PDA

View Full Version : Biggest Drop-off


TACKLE
08-09-2007, 01:33 PM
Which team do you think will have the biggest drop-off next season??? Teams that were good last year but will be a big dissapointment this year.

Personally I'd say the Giants and the Chiefs.

The Giants lost their best player in Tiki and could also lose Strahan if he retires. Both of their Left Tackles are gone and Guy Whimper is the replacement. Also on Defense they lost both of their OLB's and Kiwi is going to play their. On top of all that their coach Tom Coughlin is on the verge of being fired.

Kansas City was always a power running team with a great O-line. With Shields and Roaf now gone their O-line is diminishing. Also with their best player likely to hold-out and a first year quarterback starting for them they are going to struggle on offense. Their defence is still weak and an area for concern.

I expect both teams to pick in the Top 7 next year.


Who do you think will dissapoint?

GB12
08-09-2007, 01:36 PM
I think you hit it pretty well with New York and KC. The Titans are another team that I think will as well.

PalmerToCJ
08-09-2007, 01:39 PM
Yeah I don't see KC/NYG/TEN matching what they did last year.

KC/NYG for reasons stated plenty of times this offseason and TEN for the fact that they're less Pacman and won't have the sort of luck they had last year.

SubNoize
08-09-2007, 01:39 PM
The Chargers, not to say that they will drop off drastically, but they def. wont go 14-2 again... maybe 10-12 wins.

LSUALUM99
08-09-2007, 01:39 PM
Atlanta and NYG.

Giants for the reasons you mentioned, plus I'm not a believer in Manning at all.

Atlanta because apparently DJ is the best QB in camp. If he's your best QB you're in for a long season. Abraham's inability to stay healthy along with losing Kerney just makes it worse.

KILLERSANTA
08-09-2007, 01:42 PM
If NYG go better then 3-13 I would be shocked!

PackerLegend
08-09-2007, 01:43 PM
i think TACKLE you pretty much said my teams and explanations for me. Giants/KC

DeathbyStat
08-09-2007, 01:48 PM
Which team do you think will have the biggest drop-off next season??? Teams that were good last year but will be a big dissapointment this year.

Personally I'd say the Giants and the Chiefs.

The Giants lost their best player in Tiki and could also lose Strahan if he retires. Both of their Left Tackles are gone and Guy Whimper is the replacement. Also on Defense they lost both of their OLB's and Kiwi is going to play their. On top of all that their coach Tom Coughlin is on the verge of being fired.

Kansas City was always a power running team with a great O-line. With Shields and Roaf now gone their O-line is diminishing. Also with their best player likely to hold-out and a first year quarterback starting for them they are going to struggle on offense. Their defence is still weak and an area for concern.

I expect both teams to pick in the Top 7 next year.


Who do you think will dissapoint?

I couldn't agree with you more...the Chiefs and the Giants are the most likely in my mind.

22,895
08-09-2007, 01:48 PM
Titans- tougher schedule and Young struggled against good D's I can see then going 5-11 or 6-10.

Falcons- Joey Harrington as their QB= horrible year. I see them going 4-12 at best.

Giantsfan1080
08-09-2007, 01:52 PM
Which team do you think will have the biggest drop-off next season??? Teams that were good last year but will be a big dissapointment this year.

Personally I'd say the Giants and the Chiefs.

The Giants lost their best player in Tiki and could also lose Strahan if he retires. Both of their Left Tackles are gone and Guy Whimper is the replacement. Also on Defense they lost both of their OLB's and Kiwi is going to play their. On top of all that their coach Tom Coughlin is on the verge of being fired.

Kansas City was always a power running team with a great O-line. With Shields and Roaf now gone their O-line is diminishing. Also with their best player likely to hold-out and a first year quarterback starting for them they are going to struggle on offense. Their defence is still weak and an area for concern.

I expect both teams to pick in the Top 7 next year.


Who do you think will dissapoint?

David Diehl is going to be our LT. Also, Mitchell and Kiwi are upgrades over Arrington and Emmons.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
08-09-2007, 02:09 PM
The question was about, and I quote, "teams that were good last year but will be a big dissapointment this year." The Giants, while they did make the playoffs, were not exactly what I'd call a "good" team last season. As for the Falcons, they stunk in 2006.

Kansas City depends on the QB situation, but I could easily see them hovering around .500 if LJ shows up (and he will) and either Croyle or Huard plays just decent football. I think their defense will be improved, and looking at their schedule I can very easily see 7 wins.

The biggest "disappointment" IMO could be the Colts. Granted, they'll still win 10 games and make the playoffs, BUT: they won't be able to stop the run at all, they lost their best O-Lineman (their left tackle, at that...) to retirement, and coming from a huge LSU fan I have my doubts that Joe Addai can handle the load (which could be disaster if he can't, considering the chumps they have backing him up). With that said, they still have Manning, Harrison, and Wayne so that offense will definitely carry them to a good season, but my money is on the Jags to win the division. The defending SB champs not winning their division is a disappointment, IMO.

And of course, as a Saints fan, I have thoughts in the back of my head that this season will be a let-down. They are the Saints, after all...

Addict
08-09-2007, 02:10 PM
David Diehl is going to be our LT. Also, Mitchell and Kiwi are upgrades over Arrington and Emmons.

eh.... sure.

Titans- tougher schedule and Young struggled against good D's I can see then going 5-11 or 6-10.


Titans have nobody @ WR, Vince Young is a good, young (omg word-joke) qb, but with little to no targets, he'll struggle.


The Chargers, not to say that they will drop off drastically, but they def. wont go 14-2 again... maybe 10-12 wins.

who did they lose, seriously?

SubNoize
08-09-2007, 02:13 PM
who did they lose, seriously?

besides their HC, DC and OC??? not a lot player wise, but it's hard to believe that a teams going to repeat or improve on a 14-2 record...

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
08-09-2007, 02:14 PM
who did they lose, seriously?

Head Coach and both Coordinators?

Addict
08-09-2007, 02:15 PM
besides their HC, DC and OC??? not a lot player wise, but it's hard to believe that a teams going to repeat or improve on a 14-2 record...

Head Coach and both Coordinators?

oh right, forgot about that... damn you don't go online for a while and this stuff gets away so quickly.

