Big game for Broncos on Thanksgiving Night Football
RickyBobby
will be able to see it. But it is always on the radio everywhere.
We somehow slipped a game behind the Chargers so this game is really huge.
They say that Eli Manning has some owwie on his foot that I could not begin
to spell so maybe the Broncos can steal one if Manning plays poorly.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
Well, you could have watched it on NFL.com.
We didn't play poorly at all. We played like the Broncos of the first
6 weeks of the season. Of course, I could see how someone (like you)
would call it a "steal". Our O-line generally overpowered their D-
line (excepting the sack there in the beginning). Our D-line made it
seem that their O just wasn't in the game. Our D was well rested all
evening, and our O held up pretty damn well for playing *alot*.
Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
Cleatarrior
As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
It was good to see Sheffler back in the mix, and somewhere else than the
sidelines.
Orton, however, remains a rag-arm.
Good win D, OK performance O.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > On Nov 26, 8:36 am, "RickyBobby" <nasca...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> Too bad it is on NFL Network because only a small fraction of the NFL fans
> >> will be able to see it. But it is always on the radio everywhere.
>
> >> We somehow slipped a game behind the Chargers so this game is really huge.
> >> They say that Eli Manning has some owwie on his foot that I could not begin
> >> to spell so maybe the Broncos can steal one if Manning plays poorly.
>
> > Well, you could have watched it on NFL.com.
>
> > We didn't play poorly at all. We played like the Broncos of the first
> > 6 weeks of the season. Of course, I could see how someone (like you)
> > would call it a "steal". Our O-line generally overpowered their D-
> > line (excepting the sack there in the beginning). Our D-line made it
> > seem that their O just wasn't in the game. Our D was well rested all
> > evening, and our O held up pretty damn well for playing *alot*.
>
> > Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>
> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
those Fbombs over the air?
> It was good to see Sheffler back in the mix, and somewhere else than the
> sidelines.
>
> Orton, however, remains a rag-arm.
Orton has a strong enough arm for what McD wants him to do. He runs
into trouble when he has to throw those hailmary passes. If it's
20/30 yards, no problem.
> Good win D, OK performance O.
Were you not watching the same game? The O played exceptionally well,
especially when compared to the previous 4 games. Weren't the points
more last night, than in the previous 4 games combined?
Oh, wait... the Giants are not a *real* team, I forgot.
Cleatarrior
> On Nov 27, 11:19 am, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>>> On Nov 26, 8:36 am, "RickyBobby" <nasca...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> Too bad it is on NFL Network because only a small fraction of the NFL fans
>>>> will be able to see it. But it is always on the radio everywhere.
>>>> We somehow slipped a game behind the Chargers so this game is really huge.
>>>> They say that Eli Manning has some owwie on his foot that I could not begin
>>>> to spell so maybe the Broncos can steal one if Manning plays poorly.
>>> Well, you could have watched it on NFL.com.
>>> We didn't play poorly at all. We played like the Broncos of the first
>>> 6 weeks of the season. Of course, I could see how someone (like you)
>>> would call it a "steal". Our O-line generally overpowered their D-
>>> line (excepting the sack there in the beginning). Our D-line made it
>>> seem that their O just wasn't in the game. Our D was well rested all
>>> evening, and our O held up pretty damn well for playing *alot*.
>>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>
> You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
> those Fbombs over the air?
Good question, they even did it on replay!
>> It was good to see Sheffler back in the mix, and somewhere else than the
>> sidelines.
>>
>> Orton, however, remains a rag-arm.
>
> Orton has a strong enough arm for what McD wants him to do. He runs
> into trouble when he has to throw those hailmary passes. If it's
> 20/30 yards, no problem.
Well...those first 2 TD attempts weren't real accurate passes...
>> Good win D, OK performance O.
>
> Were you not watching the same game?
With a loud group, some fun distractions...
> The O played exceptionally well,
> especially when compared to the previous 4 games. Weren't the points
> more last night, than in the previous 4 games combined?
Sure, but to me they didn't look that great as far as execution was
concerned.
2 red zone opportunities squandered in the 1st 1/2.
I limp-arm INT.
Marshall has to make 2 circus catches.
But I _did like_ the passes to Sheffler and especially Stokley on his TD.
> Oh, wait... the Giants are not a *real* team, I forgot.
They're developing their own Jekyll/Hyde rep. I thought in preaseason
they looked poised to repeat, despite the loss of Plax and Strahan.
Now...up and down, inconsistent.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > On Nov 27, 11:19 am, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
> >> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> >>> On Nov 26, 8:36 am, "RickyBobby" <nasca...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> Too bad it is on NFL Network because only a small fraction of the NFL fans
> >>>> will be able to see it. But it is always on the radio everywhere.
> >>>> We somehow slipped a game behind the Chargers so this game is really huge.
> >>>> They say that Eli Manning has some owwie on his foot that I could not begin
> >>>> to spell so maybe the Broncos can steal one if Manning plays poorly.
> >>> Well, you could have watched it on NFL.com.
> >>> We didn't play poorly at all. We played like the Broncos of the first
> >>> 6 weeks of the season. Of course, I could see how someone (like you)
> >>> would call it a "steal". Our O-line generally overpowered their D-
> >>> line (excepting the sack there in the beginning). Our D-line made it
> >>> seem that their O just wasn't in the game. Our D was well rested all
> >>> evening, and our O held up pretty damn well for playing *alot*.
> >>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
> >> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>
> > You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
> > those Fbombs over the air?
>
> Good question, they even did it on replay!
Maybe they will get a break because they are on a higher tier, and not
available to just *any* household (?). Who knows.
> > Orton has a strong enough arm for what McD wants him to do. He runs
> > into trouble when he has to throw those hailmary passes. If it's
> > 20/30 yards, no problem.
>
> Well...those first 2 TD attempts weren't real accurate passes...
They were accurate enough to score. No one throws the perfect ball,
every single time.
> >> Good win D, OK performance O.
>
> > Were you not watching the same game?
>
> With a loud group, some fun distractions...
Considering the last few games, I rather wish I'd had some
distractions, but ended up very happy that I didn't have any.
> > The O played exceptionally well,
> > especially when compared to the previous 4 games. Weren't the points
> > more last night, than in the previous 4 games combined?
>
> Sure, but to me they didn't look that great as far as execution was
> concerned.
> 2 red zone opportunities squandered in the 1st 1/2.
Oh... yeah... Because Cutler (and Elway and Plummer and Favre and
Manning and name your favorite QB) *always* got points, *every*
*single* *time* he made it into the RedZone, how silly of me <eye
roll>. Everyone does it (well, except maybe the Saints, but even they
have faltered a couple of times).
> I limp-arm INT.
Or we could have a strong arm INT, in really silly places. Have you
forgotten how irritating it was, to see JC throw the ball into a slew
of defenders when you couldn't even *see* a Bronco jersey?
> Marshall has to make 2 circus catches.
and then joked about them both after the game, saying that he caught
them both one handed to make Orton look bad!
You know, Marshall isn't good about making others look good.
> But I _did like_ the passes to Sheffler and especially Stokley on his TD.
>
> > Oh, wait... the Giants are not a *real* team, I forgot.
>
> They're developing their own Jekyll/Hyde rep. I thought in preaseason
> they looked poised to repeat, despite the loss of Plax and Strahan.
> Now...up and down, inconsistent.
In other words, you feel they aren't a *real* team, thanks
Nancy Perry
Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>>
>
>As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
I think you are both right. :)
Nancy
Biff
<Barnab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>>
>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>
>You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
>those Fbombs over the air?
ironic that the super bowl fiasco caused need for a delay on radio,
but not in football games.
--
biff [hr14...@sneakemail.com]
(put "blackcherry" in the subject line to get through)
_______ ____
| /----/ (____)
c (.).) |Budw|
( (_)) (_)(__)
\ . | | (__)
\___/ | (__)
----
Words of Wisdom for Saturday, October 17, 2009...
Is there anything more beautiful than a beautiful,
beautiful flamingo, flying across in front of a beautiful
sunset? And he's carrying a beautiful rose in his beak,
and also he's carrying a very beautiful painting with his
feet. And also, you're drunk.
Cleatarrior
Not on the 1st 2 field goals they settled for.
>>>> Good win D, OK performance O.
>>> Were you not watching the same game?
>> With a loud group, some fun distractions...
>
> Considering the last few games, I rather wish I'd had some
> distractions, but ended up very happy that I didn't have any.
Lol.
>>> The O played exceptionally well,
>>> especially when compared to the previous 4 games. Weren't the points
>>> more last night, than in the previous 4 games combined?
>> Sure, but to me they didn't look that great as far as execution was
>> concerned.
>> 2 red zone opportunities squandered in the 1st 1/2.
>
> Oh... yeah... Because Cutler (and Elway and Plummer and Favre and
> Manning and name your favorite QB) *always* got points, *every*
> *single* *time* he made it into the RedZone, how silly of me <eye
> roll>. Everyone does it (well, except maybe the Saints, but even they
> have faltered a couple of times).
Orton remains mediocre goods.
Those were tosses Griese would have made.
>> I limp-arm INT.
>
> Or we could have a strong arm INT, in really silly places. Have you
> forgotten how irritating it was, to see JC throw the ball into a slew
> of defenders when you couldn't even *see* a Bronco jersey?
I'm dealing with the here and now, I'd take Cutler's developing skills
over Orton's mature mediocrity, yes.
>> Marshall has to make 2 circus catches.
>
> and then joked about them both after the game, saying that he caught
> them both one handed to make Orton look bad!
>
> You know, Marshall isn't good about making others look good.
Some jovial team spirit there, or not...
>> But I _did like_ the passes to Sheffler and especially Stokley on his TD.
>>
>>> Oh, wait... the Giants are not a *real* team, I forgot.
>> They're developing their own Jekyll/Hyde rep. I thought in preaseason
>> they looked poised to repeat, despite the loss of Plax and Strahan.
>> Now...up and down, inconsistent.
>
> In other words, you feel they aren't a *real* team, thanks
I think the Skinnies aren't, and they beat us. I think the Giants are
inconsistent, but still an OK team. I sure wouldn't lump them with
losers like Det. and Cleveland.
Cleatarrior
We're all all right! ;-)
Cleatarrior
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:13:33 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
> <Barnab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>> You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
>> those Fbombs over the air?
>
> ironic that the super bowl fiasco caused need for a delay on radio,
> but not in football games.
It even got the replay %-)
Howard Brazee
We did have fine down field coverage, and Graham was something else.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Biff
wrote:
I saw that. crazy stuff. you'd think that the guys running the show
would do a better job. really now, editing content has gotta be what,
the second or third top thing on their agenda?
Cleatarrior
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:22:57 -0700, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block>
> wrote:
>
>> Biff wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:13:33 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
>>> <Barnab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>>>>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>>>> You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
>>>> those Fbombs over the air?
>>> ironic that the super bowl fiasco caused need for a delay on radio,
>>> but not in football games.
>> It even got the replay %-)
>
> I saw that. crazy stuff. you'd think that the guys running the show
> would do a better job. really now, editing content has gotta be what,
> the second or third top thing on their agenda?
