Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems Wordio
Log In Create Account

Random NFL Chatter

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Random NFL Chatter
Terry_Tate's avatar

Terry_Tate

Senior Member

7,606 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:36 PM
It's still early, but I do not have any confidence that Blaine Gabbert will be even a decent NFL QB. Newton, Dalton, and Ponder all look far better so far.
Dec 5, 2011 10:36pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:37 PM
San Diego wins out they would finish 9-7

Oakland 7-5
at Green Bay - L
Detroit - ?
at Kansas City - ?
San Diego - L

They could lose three and finish 8-8.


Denver 7-5
Chicago - ?
New England - L
at Buffalo - ?
Kansas City - ?

I don't see three losses there but then again all of Denver's games are up in the air. They could even stumble against Chicago this week.
Dec 5, 2011 10:37pm
Terry_Tate's avatar

Terry_Tate

Senior Member

7,606 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:40 PM
No chance the Chargers win out. I think 8-8 is possible, but no shot at winning out. That division is the Broncos to lose.
Dec 5, 2011 10:40pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:43 PM
Non;1003669 wrote:San Diego wins out they would finish 9-7

Oakland 7-5
at Green Bay - L
Detroit - ?
at Kansas City - ?
San Diego - L

They could lose three and finish 8-8.


Denver 7-5
Chicago - ?
New England - L
at Buffalo - ?
Kansas City - ?

I don't see three losses there but then again all of Denver's games are up in the air. They could even stumble against Chicago this week.
Denver beats KC and 1 other they lock SD out, even if SD wins out.
Dec 5, 2011 10:43pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:45 PM
Agreed. But Denver has won several close games. They could easily lose a few of those down the stretch.

Chargers would have to really outscore everybody to win out because their defense stinks.

But with Rivers and Floyd, Gates, Jackson, Brown, they have a fighting chance in every game I'd say.
Dec 5, 2011 10:45pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:47 PM
If Denver beats Chicago, they'll be in good shape. But let's say they lose to Chicago and then New England.

All of a sudden they're 7-7 with two games left. Two pretty easy games at Buffalo and Kansas City but still the possibility of an upset loss in those games.
Dec 5, 2011 10:47pm
OSH's avatar

OSH

Kosh B'Gosh

4,145 posts
Dec 5, 2011 10:50 PM
I'm not too sold on Denver losing to New England either. Will New England win? Likely, but I don't think it's a given. Especially considering the game is at Mile High. The Broncos have a decent defense. The Pats have an awful defense. If Denver can hold the Pats from scoring a few times and get some scores themselves, it could be their game.
Dec 5, 2011 10:50pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:03 PM
Jon Gruden is on the Tebow train!!
Dec 5, 2011 11:03pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:05 PM
Non;1003680 wrote:If Denver beats Chicago, they'll be in good shape. But let's say they lose to Chicago and then New England.

All of a sudden they're 7-7 with two games left. Two pretty easy games at Buffalo and Kansas City but still the possibility of an upset loss in those games.
You could say about every team every week in the NFL. Denver is definitely in the drivers seat now with Oaklands schedule.
Dec 5, 2011 11:05pm
hasbeen's avatar

hasbeen

Excuse me, Flo?

6,504 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:06 PM
Non;1003677 wrote:Agreed. But Denver has won several close games. They could easily lose a few of those down the stretch.

Lose with tebow? Blasphemy.
Dec 5, 2011 11:06pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:12 PM
Skyhook79;1003699 wrote:You could say about every team every week in the NFL. Denver is definitely in the drivers seat now with Oaklands schedule.
Still have to play the games, though. That's the point.

There's a fine line between winning and losing a lot of times. Chances are Denver will win that division but it wouldn't surprise me if they lose a game or two they should win. They almost lost to Minnesota.
Dec 5, 2011 11:12pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:21 PM
When was the last great quarterback that didn't look like they had it early on but then ended up being great?

Maybe it was recently. Just throwing that out there without thinking back too much.

Manning threw a lot of interceptions but you knew he'd be great.