UKfan
08-09-2007, 02:16 PM
Indy... (10 char)

Splat
08-09-2007, 02:20 PM
Kansas City was always a power running team with a great O-line. With Shields and Roaf now gone their O-line is diminishing. Also with their best player likely to hold-out and a first year quarterback starting for them they are going to struggle on offense. Their defence is still weak and an area for concern.


I didn't know being 16th in the NFL was weak for a D our O is not going to be very good I agree but people are going to be shocked by how our D plays we really started to turn it around last year this ain't DV's D.

JK17
08-09-2007, 02:26 PM
besides their HC, DC and OC??? not a lot player wise, but it's hard to believe that a teams going to repeat or improve on a 14-2 record...

I still doubt losing those guys will consitute enough losses for the season to be considered a "disappointment"...I know you don't either, because you already said you could see 10-12 wins for them, but is losing 2 more games really a "disappointment" or drop-off. Sure its a drop off, but I doubt a two game swing will be the biggest drop off there is in the NFL...If I had to guess teams that might have bigger drop offs, I would guess maybe the Jets or Saints, teams whose schedules weren't incredibly difficult, and won ten games, that may (not definitely) fall back with a harder schedule this year.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
08-09-2007, 03:09 PM
I still doubt losing those guys will consitute enough losses for the season to be considered a "disappointment"...I know you don't either, because you already said you could see 10-12 wins for them, but is losing 2 more games really a "disappointment" or drop-off. Sure its a drop off, but I doubt a two game swing will be the biggest drop off there is in the NFL...If I had to guess teams that might have bigger drop offs, I would guess maybe the Jets or Saints, teams whose schedules weren't incredibly difficult, and won ten games, that may (not definitely) fall back with a harder schedule this year.

Uhh, come again? Last year the Saints played the AFC North and the NFC East. This year we've got the AFC South and NFC West. I've got no problem with you predicting the Saints to have a drop-off in 2007, but your reasoning is incredibly erroneous.

JK17
08-09-2007, 03:20 PM
Uhh, come again? Last year the Saints played the AFC North and the NFC East. This year we've got the AFC South and NFC West. I've got no problem with you predicting the Saints to have a drop-off in 2007, but your reasoning is incredibly erroneous.

Eh, maybe I shouldn't have just listed teams off the top of my head, don't know why I assumed they had a weaker schedule..probably because of where they finished last year in comparison to the previous year...my mistake...

Generally what I was trying to say was some of the teams that had great seasons last year, due to their strength of schedule are more likely for a fall off, then say San Diego would.

cardsalltheway
08-09-2007, 03:26 PM
Indy... (10 char)

They're definitely a candidate for having a drop-off, but they've still got enough talent to get in at least 9 or 10 wins. I really doubt they end up with a losing season.

Turtlepower
08-09-2007, 03:33 PM
The Chargers, not to say that they will drop off drastically, but they def. wont go 14-2 again... maybe 10-12 wins.

I think Phillip Rivers won't have nearly as good of a year last year as he will this year. He does have Norv Turner as his head coach, but not OC. Norv has never really turned out to do that well with offenses when he is HC, just ask Oakland and Redskins fans...

scottyboy
08-09-2007, 03:39 PM
im not getting into this, what Giantsfan1080 said will suffice, and i agree with him. anyone is an upgrade over Carlos Emmons at LB... I'll just let the regular seaosn do the talking...

UKfan
08-09-2007, 03:41 PM
They're definitely a candidate for having a drop-off, but they've still got enough talent to get in at least 9 or 10 wins. I really doubt they end up with a losing season.

Oh yeah I wasn't saying they will have a losing season, just don't think they will hit the heights of last year. If Booger is down long term as seems to be the case from what I have read, that's a big loss for them.

nfrillman
08-09-2007, 03:56 PM
The Giants and Chiefs seem to be a pretty obvious choice. I also think that the Saints and Titans qualify. I liked the story of the Saints last year and I was rooting for them to win the Super Bowl, but I think people need to remember that they were 10-6 last year, not an amazing 13-3 or 14-2 record. Their defense could become an issue for them. I liked watching Vince Young last year, but statistically he wasn't very good. On top of that, the Titans have virtually nothing else.

As far as a team that I think will struggle and everyone else thinks will be good, its the 49ers. I have argued my stance on this several times before, so I will just sum it up. The 49ers had one of the worst points differentials in the NFL, which means that in a typical season they would not have gone 7-9. Meaning they were lucky to have that 7-9 record. Alex Smith made great strides last season, mostly because he was striding forward from being utterly atrocious. Even with that stride forward, he was 22nd in QB rating. Their WR corps are very weak, better than last year, but still weak. Their defense was terrible last season and I doubt that the additions of Clements, Banta-Cain, and Willis will make that much of a difference. Clements is certainly a good CB, but any time a list of overrated CB's comes up, his name is mentioned. Banta-Cain is an amazingly overrated signing. He has 90 tackles in 4 seasons, and just 42 last season. Yeah, that definitely qualifies as season changing play. Willis is a rookie, he will be good, but expecting him to make a huge difference is asking quite a bit.

Man_Of_Steel
08-09-2007, 04:13 PM
The G-Men and also the Colts.

Diehard
08-09-2007, 05:48 PM
Chiefs and Titans... both offenses are looking more than a little shaky.

princefielder28
08-09-2007, 05:49 PM
The G-Men and also the Colts.

I wouldn't be suprised with the Colts. They've lost their LT and their CBs aren't very deep and talented. Booger is also out for the year meaning their run defense will suffer.

kmartin575
08-09-2007, 06:03 PM
Which team do you think will have the biggest drop-off next season??? Teams that were good last year but will be a big dissapointment this year.

Personally I'd say the Giants and the Chiefs.

The Giants lost their best player in Tiki and could also lose Strahan if he retires. Both of their Left Tackles are gone and Guy Whimper is the replacement. Also on Defense they lost both of their OLB's and Kiwi is going to play their. On top of all that their coach Tom Coughlin is on the verge of being fired.

Kansas City was always a power running team with a great O-line. With Shields and Roaf now gone their O-line is diminishing. Also with their best player likely to hold-out and a first year quarterback starting for them they are going to struggle on offense. Their defence is still weak and an area for concern.

