Lord Raven Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 Jags have a terrible front 7, 10 is the lowest # of puts put up against the Jags since like 2012 (jk the Texans only put up 6 against them sometime last year but that team also went 2-14) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk King Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 The bengals D-coordinator is a retard. KC blitzed the shit out of brady last week and the blew the patriots out. So then the bengals just rush 4 defenders on 95% of their defensive plays??? Why do teams still think they can beat Brady with a 4-man rush? Detroit only scored 7 points on offense against the Bills. I know the Bills have a good defense but what is up with Detroit's offense this year? They have sucked at scoring points this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 6, 2014 Author Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) Jags have a terrible front 7, 10 is the lowest # of puts put up against the Jags since like 2012 (jk the Texans only put up 6 against them sometime last year but that team also went 2-14) It didn't look terrible to me. And players CAN improve, you know. 2012 was a couple years ago. Things can change in that period of time. No team will remain exactly the same even after one season. Also, we put up 17, actually. Edited October 6, 2014 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 Hawk King - I have no idea, it sounds like air raid concepts are floundering in general in the NFL because the saints run the same offense and can't do anything. Ana - my point was that they were terrible this year, you know how many points they've given up per game on the season right? I won't crunch the numbers but they've given up like 34, 45, 41 (to a really shitty Redskins team that got eviscerafed in primetimr), and 33. Also it's 10 cause 7 were scored on defense. If the front 7 looked good it probably says a lot about the state of the OL and the fact that the steelers sorta blow this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 6, 2014 Author Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) If the front 7 looked good it probably says a lot about the state of the OL and the fact that the steelers sorta blow this season The only game the Steelers really blew was the one against the Ravens. They played very well for the most part otherwise. The loss to the Bucs was mostly due to stupid ass penalties and a little screwage from the refs. And even a bad team can have some good moments. If the Steelers DID blow more of this season so far, they still obliterated a good Panthers team. And even a good team can blow it sometimes. Look at how the Bengals did against the Patriots. Or how the Patriots did against the Chiefs. Edited October 6, 2014 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bear Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) If the front 7 looked good it probably says a lot about the state of the OL and the fact that the steelers sorta blow this season They were second in the league sacks going into the game against the Steelers actually, they're third after this game. That doesn't sound like a bad front 7 to me. Edited October 6, 2014 by Da Bear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 6, 2014 Author Share Posted October 6, 2014 Yeah, what Da Bear said too. The announcers even brought it up, now that I remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) They were second in the league sacks going into the game against the Steelers actually, they're third after this game. That doesn't sound like a bad front 7 to me. Cause sacks are the end-all be-all right?They're also dead last in the league in passing yards allowed and bottom tier in rushing yards (like #25 or something), all while probably allowing the most points of any team. Their offense blows and can't keep drives alive and they force their D back out often. If we are judging by sacks then the Jags have a better front 7 than the entire AFC North but we all know that's far from true. What you are talking about is probably the worst roster in the NFL by far. It was true last year and it's even more true this year because they lost a lot of their playmakers on offense. In fact I think the only teams that really match this team in recent memory are those Rams teams before they drafted Bradford - the guys that went 6-42 in a three year span. Pats still don't look like a good team to me, because even bad teams have strangely good games. The 2012 Jags spring to mind, who had a shootout against the same Texans that ended up 12-4. That Jags team went 2-14.... And let's not forget the 2010 Seahawks. Edited October 6, 2014 by Lord Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 The Jaguars front 7 is pretty decent I agree, the problems are on the back end mostly. Don't good teams also have strangely bad games sometimes? Seattle nearly blew games to Houston and Tampa Bay last year, San Francisco was blown out twice etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 FUCK I HAD A LONG AS FUCK POST HERE AND I HIT BACK Anyway, feel free to ask, I'm not re-typing this shit out because I can't re-create the magical amount of sarcasm I put in; basically I'm assuming tonight will either be a very Seahawks-y game where they struggle and make a huge comeback or they just blow the other guys out completely. Next week matchups: Colts @ Titans Patriots @ Bills Ravens @ Buccaneers Steelers @ Browns Panthers @ Bengals Broncos @ Jets - obviously, because the Jets did beat the Chargers 31-0 the other day right? And the Broncos lost to the Cardinals like 45 to 20? Lions @ Vikings Packers @ Dolphins Jaguars @ Titans - note, this is not a joke Chargers @ Raiders Bears @ Falcons Cowboys @ Seahawks Redskins @ Cardinals - unless this ends up like 2012 and Logan Thomas turns out to be John Skelton-levels of shitty. Giants @ Eagles - who the fuck knows what's going on with the Eagles, I'll just put them as a W until the game happens 49ers @ Rams As for Cynthia's post, I had a couple sentences detailing how the Texans at that point in the season were not a bad team, especially because they had Cushing and Watt abusing a very unspectacular offensive line, and their receivers at that point had not come onto their own (Seattle's that is). They had a solid enough run game and Andre Johnson was good. It was also before Kubiak went psycho with the team (and in fact that season was what made me hesitant with putting Kubiak as our OC and I'd have much preferred Shanahan - but he's producing results so I'm not complaining). Finally, Jaguars front 7 doesn't seem to stand out to me at all because of all those yards and points, they also seem to have a lot of pass attempts against them (which leads to more sacks) and they allow plenty of rushing yards. I'd love to see someone calculate their points-per-drive measurement because I can imagine it's ridiculously high (for reference: 3.5 is ridiculously high for a seasonal points-per-drive rating). I guess their secondary is really an issue, but the Ravens have a lot of issues in the secondary and a solid front 7 and we're doing significantly better w/ run defense even though our pass defense is marginally better, and of course this is not counting the fact that we've allowed less points (and we're like #3 in point differential right now). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dynamite Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 I'm just glad the Panters won this week. Although their offense has been as underwhelming as it has most of the season for a majority of the game, their defense (and that Forte fumble) allowed us to capitalize on their mistakes. It's a shame the Ravens couldn't capitalize on the Bradshaw fumble, though. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Assuming the Seahawks and Redskins don't have a wacky second half... Indianapolis at Houston- Colts can move the ball offensively, Texans are bad at this New England at Buffalo- Patriots may have fixed their offensive issues, Bills seem to have trouble scoring. History also favors Brady against the Bills(22-2) Baltimore at Tampa Bay- Bucs have been scrappy, but Ravens are better I think Pittsburgh at Cleveland- Both these teams have been up and down, neither of them very good on defense. Going with the home team here. Carolina at Cincinnati- Bengals are strong at home, Panthers have a lot of issues right now Denver at New York Jets- Broncos good, Jets very bad Detroit at Minnesota- Both these teams look bad offensively, but at least the Lions are good on defense Green Bay at Miami- Rodgers seems to be back in his groove and the Dolphins aren't very good Jacksonville at Tennessee- Titans aren't very good admittedly, but picking an 0-5 team on the road is a bit too gutsy for me San Diego at Oakland- Chargers actually lost at Oakland last year, but I can't really see that happening again Chicago at Atlanta- Falcons at home is a good bet, although the Bears are so inconsistent who the hell knows Dallas at Seattle- Seahawks at home good bet Washington at Arizona- Even if it's Logan Thomas, I still don't like the Redskins here New York Giants at Philadelphia- Eagles haven't been great offensively or defensively the last few weeks and have needed things like return touchdowns to win, Giants have been solid. Also Eagles are worse at home because they're weird. San Francisco at St. Louis- Oddly enough Austin Davis is all right, but the Rams defense is terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandSteve Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Yeah... I don't think the Browns can beat the Steelers if we just barely beat the Titans. That was one of the games we had to win in a blowout if we wanted to make anything of this year (of course, I never predict a Browns win. No Browns fan does because when we are certain we'll win is when we're even more likely than usual to lose). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dynamite Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Brian Hoyer is looking pretty decent, and the Steelers haven't been looking too hot lately. Anything is possible, especially considering how it's a division rivalry and the game is being played in Cleveland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Yeah... I don't think the Browns can beat the Steelers if we just barely beat the Titans. That was one of the games we had to win in a blowout if we wanted to make anything of this year (of course, I never predict a Browns win. No Browns fan does because when we are certain we'll win is when we're even more likely than usual to lose).that was also a road win, road games are tough no matter what the other team lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk King Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Brian Hoyer looks like the real deal. Hes 5-2 as a started in Cleveland, and both of their loses with him as the starter have been by 3 points or less. I'd say the Browns have a decent chance of winning every game that Hoyer plays. I could see them getting 9 or more wins this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 7, 2014 Author Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) I don't know, I'd say that Steelers vs Browns is entirely up in the air and can go either way. The Steelers lost to a bad team, but they totally crushed a good one. Meanwhile, the Browns looked good against the Ravens and Titans and almost beat us in Pittsburgh. Both of these teams are all over the place. I'm going to give a SLIGHT edge to the black and gold guys though, because they know they're in big trouble if they lose to an AFC North team again and I think they're more likely to start producing more. The Steelers have simply shown that they're CAPABLE of performing at a high level. The Browns, not really if they could only barely beat the Titans and not hold their lead against the Ravens at home. Also, a little Steeler fan bias. xP Brian Hoyer is looking pretty decent, and the Steelers haven't been looking too hot lately. Anything is possible, especially considering how it's a division rivalry and the game is being played in Cleveland. Dude, if this came down to only QBs, Big Ben makes Hoyer look like a rookie. He's been the best in the AFC North for awhile. Flacco is a good runner and has a strong arm, but Ben is even stronger, he's accurate (most of the time), he can break tackles like nobody's business, he's great at buying time, and he's beast on 3rd down. Edited October 7, 2014 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandSteve Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Brian Hoyer looks like the real deal. Hes 5-2 as a started in Cleveland, and both of their loses with him as the starter have been by 3 points or less. I'd say the Browns have a decent chance of winning every game that Hoyer plays. I could see them getting 9 or more wins this year. I will agree that Hoyer does seem to be the QB Cleveland was waiting for, but nine wins this year is quite a bit much. Maybe next year when we have Josh Gordon back (provided we don't do anything stupid in the offseason. And provided he doesn't get himself suspended again), but not this year. Dude, if this came down to only QBs, Big Ben makes Hoyer look like a rookie. He's been the best in the AFC North for awhile. Flacco is a good runner and has a strong arm, but Ben is even stronger, he's accurate (most of the time), he can break tackles like nobody's business, he's great at buying time, and he's beast on 3rd down. Hoyer is pretty much a rookie since he spent so much time just warming the bench in New England and only played three games last year before getting injured. And Ben might still be better now but he's getting older (I know Hoyer's only about three and a half years younger, but it's play time and all the hits that come with it that wear NFL players down more than their age alone, and Ben's been starting games for pretty much his entire career while Hoyer hasn't had much play time before coming to Cleveland. And maybe in a few years Manziel will be developed enough from learning from Hoyer that he could be the starter). Edited October 7, 2014 by ClevelandSteve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 7, 2014 Author Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Ben's only 32 right now, he can play for a good few more years. Especially since he's been able to play well even with injuries (he threw balls and put up numbers with a busted ankle and broken nose, both injuries being on him at the same time). Heck, I can see Ben still doing fairly well even beyond 35 years old. Though he probably won't pull any Brett Favres like Pey-Pey and Brady plan to. >.> And I'm glad, because that's just a stupid idea, imo. Ben's number of years of experience is another factor that makes him the best QB in the division too though. He's been at it for even longer than Flacco. Ben was drafted in 04, I believe, and Flacco didn't appear until four or five years later. Edited October 7, 2014 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Flacco was drafted in 08 and hasn't missed a game. Ben on the other hand... Flacco's arm and release time are considered much better than Ben's. Flacco is more elusive in the pocket whereas Ben will truck defenders and prevent a sack by force of will whereas Flacco will roll out. That's also why there's a massive difference in injury history because of Flaccos pocket presence compared to Bens... Flacco also doesn't turn the ball over lol Hoyer also has generally better pocket presence than both of them (again like Tom Brady, who trumps these guys) and a quicker release than Ben. His arm isn't as strong but at this point in their career I would take Hoyer as long as he doesn't slide. (I'd take Flacco over both though). Edited October 7, 2014 by Lord Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 7, 2014 Author Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Ben having a bad o-line for some years isn't his fault. And the bad o-line is one reason he's so good. He's extended and made plays even when his protectors fail at their job. Also, I don't believe that Flacco's smaller arm is