Have Fun With This One

[Tru11]

Who we played in weeks 3, 4, 6 is way less relevant than being incredibly hot and having momentum down the stretch.

Quote where I said it is on the same level.

Yeah, Detroit is so much worse offensively than KC, TEN, or JAX. You're right.

Being hot and having momentum is pretty irrelevant when you consider who we played and how we played, compared to who we will be playing once the play offs start.

Heck in 2012 we where not hot and had no momentum whatsoever going 1-4 and won the SB.
The 2007 Patriots where super hot going 18-0 and lost the SB.

Im asking you a question since you like to compare sack totals hence the ? at the end.
So i dont have to quote shit.

No matter how you want to spin it the lions are worse then the steelers , patriots , KC and jags.

Ow btw the titans are yet another play off team we lost to this season giving us an impressive 0-5 mark against play off teams with 9 turnovers and just 3 takeaways.....

 

[RavensFan419]

The good morning football crew did a segment today called would you rather and they did who would they rather in a big playoff game Joe or Alex Smith and Nate Burleson said Alex Smith to me that’s just disrespectful considering Joes playoff resume and Alex’s

 

[Tru11]

The good morning football crew did a segment today called would you rather and they did who would they rather in a big playoff game Joe or Alex Smith and Nate Burleson said Alex Smith to me that’s just disrespectful considering Joes playoff resume and Alex’s

probably because its been 2 years since flacco was in the play offs and alex smith is having the best season of his career for whatever that is worth lol

all i could think off as i cant remember alex smith doing anything worth remembering come play off time....

 

[RavensMania]

The good morning football crew did a segment today called would you rather and they did who would they rather in a big playoff game Joe or Alex Smith and Nate Burleson said Alex Smith to me that’s just disrespectful considering Joes playoff resume and Alex’s

Certainly is. They aren’t taking into account his 10 playoff victories

 

[Tank]

The good morning football crew did a segment today called would you rather and they did who would they rather in a big playoff game Joe or Alex Smith and Nate Burleson said Alex Smith to me that’s just disrespectful considering Joes playoff resume and Alex’s

eh. par for the course. It's not "fashionable" to give Joe his props.

 

[RavensMania]

eh. par for the course. It's not "fashionable" to give Joe his props.

He’s Not Your Average Joe

 

[RavensFan419]

eh. par for the course. It's not "fashionable" to give Joe his props.

I don’t know why I even let it bother me I’m used to it lol but they also asked who they think the Pats would rather not see in the playoffs us or the Steelers and only Kay said the Steelers everyone else said the ravens I was actually surprised

 

[Ravens20002012]

I don’t listen to the national media

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Being hot and having momentum is pretty irrelevant when you consider who we played and how we played, compared to who we will be playing once the play offs start.

Heck in 2012 we where not hot and had no momentum whatsoever going 1-4 and won the SB.
The 2007 Patriots where super hot going 18-0 and lost the SB.

Im asking you a question since you like to compare sack totals hence the ? at the end.
So i dont have to quote shit.

No matter how you want to spin it the lions are worse then the steelers , patriots , KC and jags.

Ow btw the titans are yet another play off team we lost to this season giving us an impressive 0-5 mark against play off teams with 9 turnovers and just 3 takeaways.....

It is not irrelevant to have confidence and momentum on your side and it is asinine to try to discredit a team who is hot just because they played the teams on their schedule.

I can beat four 0-16 teams and you can lose to four 16-0 teams, but at the end of the day, you're winless and I'm undefeated. One feels good and the other doesn't.

So, what you're saying is you're reaching and can't quote me because that's not what I said.

Detroit has a better offense than KC (who are one of the worst offenses in the NFL since their winning streak was snapped) and JAX. The fact that you'd think otherwise shows you don't watch other teams.

 

[rossihunter2]

I don’t know why I even let it bother me I’m used to it lol but they also asked who they think the Pats would rather not see in the playoffs us or the Steelers and only Kay said the Steelers everyone else said the ravens I was actually surprised

to be fair good morning football and particularly schrager have been giving us props all year for the most part

 

[RavensFan419]

to be fair good morning football and particularly schrager have been giving us props all year for the most part

Totally agree

 

[Tru11]

It is not irrelevant to have confidence and momentum on your side and it is asinine to try to discredit a team who is hot just because they played the teams on their schedule.