>
<chuckle>
I can't wait to see if this gets any FCC reprimand/fine come Monday...
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:22:57 -0700, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block>
> wrote:
>
> >Biff wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:13:33 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
> >> <Barnabus1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
> >>>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
> >>> You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
> >>> those Fbombs over the air?
>
> >> ironic that the super bowl fiasco caused need for a delay on radio,
> >> but not in football games.
>
> >It even got the replay %-)
>
> I saw that. crazy stuff. you'd think that the guys running the show
> would do a better job. really now, editing content has gotta be what,
> the second or third top thing on their agenda?
Yeah, that ... "gee, we are sorry for that. We didn't realize that
the coach's mic was still on..." <blink, blink>... I bought that
<cough>bullshit<cough>
Biff
wrote:
well personally, I'd rather see Janet's knobs than listen to Josh drop
the F bomb, but hey, that's just me.
Biff
let's see... get the coverage, edit out the bad parts, have lots of
commercials... what else is there in the tv world? oh, cash the
checks...
I remember listening to the radio DJs, especially those on Fox
network, telling how they have an 8 second (or something like that)
delay on every thing now. silly me, assumed that TV was doing the
same thing.
The thanksgiving game is especially tough for this. we had the game
going on two TVs and 14 people hanging around. Not everyone was glued
to the tube, but not a single one, kids included, missed that little
spectacle.
Cleatarrior
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:09:01 -0700, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block>
> wrote:
>
>> Biff wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:22:57 -0700, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Biff wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:13:33 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
>>>>> <Barnab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apparently, Mr. Dawkins' players only meeting went very well.
>>>>>>> As did Mr. McD's sideline tirade :-)
>>>>>> You wonder how much of a fine they are going to get for allowing all
>>>>>> those Fbombs over the air?
>>>>> ironic that the super bowl fiasco caused need for a delay on radio,
>>>>> but not in football games.
>>>> It even got the replay %-)
>>> I saw that. crazy stuff. you'd think that the guys running the show
>>> would do a better job. really now, editing content has gotta be what,
>>> the second or third top thing on their agenda?
>>>
>> <chuckle>
>>
>> I can't wait to see if this gets any FCC reprimand/fine come Monday...
>
> well personally, I'd rather see Janet's knobs than listen to Josh drop
> the F bomb, but hey, that's just me.
I'm betting the cable/satv status saves them any real grief, knobs or not...
Fred Waiss, Sr.
"Biff" <hr14...@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:hth2h5hrfqibemaul...@4ax.com...
I missed it. I was in the kitchen. But I caught it last night on YouTube.
Fred Waiss, Sr.
"Cleatarrior" <nos...@xx.block> wrote in message
news:hepce3$mpv$1...@news.datemas.de...
Just to present the pessimistic view: The Giants played overtime last Sunday,
and we know that can adversely affect a team a full week later. The G'nts had
to travel 2,000 miles on a short week after the OT. They were much more tired
that the Broncos, whose offense, at least, took last Sunday off.
Now, if the Broncos can go into KC in December and beat the team that beat the
team that clobbered the Broncos, then maybe they'll be back where they belong.
I figure it's 50-50 at the moment, if Royal is healthy. Maybe 45-55 against
Denver if not.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
I know that live broadcasts are all on 8 second delay, but I'm not
sure if a "micced" coach/player would be considered a "live"
broadcast. Well, obviously not...
> The thanksgiving game is especially tough for this. we had the game
> going on two TVs and 14 people hanging around. Not everyone was glued
> to the tube, but not a single one, kids included, missed that little
> spectacle.
The only people *I* know who missed it, didn't have the NFL Network
(nor the internet).
Howard Brazee
<Barnab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The thanksgiving game is especially tough for this. �we had the game
>> going on two TVs and 14 people hanging around. �Not everyone was glued
>> to the tube, but not a single one, kids included, missed that little
>> spectacle. �
>
>The only people *I* know who missed it, didn't have the NFL Network
>(nor the internet).
My cable had it with the NFL network - available to me even though I
don't have NFL network. That may be it was unscrambled for all only
because it was the Broncos.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:59:57 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
>
> >> The thanksgiving game is especially tough for this. we had the game
> >> going on two TVs and 14 people hanging around. Not everyone was glued
> >> to the tube, but not a single one, kids included, missed that little
> >> spectacle.
>
> >The only people *I* know who missed it, didn't have the NFL Network
> >(nor the internet).
>
> My cable had it with the NFL network - available to me even though I
> don't have NFL network. That may be it was unscrambled for all only
> because it was the Broncos.
I pay extra for the "sports tier" (oooh, a whopping $2.95 a month
<grin>), so I get several Foxsports channels, and the NFL Network.
The local company wouldn't *give* away a channel, for even a day, if
they *had* to.
When the premium channels have "free weekends", suddenly there is a
problem with the signal, and *no* one gets that channel. Though I do
get credits 'cause I call and complain about it.
Adam Smith
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:59:57 -0800 (PST), "Smokie Darling (Annie)"
>
> >> The thanksgiving game is especially tough for this. we had the game
> >> going on two TVs and 14 people hanging around. Not everyone was glued
> >> to the tube, but not a single one, kids included, missed that little
> >> spectacle.
>
> >The only people *I* know who missed it, didn't have the NFL Network
> >(nor the internet).
>
> My cable had it with the NFL network - available to me even though I
> don't have NFL network. That may be it was unscrambled for all only
> because it was the Broncos.
I remember hearing earlier that the NFL network tries to sell
broadcast rights to local stations for all the games they carry, i.e.,
in this case presumably they would try to find stations in Denver and
NYC to carry the Thanksgiving game.
Maybe there were no takers at the price they were asking in Denver so
they unscrambled the cable version as a backup plan? Or maybe they
did get a broadcaster and decided there was no reason not to
unscramble the game on cable?
Adam Smith
wrote:
>
> Were you not watching the same game? The O played exceptionally well,
> especially when compared to the previous 4 games. Weren't the points
> more last night, than in the previous 4 games combined?
>
> Oh, wait... the Giants are not a *real* team, I forgot.
These days I think parity is strong enough to make anyone a "real"
team. The difference between the best and worst teams just isn't that
much anymore, and bad teams can always psych themselves up enough for
a big game to make it competitive. The Red***ns for example played
quite a bit better against the Broncos than they had been up to that
point.
For whatever it's worth, the Broncos scored 7+10+17+3 = 37 points over
the losing streak. But regardless of the exact numbers, you're
correct that the offense played much better on Thanksgiving than they
had been since the bye.
My main concern about the offense is going 2-for-5 in the red zone
against a team that's been allowing TDs on 75% of opponents' red zone
possessions. I'm happy to see a decent offense returning, but I think
it's a mistake to call it a good offense just yet.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
Oh, I am just tired of someone who doesn't want to hear about 20 INTs
against... what is it, 5 so far this year? You know, he doesn't want
to "relive" the past, and yet, all I seem to hear is how awful the
Broncos *may* end up being.
Yeah, we should not have lost to the 'skins, but we did. Sort of like
we should never have to the Bengals when the Legend was our QB, but we
did. There are some teams that just have our number (like the Texans
seem to have the Colts').
The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
why, but they annoy me <smile>.
Cleatarrior
If that's me I'm happy the INTS are low, I just wish the ball went
farther than 25 yards downfield.
And I've praised the improved D.
I'm still not sold that McD is using his TEs enough and perplexed he
exiled Peyton Hillis.
> Yeah, we should not have lost to the 'skins, but we did. Sort of like
> we should never have to the Bengals when the Legend was our QB, but we
> did. There are some teams that just have our number (like the Texans
> seem to have the Colts').
>
> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
> why, but they annoy me <smile>.
Punk Rivers?
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > Oh, I am just tired of someone who doesn't want to hear about 20 INTs
> > against... what is it, 5 so far this year? You know, he doesn't want
> > to "relive" the past, and yet, all I seem to hear is how awful the
> > Broncos *may* end up being.
>
> If that's me I'm happy the INTS are low, I just wish the ball went
> farther than 25 yards downfield.
I would rather have lower INTs with a shorter arm. Less likely to
have a "pick 6" that way, and in my own defense, you haven't said
that, you've said you want JC, INTs and all. I hate stupid mistakes
by a QB. While Orton may not be a strong arm, he isn't a stupid
(immature) QB.
> And I've praised the improved D.
Be somewhat hard not to <grin>
> I'm still not sold that McD is using his TEs enough and perplexed he
> exiled Peyton Hillis.
There was obviously something with Hillis. Since his turning around
of a certain malcontent, I won't be questioning his dealings with
players (well, not yet anyway).
As for the TE usage... A brief scan of memories the Pats are a big
"go to the TE first" type team (their TE is an end run, not a primary
one). Could be misremembering that...
> > Yeah, we should not have lost to the 'skins, but we did. Sort of like
> > we should never have to the Bengals when the Legend was our QB, but we
> > did. There are some teams that just have our number (like the Texans
> > seem to have the Colts').
>
> > The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
> > why, but they annoy me <smile>.
>
> Punk Rivers?
Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
Nunya Bidnits
Why Royal? I don't get where he's been a major contributor this season. But
then I haven't looked for a few weeks, but last time I did, he was available
in my fantasy league and no one wanted him.
MartyB in KC
Howard Brazee
Nunya Bidnits
> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
> why, but they annoy me <smile>.
I found them to be extremely annoying yesterday.
Except the part where my starting fantasy QB this week was Rivers. Could
have started Favre, though.
MartyB in KC
Smokie Darling (Annie)
We haven't been using Royal alot, in game planning. At least not what
I've seen/remember. I suppose he could be used as a sort of "super
secret weapon".
Cleatarrior
> On Nov 30, 3:22 pm, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>> Oh, I am just tired of someone who doesn't want to hear about 20 INTs
>>> against... what is it, 5 so far this year? You know, he doesn't want
>>> to "relive" the past, and yet, all I seem to hear is how awful the
>>> Broncos *may* end up being.
>> If that's me I'm happy the INTS are low, I just wish the ball went
>> farther than 25 yards downfield.
>
> I would rather have lower INTs with a shorter arm. Less likely to
> have a "pick 6" that way, and in my own defense, you haven't said
> that, you've said you want JC, INTs and all. I hate stupid mistakes
> by a QB. While Orton may not be a strong arm, he isn't a stupid
> (immature) QB.
A stupid QB could never have run Shanny's offense, so both guys get a
passing grade there. I'll grant you Orton is more mature thus far, or at
least less emotive. Cutler's ability to stretch the field is key to real
success in the passing game. He has that, Orton doesn't. Even an aging
Brett Favre has it. And Cutler's picks this season have been at least
50% drops or receivers way off their routes.
>> And I've praised the improved D.
>
> Be somewhat hard not to <grin>
A guy I thought we'd really miss, and haven't comes to mind, Nate
"flying helmet" Webster...
>> I'm still not sold that McD is using his TEs enough and perplexed he
>> exiled Peyton Hillis.
>
> There was obviously something with Hillis. Since his turning around
> of a certain malcontent, I won't be questioning his dealings with
> players (well, not yet anyway).
I think I will, Stokley disappears for most of the season after a
rousing start, Eddie Royal's catches are _way_ down...Sheffler seems to
be a 2nd half only participant...
