Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed 
Hoping it was a one off.
[quote]paulwhite959 wrote:
Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed Hoping it was a one off.[/quote]
I think the winner of the Texans/Ravens game represents the AFC in the SB. Pats could mix things up and maybe Denver/Chargers as well.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]paulwhite959 wrote:
Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed Hoping it was a one off.[/quote]
I think the winner of the Texans/Ravens game represents the AFC in the SB. Pats could mix things up and maybe Denver/Chargers as well. [/quote]
Don’t sleep on Sixburgh homie
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]paulwhite959 wrote:
Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed Hoping it was a one off.[/quote]
I think the winner of the Texans/Ravens game represents the AFC in the SB. Pats could mix things up and maybe Denver/Chargers as well. [/quote]
Don’t sleep on Sixburgh homie[/quote]
If they lose this week they’ll done at least in the division. Assuming the Ravens win (a big assumption) they’d be way behind (2-6 vs 7-1). They could be a wild card and make a run, but I don’t think they’ll make the playoffs. Too many other good teams in the AFC.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]paulwhite959 wrote:
Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed Hoping it was a one off.[/quote]
I think the winner of the Texans/Ravens game represents the AFC in the SB. Pats could mix things up and maybe Denver/Chargers as well. [/quote]
Don’t sleep on Sixburgh homie[/quote]
I know California is along way from Ontario dude but if you really try, you should be able to hear me snoring away. It’s a reluctant angry snore but a snore never the less. It’s been a nice run but…
Is it me or does it seem the NFC is dominant over the AFC this year?
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Is it me or does it seem the NFC is dominant over the AFC this year?[/quote]
I feel like there is no domination really this year. Falcons and arguable the Texans (even with the big loss), but otherwise I don’t see it. The usual teams to dominate aren’t/ The Saints and Packers aren’t looking very good, but neither are the Pats or Steelers. The Ravens record looks great on paper, but they have serious flaws. They’ve given up more yardage on the ground in two games than half the season a year or 2 ago. 49s got their butts kicked by a team that is average 
This is one of those grinder it out seasons with no clear cut front runner, imo.
Although this just about ends any argument I have.
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Is it me or does it seem the NFC is dominant over the AFC this year?[/quote]
Yeah man I think you’re right.
when Seattle beats New England… There’s a bit of a tipping of the scales toward the nfc.
[quote]bond james bond wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]paulwhite959 wrote:
Hoping we come back strong, but this echos what I’ve been worried about. The Texans have played pretty well (until Green Bay) but it was against weaker teams. We got creamed Hoping it was a one off.[/quote]
I think the winner of the Texans/Ravens game represents the AFC in the SB. Pats could mix things up and maybe Denver/Chargers as well. [/quote]
Don’t sleep on Sixburgh homie[/quote]
I know California is along way from Ontario dude but if you really try, you should be able to hear me snoring away. It’s a reluctant angry snore but a snore never the less. It’s been a nice run but…
[/quote]
I know man… But there’s still time for Pitt to make some noise. We’ll see
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
[quote]bond james bond wrote:
Matty you just described the commisoner’s prime directive. I swear he wants every team to finish 8-8 just to make it “exciting for the kids”.
I personally like to have a dominate team or two every year like GB last year and the Pats of past years to appear unbeatable. I need a team to despise and fear.
[/quote]
LOL agreed I love hating teams, it makes sports so much more fun!
[/quote]
Same here. Hating the Patriots has made me a Giants fan.
Man, this game is going to be a real fucking slobber knocker. I hope they have a lot of body bags and stretchers on hand.
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Is it me or does it seem the NFC is dominant over the AFC this year?[/quote]
The NFC has been better the last couple years, I’d say. This year, Houston looks really good but I think there are a few teams in the NFC that could beat them (SF, Atl, NY) and all three of those teams are probably better than the next best team in the AFC, who I think is the Patriots now that Baltimore has lost a couple of key players.
Plus, the last two Super Bowl winners are from the NFC and like I said, I think there are several teams in the NFC who are legitimate contenders for the title this year, whereas Houston and New England are the only two from the AFC with any sort of chance.
I think you could argue that most of the best defenses in the NFL are in the NFC. SF, Seattle, Chicago, Arizona and maybe New York (when healthy) are in the top 5 or 6 in the league, in my opinion. And the two best defenses in the NFL are the Niners and the Seahawks.
Some of the best offenses in the NFL also reside in the NFC. Green Bay, New Orleans, New York, Atlanta and maybe even Washington now that they have RG3 are legitimate big-point-total threats every week. I think the only ones in the AFC that compare favorably to the top NFC teams are New England and maybe Pittsburgh and Baltimore. I’m not sold on Baltimore and Joe Flacco yet, but if Pittsburgh can get a running game of some sort going they’re legit. But that’s about it over there as far as big-time offenses.
The NFC has won 4 or the last 5 Super Bowls.
Interesting
In Reid and Vick we trust.
Everyone say it with me.
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
In Reid and Vick we trust.
Everyone say it with me.
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…![/quote]
They have a fucking bye this week.
So what?
We made some changes. We ready.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
So what?
We made some changes. We ready.[/quote]
Lol. Do those changes include putting anyone other than Michael Vick at QB? Unless that makes a complete 180 degree shift in his mindset, he’ll never be any good anymore. Their offensive line sucks, but he makes poor decisions on a pretty regular basis, regardless.
I hate to say it since I’m not very enamored with Alex Smith these days, but Vick would actually be much, much better if he modeled his game after Smith. The one thing Smith has going for him is that he doesn’t force balls into traffic very much at all. Unfortunately, he also doesn’t force the ball downfield much either and as a result, he rarely even looks down there, so when someone is open he’s usually looking to see where the yardage marker he’s going to the throw the ball over is at.
But Vick would do better to make those sorts of decisions pretty much every time. With his running ability, he should be able to scramble around enough to gain consistent yardage, but only if a lane opens up for him, rather than force the run. Otherwise, he should just toss it away, which he never does. He just doesn’t understand the value in just taking what the defense gives him, even if it means taking nothing at all and simply throwing the ball away.
But he wants to make big plays every fucking time, so now that the emphasis on staying in the pocket longer has been pounded into his head, he’s simply looking to make up for the lack of explosive running plays with explosive pass plays instead. And that is just too low-percentage for a passer like Vick. Rather than scramble for yardage first, he should scramble strictly to get into a better position to either make a pass or get rid of it, and THEN take the run if something huge opens up in front of him.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
In Reid and Vick we trust.
Everyone say it with me.
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…!
Let’s…Go…Eagles…![/quote]
They have a fucking bye this week.[/quote]
Just when I thought it couldnt get funnier than Predator drones in the SWAT valley…