Originally Posted by BlackOp:
NFL.com just had Denver finishing in 2nd place in the division...and the Chargers in 4th.
One of the guys said "you're crazy"...must have missed the production meeting...needs to brush up on his narrative steering game.
LA is legit better at every position group across the board...by a lot. Maybe LB/TE is a wash...
Denver might be improved, but they're still the worst team in the division. Again. All they'll do this year is finally finish above .500. I got them at 9-8 and last in the West. [Reply]
First six games - 3 home, 3 road. Yeah, the first 2 games are 7 and 4 win teams, but the next 4 are against winning records from last year.
Cake walk? I don't know that I would call it that...
@ SEA (7 wins in 2021)
HOU (4 wins in 2021)
49ers (10 wins in 2021)
@ Raiders (10 wins in 2021)
Colts (9 wins in 2021)
@Chargers (9 wins in 2021)
They then have the Jets and Jags before the bye. Ok, fine - they're B2B like the SEA/HOU games. You gotta play them at some point, so not sure what would satisfy you guys.
After the bye, aside from the Panthers... that's 9 games with 5 on the road and 8 against winning records from 2021.
Like last year... I don't know what winning early against shitty teams helps them down the stretch. But, break out the kleenux if you need to dry your eyes. If Denver is as bad as most of you believe, it will prove out down the stretch. [Reply]
You're incapable of having any football discussion/debate without stats. You are the typical causal that doesn't trust your eyes or your own evaluations.
Stats can be helpful. They can absolutely be used to support your argument or help refute somebody else's. They are not the be all end all though.
Feel free to ignore the stats all you want, but are you missing the fact that SNR is the one who brought up historical precedent?
Here’s my first data point: in 2013, the Panthers went 12-4 with Steve Smith. He went to Baltimore, and the Panthers went 7-8-1 in 2014. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Feel free to ignore the stats all you want, but are you missing the fact that SNR is the one who brought up historical precedent?
Here’s my first data point: in 2013, the Panthers went 12-4 with Steve Smith. He went to Baltimore, and the Panthers went 7-8-1 in 2014.
And in 2015 they went 15-1....so it is fairly obvious Steve Smith changing teams was not the sole factor in the Panthers have a .500ish year on a first place schedule after winning the division.
Chiefs have consistently had one of the toughest schedules in the last 7-8 years--so having a first place schedule impacts them much less than other teams, since they get it all the time. [Reply]
So, it's 2022... I provided the 'future opponents' schedule for KC in 2027. Aside from 2 games, it is set. Just as it is every year for the next 5 years.
Maybe you can look ahead to 2028 and figure out how the league plans to screw your team. I mean the schedule isn't out yet, so go for it and then let's revisit in 2028. I'll set my reminder.
I guarantee you the ordering of said games are in flux...do you not understand how NFL corporate works?
We're not talking about opponents...we're talking about when said games occur within an 18 week season. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
And in 2015 they went 15-1....so it is fairly obvious Steve Smith changing teams was not the sole factor in the Panthers have a .500ish year on a first place schedule after winning the division.
Chiefs have consistently had one of the toughest schedules in the last 7-8 years--so having a first place schedule impacts them much less than other teams, since they get it all the time.
Mmm… as a Broncos fan, I love being reminded of the 2015 Panthers. Thanks for that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Feel free to ignore the stats all you want, but are you missing the fact that SNR is the one who brought up historical precedent?
Here’s my first data point: in 2013, the Panthers went 12-4 with Steve Smith. He went to Baltimore, and the Panthers went 7-8-1 in 2014.
Counterpoint: Randy Moss
In his last year with the Minnesota Vikings in 2004, Vikings went 8-8. The following year w/o him they were 9-7.
In his second and last year with the Faiders (2006), they were 2-14. They improved 2 games the next year without him to 4-12.
In his last full season with the Pats (2009), they went 10-6. The next year in 2010(he was cut after 4 games) they managed to go 14-2 without him for most of the season.
Seems teams improved when Moss left and went somewhere else. Who says the same can't happen for the Chiefs w/ Hill? [Reply]
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Weird. The Chiefs also play "first year starter Trey Lance", as well as "the Seahawks and Texans who will almost assuredly pick top 5 in KC for the draft", and the "Jags, Titans (who will most likely be starting Malik Willis at this point)," and the "Raiders at home". 6 easy wins, right? (8 if you count 2 games against the Broncos)
It’s not just who you play but when. 8 of your first 11 games. The Chiefs play one team who had a losing record last year in their first 11 games. That has never happened before.
I’m glad they gave us a break with the Jags after those first 8 games….but then gave us a 3 game stretch against the Chargers and SB teams the next 3 weeks.
Chiefs schedule is insanely difficult. It was formulated that way on purpose [Reply]
Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin:
Counterpoint: Randy Moss
In his last year with the Minnesota Vikings in 2004, Vikings went 8-8. The following year w/o him they were 9-7.
In his second and last year with the Faiders (2006), they were 2-14. They improved 2 games the next year without him to 4-12.
In his last full season with the Pats (2009), they went 10-6. The next year in 2010(he was cut after 4 games) they managed to go 14-2 without him for most of the season.
Seems teams improved when Moss left and went somewhere else. Who says the same can't happen for the Chiefs w/ Hill?
Vikings didn't improve their record (by one game) due to offense, see my post above. #4 O with Moss, #25 without. [Reply]