Flops & Surprises

[Brenjetsfan]

whew...catching up with all these topics is a FULL time job when your not around 24/7....

I think that

FLOPS

Giants 6-10

49'ers 5-11

Miami 6-10

Denver 7-9

Suprises

Arizona 10-6

Redskins 12-4

Cleveland 11-5

JETS 16-0

[NJ]

I think the NFC Central just might rise out of sewage status this year. The Vikings D may be old but the additions of Cowart, Napoleon Harris, Pat Williams, Smoot, and Darren Sharper will make this D credible to go with a pretty damn good offense. Da Bears should be better than last year, but I agree Grossman is totaly unproven. If he shines - so will Chicago's chances to play more than 16 games. Their D is shaping up to be a real dominant force and they're young - hell Urlacher is the old man at just turned 28.

If Detroit clicks they could put a load of points on the board. I think the Pack lost too many big guys to have a good year - but damn near anything is possible with a football in Farve's hands - even at his age.

[faba]

The Packers defensively were not good last year and lost players from their offensive line which has been their strength- this is the chance for Bears and Lions to rise up- a lot depends for both teams will be the play of their QB's- can they get decent play out of their Garcia/Harrington in Detroit and Grossman in Chicago

[PatsFanTX]

Redskins 12-4

FlirtyGirl: Dolphins: 13-3

gg: 49ers: 14-2

[Jetsfan80]

One point that has been missed in the Lions vs. Bears debate: The Bears are also BETTER COACHED!

1) Bears 10-6

2) Vikings 8-8

3) Lions 7-9

4) Packers 5-11

[stormshadow19]

One point that has been missed in the Lions vs. Bears debate: The Bears are also BETTER COACHED!

1) Bears 10-6

2) Vikings 8-8

3) Lions 7-9

4) Packers 5-11

How can you say that when their coach has only one year under his belt? At least Mooch has an experienced staff. Tice is a moron though.

Man, I didn't realize this board was so biased towards the Bears :wink:

[Jetsfan80]

Man, I didn't realize this board was so biased towards the Bears :wink:

Well, they DID beat the Patriots in a Super Bowl.

Yeah, the Packers did also, but c'mon, it's DREW BLEDSOE!

[MiamiJet]

Yeah, I think the D is equal. Harris and Johnson aren't as good as Shaun Rogers, period. And yeah, the Lions D line is better than the Bears. Not only because they have the best player on either team, but they had more production. And, you're underestimating Marcus Bell, Shaun Cody, and Cory Redding, who is going to bust out. He's rapdily improved.

And, you wanna talk about injuries? The Lions lost their all rookie linebacker for the whole season, lost their Pro Bowl (ie: One of the best) CBs for more than a few games in the season, lost their other CB for more than a few games in the season, and they have d!ck Jaron running that defense. So yeah, I think they have an equal defense to the Bears.

And on offense? Kevin Jones wasn't healthy for the first half of the season. Roy Williams wasn't healthy after the first four games. Charles Rogers was lost on the third play of the season. Tai Streets got a concussion from Roy Williams and then became a coward, Az Hakim was injured for a few games during the season, Damien Woody was recovering from a torn ACL, and Mooch didn't call a good game. When he let someone else call it, the Lions offense blew up, but by that time, their defense was running on fumes and people off the street. This year the Lions have a healthy Kevin Jones, a healthy Roy Williams, a healthy Charles Rogers, not to mention a healthy Damien Woody, plus Mike Williams, plus Marcus Pollard, plus Kevin Johnson, plus Rick DeMulling, plus Brad Kosier. The Lions were busy revamping their offensive line too.

And, in case you missed the sports pages, the Lions and Bears were pretty much equal last year. The Lions did get a lot better on offense, due to Rogers and Williams coming aboard, and their defense is equal. Just deal.

Just deal? What the hell does that mean?

Let me get this straight. The Bears, despite losing TWO All Pros for most of the season, and having more missed games than any team in the league the past year, and having an edge in almost EVERY single defensive category than Detroit, is equal in defense?

HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIGURE?

The Bears lost some of their best players to injury and still performed better than Detroit in all but maybe two defensive categories, yet they're equal.

