Who's better between Pittsburgh, Chicago, San Diego & Houston

[mdonnelly21]

Who's the best team between these teams? 

[game3525]

1. Steelers

2. Chargers

3. Bears

4. Texans

[JMG5]

Steelers

Bears

Chargers

Texans

[Thomas5737]

According to Pittsburgh radio today on my way to work the Steelers are better than the two teams that played last night because the Steelers can beat you in many ways and those teams have to outscore you. The Steelers can score 50 on you like they did against the Panthers or they can shut you down like they did to the Jaguars in the 2nd half last week.

I would put the Steelers on the top of this list but I wouldn't be surprised to see any of these teams beat the others. A lot has been made of the Texans weak schedule but the Steelers have only faced 2 winning teams themselves. Both are 1-1 in those games.

[Jlowe22]

I still can't believe the Steelers won that Jags game...

[patriotsheatyan]

1: Steelers

2: Chargers

3: Bears/Texans

[Jimmy Austin]

Steelers 
Bears 
Chargers 
Texans 

[footbull3196]

43 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

According to Pittsburgh radio today on my way to work the Steelers are better than the two teams that played last night because the Steelers can beat you in many ways and those teams have to outscore you. The Steelers can score 50 on you like they did against the Panthers or they can shut you down like they did to the Jaguars in the 2nd half last week.

I would put the Steelers on the top of this list but I wouldn't be surprised to see any of these teams beat the others. A lot has been made of the Texans weak schedule but the Steelers have only faced 2 winning teams themselves. Both are 1-1 in those games.

I’d be more tempted to buy into that argument if the Jaguars hadn’t shut themselves down offensively.  I mean they were awful in the second half and were only up as much as they were to begin with because of turnovers

[Thomas5737]

2 minutes ago, footbull3196 said:

I’d be more tempted to buy into that argument if the Jaguars hadn’t shut themselves down offensively.  I mean they were awful in the second half and were only up as much as they were to begin with because of turnovers

I'd buy into it more if they hadn't already played in their own shootout against the Chiefs. Most defenses aren't going to look good against those teams. The Steelers didn't either.

[ET80]

...at least we're being talked about. 

[jrry32]

1. Chargers

2. Steelers

3. Bears

4. Texans (mainly because of BOB)

[jrry32]

35 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

I'd buy into it more if they hadn't already played in their own shootout against the Chiefs. Most defenses aren't going to look good against those teams. The Steelers didn't either.

Plus, the Chiefs played the Jaguars and held them to less points lol.

[ET80]

2 hours ago, jrry32 said:

4. Texans (mainly because of BOB)

I think my feelings on BOB are very well documented - but I did have this thought I shared in the Texans forum (AKA Ground Zero of the "Fire BOB" movement):

On 11/19/2018 at 2:53 PM, ET80 said:

7-3 after an 0-3 start? Not how I envisioned it, but I'll take it. There's something to be said about not getting down on yourself and turning it around like this (even if it's winning ugly). The actual coaching part, I'll criticize... but O'Brien is proving to be an adept leader, someone these guys want to play hard for. Look at the league as a whole: Steve Wilks and Matt Patricia are one and done most likely, Vance Joseph has a talented team quit on him, Pat Shurmer is probably on the hot seat next season, Todd Bowels is sitting on a landmine, Doug Marrone and Dirk Koetter are in the middle of mutinies, Jon Gruden has lost the team he's coaching for the next 10 years... heck, even stalwarts such as John Harbaugh and Mike McCarthy are getting ousted from playoff-ready teams. Those teams have more or less quit on their coaches, and it's pretty public. The Texans? No. Not at all - despite some pretty awful losses early on. Plenty of ammo to fire at him, but nobody on the team even looked at a gun during that 0-3 start.

BOB is still not a good coach, but - maybe with the right coordinators - he doesn't have to be a good coach. (He'll have to concede that he is in fact, NOT a good offensive coordinator, I'll say that). Maybe he can be a Mike Tomlin type, a Pete Carroll type, a "leader of men" that Mike Vrabel is being positioned as. I don't know, maybe I'm softening the blow knowing he's going to come back for the next few seasons, because 12-4 and a division title means he's sitting on a block of ice.

Please note, I'm probably justifying another season with BOB in 2019 - this run all but ensures he's probably coaching out his contract at the least. (Bob McNair has a track record of keeping HCs around, Gary Kubiak was stuck in 8-8 purgatory for nearly a half decade before he started to win). So, this could just be a variation of Stockholm syndrome, knowing I'm being "held hostage" by BOB.

This being said - is there something to a team that simply won't turn on a guy? A team that goes out of its way to defend a guy, even though evidence clearly points to him as below average in just about every single aspect of coaching? Almost to a man, the Texans' players have defended BOB, as early as last season. Watson, Hopkins, Watt, Clowney, Jonathan Joseph, Honey Badger (who has been here for a half season) have stood on the table for this guy - not even a silent acknowledgement on good/bad, but verbally and Twitterly defending the man. 

Is there something there we simply don't see as fans? 

EDIT - This doesn't change any rankings, Texans are probably last on this list. Just curious for a non-Texans fans' perspective.

[jrry32]

3 minutes ago, ET80 said:

I think my feelings on BOB are very well documented - but I did have this thought I shared in the Texans forum (AKA Ground Zero of the "Fire BOB" movement):

Please note, I'm probably justifying another season with BOB in 2019 - this run all but ensures he's probably coaching out his contract at the least. (Bob McNair has a track record of keeping HCs around, Gary Kubiak was stuck in 8-8 purgatory for nearly a half decade before he started to win). So, this could just be a variation of Stockholm syndrome, knowing I'm being "held hostage" by BOB.

This being said - is there something to a team that simply won't turn on a guy? A team that goes out of its way to defend a guy, even though evidence clearly points to him as below average in just about every single aspect of coaching? Almost to a man, the Texans' players have defended BOB, as early as last season. Watson, Hopkins, Watt, Clowney, Jonathan Joseph, Honey Badger (who has been here for a half season) have stood on the table for this guy - not even a silent acknowledgement on good/bad, but verbally and Twitterly defending the man. 

Is there something there we simply don't see as fans? 

The whole players not quitting thing is something you could say about Jeff Fisher prior to his last year with the Rams. Obviously, BOB is a better coach than Fisher, and I don't think he's a terrible coach. My point is more that I respect the coaches of the three teams more, so that's why I rated them higher. You can certainly do worse than BOB. However, John Harbaugh might look awful good with Houston if he'd keep Crennel on and hire a good OC. But then again, Harbaugh's weakness has always been his loyalty to bad coordinators.

[ET80]

1 minute ago, jrry32 said:

The whole players not quitting thing is something you could say about Jeff Fisher prior to his last year with the Rams. Obviously, BOB is a better coach than Fisher, and I don't think he's a terrible coach. My point is more that I respect the coaches of the three teams more, so that's why I rated them higher. You can certainly do worse than BOB. However, John Harbaugh might look awful good with Houston if he'd keep Crennel on and hire a good OC. But then again, Harbaugh's weakness has always been his loyalty to bad coordinators.

I'll concede to this and I did edit to where I agree that this view/question doesn't move the needle in terms of this discussion. Texans are last in this particular ranking.

The Fisher take is an interesting one, but Fisher was a bit more accomplished, so a bit of rope is given to the man due to his work in TN. O'Brien? He had his two years in the toughest situation in sports (where he's having to answer questions on sexual assault against minors as frequently as he's talking football) and a video of him yelling at Brady. Cool talking points, but not exactly pelts on the wall, you know?