this game would be classified as a cake walk.
I-5 wrote:Is there ever really a cake walk in the NFL? Especially this year?
obiken wrote:The problem with this game is Penney, hes a bust, and now there will be people on this site that will think he's not, he is.
Hawktawk wrote:Penney is a big fast shifty back . Injuries have derailed his career but 3 years ago there was a 2 game stretch where he made Chris Carson look pedestrian . Then the knee which too over a year then every nagging thing . I could see he hasn’t lost the speed in his opportunities last week and had a hunch this might be a good week for him which was an understatement . Not sure how you see this as a bad thing Obi. A healthy Penney is a great thing for Seattle in any number of ways
The problem with this game is Penney, hes a bust, and now there will be people on this site that will think he's not, he is.
I-5 wrote:I think bust can be defined more than one way. If you're healthy but can't produce, I'd say that's a bust. If you have produced but can't stay healthy, the results are similar, but that's a different kind of bust. So far, Penny has been the latter.
I-5 wrote:If he can get and stay in better shape, he looks like he could be productive NFL back.
TriCitySam wrote:Yeah, plenty of talent (Penny), but unlike college has had the injury bug as a pro. Wasn't a bad pick in my opinion, but certainly an unlucky one.
Stream Hawk wrote:I’ve always thought Penny had some serious upside. He has an explosive ability to take it to the house. Unfortunately, my opponent played Penny today and likely knocked me out of the playoffs:( Bittersweet!
Stream Hawk wrote:I’ve always thought Penny had some serious upside. He has an explosive ability to take it to the house. Unfortunately, my opponent played Penny today and likely knocked me out of the playoffs:( Bittersweet!
Hawktawk wrote:I remember his breakout game 3 years ago at the season end and I was drooligat the mouth for a deep playoff run . Then the bad injury and this is by far the best he’s looked .
trents wrote:By that same criteria, we haven't had a back that wasn't a bust since Lynch.
trents wrote:This. I remember the Hawk coaching staff had challenged him in the off season a couple of years ago to get in better shape and they commented he had come to camp "in the best shape we have seen him." Then he promptly got injured. I think he is one of those players who has big talent and potential but struggles with self-discipline. Of course, some injuries can prevent you from getting in shape. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the game today was the Penny took 16 snaps without injury.
This was a Pete Carol kind of game today as far as his formula for winning goes. Stout defense, effective running game, efficient passing game even if the passing stats were not gaudy. But as others have noted, the competition likely had a lot to do with it.
Old but Slow wrote:I am back. Had some logging on trouble and it took some time and help from Yoder to be able to post again. I have been reading, however.
Penny may turn into a decent back, which is welcome as he has a nice combination of speed, size, and can block. When he was drafted I was somewhat dismayed at taking a RB. While some lament that we should have taken Chubb, my take is that they should have taken Harold Landry for his pass rush (I confess that I am saying that in retrospect, not because I was focusing on him at the time). I wanted us to take a guy for the trenches or a corner, but I will be happy if Penny does well.
It is good to see Russell back in form, and to get a win in such a dismal season. Curhan filled in well at RT, a plus, and the DB's stepped up after a bad first half.
David Mills looks like a good QB for the future, but doesn't have much around him.
NorthHawk wrote:When watching Penny play lately he's reminding me more of Mike Davis in his body type but with better speed.
But like said above, he seems to be injury prone, so getting another premier RB is of high importance as we don't know what the future holds for Carson.
RiverDog wrote:I took a closer look at the NFC playoff picture. Of the 5 teams ahead of us for the 6th seed (having granted the 5th seed to either the Cards or Rams), 4 of them own tiebreakers over us as WFT, the Saints, and the Vikings all beat us head-to-head and the Eagles have 6 conference losses to our 8. The only tiebreaker we own is vs. the Niners, and they have a 2 game lead over us. Even if we win out, here's what would have to happen for us to get the 6th seed:
The Vikings would have to lose 2 of their last 4 games (Bears x2, Rams, Packers)
WFT needs to lose 2 of their last 4 (Eagles x2, Giants, Cowboys)
Saints lose 2 of their last 4 (Bucs, Dolphins, Panthers, Falcons)
Eagles lose 2 of their last 4 (WFT x2, Giants, Cowboys)
The Niners would have to lose 2 of their last 4 (Falcons, Texans, Titans, Rams)
There's other, more freakish scenarios, like the 5-8 Panthers winning out, but I didn't take those into consideration.
That's 5 teams that would all have to go .500 or worse. One of them is bound to do better than that.
Hawktawk wrote:Every one of those scenarios is reasonable though . The most unlikely imo is Seattle running the table . I suspect it crashes down Sunday . Love to be very wrong
I’ve thought all along had Penney not had the injury he might have made PC look smart . I’m impressed he still retains the speed . He was sudden to the second level unlike any back we’ve had in quite a while . And as was pointed out he looks like he’s not as lean as he could be . He’s going to get a much sterner test next weekend .It’s probably fools gold but I’m not gonna root against him . Barring some sort of injury if we see something similar next 4 games and he stays in one piece I cut Carson . We can’t trust him . He’s been gone in critical stretches almost every year.
I agree that every one is reasonable on it's own. The probability of them all happening, which they'd need to, strikes me as minuscule. But not as minuscule as the probability of Seattle running the table, as you note. Even giving the Hawks a 1% chance of making the playoffs seems generous, and I'm not being hyperbolic.
Hawktawk wrote:Every one of those scenarios is reasonable though . The most unlikely imo is Seattle running the table . I suspect it crashes down Sunday . Love to be very wrong
Oly wrote:I agree that every one is reasonable on it's own. The probability of them all happening, which they'd need to, strikes me as minuscule. But not as minuscule as the probability of Seattle running the table, as you note. Even giving the Hawks a 1% chance of making the playoffs seems generous, and I'm not being hyperbolic.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests