Quote:
Originally Posted by DomCasual
Tex, two things can be true at the same time.
1) We have not been good for almost a decade.
and
2) ROTC’s take is bad - very bad.
And no need to get worked up. Saying our schedule through four games has been more difficult than yours is not saying we are better than you.
|
How'd you prove me wrong? I'm aware of the records. I'm also aware that they're virtually meaningless at this point.
Baltimore isn't "starting to figure it out." They were very good last year and might be even better this year. They've been great in every game but the Raiders (probably overlooked them).
Not sure what point you were trying to make by mentioning that KC's games have been close. It's like you were trying to prove
my point. Tough games = close games.
You call it a "7-9 team that's overachieved." Then you go on to say that they all could/should have beaten the Chiefs. If they were good enough to beat the Chiefs and should have a better record, that means they've underachieved. You drunk?
And yeah, when you lose one of the top receivers in the league (after already losing your #2 and your top RB) at the start of the game, you're probably not going to tear apart a defense that leads the league in points allowed.
As for the Broncos' schedule...
Seattle has home wins over the mighty Broncos and Dolphins w/ Skyler Thompson, and an OT win vs the Patriots. Tonight, they played the first good team on their schedule and got slapped down. Jets have beaten the Patriots and Titans. They'd have to try to have worse records. Neither team has proven a thing and both are likely average or below.
KC's faced Lamar Jackson, Burrow, Cousins and Herbert. Denver's faced Geno, Fields, Mayfield and Rodgers' corpse. Yet it's a "very bad" take to argue that KC may have played a tougher schedule? Lol
The only thing I'll amend about my original comment is that TB might be better than a fringe playoff team. Although they clearly weren't that day.