NFL WEEK 9

[Coffee Warlord]

They might not need to, considering the Bears can't stop the run.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

They might not need to, considering the Bears can't stop the run.

True.

Though I wonder how Lacy would feel if he had to carry the ball forty times tonight?

[BillJasper]

Made the mistake of letting Wallace throw the ball...

[Coffee Warlord]

This game is getting weird.

[Coffee Warlord]

Rogers officially out.

McCown looking damned impressive.

[cuervo72]

I bet ESPN is thrilled.

"Yes - GB vs CHI!!! Finally a good matchup!"

And you get...Seneca Wallace and Josh McCown.

[Lathum]

I wonder how many people like myself needed a decent game from Rodgers to win in fantasy.

[Lathum]

Should have challenged.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Arles

Actually, the Broncos beat Dallas on the road. If you think KC is better equipped to win right now than Denver, you should go to Vegas. I'm sure a ton of people would love to take your money. There's a reason Denver is 3-1 and KC is 12-1. KC isn't going to win anything in the playoffs with Alex Smith at QB. It's fine to put up 20ish points against teams with QBs named Tuel, Fitzpatrick, Campbell, Pryor and Keenum. But when you face Peyton, Andrew Luck and Brady - you will need more than the 300 yards of total offense KC has been averaging.

Funny you should bring this up. I took a flyer on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl while in Vegas this summer. Made a $50 bet on them at 100-1 odds. I'm not counting my money by any means, but I'm pretty happy with my flyer right now.

[Coffee Warlord]

Dunno why the Packers are even bothering with throwing it. Bears can stack 8-9 in the box and still not stop them.

[Atocep]

If this were a Lovie coached game with McCown and Wallace at QB the score would be 6-3 with about 150 total yards between the two teams. Bears fans would be hoping the defense can score some points while Packers fans would be waiting on the bears offense to screw up.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by TroyF

We have went through this before, and To me, the thing that separates Denver from KC is when the games are over.

You're right. We have been through this before. Denver against the three best teams they played last year including by your logic, when the game was over...

Atlanta 27-7 with 7 minutes left in 3rd quarter
Houston 31-11 with 2 minutes left in 3rd quarter
New England 31-7 with 5 minutes left in 3rd quarter

Against the best (and really only good) team they played this year...

Indy 36-17 with 13 minutes in 4th quarter (Win probability of 99.8%, going further back they had a win probability of 98.9% with 5 minutes left in the 3rd quarter despite how close Denver tried to make it late in the game)

So I think it's fair to say that Peyton Manning has proven that he can pick apart teams when they sit back in zone defense protecting large leads. But I don't think we can say that Denver has proven anymore the past two seasons than Kansas City has (or hasn't) this season.

And as easy as it is to say "call me when someone holds Denver's offense to less than 33 points", the same could just as easily be said when someone scores more than 17 points against the Chiefs defense. And while Denver has twice allowed more than 33 points, the Chiefs have never scored less than 17. It's quite likely that both of these will give at some point in the next few weeks.

I'm sorry, but smoke and mirrors alone doesn't get you to 9-0. They've only been involved in three one score games. Their ratio of fumble recoveries is a bit high around 66% instead of closer to 50%. But if you reference games being over early, if you check their win probability, it has usually been up above 85% before the 4th quarter in most games. More often than not, they are guilty of letting teams back into games, likely due to their slightly below average offense. Is that likely to come back and haunt them at some point? Yes.

With all of that said, I do think that Denver is the better team on paper, although as highlighted, I don't think they have proven any more on the field than Kansas City has. And after the struggles of the Saints this past week and the Seahawks the past few weeks, Denver likely vaults to or near the top of my Super Bowl favorites again, although that's as much of a product of being in the AFC and having to face only one of New Orleans, Seattle, San Francisco or Green Bay (with a healthy Rodgers) in the playoffs. I think even Detroit or particularly Carolina would be very bad match-ups for them as well. I would feel comfortable putting money on any of those six teams (okay, maybe not Detroit) in a five game series against Denver on a neutral field. But alas, the AFC provides a much easier path and while those other teams beat each other up, Denver should sail into the Super Bowl with a great chance to win it. Unfortunately for them, unlike most years where the game is at a tropical locale, this year's game should take place in cool temperatures and Manning is 0-4 in playoff games played below 40 degrees with 4 touchdowns to 9 interceptions in those games. So I don't know.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

Now Green Bay finds out how lucky they've been at the QB position over the last two decades.

