due to the extra running.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... n_football

Learn more :)
 
Well, the field I actually knew.  I had assumed about the running offenses based on the types of QBs that they took up there.

I didn't know about the extra slotback or the downs (or why the did make the size different).

And now, you have given me a wiki page that is likely going to take up tons of reading time!!!  Good one!! (enabler)
 
LooseCannon said:
there are only three downs. Canadian football is much more of a running game
Click to expand...

I don't doubt you, but these two things seem inconsistent.  If one day they decided that you had only 3 downs in American football, my suspicion is that teams would run the ball far less, and pass the ball far more, than they currently do. 

By the way, I think Wasted is probably right -- weather and QB quality probably account for more running than passing in Canada as compared to the NFL.  There are fewer NFL-quality QBs than the number of NFL teams, and one has to assume that none of the Canadian QBs is better than the worst of the NFL's starting QB (otherwise they'd be picked up by an NFL team and paid more money).  By that logic, if my QB were no better than Jake Delhomme or Derek Anderson or (egads) JaMarcus Russell, then I'd mostly run the ball too.  Basically, picture Trent Edwards on the Bills, but worse. 
 
cornfedhick said:
I don't doubt you, but these two things seem inconsistent.  If one day they decided that you had only 3 downs in American football, my suspicion is that teams would run the ball far less, and pass the ball far more, than they currently do. 
Click to expand...

Yes, but with a much wider field and an extra player, it becomes a lot easier to run, too. No doubt you're right and the quality of the QB has a lot to do with it, as most good ones do go to the NFL (we've had a few nice ones like Doug Flutie, though!), but in Canadian football you can go around the defense a lot easier, just because you have a lot of extra room, and an extra player behind you.

Probably, the good receivers are all in the NFL as well. How was NFL Europa for running, as it might be a decent point of comparison?
 
I'm not sure about the European leagues. Funny you mention Flutie, cause he is one I was thinking of. Far better passer than given credit, he was smaller and had a harder time seeing over the line- that, to me, means run more. If you can give him lanes, he can go down field (Hail Mary anyone?). But he did have a hard time seeing over the big O-lines.
BTW, I am a Flutie fan.
 
That's right, and he's a 3x Grey Cup MVP and champion. 6x CFL's Outstanding Player. 6x CFL All-Star, and generally considered the best QB in CFL history.
 
Deservedly so.  I was happy to see him come back to the NFL, and was disappointed with how he got bagged again.  I believe it was the Bills, and he had taken them to the playoffs only to be benched for Rob "headband" Johnson.  The Bills only lost on that bizarre Titans 'Music City Miracle' gig, but Flutie should have been on the field.
 
I think that's great!  I think there are plenty around the States that appreciate the talent that he had.

Tho, now I'm kinda in the mood to watch some NFL Europe and some CFL.
 
Well, one of those two leagues still exists. If you can get your hand on it, watch the Grey Cup game from last year. Hands down the best football game I've ever seen.

It's the 97th Grey Cup.
 
SinisterMinisterX said:
Just surfing around, I saw this... odds for the next Super Bowl winner.

Arizona Cardinals 40/1
Atlanta Falcons 28/1
Baltimore Ravens 16/1
Buffalo Bills 100/1
Carolina Panthers 35/1
Chicago Bears 35/1
Cincinnati Bengals 30/1
Cleveland Browns 80/1
Dallas Cowboys 12/1
Denver Broncos 50/1
Detroit Lions 90/1
Green Bay Packers 14/1
Houston Texans 25/1
Indianapolis Colts 9/1
Jacksonville Jaguars 70/1
Kansas City Chiefs 90/1
Miami Dolphins 30/1
Minnesota Vikings 14/1
New England Patriots 12/1
New Orleans Saints 9/1
New York Giants 25/1
New York Jets 10/1
Oakland Raiders 80/1
Philadelphia Eagles 18/1
Pittsburgh Steelers 20/1
San Diego Chargers 11/1
San Francisco 49ers 30/1
Seattle Seahawks 40/1
St.Louis Rams 100/1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 100/1
Tennessee Titans 28/1
Washington Redskins 25/1

I am pleased to see that my Packers have been given such good odds.
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, same odds as The Vikes.
 
Flutie is fairly iconic in the U.S., too, though perhaps more as a great college player.  Flutie Flakes!! 

