NFL Week 4

[Banedon]

Asks Gruden: "What do you say to all the Packer fans? They gotta be confused."

 

Said Favre in the version that aired Sunday morning: "It was 16 great years. I hope they enjoyed it, they appreciated . . . that run as much as I did. You can't take that away. You just have to let it go and just move on."

 

In the late Sunday/early Monday version, the "and just move on" language was omitted.

[dew1679666265]

The upward trend continues for Matthew Stafford.

 

@ NO: 42.3 comp % - 0:3 TD:INT - 27.4 rating

v MIN: 60.0 comp % - 1:2 TD:INT - 56.5 rating

v WAS: 58.3 comp % - 1:0 TD:INT - 87.8 rating

@ CHI: 66.7 comp % - 1:1 TD:INT - 89.6 rating

 

Still not necessarily predictive of anything, but a slight upward trend of any sort is a good one.

[Banedon]

The upward trend continues for Matthew Stafford.

 

@ NO: 42.3 comp % - 0:3 TD:INT - 27.4 rating

v MIN: 60.0 comp % - 1:2 TD:INT - 56.5 rating

v WAS: 58.3 comp % - 1:0 TD:INT - 87.8 rating

@ CHI: 66.7 comp % - 1:1 TD:INT - 89.6 rating

 

Still not necessarily predictive of anything, but a slight upward trend of any sort is a good one.

 

Having actually watched him play for an antire game, I'll agree he's likely the real deal, though still young and mistake prone. The Lions have a good one. That first half he carved us up.

[Soul]

Some reports say his knee was dislocated on the Ogun play. He probably won't play next week, so we'll have to wait to see if the trend continues.

 

He seems to move better in the pocket than I expected, and he can definitely make all the throws.

[Banedon]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

[bukie]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

My thoughts on the Broncos: If the defense is going to be that good, they don't need much from Orton to win (see: the Bears past 3-4 years). However, there is no scenario in which they are a better team because of the QB change.

[Banedon]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

My thoughts on the Broncos: If the defense is going to be that good, they don't need much from Orton to win (see: the Bears past 3-4 years). However, there is no scenario in which they are a better team because of the QB change.

 

Well they've had 3 cupcake teams, and then the Cowboys. They have a brutal 4 game schedule coming up. If they win 1 or 2 of the next 4, then they can brag.

[dew1679666265]

The upward trend continues for Matthew Stafford.

 

@ NO: 42.3 comp % - 0:3 TD:INT - 27.4 rating

v MIN: 60.0 comp % - 1:2 TD:INT - 56.5 rating

v WAS: 58.3 comp % - 1:0 TD:INT - 87.8 rating

@ CHI: 66.7 comp % - 1:1 TD:INT - 89.6 rating

 

Still not necessarily predictive of anything, but a slight upward trend of any sort is a good one.

 

Having actually watched him play for an antire game, I'll agree he's likely the real deal, though still young and mistake prone. The Lions have a good one. That first half he carved us up.

 

Yeah, he's incredibly talented but very, very raw. That's partly why I'm looking at any kind of upward trend as a positive. I figured he'd struggle more than Mark Sanchez early on (Sanchez is more polished), but I think Stafford has more upside.

[dew1679666265]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

My thoughts on the Broncos: If the defense is going to be that good, they don't need much from Orton to win (see: the Bears past 3-4 years). However, there is no scenario in which they are a better team because of the QB change.

 

Well they've had 3 cupcake teams, and then the Cowboys. They have a brutal 4 game schedule coming up. If they win 1 or 2 of the next 4, then they can brag.

 

The Bengals aren't a cupcake team. The Broncos may or may not be the real deal, but they've had two very legit wins now (Dallas and Cincy).

[dew1679666265]

Some reports say his knee was dislocated on the Ogun play. He probably won't play next week, so we'll have to wait to see if the trend continues.

 

He seems to move better in the pocket than I expected, and he can definitely make all the throws.

 

I knew he hurt his knee, but wasn't sure how serious it was. If there's anything wrong with it, the best thing to do would probably be to sit him out.

[Soul]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

My thoughts on the Broncos: If the defense is going to be that good, they don't need much from Orton to win (see: the Bears past 3-4 years). However, there is no scenario in which they are a better team because of the QB change.

 

Well they've had 3 cupcake teams, and then the Cowboys. They have a brutal 4 game schedule coming up. If they win 1 or 2 of the next 4, then they can brag.

 

The Bengals aren't a cupcake team. The Broncos may or may not be the real deal, but they've had two very legit wins now (Dallas and Cincy).

 

Come on though. I'm not a big believer in luck, but 99/100 Denver loses that Cincy game. I'm very hesitant to call that a "legit win," they looked pretty bad most of the game and snatched the victory on one nearly impossible play.

[dew1679666265]

Oh boy...Peter King has bought into the Broncos.

My thoughts on the Broncos: If the defense is going to be that good, they don't need much from Orton to win (see: the Bears past 3-4 years). However, there is no scenario in which they are a better team because of the QB change.

 

Well they've had 3 cupcake teams, and then the Cowboys. They have a brutal 4 game schedule coming up. If they win 1 or 2 of the next 4, then they can brag.

 

The Bengals aren't a cupcake team. The Broncos may or may not be the real deal, but they've had two very legit wins now (Dallas and Cincy).

 

Come on though. I'm not a big believer in luck, but 99/100 Denver loses that Cincy game. I'm very hesitant to call that a "legit win," they looked pretty bad most of the game and snatched the victory on one nearly impossible play.