Yeah. That makes sense. If the Bears were able to field a better D than Detroit, despite losing many players, how the hell are they equal? I could only imagine how well they'll play this year, if they remain healthy. Also, losing Boss Bailey cannot be compared to lsoing Urlacher or Mike Brown. That's like trying to compare a Chevy Cavalier to a Range Rover.

The reason why most people on this board agree that the Bears have a better D, is because they're right.

SS, I love ya, but you're homerism is blinding you. All you can say is that their D's are equal, despite the stats proving otherwise.

[MiamiJet]

Yeah, I think the D is equal. Harris and Johnson aren't as good as Shaun Rogers, period. And yeah, the Lions D line is better than the Bears. Not only because they have the best player on either team, but they had more production. And, you're underestimating Marcus Bell, Shaun Cody, and Cory Redding, who is going to bust out. He's rapdily improved.

And, you wanna talk about injuries? The Lions lost their all rookie linebacker for the whole season, lost their Pro Bowl (ie: One of the best) CBs for more than a few games in the season, lost their other CB for more than a few games in the season, and they have d!ck Jaron running that defense. So yeah, I think they have an equal defense to the Bears.

And on offense? Kevin Jones wasn't healthy for the first half of the season. Roy Williams wasn't healthy after the first four games. Charles Rogers was lost on the third play of the season. Tai Streets got a concussion from Roy Williams and then became a coward, Az Hakim was injured for a few games during the season, Damien Woody was recovering from a torn ACL, and Mooch didn't call a good game. When he let someone else call it, the Lions offense blew up, but by that time, their defense was running on fumes and people off the street. This year the Lions have a healthy Kevin Jones, a healthy Roy Williams, a healthy Charles Rogers, not to mention a healthy Damien Woody, plus Mike Williams, plus Marcus Pollard, plus Kevin Johnson, plus Rick DeMulling, plus Brad Kosier. The Lions were busy revamping their offensive line too.

And, in case you missed the sports pages, the Lions and Bears were pretty much equal last year. The Lions did get a lot better on offense, due to Rogers and Williams coming aboard, and their defense is equal. Just deal.

Just deal? What the hell does that mean?

Let me get this straight. The Bears, despite losing TWO All Pros for most of the season, and having more missed games than any team in the league the past year, and having an edge in almost EVERY single defensive category than Detroit, is equal in defense?

HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIGURE?

The Bears lost some of their best players to injury and still performed better than Detroit in all but maybe two defensive categories, yet they're equal.

Yeah. That makes sense. If the Bears were able to field a better D than Detroit, despite losing many players, how the hell are they equal? I could only imagine how well they'll play this year, if they remain healthy. Also, losing Boss Bailey cannot be compared to lsoing Urlacher or Mike Brown. That's like trying to compare a Chevy Cavalier to a Range Rover.

The reason why most people on this board agree that the Bears have a better D, is because they're right.

SS, I love ya, but you're homerism is blinding you. All you can say is that their D's are equal, despite the stats proving otherwise.

[stormshadow19]

Just deal? What the hell does that mean?

Let me get this straight. The Bears, despite losing TWO All Pros for most of the season, and having more missed games than any team in the league the past year, and having an edge in almost EVERY single defensive category than Detroit, is equal in defense?

HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIGURE?

The Bears lost some of their best players to injury and still performed better than Detroit in all but maybe two defensive categories, yet they're equal.

Yeah. That makes sense. If the Bears were able to field a better D than Detroit, despite losing many players, how the hell are they equal? I could only imagine how well they'll play this year, if they remain healthy. Also, losing Boss Bailey cannot be compared to lsoing Urlacher or Mike Brown. That's like trying to compare a Chevy Cavalier to a Range Rover.

The reason why most people on this board agree that the Bears have a better D, is because they're right.

SS, I love ya, but you're homerism is blinding you. All you can say is that their D's are equal, despite the stats proving otherwise.

MJ, my green and white brotha, I get what you're saying. Due to last season. Obviously I wasn't comparing defenses from last season, if I'm mentioning Boss Bailey, Kennoy Kennedy, Terrance Holt, and the acquisition of Ty Law, am I? That and stats can be used to prove or disprove anything. They're great, but they're not fool proof. The Lions defense, of last year, was bend but don't break. You should know that better than anyone, being a Bears fan. That's how Jaron's defenses have always been. And, I'd also be willing to bet that the Lions defense was on the field for more plays and more time than the Bears defense was.

