Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Week 10 Other Games
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cutler isn't taking the Bears anywhere, they're going to live and die on their defense and special teams. Still think the AFC is the better conference, even though it seems popular to believe otherwise.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7629
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well this one isn't living up to the hype.
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

24isthelaw wrote:
Well this one isn't living up to the hype.

Two elite defensive teams playing in a rainstorm? This is pretty much exactly what I'd expect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7629
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
Well this one isn't living up to the hype.

Two elite defensive teams playing in a rainstorm? This is pretty much exactly what I'd expect.


Meh. I was hoping for a good low scoring game and not a bad one.
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Tzimisce


Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 46983
Location: Tuntmore Tower
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gronk - talent = Kellen Davis.
_________________

BlaqOptic wrote:
I dont care that that little girl was adorable... I'll punch her in the face!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24210
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
Cutler isn't taking the Bears anywhere, they're going to live and die on their defense and special teams. Still think the AFC is the better conference, even though it seems popular to believe otherwise.


I'd group them:

Houston
Chicago
Atlanta

San Francisco
Green Bay
Baltimore
Denver

New England
Pittsburgh
Seattle
Giants
Indianapolis

Everyone else

It's really wide open this year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
Cutler isn't taking the Bears anywhere, they're going to live and die on their defense and special teams. Still think the AFC is the better conference, even though it seems popular to believe otherwise.


I'd group them:

Houston
Chicago
Atlanta

San Francisco
Green Bay
Baltimore
Denver

New England
Pittsburgh
Seattle
Giants
Indianapolis

Everyone else

It's really wide open this year.

No way do I have Atlanta in that first group. I know what their record is, but my eyes tell me they aren't nearly as good as that record. For that matter, I don't even think that first group should exist, as I don't believe the Texans or Bears have clearly separated themselves to the point of clearly occupying a distinct elite category. I basically just look at teams this year as contenders and non-contenders, and many in the contender group aren't exactly dominant squads. In terms of teams that I believe have a serious shot to win the Super Bowl, I'd list Houston, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, the Giants and maybe San Francisco and Denver. That's about it. I don't think Seattle or Indianapolis are serious threats at all, Chicago's offense is going to hold them back in the playoffs if they have to play Green Bay or New York, I don't believe in Atlanta as an elite team and Baltimore has suffered too much attrition which I believe is going to catch up to them eventually. Kind of an ugly picture all around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sciz


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 15786
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh look, another player who was allowed to reenter a game after what was later admitted to be a concussion. The NFL needs to get their act together if they want to really crack down on this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24210
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
Cutler isn't taking the Bears anywhere, they're going to live and die on their defense and special teams. Still think the AFC is the better conference, even though it seems popular to believe otherwise.


I'd group them:

Houston
Chicago
Atlanta

San Francisco
Green Bay
Baltimore
Denver

New England
Pittsburgh
Seattle
Giants
Indianapolis

Everyone else

It's really wide open this year.

No way do I have Atlanta in that first group. I know what their record is, but my eyes tell me they aren't nearly as good as that record. For that matter, I don't even think that first group should exist, as I don't believe the Texans or Bears have clearly separated themselves to the point of clearly occupying a distinct elite category. I basically just look at teams this year as contenders and non-contenders, and many in the contender group aren't exactly dominant squads. In terms of teams that I believe have a serious shot to win the Super Bowl, I'd list Houston, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, the Giants and maybe San Francisco and Denver. That's about it. I don't think Seattle or Indianapolis are serious threats at all, Chicago's offense is going to hold them back in the playoffs if they have to play Green Bay or New York, I don't believe in Atlanta as an elite team and Baltimore has suffered too much attrition which I believe is going to catch up to them eventually. Kind of an ugly picture all around.


Just to be clear - you think the Patriots are a Super Bowl contender, but Chicago and Atlanta are not? I know those teams have had soft schedules, but it's a bit odd to me to put them below an extremely flawed Patriots team which has already lost to 2 "non contenders" and very well could have lost to 2 of the worst teams in the NFL (Jets, Bills).

As much as you can criticize the Cutler-led Bears' offense or the Falcons overall overratedness, the Pats defense is by far the worst single unit of any of the "contenders" you list. I don't see how it makes sense to say Cutler will hold the Bears back, but not similarly penalize the Patriots for their disastrous D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
Cutler isn't taking the Bears anywhere, they're going to live and die on their defense and special teams. Still think the AFC is the better conference, even though it seems popular to believe otherwise.


I'd group them:

Houston
Chicago
Atlanta

San Francisco
Green Bay
Baltimore
Denver

New England
Pittsburgh
Seattle
Giants
Indianapolis

Everyone else

It's really wide open this year.