stronger than Ben's bigger arm (Ben clearly towers over Flacco, thus he must have bigger, stronger arms. He isn't called Big Ben for nothing). It makes no sense to me. Flacco does turn the ball over, actually. I recall Polamalu alone forcing him to do it twice in his career, once by picking him off in an AFC Championship (which was the awesomest thing in that game, imo) and once in another game by slamming Flacco and forcing him to fumble. And last season Flacco threw two picks in one game. I just watched the plays on NFL.com. I also watched some plays where Flacco threw picks this season too. I watch every play where Flacco throws a pick or fumbles because I love it. lol Every QB throws picks and fumbles, Raven. Even the Mannings and Brady. I saw Ike Taylor pick off Eli, so I've seen this first hand. Edited October 7, 2014 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiac Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) I think what Raven is trying to say is: Flacco doesn't want to risk losing the ball so he makes the safer play by going out of the pocket, which also ties in to his lack of injuries. As opposed to Ben who stays in the pocket and would rather pick off the defenders by breaking sacks and stay in the pocket. In which, he is inclined to injury. But admittedly Ben is fun to watch, when you expect him to go down. He's still standing then throws off the ball. Also, what kind of QB never throws a pick or gets fumbled o.o.... Though Lord Raven should check his averages. Flacco has been in the NFL since 2008, Big Ben has been in the NFL since 2004. Flacco: 54 Fumbles Roethlisberger: 73 fumbles Flacco average fumble rate per season in a span of 6 seasons: 9 fumbles per season Roethlisberger average fumble rate in a span of 10 seasons: 7.3 fumbles per season. In interceptions, the same predicament occurs: Flacco: 81 INT Roethlisberger: 124 INT Flacco averages an interception rate per season in a span of 6 seasons: 13.5 interceptions per season Roethlisberger averages an interception rate per season in a span of 10 seasons: 12.4 interceptions per season. Flacco has always been backed up with a great defense, Roethlisberger has always been backed up with offensive weapons. Take your pick. Roethlisberger's stats look better due to having offensive weapons, but I won't discredit him. Flacco's weapons are bit more limited on offense but he has some at the very least, so the argument is at a stalemate. Edited October 7, 2014 by Vermilia Scarlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 7, 2014 Author Share Posted October 7, 2014 Hrm, you make good arguments there for both sides. I guess you're right. Although I never meant to say Flacco was much worse. I should've been more specific. I only thought Ben was a bit better. Not a lot better. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) Flacco fumbles but he doesn't lose them that often, and Flacco hasn't had good OLs either until the 2012 playoffs and the very beginning of each season... And if you take out last season then flaccos int average/year goes down significantly because he's always thrown only between 10 and 14 every year (in fact only two years above 12). But flaccos arm is way better than Bens. You know Flacco is two inches taller and like 20 pounds heavier right? Ben can't launch it as high as Flacco on the run and he can't put as much touch on it, on top of the fact that Flacco can throw into tighter windows... I've seen some of Bens throws but you need to have one hell of an arm if you can consistently throw the ball to places only Anquan boldin can get. Cause trust me Flacco is not that skinny and his arms are built, he just looks so tall that you don't notice these things. And yeah our receivers have been very unreliable in comparison... We had Derrick Mason, Torrey Smith, Anquan Boldin, an old Steve Smith (which is like having a much more elusive and older Mason on the field) compared to Antonio Brown, Hines Ward, Plaxico Burress, and Santonio Holmes when he wasn't terrible... Bearing in mind that of those 4 I mentioned only Torrey has been drafted by the Ravens AND under 30 let alone 25... And even he has significantly regressed. Oh yeah and I completely forgot about Mark Clayton and Lee Evans. Jesus Christ those guys... The other point I was getting at is that Ben has had many more 14-15+ interception seasons than Flacco (it's like 4 vs 1). Hell Flacco turns the ball over less than both Mannings and Brees on average especially before last season... And it's not like Roethlisberger has started 16 games most of his career to rack up the Ints.. and Polamalu caused him to fumble in the AFCCG his rookie season... lest we all forget he actually tied an NFL record held by GOAT QB Joe Montana not too long ago. EDIT: I'm gonna leave these here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajYgQjWUk80 Denver's ridiculously good 2012-2013 defensive line on a three man rush against Flacco - sure it's underthrown but he had to arc it very high so Von Miller in front of him doesn't bat it down. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fa_GrbdcjY Rookie Flacco. 70 yards without much effort. Edited October 8, 2014 by Lord Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 lolwut, Flacco looks smaller and thinner than Ben to me. But whatever, we agree that both are good QBs. xP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.