> As for the TE usage... A brief scan of memories the Pats are a big
> "go to the TE first" type team (their TE is an end run, not a primary
> one). Could be misremembering that...
No, you have it spot-on there. I mean they let us sign Graham in his
prime. They haven't been a TE friendly team since Ben Coates.
That's one of the things I despise in the NE offense, that and the
minimal use of the FB.
Let me go out on a limb here, minus a Tom Brady running the show I think
Bellichick's O is pedestrian. It almost reminds me of Bobby Bowden's
'90s Florida State offense. A lot of middle screens, dump passes and an
unspectacular running game.
>>> Yeah, we should not have lost to the 'skins, but we did. Sort of like
>>> we should never have to the Bengals when the Legend was our QB, but we
>>> did. There are some teams that just have our number (like the Texans
>>> seem to have the Colts').
>>> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
>>> why, but they annoy me <smile>.
>> Punk Rivers?
>
> Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
> SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
LOL!
Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were ya?
Cleatarrior
Better put Stokley on the list too, they don't seem to think he's our
Wes Welker anyway...
Cleatarrior
> The three biggest stars of the game are free agents after this season.
>
Orton is a sign and trade, We rescue Kevin O'Connell from gang green...
But I think Bowlen finds room for Marshall and Dumervil.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > I would rather have lower INTs with a shorter arm. Less likely to
> > have a "pick 6" that way, and in my own defense, you haven't said
> > that, you've said you want JC, INTs and all. I hate stupid mistakes
> > by a QB. While Orton may not be a strong arm, he isn't a stupid
> > (immature) QB.
>
> A stupid QB could never have run Shanny's offense, so both guys get a
> passing grade there. I'll grant you Orton is more mature thus far, or at
> least less emotive. Cutler's ability to stretch the field is key to real
> success in the passing game.
He's in ... his 4th year now? He hasn't matured yet. As each year
passes, I suspect, more and more, that he will become like Jeff George
(or Bobby Hebert). A potentially great QB who just couldn't do it.
He may end up being good, but I don't see him being great. If I'm
wrong, and I sort of hope I am, I'll admit it, but he'll need more
than one good year.
He has that, Orton doesn't. Even an aging
> Brett Favre has it. And Cutler's picks this season have been at least
> 50% drops or receivers way off their routes.
I might be willing to give him the first two games, INTs not being his
fault, but not half. The first couple of games, it was up for grabs
whose fault it was, after that... It's on him.
He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
watching his diabetes closely.
> > There was obviously something with Hillis. Since his turning around
> > of a certain malcontent, I won't be questioning his dealings with
> > players (well, not yet anyway).
>
> I think I will, Stokley disappears for most of the season after a
> rousing start, Eddie Royal's catches are _way_ down...Sheffler seems to
> be a 2nd half only participant...
I was referring to Hillis being "sent away".
> Let me go out on a limb here, minus a Tom Brady running the show I think
> Bellichick's O is pedestrian. It almost reminds me of Bobby Bowden's
> '90s Florida State offense. A lot of middle screens, dump passes and an
> unspectacular running game.
Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
<ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
> >>> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
> >>> why, but they annoy me <smile>.
> >> Punk Rivers?
>
> > Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
> > SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
>
> LOL!
>
> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
there were fewer people there.
> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were ya?
Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
Cleatarrior
> On Dec 1, 9:03 am, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>> I would rather have lower INTs with a shorter arm. Less likely to
>>> have a "pick 6" that way, and in my own defense, you haven't said
>>> that, you've said you want JC, INTs and all. I hate stupid mistakes
>>> by a QB. While Orton may not be a strong arm, he isn't a stupid
>>> (immature) QB.
>> A stupid QB could never have run Shanny's offense, so both guys get a
>> passing grade there. I'll grant you Orton is more mature thus far, or at
>> least less emotive. Cutler's ability to stretch the field is key to real
>> success in the passing game.
>
> He's in ... his 4th year now?
Yup.
> He hasn't matured yet.
He has been struggling with a new system and not very good talent at WR.
> As each year
> passes, I suspect, more and more, that he will become like Jeff George
> (or Bobby Hebert). A potentially great QB who just couldn't do it.
We'll see.
I sorta liked Hebert, there wasn't much bad press about him at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Hebert
"Nicknamed the "Cajun Cannon", Hebert led the Panthers to the USFL
championship in the league's inaugural season. Later he helped bring the
Saints their first playoff appearance in franchise history. Hebert was
inducted to the Saints Hall of Fame in 1999 and the Louisiana Sports
Hall of Fame in 2000.
Career stats
TD-INT 135-124
Yards 21,683
rating 78.0"
I recall that USFL championship game here In Denver real well, the fans
rioted and some moron tried to karate kick a cop on national TV.
> He may end up being good, but I don't see him being great. If I'm
> wrong, and I sort of hope I am, I'll admit it, but he'll need more
> than one good year.
I agree there.
> He has that, Orton doesn't. Even an aging
>> Brett Favre has it. And Cutler's picks this season have been at least
>> 50% drops or receivers way off their routes.
>
> I might be willing to give him the first two games, INTs not being his
> fault, but not half. The first couple of games, it was up for grabs
> whose fault it was, after that... It's on him.
I've seen all but one of their games, his receivers are still running
lousy routes - especially Hester. And there are still bizarre
deflections coming from that.
> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
> watching his diabetes closely.
Any evidence from the media on that?
>>> There was obviously something with Hillis. Since his turning around
>>> of a certain malcontent, I won't be questioning his dealings with
>>> players (well, not yet anyway).
>> I think I will, Stokley disappears for most of the season after a
>> rousing start, Eddie Royal's catches are _way_ down...Sheffler seems to
>> be a 2nd half only participant...
>
> I was referring to Hillis being "sent away".
I hope he isn't!
>> Let me go out on a limb here, minus a Tom Brady running the show I think
>> Bellichick's O is pedestrian. It almost reminds me of Bobby Bowden's
>> '90s Florida State offense. A lot of middle screens, dump passes and an
>> unspectacular running game.
>
> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
> <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
Not well enough to get in the SB though.
And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
I think the offensive system calls for a top flight QB, the arm has to
be there or Moss gathers moss.
>>>>> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not sure
>>>>> why, but they annoy me <smile>.
>>>> Punk Rivers?
>>> Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
>>> SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
>> LOL!
>>
>> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
>
> For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
> 16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
> there were fewer people there.
Roger that, very crowded.
Snow is overrated, especially if you grow up shoveling it all the time.
>> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were ya?
>
> Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
> what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
One of the funniest films of all time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_mad_mad_world
"The buried money is eventually found under a group of four palm trees
that have been planted to resemble the letter "W". "
Balboa Park maybe?
Nunya Bidnits
>
> "Nicknamed the "Cajun Cannon", Hebert led the Panthers to the USFL
> championship in the league's inaugural season. Later he helped bring
> the Saints their first playoff appearance in franchise history.
> Hebert was inducted to the Saints Hall of Fame in 1999 and the
> Louisiana Sports Hall of Fame in 2000.
Yeah, I was a fan of his, what an arm!
clip>
>
> I recall that USFL championship game here In Denver real well, the
> fans rioted and some moron tried to karate kick a cop on national TV.
Let me guess... alcohol was involved.
>
>
>> He may end up being good, but I don't see him being great. If I'm
>> wrong, and I sort of hope I am, I'll admit it, but he'll need more
>> than one good year.
>
> I agree there.
>
>
> I've seen all but one of their games, his receivers are still running
> lousy routes - especially Hester. And there are still bizarre
> deflections coming from that.
If they don't make the playoffs he's likely to get new coaching to help work
out his problems. And smack him around a little to teach him not to whine,
hopefully.
>
>> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
>> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
>> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
>> watching his diabetes closely.
>
> Any evidence from the media on that?
No, but he signed a fedex reciept for that box of jellies...
;-)
clip
>> I was referring to Hillis being "sent away".
>
> I hope he isn't!
Send him to the Chiefs, please!
>
>>> Let me go out on a limb here, minus a Tom Brady running the show I
>>> think Bellichick's O is pedestrian. It almost reminds me of Bobby
>>> Bowden's '90s Florida State offense. A lot of middle screens, dump
>>> passes and an unspectacular running game.
>>
>> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
>> <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>
> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
Yeah but as far as backup QB performances, Cassell was outstanding. One of
the talking heads this week was quoting a stat, w-l games by backup QBs of
late, I don't recall the exact numbers but at the time I noted it was
something like only 20 percent games won. So going 11-5, if you give him
that first game where Brady was knocked out and he played about 2/3 of it,
he's way ahead of the curve.
>
> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
>
> I think the offensive system calls for a top flight QB, the arm has to
> be there or Moss gathers moss.
Last night I think it was Chuckie who commented that everything the Saints
did was by design, while any success Brady and Moss had seemed to be coming
from stuff they were just making up as they went. It's a testament to how
well the two play together, as well as proof that they are no match for a
team like the Saints.
>
>>>>>> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not
>>>>>> sure why, but they annoy me <smile>.
>>>>> Punk Rivers?
>>>> Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
>>>> SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
>>> LOL!
>>>
>>> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
>>
>> For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
>> 16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
>> there were fewer people there.
>
> Roger that, very crowded.
>
> Snow is overrated, especially if you grow up shoveling it all the
> time.
I like the part where it piles up on the sides of the roads and in every
parking lot, taking on a lovely blackened patina, until one day it melts and
transfers said patina to every windshield in the area.
>
>>> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were
>>> ya?
>>
>> Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
>> what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
>
> One of the funniest films of all time:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_mad_mad_world
>
> "The buried money is eventually found under a group of four palm trees
> that have been planted to resemble the letter "W". "
>
> Balboa Park maybe?
Yep, and I agree, that movie was fantastic!!! Well, at least it was when I
first saw it as a kid. Like a lot of old comedy, some of it would have to
leave me scratching my head today wondering what the hell was so funny. It
was star studded though, and an amazing production too!
I'll never forget Durante kicking the bucket.
Cleatarrior
> Cleatarrior said:
>
>> "Nicknamed the "Cajun Cannon", Hebert led the Panthers to the USFL
>> championship in the league's inaugural season. Later he helped bring
>> the Saints their first playoff appearance in franchise history.
>> Hebert was inducted to the Saints Hall of Fame in 1999 and the
>> Louisiana Sports Hall of Fame in 2000.
>
> Yeah, I was a fan of his, what an arm!
>
> clip>
>> I recall that USFL championship game here In Denver real well, the
>> fans rioted and some moron tried to karate kick a cop on national TV.
>
> Let me guess... alcohol was involved.
Ah well...yes...then tear gas, lol....
>>
>>> He may end up being good, but I don't see him being great. If I'm
>>> wrong, and I sort of hope I am, I'll admit it, but he'll need more
>>> than one good year.
>> I agree there.
>>
>>
>> I've seen all but one of their games, his receivers are still running
>> lousy routes - especially Hester. And there are still bizarre
>> deflections coming from that.
>
> If they don't make the playoffs he's likely to get new coaching to help work
> out his problems. And smack him around a little to teach him not to whine,
> hopefully.
