CubbieBum

Or maybe those defenses are ranked No. 23 and No. 26 because they had to face Peyton Manning in one of the two games they've played so far. In Jacksonville's case, they also had to face Arizona, which is a good passing offense as well. And Matt Ryan's no slouch at QB either. It's not like JaMarcus Russell went and tore up Miami/Jacksonville for a 21-30, 275 yds, 2 TD line. Why are you using rankings after two games? Do you put stock in a baseball player's stats after 20 games? Of course not. Hey look, Denver's allowed 13 points in two games so they must be the best defense of all time! No, I put stock in the fact that Jacksonville and Miami were ranked 24th and 25th last year and this year have only backed up those rankings.

Albert Haynesworth is a fantastic defensive lineman, but there's so much talent along the line other than him. The line has proven it can get pressure without Albert and the secondary has proven it can cover with the best of them without him. Albert was a massive force, but he never started more than 14 games in a year and he sat out quite a few snaps in those games he played. This current secondary has been together since 2007. In those years, the defense has ranked 8th and 2nd in points allowed. The year before the main four (Harper, Finnegan, Hope and Griffin), the Titans ranked 31st in points allowed - with Albert on the team. And for what it's worth, I haven't seen an analysis yet that doesn't have the Titans' secondary in the top 5-10 (at worst) of NFL secondaries. Usually they're top 1-5. Yeah yeah yeah I hear all about the Titans every day from my brother. However he said even before the season that the Titans secondary isn't as good as its reputation. He said they have benefited from a great front seven for years and thus got overrated, now without as good of a front seven they will not do nearly as well.

If no one else will take control of coordinating on the Premier League forum I will.

They are still a good team but not the team of last year. Even my brother who is a huge Titans fan admits that. The secondary is awful and by awful I mean worst in the league so far. They could win 10-11 games at best unless the secondary gets sorted out they start getting a push up the middle. That would be down from last year. It's easily one of the most talented secondaries in the game today. The secondary has been bad since the fourth quarter of the Pittsburgh game, but a lot of that has been blown coverages - likely due to adjustments to the new scheme. I'll be utterly shocked if the secondary doesn't improve significantly. Like I said before, we won't win 13 games this year, but we were extremely unlikely to match that again this year. I've thought since before the year started that we were likely a 10-11 win team this year. We can still reach that, even after the 0-2 start. I'm sorry but Nick Harper, Cortland Finnegan, Chris Hope and Michael Griffin do not equal one of the best secondaries in the game. They aren't as bad as they have played but they aren't top 10 either. They have benefited from a defensive line that has been great against the run and capable of getting pressure on the QB while only rushing four. They are likely somewhere between 10-20 and now that they have to step up this year because of the d-line not being as good we'll see if where they fall.

They are still a good team but not the team of last year. Even my brother who is a huge Titans fan admits that. The secondary is awful and by awful I mean worst in the league so far. They could win 10-11 games at best unless the secondary gets sorted out they start getting a push up the middle. That would be down from last year.

I loved Marvin, but he was not a leader whatsoever. Even people who had been with him for 10 years had no idea who he was. He did his job and went home and didn't really ever talk to anybody. The only benefit young receivers might have gotten from him is being able to watch him on the practice field, but Harrison was certainly not taking anybody under his wing. They went back to the tape last year and it just isn't true. Harrison was mostly getting single covered last year and Wayne was getting the doubleteams. That must be quite a small sample size for the Colts supposed red zone problems because they've had an issue in exactly 1 possession so far . The first game they had 2 possessions in the red zone. One resulted in an INT (Peyton made a bad decision when he had Clark wide open) and the other one was a rushing TD. Last game the Colts had 1 red zone opportunity and had a 15 yard rushing TD. And btw, the passing game is doing just fine. Peyton is averaging over 300 yards a game and has 3 TD passes of 35 yards or more. He also has completed 68.9% of his passes which is the highest number of his career. His yards/attempt is the highest of his career, and his INT percentage is down. His QB rating is the 2nd highest of his career so far. There's speculation that the Colts passing game will suffer in the future. But so far, that hasn't been the case whatsoever. And this isn't the first time that something has been said will derail the Colts passing game and it just doesn't happen. I have no idea where you are getting that the passing game has actually been any worse so far this year though. The Colts have played the 23rd and 26th ranked passing defenses so far. That skews the stats quite a bit. Peyton does indeed have TD's of 35+ yards. He also has 0 besides those. Last year by my count 17 of his 27 TD passes were 10 yards or shorter and another four came from inside the redzone. The Colts have always been able to get into the redzone and still find the gaps and passing lanes for TD's. A lot of that is Peyton and a lot of it was being able to spread out the defense with an abundance of good receivers. From what I have seen out of the receivers they aren't good enough to beat the good teams and get open in the redzone. That could change because they are young and inexperienced but right now they haven't shown, at least to my observation, that they are good enough to be counted on in the tough situations.

