What do we know about the NFL after 2 weeks

[nobody 2,032]

After two weeks, perhaps we can draw some conclusions:

Let's try to figure out some power rankings

Teams we're pretty sure are good?
Buffalo, KC, Philly, and Tampa Bay

Teams we're pretty sure are bad?
Tennessee, Indianapolis, Houston, Carolina, Jets, Chicago

Teams that are probably bad?
Giants barely beat both Carolina and Tennessee
Cleveland lost to the Jets and barely beat Carolina
Seattle barely beat Denver and got smoked by SF
Denver lost to Seattle and barely beat Houston

Teams we should suspect are bad
Atlanta and Saints - played about even but both got handled pretty readily by decent to good teams
Cincy and Dallas - looked terrible agianst the 1 good team they played and then played each other even
New England and Pittsburgh - Looked bad against the one good team they played and then played each other close
Washington, Jacksonville - they haven't played anyone else besides a terrible Colts team and Jacksonville blew them out.  Meanwhile

Jury is still out
Arizona, Vegas - played each other tight but both lost to decent to good teams showing well enough to win.
GB, Minnesota - Minny destroys GB week and looks terrible against Philly.  Not sure which team this unless GB is bad?  But they destroyed Chicago
Baltimore and Miami - Both beat teams that are probably not that good and played close
Detroit - no shame in losing to a good Philly team
Rams and Chargers - losing to teams they should lose to and beating teams they should beat
SF - lost to Chicago in a monsoon with a qb that probably wasn't very good.  Not sure what they are with Jimmy G after domincating Seattle

[nobody 2,032]

That would lead to a power rank that looks something like this:

1		Buffalo
2		Kansas City
3		Philadelphia
4		Tampa Bay
5		LAR
6		Miami
7		Baltimore
8		LAC
9		Arizona
10		Las Vegas
11		Minnesota
12		Green Bay
13		San Francisco
14		Detroit
15		New England
16		New Orleans
17		Dallas
18		Pittsburgh
19		NYG
20		Atlanta
21		Seattle
22		Denver
23		Washington
24		Cincinatti
25		Jacksonville
26		Chicago
27		Cleveland
28		Carolina
29		NYJ
30		Tennessee
31		Houston
32		Indianapolis

[GobbleDog 815]

7 hours ago, nobody said:

Jury is still out
Miami

Jury is in and the verdict is 2022 will forever be known as the Year of the Fish 

Seriously though, everyone is still waiting to see how good this team really is. Fans had high expectations with last year's stout defense combined with new offensive players and the offensive "guru" head coach. They looked decent against a bad Pats team, but only scored 13 offensive points.  Then Week 2 and the Dolphins were terrible the first half on both sides of the ball and it looked like another sad offensive effort until Tua went bonkers in the 4th. As much as I enjoyed it, I have to admit - both of Tyreek's bomb TDs were under thrown (Hill had to slow down or stop to catch them), the defenders just weren't close enough.

Regardless, if the Fish somehow beat the Bills next week the hype train will be launching into space.

[AxeElf 787]

8 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Jury is in and the verdict is 2022 will forever be known as the Year of the Fish

The Marlins?

Dolphins are mammals.

[cmh6476 748]

I don't think indy is the worst team in the league.   But they also probably aren't beating the Chiefs. 

[weepaws 2,452]

Not missing watching it.  

[RoadLizard 73]

Clearly we know that the Bengals are a joke and had NO business being in any super bowl last year. They were textbook lucky.  Their opponents handed them most of their success.  Sports analysts had Joe Burrow ranked close to Allen, Mahomes, etc. as one of the young stud quarterbacks.  I think we can toss out that idea. 

Tennessee is terrible but that’s no shock. Miami is actually better than anticipated but we’ll see how they do against the Bills and other top teams.  I’m not sold on Denver just yet either as being a legit playoff contender.   

Looks like drama queen Brady will be able to ride the coat tails of the Bucs defense yet again this year along with being in a super crappy division and weak NFC.  Cakewalk for the Bucs this year.  If they were in the AFC they’d be lucky to end up 8-9 or 9-8.

The Chargers do seem legit despite the tough loss to KC.  The ravens are decent but tier 2 at best.  Green Bay is just Green Bay.  They won’t be a factor when it matters most.  The Vikings are lame too.  Kirk Cousins? Still? Yeah, no.  

That’s it for now. 

[GobbleDog 815]

6 hours ago, AxeElf said:

Dolphins are mammals.

If it swims like a fish, and it stinks like a fish, it's a fish. 

Don't complicate things. 

[nobody 2,032]

I was thinking about this this morning.

