-
Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
The Everything NFL Thread - 2013-2014 Edition
- Thread starter Killah
- Start date
- Status
psh.
Bears are 11-5, 8-8, 10-6 for the last three years, and in the 8-8 season they would have finished 9-7 to 11-5 had they not lost their RB and QB to serious injuries in consecutive weeks. If you are surprised that the Bears are 2-0 this season, then you literally do not pay attention to absolutely anything about football and need to stop pretending to be a football fan.
They are lucky to be 2-0 this time around though, they performed poorly in a lot of ways both games. With Steelers on the schedule, they are probably about to be 3-0 though...Steelers appear to have been the second worst team so far.
They are lucky to be 2-0 this time around though, they performed poorly in a lot of ways both games. With Steelers on the schedule, they are probably about to be 3-0 though...Steelers appear to have been the second worst team so far.
I'm guessing you have the Jags as your worst?
I wouldn't say Pittsburgh is the second worst at this point, because you still have stuff like the Bucs, Raiders, and Jets around. Their defense is still solid, they are just missing a ton of offensive players because of injuries. Missing your top 2 RBs, top 2 TEs AND your multi-Pro Bowl Center would hurt any team. Once Miller and Bell return from injury and the new center (who did alright last night, btw) gets comfortable, Pittsburgh will improve and be able to salvage a 7-9 or 8-8 season. They're not a playoff team by any stretch, but I think people are exaggerating how bad they really are just because their wounded offense put up a couple anemic performances against two underrated defenses.
Fan bias aside, I don't think this season is completely lost for Pittsburgh. They have the defense to keep them competitive, and with a healthy RB and TE they'll have enough offensive weapons to score again.
Fan bias aside, I don't think this season is completely lost for Pittsburgh. They have the defense to keep them competitive, and with a healthy RB and TE they'll have enough offensive weapons to score again.
Bucs have shown signs of life in both games (they really should have beaten the Saints! they really should have beaten the Jets too for that matter!), the Raiders have shown fantastic signs of life and both games, and the Jets definitely have an above average (too early to say elite off 2 games) D this year...considering how unsure of himself Geno Smith is in the NFL so far, to be 3rd in points allowed is pretty nuts no matter what you think of Freeman or Brady's new set of receivers. If the Jets D is as good as it looked so far, that team is winning at least 6 games.
Steelers have laid down and died for basically 1.5 halves of this nfl season so far....except for the Jaguars who seem to have put down on a lease on lying down for as many as 32/32 halves this season, nobody else looks nearly this dead. We could see game 1 that the Steelers were already bad, and then they lost their center on top of that! Just imagine how bad things could get with a few more offensive injuries. It is a small sample size, which is why I used hedging language...what do we ever really know about an NFL season until at least 6-7 weeks in? I think you are being extremely biased if you think the Steelers have looked better than the Jets or Raiders, those teams have looked miles ahead of the 2013 Steelers. I do not think you are being biased at all to believe that past results could bear out that previously great teams just had a bad 2 weeks, the problem is how fast change happens in the NFL. I mean the Vikings are definitely not winning more than 6 games just for starters, last year was a miracle year.
Jaguars, Steelers, Browns look like they have the worst 2013 NFL offenses. If you wanted to rate Steelers over Browns, that is not bias, I mean the Browns have sucked so often it would be logical to peg them there. Bucs & Panthers should both have at least one win, they are basically have the most unclutch coaching in the NFL. If there were a good way to track that, which there really probably is, they would be leading the NFL I believe. Vikings have had a ton of luck and are still 0-2, so I think we have to put them & Redskins at the top of our shitty D teams. I give Giants benefit of the doubt, they and the Cowboys always score on each other, and even an Eli Manning led team is not going to turnover the ball 4 times a game forever. So Giants are the best 0-2 team, but I only personally see about 2 wins for Jags, 4 wins for Browns, & 5 wins for Steelers this season, and if the Browns or Steelers overachieve those projections, it will probably come from one of them sweeping the other...the offenses just look that truly fucking bad for now.