Flutie sort of proves my point, though.  Once he established himself as a legit pro in the CFL, he was picked up by an NFL team.  Even then, though he was a gritty, more-effective-than-coaches-suspected QB, he was never really better than an average NFL QB.  Now, you take an average NFL QB -- say, Chad Henne or Eli Manning -- and put him on a Canadian team, look out, you'll see a lot of passing yards and a bunch of touchdowns. 

I don't know enough to have a view about the quality of receivers or defensive backs in the CFL, though I presume they are about the same relative to each other as they are in the NFL.  If so, then the receivers shouldn't make a difference.  They may not be as fast, but presumably they can run routes and catch, which will light up scoreboards with a decent QB against a similar level of competition on defense.  A good QB will make a receiver look good.   
 
Well, again, there are more players, but wider space. So the throws we see tend to go to the sides rather than deep. Not saying deep doesn't happen, but there is a lack of deep bombs and shotgun plays, and far more 5-10 yard throws. A receiver can go further wide than he can deep, if that makes sense. The defensive line still does mostly the same job, of course.
 
Sounds like a lot of 'West Coast Offense' going on.  Which makes sense, that offense was a 'throwing-running game'.  A wider field would work better with that sort of game play (IMO).  Get the receivers 'wide' rather than 'deep'. 
 
Wasted CLV said:
Sounds like a lot of 'West Coast Offense' going on.  Which makes sense, that offense was a 'throwing-running game'.  A wider field would work better with that sort of game play (IMO).  Get the receivers 'wide' rather than 'deep'.  
Click to expand...

I wonder how much the the extra defender could negate the wider field -- your average nickel-back or safety could cover the additional 12 yards pretty quickly, but that's still a lot of extra space.  Reading the Wiki article that LC posted, it seems like the biggest difference from a tactical point of view is the unlimited use of motion at the time of the snap.  In the U.S., only one offensive player can be moving at the snap, and only laterally, not forward.  In Canada, all offensive skill players can be running around like crazy, including forward toward the line of scrimmage, at the time of the snap.  That's a HUGE advantage for the offense.  That would drive most defenses nuts, because you have no idea what play is coming based on the formation, and the receivers will get a running head start.  Can you imagine Peyton Manning or Drew Brees running an offense like that?!  They'd score >50 per game!  I think that, with strong-armed, accurate QBs, the Canadian game would actually lend itself to deep (and wide) passes.  Particularly given that the end zone is much bigger (deeper and wider), too.  More space in general.    

Interesting that the Wiki says that Canadian football is more pass-happy than American football, which is consistent with my intuitive sense, though that may be less so given the evolution of American football rules that encourage passing (basically, you can't even nudge the receiver until he passes[EDIT: catches] the ball, and it is now barely legal even to hit QBs in the NFL, even if they have the ball!) and the weather/QB quality issues discussed above.  

EDIT:  In case you can't tell, I LOVE talking football strategy.  Even though I've never played past high school and don't really know what I'm talking about.  Still, football is less complicated than people think.  
 
Sounds like the offense runs more like the Arena League, with all the motion, including running towards the line of scrimmage.  Now I'm curious and I'm going to look up some game stats for CFL games.

I still think that its the QB that really slows down the passing game there.  But I'll find out some info on that.

@cfh, wish we could hang out in a bar watching football on Sunday!  You, me and LC could have a good time!  (I'm picturing conversations towards the end of the second game turning more towards the end of our Debate Drinking Game)
 
I have just been informed that, months ago, I agreed to take my son to "Walking With the Dinosaurs" this Sunday, which would be a wonderful way to spend time with him but for the fact that it's the FIRST WEEKEND OF FOOTBALL SEASON!!  Whoops.  Thank God for DVRs and the Red Zone channel. 
 
Amen!  Man, out of all the things I miss from satellite, its NFL Sunday ticket.

So, last season, there were 4 QB's with over 4k yards, and 6 RB's with over 1k yards.  One QB was just under a hundred yards short of 5k, the highest RB was 15xx yards.  Looks like 18 games a season? 

In the NFL, we had 10 QB's with over 4k yards and 15 RB's with over 1k (one hit 2k).

Hm...thats tough.  It seems that the QBs up in the CFL last longer, with several over 40k lifetime yards thrown.  (I'm recalling that Warren Moon threw for a bunch up there, back in the day)/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top