10 Chicago 5390 336.9 2050 128.1 3340 208.8 331 20.7

11 Detroit 5401 337.6 1887 117.9 3514 219.6 350 21.9

There's the numbers. The Lions have a better pass defense. The Bears had a better rush defense and a better defense overall, by one point, one yard per game and about 60 yards overall. And allowed about 19 points less. So, don't go on and say they're superior. Because, clearly they're not. Both teams had alot of losses. Dre Bly and Fernando Bryant both missed games this year and weren't healthy. The Lions had to corpses playing saftey. The Bears loss Urlacher, their corner, and Mike Brown.

Anyway, the main point is, they are equal. The stats, basically, prove that out. That is, if you wanna go by last year. This year, the Lions added Kennoy Kennedy, subtracted Brock Marion (which is an addition by subtraction), and they get a healthy Boss Bailey back.

And, by playing the stats card, and going by last year, the Lions had a top five defensive line unit. But, then again, the stats don't work for the Lions, unless it's a negative stat, right?

And, the homerism blast... was that really necessary? I could say the same about you, complaining about how the Bears lost so much, yet had better stats than the Lions. Then, when I bust out the stats, they're not as good as you make them out to be.

And, just for the record, the Lions had more sacks, tackles, and forced fumbles, while the Bears had more interceptions. So yeah, they're fairly equal.

[stormshadow19]

Just deal? What the hell does that mean?

Let me get this straight. The Bears, despite losing TWO All Pros for most of the season, and having more missed games than any team in the league the past year, and having an edge in almost EVERY single defensive category than Detroit, is equal in defense?

HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIGURE?

The Bears lost some of their best players to injury and still performed better than Detroit in all but maybe two defensive categories, yet they're equal.

Yeah. That makes sense. If the Bears were able to field a better D than Detroit, despite losing many players, how the hell are they equal? I could only imagine how well they'll play this year, if they remain healthy. Also, losing Boss Bailey cannot be compared to lsoing Urlacher or Mike Brown. That's like trying to compare a Chevy Cavalier to a Range Rover.

The reason why most people on this board agree that the Bears have a better D, is because they're right.

SS, I love ya, but you're homerism is blinding you. All you can say is that their D's are equal, despite the stats proving otherwise.

MJ, my green and white brotha, I get what you're saying. Due to last season. Obviously I wasn't comparing defenses from last season, if I'm mentioning Boss Bailey, Kennoy Kennedy, Terrance Holt, and the acquisition of Ty Law, am I? That and stats can be used to prove or disprove anything. They're great, but they're not fool proof. The Lions defense, of last year, was bend but don't break. You should know that better than anyone, being a Bears fan. That's how Jaron's defenses have always been. And, I'd also be willing to bet that the Lions defense was on the field for more plays and more time than the Bears defense was.

10 Chicago 5390 336.9 2050 128.1 3340 208.8 331 20.7

11 Detroit 5401 337.6 1887 117.9 3514 219.6 350 21.9

There's the numbers. The Lions have a better pass defense. The Bears had a better rush defense and a better defense overall, by one point, one yard per game and about 60 yards overall. And allowed about 19 points less. So, don't go on and say they're superior. Because, clearly they're not. Both teams had alot of losses. Dre Bly and Fernando Bryant both missed games this year and weren't healthy. The Lions had to corpses playing saftey. The Bears loss Urlacher, their corner, and Mike Brown.

Anyway, the main point is, they are equal. The stats, basically, prove that out. That is, if you wanna go by last year. This year, the Lions added Kennoy Kennedy, subtracted Brock Marion (which is an addition by subtraction), and they get a healthy Boss Bailey back.

And, by playing the stats card, and going by last year, the Lions had a top five defensive line unit. But, then again, the stats don't work for the Lions, unless it's a negative stat, right?

And, the homerism blast... was that really necessary? I could say the same about you, complaining about how the Bears lost so much, yet had better stats than the Lions. Then, when I bust out the stats, they're not as good as you make them out to be.

And, just for the record, the Lions had more sacks, tackles, and forced fumbles, while the Bears had more interceptions. So yeah, they're fairly equal.

