Wednesday Walk Around the NFL: 4.1.09

by Jim Schmiedeberg on Apr 1, 2009 12:00 PM EDT in New York Giants News

Good Morning Giants fans, Happy Draft Month! Wednesday has arrived, and it's time to take our weekly look at the stories making headlines around the NFL:

As you know, today is April Fools Day, which is also known as "All Fools Day", and if you are talking about fools, what better place to start than with Terrell Owens?
I know a lot of you guys are Madden players, and yesterday the release date was announced for Madden 2010. The "cursed" cover boy will be announced later this month.
Everyone knows how much Ed loves Jay Cutler, and today in The Bleacher Report, Scotty Kimberly says throwing Cutler to the Lions is the right thing to do.
Michael Vick has reached a settlement with the Falcons. What about a settlement with those poor dogs?
New Bucs coach Raheem Morris is looking to create a new environment around the team.
Wow, I hadn't heard this: The league is actually considering relocating Conference Championship games to neutral sites if the regular season is expanded? This is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Isn't this what the top teams in the conferences battle for each year, the right for home field advantage? The right to play that title game in your own stadium? If this plan were put in place, teams that got home field advantage would have one playoff game in their home stadium. I can't see how the owners would go for this either. So what if it's cold in late January. It's football, it's supposed to be cold. I understand that the Super Bowl needs to be played in a neutral site, I understand the whole need for an "NFL Experience", I get it. But to see the Giants and Bears, or Packers, or Panthers, play the NFC Championship game in Indianapolis or someplace like that would take every advantage away from the number 1 team, and that negates everything they play for during the regular season.

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

also

What if the “neutral site” winds up being the lower-seed’s home field? What if Indy (or Tampa Bay, or San Diego, or any other dome/warm weather team) winds up as a lower seed in the conference championship and but gets essentially a home game? I guess that’s a risk in the Super Bowl sometimes, too, but there are other benefits to making sure the league’s premier event is played in optimal conditions. Though I guess they could make sure no city hosts a game for its conference (ie, Indy could only host the NFC championship, and Tampa the AFC).

In any event, it’s a dumb idea for the reasons stated above.

by long time listener on Apr 1, 2009 12:23 PM EDT reply actions

Championship Games

You are right jrs … absolutely horrendous idea. I’m just not buying their logic. The weather is that much different between early January and late January?

Over the last 100 years the daily average temperature for NYC is about 32 degrees for the entire month of January, regardless if its late vs early in the month (http://www.weather.com/outlook/health/coldandflu/wxclimatology/daily/10032?climoMonth=1). In early February its virtually the same. Therefore their reasoning is completely unsound.

by potroast on Apr 1, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions

neutral sites

yeah, also dont like that idea very much. unfortuntely i’m pretty sure the owners are just going to do whatever gets them the most money, which may very well be moving conference championship games to neutral sites.

HELLO HELLO MR WILPON. WE WANT THE MANSION NOT THE CONDO.

by kendynamo on Apr 1, 2009 12:55 PM EDT reply actions

But could the owners really stand to make more money

At a neutral site as opposed to having the game in their home building?

To respond to long time listener, my guess is that the neutral site for the NFC game would always be an AFC city, and vice-versa, that seems like the easiest way to combat that.

I just don’t see any way this doesn’t take away from the game.

Giants and Rangers fan from the womb to the tomb
www.blueshirtbanter.com
www.bigblueview.com

by Jim Schmiedeberg on Apr 1, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah beats me

i think its a terrible idea because it takes away a big home field advantage incentive that helps create more competitive games toward the end of the season, but maybe thats a trade off for the union over increasing the number of meaningful games? i dunno. i just wouldnt be suprised if the nfl did figure that they’d make more money this way and then did it over the protestations of the fans. probably because like most fans, i wouldn’t like it, but i’d get over it.

HELLO HELLO MR WILPON. WE WANT THE MANSION NOT THE CONDO.

by kendynamo on Apr 1, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions

I think the league would make more money

while the individual owner of the particular team that would have hosted the championship game loses money. But, since that’s only 2 teams a year losing and 28 teams a year gaining, I think we know what’s gonna happen.

by cjmulrain on Apr 1, 2009 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Neutral Site

I am in full agreement with the above. Where can we start to file complaints as fans. The owners and the league are becoming so out of control the game is begin taken away from not just the fans, but the players as well. From this neutral site news, all the way to the new rules that are being put in, they are changing the game for the worst!

by menoff13 on Apr 1, 2009 12:59 PM EDT reply actions

Anything

so Eli won’t have to throw in the wind. In a dome we would have beat Philly (I realize it wasn’t the Championship).

by Mount17 on Apr 1, 2009 1:05 PM EDT reply actions

Conference Champ at neutral site? WTF!?