I expect both teams to pick in the Top 7 next year.


Who do you think will dissapoint?

The Kansas City defense is not still weak but thanks for the opinion that shows a complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

kmartin575
08-09-2007, 06:04 PM
Chiefs and Titans... both offenses are looking more than a little shaky.

And our offense wasn't a little shaky last year? Yet we still made the playoffs.

Flyboy
08-09-2007, 06:07 PM
Off the top of my head, I would say the Titans & Chiefs.

Ewing
08-09-2007, 06:19 PM
And our offense wasn't a little shaky last year? Yet we still made the playoffs.

Yet, you lost your starting quarterback and Larry Johnson is worn out.

nrk
08-09-2007, 06:23 PM
The Bears due to the super bowl losers curse. I am superstitious.

Splat
08-09-2007, 06:24 PM
Larry Johnson is worn out.

Ya Larry Johnson is worn out from starting one and a half seasons at 27 years old the guy is old and washed up.:rolleyes:

cardsalltheway
08-09-2007, 06:27 PM
I wouldn't be suprised with the Colts. They've lost their LT and their CBs aren't very deep and talented. Booger is also out for the year meaning their run defense will suffer.

If there's one thing that the Colts' CB's are, it's deep. They've drafted a ton of corners the last few years and the guys in place have a lot of potential, it just comes down to whether or not they can live up to it. It's not like you need to have great corners for the Cover 2 anyway, Harper and David were nothing too special.

SchizophrenicBatman
08-09-2007, 06:33 PM
The Saints. They honestly weren't that great of a team last year, their defense is still weak and they have very little depth on offense

Other candidates include the Jets (feasted on a weak schedule last year) and Giants (obvious reasons)

Ewing
08-09-2007, 06:43 PM
Ya Larry Johnson is worn out from starting one and a half seasons at 27 years old the guy is old and washed up.:rolleyes:

Oh I'm sorry but carrying the ball 752 times over two seasons is being worn out where I come from. Maybe in that fantasy land of Kansas City you don't think it'll have an effect on him but everyone who has carried the ball 370 or more times in a season didn't do well the following. Let's start with the most recent...

Shaun Alexander 2006: 370 carries, 1880 yards, 5.1 AVG
Shaun Alexander 2007: 252 carries, 896 yards, 3.6 AVG

Curtis Martin 2005: 371 carries, 1697 yards, 4.6 AVG
Curtis Martin 2006: 220 carries, 735 yards, 3.3 AVG

Jamal Lewis 2003: 387 carries, 2066 yards, 5.3 AVG
Jamal Lewis 2004: 235 carries, 1006 yards, 4.3 AVG

Ricky Williams 2002: 383 carries, 1853 yards, 4.8 AVG
Ricky Williams 2003: 392 carries, 1372 yards, 3.5 AVG

Edgerrin James 2000: 387 carries, 1709 yards, 4.4 AVG
Edgerrin James 2001: 151 carries, 662 yards, 4.4 AVG

Jamal Anderson 1998: 410 carries, 1846 yards, 4.5 AVG
Jamal Anderson 1999: 19 carries, 59 yards, 3.1 AVG

Terrell Davis 1998: 392 carries, 2008 yards, 5.1 AVG
Terrell Davis 1999: 67 carries, 211 yards, 3.1 AVG

As you can see when someone carries the load 370+ times in a year the following year they either get hurt or their production drops off.

Splat
08-09-2007, 06:57 PM
Oh I'm sorry but carrying the ball 752 times over two seasons is being worn out where I come from. Maybe in that fantasy land of Kansas City you don't think it'll have an effect on him but everyone who has carried the ball 370 or more times in a season didn't do well the following. Let's start with the most recent...

Shaun Alexander 2006: 370 carries, 1880 yards, 5.1 AVG
Shaun Alexander 2007: 252 carries, 896 yards, 3.6 AVG

Curtis Martin 2005: 371 carries, 1697 yards, 4.6 AVG
Curtis Martin 2006: 220 carries, 735 yards, 3.3 AVG

Jamal Lewis 2003: 387 carries, 2066 yards, 5.3 AVG
Jamal Lewis 2004: 235 carries, 1006 yards, 4.3 AVG

2002: 383 carries, 1853 yards, 4.8 AVG
Ricky Williams 2003: 392 carries, 1372 yards, 3.5 AVG

Edgerrin James 2000: 387 carries, 1709 yards, 4.4 AVG
Edgerrin James 2001: 151 carries, 662 yards, 4.4 AVG

Jamal Anderson 1998: 410 carries, 1846 yards, 4.5 AVG
Jamal Anderson 1999: 19 carries, 59 yards, 3.1 AVG

Terrell Davis 1998: 392 carries, 2008 yards, 5.1 AVG
Terrell Davis 1999: 67 carries, 211 yards, 3.1 AVG

As you can see when someone carries the load 370+ times in a year the following year they either get hurt or their production drops off.

Alexander - Was in his 5th year as a starter.

Martin - Was in his 10th year as a starter.

Lewis - Was in his 4th year as a starter.

Williams - Was in his 4th year as a starter.

And so on and so on it is not the same thing LJ was in his first year as a starter and he only started one year in college he didn't have the same kinda mileage going in as those players. I'm not saying he is going to play ten years but to say he is worn down and done after one full season and at 27 years old is to much.

no love
08-09-2007, 06:58 PM
The Giants and Chiefs seem to be a pretty obvious choice. I also think that the Saints and Titans qualify. I liked the story of the Saints last year and I was rooting for them to win the Super Bowl, but I think people need to remember that they were 10-6 last year, not an amazing 13-3 or 14-2 record. Their defense could become an issue for them. I liked watching Vince Young last year, but statistically he wasn't very good. On top of that, the Titans have virtually nothing else.