GB might just be a bad team.  

And Detroit might actually be good. 

[easilyscan 553]

15 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Regardless, if the Fish somehow beat the Bills next week the hype train will be launching into space.

That might actually be an understatement.

[gcmmidwest 98]

Just don't forget every team is filled with professionals ...,the very best in the country thrue high school & college,...and dogs will eat ...any given Sunday...and for that reason I quit gambling 

[cmh6476 748]

9 hours ago, gcmmidwest said:

Just don't forget every team is filled with professionals ...,the very best in the country thrue high school & college,...and dogs will eat ...any given Sunday...and for that reason I quit gambling 

except for the Raiders, I agree.

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

Title of the thread: "What do we KNOW about..."

First group ".... pretty sure"

 

Ummmm?????

[nobody 2,032]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Title of the thread: "What do we KNOW about..."

First group ".... pretty sure"

 

Ummmm?????

I'm sure you've worked your way out of tougher problems before.  

[listen2me 23 1,537]

On 9/19/2022 at 11:15 PM, nobody said:

That would lead to a power rank that looks something like this:

1		Buffalo
2		Kansas City
3		Philadelphia
4		Tampa Bay
5		LAR
6		Miami
7		Baltimore
8		LAC
9		Arizona
10		Las Vegas
11		Minnesota
12		Green Bay
13		San Francisco
14		Detroit
15		New England
16		New Orleans
17		Dallas
18		Pittsburgh
19		NYG
20		Atlanta
21		Seattle
22		Denver
23		Washington
24		Cincinatti
25		Jacksonville
26		Chicago
27		Cleveland
28		Carolina
29		NYJ
30		Tennessee
31		Houston
32		Indianapolis

Cards and Vegas are above packers and 9ers?  Naaaaah....

Not that there is any right answer to "power rankings". 

[listen2me 23 1,537]

On 9/20/2022 at 1:04 PM, nobody said:

I was thinking about this this morning.

GB might just be a bad team.  

Lol why?

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

25 minutes ago, nobody said:

I'm sure you've worked your way out of tougher problems before.  

I just think it was funny that you said things we "know", then went on to "guess".  That's all.  I just got a chuckle out of it.

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

On 9/20/2022 at 1:04 PM, nobody said:

I was thinking about this this morning.

GB might just be a bad team.  

And Detroit might actually be good. 

 

14 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Lol why?

I knew this was coming.  What took so long?  

 

 

[listen2me 23 1,537]

9 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

 

I knew this was coming.  What took so long?  

 

 

I may be getting trolled lol

But I just want to know the logic if he is serious.

I am not trying to be a fan and say Packers are the class of the NFC or anything.  But a team that has 3 straight 13 win season is all of a sudden bad because they started 1-1? 

[nobody 2,032]

3 hours ago, listen2me 23 said:

Cards and Vegas are above packers and 9ers?  Naaaaah....

Not that there is any right answer to "power rankings". 

You're probably right that Arizona and Vegas could easily and maybe even should be behind all of minny, gb, and sf.  I don't see much reason to think there is a lot of separation on those teams.  

GB got curb stomped by the vikes and beat a Chicago team that has completed 8 passes beyond the line of scrimmage total in two games.  Then they can't seem to block people and don't have the receivers to get open quickly to compensate.  I believe they get Jenkins back this week, but I wouldn't trust Bakhtiari is going to stay healthy when he gets back.  They have been effective in the run which is probably helped by the fact that they've embraced more concepts where they're pulling linemen as opposed to their usual zone schemes which I'm sure caught Chicago off guard, but coaches will start preparing for. 

So let's say they fix the secondary issues that got exposed by Minnesota and would've been masked by Chicago's ineptitude, yeah, they'll be better than I've ranked them.  I still would like to see proof that the offensive won't be in a slog trying to move the ball before I consider them a top ten team.

So to answer your question of why they might be bad more succinctly... They beat a team that can barely throw the ball which shows us nothing and got absolutely destroyed and looked terrible in every facet of the game by Minnesota in week 1.  

[Bier Meister 1,512]

we know to stream the defense who plays cincy

 

 

[listen2me 23 1,537]

12 minutes ago, nobody said:

You're probably right that Arizona and Vegas could easily and maybe even should be behind all of minny, gb, and sf.  I don't see much reason to think there are a slot of separation on those teams.  

GB got curb stomped by the vikes and beat a Chicago team that has completed 8 passes beyond the line of scrimmage total in two games.  Then they can't seem to block people and don't have the receivers to get open quickly to compensate.  I believe they get Jenkins back this week, but I wouldn't trust Bakhtiari is going to stay healthy when he gets back.  They have been effective in the run which is probably helped by the fact that they've embraced more concepts where they're pulling linemen as opposed to their usual zone schemes which I'm sure caught Chicago off guard, but coaches will start preparing for. 