I can beat four 0-16 teams and you can lose to four 16-0 teams, but at the end of the day, you're winless and I'm undefeated. One feels good and the other doesn't.

So, what you're saying is you're reaching and can't quote me because that's not what I said.

Detroit has a better offense than KC (who are one of the worst offenses in the NFL since their winning streak was snapped) and JAX. The fact that you'd think otherwise shows you don't watch other teams.

any team that makes the play offs feel good.
those with the higher seeds will probably feel better then those with the lower seeds.
having a home game will probably feel even better.
having a bye probably feels great.
im pretty sure they are all confident as well.

so its has very little relevance.

what im saying is that i asked you a question.
since you are doing your best to dodge it, i take it you agree that those sack totals you mentioned are worthless as both of those defenses are miles apart in their ability to get sacks proving my point.
moving on from this.

it seems you have fetish with just looking a certain periods that support you argument but sadly that is not how it works.
over the season both the jags and the chiefs have scored more points and gained more yards then the lions.
both teams and the chiefs in particular have commited less turnovers then the lions.

the fact remains that they have more points , more yards , less turnovers.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/

just because you apparently just started watching games after the bye or can only remember that far back does not mean everyone is the same.

 

[allblackraven]

It is not irrelevant to have confidence and momentum on your side and it is asinine to try to discredit a team who is hot just because they played the teams on their schedule.

I can beat four 0-16 teams and you can lose to four 16-0 teams, but at the end of the day, you're winless and I'm undefeated. One feels good and the other doesn't.

So, what you're saying is you're reaching and can't quote me because that's not what I said.

Detroit has a better offense than KC (who are one of the worst offenses in the NFL since their winning streak was snapped) and JAX. The fact that you'd think otherwise shows you don't watch other teams.

Detroit is severely lacking in backfield - if they had a competent RB, with Ebron improving in the second half of the season, they'd be in playoffs right now. Pretty much the same happened with KC - once they started experimenting too much with Hunt, all their mojo was gone.

Trouble is, it looks like they realised this and are going to be a handful for our D. We don't match well - have not covered TEs in any meaningful way, pass rush is less than average, lapses in run defense are obvious in near every game and our cornerback roster is getting too thin for my liking. Chiefs have just the players to exploit all these deficiencies at the same time.

Either our offense or our defense will have to play out of their minds, with the other side of the ball remaining steady and avoid fuckups, if we want to visit Foxborough in divisional round.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

any team that makes the play offs feel good.
those with the higher seeds will probably feel better then those with the lower seeds.
having a home game will probably feel even better.
having a bye probably feels great.
im pretty sure they are all confident as well.

so its has very little relevance.

what im saying is that i asked you a question.
since you are doing your best to dodge it, i take it you agree that those sack totals you mentioned are worthless as both of those defenses are miles apart in their ability to get sacks proving my point.
moving on from this.

it seems you have fetish with just looking a certain periods that support you argument but sadly that is not how it works.
over the season both the jags and the chiefs have scored more points and gained more yards then the lions.
both teams and the chiefs in particular have commited less turnovers then the lions.

the fact remains that they have more points , more yards , less turnovers.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/

just because you apparently just started watching games after the bye or can only remember that far back does not mean everyone is the same.

So, let me give you a scenario. We have a team that wins their first 12 games of the season and then loses four straight, but manages to lock up the second seed, guaranteeing a bye week and home field for the first game. We then have a team that lost 6 straight to open the season, but won their final 10 and controlled their own destiny to make the playoffs. Who feels better? Team two by a mile.

The fact that you keep trying to remove this human element of momentum and confidence is absurd and it's really pitiful.

What you asked was a question that tried to put words into my mouth. I never said anything remotely close to what you asked, but if I did, you'd be able to quote me on it. And then you go ahead making baseless assumptions for no reason other than you simply pulled an idea out of a hat and rolled with it. Keep trying to reach a little more. You'll make it one day if you try hard enough.

If you don't think trends are relevant, then you're nuts and do not watch other teams. I watched the Chiefs a lot to begin the season because they were fun and exciting and they were the best offense in the NFL statistically in just about every single category. Then all of a sudden, they started to lose and for about seven weeks, they were ranked as the 31st offense in the NFL, only ahead of the Colts. But trends don't matter... until we figure out why that was.