As far as a team that I think will struggle and everyone else thinks will be good, its the 49ers. I have argued my stance on this several times before, so I will just sum it up. The 49ers had one of the worst points differentials in the NFL, which means that in a typical season they would not have gone 7-9. Meaning they were lucky to have that 7-9 record. Alex Smith made great strides last season, mostly because he was striding forward from being utterly atrocious. Even with that stride forward, he was 22nd in QB rating. Their WR corps are very weak, better than last year, but still weak. Their defense was terrible last season and I doubt that the additions of Clements, Banta-Cain, and Willis will make that much of a difference. Clements is certainly a good CB, but any time a list of overrated CB's comes up, his name is mentioned. Banta-Cain is an amazingly overrated signing. He has 90 tackles in 4 seasons, and just 42 last season. Yeah, that definitely qualifies as season changing play. Willis is a rookie, he will be good, but expecting him to make a huge difference is asking quite a bit.

So let me sum it up. 49ers improved in almost every area from last year. But they will struggle more than last year? Great argument.

You say our wr corps is still weak... Darrell Jackson is weak? i guess 9 receptions for 179 yds and 2 tds in two games against your defense is weak. They also get Vernon Davis back this year who will probably be big in the red zone/3rd downs where we really struggled.

The said the defense added Banta-Cain, Clements and Willis and that wouldn't make a big impact. What about adding 5 starters to a defense? That means we have better depth and better starters.

Throw the point differentials out the window. The only thing that matters is wins and losses. The point differential is really because of 3 games in which the 49ers were just blown out and admittedly played like crap.

Diehard
08-09-2007, 09:32 PM
And our offense wasn't a little shaky last year? Yet we still made the playoffs.

You lost your starting QB, the OL is rebuilding, and your star RB is holding out. Not exactly a recipe for success...

Dam8610
08-09-2007, 10:09 PM
To those that answered Indy, can I ask why? The only significant losses the Colts suffered were Tarik Glenn (which, admittedly, could be a big loss), Booger McFarland to injury (again, could be big), and Nick Harper. Dominic Rhodes was essentially a backup, and Jason David and Cato June were average starters, the kind the Colts constantly replace (while having 50 wins in the last 4 years). As for Brandon Stokley, Montae Reagor, and Corey Simon, they didn't contribute very much if at all to last year's team, so the loss of those players are basically irrelevant. I'd just like to know why people would pick the Colts. I know they didn't have the greatest of offseasons on paper (but we all know how relevant "on paper" is), but I don't think they had the worst either.

Ewing
08-09-2007, 10:14 PM
Alexander - Was in his 5th year as a starter.

Martin - Was in his 10th year as a starter.

Lewis - Was in his 4th year as a starter.

Williams - Was in his 4th year as a starter.

And so on and so on it is not the same thing LJ was in his first year as a starter and he only started one year in college he didn't have the same kinda mileage going in as those players. I'm not saying he is going to play ten years but to say he is worn down and done after one full season and at 27 years old is to much.

There is no way anyone's body can withstand the amount of carries LJ has been getting and not get injured. I'm sorry but it's impossible.

ripdw27
08-09-2007, 10:16 PM
the chiefs n titans for me. idk ill think of someone else later

bored of education
08-09-2007, 10:16 PM
yeah but the chiefs D didn't upgrade at any position.

nfrillman
08-09-2007, 11:38 PM
So let me sum it up. 49ers improved in almost every area from last year. But they will struggle more than last year? Great argument.

You say our wr corps is still weak... Darrell Jackson is weak? i guess 9 receptions for 179 yds and 2 tds in two games against your defense is weak. They also get Vernon Davis back this year who will probably be big in the red zone/3rd downs where we really struggled.

The said the defense added Banta-Cain, Clements and Willis and that wouldn't make a big impact. What about adding 5 starters to a defense? That means we have better depth and better starters.

Throw the point differentials out the window. The only thing that matters is wins and losses. The point differential is really because of 3 games in which the 49ers were just blown out and admittedly played like crap.

Okay, I have discussed this many times before and don't really want to get into another debate about this. Check out the NFC West thread if you want to read up on what myself and some other 49er fan were debating. If simply feeling that you have improved in the offseason automatically meant the team would be better, there would be about 25 teams a year making the playoffs. As for Jackson, he is definitely an improvement on the number 1 from last year, but he is by no means an elite WR. Bringing up individual game performances is rather ridiculous too, especially when it is against the Rams, since many a player have had career games against the Rams the past few years. I don't know what more I have to say to get 49er fans to understand where I am coming from. The 49ers are not going to finish .500 or above, as my sig says. Just wait and see, if you are still on this site by the time the 49ers have proven they aren't very good I will send you a little reminder of my immense knowledge. If you wish to do some sort of signature bet I am willing, my deal is that the Rams will have a better record than the 49ers.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:10 AM
Yet, you lost your starting quarterback and Larry Johnson is worn out.

And what makes you think Larry Johnson is worn out? That is complete speculation on your part. Counting the playoffs Emmitt Smith went over 400 carries three times in his career, all three times being early in his career. That didn't wear him out. If we get LJ back in camp he will have missed all of training camp and likely all of the preseason. He will be plenty fresh.

And we LOST our starting QB? If we wanted to keep Green we would have. Green sucked last year. Huard is currently a better QB than Green is and Brodie Croyle is much more talented than both of them and has the potential to be a much better player than either of them.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:13 AM
Oh I'm sorry but carrying the ball 752 times over two seasons is being worn out where I come from. Maybe in that fantasy land of Kansas City you don't think it'll have an effect on him but everyone who has carried the ball 370 or more times in a season didn't do well the following. Let's start with the most recent...

Shaun Alexander 2006: 370 carries, 1880 yards, 5.1 AVG
Shaun Alexander 2007: 252 carries, 896 yards, 3.6 AVG

Curtis Martin 2005: 371 carries, 1697 yards, 4.6 AVG
Curtis Martin 2006: 220 carries, 735 yards, 3.3 AVG

Jamal Lewis 2003: 387 carries, 2066 yards, 5.3 AVG
Jamal Lewis 2004: 235 carries, 1006 yards, 4.3 AVG

Ricky Williams 2002: 383 carries, 1853 yards, 4.8 AVG
Ricky Williams 2003: 392 carries, 1372 yards, 3.5 AVG

Edgerrin James 2000: 387 carries, 1709 yards, 4.4 AVG
Edgerrin James 2001: 151 carries, 662 yards, 4.4 AVG

Jamal Anderson 1998: 410 carries, 1846 yards, 4.5 AVG
Jamal Anderson 1999: 19 carries, 59 yards, 3.1 AVG

Terrell Davis 1998: 392 carries, 2008 yards, 5.1 AVG
Terrell Davis 1999: 67 carries, 211 yards, 3.1 AVG

As you can see when someone carries the load 370+ times in a year the following year they either get hurt or their production drops off.