This got kind of meandering so I will stop talking for now I guess =j
Steelers have laid down and died for basically 1.5 halves of this nfl season so far....except for the Jaguars who seem to have put down on a lease on lying down for as many as 32/32 halves this season, nobody else looks nearly this dead. We could see game 1 that the Steelers were already bad, and then they lost their center on top of that! Just imagine how bad things could get with a few more offensive injuries. It is a small sample size, which is why I used hedging language...what do we ever really know about an NFL season until at least 6-7 weeks in? I think you are being extremely biased if you think the Steelers have looked better than the Jets or Raiders, those teams have looked miles ahead of the 2013 Steelers. I do not think you are being biased at all to believe that past results could bear out that previously great teams just had a bad 2 weeks, the problem is how fast change happens in the NFL. I mean the Vikings are definitely not winning more than 6 games just for starters, last year was a miracle year.
Jaguars, Steelers, Browns look like they have the worst 2013 NFL offenses. If you wanted to rate Steelers over Browns, that is not bias, I mean the Browns have sucked so often it would be logical to peg them there. Bucs & Panthers should both have at least one win, they are basically have the most unclutch coaching in the NFL. If there were a good way to track that, which there really probably is, they would be leading the NFL I believe. Vikings have had a ton of luck and are still 0-2, so I think we have to put them & Redskins at the top of our shitty D teams. I give Giants benefit of the doubt, they and the Cowboys always score on each other, and even an Eli Manning led team is not going to turnover the ball 4 times a game forever. So Giants are the best 0-2 team, but I only personally see about 2 wins for Jags, 4 wins for Browns, & 5 wins for Steelers this season, and if the Browns or Steelers overachieve those projections, it will probably come from one of them sweeping the other...the offenses just look that truly fucking bad for now.
This got kind of meandering so I will stop talking for now I guess =j
Actually the Giants are averaging 5 TOs per game so far into the season. Once they get their shit together they'll bounce back. If they stay healthy(OR if they get healthy in time for the playoffs) they have a shot at winning the SB this year. I'm a homer i know but jesus this is the best defense they've had since 2010. Hear me out, allowing 77 points through two games is terribad but thats with the offense giving the other team 10 extra possesions along with slow starts. Once they get it together this is the type of defense that will keep any game close enough where you win with a mistake free offense. The most important part is JPP getting healthy. They can win 9 games with his slow, injured self but will need him near the end of the season. If they somehow make it to the playoffs, which is of course not guranteed cuz the crap offensive scheme might be too bad to overcome, they'll win the SB. I would still take a garbage season to get rid of gilbride but eh a SB is okay too. Either way i win. I have no idea why losses get me more pumped up than wins. If the Giants were 2-0 right now i'd be angry as hell. Since they're 0-2 i'm really comfident in the team.
So far Romo has been off. I gave him a pass during the Giants game because thats what QBs look like when their defense wins the game for them. But the Chiefs game was depressing. I'm blaming it on the injury in combination with the Chiefs defense being led by Reid. Romo looked flat out BAD. Last year, in almost every game(after week 6 i think?) Romo was edge of your seat action. Week in and out he was putting the best performances on tv. And every game it felt like he was about to bring the boys back and win it for them. It was scary to watch. But in the 4th q against the chefs he looked average. Defintley not last years 4900 romo. Not going to overreact YET because it was the same last year. Bad offense and good defense early, great offense and terrible defense late in the season. So i guess i'm going to have to wait a couple more weeks for Romo to get back.
So far Romo has been off. I gave him a pass during the Giants game because thats what QBs look like when their defense wins the game for them. But the Chiefs game was depressing. I'm blaming it on the injury in combination with the Chiefs defense being led by Reid. Romo looked flat out BAD. Last year, in almost every game(after week 6 i think?) Romo was edge of your seat action. Week in and out he was putting the best performances on tv. And every game it felt like he was about to bring the boys back and win it for them. It was scary to watch. But in the 4th q against the chefs he looked average. Defintley not last years 4900 romo. Not going to overreact YET because it was the same last year. Bad offense and good defense early, great offense and terrible defense late in the season. So i guess i'm going to have to wait a couple more weeks for Romo to get back.