Basically how I feel. Oh no, Packer fans have to watch ONE GAME with bad QB play.

[mckerney]

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel this Saturday.

Bob McGinn - Packers could win without Aaron Rodgers

They've never had to make do without possibly the finest player in the league. Losing Rodgers to major injury would be the nightmare of all nightmares. He makes everyone's job easier.

Yet, no organization would be better equipped to handle it than Green Bay.

Fools will cry that I'm jinxing Rodgers and the Packers by writing about this.

[hoopsguy]

Marion Barber would have gone out of bounds there.

[Danny]

Lacy is pretty beastly

[Arles]

That was pretty awful. Packers can handle losing both tackles, their best defensive player, 2 of their top 3 receivers, their TE and even 4 of their top 5 LBs. But, losing Rodgers was too much. Hopefully, he's not hurt too bad, but this Packer team is a wreck and I think it's time to start thinking about next year.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Funny you should bring this up. I took a flyer on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl while in Vegas this summer. Made a $50 bet on them at 100-1 odds. I'm not counting my money by any means, but I'm pretty happy with my flyer right now.

100-1 odds is nice. I'd call and see if they'd give you 20-1 cash right now. Because in 3-4 weeks, I think the fairy tale will be over.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Arles

That was pretty awful. Packers can handle losing both tackles, their best defensive player, 2 of their top 3 receivers, their TE and even 4 of their top 5 LBs. But, losing Rodgers was too much. Hopefully, he's not hurt too bad, but this Packer team is a wreck and I think it's time to start thinking about next year.

What a tough situation. With Lacy and the offensive line playing so well it was only a matter of time before that offense was unstoppable.

I would speculate its a broken collarbone and will be 4-6 weeks before he comes back. I think if it wasnt a broken bone he would have been back out there.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

What a tough situation. With Lacy and the offensive line playing so well it was only a matter of time before that offense was unstoppable.

I would speculate its a broken collarbone and will be 4-6 weeks before he comes back. I think if it wasnt a broken bone he would have been back out there.

Its funny, I told my buddy I thought it was a collarbone when it happened. As many have said, GB has been fortunate but this may be the season the injuries finally overtake them. With no Rodgers for a month+, they will be lucky to win 9 games. Maybe it's finally the Lions year - the Bears looked awful and I can't see them winning much.

[jbergey22]

I cant believe how much better Lacy looks as a NFL player than Richardson does. Would have never guessed it. I figured Lacy for a hammer it down your throat guy and picking up the tough yards but the speed he shows on the field has been surprising. His 40 times were pretty average. Must be one of them guys that plays faster on the field.

[Danny]

The Bus V2

[fantom1979]

Put together a spreadsheet of the last 23 teams that have lead the league in PPG allowed. My conclusion is that anything can happen in the playoffs. Also, I wonder if the Chiefs will be able to finish on top of PPG allowed with their remaining schedule. The Panthers are on their heals, but they still have to face Brees twice and Brady.

Clipboard01.jpg

[jbergey22]

On a side note I wonder when some of these NFL players will figure out it is not 1970 anymore and they cant act like it is anymore?

Ya, maybe the illegal hits have gone too far. Ya, maybe you should be able to allowed to motivate your teammates in a way the public may not approve of. But in working for a business(NFL) you are still required to follow their rules which are usually the influence of society. These players just act like complete morons when they refuse to follow rules and pay thousands dollar fines each week.

I probably shouldnt lump this psycho Incogito in with the rest of them but for some reason I think this just follows the same type of attitude a lot of them have. We could do that in 1970 so I am going to do it now. Clearly the NFL doesnt want more lawsuits down the road and the fans have chosen to prefer offense to defense so these players just need to get over it and move on to the present.

When they feel the need to take shots at players heads they should think of Muhammed Ali or talk with Corey Koskie and think of if they would want to end up like that down the road.