A player is more than just the stats he put up. Harrison had been on the Colts as long as anyone. I would assume he had some kind of leadership role especially with the receiving core. Also while he didn't have great stats the last couple years he was still focused on by defenses and opposing teams still worried about him dominating them. He is a bigger loss then you seem willing to admit. Its a small sample size obviously but from what I've seen the Colts passing game hasn't gotten in the endzone a whole lot because once they get into the redzone Peyton doesn't have a arsenal of targets like he has always had. He has Wayne and Clark. Everyone knows those are the only two reliable targets in the redzone and the two Peyton is going to want to get it to the most. The run game should be better but the Colts live off of the passing game. So the way I look at it is the Colts passing game won't be as good and the defense is as bad as ever = a worse Colts team. Then again Jax and Tennessee don't look as good so the Colts might benefit from that. They also get to play the NFC West.

Not being able to get off the field defensively against Miami shows how bad the defense is. The offense scored but Miami was 25th in pass defense last year and 23rd so far this year so it was a team they could score quick on. What happens when they play top teams who can actually stop the pass? It was one game against an anomalous offensive scheme -- one that perplexed an 11-win Patriot team last year to the tune of 38-13 in Foxboro. The Colts have always had issues against great running teams. They can't stop the run especially without Sanders.

If you do so you should in turn insist that he take down his Aaron Rodgers avatar. :twisted: Actually his sig does make my pages load slowly when using wifi. Although I have to admit, it would be more enjoyable if it was something like Ted Lilly plowing Yadier Molina. Or, of course, if it was a montage of Jay Cutler throwing to Packer defenders, or Greg Jennings... Oh, you get the picture. I use Wifi and have no issues.

Not being able to get off the field defensively against Miami shows how bad the defense is. The offense scored but Miami was 25th in pass defense last year and 23rd so far this year so it was a team they could score quick on. What happens when they play top teams who can actually stop the pass?

Why not? He can play the OF. He just doesn't play it very well.

Haha. Yeah, let's just start the playoffs now. We've seen everything we need to know. Yeah because that is what I was suggesting.

They went 10-6 last year and if Brett Favre can pass against a good defense like the 49ers it means they are quite a bit better than last year's team because the offense isn't one dimensional. Considering the team with the best record from last year is 0-2, the Superbowl champ is 1-1, the Colts don't look as good as last yearand have lost some key players and the Patriots are 1-1 they might be the top team. It would be between Minnesota, Giants, Atlanta, Jets and Baltimore. This week the Giants are on the road, Jets play Tennessee and Atlanta is at New England. The only one who has a true easy win is Baltimore but even they play a rival in Cleveland. Why are you ignoring the Broncos? They beat two teams of the same quality (or better) than the Vikings did. More seriously, why are you ignoring New Orleans? They've been the most impressive NFC team so far if you ask me. I'd also like to add to this vis-a-vis the Colts. Last year at this time, the Colts were 1-1 with a home loss to the Bears and a road win over the Vikings in which they rallied from a 15-0 third quarter deficit. So far, the Colts look better than last year (and I think that will continue, though who knows what that means record-wise). Second, the "key players" they've lost are: Marvin Harrison, end of list. Now, Harrison is one of the greatest receivers of all time, and one of my favorite players of all time. However, he's unfortunately been a cipher since 2006. The past two seasons he combined for 80 catches and six touchdowns while playing only 20 games due to injury (for comparison's sake, that's worse than every season of his since Manning's rookie year). Love him, but he was no longer a key player -- see his current unsigned status. Anthony Gonzalez is currently hurt, and if he can't come back to near full strength, that would likely be a devastating injury to a key player. And, obviously, I'm not exactly ready to dismiss teams like the Steelers, Patriots, Titans, etc. For what it's worth, Baltimore has probably been the most impressive team so far to me. The Colts were a better team last year. The Colts struggled to start last year but that was mainly because Peyton was getting his timing down. Right now they have no Marvin and Gonzalez is hurt with no guarantee of being what some think he could be. They have Wayne and Clark, which is much better than most teams but not as good as what it has been. The defense is the same crap defense, plus Sanders is hurt, and the offense isn't as good.