I picked the Bears because I'm surprised that they are 2-0 after their performance in the first two weeks. I think it's funny that you ridiculed me for saying they are surprising and then explain why I find them surprising. I swear, sometimes you're worse than some hero.
Anyway:
and I called you out for actually, in fact, not watching football because you were surprised over something that is factually impossible to surprise anybody who paid any attention to the last ten years of football, or even just the last three, and would know that the Bears bring it every single year
I do not need to hedge to swear that some hero lying about being happy his team is 0-2 instead of 2-0 is more entertaining than every implausibly shitty post you make
The Giants have won the SB twice the last couple years, the Broncos have Peyton Manning. Dude i could care less about regular season GIANT wins at this point. All i want to see is Eli put up stats. And thats best with gilbride and his 90s offense gone. If i was a Eggs, Skins or Boys fan i'd probably care. But i get to watch Peyton Manning in orange blow out teams even when playing like garbage. So yeah at this point i can just enjoy football and root for Eli Manning to pad his stats.
Talk to me when Peyton retires and the Broncos go back mediocrity for 10 years.
And this isn't directed at you but the regular season can suck my balls. Get to the playoffs healthy and get me my championship. The last time a dominant regular season team won the super bowl was the Saints in 2009/10.
To be fair, the Steelers cut their top 1 RB before desperately re-signing him a week later due to said injuries.
Pittsburgh's backfield is really god damn bad no matter how many running backs they don't have injured.
Lel, Colts suddenly a top contender in the AFC now that they have a solid RB. I'd still put them behind the Broncos/Texans but they could make the AFC Championship game now if things fall their way in the playoffs.
My mind is blown... The Browns could have at least gotten an extra 2nd round pick for him or something. Indy's 1st rounder will be a 15-24 pick. I just dont understand this at all.
So now they have to draft a new RB and a new QB just 2 drafts after using a 3rd overall and 22nd overall to address those needs. Though RBs arent that hard to find they will probably use Indy's pick on a WR or Safety/DB.
Im not a big fan of their O-line or defense but in a weak AFC they could make some noise.
So now they have to draft a new RB and a new QB just 2 drafts after using a 3rd overall and 22nd overall to address those needs. Though RBs arent that hard to find they will probably use Indy's pick on a WR or Safety/DB.
Im not a big fan of their O-line or defense but in a weak AFC they could make some noise.
Last edited:
Its really not Lombardi's fault that the previous regime wasted the 3rd overall pick on a RB and another 1st round pick on a 30 year old QB.
The master plan: Trade Trent, start Hoyer and tank then use picks to take Teddy Bridgewater and probably a WR for Bridgewater.
Sucks for Cleveland fans though, team basically says "we done" two games into the year. This will be what the 3rd or 4th rebuild since the new franchise was started?
Last edited:
so lets get this straight:
2012 draft: browns trade the #4, 118, 139, and 211 picks to minnesota for the #3 to select trent richardson. minnesota already has adrian peterson.
now: the browns trade the #3 in the 2012 draft for presumably the #20 or so in the 2014 draft.
they traded the value of the #4, 118, 139, and 211 for ~#20
did somebody take off the fair trades setting on madden accidentally??? if you want to rebuild quickly you're supposed to trade assets for more value, not less.
2012 draft: browns trade the #4, 118, 139, and 211 picks to minnesota for the #3 to select trent richardson. minnesota already has adrian peterson.
now: the browns trade the #3 in the 2012 draft for presumably the #20 or so in the 2014 draft.
they traded the value of the #4, 118, 139, and 211 for ~#20
did somebody take off the fair trades setting on madden accidentally??? if you want to rebuild quickly you're supposed to trade assets for more value, not less.
There are obviously additional reasons the Browns got rid of Richardson. They claim that he doesn't fit in with the new scheme... yeah, right. This screams "Percy Harvin" a year early and a dollar shy. You think that a dozen other teams wouldn't have jumped on getting Richardson for a 1st if there wasn't something that we were already missing?
- Status