2 names have come up, Martz and Weiss.
Ron Turner is gone, either with or without Lovie.
>>> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
>>> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
>>> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
>>> watching his diabetes closely.
>> Any evidence from the media on that?
>
> No, but he signed a fedex reciept for that box of jellies...
> ;-)
>
> clip
I think Urlacher forged that;-)
>>> I was referring to Hillis being "sent away".
>> I hope he isn't!
>
> Send him to the Chiefs, please!
Nooooooooooo......
>>>> Let me go out on a limb here, minus a Tom Brady running the show I
>>>> think Bellichick's O is pedestrian. It almost reminds me of Bobby
>>>> Bowden's '90s Florida State offense. A lot of middle screens, dump
>>>> passes and an unspectacular running game.
>>> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
>>> <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
>
> Yeah but as far as backup QB performances, Cassell was outstanding. One of
> the talking heads this week was quoting a stat, w-l games by backup QBs of
> late, I don't recall the exact numbers but at the time I noted it was
> something like only 20 percent games won. So going 11-5, if you give him
> that first game where Brady was knocked out and he played about 2/3 of it,
> he's way ahead of the curve.
Interesting.
His number this year are, ok...
http://www.nfl.com/players/mattcassel/profile?id=CAS541133
quick stats (2009)
TDS
13
INT
7
YDS
1,898
RTG
77.6
Sorta Hebert-like if you will...
>> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
>>
>> I think the offensive system calls for a top flight QB, the arm has to
>> be there or Moss gathers moss.
>
> Last night I think it was Chuckie who commented that everything the Saints
> did was by design, while any success Brady and Moss had seemed to be coming
> from stuff they were just making up as they went. It's a testament to how
> well the two play together, as well as proof that they are no match for a
> team like the Saints.
Did you see how Moss cut short a X-post route on that last INT?
Brady really looked like he thought he had him figured.
>>>>>>> The one that gets stuck in my craw is the freakin' Bolts. Not
>>>>>>> sure why, but they annoy me <smile>.
>>>>>> Punk Rivers?
>>>>> Nah, has nothing to do with the players. I was born and raised in
>>>>> SandyEggo, I think that's part of what sticks in my craw <smile>
>>>> LOL!
>>>>
>>>> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
>>> For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
>>> 16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
>>> there were fewer people there.
>> Roger that, very crowded.
>>
>> Snow is overrated, especially if you grow up shoveling it all the
>> time.
>
> I like the part where it piles up on the sides of the roads and in every
> parking lot, taking on a lovely blackened patina, until one day it melts and
> transfers said patina to every windshield in the area.
LOL!
Used to be we had the sand...er..pebble treatment here each year. You
were flat guaranteed a new windshield every spring.
Now they put that Mag-Chlor ice-melt goo down and it sticks to the
windshield like Karo syrup. It also corrodes the undercarriage. A
problem we never had in the old days.
>
>>>> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were
>>>> ya?
>>> Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
>>> what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
>> One of the funniest films of all time:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_mad_mad_world
>>
>> "The buried money is eventually found under a group of four palm trees
>> that have been planted to resemble the letter "W". "
>>
>> Balboa Park maybe?
>
> Yep, and I agree, that movie was fantastic!!! Well, at least it was when I
> first saw it as a kid. Like a lot of old comedy, some of it would have to
> leave me scratching my head today wondering what the hell was so funny. It
> was star studded though, and an amazing production too!
>
> I'll never forget Durante kicking the bucket.
Old Smiler Grogan...
I have the DVD, it still holds up.
Is there anything funnier than Jonathan Winters destroying the gas station?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057193/trivia
"During filming of the infamous "gas station" destruction, Jonathan
Winters was accidentally left on stage and completely bound in thick
tape. Hours later, when the cast returned from lunch, they found that he
had not even been able to free his arms from the chair. In retaliation,
Winters gave a three-hour lecture to Arnold Stang and Marvin Kaplan on
forced potty training."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2SpROYbYig
enjoy!
Cleatarrior
> I'll never forget Durante kicking the bucket.
>
The gas station scene:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YObSMgp9dD0&feature=related
"Now fellas if you keep this up, I'm gonna get sore..."
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > He's in ... his 4th year now?
>
> Yup.
>
> > He hasn't matured yet.
>
> He has been struggling with a new system and not very good talent at WR.
Explain the last two years with the Broncos then, while his INTs crept
up, higher and higher.
> > As each year
> > passes, I suspect, more and more, that he will become like Jeff George
> > (or Bobby Hebert). A potentially great QB who just couldn't do it.
>
> We'll see.
>
> I sorta liked Hebert, there wasn't much bad press about him at the time.
My point being, Hebert never lived up to the hype.
> I might be willing to give him the first two games, INTs not being
his
> > fault, but not half. The first couple of games, it was up for grabs
> > whose fault it was, after that... It's on him.
>
> I've seen all but one of their games, his receivers are still running
> lousy routes - especially Hester. And there are still bizarre
> deflections coming from that.
I watch RedZone, and have seen nearly all 20 of his INTs. Some are
the fault of his receivers, I have already given that. Most are
*not*.
> > He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
> > he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
> > isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
> > watching his diabetes closely.
>
> Any evidence from the media on that?
What part of "I do not believe" said that there would be "evidence" of
it in the media? My father is a diabetic, my best friend is a
diabetic. They both have issues with decision making when their
glucose levels fluctuate.
If his diabetes is *so* bad that he requires a pump (and they won't do
a pump just because it's easier or more convenient) to monitor his
blood sugar every 30 minutes (which is what most pumps do), then it is
not under control when he takes it off.
His INTs per game are going up. He has fewer completions. He makes
poor decisions. His QB rating is dropping like a stone. It is worse
in the second half, and it is worse in the second half of the season
(like last year, and the year before).
> > Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
> > <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>
> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
If that's the determining factor, then JC really sucks (and Orton at
least *got* to a SB <smile>).
> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
That wasn't being discussed, but since you brought it up... Letting
Tedy retire started the downfall of their D (imo).
> >> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
>
> > For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
> > 16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
> > there were fewer people there.
>
> Roger that, very crowded.
>
> Snow is overrated, especially if you grow up shoveling it all the time.
We never have to shovel snow over here. Occasionally brush it off
vehicles, but no shovelling.
>
> >> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were ya?
>
> > Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
> > what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_mad_mad_world
>
> Balboa Park maybe?
I've been there, and there used to be an amusement park. My sister
and I would take the bus and go there every weekend during the
summer. It's been years since I saw that film (but if you ever watch
Harry O, there was one ep that was filmed at Balboa Park and my sister
and I were both in it, no lines, just two kids standing in line).
Cleatarrior
> On Dec 1, 12:07 pm, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>> He's in ... his 4th year now?
>> Yup.
>>
>>> He hasn't matured yet.
>> He has been struggling with a new system and not very good talent at WR.
>
> Explain the last two years with the Broncos then, while his INTs crept
> up, higher and higher.
But so did his total yards and TDs:
http://www.nfl.com/players/jaycutler/profile?id=CUT288111
G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck
2008 16 16 384 616 62.3 4,526 7.3 25 18 11
2007 16 16 297 467 63.6 3,497 7.5 20 14 27
2006 5 5 81 137 59.1 1,001 7.3 9 5 3
>>> As each year
>>> passes, I suspect, more and more, that he will become like Jeff George
>>> (or Bobby Hebert). A potentially great QB who just couldn't do it.
>> We'll see.
>>
>> I sorta liked Hebert, there wasn't much bad press about him at the time.
>
> My point being, Hebert never lived up to the hype.
I don't recall there was that much hype, and he did revive a failing
Aints team and then did good things In Atlanta too.
He also won that USFL championship.
> > I might be willing to give him the first two games, INTs not being
> his
>>> fault, but not half. The first couple of games, it was up for grabs
>>> whose fault it was, after that... It's on him.
>> I've seen all but one of their games, his receivers are still running
>> lousy routes - especially Hester. And there are still bizarre
>> deflections coming from that.
>
> I watch RedZone, and have seen nearly all 20 of his INTs. Some are
> the fault of his receivers, I have already given that. Most are
> *not*.
I'd say about split between outright WR miscues and short routes leading
to deflections. At least half aren't his fault.
I watch the 30 minute DTV Short Cuts of the entire game.
Forte's RB swoon hasn't helped either.
>>> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
>>> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
>>> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
>>> watching his diabetes closely.
>> Any evidence from the media on that?
>
> What part of "I do not believe" said that there would be "evidence" of
> it in the media?
I'm just curious.
I read the Chi. Tribune stories on him and the only thing I found was
one reader questioning if his night vision was poorer to to diabetes.
I can appreciate that might be one angle.
> My father is a diabetic, my best friend is a
> diabetic. They both have issues with decision making when their
> glucose levels fluctuate.
Decisions haven't been it.
Aikman says he's trying to do too much.
Favre says he's going to be fine and that he's got a better arm htan
Brett did at that age.
When it comes to swarms of INTs Favre would have to be the acknowledged
authority ;-)
> If his diabetes is *so* bad that he requires a pump (and they won't do
> a pump just because it's easier or more convenient) to monitor his
> blood sugar every 30 minutes (which is what most pumps do), then it is
> not under control when he takes it off.
I'll leave that to his physicians and the team to determine.
Do we need to go down the list of great athletes who have done well with
diabetes in football and baseball?
> His INTs per game are going up. He has fewer completions. He makes
> poor decisions. His QB rating is dropping like a stone. It is worse
> in the second half, and it is worse in the second half of the season
> (like last year, and the year before).
And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie Smith is
gone.
>>> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in an
>>> <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
>
> If that's the determining factor, then JC really sucks (and Orton at
> least *got* to a SB <smile>).
Not as a starter.
>> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
>
> That wasn't being discussed, but since you brought it up... Letting
> Tedy retire started the downfall of their D (imo).
Well, he was on the downside and it was his right after coming back from
a stroke - an amazing feat.
They're also missing Rodney Harrison.
Look at what adding Mike Mackenzie back in meant to the Saints D last
night. The guy was on fire.
Oh andsigning Chris McAllIster too , think the Ravens miss him about now?
In NE's "defense" they have an awfully inexperienced 2ndry this year.
>>>> Well it can't be the weather, because that's some of the best ;-)
>>> For adults? Yeah. For a kid, who had never seen snow until she was
>>> 16? Hardly. I hated the weather, though I'd like it now I think, if
>>> there were fewer people there.
>> Roger that, very crowded.
>>
>> Snow is overrated, especially if you grow up shoveling it all the time.
>
> We never have to shovel snow over here. Occasionally brush it off
> vehicles, but no shovelling.
<jealous mode>
You guys stay a bit colder in the AM than the Front Range but the payoff
is evident.
>>>> You weren't looking for something buried under a "big W" now, were ya?
>>> Um... huh? I am sure I'll feel particularly dumb when you tell me
>>> what it means, but right now, I have no clue.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_mad_mad_world
>>
>> Balboa Park maybe?
>
> I've been there, and there used to be an amusement park. My sister
> and I would take the bus and go there every weekend during the
> summer. It's been years since I saw that film (but if you ever watch
> Harry O, there was one ep that was filmed at Balboa Park and my sister
> and I were both in it, no lines, just two kids standing in line).
