Are the Titans the 2008 version of the 2000 Ravens? (1 Viewer)

[monessen]

Seems like with the stifling defense, the reliance on the running game, and a veteran QB to "manage" the offense that this year's Tennessee squad bears a distinct resemblance to the Baltimore team of 2000.

And it is ironic that Kerry Collins, so intimidated in the Super Bowl against Baltimore that season, is the Dilferesque Titan QB?

Too soon for comparisons? Thoughts?

 

[JZilla]

The Titans don't have a Ray Lewis

Kerry > Trent

Chris/Lendale > Jamal/Priest (back then)

Sharpe/Ismail/Stokley > Scaife/Crumpler/whoever

Similar somewhat I guess, but what's more significant, is there's no majorly scary competition to really fear, especially in the AFC, just like the Ravens had in '00. Things look good for the Titans I think but they may be peaking too early. At this point in that season, the Ravens were hurting, couldn't sniff the end zone. They got on a huge roll late.

 

[kaa]

That 2000 Ravens D was like 25 yards allowed per point, which was ridiculous. I remember them being impossible to run on. The 2008 Titans D is 24.4 yards allowed per point, which is pretty close.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Well, they are both boring as hell to watch. You may be onto something here.

 

[monessen]

Well, they are both boring as hell to watch. You may be onto something here.

Great comment, my friend.

 

[Steeler43]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

They'll win 1 if they get lucky.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens. I think the 2000 Titans are a better comparison: same kind of fisher ball except with a mobile quarterback. Titan WRs (Mason) were still developing.

And no competition in the AFC during the Baltimore run? The Titans were tops at 13-3, Baltimore was 11-5. TEN played a great game and only lost to the Ravens due to a couple fluke plays (george getting knocked unconscious, a blocked field goal, and a blown coverage on sharpe).

 

[JZilla]

I didn't say no competition. I said no majorly scary competition, as proven by the beatable Titans and Raiders that year. What I was pointing to was the weakened Pats & Colts now. This Titans team would not have been able to beat those guys the past couple of years. There's nobody right now that they couldn't compete with. Still, personally I think the Steelers are the team to beat in the AFC right now. Just like the Titans were in '00.

 

[enfuego]

Well, they are both boring as hell to watch. You may be onto something here.

Great comment, my friend.

Chris Johnson down?

 

[enfuego]

I didn't say no competition. I said no majorly scary competition, as proven by the beatable Titans and Raiders that year. What I was pointing to was the weakened Pats & Colts now. This Titans team would not have been able to beat those guys the past couple of years. There's nobody right now that they couldn't compete with. Still, personally I think the Steelers are the team to beat in the AFC right now. Just like the Titans were in '00.

Don't want to hijack, but I see the Titans matching up nicely vs. the Steelers.

 

[kaa]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens. I think the 2000 Titans are a better comparison: same kind of fisher ball except with a mobile quarterback. Titan WRs (Mason) were still developing.And no competition in the AFC during the Baltimore run? The Titans were tops at 13-3, Baltimore was 11-5. TEN played a great game and only lost to the Ravens due to a couple fluke plays (george getting knocked unconscious, a blocked field goal, and a blown coverage on sharpe).

I believe the Titans had the #1 defense if you just use yards allowed as a measuring stick, which I think is far too simplistic.

 

[kaa]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

Actually a lot of people said the 2000 Ravens would be one and done because Dilfer would not be able to compete on that level.

 

[Assani Fisher]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens.

If you'd rather your team give up less yards but more points, then you'd be correct.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens.

If you'd rather your team give up less yards but more points, then you'd be correct.

Thank you for reiterating the definition of "#1 defense" for the rest of the board.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens. I think the 2000 Titans are a better comparison: same kind of fisher ball except with a mobile quarterback. Titan WRs (Mason) were still developing.

And no competition in the AFC during the Baltimore run? The Titans were tops at 13-3, Baltimore was 11-5. TEN played a great game and only lost to the Ravens due to a couple fluke plays (george getting knocked unconscious, a blocked field goal, and a blown coverage on sharpe).

I don't know if you can classify those as fluke plays. A fluke play would be a play such as the Music City Miracle.

 

[CASS101]

I didn't say no competition. I said no majorly scary competition, as proven by the beatable Titans and Raiders that year. What I was pointing to was the weakened Pats & Colts now. This Titans team would not have been able to beat those guys the past couple of years. There's nobody right now that they couldn't compete with. Still, personally I think the Steelers are the team to beat in the AFC right now. Just like the Titans were in '00.

Actually, the Titans are 2-2 against Indy over the last 2 years. We lost one game by 2 and the other by 1. We have always matched up well against them. And now we have Chris Johnson.

 

[nxmehta]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

Ding ding ding we have a winner.