Then I guess Larry Johnson is going to have to prove the ignorant fans around the NFL, such as yourself, wrong.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:15 AM
yeah but the chiefs D didn't upgrade at any position.

Huh? Are you serious?

I guess the addition of Donnie Edwards and Napoleon Harris won't help at linebacker?

The additions of Turk McBride, Tank Tyler, and Alfonso Boone won't help on the defensive line?

And what about the further growth and progression of young players like Derrick Johnson, Tamba Hali, Bernard Pollard, and Jarrad Page?

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:16 AM
And what makes you think Larry Johnson is worn out? That is complete speculation on your part. Counting the playoffs Emmitt Smith went over 400 carries three times in his career, all three times being early in his career. That didn't wear him out. If we get LJ back in camp he will have missed all of training camp and likely all of the preseason. He will be plenty fresh.

And we LOST our starting QB? If we wanted to keep Green we would have. Green sucked last year. Huard is currently a better QB than Green is and Brodie Croyle is much more talented than both of them and has the potential to be a much better player than either of them.

Jeez, it sounds like every subtraction was actaully an addition, I guess nothing can go wrong this yearin Kansas City...

Or, Green actually was a better starter then Huard, numbers or not, Croyle has shown/proved nothing and if he was so much more talented, he would be the clearcut starter. Not to mention Emmit Smith did not have the same running style, or take the same hits LJ did, that may contribute to him wearing down faster, the receivers are either rookies or ineffective, the O-Line is getting worse each year, and although the defense is average, it is still not effective enough for them to win games on it...

Some of those problems they may be able to overcome, but reading what you post, you seem to feel there's no concerns at all going into this season...

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:17 AM
There is no way anyone's body can withstand the amount of carries LJ has been getting and not get injured. I'm sorry but it's impossible.

Sure there is. Emmitt Smith went over 400 carries three times in his career counting the playoffs and he went over 300 carries 6 other times. That may be just one player but you said there is no way so I offered one player who did it.

Larry Johnson is a wrecking ball at 230 pounds and he doesn't take alot of hard hits. He gives out hits. I will remember this thread so later in the year I can come back and rub it in your face that you were wrong.

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:19 AM
Larry Johnson is a wrecking ball at 230 pounds and he doesn't take alot of hard hits. He gives out hits. I will remember this thread so later in the year I can come back and rub it in your face that you were wrong.

No matter how differently you word that, LJ gets in a lot of collisions, giving or taking, his body will take a toll. It might not happen this year, it might happen next year, but its not really unrealistic to think taking that pounding 410 times, plus the playoffs, won't effect him at all. He's a runningback not a god.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:20 AM
Jeez, it sounds like every subtraction was actaully an addition, I guess nothing can go wrong this yearin Kansas City...

Or, Green actually was a better starter then Huard, numbers or not, Croyle has shown/proved nothing and if he was so much more talented, he would be the clearcut starter. Not to mention Emmit Smith did not have the same running style, or take the same hits LJ did, that may contribute to him wearing down faster, the receivers are either rookies or ineffective, the O-Line is getting worse each year, and although the defense is average, it is still not effective enough for them to win games on it...

Some of those problems they may be able to overcome, but reading what you post, you seem to feel there's no concerns at all going into this season...

Of course their are concerns.

-depth at corner
-offensive line
-injured left tackle
-will Larry Johnson ever show up?

And why is it a problem that Croyle has proven nothing? No great player in the history of the NFL was ever great until he was given a chance to prove himself. Does unproven mean bad? Every single player drafted this year is unproven and has done nothing until they are given the chance to compete.

I guess it Tom Brady was so good he wouldn't have had to compete with Drew Bledsoe in his second year in the NFL. Just because you are having to compete for your spot means nothing. Croyle is a young player who still has alot of growing to do. That is why he is competing.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:25 AM
No matter how differently you word that, LJ gets in a lot of collisions, giving or taking, his body will take a toll. It might not happen this year, it might happen next year, but its not really unrealistic to think taking that pounding 410 times, plus the playoffs, won't effect him at all. He's a runningback not a god.

Counting receptions Ladainian Tomlinson has totals of 398, 451, 413, 392, 389, and 404 touches for each of his 6 seasons in the NFL. I don't see anybody bitching and complaining that he is going to burnout before too long. As far as I am concerned LT has much more wear and tear than LJ does. LT has over 900 more carries in his career than LJ does. LT started all through college and had 5,000+ yards in college. LJ didn't start in college until his senior season. Counting college and the NFL LJ has only started 2 1/2 years. But go ahead and keep telling yourself he is going to wear down.

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:26 AM
Of course their are concerns.

-depth at corner
-offensive line
-injured left tackle
-will Larry Johnson ever show up?

Add to that list...

An effective Starting QB
LJ breaking down
Aging cornerbacks
Proven/Good WRs

And why is it a problem that Croyle has proven nothing? No great player in the history of the NFL was ever great until he was given a chance to prove himself. Does unproven mean bad? Every single player drafted this year is unproven and has done nothing until they are given the chance to compete.

No unproven does not mean bad. Philip Rivers was unproven last year too. But Brodie Croyle is going into his second year as a player! With 0 games started and 7 passes attempted...That's different from having time to be mentored, or learn the system...if you think he won't encounter struggles your ridiculous! Not to mention, he hasn't shown much of anything, accept maybe flashes in Training Camp that he will be a great/good QB at all!

I guess it Tom Brady was so good he wouldn't have had to compete with Drew Bledsoe in his second year in the NFL. Just because you are having to compete for your spot means nothing. Croyle is a young player who still has alot of growing to do. That is why he is competing.

You're comparing Brodie Croyle to Tom Brady? Tom Brady, to echo every sportscaster and fan, is the exception not the rule....His situation has no relevance to Croyle's, and even though Brady did blossom, seemingly out of nowhere, he was better coached, better prepared, and had a better team around him to help him become better. But just comparing the two at all is a stretch.

kmartin575
08-10-2007, 12:28 AM
Add to that list...