Vent over.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Put together a spreadsheet of the last 23 teams that have lead the league in PPG allowed. My conclusion is that anything can happen in the playoffs. Also, I wonder if the Chiefs will be able to finish on top of PPG allowed with their remaining schedule. The Panthers are on their heals, but they still have to face Brees twice and Brady.

Attachment 4863

Could you do one with the offensive PPG? Id be curious if that looked very similar.

I know the 98 Vikings would be on that list w/o a super bowl ring along with 07 Pats.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by Arles

Its funny, I told my buddy I thought it was a collarbone when it happened. As many have said, GB has been fortunate but this may be the season the injuries finally overtake them. With no Rodgers for a month+, they will be lucky to win 9 games. Maybe it's finally the Lions year - the Bears looked awful and I can't see them winning much.

Lions remaining schedule:
@Chicago
@Pittsburgh
Tampa
Green Bay
@Philly
Baltimore
NY Giants
@Minnesota

I could see them winning 6 of those games, but knowing the Lions they will somehow figure out a way to lose 6 of them.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Could you do one with the offensive PPG? Id be curious if that looked very similar.

I know the 98 Vikings would be on that list w/o a super bowl ring along with 07 Pats.

Clipboard02.jpg

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

Attachment 4864

Thank You!

That is interesting. Each of them have 6 Super Bowl Wins. Maybe the biggest surprise was seeing 2 of the "highest scoring teams" not even make the playoffs.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

You're right. We have been through this before. Denver against the three best teams they played last year including by your logic, when the game was over...

Atlanta 27-7 with 7 minutes left in 3rd quarter
Houston 31-11 with 2 minutes left in 3rd quarter
New England 31-7 with 5 minutes left in 3rd quarter

Against the best (and really only good) team they played this year...

Indy 36-17 with 13 minutes in 4th quarter (Win probability of 99.8%, going further back they had a win probability of 98.9% with 5 minutes left in the 3rd quarter despite how close Denver tried to make it late in the game)

So I think it's fair to say that Peyton Manning has proven that he can pick apart teams when they sit back in zone defense protecting large leads. But I don't think we can say that Denver has proven anymore the past two seasons than Kansas City has (or hasn't) this season.

And as easy as it is to say "call me when someone holds Denver's offense to less than 33 points", the same could just as easily be said when someone scores more than 17 points against the Chiefs defense. And while Denver has twice allowed more than 33 points, the Chiefs have never scored less than 17. It's quite likely that both of these will give at some point in the next few weeks.

I'm sorry, but smoke and mirrors alone doesn't get you to 9-0. They've only been involved in three one score games. Their ratio of fumble recoveries is a bit high around 66% instead of closer to 50%. But if you reference games being over early, if you check their win probability, it has usually been up above 85% before the 4th quarter in most games. More often than not, they are guilty of letting teams back into games, likely due to their slightly below average offense. Is that likely to come back and haunt them at some point? Yes.

With all of that said, I do think that Denver is the better team on paper, although as highlighted, I don't think they have proven any more on the field than Kansas City has. And after the struggles of the Saints this past week and the Seahawks the past few weeks, Denver likely vaults to or near the top of my Super Bowl favorites again, although that's as much of a product of being in the AFC and having to face only one of New Orleans, Seattle, San Francisco or Green Bay (with a healthy Rodgers) in the playoffs. I think even Detroit or particularly Carolina would be very bad match-ups for them as well. I would feel comfortable putting money on any of those six teams (okay, maybe not Detroit) in a five game series against Denver on a neutral field. But alas, the AFC provides a much easier path and while those other teams beat each other up, Denver should sail into the Super Bowl with a great chance to win it. Unfortunately for them, unlike most years where the game is at a tropical locale, this year's game should take place in cool temperatures and Manning is 0-4 in playoff games played below 40 degrees with 4 touchdowns to 9 interceptions in those games. So I don't know.

What's funny is Denver was in EVERY one of those games with a chance to win with under 5 minutes left. Key turnovers hurt them. Beyond that, I notice you say the three best teams Denver played last year were those three. I notice you forget the POUNDED the eventual Super Bowl Champions in Baltimore in a game they led 31 to 3 at the end of the third quarter.

