2022-23 NFL Season Discussion Thread

[thehef]

Originally Posted by thehef

BTW, with first Jacksonville and then Dallas getting bounced from the playoffs, we can safely say that, still, no Super Bowl winning coach has ever gone to another team and won a Super Bowl...

I had mentioned this curious fact at a playoff gathering last weekend and one of my friends asked about QB's, if one had ever won it all with one team and then went to another and won it all. We quickly came up with two: Brady and P Manning...

Turns out, best I can tell, that's it.

Much like with coaches, some legendary QB's ended up retiring with the same team that they won the title: Starr, Dawson, Staubach, Griese, Bradshaw, Young, Elway, E Manning, Brees... others who never went to another team are Theismann, Simms, D Williams, Aikman, Roethlisberger... Plunkett belongs on that list, too, although it's noteworthy that he won twice with the same org, but in different cities (Oak & LA)... Mahomes & Stafford are tbd...

Those that left their SB winning teams and failed to win it all again: Namath, Unitas, Stabler, Montana, McMahon, Hostetler, Rypien, Favre, Warner, Dilfer, Flacco... R Wilson and Foles both left their title teams and are tbd, with Wilson being unlikely to repeat given that he's 34 yrs old and on a lousy team, and Foles unlikely due to also being 34, and essentially looking at - at most - a few more years only as a backup QB...

As for this year - no news here - but Mahomes can get a 2nd ring early in his career, and the other three guys can get a first ring very early in theirs... I guess of these 4 survivors, Mahomes is the greybeard at 27 years of age

[Bluenoser]

If the 9ers win the SB, will Garappolo be the 1st QB to win it as a backup on 2 different teams?

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

If the 9ers win the SB, will Garappolo be the 1st QB to win it as a backup on 2 different teams?

Wow. That's gonna take some serious research...

Earl Morrall would be the obvious & first one. And he's got a kicker in that not only was he the backup to Unitas in Super Bowl V, but he came in the game after Johnny U was injured, and got the win... He played in the next three SB's with Miami as Griese's backup, winning the last two... In fact, he was on SB teams five out of six years, III thru VIII (not IV).

[Bluenoser]

Earl Morrall - a name easy to forget at times, but an impressive run for sure.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

If the 9ers win the SB, will Garappolo be the 1st QB to win it as a backup on 2 different teams?

In addition to Morrall, I found two others*:

Matt Cavanuagh - Niners & Giants
Jeff Rutledge - Giants & Redskins

*To find backups, I was only looking at guys who threw a regular season pass. So there could be a few other guys that should make this list...

Among current NFL backup QB's who have one ring and could conceivably get another: Tyrod Taylor, Jacoby Brissett, Nate Sudfeld, Brian Hoyer, Blaine Gabbert, John Wolford... Of these guys, I think only Gabbert & Wolford are currently on the same team as the one where they got their ring...

[Cobra Mgr]

Kinda cheapens the label "SB Winning QB".

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I think Pitt v Dal, Buf v Dal, NYG v NE & SF v Cincy are the only repeat SB's.

Don't forget Washington/Miami, Patriots/Rams.

I was talking about meeting 3 times. I think that's only Cowboys v Steelers so far.

[pilight]

I don't know why the pre-merger league doesn't count. In those championship games we got Bears-Giants six times, Bears-Redskins four times, Browns-Lions four times, Giants-Packers four times, and Browns-Rams three times.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by pilight

I don't know why the pre-merger league doesn't count. In those championship games we got Bears-Giants six times, Bears-Redskins four times, Browns-Lions four times, Giants-Packers four times, and Browns-Rams three times.

You'd have to include Cowboys/Packers as well. Even though they had an AFL VS NFL bragging rights game afterwards, the Packers still get credit for the NFL championship game whether they won the following games or not.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Don't forget Washington/Miami, Patriots/Rams.

.

i forgot about both of those. I cian't remember anything from the 2nd Was/Mia game & I was old to remember then.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

i forgot about both of those. I cian't remember anything from the 2nd Was/Mia game & I was old to remember then.

I wasn't old enough to watch the first one, but I love this play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4h_lD5lo0c&t=12s

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

I wasn't old enough to watch the first one, but I love this play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4h_lD5lo0c&t=12s

It was the only "offense" the Redskins could muster all day, and it turned the game from pretty much decided to in doubt in a flash...

And I was still a young kid, too. The next Super Bowl - Dolphins-Vikings - was the first one I (barely) remember watching

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by thehef

It was the only "offense" the Redskins could muster all day, and it turned the game from pretty much decided to in doubt in a flash...

And I was still a young kid, too. The next Super Bowl - Dolphins-Vikings - was the first one I (barely) remember watching

Speaking of being too young. Super Bowl 10 was the first I was able to watch and understand. I won't get into detail, but I rooted for the Cowboys to spite my father. I never liked them otherwise. But it stuck. And after awhile you just get attached.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Speaking of being too young. Super Bowl 10 was the first I was able to watch and understand. I won't get into detail, but I rooted for the Cowboys to spite my father. I never liked them otherwise. But it stuck. And after awhile you just get attached.

