This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Hey they have done it once before, why not again?
You're right, Trent Dilfer was a master at forcing the opposing defense into misplays.
Jeff Fisher might disagree.
I doubt it could be any worse than Ravens/Giants was
Correct. And, if the Colts beat the Titans this Sunday, the Colts would have the TB over the Ravens if it came down to that (both would have the same conference record, but the Colts would win the common opponents tie-breaker). They'd still have the TB over the Chargers and Pats if it came down to that.The Ravens don't even have a first round bye right now.
Disagree completely. It wouldn't be my favorite matchup to be sure but there have been a few lopsided Super Bowls that were terrible to watch. I would rather have a close, low scoring game than a blowout.
Please be more specific. Are you "calling it" or should we "mark it down"?Also, the use of statistically impossible is copyrighted, so you can't use that one.TIA.
The Bengals also had a short week, their defense was pretty amped up. I strongly agree with your second point. McNair just looked confused and off in the hurry up, if I was a Ravens fan I would be pretty worried about that.
Agreed. I like SD in that matchup.
Right now SD would be the #2 seed, and Bal the #3 seed - which mean they'd play each other in the divisional round if form held.
I'll agree they don't have the most dynamic downfield offense, but it has at times looked better than last night. Either way, given history, your comment looks a bit silly.Week 2 vs. Cleveland: Trailing by 12 at half, and heading into 4th quarter. Win
I get your point but I am pretty sure they won't be facing Cleveland & Tennessee in the playoffs.
Given the parity in the game today, when two good teams meet late in the season with one in a significantly better playoff position than the other, the more desperate team very frequently comes out on top.Good thing I put in Travis Henry and took out Jamal at the last minute last night... 
It was technically a "Muff" not a fumble. If the punt returner does not ever have posession of the ball it is considered a muffed punt since he never had possession of the ball to be able to fumble it. By rule, a muffed punt recovered by the kicking team can not be advanced, so they get it where he recovered the ball.Slightly off topic, but I couldn't find an ***OFFICIAL*** thread on the game.Can someone explain how the fumbled punt recovered by the Bengals in the the 4th quarter was ruled down? The Bengals player scooped it up and ran it in for a TD, but he was somehow ruled down? I was at the game, and everyone was
True, but he said they could never do it, and they've already come from behind in these two, plus the game against SD (down by 6)
To add to what Mungo said, look here: NFL Rules.Verbal Kint said:Slightly off topic, but I couldn't find an ***OFFICIAL*** thread on the game.
Can someone explain how the fumbled punt recovered by the Bengals in the the 4th quarter was ruled down? The Bengals player scooped it up and ran it in for a TD, but he was somehow ruled down? I was at the game, and everyone was
Ahh. Thanks.Mungo Burrows said:It was technically a "Muff" not a fumble. If the punt returner does not ever have posession of the ball it is considered a muffed punt since he never had possession of the ball to be able to fumble it. By rule, a muffed punt recovered by the kicking team can not be advanced, so they get it where he recovered the ball.Verbal Kint said:Slightly off topic, but I couldn't find an ***OFFICIAL*** thread on the game.Can someone explain how the fumbled punt recovered by the Bengals in the the 4th quarter was ruled down? The Bengals player scooped it up and ran it in for a TD, but he was somehow ruled down? I was at the game, and everyone was
I forget - how many teams are undefeated again?Listen, the Ravens - because of the way they're built & the way they play - seem to have a razor-thin margin of error. But they've won enough games "unconventionally" that, to me, those wins start to leave the area of fluk-ism & lean towards a trend. Would I rather have the Colts team if I were down 21-0? Sure. But I'd also rather have the Ravens if I were up 21-0. They've got issues, but everyone else does too.
Banger said:
Sams was one of the unsung heroes of this team. When you have a vanilla offense, you need short fields. The D is doing their part, but the return game is going to suffer. Corey Ivy's muff also cost the team timeouts and should have caused the lead to expand from 13 to 16.I agree with Biabreakable's point that Baltimore looked flat, and that they weren't as prepared as you expect the Ravens to be. It didn't seem like Billick was too stressed out about this loss. So "not reading too much into this loss" is a good conventional wisdom about this game.That being said, I already had my mind made up about the Ravens before this game. I would still rank the Ravens behind IND, SD and NE in the AFC power ranks, and the most likely division winner to be bounced in the first round. It's hard to see them coming back against a good defense with that "clipped wings" offense. They only look like a quality team against good teams when they have a big early lead. If their playoff opponent can limit mistakes, the Ravens will be in trouble.
They did, but only because SD turned into the Bad News Bears in the fourth with numerous penalties and a botched FG attempt. The Chargers also had not taken the shackles off of Rivers yet.Dt said:
This is a good point. That was Rivers 3rd game as a starting QB and he still had the training wheels on. Marty was also roundly criticized for his 2nd half "Martyball" he played on the road and I've read that this game was kind of a turning point for playcalling away from the super conservative (which lost them the game) to the more aggressive calling pretty much since that game.Here are SD's possessions prior to Balt's winning drive in the last minute of the game....
Exactly. The Chargers couldn't have exucted any worse, and they clearly deserved that ballgame.
Ya, I agree that I'd also put Baltimore behind Indy, SD, and NE but there really isn't a lot of room between each one. They all can be beat which means anyone of the 4 could beat each other on a given day.Banger said:
sounds like their superbowl year doesn't it?rockbottom895 said:
Except that Jamal Lewis was actually good back then.
Don't forget that Baltimore had 3 points taken away when the Bengals called a timeout at the last second. The second FG attempt was bad due to a bad snap. Add that 3 pts and the Ravens lost by only 3 on the road against a team with one of the best offenses in the league.
Exactly. He was a rookie that year and was a beast. This Jamal is a hollow shell in comparison to that one. With McNair though I would say their short passing game and his ability to scramble for 1st downs is better than the Superbowl team. Overall I'd say this offense is better than that one was but their defense is not as good.
That Superbowl sucked.Aaron Rudnicki said:
Against which teams? Cleveland and Tennesse? I am pretty sure we wont be seeing them come playoff time,
Other than SD vs. Cincy, has anyone done this against possible legit (AFC-level) playoff competition?
forgetting sad diego??
If you're going to give the Ravens credit for things that didn't officially happen, then you have to give the Bengals 7 pts for the mauling of Chris Henry in the endzone in the first half, instead of the 3 pts we settled for. That puts the Bengals back up by 7.
Why do you keep harping on this? They were never down by 10 to SD.