The first three games all happened at the beginning of the year.

But why the hell are we talking about this anyway? This Denver team is a far different one than the Broncos team of last year. There are 6 different starters on offense. That Denver team averaged 30 points a game and just under 400 yards. This Denver team is averaging 42 and 466.

No matter how likely the Colts were to win the game, Denver dominated the final quarter even without their starting two tackles and were in a good position to win the game. It was a game Denver had 100 more yards than the Colts, more first downs, and over a yard more per play. They also had 12 penalties for over 100 yards and 3 turnovers all in horrible spots. (2 were within 20 yards of their own goal line, 1 was on the Colts 2 as they were driving in for a score)

Look, the Colts won the damned game and they did it fair and square. I'm not making excuses for the loss, just pointing out there were mitigating factors and despite all of them, they were in position to win the football game. I still think Denver's biggest rival in the AFC west in San Diego. I fully expect SD and Denver to take a minimum of 3 out of 4 games from the Chiefs and I expect them to take all 4. The Chargers, unlike the Chiefs can put up 30 or more points against the Broncos. A few turnovers and who knows.

That said, as of now, I still fully expect Denver to win the AFC West and head into the playoffs with the one or two seed. They could be beat by any team, but I would rank the Chiefs virtually dead last of playoff teams I would expect them to lose to. (NE, Cincy, Indy all have a MUCH better chance)

I don't think Denver is a Super Bowl lock. I also think they are far better than you are giving them credit for being. I think they are a superior team to KC.

[jbergey22]

The reaction the poor Chiefs get. A good running game and a good defense is no longer considered the secret to success in the NFL.

I think people think that Alex Smith cant win a shootout which is probably the case. The thing about Alex Smith is he knows how to control the ball and limit turnovers. By his team controlling the ball like they do they would be able to limit the Broncos possessions which in turn would make the turnover battle that much more important.

In Kansas City I wouldnt count out the Chiefs in that type of game.

I dont think too many would argue that on paper the Broncos are the favorite. However as well have seen lately the favorite doesnt always win. On paper the Broncos should have a good defense, in reality teams are going through them like a hot knife on butter.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Thank You!

That is interesting. Each of them have 6 Super Bowl Wins. Maybe the biggest surprise was seeing 2 of the "highest scoring teams" not even make the playoffs.

That 2000 St. Louis team must have had some injuries on defense. They went from 4th to 31st to 7th in defense between 1999-2001.

I was also pretty interested in some teams that I didn't remember being as good as they were. I knew Seattle had made the superbowl a few years ago, but I had no clue they were the best offense in football that year.

I also had no clue the Colts had the best defense in 2007, also didn't remember Jacksonville being so good in the late 90's under Coughlin. I knew they were making the playoffs, but they went 36-12 from 1997-99.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

The reaction the poor Chiefs get. A good running game and a good defense is no longer considered the secret to success in the NFL.

I think people think that Alex Smith cant win a shootout which is probably the case. The thing about Alex Smith is he knows how to control the ball and limit turnovers. By his team controlling the ball like they do they would be able to limit the Broncos possessions which in turn would make the turnover battle that much more important.

In Kansas City I wouldnt count out the Chiefs in that type of game.

I dont think too many would argue that on paper the Broncos are the favorite. However as well have seen lately the favorite doesnt always win. On paper the Broncos should have a good defense, in reality teams are going through them like a hot knife on butter.

There have been plenty of teams that have had success with QBs that were worse than Alex Smith (Trent Dilfer, Rex Grossman, Jake Delhomme, and Mark Sanchez all come to mind). The defense and running game just need to be excellent. The Chiefs held two top ten scoring teams to 32 combined points. Denver will give them trouble, but Denver gives everyone trouble. I don't think Indy without Wayne or San Diego will bother the Chiefs anymore than Dallas or Philly did.

Would not be shocked if KC finished 14-2, and then anything can happen in the playoffs.

[Honolulu_Blue]

While I wish injury on no person, if Rodgers is injured I do hope he's out at least through Thanksgiving.

