A few NFL questions in quest for knowledge.

[DoubleVodkas]

I've asked a few on here over the last few months. I'm from the UK and been watching for around 3 years now and have a few questions for you chaps....

What makes an elite punter? Being able to do it under pressure?

Is a undrafted player just someone who was seen playing in a minor league?

What is considered the best network to watch it on? We get them all on the same channel over here but from different networks. I like the dude who commentates for CBS.

Is there too much emphasis on size and strength? As in regards to being able to read the game?

Is a 'West Coast Offence' a team that passes the ball a lot? Heard the term in relation to the Saints and my geography tells me they are not on the West Coast.


Cheers in advance gentleman.

[Machado]

I've asked a few on here over the last few months. I'm from the UK and been watching for around 3 years now and have a few questions for you chaps....

What makes an elite punter? Being able to do it under pressure?
Able to punt ball high in the air. Able to directionally punt the ball near the sidelines, without ball bouncing into end zone

Is a undrafted player just someone who was seen playing in a minor league?
This player was not picked in the NFL draft




Cheers in advance gentleman.

[MickeyG]

I think undrafted means someone who was eligible to be drafted, but didn't get picked in any of the 7 rounds. A lot of these players do get picked up later to at least play on practice squads and if they impress, could get asked to stay around a bit longer and maybe make the final roster.

[thejuggernaut]

I've asked a few on here over the last few months. I'm from the UK and been watching for around 3 years now and have a few questions for you chaps....

What makes an elite punter? Being able to do it under pressure?

What machado said. Accuracy is important, but just as important is hang time to let the coverage team get down field to minimize returns.

Is a undrafted player just someone who was seen playing in a minor league?

There is no "minor league" in a way. There are other pro leagues. Undrafted players sometimes go to camp and get signed if they're good. Sometimes they go to Canada to play and some of them eventually make the NFL. Some players go to other leagues - Kurt Warner, 2 time league MVP and Super Bowl MVP, played in the arena league and NFL Eurose to hone his skills.

What is considered the best network to watch it on? We get them all on the same channel over here but from different networks. I like the dude who commentates for CBS.

Hard to say really. Because of satellite, you can get every game and they are all on network affiliates. It more or less depends what your favorite team is, as certain networks show certain conferences.

Is there too much emphasis on size and strength? As in regards to being able to read the game?

Strength not so much, because strength is essential. Size, far too much, although with good reason. Roster limitations and the salary cap have forced teams to stick with a certain prototype.

There are players who are "undersized" but they usually have a tougher road especially with contracts. Not always, but quite often, an "undersized" player will have to produce consistently to get a contract, where as the prototypes often get contracts because of potential.

It's understandable though because you are only allowed to spend so much money on contracts, it's risky giving millions to "smaller" player who would be more susceptible to injury.

Because of this, it has limited the game in so many ways. The NFL is pretty vanilla because it's essentially a low risk league. Some fans maintain it's "the best of the best" when in reality it's 'the best of a certain prototype"

Is a 'West Coast Offence' a team that passes the ball a lot? Heard the term in relation to the Saints and my geography tells me they are not on the West Coast.

Traditionally, yes. The basic principle of the West Coast offense are very simple:

High percentage throws.

The true West Coast created by Bill Walsh (his version was a variant of another system, but the West Coast we know today came from him.)

Basically, West Coast teams don't necessarily worry about a strong running game because short passes to the RB serve the same function and sometimes is even more effective - the goal is to get the RB in space and short passes to an RB gets him more room than running up the middle.

Also, instead of heaving the ball downfield (low percentage completion, high risk of interception) the goal is to hit the receivers quickly on short throws and let them make plays after the catch.

Mobile lineman are preferred and often times "undersized" lineman will cut it since moving the pocket is an important aspect of the offense.

Now, there are a lot of disciples of the West Coast. Something like %90 of the league is either a disciple of Bill Walsh or of Bill Parcells (not a west coast guy).

Each West Coast coach has a different variation of it. For instance, Brad Childress in Minnesota has a beastly power running game and still likes high percentage throws, but he has a gunslinger of a QB who takes more risks than a WC quarterback really should.

Andy Reid of Philly learned at the feet of Mike Holmgren who learned from Bill Walsh and Reid and Holmgren favor more of the Walsh version - they are more concerned with multi talented running backs than traditional chain movers because they like to throw the ball to their RBs. Now, they've had some decent rushers, for sure, but they favor the short passing game more than the traditional running game.

