5wide

Brady. I would never bench Tom Brady.

Their line looked like it was on the rise last season. What happened? It's the same players.

I sort of agre with you, but the Chargers are capable of playing really good football when they get focused and bring it. And, you never know when that will happen. Also, Pittsburgh is really struggling offensively and that causes me to hesitate on picking a blowout. I imagine they'll sit LT until after the bye week, so he won't be availabe either. Is it possible LT's demise has more to do with an offensive line that isn't as good as it once was?

I'm not sure what I think. I like the defense and I think it will get better. The offense seems to run hot and cold...it can look good at times and then really bad. Same with Carson...good and bad. Two keys...1) the offensive line and 2) Carson Palmer. If the line can continue to improve and develop into a solid unit that can protect the QB and give Benson some running room, then this offense has a chance to be really good. If #1 happens, then Carson has to get better. I think he's rusty and still finding his way back after the injury and some tough years. If he can return to his "franchise" form, look out. I think the Bengals are in great shape at the skill positions. They need to keep finding ways to win games while Carson shakes off the rust and the o-line matures. If they can stay in good position, they have a chance to be a very, very strong team by season's end, IMO. It may not happen, but I think people who have paid attention to what Cincy has been doing over the last couple of years realized that they were putting together a solid roster and getting some pieces in place. I still thought they were a year away, but sometimes these things come together faster than you expect. I'd go 50/50 at this point, because I believe Carson will get better, but I'm still a little skeptical about the Bengals up front.

Best team in the league right now if they're healthy. Nobody else has it going on across the board like the G-Men. You could argue that the two best teams in the league right now are in the Big Apple.

Looks like the return of the traditional powers was a little premature...Miami and Florida State still have some work to do. I'm buying Miami. I'm selling Florida State.

They lost three offensive linemen, I think. Maybe more. I think some of those guys played some on the defensive side at times. Ryan Allen - WR/DB - He was the best and most dependable WR on the team and a strong defensive player. And, he provided some strong leadership for the team, IMO. And, one more key guy and I can't think of his team. I think total they only lost 6 seniors maybe, but most, if not all, of them were starters. However, what they lost can't be blamed for this season. Neither can the loss of Chapman. To be blunt, Breathitt doesn't look like a team that's in shape to me. And, the results support that. P'burg scored the final 19 points of the game to beat Breathitt. The Bobcats looked gassed. They couldn't move the ball offensively and couldn't cover the receivers on the other side. Against Perry Central and Johnson Central, both games were competitive and close at the half, before Breathitt gets run off the field in the second half. LCA was just a massacre. Breathitt County has been playing players on both sides of the ball ever since I've been watching them, so that's not a valid excuse for what I'm seeing from this team. You can't fix "out of shape" this late in the season.

New QB. Same result. I'm not sure why they made the switch at this point, unless they've thrown in the towel for this season and are preparing for the future.

No doubt. I think the only people who said otherwise were allowing their hatred for Favre and his waffling the last few years to skew their words. I don't think anybody actually believed Minnesota would be better without Favre and with Jackson and Rosenfels.

I'm just not prepared to drop the Steelers based on two weeks worth of football. I'm not ready to anoint Baltimore because they can pass the ball against the NFL junior varsity. To be honest, I considered putting the Bengals above Baltimore and I would have if San Diego had beat the Ravens. As it was, considering the past and that the Ravens are 3-0, I had to leave them at #2. Nah...scratch that... Pittsburgh Cincinnati Baltimore How's that?

:thumb: I can go with that. They're getting there and they may get there soon. But, I'm not ready to anoint them yet. I think they're getting credit for being better than they actually are because the defense in Cincinnati has been so abysmal for basically two decades.

Nobody knows until Manning gets hurt. The same stuff was said about Brady prior to an injury actually occurring. Regardless, we're talking about who the best player is, not which team is better equipped to win without that player. And, Brady is better.

I thought it was pretty good too. It took me a while to figure out how to describe Peyton.