So let's say they fix the secondary issues that got exposed by Minnesota and would've been masked by Chicago's ineptitude, yeah, they'll be better than I've ranked them.  I still would like to see proof that the offensive won't be in a slog trying to move the ball before I consider them a top ten team.

So to answer your question of why they might be bad more succinctly... They beat a team that can barely throw the ball which shows us nothing and got absolutely destroyed and looked terrible in every facet of the game by Minnesota in week 1.  

They got beat 38 to 3 last year week 1 vs the Saints.  They lost to thr Chiefs 13 to 7 because Rodgers had to sit out with covid.   They didn't have to try in week 17 and didnt and took a loss to Detroit.  4 pro bowl/all pro players missed significant time or in some cases basically the whole season.

They won 13 games and got the 1 seed anyway......

People took WAY too much away from that Minny game.  That was Minnesota's Superbowl.  Packers didn't get off the bus just like they didn't last year.  Their secondary is actually their best unit.....they just had communication breakdowns and blew coverages.  Watson dropped an easy 75 yard TD on first play on offense that changed thr whole dynamics of the game. 

[listen2me 23 1,537]

They didn't have either starting tackle nor their #1 WR in week 1.

No excuse, they played awful.  

The Bills in their last 20 wins have won thrm all by double digits.  

They lost to the Jags last year 9 to 6.

Teams have games where they don't show up.  It happens each year....

So Packers win 13 games for 3 straight years and because they lost week 1 bad, just like last year.....it means they are in trouble? It is week 3 lmao.

I am not saying they win 13 games this year.  They could.  Who knows.  But what happened to their team that takes them from 3 straight 13 win season to mediocrity or even below average?  Just dumb luck?  

[listen2me 23 1,537]

Also I don't even know if they got curb stomped.  They ran the ball really well.    For as many blown coverages that lead to easy big gains the vikings scored a whopping 23 pts.

The Packers left 10 simple pts on the field in dropping a wide open 75 yard TD to start the game(and deflate themselves) and going for it on like the 3 yard line (which I am fine with) instead of kicking the 3.  

If even either of those situations results in 7 pts it is a game.  

A curb stomping is what the Saints did to them last year in week 1.  

[nobody 2,032]

27 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

They got beat 38 to 3 last year week 1 vs the Saints.  They lost to thr Chiefs 13 to 7 because Rodgers had to sit out with covid.   They didn't have to try in week 17 and didnt and took a loss to Detroit.  4 pro bowl/all pro players missed significant time or in some cases basically the whole season.

They won 13 games and got the 1 seed anyway......

People took WAY too much away from that Minny game.  That was Minnesota's Superbowl.  Packers didn't get off the bus just like they didn't last year.  Their secondary is actually their best unit.....they just had communication breakdowns and blew coverages.  Watson dropped an easy 75 yard TD on first play on offense that changed thr whole dynamics of the game. 

They were also 6-2 in one score games they cared about winning.  I don't get why Watson dropping a TD would change the whole dynamics of the game.  Did the Packers just quit after that?  Were the Vikings like, "Oh man, now we really need to play defense!"   If they scored the TD, would Minnesota just have quit?

Please explain to me exactly how the dynamics of the game changed.

[listen2me 23 1,537]

14 minutes ago, nobody said:

They were also 6-2 in one score games they cared about winning.  I don't get why Watson dropping a TD would change the whole dynamics of the game.  Did the Packers just quit after that?  Were the Vikings like, "Oh man, now we really need to play defense!"   If they scored the TD, would Minnesota just have quit?

Please explain to me exactly how the dynamics of the game changed.

When Vikings drive and score 1st and you dial up a deep pass on the first play you have the ball with a chance to respond....and it is wide open.....and you totally muff a sure TD and answer.  

Yes it deflates you. Yes it changes things.  He catches it and walks in and momentum goes right back to GB.  

Is this a real question?

So they were 6-2 in 1 score games last year.  Um ok.  Good teams usually have a good recors in 1 score games.  If Rodgers doesn't have to sit out with covid they beat thr Chiefs.  If they wanted to try in week 17 vs the Lions they win that one.  They are 15-2. 

So because they won close games last year that means 3 years of 13 and 3 is a mirage?

Again it was 1 game.....the Vikings Superbowl.   The Packers clearly were not ready to play.  Ask any analyst what they think of the Packers secondary and more times than not they would say it is maybe the best unit in the league.    They play 1 lousy game and now theit secondary is a problem?

