FrantikRam Posted July 18, 2019 Share Posted July 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Superman(DH23) said: The Bears OL has been very good for the last several years. They are elite GCG, with reliable above average OT play outside. The Vikes OL wasnt even average last year, let alone close to equal to the Bears. The Rams OL was old and still is old. They are formerly great players that have seen their skills decline rapidly over the last year. The Bears OL is young. The "old" men on the OL are 28 yo Kyle Long and 29 yo Bobbie Massie. To try and compare the Bears OL to the Rams or Vikes is just plain foolish. Rams OL is old? Whitworth is - but he's also better than any OL on the Bears. Other than him our projected starters are: 24, 23, 27 and 27. Again, it's dumb to use last year, but since you are - the Rams and Bears both allowed 33 sacks. Rams allowed 9 more QB hits. Rams averaged 4.9 yards per carry running the ball while the Bears averaged 4.1 - but Trubisky averaged 6.2 yards per carry, which inflates that a little. If anything I'd say the Rams and Bears offensive lines played very similarly last year, and there's an argument to be made that the Rams were better because of how much better we were running the ball. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingseanjohn Posted July 19, 2019 Share Posted July 19, 2019 With the news of Hill not being suspended, where do you rank the Chiefs now? @goldfishwars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckweath Posted July 19, 2019 Share Posted July 19, 2019 44 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said: With the news of Hill not being suspended, where do you rank the Chiefs now? @goldfishwars Golffishwars did great with that list but that 8-8 prediction and #14 overall never made any sense, Hill or no Hill. I wish I could have seen Mahomes a few games without Hill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onejayhawk Posted July 20, 2019 Share Posted July 20, 2019 He did say that the Chiefs are a SB contender with Hill. J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted July 20, 2019 Author Share Posted July 20, 2019 13 hours ago, kingseanjohn said: With the news of Hill not being suspended, where do you rank the Chiefs now? @goldfishwars Don't know, didn't factor no suspension even being a plausible scenario and would need to adjust too much with other teams to reflect a new ranking. But yeah, as stated before this would make them a Super Bowl contender for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVRamsFan Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 On 7/20/2019 at 1:36 AM, goldfishwars said: Don't know, didn't factor no suspension even being a plausible scenario and would need to adjust too much with other teams to reflect a new ranking. But yeah, as stated before this would make them a Super Bowl contender for sure. Better change it all and fast or Chiefs fans will hold that ranking against you for years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckweath Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, NVRamsFan said: Better change it all and fast or Chiefs fans will hold that ranking against you for years We are already holding that ranking against him. Just waiting for the season to play out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elky Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 (edited) KC were still contenders without Hill. Edited July 22, 2019 by Elky 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share Posted July 22, 2019 4 hours ago, Buckweath said: We are already holding that ranking against him. Just waiting for the season to play out. That ranking was made without Hill and now you have him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 52 minutes ago, goldfishwars said: That ranking was made without Hill and now you have him. If only there had been any information at the time suggesting that we were likely to have Hill for the majority of the season, at least... On 7/4/2019 at 2:16 AM, Jakuvious said: Current predictions and rumors around Hill's suspension have been about 4 games. That's what the team is currently expecting, in any case. Your expectations were wrong at the time. We even pointed that out to you, at the time. It's not like you were only wrong because no one could have possibly known he wasn't going to miss the entire season. You made a prediction around an out of date guess. We had Hill, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Jakuvious said: If only there had been any information at the time suggesting that we were likely to have Hill for the majority of the season, at least... Your expectations were wrong at the time. We even pointed that out to you, at the time. It's not like you were only wrong because no one could have possibly known he wasn't going to miss the entire season. You made a prediction around an out of date guess. We had Hill, then. Yeah my bad, I guess. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 13 hours ago, Buckweath said: We are already holding that ranking against him. Just waiting for the season to play out. I haven't seen the 32 team ranking you put out for public scrutiny. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 I actually don't have an issue with the 8-8 prediction if they were without HIll, but for the whole year. The defense could be bad enough again that any sizeable dropoff from the offense would have them at .500. It's not ridiculous, the Chiefs lost 3 out of 4 games decided by 3 or less points last year, and without Hill you could see a lot more close games With Hill again though, yeah, tough to see it happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckweath Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 54 minutes ago, wackywabbit said: I haven't seen the 32 team ranking you put out for public scrutiny. I commend him for putting out that ranking. Much respect. I just think his Chiefs ranking regardless of Hill is clearly a bad take. This is a team which was second to the Pats as 2020 SB favorites at the time he published his ranking. It is what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 (edited) Anyone who thinks that we can predict what the NFL will do punishment wise is kidding themselves. Remember, there was a ton of talk that career-ending was possible. 1 year was certainly in the cards, and given Zeke's punishment, 8 games was a fair guess, too. Giving GFW a hard time because he should have known Hill was going to get 4 games or less is all hindsight. If GFW made a 8-8 prediction because he didn't know if Hill was on the team or not, it's fair to say the prediction should revised. He even qualified that the Chiefs with Hill were a SB contender. I mean, in the end, we're all uncertain. But let's not pretend that the NFL has any type of consistency in this realm. If someone wanted to take a pessimistic view on Hill's future, it doesn't seem crazy at all. Now with more info, it's easy to say the Chiefs' odds go way, way up. My 2 cents. Edited July 22, 2019 by Broncofan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.