An effective Starting QB
LJ breaking down
Aging cornerbacks
Proven/Good WRs



No unproven does not mean bad. Philip Rivers was unproven last year too. But Brodie Croyle is going into his second year as a player! With 0 games started and 7 passes attempted...That's different from having time to be mentored, or learn the system...if you think he won't encounter struggles your ridiculous! Not to mention, he hasn't shown much of anything, accept maybe flashes in Training Camp that he will be a great/good QB at all!



You're comparing Brodie Croyle to Tom Brady? Tom Brady, to echo every sportscaster and fan, is the exception not the rule....His situation has no relevance to Croyle's, and even though Brady did blossom, seemingly out of nowhere, he was better coached, better prepared, and had a better team around him to help him become better. But just comparing the two at all is a stretch.

So what team do you root for? I'm sure I can find plenty of holes in that team unless it happens to be New England or San Diego.

Edit: nevermind, now I see why you are posting everything you are posting. Your a Chargers fan.

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:31 AM
Counting receptions Ladainian Tomlinson has totals of 398, 451, 413, 392, 389, and 404 touches for each of his 6 seasons in the NFL. I don't see anybody bitching and complaining that he is going to burnout before too long. As far as I am concerned LT has much more wear and tear than LJ does. LT has over 900 more carries in his career than LJ does. LT started all through college and had 5,000+ yards in college. LJ didn't start in college until his senior season. Counting college and the NFL LJ has only started 2 1/2 years. But go ahead and keep telling yourself he is going to wear down.

LT also takes much less big hits, runs in a completely different style, and conditions differently then Larry Johnson does. But even so, you keep acting like its some competition to who burns out first. LJ will wear down, he's had to much work, and taken to many hits not too. LT tries to avoid contact where LJ seeks it. But fine, I really don't care for arguing LT vs. LJ with a homer. It's fine, I admit and I've said before, LT only has a few years left at the top. But keep telling yourself the Chiefs have no concerns with their QB's, RB's, etc. It's fine.

MasterShake
08-10-2007, 12:31 AM
The 49ers are not going to finish .500 or above, as my sig says. Just wait and see, if you are still on this site by the time the 49ers have proven they aren't very good I will send you a little reminder of my immense knowledge.

Quick note nfrillman:

That worst differential ever for a 7-9 team is an interesting stat, but only to those who didn't follow the 2006 49ers.

The 49ers point differential over the first 7 games was.... -101

The 49ers point differential over the last 9 games was.... -13


Big difference. The difference was the combination of new defensive starters and the young players starting to gain experience and come together.

Obviously the 49ers have alot of question marks still, but they have alot more answers to those questions then they have had in years. This team could explode, or it could be mediorce. Less than .500? Maybe, but doubtful. The Rams having a better record? They better learn to play some defense and quick.

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:35 AM
So what team do you root for? I'm sure I can find plenty of holes in that team unless it happens to be New England or San Diego.

Edit: nevermind, now I see why you are posting everything you are posting. Your a Chargers fan.

Yeah I am a Charger fan, and even as a Charger fan, I can admit my team has flaws. We don't have a steady proven WR, we lost our coaches, our ILBs are weak, and our safeties will always be a concern. i could make up excuses for each of those positions, like you've been doing, but that would be pointless and solve nothing. I could easily say VJ and Craig Davis look to be stars and have potential (like you said about Croyle), or that our coaches are better off now because we couldn't win with them when it counts (similar to why you don't mind losing Green), or that our ILBs are unproven but show potential (Croyle), same with the secondary, etc.

Everyone can make excuses. I'm not criticsing you to argue with a KC fan, that's just stupid. I've given credit to plenty of division rivals, and argued about a bunch of other ones also. So spare me the "Why I'm posting what I'm posting." I'm doing it because it bothers me that someone can so blindly follow their team, they can't recognize its flaws.

Vikes99ej
08-10-2007, 01:00 AM
I think you hit it pretty well with New York and KC. The Titans are another team that I think will as well.

Yeah, I was going to say the Titans as well. MADDEN CURSE!!!

SenorGato
08-10-2007, 03:13 AM
Question: How do people think the Jets will do?

I'd like to nominate them...even if I think overall we'll improve on important things for the long term. Schedule is tough as hell (unlike last years) and our luck with injuries, fumble recoveries, crappiness of opponents could lead to an 8-9 win season. It won't make people happy, but I think as a rebuilding team it's perfectly fine if other stuff (run D, pass rush, QB play, O-line play) improves.

bored of education
08-10-2007, 06:36 AM
Huh? Are you serious?

I guess the addition of Donnie Edwards and Napoleon Harris won't help at linebacker?

The additions of Turk McBride, Tank Tyler, and Alfonso Boone won't help on the defensive line?

And what about the further growth and progression of young players like Derrick Johnson, Tamba Hali, Bernard Pollard, and Jarrad Page?

I was being sarcastic, making the point that KC doesn't need to ride the coat tails of LJ, as everyone else presumes.

umphrey
08-10-2007, 08:25 AM
I think Indy is gonna be more of what they were 3 years ago - very little defense but still winning on Peyton's arm.

cardsalltheway
08-10-2007, 09:18 AM
I think Indy is gonna be more of what they were 3 years ago - very little defense but still winning on Peyton's arm.

That's what they were last year

Smooth Criminal
08-10-2007, 09:49 AM
I'm really expecting it to be Tennessee. They overachieved last season and they have major holes on both sides of the ball. Teams should be more prepared for Young now aswell after seeing what he can do last year.

Smooth Criminal
08-10-2007, 09:56 AM
That's what they were last year

Their defense was way better last year than it looks to be this year. It looks like has potential to be one of the worst we have seen in a long time.

cardsalltheway
08-10-2007, 10:16 AM
Their defense was way better last year than it looks to be this year. It looks like has potential to be one of the worst we have seen in a long time.

You mean like bad enough to allow more YPC than any team in the last 45 years? :roll:

nobodyinparticular
08-10-2007, 10:20 AM
im not getting into this, what Giantsfan1080 said will suffice, and i agree with him. anyone is an upgrade over Carlos Emmons at LB... I'll just let the regular seaosn do the talking...

