The W
Views: 98318329
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.8.14 0315
The W - Football - Welker Goes Down!
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.08
Pages: 1
(565 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (11 total)
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 6 hours
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.39
Why do the Pats always end up proving the Colts right? Click Here (sports.espn.go.com). It didn't look good, but it figures he doesn't get hurt on a hit.


This is bad if he is out for the playoffs, but I am for playing starters all season. This year Belichick is going to make all coaches go even more conservative.

(edited by BigDaddyLoco on 3.1.10 1338)
Promote this thread!
Psycho Penguin
Liverwurst








Since: 24.6.07
From: Greenacres FL

Since last post: 1411 days
Last activity: 1407 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.12
Injuries happen. Tom Brady got hurt in the first game of the year. If you're worried about injuries, you might as well not even play any game at all.



http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/recognition/9471.html

IT'S TRUE! IT'S DAMN TRUE!

dwaters
Lap cheong








Since: 16.10.02
From: Connecticut

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 18 hours
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.40
...and wouldn't you know Bernard (bleep) Pollard was in on the tackle.

Wes Welker will heal, but that Patriots will never get back that stinker of a loss in Houston.....crap!
It's False
Scrapple








Since: 20.6.02
From: I am the Tag Team Champions!

Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 17 min.
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.32
    Originally posted by BigDaddyLoco
    This is bad if he is out for the playoffs, but I am for playing starters all season. This year Belichick is going to make all coaches go even more conservative.


Maybe not, necessarily...

NFL to review policy on playoff teams resting starters

While Welker is a textbook case on why those playoff teams should reserve the right to rest their starters, the counter-argument could be the fact that the Jets are a 7-9 team if the Colts and Bengals don't lay down for them. Instead, New York's going to the playoffs and the Texans get shafted.




There can be only ONE!
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 9 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.22
    Originally posted by It's False
      Originally posted by BigDaddyLoco
      This is bad if he is out for the playoffs, but I am for playing starters all season. This year Belichick is going to make all coaches go even more conservative.


    Maybe not, necessarily...

    NFL to review policy on playoff teams resting starters

    While Welker is a textbook case on why those playoff teams should reserve the right to rest their starters, the counter-argument could be the fact that the Jets are a 7-9 team if the Colts and Bengals don't lay down for them. Instead, New York's going to the playoffs and the Texans get shafted.


Here's why I think this is stupid: Can anyone give me a hypothetical rule the league could adopt that would be both enforceable and not stupid? I mean, "You must start your starters" doesn't really mean anything. What could the league possibly do even if it wanted to?
Texas Kelly
Lap cheong








Since: 3.1.02
From: FOREST HILLS CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 9 hours
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.07
Ladies and gentlemen, the following public service message is brought to you by your friends from D-Generation X, who would like to remind each and every one of you that if you're not down with that, we've got two words for you...

Preliminary diagnosis is torn ACL & PCL.

I was inclined to pick the Ravens against the Patriots anyway, but with the key cog in the Patriots' offensive engine dislodged, it's now easier to do so. The question now is whether they'll get Welker back in time for next season.

    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    Here's why I think this is stupid: Can anyone give me a hypothetical rule the league could adopt that would be both enforceable and not stupid? I mean, "You must start your starters" doesn't really mean anything. What could the league possibly do even if it wanted to?

There isn't one. The idea of rewarding playoff teams with extra compensatory draft picks for not benching players is also downright stupid and damn near discriminatory. Why shouldn't a team that's 3-12 be able to get some extra draft picks for playing their top guys the last week of the season?

Nothing's going to change in the end.



e-mail me at texas (dot) kelly (at) gmailread a bunch of incoherent nonsense
now 52% more incoherent!
smark/net attack Advisory System is Elevatedsmark/net attack Advisory System Status is: Elevated
(Holds; June 18, 2006)
While the switch from Cena to RVD should alleviate some complaints, the inevitability of the belt's return to Cena (note where Summerslam is this year) and the poor initial showing by the new ECW are enough to keep the indicator where it is for now. The pieces are in place, though, especially on RAW, for improvements to be made to the IWC's psyche in the near future.
supersalvadoran
Landjager








Since: 10.1.08
From: westbury, new york

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.13
    Originally posted by It's False
    While Welker is a textbook case on why those playoff teams should reserve the right to rest their starters, the counter-argument could be the fact that the Jets are a 7-9 team if the Colts and Bengals don't lay down for them. Instead, New York's going to the playoffs and the Texans get shafted.


The Texans didn't get shafted. Yes, the Jets most likely didn't play a regular squad the full 60 in their last two games, but they still did the job they had to do and won. If the Texans were truly a playoff team, they wouldn't had blown all of those leads they had against the Jags and the Colts, among others. And they definitely wouldn't had laid an egg in the opener against the Jets.

The same could be said about the Steelers. If they truly deserved to defend their championship, they should had won against KC, Oakland, and Cleveland. The Broncos shouldn't had collasped in the second half of the season, and the Jags shouldn't had lost their last four games. The Jets earned their spot. And I hate them, so it pains me to say this, but it's the truth.






JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 13 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.30
I'm perfectly fine with the fact that White Wes was in there, even if they have White Wes Jr. (Edelman) right there on the sidelines. I might have shed a man-tear right along with Welker. (And, I'm not exaggerating when I say this was like the first play I watched of football Sunday. Nice start, boys.)

Hopefully a "renewed-and-'we gotta to this for Wes'"-Randy Moss and Julian Edelman = whatever-percent-we-were-getting-of-Randy-Moss and Welker. Or at least close.



Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....

*snip*

Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass.
-- The Guinness. to Cerebus
dMr
Andouille








Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 43 days
Last activity: 9 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.63
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    Here's why I think this is stupid: Can anyone give me a hypothetical rule the league could adopt that would be both enforceable and not stupid? I mean, "You must start your starters" doesn't really mean anything. What could the league possibly do even if it wanted to?

Not a lot. You'd just wind up with a bunch of starters picking up mystery ailments late in the season. Even then, with the amount of rotation that goes on at many positions these days defining what constitutes a starter might be difficult in some cases.

A similar argument gets brought up nearly every year in soccer for some reason even though it seems glaringly obvious that you could never enforce such a rule. Besides, why should a team that played well enough to secure a playoff spot be denied the right to give some of their young guys some game time?

    Originally posted by It's False
    Instead, New York's going to the playoffs and the Texans get shafted.

To be fair, I don't think the Pats will have Brian Hoyer as their go to guy if they're looking for a 4th quarter comeback this weekend. And the Jets *did* beat the Texans already.

It sucks a little for the teams that miss out, but if the Texans, Steelers or anyone else is upset about it they should give serious consideration to not playing like shite on multiple occasions during the regular season.
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.91
Well, Bill B. thinks it's the field's fault.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Belichick-blames-field-welker-injury-010510
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 388 days
Last activity: 349 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.39
Oh, yeah, I saw that on PTI. I couldn't help but think that was ridiculously ironic when it seemed like 5 years in a row that Gillette/Foxboro would turn into a quagmire each time the passing-oriented offense of the Colts came to town.
Thread rated: 4.08
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Mike Shanahan signs with the Redskins
Next thread: Orange Bowl
Previous thread: The W Survival League: 2009 style (Week 17)
(565 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
According to the NFLPA President, it's a possibility. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8313071/nflpa-executive-director-demaurice-smith-blasts-league-locking-refs I can see this happening.
Related threads: When did the Patriots lose their edge? - Adalius Thomas vs The Weather - Belichick Appreciation Thread! - More...
The W - Football - Welker Goes Down!Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.118 seconds.