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by digamma

Yeah, Incognito didn't think anyone would be able to detect his identity.

This deserves love.

[ISiddiqui]

KC really reminds me of the 2000 Ravens in a lot of ways. I do think they get a piss poor reaction.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

That 2000 St. Louis team must have had some injuries on defense. They went from 4th to 31st to 7th in defense between 1999-2001.

I was also pretty interested in some teams that I didn't remember being as good as they were. I knew Seattle had made the superbowl a few years ago, but I had no clue they were the best offense in football that year.

I also had no clue the Colts had the best defense in 2007, also didn't remember Jacksonville being so good in the late 90's under Coughlin. I knew they were making the playoffs, but they went 36-12 from 1997-99.

From what I remember with the Rams post Super Bowl is they were in a lot of shootouts with that offense so they may give up 30 points but they would score 45. They also had Mike Martz taking over when Dick Vermeil retired after the Super Bowl win. I don't remember the specifics of their schedule but they were the best team in the football the previous year so my guess is that a 1st place schedule also factors in there a little bit.

Seattle's Super Bowl team was the height of Shaun Alexander's breakout so the offense was pretty potent and Jacksonville was pretty powerful with Fred Taylor and Brunell. Remember Marino's retirement party? I think they put up like 60 points on them in the playoffs?

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

KC really reminds me of the 2000 Ravens in a lot of ways. I do think they get a piss poor reaction.

I need to see them hold the Broncos in check before I start comparing them to the Ravens.

[cartman]

I hope Rodgers isn't out too long. My boss is a huge Packers fan, and we have a suite rented for Customer Appreciation Day when they come to play the Cowboys on Dec. 15th.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by cartman

I hope Rodgers isn't out too long. My boss is a huge Packers fan, and we have a suite rented for Customer Appreciation Day when they come to play the Cowboys on Dec. 15th.

Sounds like a small break in the collarbone for Rodgers. They are projecting he will be out 3 weeks.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Sounds like a small break in the collarbone for Rodgers. They are projecting he will be out 3 weeks.

Let's push it out to 4, just to be sure.

[Coffee Warlord]

Nah, put him in there against Suh, who can end his season.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

KC really reminds me of the 2000 Ravens in a lot of ways. I do think they get a piss poor reaction.

I think a better example might be the 1999 Jaguars, the 14-2 ones who were swept by the Titans in the year the Titans made it past the jags in the playoffs and went to the Bowl.

[BillJasper]

My memory is failing me a bit: has there ever been a 14-2 team that hasn't won their division? If the Chiefs were to lose twice to Denver they could very well be in that boat.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

My memory is failing me a bit: has there ever been a 14-2 team that hasn't won their division? If the Chiefs were to lose twice to Denver they could very well be in that boat.

No. Only one 14 win team didnt have the best record in their conference(1998 Falcons). A few teams finished 2nd in their division with 12 wins.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

No. Only one 14 win team didnt have the best record in their conference(1998 Falcons). A few teams finished 2nd in their division with 12 wins.

Thanks!

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

KC really reminds me of the 2000 Ravens in a lot of ways. I do think they get a piss poor reaction.

See, to me they don't resemble each other at all. The Ravens defense was dominant in every way. They were the top rushing defense in the league. Top yards against defense in the league. Them and the Titans of that year were close to 500 yards better than the next best defensive team in the league.

Their offense has been almost criminally underrated as time goes on. They had a horrible, horrible stretch to start the season. By the time they changed QB's, they were an above average offense. They averaged over 330 yards and 27 points a game in the final 7 games of that year. The league averages were 319 yards a game and 20 points. They were outgained 5 times in 16 games. At the end of the year, the Ravens had a league average offense statistically and that was WITH the horrible 5 game stretch. So you combined one of the top defenses of all time, which dominated the run and the pass AND added an above average offense to the mix? Simply put, they were better than people gave them credit for and while I despise the Ravens and Ray Lewis, I sure hope history treats them better than being compared to this years Chiefs team.

The Chiefs of this year are 8th in total defense, 3rd against the pass and 24th against the run. They are also tops in points allowed. Good defense.