If you actually watched the Chiefs, they were doing incredibly well because Hunt was electric and shredding defenses and Reid was making tons of gadget plays to Tyreek Hill work. But then teams began to focus in on Hunt and take away the gadget and force Smith to beat them in a traditional offense and the Chiefs fell apart offensively. Handing over play calling to Matt Nagy has certainly helped things to a degree, but this is far from the Chiefs offense that we saw start the season 5-0 and hang 40 up on the Patriots.

Yeah, that trend is incredibly relevant for understanding how to stop what the Chiefs want to do and you'd be incredibly naive to ignore that.

The Lions don't have the benefit of a great running game to lean on like the Chiefs and the Jags, which props up the stats, or a great defense to give the ball back, which aids the opportunities of the offense, but give me Matthew Stafford and that Lions offense over KC and JAX any day of the week because with the game on the line, I trust Stafford to make a big time throw to Tate or Jones or Ebron (especially with how much he's come alive) over Bortles or Smith.

I don't know if you've ever heard of Football outsiders, but they do in depth rankings that looks at schedule, turnovers, starting field position, blah blah blah. Basically they don't just look at the rankings like you did and make a conclusion. They look at the entire picture as a whole.

They base their rankings on the entire season, but weight more heavily toward recent games. At week 10, when the Ravens went on their bye week, the Chiefs were ranked third and the Jags were ranked 12th in offense. Since that time, the Chiefs are now 25th and the Jags are now 18th. Know where Detroit ranks? 21st at week 10 to third overall now.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Detroit is severely lacking in backfield - if they had a competent RB, with Ebron improving in the second half of the season, they'd be in playoffs right now. Pretty much the same happened with KC - once they started experimenting too much with Hunt, all their mojo was gone.

Trouble is, it looks like they realised this and are going to be a handful for our D. We don't match well - have not covered TEs in any meaningful way, pass rush is less than average, lapses in run defense are obvious in near every game and our cornerback roster is getting too thin for my liking. Chiefs have just the players to exploit all these deficiencies at the same time.

Either our offense or our defense will have to play out of their minds, with the other side of the ball remaining steady and avoid fuckups, if we want to visit Foxborough in divisional round.

Give Detroit Hunt or Fournette and Stafford is probably easily the MVP of the league right now.

KC had issues when teams figured out how to stop Hunt. The gadget plays stopped working and Smith had to be a real pocket passer and beat teams with his arm. Turns out, that's a little bit harder to do than KC anticipated. They were, for like seven weeks after the winning streak, the 31st offense only ahead of the Colts.

On the flip side, the Ravens have been the highest scoring offense in the AFC and fifth highest in the NFL since the bye.

I don't think the Chiefs are actually a HUGE problem. Yeah, Kelce will probably kill it and get his due, but Hill doesn't really scare me with how well Canady and Humphrey have played (just keep Carr far away) and the run defense is actually really solid on the edges with Suggs and Judon. I'd worry more if Hunt were a bruiser type runner because Williams and Pierce are actually playing well, but as you said, there's those four to five times a game where they just get blocked out too easily. As for the pass rush, they're actually doing really well... when they show up. I'm willing to chalk Indy up to poor footing and slippery field conditions because the Ravens absolutely demolished Cleveland the week before. If Judon, Henry, and Suggs find a groove, it's game over for the opposing offense. It's just a matter if they can get a little momentum going early.

As for the KC defense, Peters hasn't been his usual self this year and whoever is lining across from him now is certainly not very good from what I've seen. I think the way the Ravens have been playing would be enough to beat the Chiefs. Honestly, I feel pretty good about any team right now. Even New England only scares me because of Gronk, but Gronk is unstoppable no matter what team he's playing against.

 

[allblackraven]

Give Detroit Hunt or Fournette and Stafford is probably easily the MVP of the league right now.

KC had issues when teams figured out how to stop Hunt. The gadget plays stopped working and Smith had to be a real pocket passer and beat teams with his arm. Turns out, that's a little bit harder to do than KC anticipated. They were, for like seven weeks after the winning streak, the 31st offense only ahead of the Colts.

On the flip side, the Ravens have been the highest scoring offense in the AFC and fifth highest in the NFL since the bye.