I certainly get that. A cousin of mine had recently moved from Florida and a Dolphins game was on TV and he said they were his team. Some time later (days, months?) some kids in school were talking football and asked me which team was my favorite. Not wanting to admit that I didn't have a favorite team and didn't really watch football, I said "Miami Dolphins." This was probably in late '73, and so I watched the '74 Super Bowl between the Dolphins & Vikings, but have no real recollection of it, other than where I was, and I'm sure I didn't really understand or care... But the next game I remember watching - and probably the first game where I really was focused in and cared - a lot - was the Dolphins/Raiders playoff game in Dec '74, aka "The Sea of Hands" game...

Come to think of it, I should've realize then - essentially becoming a serious Dolphins fan right after the epic early-mid-70's glory days, and seeing them lose in heartbreak fashion (thus ending the glory days) - that the last thing I should become is a sports fan...

Super Bowl IX was the first where I actually remember watching it and where I understood & was interested...

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by thehef

I certainly get that. A cousin of mine had recently moved from Florida and a Dolphins game was on TV and he said they were his team. Some time later (days, months?) some kids in school were talking football and asked me which team was my favorite. Not wanting to admit that I didn't have a favorite team and didn't really watch football, I said "Miami Dolphins." This was probably in late '73, and so I watched the '74 Super Bowl between the Dolphins & Vikings, but have no real recollection of it, other than where I was, and I'm sure I didn't really understand or care... But the next game I remember watching - and probably the first game where I really was focused in and cared - a lot - was the Dolphins/Raiders playoff game in Dec '74, aka "The Sea of Hands" game...

Come to think of it, I should've realize then - essentially becoming a serious Dolphins fan right after the epic early-mid-70's glory days, and seeing them lose in heartbreak fashion (thus ending the glory days) - that the last thing I should become is a sports fan...

Super Bowl IX was the first where I actually remember watching it and where I understood & was interested...

Being a sports fan is usually a lot more misery than glory. I've known several people that just stopped being fans because of it.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Being a sports fan is usually a lot more misery than glory.

So it's just like playing golf...

[Ragnar]

The Bengals/Chiefs line moved 3 points since Wednesday. That's a lot. There's usually a reason a line moves that much. My guess is this was just a bookmaker's mistake. I've seen bigger mistakes. I have to believe gambling sites are going to take a hefty loss if the Chiefs win. I don't think they're making up for the initial loss.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

The Bengals/Chiefs line moved 3 points since Wednesday. That's a lot. There's usually a reason a line moves that much. My guess is this was just a bookmaker's mistake. I've seen bigger mistakes. I have to believe gambling sites are going to take a hefty loss if the Chiefs win. I don't think they're making up for the initial loss.

Wasn't the opening line (favoring Cincy by I think 1.5 points) mostly due to speculation on Mahomes' ankle? And don't lines move because - with the initial line - the book is not predicting the spread but setting to where they think half the money will come in on one side, and half the money on the other, and then when the money comes in tilted significantly on one team, they adjust it so people will more-inclined to go the other way?

So I'm thinking that when the opening line had something like Cincy -1.5, a lot of betters said, "screw that, Mahomes is going to come through" and took the points. So the books had to adjust to get some people taking Cincy and a couple points...

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by thehef

Wasn't the opening line (favoring Cincy by I think 1.5 points) mostly due to speculation on Mahomes' ankle? And don't lines move because - with the initial line - the book is not predicting the spread but setting to where they think half the money will come in on one side, and half the money on the other, and then when the money comes in tilted significantly on one team, they adjust it so people will more-inclined to go the other way?

So I'm thinking that when the opening line had something like Cincy -1.5, a lot of betters said, "screw that, Mahomes is going to come through" and took the points. So the books had to adjust to get some people taking Cincy and a couple points...

Yes. It opened with Cinci -1.5, and now it's KC -2. So it moved another half point. I think your reasoning is spot on as to why. They were over thinking it.

The opening line is set with the idea of getting equal bets on both teams. If they mess this up and bets come in heavily for 1 team, they move the line. But not to encourage bets for the other team, but to get where they wanted to be in the first place. The line stops moving when even money starts coming in.

They're still going to win money. But in this particular case, I think they're winning a lot more if the Bengals win.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

The Bengals/Chiefs line moved 3 points since Wednesday. That's a lot. There's usually a reason a line moves that much. My guess is this was just a bookmaker's mistake. I've seen bigger mistakes. I have to believe gambling sites are going to take a hefty loss if the Chiefs win. I don't think they're making up for the initial loss.

I think Mahomes is healthier than initially thought. Also the line moves with public money. Bettors have bet Kansas City hard