That's what Raider fans said about Bill Callahan and then Norv Turner as head coach. Both times, we were proved to be very wrong.

Iamcanadian
08-10-2007, 10:39 AM
The NFL is a schedule/QB league and every year between 7 to 9 different teams make the playoffs mostly due to tougher schedules for the teams that made it last year. So, 7-9 teams will have a significant fall off from last year, you can count on it, it happens every year.

So here's my list of contenders who could easily drop off:

1) Giants - Tiki, Coughlin and OL = poor year
2) New York Jets - Get to play AFC North and NFC East - not pretty
3) Baltimore - Caught the Steelers and Bengals with recovering QB's, doubt they repeat
4) San Diego - New HC will prove to be a disaster
5) Kansas City - Team is in flux and will need time
6) Philadelphia - I based this on McNabb getting injured.
7) Seattle - Soft touch Division is over and they could fall.
8) Dallas - New HC could = trouble and is Romo really the answer?

Ewing
08-10-2007, 10:41 AM
Then I guess Larry Johnson is going to have to prove the ignorant fans around the NFL, such as yourself, wrong.

How am I igornant when all I did was state facts. Every single running back who carried the ball 370 times in a season declined the following year. History shows it's more than likely LJ is going to have a down year.

Shiver
08-10-2007, 12:01 PM
Jets, Titans, Chiefs, Giants are the four teams I expect to see drop off in performance.

Vikes99ej
08-10-2007, 12:09 PM
I think the Falcons will experience a substantial drop-off as well. Joey Harrington, Michael Jenkins, and Roddy White are not ingredients for an explosive passing attack.

Shiver
08-10-2007, 12:11 PM
I think the Falcons will experience a substantial drop-off as well. Joey Harrington, Michael Jenkins, and Roddy White are not ingredients for an explosive passing attack.

Joey Harrington may not even be the starting QB. DJ Shockley may beat him out. Either way, not good.

Vikes99ej
08-10-2007, 12:12 PM
Joey Harrington may not even be the starting QB. DJ Shockley may beat him out. Either way, not good.

I haven't seen much of Shockley since his days at UGA, but will he still be a dual-threat, or has he toned the running down?

JK17
08-10-2007, 12:13 PM
Joey Harrington may not even be the starting QB. DJ Shockley may beat him out. Either way, not good.

What do you think are the odds Shockley does beat him out? I know its not very reassuring with either of them, but I just started hearing talk about it, and was wondering what Falcons fans thought/wanted...

Shiver
08-10-2007, 12:15 PM
Falcons fans in general want Shockley to succeed. I think he won't be the day-1 starter, but if Harrington struggles enough he will get his opportunity.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
08-10-2007, 02:03 PM
Counting receptions Ladainian Tomlinson has totals of 398, 451, 413, 392, 389, and 404 touches for each of his 6 seasons in the NFL. I don't see anybody bitching and complaining that he is going to burnout before too long. As far as I am concerned LT has much more wear and tear than LJ does. LT has over 900 more carries in his career than LJ does. LT started all through college and had 5,000+ yards in college. LJ didn't start in college until his senior season. Counting college and the NFL LJ has only started 2 1/2 years. But go ahead and keep telling yourself he is going to wear down.

Receptions are different from carries. When a RB catches the ball, he isn't surrounded by 7 guys totalling 2000 or so pounds all trying to hit him. He's outside against DBs. Also, watch a game, LT's running style is completely different from LJ's. LT doesn't take hits, he dodges them. And that takes less of a toll on his body.

bigbluedefense
08-10-2007, 02:28 PM
Our defense will improve by leaps and bounds for the simple fact that Tim Lewis is no longer calling the shots.

However, our offense will take a dip in production. We're going into the season with a Guard at Tackle, and we have thin depth on the leftside. Plus losing Tiki is losing production no matter how you wanna slice it.

However, if the line can hold up, our pass game should improve with a healthy Moss and Smith. Thats a big IF though.

Regardless, looking at an easier schedule and in all likelihood being healthier than last year (knock on wood), I dont see why the Giants can't repeat last year's 8-8 record. In fact, thats what I have us achieving going into the season. 8-8. With a lil bit of luck who knows, but for now, the reasonable fan in me says 8-8.



The homer in me says 10-6 :) But I know thats pushing it of course. 8-8 is what i say.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
08-10-2007, 07:01 PM
Our defense will improve by leaps and bounds for the simple fact that Tim Lewis is no longer calling the shots.

However, our offense will take a dip in production. We're going into the season with a Guard at Tackle, and we have thin depth on the leftside. Plus losing Tiki is losing production no matter how you wanna slice it.

However, if the line can hold up, our pass game should improve with a healthy Moss and Smith. Thats a big IF though.

Regardless, looking at an easier schedule and in all likelihood being healthier than last year (knock on wood), I dont see why the Giants can't repeat last year's 8-8 record. In fact, thats what I have us achieving going into the season. 8-8. With a lil bit of luck who knows, but for now, the reasonable fan in me says 8-8.



The homer in me says 10-6 :) But I know thats pushing it of course. 8-8 is what i say.

The fact is, that offense isn't going to improve by leaps and bounds unless Eli Manning improves by leaps and bounds. It's possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Losing Tiki is going to have a huge negative effect on not only the offense, but the team as a whole.

I just don't see how the G-Men got better at all... if anything, they took a few steps backwards. I simply cannot see them finishing anything better than 3rd in the East, again... this time, that probably won't include a playoff spot.

bigbluedefense
08-10-2007, 11:03 PM
The fact is, that offense isn't going to improve by leaps and bounds unless Eli Manning improves by leaps and bounds. It's possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Losing Tiki is going to have a huge negative effect on not only the offense, but the team as a whole.

I just don't see how the G-Men got better at all... if anything, they took a few steps backwards. I simply cannot see them finishing anything better than 3rd in the East, again... this time, that probably won't include a playoff spot.


Um....did you read what I wrote? Read it again, I think you misinterpreted what I said...

Bobo
08-11-2007, 12:39 AM
Surely the Titans are going to fall apart because they have no one at WR!!!! Just think back to the stars they had....last.....uh.....year.