[DoubleVodkas]

Thanks thejuggernaut, no doubt I will have a few more in due course.

[thejuggernaut]

Thanks thejuggernaut, no doubt I will have a few more in due course.

Let em rip.

[cc117]

Like Juggernaut said, the networks are tied to conferences. AFC games are on CBS. NFC games are on Fox. The Sunday night game is on NBC regardless of conference. Same for the Monday night game on ESPN. AFC vs. NFC games are on the network of the visiting team.

[DoubleVodkas]

Here we go....

What makes a good kicker? Seen Rackers shank one in the play off. Is he in the top bracket?


Are HOF inductees based solely on stats?


Heard the commentators talk about the '40' time. Has this got be low for a receiver?


I like how Peyton Manning does his no huddle offence on occasions. Is he the best at what he does?

Troy Aikman. Cowboy's leading passer. Seen 'America's Game' and he came across as a good guy. Opinions?


Juggernaut....

[poizond13]

What makes a good kicker? Seen Rackers shank one in the play off. Is he in the top bracket?

Accuracy, leg strength, and the ability to stay calm and make clutch kicks when it counts. You'd also like the ability to get a consistent amount of touchbacks on kick offs. As for Rackers, I think he's seen as an average or slightly above average kicker.

Are HOF inductees based solely on stats?

No, not in the sense that baseball players are. Personal stats are important, but people are also going to look at how important that player was to the success of their team, Superbowl victories are very important, as well as what the player meant for the overall game of football. For example, someone who revolutionized a position or changed the way the game is played in some aspect is going to have a good edge. But still, personal stats are important.

Heard the commentators talk about the '40' time. Has this got be low for a receiver?

It's critical, but you also need to have good hands, route running ability, strength, and the ability to run after the catch. You need all of those qualities, but you could still be a good receiver without necessarily having the greatest speed and quickness if you do everything else perfect. But to be an elite receiver, you really need that speed and explosiveness. Of course, someone who is blazingly fast and quick, yet can't run routes for shit and has terrible hands, won't have a shot in hell of being a good receiver in the NFL. It really takes a combination of all of those attributes.

I like how Peyton Manning does his no huddle offence on occasions. Is he the best at what he does?

Ab-so-lutely. The no-huddle has been a staple of the Colts' offense for many years. There is no one better than Peyton at running it. Peyton's ability to read the defense, and call the correct play for a given situation, is unmatched by anyone else in the league, probably in the history of the league. The way it works is that Tom Moore (offensive coordinator) will radio in a "concept" to Peyton. What this means is that he will give him a general idea of what kind of play to run. It's up to Peyton to then read the defense and choose which play would work well within that concept, or audible to an entirely different play if that's what the situation calls for. Peyton has earned the right to do this, and he has the complete trust of the coaching staff. That's something you don't see too often in today's NFL. That's because many people consider Peyton to be, in a sense, a coach who is on the field. His ability to read defenses and direct an offense is absolutely second to none. Anyone with a sense of the history of the NFL should appreciate the fact that we are watching probably the best person to play the position, ever. Take advantage of that and watch him as often as possible, as he will not play forever. There's only one Michael Jordan, and there will only be one Peyton Manning.

[thejuggernaut]

Here we go....

What makes a good kicker? Seen Rackers shank one in the play off. Is he in the top bracket?

I have a particular disdain for kickers, in that they should be marginalized as much as possible. That being said, while no kicker is immune and it can happen at any time, Rackers has been around long enough that he shouldn't be shanking kicks of that magnitude, and may face some heat.

Are HOF inductees based solely on stats?

Mostly, yes. Sometimes exceptions can be made, as there really is not set stat barriers.

Stats usually tell a good story, but not the whole story. Terrell Davis is a good example.

Some claim he didn't play long enough, and my point is he played long enough to leave a historical mark.

He really only played 4 years (blew his knee out, never really truly played after that)

In those 4 years, he:

* 3× Pro Bowl selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 3× First-team All-Pro selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 2× Super Bowl champion (XXXII, XXXIII)
* NFL 1990s All-Decade Team
* 1998 NFL MVP
* 1998 PFWA NFL MVP
* 2× NFL Offensive Player of the Year (1996, 1998)
* 1996 UPI AFL-AFC Player of the Year
* 1997 Super Bowl MVP

He's one of a few backs who've rushed for 2,000 yards. And probably most importantly, he delivered Elway his first Super Bowl after so many failures.