How cool!
That was the '70s David Janssen PI show, iirc?
He was a fine actor.
Howard Brazee
wrote:
I think we need Marshall and Dumervil. But we Josh might think we
could get a better Orton pretty cheap for a quarterback.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> >>> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
> >>> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
> >>> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
> >>> watching his diabetes closely.
> >> Any evidence from the media on that?
>
> > What part of "I do not believe" said that there would be "evidence" of
> > it in the media?
>
> I'm just curious.
It's what I said last year (about this time). His skill set seemed to
fall off.
>
> I read the Chi. Tribune stories on him and the only thing I found was
> one reader questioning if his night vision was poorer to to diabetes.
>
> I can appreciate that might be one angle.
Night Vision loss wouldn't matter in the stadium. It's bright as day
there.
It *would* affect his drive home though (and that's frightening).
Massive halos around any light source, when it's dark around them (so
if he looked at a street light, he would not be able to see someone
standing below it). *If* his eye sight has been affected (that is).
> > My father is a diabetic, my best friend is a
> > diabetic. They both have issues with decision making when their
> > glucose levels fluctuate.
>
> Decisions haven't been it.
Throwing into a bunch of opponents, when your guy is nowhere in
sight. That's poor decision making. Staring down your receiver
(which he's been doing) is poor decision making. It seems to me that
it has gotten worse as the season progresses, and is worse in the
second half of games.
> Aikman says he's trying to do too much.
...and I've heard him say that he didn't see exactly where Jay was
going with that toss as well. I get 'doing too much' when the team is
behind, any QB will do that, but that isn't all of his INTs either.
> > If his diabetes is *so* bad that he requires a pump (and they won't do
> > a pump just because it's easier or more convenient) to monitor his
> > blood sugar every 30 minutes (which is what most pumps do), then it is
> > not under control when he takes it off.
>
> I'll leave that to his physicians and the team to determine.
You mean like with concussions? They've shown they can't be trusted
with that. They want to win. We won't know if any harm's been done
to JC for years (unless he goes into a coma, but I don't expect
that). Diabetes can be very insidious.
> Do we need to go down the list of great athletes who have done well with
> diabetes in football and baseball?
Yeah, but the caveat is *only* the ones who wear insulin pumps (and
pitchers don't count, as they generally wouldn't slide anywhere).
Diabetes that can be controlled with pills or once/twice daily shots
is one thing. Diabetes that requires a pump to inject multiple times
a day/night is a whole other monster.
Diabetes is controllable, but when you screw with blood sugar, it
screws with your head (talk to anyone who has ever tried an Atkins
diet, you get dizzy, you forget what you're doing, you think you are
making sense when you aren't, you think one thing, you say something
else).
> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie Smith is
> gone.
Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
(remember Reeves and Elway?). It does not explain the first part of
the year though, does it.
> > We never have to shovel snow over here. Occasionally brush it off
> > vehicles, but no shovelling.
>
> <jealous mode>
>
> You guys stay a bit colder in the AM than the Front Range but the payoff
> is evident.
Yeah, and the snow generally melts off within a day of falling.
That's always a plus. Been particularly dry this year though.
> >> Balboa Park maybe?
>
> > I've been there, and there used to be an amusement park. My sister
> > and I would take the bus and go there every weekend during the
> > summer. It's been years since I saw that film (but if you ever watch
> > Harry O, there was one ep that was filmed at Balboa Park and my sister
> > and I were both in it, no lines, just two kids standing in line).
>
> How cool!
>
> That was the '70s David Janssen PI show, iirc?
>
> He was a fine actor.
Yep, at least I think it was Janssen... Hang on... yep. Funny the
way my memory works... I thought it got cancelled because he had
died, but didn't die until 1980.
He was a nice man. He came over and spoke to both of us, between
filming. I can't even remember what they were filming, just hating
that I couldn't actually *get* on the stupid roller coaster, because
they didn't want the "back ground" to change. Sorta sucked (keeping
in mind that I was 10/11 at the time).
Cleatarrior
> On Dec 1, 3:59 pm, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>>>> He's also doing what happened last year. Second half of the season,
>>>>> he is making very poor decisions during the second half of games. He
>>>>> isn't adjusting. I will again state that I do not believe he is
>>>>> watching his diabetes closely.
>>>> Any evidence from the media on that?
>>> What part of "I do not believe" said that there would be "evidence" of
>>> it in the media?
>> I'm just curious.
>
> It's what I said last year (about this time). His skill set seemed to
> fall off.
Different team, different situation, though with our running game in
shreds one can draw a comparison to Chicago's now MIA running game.
>> I read the Chi. Tribune stories on him and the only thing I found was
>> one reader questioning if his night vision was poorer to to diabetes.
>>
>> I can appreciate that might be one angle.
>
> Night Vision loss wouldn't matter in the stadium. It's bright as day
> there.
How about contrast, glare, etc?
They talk about problems with people who have had Lasic getting halos,
any similarity there?
> It *would* affect his drive home though (and that's frightening).
> Massive halos around any light source, when it's dark around them (so
> if he looked at a street light, he would not be able to see someone
> standing below it). *If* his eye sight has been affected (that is).
Ok, so there is a similarity, interesting.
>>> My father is a diabetic, my best friend is a
>>> diabetic. They both have issues with decision making when their
>>> glucose levels fluctuate.
>> Decisions haven't been it.
>
> Throwing into a bunch of opponents, when your guy is nowhere in
> sight. That's poor decision making.
Actually, the times I've seen it, it has been a receiver not running out
a route - much like what Moss did to Brady Monday night.
> Staring down your receiver
> (which he's been doing) is poor decision making.
I saw Brady and Brees do the same thing Monday night, with varying results.
> It seems to me that
> it has gotten worse as the season progresses, and is worse in the
> second half of games.
It seems to me the entire offensive scheme and WR performance have
gotten worse, and I've seen all but one game.
>> Aikman says he's trying to do too much.
>
> ...and I've heard him say that he didn't see exactly where Jay was
> going with that toss as well. I get 'doing too much' when the team is
> behind, any QB will do that, but that isn't all of his INTs either.
Agreed, it's bad WR routes and deflections.
Hester is a real failure as a starting WR thus far, imho.
>>> If his diabetes is *so* bad that he requires a pump (and they won't do
>>> a pump just because it's easier or more convenient) to monitor his
>>> blood sugar every 30 minutes (which is what most pumps do), then it is
>>> not under control when he takes it off.
>> I'll leave that to his physicians and the team to determine.
>
> You mean like with concussions? They've shown they can't be trusted
> with that. They want to win. We won't know if any harm's been done
> to JC for years (unless he goes into a coma, but I don't expect
> that). Diabetes can be very insidious.
Wade Wilson managed just fine for what, 18 years...
>> Do we need to go down the list of great athletes who have done well with
>> diabetes in football and baseball?
>
> Yeah, but the caveat is *only* the ones who wear insulin pumps (and
> pitchers don't count, as they generally wouldn't slide anywhere).
OK, so:
Jay Leeuwenburg
Calvin Muhammed
Michael Sinclair
Art Shell
Sugar Ray Robinson
James "Buster" Douglas
"Smokin' Joe" Fraizer
Ron Santo
Ed Kranepool
Ty Cobb
Bobby Clarke
...do these guys count?
> Diabetes that can be controlled with pills or once/twice daily shots
> is one thing. Diabetes that requires a pump to inject multiple times
> a day/night is a whole other monster.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/broncos-quarterback-joins-roster-of-athletes-with-diabetes/
People with Type 1 disease must monitor their blood sugar and food
intake and take insulin injections. Type 2 diabetes, the more common
form of the disease, typically develops later in life and often can be
controlled by dietary changes alone.
Although exercise often is prescribed as a way to manage Type 2
diabetes, athletes with Type 1 face special challenges. In people with
Type 1, exercise can cause blood-sugar levels to drop precipitously.
Therefore, exercise, food intake and insulin injections must be
carefully monitored and balanced.
New technology has made it easier for athletes with diabetes to stay on
the field without having to think constantly about the disease.
Continuous glucose monitors can track blood sugar and sound alarms if it
goes outside of safe ranges. Wireless insulin pumps can deliver insulin
as needed without a tangle of tubes and wires.
Mr. Cutler, 25, was diagnosed about two weeks ago and learned he needed
daily insulin injections, his business manager Marty Garafalo told The
Associated Press. Mr. Garafalo said the quarterback is managing his
disease and �in no way is his football career jeopardized.�
Last week a professional cycling team called Team Type 1 placed third
among teams in the Tour de Georgia, a major United States cycling race.
Four of the 15 riders on the Team Type 1 professional squad �
co-founders Phil Southerland and Joe Eldridge, as well as Tim Hargrave
and Fabio Calabria � have Type 1 diabetes, although only Mr. Calabria
rode in the race.
The Web site Dlife lists other famous athletes who have Type 1 diabetes,
including swimmer Gary Hall Jr., an Olympic gold medalist, professional
snowboarder Sean Busby, and New York Knicks center Chris Dudley.
> Diabetes is controllable, but when you screw with blood sugar, it
> screws with your head (talk to anyone who has ever tried an Atkins
> diet, you get dizzy, you forget what you're doing, you think you are
> making sense when you aren't, you think one thing, you say something
> else).
Been there once, tried that, can confirm!
>> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie Smith is
>> gone.
>
> Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
> (remember Reeves and Elway?).
Reeves won how many Super Bowls with NY or Atlanta?
Great coach yes, but he throttled Elway's progress with too much Winder.
Folks have been questioning Lovie Smith before Cutler came along.
> It does not explain the first part of
> the year though, does it.
Unfamiliarity and timing in a new system sure does, and Ron Turner
hasn't gotten one bit better at play calling, has he?
>>> We never have to shovel snow over here. Occasionally brush it off
>>> vehicles, but no shovelling.
>> <jealous mode>
>>
>> You guys stay a bit colder in the AM than the Front Range but the payoff
>> is evident.
>
> Yeah, and the snow generally melts off within a day of falling.
> That's always a plus. Been particularly dry this year though.
Plus I love the way the light hits the Book Cliffs in the evening, just
beautiful colors.
>>>> Balboa Park maybe?
>>> I've been there, and there used to be an amusement park. My sister
>>> and I would take the bus and go there every weekend during the
>>> summer. It's been years since I saw that film (but if you ever watch
>>> Harry O, there was one ep that was filmed at Balboa Park and my sister
>>> and I were both in it, no lines, just two kids standing in line).
>> How cool!
>>
>> That was the '70s David Janssen PI show, iirc?
>>
>> He was a fine actor.
>
> Yep, at least I think it was Janssen... Hang on... yep. Funny the
> way my memory works... I thought it got cancelled because he had
> died, but didn't die until 1980.
>
> He was a nice man. He came over and spoke to both of us, between
> filming. I can't even remember what they were filming, just hating
> that I couldn't actually *get* on the stupid roller coaster, because
> they didn't want the "back ground" to change. Sorta sucked (keeping
> in mind that I was 10/11 at the time).