But seriously, it sounds like Moulds can actually catch the ball. Too bad Bennett is not the sure handed receiver that it seems people generally think he is.

Xenos
08-11-2007, 01:05 AM
Receptions are different from carries. When a RB catches the ball, he isn't surrounded by 7 guys totalling 2000 or so pounds all trying to hit him. He's outside against DBs. Also, watch a game, LT's running style is completely different from LJ's. LT doesn't take hits, he dodges them. And that takes less of a toll on his body.

To add to what you're already saying, LT also has a much much better oline in front of him, making it easier for him to find the hole and get into space where he can do his thing instead of constantly running into a wall like in 2005.

nfrillman
08-11-2007, 02:14 AM
Surely the Titans are going to fall apart because they have no one at WR!!!! Just think back to the stars they had....last.....uh.....year.

But seriously, it sounds like Moulds can actually catch the ball. Too bad Bennett is not the sure handed receiver that it seems people generally think he is.

It is even more unfortunate that Bennett is not on the Titans anymore. That is going to make it infinitely more difficult for him to be productive for the Titans.

Smooth Criminal
08-11-2007, 06:49 AM
The titans dont just have no recievers they have no offense other than Young. Plus their defensive backs are terrible and their front 7 isn't that great either. I just dont think they have the talent on either side of the ball to match last years record.

OzTitan
08-11-2007, 07:13 AM
I think his point was, the Titans WR's didn't really get worse, they just didn't get obviously better (if you disregard the possibility of pre-existing young guys progressing anyway, which most people seem happy to do).

With that in mind, it doesn't really seem to make any sense to suggest WR will be their downfall when it wasn't last season with what was basically the same unit. People put waaayyy too much worth into who was "starting" - if you look at the stats, you'll see Bennett was totally non existent during the winning streak and a significant portion of his production came with Kerry Collins in the first 3 weeks anyway. Wade was a great contributer but nothing more - not exactly irreplaceable and easily in line with the type of player just about every team has to replace on a common basis from season to season.

Plus, if VY shows improvement with his passing as you'd expect he would, does that not at least logically offset an apparent weaker WR group? If the WR's were stronger last year, one can make the same assumption VY was weaker at passing than he will be this year. Funnily enough, QB's factor into the passing attack too! On this topic, maybe the WR's just didn't look so great because they had a rookie QB throwing them the ball and an improved Young will allow them to flourish more. See, it works both ways.

As for the "luck" angle, well you make a lot of your own luck in the NFL. Besides, for every instance of "luck" anyone can list for the Titans last year, I can list just as many unlucky ones. They had quite a lot of factors and 50/50 outcomes working against them last season as well.

OzTitan
08-11-2007, 07:36 AM
The titans dont just have no recievers they have no offense other than Young. Plus their defensive backs are terrible and their front 7 isn't that great either. I just dont think they have the talent on either side of the ball to match last years record.

Overall, the DB's are better on paper (the only thing anyone can go by at the moment) than last year thanks to some vets singings and drafting Griffin. Losing one star CB sucks but good secondaries need quality all over to be good, not one or two good players and crap elsewhere. As a unit, they were upgraded this offseason.

As said in my above post, they basically had "no receivers" last season, too.

The front 7 didn't get worse. In fact, it got a wee bit better with the removal of Sirmon, who was as fast as a turtle at MLB, and some DE's back up to health. Albert was suspended 5 games last year and the front 7 suffered a lot without him. As of right now, he's looking to play all 16 games this season like every other currently active player.

You see, what you're doing is confusing general weaknesses as new weaknesses. Nothing you listed above is a new weakness - they were the same weaknesses as last season. Some of those have the potential to be more of a weakness (WR, although it's definitely arguable), while the others on paper should be stronger (front 7, DB's as a group, but obviously we can't account for injuries etc).

One you didn't list was HB which could be legit, but if you scratch beneath the surface there, you'll see a lot of Henry's success can be attributed to great run blocking from the OL and VY opening up the rushing game with the threat of play action scrambles. It's still obviously a question mark, but all the Titans will need is average HB play and that position will be fine, and probably overall no worse than last year due to the fact the rushing success didn't get started until they reshuffled the OL and VY took the QB role. In 07, these two factors will be in play from week 1.

Now, don't take this as me saying they definitely won't do worse - there are other factors at play for a record (injuries, SOS, etc) - I just don't see one overriding reason the Titans should do worse. The only legitimate reason seems to be "they won't be able to repeat that season again because they were lucky and didn't get better enough to overcome any change in luck in 07", but that's an incredibly trivial reason that opens the door for all sorts of weird and wonderful logic applicable to almost every team.

Smooth Criminal
08-11-2007, 12:23 PM
I just dont think they have the talent to win 8 games again. Young carried them last year and I think teams will be more prepared for him after seeing him play in the pros last year.

Bobo
08-11-2007, 12:37 PM
It is even more unfortunate that Bennett is not on the Titans anymore. That is going to make it infinitely more difficult for him to be productive for the Titans.

Uh yeah, I know he's a Ram now. Got overpayed and all that. You see, I'm saying replacing a WR that drops a lot of passes with one who has good hands could be a plus for us, not a minus.

You can't get much worse than what the Titans had for a WR core last year.

Bobo
08-11-2007, 12:41 PM
I just dont think they have the talent to win 8 games again. Young carried them last year and I think teams will be more prepared for him after seeing him play in the pros last year.

The o-line had a big part in it too. They, along with Ahmard Hall (remember that name) will keep the running game at least good, even if there's no great RB.

Young had a big hand in turning things around last year, but it wasn't all on him. And his physical talent isn't just going to be stopped by gameplanning.

nfrillman
08-11-2007, 03:45 PM
Uh yeah, I know he's a Ram now. Got overpayed and all that. You see, I'm saying replacing a WR that drops a lot of passes with one who has good hands could be a plus for us, not a minus.

You can't get much worse than what the Titans had for a WR core last year.

Oh, okay then. I thought you were just really not up to date on what the Titans roster looked like.

Shiver
08-11-2007, 07:09 PM
Yodachu, your boy Joey had a pretty nice game yesterday..