On offense, they rank 25th. 29th in passing yards and 14th in rushing yards. They have been outgained 4 times in 9 weeks. (Denver has been outgained 1 time this year, by 5 yards in a game they were missing 5 defensive starters) In all, this Chiefs team is 9-0 and has been outgained on the season. The last time a team was outgained and still won the Super Bowl is the team I would compare the KC Chiefs to. The 2001 New England Patriots.

That was the team that won the tuck rule game, won three playoff games by a combined 13 points and won it all. Now, could that happen with the Chiefs this year? Maybe. But that NE team finished 6th in total points per game. Currently, the Chiefs sit at 16th.

Keep in mind, the Chiefs supporters and the people who think the Broncos are overrated keep parroting the schedule and how similar they are. That's fine. When one team is crushing their opponents, ending games by the early part of the fourth quarter and is still getting healthy while the other is getting outgained, winning games with 3 minutes to go and has been injury free. . . I don't think it's rocket science what the future is going to hold here. While both teams may be overrated, one is overrated and quite a bit lucky. The odds the Chiefs are the 2001 Patriots are somewhere south of 10% in my opinion.

If you have a different one, I'm ok with that, but I don't see where you are coming from.

(FWIW, I'm going through the same thing with the Avalanche this year. I'm excited at their start and obviously love how the season is playing out. I will be cheering and hoping as long as I can this continues. But cmon, it's not going to continue when they have the best save percentage in the NHL despite getting outshot on a per game basis. I hope they hang onto a playoff spot before the inevitable snap back to reality happens. They are having a special year. Assuming they stay hot and get in the playoffs, do I think they have a shot against San Jose, a team just like the Broncos who hasn't performed in the playoffs? Ummm, no, no chance in hell.)

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by TroyF

What's funny is Denver was in EVERY one of those games with a chance to win with under 5 minutes left. Key turnovers hurt them. Beyond that, I notice you say the three best teams Denver played last year were those three. I notice you forget the POUNDED the eventual Super Bowl Champions in Baltimore in a game they led 31 to 3 at the end of the third quarter.

Your memory must be foggy, or we have a very different definition of "chance to win". Against the Falcons, the Broncos scored a touchdown with just over 3 minutes to get within a score and never got the ball back. Against the Texans, they scored with 3 minutes left to get within a score and got the ball back with 20 seconds left at their 10 yard line. Against the Patriots, they scored with just under 7 minutes to go to make it a two score game and only got the ball back once after that. While I haven't checked, I would say their Win Probability with less than 5 minutes to go in those games was never greater than 1%. I guess if you are using the Lloyd Christmas definition, then yeah, they had a chance.

And no, I don't count the Ravens as one of the three best teams they played. First off, the three aforementioned teams all had better records. Secondly, at the time they played, the Ravens had just fired their offensive coordinator and it was the first game with a new coordinator. Thirdly, the Ravens were coming off back-to-back losses heading into the game, including giving up 276 pass yards to a Charlie Batch led Pittsburgh Steelers. Other than getting on a hot streak a few weeks later (including a win over the Broncos), why would I count the Ravens?

The reason that we still talk about it is that to this day, the Broncos have still failed to impress against any relevant competition. I'm in total agreement with you that the Broncos, on paper, are a better team than the Chiefs. But people go around giving the Broncos all kinds of credit for being "elite" and speaking as if it's a fact that they are better than the Chiefs, while also blasting the Chiefs for winning against a weak schedule. The fact is that neither has done anything against a relevant team either last year or this year. I think the Broncos will win both games against the Chiefs but I think they should be closer than you suspect (particularly given your broad definition of chance to win). But until that time, lets stop pretending that the Broncos have done anything that the Chiefs haven't (except for lose a game that is).

I'm also not sure how you can say that they are better than I am giving them credit for. I said that they are clearly my AFC favorite, and possibly Super Bowl favorite. But at the same time, I can't give them credit for their play on the field against good teams, because their performances in those games have been very disappointing and they don't deserve any credit for that.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I cant believe how much better Lacy looks as a NFL player than Richardson does.

YPC for their careers at Alabama...