Brady ended up being a lot better passing wise than expected but he was never bad early on.

Brees maybe didn't get the credit he deserved.

Bradshaw was a QB that struggled a lot and then went on to be great the second half of his career. That doesn't usually happen.

I think you usually get a sense early on or at least within a couple years.
Dec 5, 2011 11:21pm
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:23 PM
This game tonight has to make browns fans feel good about their team.
Dec 5, 2011 11:23pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:23 PM
Non;1003711 wrote:Still have to play the games, though. That's the point.

There's a fine line between winning and losing a lot of times. Chances are Denver will win that division but it wouldn't surprise me if they lose a game or two they should win. They almost lost to Minnesota.
Denvers margin of error is greater than SD's...SD can't lose another game.
Dec 5, 2011 11:23pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:24 PM
THE4RINGZ;1003718 wrote:This game tonight has to make browns fans feel good about their team.
IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.
Dec 5, 2011 11:24pm
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:27 PM
Skyhook79;1003721 wrote:IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.

The Jags have no sense of purpose
Dec 5, 2011 11:27pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:28 PM
Skyhook79;1003720 wrote:Denvers margin of error is greater than SD's...SD can't lose another game.
Difficult, not impossible. Crazy things have happened before in the NFL.

Rivers is like 23-2 December and January regular season games.
Dec 5, 2011 11:28pm
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:29 PM
Gabbert is horrible
Dec 5, 2011 11:29pm
D

dave

Senior Member

4,558 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:37 PM
Non;1003717 wrote:When was the last great quarterback that didn't look like they had it early on but then ended up being great?

Maybe it was recently. Just throwing that out there without thinking back too much.

Manning threw a lot of interceptions but you knew he'd be great.

Brady ended up being a lot better passing wise than expected but he was never bad early on.

Brees maybe didn't get the credit he deserved.

Bradshaw was a QB that struggled a lot and then went on to be great the second half of his career. That doesn't usually happen.

I think you usually get a sense early on or at least within a couple years.
Eli
Dec 5, 2011 11:37pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:44 PM
dave;1003743 wrote:Eli
True.

He was solid but playing in New York and being a Manning and top pick, put a lot of added pressure on him to not just be good but an elite QB.
Dec 5, 2011 11:44pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 5, 2011 11:47 PM
Warner came out of nowhere. Gannon became an MVP after years of being a backup/journeyman.

But I was talking more about early round draft picks with expectations.

A player like Blaine Gabbert is never going to be a great QB. More than likely. We would've seen some flashes.

Cam Newton has something. Andy Dalton, too.

Colt McCoy isn't going to go from what he's shown this season to a Brees, Rogers, Brady level or even Roethlisberger, Rivers, etc.
Dec 5, 2011 11:47pm
Non's avatar

Non

Senior Member

9,517 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:03 AM
I also think it's a misconception when analysts will say that a young QB should sit for a year or two and watch before being thrown in there.

Flacco, Roethlisberger and Sanchez all had success right away. They had good teams around them but you look at a player like Newton or Tebow in his second year and if a guy has the talent he can survive and still show quite a bit. Rodgers sat but in hindsight he probably didn't need to. If he had played right away he still would've been just as good.
Dec 6, 2011 12:03am
Terry_Tate's avatar

Terry_Tate

Senior Member

7,606 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:37 AM
It scares me how much I agree with Skip Bayless regarding Tim Tebow. Been thinking the same thing since he left college.
Dec 6, 2011 12:37am
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Dec 6, 2011 6:45 PM
Skyhook79;1003721 wrote:IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.
It took a miscalled FG to make it even that close. Browns have somewhat of a direction, the Jags really don't. They don't even know where their team will be in the future.
Dec 6, 2011 6:45pm
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 6, 2011 7:04 PM
like_that;1004758 wrote:It took a miscalled FG to make it even that close. Browns have somewhat of a direction, the Jags really don't. They don't even know where their team will be in the future.
Somewhat of a direction? They are worse than last year.
Dec 6, 2011 7:04pm