[MiamiJet]

MJ, my green and white brotha, I get what you're saying. Due to last season. Obviously I wasn't comparing defenses from last season, if I'm mentioning Boss Bailey, Kennoy Kennedy, Terrance Holt, and the acquisition of Ty Law, am I? That and stats can be used to prove or disprove anything. They're great, but they're not fool proof. The Lions defense, of last year, was bend but don't break. You should know that better than anyone, being a Bears fan. That's how Jaron's defenses have always been. And, I'd also be willing to bet that the Lions defense was on the field for more plays and more time than the Bears defense was.

There's the numbers. The Lions have a better pass defense. The Bears had a better rush defense and a better defense overall, by one point, one yard per game and about 60 yards overall. And allowed about 19 points less. So, don't go on and say they're superior. Because, clearly they're not. Both teams had alot of losses. Dre Bly and Fernando Bryant both missed games this year and weren't healthy. The Lions had to corpses playing saftey. The Bears loss Urlacher, their corner, and Mike Brown.

Anyway, the main point is, they are equal. The stats, basically, prove that out. That is, if you wanna go by last year. This year, the Lions added Kennoy Kennedy, subtracted Brock Marion (which is an addition by subtraction), and they get a healthy Boss Bailey back.

And, by playing the stats card, and going by last year, the Lions had a top five defensive line unit. But, then again, the stats don't work for the Lions, unless it's a negative stat, right?

And, the homerism blast... was that really necessary? I could say the same about you, complaining about how the Bears lost so much, yet had better stats than the Lions. Then, when I bust out the stats, they're not as good as you make them out to be.

And, just for the record, the Lions had more sacks, tackles, and forced fumbles, while the Bears had more interceptions. So yeah, they're fairly equal.

Let's say your stats are correct.

The Bears also allowed 25 less offensive plays, 31 less 3rd downs converted, 12 % less 3rd down conversion rate, less time of possession, forced 5 more turnovers, had 3 more interceptions, forced 2 more fumbles, etc.

Which would you rather have? Regardless of who you root for, the team that allowed the least plays, and prevented fewer 3rd downs, points, etc should be the defense to choose.

Yes, the Bears are superior. You can disagree all you want, but no one else agrees with you. I can say Chicago's D is superior, because they are. Less points, third downs, third downs converted, less yardage, less time of possession, and more turnovers caused. Three rookies started on our D.

In other words, they got off the field. The simple fact that their O was the worst in the league, and still allowed less plays, etc than Detroit tells me everything I need to know.

The test of any good defense is its' ability to stop the run. The Bears started two rookie defensive tackles, missed the qb of their defense for 7 games, yet they have almost identical stats against the run, despite your claim about Shaun Rogers being the best player on both defenses. You claim Detroit was better against the pass, yet the Bears gave up less yardage, had more ints and more td's scored off of ints.

One other thing. Despite starting two rookie defensive tackles, and Ogunleye missing a bunch of games, the Bears only had 3 less sacks. Three.

My homer remark was due to the fact that practically everyone else that's viewed this thread agrees that Chicago's D is better. My beliefs are based on fact, stats, and the opinions of others. Again, the Bears outplayed and are superior to Detorit in almost every defensive category, and the most important stats, yet you disagree.

[MiamiJet]

MJ, my green and white brotha, I get what you're saying. Due to last season. Obviously I wasn't comparing defenses from last season, if I'm mentioning Boss Bailey, Kennoy Kennedy, Terrance Holt, and the acquisition of Ty Law, am I? That and stats can be used to prove or disprove anything. They're great, but they're not fool proof. The Lions defense, of last year, was bend but don't break. You should know that better than anyone, being a Bears fan. That's how Jaron's defenses have always been. And, I'd also be willing to bet that the Lions defense was on the field for more plays and more time than the Bears defense was.

There's the numbers. The Lions have a better pass defense. The Bears had a better rush defense and a better defense overall, by one point, one yard per game and about 60 yards overall. And allowed about 19 points less. So, don't go on and say they're superior. Because, clearly they're not. Both teams had alot of losses. Dre Bly and Fernando Bryant both missed games this year and weren't healthy. The Lions had to corpses playing saftey. The Bears loss Urlacher, their corner, and Mike Brown.

Anyway, the main point is, they are equal. The stats, basically, prove that out. That is, if you wanna go by last year. This year, the Lions added Kennoy Kennedy, subtracted Brock Marion (which is an addition by subtraction), and they get a healthy Boss Bailey back.