In my opinion, he belongs because he had more of an impact in 4 years than a lot of guys had over 10-15 year period.

Heard the commentators talk about the '40' time. Has this got be low for a receiver?

For the most part, yes. It's not set in stone. Al Davis (Raiders) loves having the fastest team on the planet, but they rarely are any good because his receivers can't run routes or catch.

Now, you can't really have someone who runs a 5.0 40 Yard dash, but anything around the 4.4 - 4.5 range is good.

A huge factor for receivers is quickness, more so than speed. Lots of guys have straight line speed but the really great ones have great lateral quickness and can explode out of their cuts.

Plus, there are a lot of guys who have "game speed"

Jerry Rice and Emmit Smith are two examples of guys didn't score particularly well in their 40 yard dash times, but went on to have amazing careers, arguably the best ever at their respective positions. Someone once said about those two - "they may not have the most impressive stopwatch times, but they run just fast enough that they don't get caught from behind".

I like how Peyton Manning does his no huddle offence on occasions. Is he the best at what he does?

He'd have to be considered the best. He does have some weaknesses in his game, but you certainly wouldn't pass him up if you had a chance to draft him.

Troy Aikman. Cowboy's leading passer. Seen 'America's Game' and he came across as a good guy. Opinions?


Juggernaut....

Aikman seems like a decent enough guy, as much as one can gauge that from watching tv.

[poizond13]

Here we go....

What makes a good kicker? Seen Rackers shank one in the play off. Is he in the top bracket?

I have a particular disdain for kickers, in that they should be marginalized as much as possible. That being said, while no kicker is immune and it can happen at any time, Rackers has been around long enough that he shouldn't be shanking kicks of that magnitude, and may face some heat.

Are HOF inductees based solely on stats?

Mostly, yes. Sometimes exceptions can be made, as there really is not set stat barriers.

Stats usually tell a good story, but not the whole story. Terrell Davis is a good example.

Some claim he didn't play long enough, and my point is he played long enough to leave a historical mark.

He really only played 4 years (blew his knee out, never really truly played after that)

In those 4 years, he:

* 3× Pro Bowl selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 3× First-team All-Pro selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 2× Super Bowl champion (XXXII, XXXIII)
* NFL 1990s All-Decade Team
* 1998 NFL MVP
* 1998 PFWA NFL MVP
* 2× NFL Offensive Player of the Year (1996, 1998)
* 1996 UPI AFL-AFC Player of the Year
* 1997 Super Bowl MVP

He's one of a few backs who've rushed for 2,000 yards. And probably most importantly, he delivered Elway his first Super Bowl after so many failures.

In my opinion, he belongs because he had more of an impact in 4 years than a lot of guys had over 10-15 year period.

Heard the commentators talk about the '40' time. Has this got be low for a receiver?

For the most part, yes. It's not set in stone. Al Davis (Raiders) loves having the fastest team on the planet, but they rarely are any good because his receivers can't run routes or catch.

Now, you can't really have someone who runs a 5.0 40 Yard dash, but anything around the 4.4 - 4.5 range is good.

A huge factor for receivers is quickness, more so than speed. Lots of guys have straight line speed but the really great ones have great lateral quickness and can explode out of their cuts.

Plus, there are a lot of guys who have "game speed"

Jerry Rice and Emmit Smith are two examples of guys didn't score particularly well in their 40 yard dash times, but went on to have amazing careers, arguably the best ever at their respective positions. Someone once said about those two - "they may not have the most impressive stopwatch times, but they run just fast enough that they don't get caught from behind".

I like how Peyton Manning does his no huddle offence on occasions. Is he the best at what he does?

He'd have to be considered the best. He does have some weaknesses in his game, but you certainly wouldn't pass him up if you had a chance to draft him.

Troy Aikman. Cowboy's leading passer. Seen 'America's Game' and he came across as a good guy. Opinions?


Juggernaut....

Aikman seems like a decent enough guy, as much as one can gauge that from watching tv.

Thanks for basically repeating what I already said, aka plagiarizing.

[JakeYonkel]

If you really think he copied everything you wrote a mere 4 minutes after you wrote it...

Nevermind.

[thejuggernaut]

Here we go....