Holy overreaction batman!

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

2 hours ago, listen2me 23 said:

I may be getting trolled lol

But I just want to know the logic if he is serious.

I am not trying to be a fan and say Packers are the class of the NFC or anything.  But a team that has 3 straight 13 win season is all of a sudden bad because they started 1-1? 

Not trolling, just having fun.  We had this discussion in the Aaron Rodgers rookie WR thread.

[listen2me 23 1,537]

Bucs were 6-0 in 1 score games last year by my quick tally.   

Fluke 

[AxeElf 787]

Per FootballGuys:  Justin Fields now ranks 33rd in Pass Attempts.  (There are only 32 NFL teams.)

[nobody 2,032]

18 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

When Vikings drive and score 1st and you dial up a deep pass on the first play you have the ball with a chance to respond....and it is wide open.....and you totally muff a sure TD and answer.  

Yes it deflates you. Yes it changes things.  He catches it and walks in and momentum goes right back to GB.  

Is this a real question?

So they were 6-2 in 1 score games last year.  Um ok.  Good teams usually have a good recors in 1 score games.  If Rodgers doesn't have to sit out with covid they beat thr Chiefs.  If they wanted to try in week 17 vs the Lions they win that one.  They are 15-2. 

So because they won close games last year that means 3 years of 13 and 3 is a mirage?

Again it was 1 game.....the Vikings Superbowl.   The Packers clearly were not ready to play.  Ask any analyst what they think of the Packers secondary and more times than not they would say it is maybe the best unit in the league.    They play 1 lousy game and now theit secondary is a problem?

Holy overreaction batman!

Performance in one score games is usually subject to regression to a roughly even record.  That's why it matters when you're saying the Packers are good this year because they had a good record last year.

[nobody 2,032]

15 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Bucs were 6-0 in 1 score games last year by my quick tally.   

Fluke 

They'll likely regress, too.  Accept they came out and didn't get destroyed by anyone.

[AxeElf 787]

The Colts have scored 3 total first-half points so far this season, against the Texans and Jaguars.  They might want to step it up against the Chiefs this week.

[AxeElf 787]

According to NextGen Stats, there have been only 17 times in the last 7 seasons that a team reached a 98% win probability and lost.  It happened 3 times on Sunday.

[listen2me 23 1,537]

35 minutes ago, nobody said:

Performance in one score games is usually subject to regression to a roughly even record.  That's why it matters when you're saying the Packers are good this year because they had a good record last year.

How about the year before last year? And the year before that?   Just a above average team winning 13 games because the ball bounced their way? 

I am not saying they won't see some regression at some point.   13 win seasons is hard to sustain forever in the NFL when teams change and injuries occur.   

But may be a bad team?  Ill get on board for the reverse jinx since it feels I am jinxing them by saying so much here.  So yes they may totally suck this year.  It is definitely possible.   I wouldn't draw that conclusion from a week 1 game where they looked like they were still in preseason mode tho.

[listen2me 23 1,537]

35 minutes ago, nobody said:

They'll likely regress, too.  Accept they came out and didn't get destroyed by anyone.

So AZ got destroyed week 1.  Lucks into a fluke comback in week 2.  Yet they are higher on the rankings? When they were clearly not as good as thr 9ers or Packers last year?

Make it make sense.  

[listen2me 23 1,537]

The Browns in week 1 of 2020 lost 38 to 6 vs the Ravens.  You know a division rival.  Then they just make it to thr divisional round (whens the last time that franchise did that?) And played right with the SB Chiefs at their place losing by 5.  

Imagine that.  

 

[nobody 2,032]

4 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

So AZ got destroyed week 1.  Lucks into a fluke comback in week 2.  Yet they are higher on the rankings? When they were clearly not as good as thr 9ers or Packers last year?

Make it make sense.  

I said they likely could and should be higher.  Do you need me to edit the ranking?

[listen2me 23 1,537]

Just now, nobody said:

I said they likely could and should be higher.  Do you need me to edit the ranking?

No just trying to piece together your logic.  You are certainly entitled to your opinion.  I am just discussing and debating how you arrived there.

[nobody 2,032]

This is a good exercise for me.  My real motivation is to identify teams that are either overrated or underrated for betting.

Right now I think GB might be falling into that over optimistic category, and I think Detroit might be in the underrated category.

I mean GB is only +1 against TB.  I assume some (most?) of that is driven by the bucs cluster injuries/issues at receiver, but that seems quite absurd to me.

[kcBlitzkrieg 17]

Lions 9-2 ATS last 11 

still underrated...