And, by playing the stats card, and going by last year, the Lions had a top five defensive line unit. But, then again, the stats don't work for the Lions, unless it's a negative stat, right?

And, the homerism blast... was that really necessary? I could say the same about you, complaining about how the Bears lost so much, yet had better stats than the Lions. Then, when I bust out the stats, they're not as good as you make them out to be.

And, just for the record, the Lions had more sacks, tackles, and forced fumbles, while the Bears had more interceptions. So yeah, they're fairly equal.

Let's say your stats are correct.

The Bears also allowed 25 less offensive plays, 31 less 3rd downs converted, 12 % less 3rd down conversion rate, less time of possession, forced 5 more turnovers, had 3 more interceptions, forced 2 more fumbles, etc.

Which would you rather have? Regardless of who you root for, the team that allowed the least plays, and prevented fewer 3rd downs, points, etc should be the defense to choose.

Yes, the Bears are superior. You can disagree all you want, but no one else agrees with you. I can say Chicago's D is superior, because they are. Less points, third downs, third downs converted, less yardage, less time of possession, and more turnovers caused. Three rookies started on our D.

In other words, they got off the field. The simple fact that their O was the worst in the league, and still allowed less plays, etc than Detroit tells me everything I need to know.

The test of any good defense is its' ability to stop the run. The Bears started two rookie defensive tackles, missed the qb of their defense for 7 games, yet they have almost identical stats against the run, despite your claim about Shaun Rogers being the best player on both defenses. You claim Detroit was better against the pass, yet the Bears gave up less yardage, had more ints and more td's scored off of ints.

One other thing. Despite starting two rookie defensive tackles, and Ogunleye missing a bunch of games, the Bears only had 3 less sacks. Three.

My homer remark was due to the fact that practically everyone else that's viewed this thread agrees that Chicago's D is better. My beliefs are based on fact, stats, and the opinions of others. Again, the Bears outplayed and are superior to Detorit in almost every defensive category, and the most important stats, yet you disagree.

[stormshadow19]

Let's say your stats are correct.

The Bears also allowed 25 less offensive plays, 31 less 3rd downs converted, 12 % less 3rd down conversion rate, less time of possession, forced 5 more turnovers, had 3 more interceptions, forced 2 more fumbles, etc.

Which would you rather have? Regardless of who you root for, the team that allowed the least plays, and prevented fewer 3rd downs, points, etc should be the defense to choose.

Yes, the Bears are superior. You can disagree all you want, but no one else agrees with you. I can say Chicago's D is superior, because they are. Less points, third downs, third downs converted, less yardage, less time of possession, and more turnovers caused. Three rookies started on our D.

In other words, they got off the field. The simple fact that their O was the worst in the league, and still allowed less plays, etc than Detroit tells me everything I need to know.

The test of any good defense is its' ability to stop the run. The Bears started two rookie defensive tackles, missed the qb of their defense for 7 games, yet they have almost identical stats against the run, despite your claim about Shaun Rogers being the best player on both defenses. You claim Detroit was better against the pass, yet the Bears gave up less yardage, had more ints and more td's scored off of ints.

One other thing. Despite starting two rookie defensive tackles, and Ogunleye missing a bunch of games, the Bears only had 3 less sacks. Three.

My homer remark was due to the fact that practically everyone else that's viewed this thread agrees that Chicago's D is better. My beliefs are based on fact, stats, and the opinions of others. Again, the Bears outplayed and are superior to Detorit in almost every defensive category, and the most important stats, yet you disagree.

My stats are correct. They're from ESPN.com. They get them from STATS Inc.

Well, the Lions defense was also on the field for more plays and a longer time... didn't I say that? Another stat would be that the Lions offense was on the field for less time too. They Lions offense could not be on the field for more than three plays.

You want to say that they're superior, fine. They're clearly not, but whatever. And, just for the record, three people is not everyone.

But hey, you don't want to see it my way, and I won't ever see it your way. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't like the Bears, I hate Chicago, and that won't ever change. Obviously, you don't want to give Detroit any credit and must hate Detroit, so we'll agree to disagree.

[stormshadow19]

Let's say your stats are correct.

The Bears also allowed 25 less offensive plays, 31 less 3rd downs converted, 12 % less 3rd down conversion rate, less time of possession, forced 5 more turnovers, had 3 more interceptions, forced 2 more fumbles, etc.