No way do I have Atlanta in that first group. I know what their record is, but my eyes tell me they aren't nearly as good as that record. For that matter, I don't even think that first group should exist, as I don't believe the Texans or Bears have clearly separated themselves to the point of clearly occupying a distinct elite category. I basically just look at teams this year as contenders and non-contenders, and many in the contender group aren't exactly dominant squads. In terms of teams that I believe have a serious shot to win the Super Bowl, I'd list Houston, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, the Giants and maybe San Francisco and Denver. That's about it. I don't think Seattle or Indianapolis are serious threats at all, Chicago's offense is going to hold them back in the playoffs if they have to play Green Bay or New York, I don't believe in Atlanta as an elite team and Baltimore has suffered too much attrition which I believe is going to catch up to them eventually. Kind of an ugly picture all around.


Just to be clear - you think the Patriots are a Super Bowl contender, but Chicago and Atlanta are not? I know those teams have had soft schedules, but it's a bit odd to me to put them below an extremely flawed Patriots team which has already lost to 2 "non contenders" and very well could have lost to 2 of the worst teams in the NFL (Jets, Bills).

As much as you can criticize the Cutler-led Bears' offense or the Falcons overall overratedness, the Pats defense is by far the worst single unit of any of the "contenders" you list. I don't see how it makes sense to say Cutler will hold the Bears back, but not similarly penalize the Patriots for their disastrous D

It makes perfect sense if you don't consider all units to be equally important. The Patriots' bad defense is less likely to hold them back given the teams they are most probable to face in the AFC playoffs than the Bears' mediocre offense is going up against their NFC rivals. And, as much as what you say about the Patriots' potential losses is true, the same argument could be made for every team on that list. It's just a far more convincing one for Atlanta, who really should be a .500 or so team, based on how they've performed. I'd also make the argument that the Patriots have a potential avenue for improvement in their weak area, whereas I don't see an obvious means by which the Bears improve their offense, or the Falcons become a team that is worthy of their record.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22634
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Falcons are the least dominant, worst 'best' team in a while. They've had several wins they had no business winning. No way they are ahead of SF.
_________________
A sunny disposition is worth more than fortune. Young people should know that it can be cultivated; that the mind like the body can be moved from the shade into sunshine. Thine own reproach alone do fear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7629
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:

It makes perfect sense if you don't consider all units to be equally important. The Patriots' bad defense is less likely to hold them back given the teams they are most probable to face in the AFC playoffs than the Bears' mediocre offense is going up against their NFC rivals. And, as much as what you say about the Patriots' potential losses is true, the same argument could be made for every team on that list. It's just a far more convincing one for Atlanta, who really should be a .500 or so team, based on how they've performed. I'd also make the argument that the Patriots have a potential avenue for improvement in their weak area, whereas I don't see an obvious means by which the Bears improve their offense, or the Falcons become a team that is worthy of their record.


If you follow this reasoning, wouldn't you be led to believe Atlanta is a legitimate contender? They have the kind of offense that seems to flourish in the playoffs these days. They stretch the field vertically really well.Two elite wide receivers who will eat up defenders one-on-one, a top receiving tight end, and a guy in Rodgers who can work the flats when the receivers clear them out. That's the kind of unit that has a better chance at beating strong defenses.
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)


Last edited by 24isthelaw on Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
The Falcons are the least dominant, worst 'best' team in a while. They've had several wins they had no business winning. No way they are ahead of SF.

I have to say, we are in total agreement. My wallet also agrees, after I took the Saints twice over this past week.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24210
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
The Falcons are the least dominant, worst 'best' team in a while. They've had several wins they had no business winning. No way they are ahead of SF.


The 49ers have 2 fewer wins (an extra loss and the tie) and have played only a slightly stronger schedule.

Losing the the Giants and Vikings and tying the Rams takes away any argument you can make for the 49ers being better than the Falcons. On paper, maybe. But in execution, it just hasn't been there this year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12258
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

24isthelaw wrote:
Richter wrote:

It makes perfect sense if you don't consider all units to be equally important. The Patriots' bad defense is less likely to hold them back given the teams they are most probable to face in the AFC playoffs than the Bears' mediocre offense is going up against their NFC rivals. And, as much as what you say about the Patriots' potential losses is true, the same argument could be made for every team on that list. It's just a far more convincing one for Atlanta, who really should be a .500 or so team, based on how they've performed. I'd also make the argument that the Patriots have a potential avenue for improvement in their weak area, whereas I don't see an obvious means by which the Bears improve their offense, or the Falcons become a team that is worthy of their record.


If you follow this reasoning, wouldn't you be led to believe Atlanta is a legitimate contender? They have the kind of offense that seems to flourish in the playoffs these days. They stretch the field vertically really well.Two elite wide receivers who will eat up defenders one-on-one, a top receiving tight end, and a guy in Rodgers who can work the flats when the receivers clear them out.

You have to consider it in the context of the teams they are going to play in the playoffs. Their offense is well-suited to the playoffs, but I'm still taking Green Bay and New York ahead of them on the offensive side. And defensively, they're solid but unspectacular, and they may not even be that; it's hard to tell, given the opposition they've faced. I'd much rather be the Patriots, given the teams they are likely to face in a playoff situation, than the Falcons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 7 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group