It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Official NFL 2010 Regular Season & Playoffs Thread

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 08:37 PM

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Now if we can only protect our QB until January...

That doesn't seem to be going too well at the moment.

The injury bug has hit the Pack worse than the Bears though. Grant is done for the season. Finley is done for 3-6 weeks. Rodgers will probably miss next game. Then various injuries like Pickett, Lee, Matthews, Barnett... It's been rough.

We're on our third string tight end. Andrew Quarless. Watch out, NFL... we're unleashing The Quarless...

He's going to take the league by storm...


posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by PETROLCOIN

Don't even talk about injuries...

The Eagles and injuries seem to be synonyms this season.

posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 12:06 PM
reply to post by Modern Americana

Our starting running back is out for the season and our dominating tight end is out for at least 3 weeks. How are yours doing?

That's not to mention Aaron Rodger's concussion. You'd have to take Michael Vick and Kevin Kolb and multiply them by 25 to equal the talent of Rodgers. Losing Rodgers for even a week is more significant than if you lost Ron Mexico to a career ending injury.

posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 10:31 AM

Ain't no way Rodgers is better than Romo. No way.


Wow. Just wow. Even at their pathetic 1-3 record, the defense of the Cowgirls and their sorry players holds strong. That is blind ignorance.

I don't even need to go further into it. I've seen both Aaron Rodgers and Tony Homo play and there is NO comparison whatsoever. Aaron Rodgers is by far the better quarterback.

This idiot needs to be fired: Cowboys QB gets raw deal in Romo-Rodgers comparison

edit on 10/17/2010 by PETROLCOIN because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 01:10 PM
The Falcons may need a restraining order on the Kolb and the Eagles' offense

It is getting ridiculous for a team that thought they were the best in the NFC.

edit on 17-10-2010 by Modern Americana because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 03:24 PM


The Bears lost. We have a perfect opportunity to tie things up in the division, and we lose to the Dolphins...?

That's pathetic.

Tim Masthay (the punter) needs to go. He's terrible. 30th in Net Yardage in the league. The Packers fight back and force it to overtime, they play defense and get the ball in overtime... but then they have to punt and he uncorks some piece of # kick and gives the Dolphins good field position.

Horrible. This team is good enough, despite the injuries, to be better than 3-3. It's the stupid penalties and sub-par performances from players like their punter that have led to this.

posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 03:27 PM
I swear the Texans are the most dramatic team in the NFL. That was a great game.

I am liking how Kolb is developing. He isn't perfect, but he could be much worse.

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 10:52 AM
I saw somewhere that the head injuries this year are more than double what they were this time last year. That's pretty ridiculous. I thought the NFL implemented new rules to be stricter about blows to the head? Obviously it hasn't deterred anyone or prevented anything.

I like Joe Paterno's idea of removing the facemask.

In other news, I'm going to the Vikings-Packers game Sunday night! Driving from Michigan to Green Bay. I'll be in section 126. It will be fun watching Brett lose in his last game in Lambeau.

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 10:56 AM
reply to post by PETROLCOIN

The facemask is there to lessen the force on the face, like a roll cage in a race car. Removing it would not be a good thing.

It isn't perfect, but it is better than not having it.

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Modern Americana
The facemask is there to lessen the force on the face

Exactly. Removing it would discourage players from leading with their head. If they knew there was nothing there to protect them, they would focus more on making actual tackles and less on making the big hit to get on the highlight reel. The facemask makes them feel invincible and encourages those types of hits.
edit on 10/22/2010 by PETROLCOIN because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by PETROLCOIN

That is true, but what about the players that hit the ground face first? There is nothing there to keep their faces from skidding across the ground, or to keep wild knees and elbows from hitting their face and breaking their respective noses.

They will never take away the facemask completely without bringing in something better.

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 12:05 PM
reply to post by Modern Americana

The only other solution would be to give referees the power to review the hit - just as they would review a play on a challenge - and determine whether or not to eject the player who made the hit right then and there. If there is not some sort of immediate punishment for their actions, players will continue to make these violent hits.

posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 11:59 PM
A few pictures from the Vikings-Packers game I went to:


National Anthem



posted on Oct, 31 2010 @ 09:18 PM
My team gets the first shutout of the season for the entire league.

That's right, boys and girls. Here we come. Injuries or no injuries.

posted on Nov, 1 2010 @ 03:10 PM
The Vikings waived Randy Moss...

I don't understand this. Apparently the Vikings haven't given a reason either.

That's really odd. I wonder what happened to cause that?

posted on Nov, 1 2010 @ 07:06 PM
reply to post by PETROLCOIN

One less problem for your division, right?

Honestly, I don't care where Randy Moss goes. I know he wont be in my division, and I know he wont be as great as he was in New England in 2007. Needless to say that his time is numbered.

posted on Nov, 1 2010 @ 07:40 PM
Pretty big showdown tonight on Monday Night Football. Indy vs Houston for first in the division and second best record in the AFC behind only New England. Can't say either of the teams are my favs, but it should make for a high scoring affair.

I'm going to go with Texans 35-28.

posted on Nov, 1 2010 @ 11:57 PM
The Texans didn't play very well at all. They didn't convert when they needed to. Too many turnovers. Too many penalties. I didn't think Indianapolis played all that great either. The game was winnable, but the Texans beat themselves.

posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 02:03 AM
reply to post by PETROLCOIN

They really did, a team with the players like Andre Johnson and Arian Foster, should be almost unbeatable. Unless, as previously stated, they beat themselves. I really dig Arian Foster, I like the way he runs.

And about me picking Houston to win, makes me remember why I don't bet on football!
edit on 2-11-2010 by anthbes because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 7 2010 @ 10:31 PM

Nuff said.

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in