What makes a good kicker? Seen Rackers shank one in the play off. Is he in the top bracket?

I have a particular disdain for kickers, in that they should be marginalized as much as possible. That being said, while no kicker is immune and it can happen at any time, Rackers has been around long enough that he shouldn't be shanking kicks of that magnitude, and may face some heat.

Are HOF inductees based solely on stats?

Mostly, yes. Sometimes exceptions can be made, as there really is not set stat barriers.

Stats usually tell a good story, but not the whole story. Terrell Davis is a good example.

Some claim he didn't play long enough, and my point is he played long enough to leave a historical mark.

He really only played 4 years (blew his knee out, never really truly played after that)

In those 4 years, he:

* 3× Pro Bowl selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 3× First-team All-Pro selection (1996, 1997, 1998)
* 2× Super Bowl champion (XXXII, XXXIII)
* NFL 1990s All-Decade Team
* 1998 NFL MVP
* 1998 PFWA NFL MVP
* 2× NFL Offensive Player of the Year (1996, 1998)
* 1996 UPI AFL-AFC Player of the Year
* 1997 Super Bowl MVP

He's one of a few backs who've rushed for 2,000 yards. And probably most importantly, he delivered Elway his first Super Bowl after so many failures.

In my opinion, he belongs because he had more of an impact in 4 years than a lot of guys had over 10-15 year period.

Heard the commentators talk about the '40' time. Has this got be low for a receiver?

For the most part, yes. It's not set in stone. Al Davis (Raiders) loves having the fastest team on the planet, but they rarely are any good because his receivers can't run routes or catch.

Now, you can't really have someone who runs a 5.0 40 Yard dash, but anything around the 4.4 - 4.5 range is good.

A huge factor for receivers is quickness, more so than speed. Lots of guys have straight line speed but the really great ones have great lateral quickness and can explode out of their cuts.

Plus, there are a lot of guys who have "game speed"

Jerry Rice and Emmit Smith are two examples of guys didn't score particularly well in their 40 yard dash times, but went on to have amazing careers, arguably the best ever at their respective positions. Someone once said about those two - "they may not have the most impressive stopwatch times, but they run just fast enough that they don't get caught from behind".

I like how Peyton Manning does his no huddle offence on occasions. Is he the best at what he does?

He'd have to be considered the best. He does have some weaknesses in his game, but you certainly wouldn't pass him up if you had a chance to draft him.

Troy Aikman. Cowboy's leading passer. Seen 'America's Game' and he came across as a good guy. Opinions?


Juggernaut....

Aikman seems like a decent enough guy, as much as one can gauge that from watching tv.

Thanks for basically repeating what I already said, aka plagiarizing.

Yeah, I typed all of that in 4 minutes.

Your stupidity really knows no bounds.

Besides, it seems he was asking for my input, not that of a guy who weighs 160 pounds soaking wet.

Doublevodkas -

Although some things he said were accurate, keep in mind Poizond13 is an obsessive fanboy type who has allegedly has cheered for the Colts his entire life.

Also keep in mind he has never played the game of football competitively, much less coached or trained people.

His knowledge consists of sitting on a couch, attending the occasional game, and playing video games.

[poizond13]

Yeah, I typed all of that in 4 minutes.

Your stupidity really knows no bounds.

Besides, it seems he was asking for my input, not that of a guy who weighs 160 pounds soaking wet.

Doublevodkas -

Although some things he said were accurate, keep in mind Poizond13 is an obsessive fanboy type who has allegedly has cheered for the Colts his entire life.

Also keep in mind he has never played the game of football competitively, much less coached or trained people.

His knowledge consists of sitting on a couch, attending the occasional game, and playing video games.

LOL, so you're telling the OP that my information is correct, but he shouldn't listen to it because of your false assumption that I never played football? HAHA, great logic there.

All of your inaccurate speculation about my personal life is completely irrelevant, given the fact that you not only plagiarized my post, but also confirmed that it was correct. Thanks for playing, troll.

Doublevodkas- keep in mind that juggernaut is an obsessive troll who doesn't have great knowledge on any subject. Also, he is canadian, which means you should take anything he says about the great American sport of football with a giant grain of salt.

[thejuggernaut]

If you really think he copied everything you wrote a mere 4 minutes after you wrote it...

Nevermind.

Oh don't worry.

