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!
Baltimore
My bust. Thanks for the catch.
They go down Monday night....
I agree with this guy - the Ravens looked positively SICK against the Bucs, who were supposed to be decent. I will admit to being a Ravens homer, but for them to go on long (9-minutes plus) scoring drives and to completely shut down the Bucs on defense the way they did bodes really well for the coming weeks. Ray Lewis looks rejuvenated, and Bart Scott and Adalius Thomas look they could be in for huge seasons.Baltimore
Assuming they beat the Browns, they will have a tough matchup against the Chargers coming off a bye. The Ravens have 3 straight tough games - Chargers, Broncos and Panthers.
IMO, we can narrow this list down to BAL, IND, JAX, SD and CHI. The others, while good, have some glaring weaknesses that a good opponent will exploit. BAL: at home vs. the Chargers and MNF at Denver. I see SD beating Baltimore, and if they don't, Denver will be coming around by then and are tough at home.IND: JAX this week will be huge. If they make it past this week, they shouldn't lose until December 10 or 18. JAX: see above, it will be close. I wouldn't bet against either team.SD: B2B Baltimore and Pittsburgh with a healthy Ben, at Arrowhead and even St. Louis should be tough games. CHI: best chance to remain undefeated the longest, as frankly, their opponents aren't too strong, their D is great, and their offense centered on the run, has enough in the passing game. CHI gets my vote.After week 2, here are the teams at 2-0.NEBALCININDJAXSDCHIMINATLNOSEAWho will stay undefeated the longest?
Tell me about NE's glaring weakness(es)...I'm curious.IMO, we can narrow this list down to BAL, IND, JAX, SD and CHI. The others, while good, have some glaring weaknesses that a good opponent will exploit.After week 2, here are the teams at 2-0.NEBALCININDJAXSDCHIMINATLNOSEAWho will stay undefeated the longest?
I know you'll take this a little personal after reading your sig....but, they are not even close to the same team that won three Superbowls. They have a weak WR corps and their defense is softer than it has been in recent years. They allowed two weak teams in Buffalo & the Jets to stay close for the entire game. Once they play tougher teams, they will lose.SeniorVBDStudent said:
I wasn't going to call the defense a glaring weakness, but you're right that it's not the same caliber as the Super Bowl teams. The WR corps is among the weakest in the league, at least among the contenders. Any team that considers Doug Gabriel as a possible #1 is in trouble. Now, they make up for that to a degree with one of the best QBs, a good running game and a couple good TEs, but if you can't see the WR corps as a glaring weakness, put down your homer blinders.
I think Atlanta is the longest sure thing since they don't play a formidible opponent until week 6. Whoever wins these matchups has a good shot, however:CIN @ PIT week 3JAX @ IND week 3SD @ BAL week 4SEA @ CHI week 4Out of this group, I think Chicago has the best chance.It is only a matter of time for NE, MIN & NO.After week 2, here are the teams at 2-0.NEBALCININDJAXSDCHIMINATLNOSEAWho will stay undefeated the longest?
I don't think anyone in New England has called Doug Gabriel the #1 receiver. A lot of people from outside New England annointed him the #1 because they don't like the receivers there, but that's fantasy football at its finest. The New England offense seems fairly comparable to San Diego's offense last year. The starting receivers in New England will include some combination of Reche Caldwell, Chad Jackson and Troy Brown, who compare reasonably well to Caldwell, McCardell and Parker. Ben Watson leads the deepest tight end corps in a league that's trending towards using the TE more to exploit matchups; he's not as good as Gates, but the TE corps as a whole may be better and may produce more as a whole than Gates and co. did last year. Meanwhile the quarterback is arguably the best in the league, and while they don't have Tomlinson, the 2006 New England backfield seems fairly similar to the 2005 Chargers backfield. In fact, the New England defense has similar talent to that Chargers defense, with a couple young studs in the front seven and some questions in the secondary. Both have quality coaching staffs, although the Chargers coaching is deeper while Belichick is the better head coach. In fact, the biggest difference I can see between this year's New England team and last year's Chargers team is the schedule. New England appears to have an easier division, and plays the NFC North. If they can make the playoffs, New England has the better coaching staff and is obviously much more playoff tested. Overall, I'd say you have to consider them a legit contender right now.
As Yudkin said, you can compare these teams if you want, but keep in mind, the Chargers didn't go more than 5 games at any point last season without a loss. In fact, they started 2-3. You're kidding yourself if you think the receiving group as a whole is on par with San Diego's last year.
at comparing the backfields. The defense? Maybe, but they ranked #13 in both pass and run defense. (tougher schedule for sure though)In fact, the only area that New England is better than the Chargers last year is the QB. As much as I like Brady, he isn't going to win 16 games, or even 10 straight games by himself.
I'm not sold on the comparison as Dillon/Maroney <<<<<<<<<< Tomlinson, but they do have the benefit of a much weaker schedule than the Chargers did.
We're talking about who will stay undefeated the longest and you compare them to a team that didn't even make the playoffs?
Puh-leez.
Couple comments...1. I'm not sure that Buffalo is a weak team. They beat Miami worse than Pittsburg beat Miami.
