Jump to content

What team unexpectedly collapses this year


patriotsheatyan

Recommended Posts

On 7/26/2020 at 8:48 AM, Vorsutus said:

Ya i should said it more like how the titans beat all 3 teams anyone thought were better going into the playoffs and should have beat the bills. But my fandom made it come out over zealous.

nothing wrong with being a zealous fan. tennessee about to do big things this season 👌

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to choose the 49ers. Here is my reasoning. 

Most Super Bowl losers have a tough time making the playoffs the next year. Everybody is looking at that game on the schedule and the difficulty of schedule increases from the previous year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2020 at 4:21 PM, cconocool said:

I am going to choose the 49ers. Here is my reasoning. 

Most Super Bowl losers have a tough time making the playoffs the next year. Everybody is looking at that game on the schedule and the difficulty of schedule increases from the previous year. 

SB losers have a hard time reaching the SB, NOT making the playoffs the following season. That is a huge myth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most obvious is TEN simply because I have a hard time believing Ryan Tannehill will be able to repeat his performance last year after seeing him perform for 6 years in MIA.

He might be able to, but last year for him feels more like a 2007 Derek Anderson year than a "this is actually who I am" type of year.

Edited by AkronsWitness
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2020 at 4:21 PM, cconocool said:

I am going to choose the 49ers. Here is my reasoning. 

Most Super Bowl losers have a tough time making the playoffs the next year. Everybody is looking at that game on the schedule and the difficulty of schedule increases from the previous year. 

Still not really a thing

On 7/14/2020 at 10:43 AM, Forge said:

FWIW, this is actually overblown in recent times. Out of the last 10 super bowl losers, 8 made the playoffs the following year, 9 had winning records. 8 won at least 10 games, and half won at least 11. 5 won at least 1 playoff game. 

There's some regression, because winning is hard and it's hard to match a season where you were the second best team in the league, but losing the super bowl hasn't led to collapses very often the following season. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chris87 said:

You are right he was, but anyone who watched that game could tell he didn’t belong there

I'll admit that he had a shaky game, but it happens.  He definitely played a role in getting his team there.  There have been worse QB's in the Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2020 at 4:39 PM, AkronsWitness said:

The most obvious is TEN simply because I have a hard time believing Ryan Tannehill will be able to repeat his performance last year after seeing him perform for 6 years in MIA.

He might be able to, but last year for him feels more like a 2007 Derek Anderson year than a "this is actually who I am" type of year.

But the Ryan Tannehill that played in Miami wasnt that bad. He was winning around 8 games a year in Miami. Miami never had a good HC. He just had issues staying healthy the past couple of years. Paired with a good HC and solid defense, he can win 10 games as a starters. I be more concerned in Henry being able to pick up where he left off and staying healthy 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buno67 said:

But the Ryan Tannehill that played in Miami wasnt that bad. He was winning around 8 games a year in Miami. Miami never had a good HC. He just had issues staying healthy the past couple of years. Paired with a good HC and solid defense, he can win 10 games as a starters. I be more concerned in Henry being able to pick up where he left off and staying healthy 

 

Tennessee should regress on paper.  Tannehill wasn't bad pre-Tennessee, but he did have a career year.  And Henry had a ton of carries, and they lost Dean Pees as DC.  But, regression for a team that switched QBs and went 9-3 counting the playoffs including beating the eventual Super Bowl champs doesn't mean they drop from 9 wins to less than 9 wins.  I'd expect them to end the season at roughly the same number of wins with that stuff canceling itself out, more or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it’s a risky pick because they could easily be a top seed but I could see the Saints missing the playoffs. I expect Bucs and Falcons to be better and the home field advantage may not be there with COVID. Plus Jameis has talent but if he plays he may not give that same safe game manager feel as a backup that a backup needs to be. Don’t think they’ll be a bad team by any means But could see them being a team that misses the playoffs despite realistically being a top 4 NFC team. 
 