 

Good point. It was a fluke win over a legit team is how I should have phrased it.

[Soul]

I won't try to take away what they've accomplished though. Especially yesterday -- that was a great win. And 3-1 would still have been much better than expected given the offseason.

 

I guess it's just another example of why offseason drama and preseason just isn't all that good of an indicator of what will happen when the regular season starts.

[dew1679666265]

I won't try to take away what they've accomplished though. Especially yesterday -- that was a great win. And 3-1 would still have been much better than expected given the offseason.

 

I guess it's just another example of why offseason drama and preseason just isn't all that good of an indicator of what will happen when the regular season starts.

 

I think it's also a sign that even in the NFL, good coaching can make a difference. McDaniels, it appears, is a really good coach and he's surrounded himself with some very good coaches as well.

[Banedon]

I'm still a Bengals skeptic.

[TruffleShuffle]

i know the 49ers have become pretty good, but man the rams [expletive] suck.

[dew1679666265]

I'm still a Bengals skeptic.

 

I don't know how good they are exactly, but consider last year's team was without Carson Palmer, no running game (til late when Benson came on), an uninspired Ochocinco and a rash of LB injuries.

 

Now, Carson is healthy, Benson has given them a solid ground game, the linebackers are healthy and Ocho is playing hard again. They're a pretty good team.

[Flames24Rulz]

Asks Gruden: "What do you say to all the Packer fans? They gotta be confused."

 

Said Favre in the version that aired Sunday morning: "It was 16 great years. I hope they enjoyed it, they appreciated . . . that run as much as I did. You can't take that away. You just have to let it go and just move on."

 

In the late Sunday/early Monday version, the "and just move on" language was omitted.

 

Pretty unethical move by ESPN, but what else is new? They have to protect their guy.

[Derwood]

so where's the parity this year? After 4 weeks, there are five 0-4 teams, and, after tonight, potentially five 4-0 teams.

[Soul]

Asks Gruden: "What do you say to all the Packer fans? They gotta be confused."

 

Said Favre in the version that aired Sunday morning: "It was 16 great years. I hope they enjoyed it, they appreciated . . . that run as much as I did. You can't take that away. You just have to let it go and just move on."

 

In the late Sunday/early Monday version, the "and just move on" language was omitted.

 

Pretty unethical move by ESPN, but what else is new? They have to protect their guy.

 

It's not like Packer fans aren't going to know what he said anyway. If they were trying to fool someone, cutting it out for Sunday evening wasn't going to be very effective.

[bukie]

so where's the parity this year? After 4 weeks, there are five 0-4 teams, and, after tonight, potentially five 4-0 teams.

There's never really been parity in the NFL. Every year there's at least one team that wins 75% of their games and at least one team that loses 75% of their games. There's less parity in the NFL than any other sport.

 

There are, however (assuming Minnesota wins), six 3-1 teams, two 2-1 teams, seven 2-2 teams, a 1-2 team, five 1-3 teams and an 0-3 team. So, really, 4 games into the season the distribution is pretty standard.

[Derwood]

so where's the parity this year? After 4 weeks, there are five 0-4 teams, and, after tonight, potentially five 4-0 teams.

There's never really been parity in the NFL. Every year there's at least one team that wins 75% of their games and at least one team that loses 75% of their games. There's less parity in the NFL than any other sport.

 

There are, however (assuming Minnesota wins), six 3-1 teams, two 2-1 teams, seven 2-2 teams, a 1-2 team, five 1-3 teams and an 0-3 team. So, really, 4 games into the season the distribution is pretty standard.

 

I guess. I just don't remember the last time 1/3 of the league was either 4-0 or 0-4 after four weeks

[jersey cubs fan]

so where's the parity this year? After 4 weeks, there are five 0-4 teams, and, after tonight, potentially five 4-0 teams.

There's never really been parity in the NFL. Every year there's at least one team that wins 75% of their games and at least one team that loses 75% of their games. There's less parity in the NFL than any other sport.

 

There are, however (assuming Minnesota wins), six 3-1 teams, two 2-1 teams, seven 2-2 teams, a 1-2 team, five 1-3 teams and an 0-3 team. So, really, 4 games into the season the distribution is pretty standard.

 

Yeah, the parity talk was always overstated. Everybody decided to pretend the NFL was nothing but 7, 8 or 9 win teams for some reason, but every year there are multiple great teams and horrible teams. What the NFL does offer is a chance for a team to go from worst to first quickly.

[Guest]

The Brandon Marshall touchdown against Dallas was no more a product of Orton's throw than the one where they beat the Bengals earlier in the season on a tipped pass. Marshall gets the entire credit for that touchdown, from the catch of what appeared to be a horribly thrown ball to the run after the catch all the way into the endzone.

[Soul]

so where's the parity this year? After 4 weeks, there are five 0-4 teams, and, after tonight, potentially five 4-0 teams.

There's never really been parity in the NFL. Every year there's at least one team that wins 75% of their games and at least one team that loses 75% of their games. There's less parity in the NFL than any other sport.

 

There are, however (assuming Minnesota wins), six 3-1 teams, two 2-1 teams, seven 2-2 teams, a 1-2 team, five 1-3 teams and an 0-3 team. So, really, 4 games into the season the distribution is pretty standard.

 

I guess. I just don't remember the last time 1/3 of the league was either 4-0 or 0-4 after four weeks

 

Slightly abnormal, but probably just an anomaly.