He'll do his usual - he'll say some more clinically retarded things and, when called on them, he'll try to go off topic by suggesting people are idiots and virgins (depending on who shows up) and then he'll cry "troll" once his special ed brain realizes he's been half past stupid since he hit "preview".

Although it is comical, watching a lazy eyed, ping pong beer guzzling tranny lover who, as recently as this morning, admitted to not realizing there were good discussions here until recently (December 09 is the first p13 sighting in the Locker Room that I can think of) yet somehow, us folks who've been here shooting this kind of shit for years, are apparently copying HIS posts.

He makes a good punching bag, that much is for certain.

If we're really lucky, maybe the toilet paper with teeth will proclaim to one of us that he would own us at any sport.

[thejuggernaut]

Yeah, I typed all of that in 4 minutes.

Your stupidity really knows no bounds.

Besides, it seems he was asking for my input, not that of a guy who weighs 160 pounds soaking wet.

Doublevodkas -

Although some things he said were accurate, keep in mind Poizond13 is an obsessive fanboy type who has allegedly has cheered for the Colts his entire life.

Also keep in mind he has never played the game of football competitively, much less coached or trained people.

His knowledge consists of sitting on a couch, attending the occasional game, and playing video games.

LOL, so you're telling the OP that my information is correct, but he shouldn't listen to it because of your false assumption that I never played football? HAHA, great logic there.

All of your inaccurate speculation about my personal life is completely irrelevant, given the fact that you not only plagiarized my post, but also confirmed that it was correct. Thanks for playing, troll.

Doublevodkas- keep in mind that juggernaut is an obsessive troll who doesn't have great knowledge on any subject. Also, he is canadian, which means you should take anything he says about the great American sport of football with a giant grain of salt.

Notice I said "Although some things".

And I am sure you can provide the link where I said you shouldn't be listened to.

Although, I keep forgetting, we're dealing with the guy who thinks less than %100 capacity can be jam packed.

Oh don't worry.

He'll do his usual - he'll say some more clinically retarded things and, when called on them, he'll try to go off topic by suggesting people are idiots and virgins (depending on who shows up) and then he'll cry "troll" once his special ed brain realizes he's been half past stupid since he hit "preview".

Didn't take long for you to start crying troll.

I wonder how many people think this limp wristed, 160 pound shit smasher ever set foot on a football field when the players were around it.

[thejuggernaut]

If you really think he copied everything you wrote a mere 4 minutes after you wrote it...

Nevermind.

Do you think P13 didn't come back because he eventually realized that he trolled this thread ? Or is that giving him too much credit, assuming that light went off ?

He has a funny habit of vanishing once his stupidity his pointed out to the board, which he has been known to claim is because of a "long standing policy on this site to not converse with trolls, except in certain circumstances."

[thejuggernaut]

Doublevodkas- keep in mind that juggernaut is an obsessive troll who doesn't have great knowledge on any subject. Also, he is canadian, which means you should take anything he says about the great American sport of football with a giant grain of salt.

Although the game has changed drastically and the US is the king of football, what P13 probably doesn't realize is that the "great American sport of football" actually had its North American origins in Canada and first appeared in the US at the college level.

The core rules of the version of American football played today (4 downs, 11 men, 100 yard field) was due to inferior facilities, so the Americans opted to play with more downs and fewer players (11 for American football, 12 was the standard) on a smaller field (100 yards for American football, 110 yards for Canadian football).

The British gave it to Canada, Canada gave it to the US.

Learn American football first because it's a much simpler game. Once you have that down pat, check out some Canadian football. It's a drastically different, much more complex game but is very entertaining. Some tend to say it's players who weren't "good enough" for the NFL but the reality is, it goes more to what I spoke of earlier, about there being certain size templates players must fall within.

The American game is much more popular, like light years more popular. That being said, popularity does not determine quality. Not being able to make the NFL does not mean one is not a good football player; it simply means you're not right for THAT type of football. Of course, given the huge revenues in the NFL, to not make the NFL is perceived, by some, as a failure or lack of ability when the reality is, it's like Indy Car and F1 drivers switching - sometimes it's interchangeable but it's certainly not a given because, while similar, they are different enough that success not translating to the other is not the mark of failure.

The NFL is much more regimented and unadaptive whereas Canadian football is wide open, more like sandlot football.

[whammybar]

I want to know why they come off a break showing the hottest cheerleader in world history... and then cover her up 2 seconds later with an ad logo.