Results 13 to 24 of 31
-
09-20-2010, 11:30 AM #13
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
Just some food for thought, who were some teams that started 2-0 last year?
Giants, Broncos, and 49ers.
-
09-20-2010, 11:32 AM #14
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
-
09-20-2010, 12:33 PM #15
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
Weren't most people saying they would be happy to be 3-1 or 2-2 through our toughest stretch of the season. I am by no means saying Flacco did not stink up the joint but it is amazing how many people are getting close to jumping ship or throwing in the towel. Lucky for us there is 15 weeks of football to be played in the NFL and a ton can happen, relax!
Hating Steeler Fans Since Birth
Section 126, Row 33
Lets Go Flacco :happyanim
-
09-20-2010, 01:09 PM #16
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
Current division leaders:
Miami
Pittsburgh
Houston
Kansas City
Washington
Chicago
Tampa Bay
Seattle
Yeah, it's a topsy-turvy world after two weeks of the season. It won't stay this way.ERIG20, your local draftnik
Signature currently under construction
-
09-20-2010, 01:25 PM #17
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
"Grab those pusillanimous sons-a-bitches by the nose and kick 'em in the balls.." General George S. Patton
-
09-20-2010, 01:54 PM #18
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
After two weeks, no, this is not necessarily the case.
Tampa Bay is not an elite team. Neither is Kansas City. And we are, in fact, better than many of the 1-1 teams out there right now; and some of them may well be better than us.
Two games is simply too small a sample size to claim this.
- C ----------------------------------------------------
www.oblongspheroid.com
A blog about any and everything football.
Twitter: oblong_spheroid
-
09-20-2010, 02:48 PM #19Rookie Poster
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Posts
- 25
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
You are a wise man, you panicing Raven's fans should take note.
Defense wins championships, you guys if any, should recognize that.
The difference between the Steelers 2-0 start and your 1-1? We got some breaks on the offensive side of the ball. When your offense gets a little more consistancy to it you'll be fine, its a long season.
Speaking of offensive consitancy, I cant wait for Big Ben to return!! Hate all you want but he is going to make the Steelers that much tougher to beat!
-
09-20-2010, 02:55 PM #20
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
It's sort of pathetic that on a Ravens board a Steeler fan has to be the voice of reason.
BTW, I agree with you on Big Ben. I'm pretty sure I could play QB and the Steelers still win games with the way they're playing D. But if Ben comes back and plays well, that team could really be scary good.
- C ----------------------------------------------------
www.oblongspheroid.com
A blog about any and everything football.
Twitter: oblong_spheroid
-
09-20-2010, 02:56 PM #21
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
Yup, much like people's reactions to everything else in modern society, it seems we swing from exuberant highs to unjustified lows here. Maybe that's part of the nature of being a dyed-in-the-wool fan...
As others have said, two games does not a season make. I agree that there's plenty to be concerned about when it comes to Joe Flacco. That doesn't make it panic time. Why is it that so many people either want to label him "elite" or else say he's a failure? He is neither. He has the potential to become elite, but as the Bengals game demonstrated, he has a ways to go. It's also possible his career could spiral downward from here ...but I think that's a very unlikely outcome. Only time will tell. No point in all the hand-wringing.
As to our division ....hey, apart from the Brownies it's a damned tough one. It seems a number of people keep saying that the Bengals aren't that good. That's just plain denial. They have their weaknesses and inconsistencies (just as we do), but they are a very good football team. They've owned us since last year. I don't care if our losses were caused by penalties, or turnovers, or Joe Flacco having his mind on pizza instead of coverage schemes. A loss is a loss, and Cincy has found ways to beat us. Three times straight is not a fluke. Now it's up to the Ravens to break that string next time we play them.
Right now we're third in the division, and deservedly so. But there are 14 games left, for cryin' out loud. Last year we managed to get into the playoffs despite performing so-so (3-3) in our intra-division games. We need to do better this time out. If we do that (beating Cincy next time and at least splitting with Pittsburgh), then we'll have some credibility going into the playoffs. And if we don't, then I daresay we wouldn't deserve to go deep into the playoffs, or even reach them in the first place.
So here's how I see it: if we're truly a championship caliber team, we'll do what needs to be done in most of the games that count. And if we're not, the fact will manifest itself by more losses against the good teams and another mediocre record within the division.
It's a long season.Last edited by trailhiker85; 09-20-2010 at 03:01 PM.
-
09-20-2010, 03:27 PM #22
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
"Grab those pusillanimous sons-a-bitches by the nose and kick 'em in the balls.." General George S. Patton
-
09-20-2010, 03:31 PM #23
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
Sample size renders that argument useless. 6-4 vs 9-1 are much different levels of teams, and they can be judged (in the vast majority of cases) as such fairly after playing ten games. 1-1 doesn't tell you much.
