Jump to content

Which team do you think is overrated and will underachieve?


DigInBoys

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, warrenblue said:

Browns. They're not winning the division and I wouldn't be surprised if the finish 4th in the AFC north even behind the Bengals.

They're like the 2013 Lakers with Nash, Kobe, Artest, Gasol and Howard. Too much hype, ego and no substance.

All those guys were past their prime with the exception of Howard who had major back issues 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bolts223 said:

Rams are in trouble if Goff doesn't improve in his ability to read defenses without McVay whispering into his ear. The Pats pretty much showed the entire league on the biggest stage how you shut their offense down.

 

What was the formula? Audible the defense? 

Pederson has always just outgunned McVay but Schwartz never really but the kabosh on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I just don't get the mention of the Chiefs here. That offense isn't going to all of a sudden stop being dominant this season. There is really no defense for it and they will continue putting up big numbers. And defensively I don't see them any worse than last season. In fact, the secondary should/could be improved with the additions of Thornhill and Honey Badger. 

I'm still not a big believer of the Packers and think the Bears have bit of a drop off. 

Rams will be battling until the end for the division and shouldn't be as big favorites to win it as they are. 

So I would say those teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Starless said:

The Bears did it first, but yeah. Basically my thinking as well.

 

The Bears did it on a freezing night in December in Chicago, the 2nd consecutive East coast trip for the Rams.

The Patriots did it on a neutral field after a week off.

But neither game will have an impact this year - McVay will adjust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FrantikRam said:

....and for the half of the year he was healthy we were unstoppable....so it might be a legit excuse.

The Rams averaged almost 39 points a game for the first 4 games after Cupp went down. It wasn't until Goff got exposed in the Chicago game that that average dropped to 24 ppg. 
It wasn't Cupp's absence that slowed their offense down. It was teams figuring out how to force Goff off his primary reads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Starless said:

The Rams averaged almost 39 points a game for the first 4 games after Cupp went down. It wasn't until Goff got exposed in the Chicago game that that average dropped to 24 ppg. 
It wasn't Cupp's absence that slowed their offense down. It was teams figuring out how to force Goff off his primary reads.

Possible and the knee problems of Gurley did not help too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Starless said:

The Rams averaged almost 39 points a game for the first 4 games after Cupp went down. It wasn't until Goff got exposed in the Chicago game that that average dropped to 24 ppg. 
It wasn't Cupp's absence that slowed their offense down. It was teams figuring out how to force Goff off his primary reads.

 

That's a little misleading. Here are the games Kupp missed completely:

 

Niners (39 points)

Packers (29 points)

Chiefs (51 points)

Lions (30 points)

Bears (6 points)

Eagles (23 points)

Cardinals (31 points)

Niners (48 points)

Cowboys (30 points)

Saints (26 points)

Patriots (3 points)

 

So if we average the first four after his season ending injury, it's 37 PPG.

If we average from the Eagles to Saints games, it's 31 PPG.

What's really great is that if we average from Niners to Bears you get 31 PPG - then from Eagles to Saints, as noted above - 31 PPG.

 

You'd have had to actually watched the Rams last year to realize this - it was the Lions game that started the offense unraveling. Goff was horrific against the Lions/Bears/Eagles - so if you want to talk about who figured out how to stop the Rams, it was the Lions. The point total is misleading.

And obviously the Niners and Cardinals were the worst teams in the NFL - so throwing those out for a second. We struggled offensively against the Packers (for a good chunk of the game), Lions, Bears, and Eagles - basically every game except for the Chiefs game, which in itself is an outlier. Our offense still wasn't elite in the playoffs, the defense just stepped up and finally played to its potential.

You can obviously think whatever you want to - but Kupp and Gurley being banged up played a huge role in the Rams struggles. Goff should also get better going into his third year under McVay, and the interior OL with Sullivan was a big reason why we lost to the Bears/Eagles/Patriots - he's been replaced as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27299239/predicting-nfl-teams-likeliest-decline-barnwell-picks-five-2019 

"......I can see the argument from Cowboys fans here. Things turned around for Dallas only after the team traded for Amari Cooper. The Cowboys were 3-4 before acquiring their star receiver and 7-2 afterward. What if we only evaluate the Cowboys on their performance after acquiring Cooper? Are they still likely to decline?

Actually, yes. The Cowboys were slightly better than their record during the first seven weeks. While they went 3-4, Dallas outscored its opposition by three points over that stretch, which is roughly the level of a .500 team. And likewise, during their final nine-game run, the Cowboys went 7-2 while outscoring opponents by a total of 13 points, which is also about the level of a .500 team. We would have expected the Cowboys to win 4.8 of those nine games by point differential. Instead, they won seven.......

.......If a young Cowboys team takes a step backward, the blame will likely be thrust upon Garrett and/or the various contract situations that are currently enveloping the team's core. I wouldn't be so sure. The Cowboys were a league-average team or worse in 2018, when they finished finished 21st in DVOA -- below the Broncos, Giants and Packers. It wouldn't shock me if Jerry Jones' team were actually better on a game-by-game basis in 2019 yet failed to make it to 10 wins."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Uncle Buck said:

Maybe the Chargers or the Saints?  Both are good teams and should do well, but could one of those old QB's have a "Peytonesque" drop off this season?

Another possibility could be the Eagles.  Again, a very good team, but they have a lot riding on how Wentz comes back.

I think the Chargers would be hurt more by a "Peytonesque" dropoff than the Saints.  The Saints have been moving more towards their rushing game than relying on Brees' arm for the past few years and should continue to this year.  I mean Brees already barely throws the ball deep, so he just needs to keep his accuracy on his short to mid throws and they are good to go.  Though the Saints do have concerns with other aspects for a potential letdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...