I think the further away we get from the NCAA College basketball tourney the quicker that idea will die, because that’s why they’re probably proposing something that stupid in the first place.

They see all the excitement that’s generated by March Madness and think they can duplicate it in the NFL.

by John W on Apr 1, 2009 1:50 PM EDT reply actions

Can the Giants benefit from the Jay Cutler fiasco?

How about this for crazy?

The Giants trade a bunch of their draft picks for Cutler and then turnaround and trade him straight up to the Lions for Calvin Johnson?

I know crazy and stupid.

by John W on Apr 1, 2009 1:58 PM EDT reply actions

Crazy...yes

Stupid…..

Not really. The Giants Could parlay a bunch of picks for cutler, plus maybe even David Carr so that the Broncos would at least have a starter I guess. Then the Gints trade Cutler for Megatron and maybe another lower round pick

Id love it. If the Giants could somehow grab Megatron I could really care less about any single other one of our draft picks. Id trade all 10 picks for him actually cuz to me he’s Plax -minus the off-field stuff as well as you know, being 10x as fast and athletic as Plax.

Not a chance this happens. About as much a chance as the Jets winning the SB (Cutler, no Cutler, Namath, NO SB!!)

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 1, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, a three team trade

Not necessarily all that crazy. But in the end, if the Lions make the deal, who does Cutler throw to?

I got it, we throw Sinorice Moss into the sauce

Giants and Rangers fan from the womb to the tomb
www.blueshirtbanter.com
www.bigblueview.com

by Jim Schmiedeberg on Apr 1, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions

lol

Send detroit plax too

by gobs56 on Apr 1, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Three team

Wouldn’t be that out of control. Send Carr and a package deal of picks to Denver. The Giants get CJ from Detroit along with perhaps a later round pick. Detroit and Denver trade first round draft choices, allowing Denver the opportunity to have the number 1 overall, while giving the Lions the opportunity to get a guy like Maclin, Harvin, or Heyward-Bey in the draft in the Denver slot.

Giants would then have the monster receiver they need. Lions would get Cutler. Denver would get Carr and a bunch of picks. Perhaps you were onto something John W

by menoff13 on Apr 1, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions

LOL

It sounds great as a Giant fan right? We get the receiver with infinite potential, a guy who’s bigger than Plax and faster than Randy Moss.

But yea, Im pretty sure the Lions idea that they can get a QB is cuz they have a excellent WR to throw to.

Id say the Giants would have to throw in a guy like Kiwi. Id hate to give up Kiwi, but there are pass rushers in the draft to come in and enter our rotation. If they threw him in, It would mean a few less picks for the Giants throw in too, maybe they only have to give up the 1st rounder and their 3rd (not compensatory one of course, they can’t give it up.

1st, 3rd,and Carr to the Broncos for Cutler (and maybe a 4th or something) then trade Cutler and maybe that 4th rounder, Kiwi and Cutler for CJ and maybe another lower round pick………..Lions can maybe send their #1 overall, or even the #20 + #33 to the Broncos

SOunds great to me. The giants could then gamble on another guy from Georgia Tech, Michael Johnson, in the 2nd round if he falls, or maybe wait for guys like Paul Kruger, Clint Sintim, whatever just someone to replace Kiwi.

by FreeBradshaw on Apr 1, 2009 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions

That trade only works in Madden.

Think about how easy it is to call the Giants bluff if they were to deal for Cutler. EVERYONE knows that the Gmen would have zero thoughts of supplanting Eli with Cutler.

by Cody K on Apr 1, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Alas, the draft fever dreams have emerged a few days early this year.

Follow Dr. Gonz’s advice:
Get plenty of rest
Drink plenty of fluids (non alcoholic)
Suck on ice cubes
Dress lightly , keep room temp at 69.
If cold, wrap self in blanket.
Have your better half give you a sponge bath (luke warm water.)
Take aspirin or ibuprofin
lubricate your lips with chap stick
IF DREAMS PERSIST:
Try cold compresses to armpits and forehead.
Be sure you’re not wearing socks or a hat (it happens.)
IF NONE OF THE ABOVE WORKS:
Seek help from your spiritual advisor.
Excorsism might be indicated

by blue gonz on Apr 1, 2009 7:21 PM EDT reply actions