What a great memory. It's encouraging when "celebrities" take time for
the real people on the side. Another guy who's like that is Bruce
Willis. Buddy of mine was an extra in the Die Hard sequel that filmed at
the old Stapleton Airport and said Bruce was gracious about hanging with
the extras between shots and just chatting.
http://www.davidjanssen.net/biography.htm
David Janssen enjoyed a reputation as both a consummate professional and
as a great guy to work with. He was extremely well-liked up and down the
"food chain" of his industry, from the creative elite, to the crew
�worker-bee� ranks.
Known for having a quick wit, his sense of humor unfortunately was
seldom utilized to its full potential on-screen. His "life-of-the-party"
public persona masked a more private side - that of an autodidact who
read voraciously and enjoyed the intellectual stimulation of a select
coterie of smart friends. He dabbled in songwriting, photography, plane
and racehorse ownership, and a variety of other interests in his short life.
Cleatarrior
> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:06:33 -0700, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block>
> wrote:
>
>> Howard Brazee wrote:
>>> The three biggest stars of the game are free agents after this season.
>>>
>> Speculation...
>>
>> Orton is a sign and trade, We rescue Kevin O'Connell from gang green...
>>
>> But I think Bowlen finds room for Marshall and Dumervil.
>
> I think we need Marshall and Dumervil. But we Josh might think we
> could get a better Orton pretty cheap for a quarterback.
>
I don't know if the Jets will cut O'Connell loose, but he's someone McD
is familiar with.
I always thought he was the one bright spot in Craft's otherwise dismal
SDSU stay.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > Night Vision loss wouldn't matter in the stadium. It's bright as day
> > there.
>
> How about contrast, glare, etc?
If he were having that kind of issue, then his diabetes would be
completely out of control, and he'd *have* to stop playing. He'd be
risking blindness (my dog has diabetes, her glucose level is always
under 150 - for a dog her size glucose should not get above 250 - ,
and she went blind over a weekend, granted, she's a dog, but that's
what the disease can do). I do not think that's his issue.
>
> They talk about problems with people who have had Lasic getting halos,
> any similarity there?
most of the halos are around lights, when the surrounding area is dark
(like a street light at night). There wouldn't be a halo because of
sunlight, and he wouldn't be looking into the lights on the field.
> > You mean like with concussions? They've shown they can't be trusted
> > with that. They want to win. We won't know if any harm's been done
> > to JC for years (unless he goes into a coma, but I don't expect
> > that). Diabetes can be very insidious.
>
> Wade Wilson managed just fine for what, 18 years...
Gee, did he play with a pump? Did he even use one? No, he used a
glucose meter and did shots.
> >> Do we need to go down the list of great athletes who have done well with
> >> diabetes in football and baseball?
>
> > Yeah, but the caveat is *only* the ones who wear insulin pumps (and
> > pitchers don't count, as they generally wouldn't slide anywhere).
>
> OK, so:
>
> Jay Leeuwenburg
>
> Calvin Muhammed
>
> Michael Sinclair
>
> Art Shell
>
> Sugar Ray Robinson
>
> James "Buster" Douglas
>
> "Smokin' Joe" Fraizer
>
> Ron Santo
>
> Ed Kranepool
>
> Ty Cobb
>
> Bobby Clarke
>
> ...do these guys count?
Thanks for ignoring the one caveat I had. These guys didn't wear
insulin pumps.
> New technology has made it easier for athletes with diabetes to stay on
> the field without having to think constantly about the disease.
> Continuous glucose monitors can track blood sugar and sound alarms if it
> goes outside of safe ranges. Wireless insulin pumps can deliver insulin
> as needed without a tangle of tubes and wires.
Which he does *not* wear during games. Even he has discussed that,
and that is my primary issue. He's got diabetes, yes he can have a
normal life. However, if he *requires* the pump to inject the
insulin, then it is not "simple" diabetes (and the fact that he still
drinks beer, according to friends a bit to excess, is the stupidist
thing on the planet).
Cleat.... It's simple. We have two kinds of type 1 diabetes. The
kind that requires an injection once or twice a day (the people you
listed). The other type requires injections ever 30 to 60 minutes,
depending. Jay has the second one. It isn't like "typical" diabetes,
he needs constant monitoring (and insulin replacement). When he takes
the pump off, to play the game, he goes for up to 5 hours, without the
pump (without instant monitoring/replacing).
I don't care how careful the docs are, his insulin levels will
fluctuate. That is my concern. He could *die*, he could go blind, he
could lose his legs, feet, toes. All because of this disease (and his
normal twentysomething thought process that he's invulnerable, show me
a 25 to 30 year old who doesn't think that?). He doesn't think that
those things can happen to him, but they can (and that's what really
worries me, when I see him doing things that seem very out of the norm
for him).
> Mr. Cutler, 25, was diagnosed about two weeks ago and learned he needed
> daily insulin injections, his business manager Marty Garafalo told The
> Associated Press. Mr. Garafalo said the quarterback is managing his
> disease and “in no way is his football career jeopardized.”
Uh huh... Right after he was diagnosed. Before he started the
insulin pump.
> The Web site Dlife lists other famous athletes who have Type 1 diabetes,
> including swimmer Gary Hall Jr., an Olympic gold medalist, professional
> snowboarder Sean Busby, and New York Knicks center Chris Dudley.
Who don't wear pumps. They do injections. Completely different
scenario.
> > Diabetes is controllable, but when you screw with blood sugar, it
> > screws with your head (talk to anyone who has ever tried an Atkins
> > diet, you get dizzy, you forget what you're doing, you think you are
> > making sense when you aren't, you think one thing, you say something
> > else).
>
> Been there once, tried that, can confirm!
Yep. Me too, but I did lose 105 pounds in 3 months.
> > Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
> > (remember Reeves and Elway?).
>
> Reeves won how many Super Bowls with NY or Atlanta?
That has what to do with my point that people were calling for Reeves
head when the team did poorly, because we didn't want to blame John?
People are calling for Lovie's head because they don't want to blame
Urlacher and Hester and whichever other player they think they *have*
to keep in order to win.
> Plus I love the way the light hits the Book Cliffs in the evening, just
> beautiful colors.
You should see it hit the Monument in the morning, jaw dropping!
Cleatarrior
> On Dec 2, 10:48 am, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>> Night Vision loss wouldn't matter in the stadium. It's bright as day
>>> there.
>> How about contrast, glare, etc?
>
> If he were having that kind of issue, then his diabetes would be
> completely out of control, and he'd *have* to stop playing. He'd be
> risking blindness (my dog has diabetes, her glucose level is always
> under 150 - for a dog her size glucose should not get above 250 - ,
> and she went blind over a weekend, granted, she's a dog, but that's
> what the disease can do). I do not think that's his issue.
Ok.
>> They talk about problems with people who have had Lasic getting halos,
>> any similarity there?
>
> most of the halos are around lights, when the surrounding area is dark
> (like a street light at night). There wouldn't be a halo because of
> sunlight, and he wouldn't be looking into the lights on the field.
Ok.
>>> You mean like with concussions? They've shown they can't be trusted
>>> with that. They want to win. We won't know if any harm's been done
>>> to JC for years (unless he goes into a coma, but I don't expect
>>> that). Diabetes can be very insidious.
>> Wade Wilson managed just fine for what, 18 years...
>
> Gee, did he play with a pump? Did he even use one? No, he used a
> glucose meter and did shots.
Isn't it possible that pump technology is more advanced now then it was
in the 80s?
http://www.odu.edu/ao/instadv/quest/ExcellingWithExercise.html
Take an NPH user, for example, and compare her or him to a user of
ultralente or to someone using an insulin pump. NPH is an
intermediate-acting insulin that peaks between four and 10 hours after
injection and will persist in the body for up to 16 hours. An NPH user
will be affected by exercise in the late afternoon differently than an
ultralente user, since ultralente is a longer-acting insulin with a
minimal peak designed to provide only basal insulin coverage. By
contrast, an insulin-pump user can turn off the pump or reduce the basal
rate, thereby creating circulating insulin levels that are more similar
to the body�s normal, lower physiological levels during exercise.
>>>> Do we need to go down the list of great athletes who have done well with
>>>> diabetes in football and baseball?
>>> Yeah, but the caveat is *only* the ones who wear insulin pumps (and
>>> pitchers don't count, as they generally wouldn't slide anywhere).
>> OK, so:
>>
>> Jay Leeuwenburg
>>
>> Calvin Muhammed
>>
>> Michael Sinclair
>>
>> Art Shell
>>
>> Sugar Ray Robinson
>>
>> James "Buster" Douglas
>>
>> "Smokin' Joe" Fraizer
>>
>> Ron Santo
>>
>> Ed Kranepool
>>
>> Ty Cobb
>>
>> Bobby Clarke
>>
>> ...do these guys count?
>
> Thanks for ignoring the one caveat I had. These guys didn't wear
> insulin pumps.
None of them?
I couldn't find a reference one way or the other.
Regardless, when you start talking boxers, that's super-high stress
activity.
>> New technology has made it easier for athletes with diabetes to stay on
>> the field without having to think constantly about the disease.
>> Continuous glucose monitors can track blood sugar and sound alarms if it
>> goes outside of safe ranges. Wireless insulin pumps can deliver insulin
>> as needed without a tangle of tubes and wires.
>
> Which he does *not* wear during games. Even he has discussed that,
> and that is my primary issue. He's got diabetes, yes he can have a
> normal life. However, if he *requires* the pump to inject the
> insulin, then it is not "simple" diabetes (and the fact that he still
> drinks beer, according to friends a bit to excess, is the stupidist
> thing on the planet).
I'm not going there on the rumor-mill stuff.
> Cleat.... It's simple. We have two kinds of type 1 diabetes. The
> kind that requires an injection once or twice a day (the people you
> listed). The other type requires injections ever 30 to 60 minutes,
> depending. Jay has the second one. It isn't like "typical" diabetes,
> he needs constant monitoring (and insulin replacement). When he takes
> the pump off, to play the game, he goes for up to 5 hours, without the
> pump (without instant monitoring/replacing).
How about gel packets?
http://www.slamdunkkids.net/athletes.htm
Two years ago, I switched from multiple daily injections to the Deltec
Cosmo insulin pump. I keep the pump connected when exercising, and
usually lower my basal insulin rate. I also carry carbohydrate gel
packets to keep my blood sugar from dropping too low when exercising.
> I don't care how careful the docs are, his insulin levels will
> fluctuate. That is my concern. He could *die*, he could go blind, he
> could lose his legs, feet, toes. All because of this disease (and his
> normal twentysomething thought process that he's invulnerable, show me
> a 25 to 30 year old who doesn't think that?). He doesn't think that
> those things can happen to him, but they can (and that's what really
> worries me, when I see him doing things that seem very out of the norm
> for him).
I can't speak as to what he does or doesn't know can happen to him.
>> Mr. Cutler, 25, was diagnosed about two weeks ago and learned he needed
>> daily insulin injections, his business manager Marty Garafalo told The
>> Associated Press. Mr. Garafalo said the quarterback is managing his
>> disease and �in no way is his football career jeopardized.�
>
> Uh huh... Right after he was diagnosed. Before he started the
> insulin pump.
