Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The new NFL -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (18232)	10/2/2007 6:36:34 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90886

no one scored back then, the running game was dead, so the defense smoothered the passing game. With all your receivers cut at the line, who was he gonna pass to? Himself ?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (18232)	10/4/2007 12:05:32 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90886

I can believe the 200 less TDs, or at least 100. I don't believe 200 more interceptions. He would probably have thrown less, considering it would be more difficult to consistently move the ball with the pass. That and the fact that when he did throw it would be harder to complete could make for a lot less TDs. But fewer attempts would keep the interceptions from being anywhere near +200 in my opinion, also QBs adjusted to the defenses. A good QB might not try to make some passes they make now (unless the situation was really desperate, or maybe unless the potential completion was so big that the potential reward justified the risk, and even if it was intercepted it would be way down the field, and absent a good return would be like a good punt)