 

[kaa]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens.

If you'd rather your team give up less yards but more points, then you'd be correct.

Thank you for reiterating the definition of "#1 defense" for the rest of the board.

In what way do you think "least yards allowed" equates to "#1 defense"? What if one team has a strong ball-control offense that hoards time of possession by grinding out first downs and few turnovers, which lowers the yards allowed by the defense? Conversely, what if a team has a pathetic offense that punts a lot putting enormous pressure on the defense to perform?"yards allowed" is just too simplistic. I like "yards per point allowed" because, while not perfect, it at least ties yardage to the "bottom line" stat of POINTS.I can think of all kinds of metrics that could be included in a soup to determine #1 defense, like yards, points, number of drives, red zone defense, etc. I'll never understand how some people just think yardage is the only measure.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens.

If you'd rather your team give up less yards but more points, then you'd be correct.

Thank you for reiterating the definition of "#1 defense" for the rest of the board.

In what way do you think "least yards allowed" equates to "#1 defense"? What if one team has a strong ball-control offense that hoards time of possession by grinding out first downs and few turnovers, which lowers the yards allowed by the defense? Conversely, what if a team has a pathetic offense that punts a lot putting enormous pressure on the defense to perform?"yards allowed" is just too simplistic. I like "yards per point allowed" because, while not perfect, it at least ties yardage to the "bottom line" stat of POINTS.

I can think of all kinds of metrics that could be included in a soup to determine #1 defense, like yards, points, number of drives, red zone defense, etc. I'll never understand how some people just think yardage is the only measure.

Defenses are good if they don't allow yards. Defenses are good if they don't allow points.Why would you divide one by another? It's a gimmicky stat. It would be like ranking wide receivers or quarterbacks by yards per touchdown or defensive lineman by tackles per sack.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

This was a snide way of making the point I really wanted to make. Now that I'm in a better mood...Lots of teams in NFL history have had great defenses and bad passing games. Many of them had above average running games, too. IMO, that's all the Titans running game is right now. They don't have a better rushing attack than the Cowboys or Vikings or Redskins or Giants or Falcons. They're one of another five to ten teams with very good but not great rushing attacks.Whenever we see the formula: team that runs the ball a lot + bad QB + great defense we think of the 2000 Ravens. That's silly, though. Tons of teams in NFL history have had that formula, the '06 Ravens included. But none of them won the SB except the '00 Ravens, who had an all time great defense, something you can't crown in week seven.It would be like saying the Jets look like the '07 Giants. Obviously that team won the SB; it's silly to compare the two just because both started hot and cold and have talented but interception prone QBs and play in NY.

 

[Bri]

The 2000 Titans had the #1 defense, not the 2000 Ravens.

If you'd rather your team give up less yards but more points, then you'd be correct.

Thank you for reiterating the definition of "#1 defense" for the rest of the board.

In what way do you think "least yards allowed" equates to "#1 defense"? What if one team has a strong ball-control offense that hoards time of possession by grinding out first downs and few turnovers, which lowers the yards allowed by the defense? Conversely, what if a team has a pathetic offense that punts a lot putting enormous pressure on the defense to perform?"yards allowed" is just too simplistic. I like "yards per point allowed" because, while not perfect, it at least ties yardage to the "bottom line" stat of POINTS.I can think of all kinds of metrics that could be included in a soup to determine #1 defense, like yards, points, number of drives, red zone defense, etc. I'll never understand how some people just think yardage is the only measure.

11 points per game, 10 INTs, 8 FF, 18 sacks in 6 gamesI don't think a WR has 100 yards yet on them in 08.I think one RB in the last calendar year has 100 yards, maybe two.this is an excellent D that just about any stat you post looks good

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

at this pace the Titans will likely have a bye to rest players, then win two games at home where they have an enormous home field advantage, to make the superbowl. On the strength of a power running game and sick defense. The titans are getting it done on D with a dominant front four which allows them to create pressure and drop 7 in coverage. Yeah Kerry Collins sin't gonna light anyone up, but he is being very careful with the ball and allowing the power running game to carry em. Seems VERY similar to the ravens IMHO.

 

[Chase Stuart]

at this pace the Titans will likely have a bye to rest players, then win two games at home where they have an enormous home field advantage, to make the superbowl. On the strength of a power running game and sick defense. The titans are getting it done on D with a dominant front four which allows them to create pressure and drop 7 in coverage. Yeah Kerry Collins sin't gonna light anyone up, but he is being very careful with the ball and allowing the power running game to carry em. Seems VERY similar to the ravens IMHO.

If the '00 Ravens had Lendale White instead of Jamal Lewis, I don't think they would have won the Super Bowl.

