Sluss's 2007 AFC Rankings (Week 2) - Page 2

Sluss · #11 09-18-2007, 04:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]

It should be noted that their best offensive lineman is injured at the moment(brad meester) and will return during the season. Another thing to note is the team was #2 in rushing last year. But, through the first two games last year they only had 188 yards rushing, wow. But...wait, they have 188 yards rushing this year through 2 games?

Run attacks take timing and when a center is the one that gets hurt timing does disappear for some time. I have a feeling there might be a rushing attack to fear coming 4:30 sunday afternoon all the way up in Denver.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Needle.

I've been thinking this all along. It's why I've been reluctant to drop them even though they have looked pretty bad. I just would have thought they would have been able to slide both Taylor and Drew into their same roles as last year. Of course OCs don't do this because they like to believe that last year's success was only a quick fix and that they need to use one back or the other more or less this year.

[ QUOTE ]
San Diego is too high. You like everybody else is basing it on last years's team. With new HC and 8 new assistants they are a different team. In football, more than any other sport, coaching is critical.

[/ QUOTE ]San Deigo still has the players to keep them that high. I think alot of people are also underestimating the losses of Donnie Edwards and Keenan McCardell who were the leaders of the offense and defense respectively. Losing all of those coaches and those two guys has really left a power void and like I said the Chargers spent the whole week trash-talking the Bears when they should have been focused on the Patriots. Last year that wouldn't have happened. But they still play the NFC North, which means games against Green Bay this week along with Detroit and Minnesota, plus they get to play the Chiefs and Raiders twice.

Also everbody bashing the Broncos read Challenger's & Nez's posts. They have looked good it has just been a couple of Cutler mistakes that have cost them some touchdown scoring drives. It will even out.

aditya · #12 09-18-2007, 04:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Also everbody bashing the Broncos read Challenger's & Nez's posts. They have looked good it has just been a couple of Cutler mistakes that have cost them some touchdown scoring drives. It will even out.

[/ QUOTE ]

How will it even out? Is he magically gonna stop making these mistakes? Btw, I think they should be 5th so yeah I agree with you guys but just trying to get something going.

Richard Tanner · #13 09-18-2007, 04:52 PM

Are we ready to start talking about a potential LDT drop off in SD. I know LDT is the second coming of christ (Meaning VY is at least 3rd) but he had a long, hard year last year and traditionally RBs fare poorly after those years.

Is it possible that the most stacked team in the NFL really isn't that stacked after all. We all know that Fantasy Football has forever screwed up people's ability to evaluate talent in the NFL, but people still seem to be giving alot of credit to the Chargers on paper and not for what they've done on the field.

Now it is true that they had two hard games to begin with, but still they didn't even challenge the Pats and that game, on paper, should've been much closer.

Cody

Sluss · #14 09-18-2007, 05:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Are we ready to start talking about a potential LDT drop off in SD. I know LDT is the second coming of christ (Meaning VY is at least 3rd) but he had a long, hard year last year and traditionally RBs fare poorly after those years.

[/ QUOTE ] Are we seriously writing off a guy who just played two of the best defenses in football? When he scores six TDs in the next two weeks against Green Bay and Kansas City do we then start asking if he is going to break the TD record again?

xorbie · #15 09-18-2007, 05:34 PM

It seems that the problem with the Chargers is that most of their big play potential (or even medium play potential) is in the hands of Gates and LDT, so a team with good, fast LB will be quite successful. Since their OLine doesn't seem as good as last year, Rivers doesn't have time to do much but dump it off to one of those two and really doesn't look very comfortable.

Richard Tanner · #16 09-18-2007, 05:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are we ready to start talking about a potential LDT drop off in SD. I know LDT is the second coming of christ (Meaning VY is at least 3rd) but he had a long, hard year last year and traditionally RBs fare poorly after those years.

[/ QUOTE ] Are we seriously writing off a guy who just played two of the best defenses in football? When he scores six TDs in the next two weeks against Green Bay and Kansas City do we then start asking if he is going to break the TD record again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Letdown =/= Writing him off. All I'm asking is "is it unrealistic to expect a dropoff from LDT, not just a "coming back to earth" but an almost "standardization" of him for this year, if not for the rest of his career.

His line does seem a little weaker this year and their D seems to be less fearsome then in years past. Who knows, I'm just not sold on the "Best talent in the NFL" argument right now.

Cody

Kneel B4 Zod · #17 09-18-2007, 06:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible that the most stacked team in the NFL really isn't that stacked after all.

[/ QUOTE ]

just in terms of pure talent, I think the Pats have them beat. they are much better at QB, WR, a few DB positions, and even though the Chargers D Line is great, the Pats' is better.

the Chargers are clearly more talented at RB, TE, and probably the LB group, though with Adalius Thomas and Rose Colvin playing as well as they are, even that is very close.

[ QUOTE ]
but people still seem to be giving alot of credit to the Chargers on paper and not for what they've done on the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

they went 14-2 last year, losing only 2 very close games (both very tough road games, both 3 point losses), and really outplayed NE in the playoffs. they were the best AFC team last year.

lastchance · #18 09-18-2007, 06:53 PM

You're underrating Pittsburgh so, so much. They were going to be good early in the year, and they have dominated as much as any team except, of course, the NE patriots. Looking at DVOA + DAVE, Nez + challenger are right, Denver is a solid team and really may be better than SD this year (due to SD's regression on defense and Marty).

That said, Pittsburgh has been miles better than anyone expected (and I don't think most people expected them to miss the playoffs). They look really, really good right now and even playing the easy part of the schedule, two 20+ point wins for a team that was expected to be good already should have them at least 3.

Chairman Wood · #19 09-18-2007, 07:41 PM

Next week include the records of all the teams within their rankings. It helps.

Richard Tanner · #20 09-18-2007, 08:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
just in terms of pure talent, I think the Pats have them beat

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm displeased, though not suprised, that you didn't mention the Colts in here, but in any case I agree the Pats seem to have more "player talent".

[ QUOTE ]
they went 14-2 last year, losing only 2 very close games (both very tough road games, both 3 point losses), and really outplayed NE in the playoffs. they were the best AFC team last year .

[/ QUOTE ]

Emphasis mine.

Cody