Which would you rather have? Regardless of who you root for, the team that allowed the least plays, and prevented fewer 3rd downs, points, etc should be the defense to choose.

Yes, the Bears are superior. You can disagree all you want, but no one else agrees with you. I can say Chicago's D is superior, because they are. Less points, third downs, third downs converted, less yardage, less time of possession, and more turnovers caused. Three rookies started on our D.

In other words, they got off the field. The simple fact that their O was the worst in the league, and still allowed less plays, etc than Detroit tells me everything I need to know.

The test of any good defense is its' ability to stop the run. The Bears started two rookie defensive tackles, missed the qb of their defense for 7 games, yet they have almost identical stats against the run, despite your claim about Shaun Rogers being the best player on both defenses. You claim Detroit was better against the pass, yet the Bears gave up less yardage, had more ints and more td's scored off of ints.

One other thing. Despite starting two rookie defensive tackles, and Ogunleye missing a bunch of games, the Bears only had 3 less sacks. Three.

My homer remark was due to the fact that practically everyone else that's viewed this thread agrees that Chicago's D is better. My beliefs are based on fact, stats, and the opinions of others. Again, the Bears outplayed and are superior to Detorit in almost every defensive category, and the most important stats, yet you disagree.

My stats are correct. They're from ESPN.com. They get them from STATS Inc.

Well, the Lions defense was also on the field for more plays and a longer time... didn't I say that? Another stat would be that the Lions offense was on the field for less time too. They Lions offense could not be on the field for more than three plays.

You want to say that they're superior, fine. They're clearly not, but whatever. And, just for the record, three people is not everyone.

But hey, you don't want to see it my way, and I won't ever see it your way. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't like the Bears, I hate Chicago, and that won't ever change. Obviously, you don't want to give Detroit any credit and must hate Detroit, so we'll agree to disagree.

[StillerPaul]

Flops: Pats, Steelers and Chargers.

Surprises: Bucs, Bengals and Jags.

[StillerPaul]

Flops: Pats, Steelers and Chargers.

Surprises: Bucs, Bengals and Jags.

[TomShane]

Flops: Pats, Steelers and Chargers.

Surprises: Bucs, Bengals and Jags.

I, too, think the Pats will flop and the Bengals will be a good team, but why do you see the Steelers flopping? Sophomore slump for Ben?

[TomShane]

Flops: Pats, Steelers and Chargers.

Surprises: Bucs, Bengals and Jags.

I, too, think the Pats will flop and the Bengals will be a good team, but why do you see the Steelers flopping? Sophomore slump for Ben?

[StillerPaul]

I, too, think the Pats will flop and the Bengals will be a good team, but why do you see the Steelers flopping? Sophomore slump for Ben?

Well i do think Ben will struggle a bit early next season, but the Cowher trend is that usually after a real good year the team seems to me to struggle at times the next couple of years. IMO, his coaching style makes for a hell of alot of close games. I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

[StillerPaul]

I, too, think the Pats will flop and the Bengals will be a good team, but why do you see the Steelers flopping? Sophomore slump for Ben?

Well i do think Ben will struggle a bit early next season, but the Cowher trend is that usually after a real good year the team seems to me to struggle at times the next couple of years. IMO, his coaching style makes for a hell of alot of close games. I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

[PatsFanTX]

I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

Is it true he will be playing games without a helmet this year?

[PatsFanTX]

I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

Is it true he will be playing games without a helmet this year?

[StillerPaul]

Is it true he will be playing games without a helmet this year?

Haha thats only when he rides his harley out for intro's at home games.

[StillerPaul]

Is it true he will be playing games without a helmet this year?

Haha thats only when he rides his harley out for intro's at home games.

[faba]

Well i do think Ben will struggle a bit early next season, but the Cowher trend is that usually after a real good year the team seems to me to struggle at It times the next couple of years. IMO, his coaching style makes for a hell of alot of close games. I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

Ben struggled in the playoffs against the Jets and Pats- it will be interesting to see what level he can perform at next year. Steelers attack though is based on strong running game and not putting too much emphasis on the QB winging the ball all over. IT will make it easier on a young QB like him

[faba]

Well i do think Ben will struggle a bit early next season, but the Cowher trend is that usually after a real good year the team seems to me to struggle at It times the next couple of years. IMO, his coaching style makes for a hell of alot of close games. I'm guessing that Ben will have to pull em' out at the end sometimes and that'll be asking alot of the young man.

