Jump to content

NFL 2021 Week 2: Is that Jeopardy! gig still available?


Rhom

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

@aceluby,

You make picks like a madman! Taking Chicago and Cincy? 

Have to take a few upsets here and there.  Chicago D was looking good the first couple weeks, so I thought that game would be closer (hence the 2 point bet on that one).  Cincy I was more confident since they've been looking pretty strong this year and the Pitt offense is pretty terrible.  

I'm pulling a you this year with the most correct picks, but sitting in 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aceluby said:

I'm pulling a you this year with the most correct picks, but sitting in 4th.

It's deeply unfair that I regularly win the picks, but never land the confidence points. 

FF looks to be 4-2, off chance I get 5-1. The money team is a problem though which makes no sense given how stacked it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, aceluby said:

Have to take a few upsets here and there.  Chicago D was looking good the first couple weeks, so I thought that game would be closer (hence the 2 point bet on that one).  Cincy I was more confident since they've been looking pretty strong this year and the Pitt offense is pretty terrible.  

I'm pulling a you this year with the most correct picks, but sitting in 4th.

Pit was also without their best WR and best defensive player.  I think Juju got hurt during the game too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, briantw said:

Pit was also without their best WR and best defensive player.  I think Juju got hurt during the game too.

Eh, the Bengals were missing one of their top WR’s in Tee Higgins, their CB1 in Trae Waynes (and Chidobe Awuzie went out during the game), and their starting RG in Xavier Su'a-Filo. Obviously Pitt not having Watt completely changes things, but the Bengals were missing some key players as well.

We've now beaten them in two straight games, so it’s not really like it was a fluke. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nictarion said:

Eh, the Bengals were missing one of their top WR’s in Tee Higgins, their CB1 in Trae Waynes (and Chidobe Awuzie went out during the game), and their starting RG in Xavier Su'a-Filo. Obviously Pitt not having Watt completely changes things, but the Bengals were missing some key players as well.

We've now beaten them in two straight games, so it’s not really like it was a fluke. 

Didn't mean for that to seem disparaging to the Bengals.  A win is a win in the NFL.  Was just saying that aceluby's bet on the Bengals wasn't as crazy as it may have seemed.  The Bengals have a good offense when Burrow isn't getting murdered and the Steelers were missing some key defenders, and their already unimpressive offense was without Ben's favorite target.

On a different AFC North note:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cowboys continue to look good, granted it's against the eggles who are a little banged up but so are we on def. Still not confident in the defense, still see Jaylon Smith chasing plays instead of making them and the secondary looks amazing on a play and horrendous on another one. Loving what I see from Micah Parsons so far. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

He's going to murder Kirk this weekend.

The Vikings probably won't game plan to get their QB murdered like the Bears did.  It's hard to come up with a better explanation for how they just kept letting Garrett go 1on1 with a washed up LT who Garrett has absolutely abused in the past.  It was coaching malpractice. 

Fields might suck, but Nagy did nothing to put him in a position to succeed on Sunday.

The Vikings will be a much tougher test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, briantw said:

The Vikings probably won't game plan to get their QB murdered like the Bears did.  It's hard to come up with a better explanation for how they just kept letting Garrett go 1on1 with a washed up LT who Garrett has absolutely abused in the past.  It was coaching malpractice. 

Fields might suck, but Nagy did nothing to put him in a position to succeed on Sunday.

Nagy deserves to get fired for what he did Sunday. I still think Fields should have been the second overall pick, but it's clear he's not ready yet and that offense isn't very good. However, actively not helping Fields protect himself? There's no justification for what he did.

Quote

The Vikings will be a much tougher test.

The teams are pretty equal talent wise. The two key things to me are the Browns run game and the Vikes O-Line. The Browns will be able to run on our D, it's only a matter if they have a good or great game. I can't see us stopping them, so we'll have to try and take them out of it. If the Vikes line holds up we should be able to move the ball on you guys fairly easily, but if not it could be a long day as you control the ball with said run game and beat Kirk up. I think it either ends in a close game or the Browns win by like 10, depending on how those two match ups go. Can't really see the Vikes winning easily unless there's an injury to Baker or Chubb (not rooting for that, just saying).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2021 at 6:10 PM, DMC said:

Wouldn't have expected Mark Gastineau to be third either.

Gastineau was incredible.  He had 19 sacks one year and 22 another.  But he gained something like 30 sacks if I remember correctly when they adjusted his numbers for the years where they did not track sacks.  

And his celebration was the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I do love me some Baker off the field, even if I'm still not 100% sold on him as an upper echelon QB. 

I don't think he's ever going to be a top five quarterback in the NFL, but if he can settle into the top ten, I'm good with that.  He's got top ten arm talent, I think.  He can make all the throws.  He's got a big arm.  

He's the type of QB who needs a system that maximizes his talent, though.  He excels at play action and making tight window throws where he knows exactly where his receiver is going to be, and so Stefanski has been a perfect marriage for him because that's the type of system that Stefanski wants to run.  

Baker isn't Aaron Rodgers and will never be Aaron Rodgers.  But Aaron Rodgers only has one championship, because at the end of the day a QB is only as good as the talent around him and the coaching to maximize (or minimize) it.  If Baker can continue to minimize his mistakes while maximizing his efficiency, I think he's good enough to win a title if the Browns can continue putting talent around him and everything breaks right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, briantw said:

I don't think he's ever going to be a top five quarterback in the NFL, but if he can settle into the top ten, I'm good with that.  He's got top ten arm talent, I think.  He can make all the throws.  He's got a big arm.  

He's the type of QB who needs a system that maximizes his talent, though.  He excels at play action and making tight window throws where he knows exactly where his receiver is going to be, and so Stefanski has been a perfect marriage for him because that's the type of system that Stefanski wants to run.  

I agree 100%. Baker is a top 10ish QB, which is all you need if you have a good overall team, and he seems like the type that if you design things around what he does well you can get overproduction out of him.

Quote

Baker isn't Aaron Rodgers and will never be Aaron Rodgers.  But Aaron Rodgers only has one championship, because at the end of the day a QB is only as good as the talent around him and the coaching to maximize (or minimize) it.  If Baker can continue to minimize his mistakes while maximizing his efficiency, I think he's good enough to win a title if the Browns can continue putting talent around him and everything breaks right.

I think it's worth asking what the Packers have been doing when you consider that over the last 30+ years they've had the first three time consecutive MVP and possibly the best QB ever, and between the two they had four Owls appearances and two wins. The same number as Eli :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I agree 100%. Baker is a top 10ish QB, which is all you need if you have a good overall team, and he seems like the type that if you design things around what he does well you can get overproduction out of him.

I think it's worth asking what the Packers have been doing when you consider that over the last 30+ years they've had the first three time consecutive MVP and possibly the best QB ever, and between the two they had four Owls appearances and two wins. The same number as Eli :P

Another cheap shot from our friend from Minnesota I see.

The better question is how does a small market team like GB manage to have those top talent QB's and land in those Super Bowls in the first place?

Somehow you've flipped them defying the odds into underachieving:rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Another cheap shot from our friend from Minnesota I see.

The better question is how does a small market team like GB manage to have those top talent QB's and land in those Super Bowls in the first place?

Somehow you've flipped them defying the odds into underachieving:rofl:

You know Green Bay was originally called The Bay of Stinky Waters, right?

As for getting two elite QBs, it's just dumb luck. Look at the Colts. They were terrible two times before elite QBs were in the draft. You can't argue they planned for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...