Terry_Tate
Posts: 7,606
Dec 5, 2011 10:36pm
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 10:37pm
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.
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.
Terry_Tate
Posts: 7,606
Dec 5, 2011 10:40pm
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.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 5, 2011 10:43pm
Denver beats KC and 1 other they lock SD out, even if SD wins out.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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 10:45pm
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.
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 10:47pm
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.
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.
OSH
Posts: 4,145
Dec 5, 2011 10:50pm
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.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 5, 2011 11:03pm
Jon Gruden is on the Tebow train!!
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 5, 2011 11:05pm
You could say about every team every week in the NFL. Denver is definitely in the drivers seat now with Oaklands schedule.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.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
Dec 5, 2011 11:06pm
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 11:12pm
Still have to play the games, though. That's the point.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.
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 11:21pm
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.
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.
THE4RINGZ
Posts: 16,816
Dec 5, 2011 11:23pm
This game tonight has to make browns fans feel good about their team.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 5, 2011 11:23pm
Denvers margin of error is greater than SD's...SD can't lose another game.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.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 5, 2011 11:24pm
IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.THE4RINGZ;1003718 wrote:This game tonight has to make browns fans feel good about their team.
THE4RINGZ
Posts: 16,816
Dec 5, 2011 11:27pm
Skyhook79;1003721 wrote:IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.
The Jags have no sense of purpose
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 11:28pm
Difficult, not impossible. Crazy things have happened before in the NFL.Skyhook79;1003720 wrote:Denvers margin of error is greater than SD's...SD can't lose another game.
Rivers is like 23-2 December and January regular season games.
THE4RINGZ
Posts: 16,816
Dec 5, 2011 11:29pm
Gabbert is horrible
D
dave
Posts: 4,558
Dec 5, 2011 11:37pm
EliNon;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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 11:44pm
True.dave;1003743 wrote:Eli
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 5, 2011 11:47pm
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.
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.
Non
Posts: 9,517
Dec 6, 2011 12:03am
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.
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.
Terry_Tate
Posts: 7,606
Dec 6, 2011 12:37am
It scares me how much I agree with Skip Bayless regarding Tim Tebow. Been thinking the same thing since he left college.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Dec 6, 2011 6:45pm
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.Skyhook79;1003721 wrote:IDK Jacksonville just about beat the Browns.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Dec 6, 2011 7:04pm
Somewhat of a direction? They are worse than last year.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.