And, Dan Marino gets docked when he's stacked up with guys like Elway and Montana because he doesn't have the jewelry those guys do. It matters when you're splitting hairs with all-time greats. It doesn't matter when you're comparing Trent Dilfer to Dan Marino.

Hey, if you want to believe the Steelers have a good offense, I can't stop you. I can just tell you the facts.

I'm not a Steelers fan either. I lost a bet. I like the Bengals. But, I'm a Titans fan.

I don't know that there's a huge difference between those defenses and Cincinnati. I don't believe everything I hear in the media. All we've heard is how New England has a bad defense, but the numbers don't support that. They had one bad game against Buffalo. New England has played Buffalo, NY Jets, and Atlanta...they're allowing 262 ypg and 16.7 ppg. Does that sound like a bad defense to you? And, they're playing without their best LB. The Panthers were 12-4 and had a strong defense last year. The Colts are built to play with a lead, so they can look real good or real bad. San Diego has talent, but aren't playing to their potential. And, the Saints are a much improved defense (the Bengals aren't the only team that's allowed to turn it around defensively). All I know is that they are statistically better than the Bengals right now, and you can't say the Bengals have played high powered offenses to skew the numbers.

I wasn't aware I was a Bengals fan. :idunno:

Pittsburgh Baltimore Cincinnati

They're not a good offense. Who do they have that scares people other than Roethlisberger? They've been awful running the ball for two seasons now (but they did fare better against Cincinnati). They don't have any studs at WR...Ward is a great, all-around WR, but he's not a game-changer. Other than the Super Bowl, Santonio Holmes has largely been a disappointment. It doesn't say much for Mendenhall that he can't supplant Parker. Sweed looks like a bust. The line gets some unjust criticism thanks to Big Ben, but it's still not a great unit. Rookie Mike Wallace may be their best big play threat. They're just not that good. They rely on a dominant defense and a one-of-a-kind, clutch QB to win football games.

I don't view them as a top 10 defense right now. Why should I? After 3 weeks, they'll rate, at best, 16th in the NFL statistically. Broncos, Giants, Jets, Vikings, Eagles, Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Bears, Saints, Seahawks, Colts, Panthers, 49ers, Chargers, and Redskins all currently rate ahead of Cincy in yards per game allowed. That puts the Bengals at #17. The Bengals currently rate #13 is points allowed per game. There's no reason to think they're a top 10 defense right now because they aren't.

The Steelers were 22nd in the league in total offense last year (17th in passing, 23rd in rushing). They aren't a good offensive football team. They just have a playmaker at QB who makes a few big plays and almost always delivers in the clutch when the game is tight. Since they have a great defense, that recipe is enough to win a majority of their games.

No doubt about that. But, I do think it would be a good idea to remember who the best player on the team is and call plays accordingly. They don't need to rely on Favre all the time. And, as I said earlier, I'd be cautious with him due to his age and last year's injury. I'd treat him like pitcher in baseball and monitor his throws. JMO If they can head into the post-season, with a healthy and relatively fresh Brett Favre, they have a good shot to make some noise. If Favre is worn down or injured or not playing at all, they're done.

That probably means the Titans will sign him to a big contract when he's a free agent. I was really impressed with Nate "T-Rex" Washington yesterday. Not.

I don't understand why you throw the ball 46 times and Peterson only gets 19 carries. He's averaged 17 carries per game the past two weeks after getting 25 in week one. Incidentally, Week One was when Minnesota looked the best, IMO. That's not enough touches for Peterson and that's too many pass attempts for Favre. A few reasons for that. First, Peterson is the best player in purple. He should get 25+ touches every week. Second, you have a 38 year old QB, who finished last season with a torn bicep muscle, that you absolutely have to have if you're going to the Super Bowl...do you really want to start slinging it 40 times a game in Week 3 and hope his arm holds up? I think this is something the Vikings better monitor and keep an eye on or they'll end up underusing Peterson and relying on Tarvaris Jackson or Sage Rosenfels when it matters most.