I've enjoyed most games from the comfort of my home or at the sports bar or at a friend's house. The ball park doesn't mean a whole lot to me, personally. I won't take away it's place or its rightful spot in history. I've enjoyed being a Cub fan without going to Wrigley much... not because I don't want to go there, just because I haven't gone to a whole lot of ball games in my life. Now that I'm out of college and working full-time, I can afford to go to a couple of games a year and don't mind taking the Red Line to get down there. Growing up, my parents never wanted to take me there because of the traffic and parking situation. Its not the not going to Wrigley its the not associating it much with the Cubs. I've been to Wrigley all of 5 times but Wrigley is the Cubs to me and visa versa.

As a 49er fan you're welcome.

How much is toll troll? Don't associate Wrigley with the team because you haven't been to Wrigley much??? Wrigley is as much a part of the Cubs as anything and its impossible to not associate it a lot with the Cubs. Fans and foes alike associate Wrigley with the Cubs.

They went 10-6 last year and if Brett Favre can pass against a good defense like the 49ers it means they are quite a bit better than last year's team because the offense isn't one dimensional. Considering the team with the best record from last year is 0-2, the Superbowl champ is 1-1, the Colts don't look as good as last year and have lost some key players and the Patriots are 1-1 they might be the top team. It would be between Minnesota, Giants, Atlanta, Jets and Baltimore. This week the Giants are on the road, Jets play Tennessee and Atlanta is at New England. The only one who has a true easy win is Baltimore but even they play a rival in Cleveland.

1) It's about 1,000 times different with a running back than a QB. 2) What you described is pretty much just man coverage with a MLB. It's not anything radical but there's no way they play man all day and if they just keep him assigned to Adrian it opens up a large hole in the middle for the passing game. It is an interesting game though. Of course it is different than a running QB but it is still the most effective way to limit AP. Willis is one of the few if not the only defensive player with the speed, power and skill to take on AP by himself consistently. Also Spikes is more than capable of playing zone over the middle. We run a 3-4 so Willis isn't the only guy in the middle.

Favre for the Favre reasons and Hill for the proving himself reasons. He's 9-3 as a starter but has gotten very little credit. Beat Minnesota on the road and he will get a lot more credit and the Hill beating Favre will likely be talked about along with it. It's not the most intriguing aspect to the game by a long shot but it is something to watch for.

In what universe does beating the San Francisco 49'ers the leagues top team? It's not just the 49ers ... obviously. Minnesota were a highly touted team coming into the season. If Favre can move the ball against a defense Warner couldn't then it would make a strong case for Minnesota being the best team. They have a very good defense and perhaps the best offensive player. Add to that a passing game that can actually move the ball against good defenses and you yeah I would say that makes the case for them being perhaps the best team.

Yeaaaa let's baby pitchers more. Pitchers can't pitch a lot because they aren't used a lot. Pitchers used to be able to go a lot more innings because they always pitched a lot of innings and their arms thus built the durability for it over time. Pitchers can't pitch nearly as much nowadays because they are babied due to fear of injury. If he is healthy let him pitch. If his arm is feeling tired then pull him.

Man this 49ers vs Minnesota has so many things that make it intriguing. AP vs. Gore. AP vs. Patrick Willis. Brett Favre vs. Shaun Hill. If 49ers win they are for real. If Minnesota wins they could be the leagues top team. I really want to watch this game just to see Willis and AP go at it. If I was the 49ers I would do what Tampa did to stop Vick. Give Willis the AP assignment. He follows him everywhere. He covers him on pass routes, lines up to stop him on running plays and if AP stays in to block then Willis blitzes or plays an underneath zone.

I enjoy them.

I forgot about Stenerud and Blanda. If you support them being in, though, I think you have to support Vinatieri - if for no other reason than great consistency. Vinatieri is 15th all-time in field goal % and has been kicking longer than any other kicker ahead of him other than Jason Hanson, Matt Stover and John Carney - three kickers I'd argue could also eventually be in. Stenerud had a career FG% of 66.8% and Blanda had a career FG% of 52.4%. Vinatieri is .1% behind Blanda in extra point % and a few percentage points ahead of Stenerud. He's also 15th all-time in points scored - with mostly guys I'd have in consideration for the hall of fame ahead of him (including Blanda and Stenerud). The Anderson's are the two that immediately jump to my mind.

Right, I'm just saying from a value standpoint he's the Jim Rice of kickers. Yep, I was just showing that kickers have made it in. Kicking could be the ultimate clutch position in sports. You are consistently called on to win the game with one kick and if you miss everyone blames you for the loss. Due to this a kicker who consistently makes game winning kicks, especially in the playoffs when the miss can end a season, should be strongly considered for the Hall of Fame (assuming he isn't terrible the rest of the time).