Lacy 6.8
Richardson 5.8
Ingram 5.7

Edit: I know that it can't be used as a universal reference throughout college football but I think these three can be compared somewhat based on similar offensive lines, personnel and schemes.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Your memory must be foggy, or we have a very different definition of "chance to win". Against the Falcons, the Broncos scored a touchdown with just over 3 minutes to get within a score and never got the ball back. Against the Texans, they scored with 3 minutes left to get within a score and got the ball back with 20 seconds left at their 10 yard line. Against the Patriots, they scored with just under 7 minutes to go to make it a two score game and only got the ball back once after that. While I haven't checked, I would say their Win Probability with less than 5 minutes to go in those games was never greater than 1%. I guess if you are using the Lloyd Christmas definition, then yeah, they had a chance.

And no, I don't count the Ravens as one of the three best teams they played. First off, the three aforementioned teams all had better records. Secondly, at the time they played, the Ravens had just fired their offensive coordinator and it was the first game with a new coordinator. Thirdly, the Ravens were coming off back-to-back losses heading into the game, including giving up 276 pass yards to a Charlie Batch led Pittsburgh Steelers. Other than getting on a hot streak a few weeks later (including a win over the Broncos), why would I count the Ravens?

The reason that we still talk about it is that to this day, the Broncos have still failed to impress against any relevant competition. I'm in total agreement with you that the Broncos, on paper, are a better team than the Chiefs. But people go around giving the Broncos all kinds of credit for being "elite" and speaking as if it's a fact that they are better than the Chiefs, while also blasting the Chiefs for winning against a weak schedule. The fact is that neither has done anything against a relevant team either last year or this year. I think the Broncos will win both games against the Chiefs but I think they should be closer than you suspect (particularly given your broad definition of chance to win). But until that time, lets stop pretending that the Broncos have done anything that the Chiefs haven't (except for lose a game that is).

I'm also not sure how you can say that they are better than I am giving them credit for. I said that they are clearly my AFC favorite, and possibly Super Bowl favorite. But at the same time, I can't give them credit for their play on the field against good teams, because their performances in those games have been very disappointing and they don't deserve any credit for that.

Falcons: Denver scored to make it 27-21 with over 3 minutes to play. The Falcons had a 6 yard pass play on a 3rd and 5 where Miller narrowly missed getting the sack.

Houston: After Denver scored to make it 31-25, Houston faced a 3rd and 5 on their own 24 yard line with 2:49 left. Shaub, under heavy pressure, hit Johnson for a first down which allowed Houston to kill the clock and win the game.

NE: With all three time outs left, Denver drives to the 14 yard line. McGahee fumbles, NE recovers. If Denver goes into score there, they don't have to kick onside and they would have been down three points.

I can promise you the win probability for Denver was well over 1% in all three of those games. Especially at the third down plays of the Falcons and Texans games.

As for the Broncos/Chiefs comparison, I'm not trying to say either has played a difficult schedule. If someone believes that wins and losses are the SOLE determining factor about how good of a team each is, they can do that. I try to look deeper. And the deeper I look, the more unimpressed I get. Against the same schedule as Denver, the Chiefs have been outgained in yardage. That doesn't bode well at all when they face better competition. If I were doing an "honest" power ranking based on who I thought was the better team, I would rank the Chiefs in the area between 10 and 12.

Lions, Packers, Saints, Panthers, Seahawks, 49ers, Patriots, Bengals, Colts, Broncos, Chargers.

I think all of those teams beat the Chiefs 7 our of 10 times right now. (The Pack losing Rodgers makes things slide the Chiefs way a bit, I'll give them up)

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by TroyF

If I were doing an "honest" power ranking based on who I thought was the better team, I would rank the Chiefs in the area between 10 and 12.

Lions, Packers, Saints, Panthers, Seahawks, 49ers, Patriots, Bengals, Colts, Broncos, Chargers.

I think I'd rank them somewhere between five and seven. With the Lions, Saints, Panthers, Patriots, Bengals and Chargers you have to worry about which team is going to show up and where they're playing at.

But the Chiefs are slipping in my estimation because the offense doesn't seem to be progressing and the defense gave up a ton of yards this week.