His docs seem to be fine with it so far.
>> The Web site Dlife lists other famous athletes who have Type 1 diabetes,
>> including swimmer Gary Hall Jr., an Olympic gold medalist, professional
>> snowboarder Sean Busby, and New York Knicks center Chris Dudley.
>
> Who don't wear pumps. They do injections. Completely different
> scenario.
I listed a few people above who do wear pumps.
>>> Diabetes is controllable, but when you screw with blood sugar, it
>>> screws with your head (talk to anyone who has ever tried an Atkins
>>> diet, you get dizzy, you forget what you're doing, you think you are
>>> making sense when you aren't, you think one thing, you say something
>>> else).
>> Been there once, tried that, can confirm!
>
> Yep. Me too, but I did lose 105 pounds in 3 months.
I dropped a quick 15 and learned to hate broccoli and beef jerkey;-)
>>> Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
>>> (remember Reeves and Elway?).
>> Reeves won how many Super Bowls with NY or Atlanta?
>
> That has what to do with my point that people were calling for Reeves
> head when the team did poorly, because we didn't want to blame John?
I'd say John wasn't to blame as he wasn't coaching or play-calling.
http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/elway/article13.html
Because Tommy Maddox was their No. 1 draft choice, the Denver Broncos
waited until his spring term was finished at UCLA before they opened
their two-week, offseason quarterback school. That way, Maddox was in
Denver for his first lessons in professional football.
But John Elway wasn't, at least not during the second week of the annual
out-of-pad session with its quarterbacks, receivers and running backs.
Elway had gone fishin'. There is nothing so unusual about that. After
all, as Coach Dan Reeves says, "John needs a quarterback camp like I
need a hole in the head."
The oddity in Elway's absence, though, is that he spent that week
fishing in Alaska with Mike Shanahan, the new offensive coordinator of
the San Francisco 49ers. That's the same Mike Shanahan who was fired by
Reeves as Denver's offensive coordinator last January, shortly after the
Broncos lost to Buffalo in the AFC championship game.
That's the same Mike Shanahan who ran interference for Elway in his feud
with Reeves last season. The same Mike Shanahan who was accused by
Reeves of scripting plays with Elway -- without Reeves' knowledge. The
same Mike Shanahan who reportedly leaked personnel information to Elway
from private coaches meetings.
Reeves never specified his reasons for dismissing Shanahan, but it's
clear he was fired -- in part, anyway -- to eliminate those problems.
It's clear, too, that Shanahan, who had become one of Elway's best
friends, was fired -- again, in part -- to give Reeves a fresh start
with his star quarterback.
"That was my main concern with Mike, that he was too close to John,"
Reeves said. "I felt like it was causing some problems within our staff."
And then Shanahan and Elway go fishing together this summer during an
important Broncos' practice session. It doesn't look good, even if Elway
doesn't exactly need a primer on the forward pass.
That's the point from where Reeves and Elway begin the 1992 season: with
a lot of Mile High air to clear.
It's going to be an interesting season in Denver. On paper, the Broncos
are as strong as anyone in the AFC. They have the best defense in the
conference, they have a strong running game and they have Elway.
If they survive their matchups with the brutal NFC East Division -- they
meet Philadelphia and Washington on the road and Dallas and the New York
Giants at home -- the Broncos will be the class of the conference.
"We've got an excellent chance to repeat as AFC West champions, because
the whole division basically plays the same schedule," Reeves said. "And
if we do, if we win the AFC West, we'll be as tough a football team
going into the playoffs as we've ever been because of the schedule we'll
have played."
The relationship has ebbed since then through nine seasons, spurred in
no small measure by the perception that Reeves' offense, which puts a
premium on the short "touch" passes, has kept Elway from making full use
of the Howitzer that hangs from his right shoulder. In another offense,
the thinking goes, Elway could have put up Marino-like numbers.
Cleatarrior
article on '92 season contd. - sorry, hit send too soon:
http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/elway/article13.html
Last season, the feud flared up again, this time over the play-calling.
Elway started the season calling his own plays. Reeves finished the
season sending them into the huddle.
In between, they fumed.
"Mike Shanahan suggested to me that John call the plays last year,"
Reeves said. "To me, it was going to make the game more fun for John.
Every day he came to practice, it (hadn't been) any fun for him. I
thought it would motivate him, and I think it did.
"Then it got to the point that John got the feeling I was trying to make
it so complicated on purpose, so that he couldn't call the plays,
because we are so multiple of offense.
"That was totally wrong. I mean, I have no qualms whatsoever about John
calling the plays. If that's the best way for us to win, that's all I
want. But John is such a competitor that there's no way in the world he
would've ever come to me and said, 'Dan, the game plan is getting too
complicated for me. I can't call the formations and still get the
players on the field in time.'"
It was a problem because Elway's play-calling was keeping Denver in a
basic -- albeit successful -- attack, and Reeves thought the team needed
to outwit defenses with motion and options. Reeves won that battle.
They haven't settled on a system yet for '92. But early in training
camp, Reeves and Elway were trying to put a happy face on the
play-calling issue, specifically, and their bickering past, in general.
It's usually like that the first few weeks of camp, before the strain of
the long season settles in.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/1992.htm
Record: 8-8-0, Finished 3rd in AFC West Division
..and the rest is history, after a bump in the Wade...
> People are calling for Lovie's head because they don't want to blame
> Urlacher and Hester and whichever other player they think they *have*
> to keep in order to win.
No I think based on what I read in eh Trib that there is a real sense
that Ron Turner is a play-calling moron.
Urlacher is out with the broken wrist, so no fault there.
And Hester has been terrible.
Bad routes and only 3 TDs, matching his total for all last year.
> > Plus I love the way the light hits the Book Cliffs in the evening,
> > > just beautiful colors.
> You should see it hit the Monument in the morning, jaw dropping!
Oh yeah, like a fiery plum.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
> > Gee, did he play with a pump? Did he even use one? No, he used a
> > glucose meter and did shots.
>
> Isn't it possible that pump technology is more advanced now then it was
> in the 80s?
The pump will get damaged in a football game (or pretty much any
contact sport). Jay can't play with his pump on. He takes it off, he
has already said he does.
>
> http://www.odu.edu/ao/instadv/quest/ExcellingWithExercise.html
>
> Take an NPH user, for example, and compare her or him to a user of
> ultralente or to someone using an insulin pump. NPH is an
> intermediate-acting insulin that peaks between four and 10 hours after
> injection and will persist in the body for up to 16 hours.
Not sure on what this is based, but this isn't true of anyone I know
on NPH. Then again, that's part of the problem with diabetes, what
works in the lab doesn't always work in the 'field'.
> >> Jay Leeuwenburg
>
> >> Calvin Muhammed
>
> >> Michael Sinclair
>
> >> Art Shell
>
> >> Sugar Ray Robinson
>
> >> James "Buster" Douglas
>
> >> "Smokin' Joe" Fraizer
>
> >> Ron Santo
>
> >> Ed Kranepool
>
> >> Ty Cobb
>
> >> Bobby Clarke
>
> >> ...do these guys count?
>
> > Thanks for ignoring the one caveat I had. These guys didn't wear
> > insulin pumps.
>
> None of them?
Insulin pumps didn't exist for a good number of those guys.
However, if he *requires* the pump to inject the
> > insulin, then it is not "simple" diabetes (and the fact that he still
> > drinks beer, according to friends a bit to excess, is the stupidist
> > thing on the planet).
>
> I'm not going there on the rumor-mill stuff.
It isn't just rumors though, he's admitted it (and admitted that he
knows it isn't wise).
> > he needs constant monitoring (and insulin replacement). When he takes
> > the pump off, to play the game, he goes for up to 5 hours, without the
> > pump (without instant monitoring/replacing).
>
> How about gel packets?
Those are great, if you just want your glucose levelled out, not if
you need to function at a high level. Even with insulin on the
sidelines, his glucose will vary, and because of his pump, he won't be
able to handle that well. That's been my standing all along. A pump
picks up a tenth of a point change, and adjusts the insulin for it. A
person, at best, can't adjust for that small an amount.
I'm not saying that he can't function at a high level, I'm saying that
what I've seen (last year and this one) he doesn't seem as sharp in
the second half of games (and in the latter half of the season). It
looks like, to me, that his glucose levels are not kept level when he
isn't wearing a pump.
He doesn't think that
> > those things can happen to him, but they can (and that's what really
> > worries me, when I see him doing things that seem very out of the norm
> > for him).
>
> I can't speak as to what he does or doesn't know can happen to him.
I was talking about any person his age. It's common to think that
"that" won't happen to "me". Most young people think that horrible
things can't happen to them. It's a common malady (I used to think
that too, which explains alot of the things I did when I was young).
> > Uh huh... Right after he was diagnosed. Before he started the
> > insulin pump.
>
> His docs seem to be fine with it so far.
Rich patient and a doctor. Michael Jackson comes to mind. I'm not
saying that Jay is paying to get the opinion he wants, but we all do.
A doctor gives us a bad diagnosis... We go and get another opinion.
He could be fine, but what I've seen, he doesn't *seem* fine.
> > Yep. Me too, but I did lose 105 pounds in 3 months.
>
> I dropped a quick 15 and learned to hate broccoli and beef jerkey;-)
I still love broccoli and beef jerky
>
> >>> Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
> >>> (remember Reeves and Elway?).
> >> Reeves won how many Super Bowls with NY or Atlanta?
>
> > That has what to do with my point that people were calling for Reeves
> > head when the team did poorly, because we didn't want to blame John?
>
> I'd say John wasn't to blame as he wasn't coaching or play-calling.
Interesting article, but my point stands... A coach may call a game,
but he doesn't go out and run the ball, or throw the ball or tackle a
runner. He can only put plays together. The *players* need actually
play (it's a combination of coaching and playing, with both sides
being equally responsible).
Then again, I recall hearing calls for Reeves head as early as after
the second monumental fail in the Super Bowl (was that 85?)
Nunya Bidnits
clip
>
> Forte's RB swoon hasn't helped either.
He's a bum. Kicked him from my fantasy team many weeks ago. That's ok, by
the time the trades were done, I ended up with MJD, Pierre Thomas, and
Thomas Jones. Adios Forte.
>clip>
> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie Smith
> is gone.
>
Cue Mike Shanahan...
>>>> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in
>>>> an <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>>> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
>>
>> If that's the determining factor, then JC really sucks (and Orton at
>> least *got* to a SB <smile>).
>
> Not as a starter.
>
>>> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
Seymour and Bellichick must both be having recurring nightmares about that
deal. And then they wake up and have them again. Especially Seymour. I
wonder if he can play QB?
MartyB
Adam Smith
> article on '92 season contd. - sorry, hit send too soon:
>
> http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/elway/article13.html
>
[good article snipped]
Another problem with NFL QBs calling their own plays is all the
incentives built into players' contracts. Every receiver and running
back wants the ball as often as possible to pad his stats and activate
incentive bonuses, and the coach/OC on the sidelines or in the booth
is much more insulated from pressure than the QB in the huddle.
Also, the fact that virtually no college QBs call their own plays
anymore makes it hard to find an NFL QB with play-calling experience
past high school (and maybe not even that).