Like I said in another thread, if we had played Kansas City (or Buffalo) and Cleveland in the first two games, according to your mantra, we would be a better team than we are with a 1-1 start @Jets and @Bengals. It doesn't really hold true at this point of the season. Semantics.
-
09-20-2010, 03:52 PM #24
Re: steelers, first; cincy, second; bmore, third
This isn't just false because I think it is; it's false empirically, and not just in very small samples (like the first two games of a season).
In Liam Lenten's study of competitive balance in the NFL's unbalanced schedule, he found that when adjusting for schedule difficulty, the below adjustments should be made to win percentages over 2002 through 2009. Unsurprisingly, every team in the NFC West gets a huge negative adjustment because its division is so terrible.
As a point of reference, an adjustment of .0625 would represent one full additional win over the course of a 16 game season. While a lot of these differences may seem small, you have to consider how much larger these effects are through two weeks when some teams have played hard portions of their schedules and some the easier portions.
One of the more interesting results (bolded below) was that the 2004 Ravens, even at 9-7, deserved to make the playoffs over the 10-6 Broncos.
Team 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Bills -0.0273 0.0663 0.0137 -0.0060 0.0175 0.0136 -0.0489 0.0116
Dolphins 0.0098 0.0158 0.0466 -0.0410 0.0155 0.0249 -0.0330 0.0566
Patriots 0.0274 -0.0035 0.0043 0.0118 0.0120 -0.0151 -0.0135 0.0197
Jets 0.0020 0.0233 0.0275 0.0193 0.0275 0.0154 -0.0273 0.0176
Ravens 0.0038 -0.0389 0.0528 0.0194 -0.0095 0.0096 0.0275 0.0255
Bengals 0.0250 -0.0430 0.0430 -0.0174 0.0078 -0.0411 0.0457 -0.0038
Browns -0.0117 0.0330 0.0818 0.0038 -0.0003 -0.0663 0.0642 0.0057
Steelers -0.0086 -0.0040 -0.0015 -0.0018 0.0469 -0.0428 0.0335 -0.0097
Texans 0.0095 0.0643 0.0019 0.0231 0.0194 0.0156 0.0176 0.0059
Colts -0.0175 0.0003 0.0081 -0.0309 0.0237 0.0257 0.0061 -0.0152
Jaguars 0.0018 0.0369 0.0294 -0.0271 0.0195 0.0217 0.0311 -0.0059
Titans -0.0154 -0.0193 0.0057 0.0037 -0.0234 0.0040 -0.0309 0.0391
Broncos 0.0294 0.0040 -0.0116 0.0101 0.0411 0.0136 -0.0430 0.0273
Chiefs 0.0273 -0.0720 0.0488 0.0079 0.0137 0.0076 0.0250 0.0076
Raiders 0.0353 0.0076 0.0643 0.0310 0.0465 0.0076 0.0135 0.0213
Chargers -0.0078 -0.0042 -0.0154 0.0606 0.0082 0.0060 0.0156 -0.0368
Cowboys -0.0060 -0.0350 0.0116 0.0255 -0.0292 0.0062 0.0001 -0.0057
Giants -0.0135 0.0466 0.0116 -0.0018 -0.0039 0.0197 0.0100 0.0352
Eagles -0.0232 -0.0154 -0.0368 0.0272 -0.0194 0.0625 0.0167 -0.0096
Redskins 0.0253 0.0252 -0.0275 0.0431 0.0174 0.0567 -0.0215 -0.0159
Bears 0.0134 -0.0137 -0.0412 -0.0369 -0.0680 0.0410 -0.0234 -0.0059
Lions -0.0159 0.0291 -0.0079 -0.0021 -0.0023 0.0410 0.0425 0.0113
Packers -0.0408 -0.0077 -0.0389 0.0232 -0.0117 -0.0212 -0.0001 -0.0525
Vikings -0.0060 -0.0410 -0.0195 -0.0136 -0.0118 0.0039 0.0079 -0.0505
Falcons -0.0028 0.0330 -0.0604 -0.0078 -0.0020 0.0076 -0.0350 0.0059
Panthers -0.0157 -0.0486 0.0058 -0.0447 -0.0273 0.0214 -0.0037 0.0391
Saints 0.0001 0.0000 -0.0352 0.0134 -0.0311 -0.0215 -0.0039 -0.0641
Buccaneers -0.0095 0.0058 -0.0295 -0.0447 -0.0120 -0.0292 -0.0175 0.0446
Cardinals -0.0060 0.0349 -0.0431 0.0018 -0.0178 -0.0664 -0.0117 -0.0507
Rams 0.0058 -0.0583 -0.0117 -0.0197 -0.0156 0.0016 0.0211 0.0054
49ers 0.0079 0.0097 -0.0238 0.0310 -0.0059 -0.0412 -0.0548 -0.0234
Seahawks 0.0038 -0.0311 -0.0527 -0.0602 -0.0253 -0.0819 -0.0100 -0.0295ERIG20, your local draftnik
Signature currently under construction
Bookmarks