Ben struggled in the playoffs against the Jets and Pats- it will be interesting to see what level he can perform at next year. Steelers attack though is based on strong running game and not putting too much emphasis on the QB winging the ball all over. IT will make it easier on a young QB like him

[StillerPaul]

Faba, this may sound crazy but i wish they would let Ben pass alot more often. In fact, i wish they would let him call his own plays and audibles at the line by mid-season. I honestly think he's bright enough and more than capable of handling the load. Something about that guy spells winner to me man.

[StillerPaul]

Faba, this may sound crazy but i wish they would let Ben pass alot more often. In fact, i wish they would let him call his own plays and audibles at the line by mid-season. I honestly think he's bright enough and more than capable of handling the load. Something about that guy spells winner to me man.

[MiamiJet]

My stats are correct. They're from ESPN.com. They get them from STATS Inc.

Well, the Lions defense was also on the field for more plays and a longer time... didn't I say that? Another stat would be that the Lions offense was on the field for less time too. They Lions offense could not be on the field for more than three plays.

You want to say that they're superior, fine. They're clearly not, but whatever. And, just for the record, three people is not everyone.

But hey, you don't want to see it my way, and I won't ever see it your way. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't like the Bears, I hate Chicago, and that won't ever change. Obviously, you don't want to give Detroit any credit and must hate Detroit, so we'll agree to disagree.

Me, hate Detroit? Why? Why would I hate the Lions? The Lions, aside from that little run they made with Fontes, have done little to upset Bears fans.

Any Bears fan will tell you that the Packers are the team to hate. Detroit?

Come on, man.

This has nothing to do with hate or dislike. You think this is because I have some bitterness or anger, but I don't. You claim Detroit has an equal D to Chicago and I strongly disagree. It's as simple as that. If Detroit were better or equal, I'd say so. I just don't think they are. Detroit has some nice players on D, but imho, Chicago's D can completely change a game. Ask any Giants fan about the game last year. I can't remember Detroit's D having that kind of effect on a game in a long time.

[MiamiJet]

My stats are correct. They're from ESPN.com. They get them from STATS Inc.

Well, the Lions defense was also on the field for more plays and a longer time... didn't I say that? Another stat would be that the Lions offense was on the field for less time too. They Lions offense could not be on the field for more than three plays.

You want to say that they're superior, fine. They're clearly not, but whatever. And, just for the record, three people is not everyone.

But hey, you don't want to see it my way, and I won't ever see it your way. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't like the Bears, I hate Chicago, and that won't ever change. Obviously, you don't want to give Detroit any credit and must hate Detroit, so we'll agree to disagree.

Me, hate Detroit? Why? Why would I hate the Lions? The Lions, aside from that little run they made with Fontes, have done little to upset Bears fans.

Any Bears fan will tell you that the Packers are the team to hate. Detroit?

Come on, man.

This has nothing to do with hate or dislike. You think this is because I have some bitterness or anger, but I don't. You claim Detroit has an equal D to Chicago and I strongly disagree. It's as simple as that. If Detroit were better or equal, I'd say so. I just don't think they are. Detroit has some nice players on D, but imho, Chicago's D can completely change a game. Ask any Giants fan about the game last year. I can't remember Detroit's D having that kind of effect on a game in a long time.

[jets6ever]

San Diego to be a flop...not terrible, but no post-season.

Minny will be a flop, IMO.

New Orleans won't flop, but they'll continue to underachieve.

I think the Bengals, Jags and Bills have legit shots at doing very well in the AFC. I expect KC to be tough again. Don't think Oakland will be very good.

Pittsburgh will win 10 games, tops..and maybe not even that many. Baltimore will be their usual 9-7, 10-6 selves.

NFC - I like Philly to run away late with their division, while the Gints ands Cowboys stick around for about 10 weeks before falling off.

Arizona could sneak into the playoffs, Detroit could make some noise...but I think those teams are a little bit away, still. However, the NFC is so bad, they may make the SB!

The AFC will win the SB again, no doubt. Pats and Colts are the two best teams going in. Jets, Steelers, Ravens, Jags, KC...they are the next tier IMO.