Could see any of the 4 NFC West teams having really unexpectedly disappointing seasons as far as W/L because of the tough division. Rams are bound for a resurgence, Cards are on the rise, Seahawks are good but won a lot of close games and very RW dependent and 49ers have a much tougher schedule and target on their back. Jimmy ended on a disappointment and QB is so mental so he’s gotta step up or they could lose some tough games. Could see any of those four teams winning about 4-5 less games than expected. I think all four teams think they could make the playoffs and Cards would be the l my team that could miss and not consider the season a huge disappointment. I guess I could most likely see Rams being pretty bad because shoddy line play so Goff could take a beating and without good play and health from him it could be tough. Seahawks will somehow always play games that are within 10 points in the 4th that get interesting 

Most other divisions I don’t see real contenders facing a huge disappointment without a major QB injury. NFC Eagles and Cowboys one will make it and both will compete but don’t see a huge collapse, and SB expectations are hopeful. GB and Vikings i think will both be very good and one may miss the playoffs but don’t see any big collapse without major injury. 

As far as the AFC I don’t see a lot of  teams with huge expectations besides KC, Bal who will be good barring injury and Ten I think will battle Indy but I doubt a huge collapse. They should make the playoffs and if they miss I could see Indy having a good year and Texans being good despite an expected down year. Most other AFC teams are on the rise and no lofty expectations where I would consider missing the playoffs truly shocking. I guess there could be a team that is like 1 win awful that gets blown out all year so it may be considered a collapse but if that happens I think it’ll be tanking for Lawrence.

Edited by LA Niner Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2020 at 2:46 PM, Uncle Buck said:

Uh, wasn't he IN the Super Bowl last year?

Absolutely!

Jimmy G took his team to a Super Bowl.

  • He had that game in New Orleans.
  • He is 21-5 / 2-1 as a starter.
  • He's a 67.5% passer.
  • He has a 100 career rating 
  • He has 7 game winning drives in 26 career starts.
  • The 49ers are 4-20 without Jimmy G the last 3 years and 19-5 (2-1) with him.

Other than that... he is trash? 😂

 

He played poorly in the 4th quarter of a Super Bowl.

Ask Dan Marino, John Elway, Jim Kelly, and many others if a bad Super Bowl makes them bad QBs

Edited by SkippyX
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for regression:

New England looks 7-9 or 8-8 to me now. The COVID opt out guys were the final straw.

On offense they lost the GoaT, Cannon, Karras, and the best O-line coach in football.

They lost like 7 of their top 16 contributors on D (5 starters)

  • Hightower
  • Van Noy
  • Collins
  • Chung
  • Harmon
  • Shelton
  • Roberts

Guys like Harmon, Chung, and Roberts were not studs like the rest but they knew exactly what to do in that system after doing it for years.

Their top 4 secondary players are still very good but I don't think any other Patriots unit would crack the top 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

As for regression:

New England looks 7-9 or 8-8 to me now. The COVID opt out guys were the final straw.

On offense they lost the GoaT, Cannon, Karras, and the best O-line coach in football.

They lost like 7 of their top 16 contributors on D (5 starters)

  • Hightower
  • Van Noy
  • Collins
  • Chung
  • Harmon
  • Shelton
  • Roberts

Guys like Harmon, Chung, and Roberts were not studs like the rest but they knew exactly what to do in that system after doing it for years.

Their top 4 secondary players are still very good but I don't think any other Patriots unit would crack the top 12.

Roberts was in on 20% of defensive snaps last year. 5 LBs were ahead of him. 20 defensive players were ahead of him. Not sure why you are thinking of him here. Whose the 5th starter? Harmon, Shelton, and Roberts were not regular starters. Butler and Guy were ahead of Danny on the DT DC and both had more snaps. I think you are severly overrating those two guys, Shelton and Roberts, the latter a great deal. 

 

Your point stands as there are significant loses on the defensive side without a lot of gains. 

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...