 

[TinHat]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

Actually a lot of people said the 2000 Ravens would be one and done because Dilfer would not be able to compete on that level.

He only completed 5 passes v. Tenn in the playoffs.If not for a few fluke plays, Dilfer's lack of eptness would have sunk them.

 

[CASS101]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

This was a snide way of making the point I really wanted to make. Now that I'm in a better mood...Lots of teams in NFL history have had great defenses and bad passing games. Many of them had above average running games, too. IMO, that's all the Titans running game is right now. They don't have a better rushing attack than the Cowboys or Vikings or Redskins or Giants or Falcons. They're one of another five to ten teams with very good but not great rushing attacks.

Whenever we see the formula: team that runs the ball a lot + bad QB + great defense we think of the 2000 Ravens. That's silly, though. Tons of teams in NFL history have had that formula, the '06 Ravens included. But none of them won the SB except the '00 Ravens, who had an all time great defense, something you can't crown in week seven.

It would be like saying the Jets look like the '07 Giants. Obviously that team won the SB; it's silly to compare the two just because both started hot and cold and have talented but interception prone QBs and play in NY.

First of all....The Titans are 6-0 and the only undefeated team! The Titans are currently ranked #4 in rushing behind NY Giants, Atlanta and Washington. Those 4 teams are really in their own tier as of right now. Compared to the other three, the Titans have played a much tougher schedule against the run so far while facing 2 of the top 3 teams against the run as of week 7. So to say that the Titans have just a "very good but not great rushing attack" is false.

The Titans were ranked #5 in rushing in 2007..............before we drafted Chris Johnson.

 

[FUBAR]

at this pace the Titans will likely have a bye to rest players, then win two games at home where they have an enormous home field advantage, to make the superbowl. On the strength of a power running game and sick defense. The titans are getting it done on D with a dominant front four which allows them to create pressure and drop 7 in coverage. Yeah Kerry Collins sin't gonna light anyone up, but he is being very careful with the ball and allowing the power running game to carry em. Seems VERY similar to the ravens IMHO.

If the '00 Ravens had Lendale White instead of Jamal Lewis, I don't think they would have won the Super Bowl.

If that's the only RB the Titans had, they wouldn't be 6-0. Like it or not, there are many different ways to win in the NFL. Many teams like to score more than their opponent. The Titans prefer to make their opponent score less than they do. It may sound like semantics, but it's a difference in philosophy.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think the Titans remind me more of the 2006 Ravens. Veteran QB, lots of rushes and not a high YPC average (at least before today), great defense. 13-3 regular season than zero playoff wins.

This was a snide way of making the point I really wanted to make. Now that I'm in a better mood...Lots of teams in NFL history have had great defenses and bad passing games. Many of them had above average running games, too. IMO, that's all the Titans running game is right now. They don't have a better rushing attack than the Cowboys or Vikings or Redskins or Giants or Falcons. They're one of another five to ten teams with very good but not great rushing attacks.

Whenever we see the formula: team that runs the ball a lot + bad QB + great defense we think of the 2000 Ravens. That's silly, though. Tons of teams in NFL history have had that formula, the '06 Ravens included. But none of them won the SB except the '00 Ravens, who had an all time great defense, something you can't crown in week seven.

It would be like saying the Jets look like the '07 Giants. Obviously that team won the SB; it's silly to compare the two just because both started hot and cold and have talented but interception prone QBs and play in NY.

First of all....The Titans are 6-0 and the only undefeated team! The Titans are currently ranked #4 in rushing behind NY Giants, Atlanta and Washington. Those 4 teams are really in their own tier as of right now. Compared to the other three, the Titans have played a much tougher schedule against the run so far while facing 2 of the top 3 teams against the run as of week 7. So to say that the Titans have just a "very good but not great rushing attack" is false.

The Titans were ranked #5 in rushing in 2007..............before we drafted Chris Johnson.

The Titans rushing attack was just good and not great when I wrote that post. Things have changed though. Before we get to that, there's no sense in looking at raw rushing totals from 2007 when Vince Young was the QB -- incredibly misleading.Since I've last posted, the Titans running backs have jumped from 24th or 26th (I can't remember) in the league in YPC to sixth. That's a significant difference. They also have a ton of rushing touchdowns. Outside of New York and maybe Atlanta, the Titans running game is probably the most effective running game in the NFL.

 

[[scooter]]

And remember: both teams began the season with a different starting QB.

(Little known fact: Dilfer didn't even play until Week 8 of the 2000 season.)

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Looking at the Titans schedule they've not played a division road game yet. Seems odd at the halfway mark.

 

[Chase Stuart]

And remember: both teams began the season with a different starting QB.

(Little known fact: Dilfer didn't even play until Week 8 of the 2000 season.)

That's a little known fact?