Cleatarrior
> On Dec 2, 12:45 pm, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
>
>>> Gee, did he play with a pump? Did he even use one? No, he used a
>>> glucose meter and did shots.
>> Isn't it possible that pump technology is more advanced now then it was
>> in the 80s?
>
> The pump will get damaged in a football game (or pretty much any
> contact sport). Jay can't play with his pump on. He takes it off, he
> has already said he does.
Bu that's just for maybe 4 hours, tops.
>> http://www.odu.edu/ao/instadv/quest/ExcellingWithExercise.html
>>
>> Take an NPH user, for example, and compare her or him to a user of
>> ultralente or to someone using an insulin pump. NPH is an
>> intermediate-acting insulin that peaks between four and 10 hours after
>> injection and will persist in the body for up to 16 hours.
>
> Not sure on what this is based, but this isn't true of anyone I know
> on NPH. Then again, that's part of the problem with diabetes, what
> works in the lab doesn't always work in the 'field'.
Just some stuff I googled up.
>>>> Jay Leeuwenburg
>>>> Calvin Muhammed
>>>> Michael Sinclair
>>>> Art Shell
>>>> Sugar Ray Robinson
>>>> James "Buster" Douglas
>>>> "Smokin' Joe" Fraizer
>>>> Ron Santo
>>>> Ed Kranepool
>>>> Ty Cobb
>>>> Bobby Clarke
>>>> ...do these guys count?
>>> Thanks for ignoring the one caveat I had. These guys didn't wear
>>> insulin pumps.
>> None of them?
>
> Insulin pumps didn't exist for a good number of those guys.
Oh, guess I should have checked how long they've been around.
So couldn't some of them have had it as bad as Jay?
> However, if he *requires* the pump to inject the
>>> insulin, then it is not "simple" diabetes (and the fact that he still
>>> drinks beer, according to friends a bit to excess, is the stupidist
>>> thing on the planet).
>> I'm not going there on the rumor-mill stuff.
>
> It isn't just rumors though, he's admitted it (and admitted that he
> knows it isn't wise).
Too celebrity tell for me.
>>> he needs constant monitoring (and insulin replacement). When he takes
>>> the pump off, to play the game, he goes for up to 5 hours, without the
>>> pump (without instant monitoring/replacing).
>> How about gel packets?
>
> Those are great, if you just want your glucose levelled out, not if
> you need to function at a high level. Even with insulin on the
> sidelines, his glucose will vary, and because of his pump, he won't be
> able to handle that well. That's been my standing all along. A pump
> picks up a tenth of a point change, and adjusts the insulin for it. A
> person, at best, can't adjust for that small an amount.
>
> I'm not saying that he can't function at a high level, I'm saying that
> what I've seen (last year and this one) he doesn't seem as sharp in
> the second half of games (and in the latter half of the season). It
> looks like, to me, that his glucose levels are not kept level when he
> isn't wearing a pump.
I haven't see a real 2nd half fade, let's check his game stats by the
1/2 before we go there.
http://www.nfl.com/players/jaycutler/situationalstats?id=CUT288111
Att Comp Pct Yds Avg Lng TD Int Rtg.
1st Half 209 136 65.1 1,394 6.7 68 7 11 73.3
2nd Half 195 117 60.0 1,277 6.5 41 9 9 75.5
I call that a bit of a push...
> He doesn't think that
>>> those things can happen to him, but they can (and that's what really
>>> worries me, when I see him doing things that seem very out of the norm
>>> for him).
>> I can't speak as to what he does or doesn't know can happen to him.
>
> I was talking about any person his age. It's common to think that
> "that" won't happen to "me". Most young people think that horrible
> things can't happen to them. It's a common malady (I used to think
> that too, which explains alot of the things I did when I was young).
Heh, same here...
But I knew one thing I couldn't just wish away, health-wise .
I suspect he does too.
>>> Uh huh... Right after he was diagnosed. Before he started the
>>> insulin pump.
>> His docs seem to be fine with it so far.
>
> Rich patient and a doctor. Michael Jackson comes to mind.
Whoa, way different lifestyle and family background there...
> I'm not
> saying that Jay is paying to get the opinion he wants, but we all do.
> A doctor gives us a bad diagnosis... We go and get another opinion.
>
> He could be fine, but what I've seen, he doesn't *seem* fine.
Stats aren't compelling though.
His "not fine" is about playing in a lousy offense with marginal talent.
>>> Yep. Me too, but I did lose 105 pounds in 3 months.
>> I dropped a quick 15 and learned to hate broccoli and beef jerkey;-)
>
> I still love broccoli and beef jerky
I may have overdone it a bit...
>>>>> Yeah, because we will always blame the coach when we like the player
>>>>> (remember Reeves and Elway?).
>>>> Reeves won how many Super Bowls with NY or Atlanta?
>>> That has what to do with my point that people were calling for Reeves
>>> head when the team did poorly, because we didn't want to blame John?
>> I'd say John wasn't to blame as he wasn't coaching or play-calling.
>
> Interesting article, but my point stands... A coach may call a game,
> but he doesn't go out and run the ball, or throw the ball or tackle a
> runner. He can only put plays together. The *players* need actually
> play (it's a combination of coaching and playing, with both sides
> being equally responsible).
So Marty wasn't a big game choker?
> Then again, I recall hearing calls for Reeves head as early as after
> the second monumental fail in the Super Bowl (was that 85?)
Yeah, and that was unfair, at the time.
But he sure couldn't get Atlanta past us even with Chris Chandler having
a career year, and Jamel Anderson too.
Cleatarrior
> Cleatarrior said:
> clip
>> Forte's RB swoon hasn't helped either.
>
> He's a bum. Kicked him from my fantasy team many weeks ago. That's ok, by
> the time the trades were done, I ended up with MJD, Pierre Thomas, and
> Thomas Jones. Adios Forte.
Oh yeah, liking the Pierre Thomas choice...
>> clip>
>> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie Smith
>> is gone.
>>
> Cue Mike Shanahan...
That could be a _very_ nice fit, couldn't it?
Can we say instant resurrection?
I wonder if the McCasckey's are flush enough for Mike...
>>>>> Well, Matt Cassell played exceptionally well for them last year in
>>>>> an <ahem> pedestrian offense <giggle>.
>>>> Not well enough to get in the SB though.
>>> If that's the determining factor, then JC really sucks (and Orton at
>>> least *got* to a SB <smile>).
>> Not as a starter.
>>
>>>> And now that they've cut loose Seymour their D is lagging.
>
> Seymour and Bellichick must both be having recurring nightmares about that
> deal. And then they wake up and have them again. Especially Seymour. I
> wonder if he can play QB?
>
> MartyB
>
Maybe they can get Culpepper back and form a Rugby team!
Cleatarrior
That's one area that's really changed for sure.
I don't know if Tony Pike calls any of his, but I like what I see.
Fred Waiss, Sr.
"Nunya Bidnits" <nunyab...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote in message
news:hf1mef$m3g$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Fred Waiss, Sr. said:
>> "Cleatarrior" <nos...@xx.block> wrote in message
>> news:hepce3$mpv$1...@news.datemas.de...
>>>> On Nov 27, 11:19 am, Cleatarrior <nos...@xx.block> wrote:
>>>>> Smokie Darling (Annie) wrote:
against him, he can burn you. First down...first down...first down...first down
Fred Waiss, Sr.
> Yeah, and that was unfair, at the time.
>
> But he sure couldn't get Atlanta past us even with Chris Chandler having a
> career year, and Jamel Anderson too.
One of the neatest things about that SB was during the on-field celebration,
with Elway & Co. on the bandbox, and Reeves came up quietly to the side and
congratulated John. The expression of surprise on Elway's face at seeing Reeves
was really something I won't forget. Classy move by Reeves after some of the
pre-game rehashing (by the media) of their problems.
Cleatarrior
What a special memory, I hadn't even thought of that until now. I do
remember it, and it was 100% class, especially for a guy of Reeves' age
and station.
Nunya Bidnits
> Nunya Bidnits wrote:
>> Cleatarrior said:
>> clip
>>> Forte's RB swoon hasn't helped either.
>>
>> He's a bum. Kicked him from my fantasy team many weeks ago. That's
>> ok, by the time the trades were done, I ended up with MJD, Pierre
>> Thomas, and Thomas Jones. Adios Forte.
>
> Oh yeah, liking the Pierre Thomas choice...
Me too, and he's the least productive in fantasy points of the three, but my
thing is with that RB group plus my weekly pick of QBs Favre and Rivers, I
can afford to stack my team with Saints... Colston, Meacham, Thomas and
Carney.
I've been hurt some though, losing Daniel Owens. He was outproducing all TEs
when he went down for the season, and I didn't have a backup, so now I scour
second tier free agent TEs every week, looking for someone with a good
matchup. Before I lost him I was leading my league in total points.
>
>>> clip>
>>> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie
>>> Smith is gone.
>>>
>> Cue Mike Shanahan...
>
> That could be a _very_ nice fit, couldn't it?
>
> Can we say instant resurrection?
>
> I wonder if the McCasckey's are flush enough for Mike...
Yeah, it would make a real nice fit, and I'm glad it's not in the AFC.
Chicago media coverage rivals the big coastal cities, and he could write his
own ticket. And afford to take that bigass loss staring him down on the
bazillion dollar house he built right before he got canned.
MartyB
Cleatarrior
> Cleatarrior said:
>> Nunya Bidnits wrote:
>>> Cleatarrior said:
>>> clip
>>>> Forte's RB swoon hasn't helped either.
>>> He's a bum. Kicked him from my fantasy team many weeks ago. That's
>>> ok, by the time the trades were done, I ended up with MJD, Pierre
>>> Thomas, and Thomas Jones. Adios Forte.
>> Oh yeah, liking the Pierre Thomas choice...
>
> Me too, and he's the least productive in fantasy points of the three, but my
> thing is with that RB group plus my weekly pick of QBs Favre and Rivers, I
> can afford to stack my team with Saints... Colston, Meacham, Thomas and
> Carney.
>
> I've been hurt some though, losing Daniel Owens. He was outproducing all TEs
> when he went down for the season, and I didn't have a backup, so now I scour
> second tier free agent TEs every week, looking for someone with a good
> matchup. Before I lost him I was leading my league in total points.
At some point you'd think Todd Heap would break out maybe...or even
Sheffler?
Nah...
>>>> clip>
>>>> And his entire TEAM is in the tank. There is serious talk Lovie
>>>> Smith is gone.
>>>>
>>> Cue Mike Shanahan...
>> That could be a _very_ nice fit, couldn't it?
>>
>> Can we say instant resurrection?
>>
>> I wonder if the McCasckey's are flush enough for Mike...
>
> Yeah, it would make a real nice fit, and I'm glad it's not in the AFC.
> Chicago media coverage rivals the big coastal cities, and he could write his
> own ticket. And afford to take that bigass loss staring him down on the
> bazillion dollar house he built right before he got canned.
>
> MartyB
>
The Shanny-mansion is reported to be 7.6 mil$ and up.
Then again he sold his last crib for freaking 16 mil$!!!
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_8644012
I wonder if Bowlen enjoys his contribution?