I don't think the Chiefs are actually a HUGE problem. Yeah, Kelce will probably kill it and get his due, but Hill doesn't really scare me with how well Canady and Humphrey have played (just keep Carr far away) and the run defense is actually really solid on the edges with Suggs and Judon. I'd worry more if Hunt were a bruiser type runner because Williams and Pierce are actually playing well, but as you said, there's those four to five times a game where they just get blocked out too easily. As for the pass rush, they're actually doing really well... when they show up. I'm willing to chalk Indy up to poor footing and slippery field conditions because the Ravens absolutely demolished Cleveland the week before. If Judon, Henry, and Suggs find a groove, it's game over for the opposing offense. It's just a matter if they can get a little momentum going early.

As for the KC defense, Peters hasn't been his usual self this year and whoever is lining across from him now is certainly not very good from what I've seen. I think the way the Ravens have been playing would be enough to beat the Chiefs. Honestly, I feel pretty good about any team right now. Even New England only scares me because of Gronk, but Gronk is unstoppable no matter what team he's playing against.

I'm mostly scared of Hill because of what you said above "just keep Carr far away". I don't think Pees has guts to play Canady on that side.
And I think you underrate KC offense. They are dangerous.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

I'm mostly scared of Hill because of what you said above "just keep Carr far away". I don't think Pees has guts to play Canady on that side.
And I think you underrate KC offense. They are dangerous.

KC offense has fallen off a cliff and I think Pees absolutely has the guts to put Humphrey on Hill any time he's on the boundary and of course Canady will only play the slot. Against Indy, any time it was a man look and for most of the zone looks, Humphrey was on Hilton. Pees learned from Brown.

 

[Tru11]

So, let me give you a scenario. We have a team that wins their first 12 games of the season and then loses four straight, but manages to lock up the second seed, guaranteeing a bye week and home field for the first game. We then have a team that lost 6 straight to open the season, but won their final 10 and controlled their own destiny to make the playoffs. Who feels better? Team two by a mile.

The fact that you keep trying to remove this human element of momentum and confidence is absurd and it's really pitiful.

What you asked was a question that tried to put words into my mouth. I never said anything remotely close to what you asked, but if I did, you'd be able to quote me on it. And then you go ahead making baseless assumptions for no reason other than you simply pulled an idea out of a hat and rolled with it. Keep trying to reach a little more. You'll make it one day if you try hard enough.

If you don't think trends are relevant, then you're nuts and do not watch other teams. I watched the Chiefs a lot to begin the season because they were fun and exciting and they were the best offense in the NFL statistically in just about every single category. Then all of a sudden, they started to lose and for about seven weeks, they were ranked as the 31st offense in the NFL, only ahead of the Colts. But trends don't matter... until we figure out why that was.

If you actually watched the Chiefs, they were doing incredibly well because Hunt was electric and shredding defenses and Reid was making tons of gadget plays to Tyreek Hill work. But then teams began to focus in on Hunt and take away the gadget and force Smith to beat them in a traditional offense and the Chiefs fell apart offensively. Handing over play calling to Matt Nagy has certainly helped things to a degree, but this is far from the Chiefs offense that we saw start the season 5-0 and hang 40 up on the Patriots.

Yeah, that trend is incredibly relevant for understanding how to stop what the Chiefs want to do and you'd be incredibly naive to ignore that.

The Lions don't have the benefit of a great running game to lean on like the Chiefs and the Jags, which props up the stats, or a great defense to give the ball back, which aids the opportunities of the offense, but give me Matthew Stafford and that Lions offense over KC and JAX any day of the week because with the game on the line, I trust Stafford to make a big time throw to Tate or Jones or Ebron (especially with how much he's come alive) over Bortles or Smith.

I don't know if you've ever heard of Football outsiders, but they do in depth rankings that looks at schedule, turnovers, starting field position, blah blah blah. Basically they don't just look at the rankings like you did and make a conclusion. They look at the entire picture as a whole.

They base their rankings on the entire season, but weight more heavily toward recent games. At week 10, when the Ravens went on their bye week, the Chiefs were ranked third and the Jags were ranked 12th in offense. Since that time, the Chiefs are now 25th and the Jags are now 18th. Know where Detroit ranks? 21st at week 10 to third overall now.

no tnx.

i cant be bothered reading all this ....

 

[29BmoreBird22]

no tnx.

i cant be bothered reading all this ....

Glad you bowed out with grace rather than admitting you're wrong.

 

[Tru11]

Glad you bowed out with grace rather than admitting you're wrong.

i stand by what i said .

novels based on your assumptions wont change it.

facts i might though.