Kansas Crimson

Paul1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:21 amwouldn't it be nice if NFL teams played balanced schedules?

For 16-game schedules for each of 32 teams, the NFL does a tremendous job with scheduling. It's calculated and the big conference matchups everyone wants to see almost always happens in the regular season.

Yeah they do schedule in a great way. Rotate out of conference play, so like the Chiefs play the NFC North this year, the NFC South next year, the NFC East the following year and the NFC West the next. And then they play the #1 seeds from the AFC from the previous year (Pats, Ravens, Texans) on top of the rest of the AFC South and there is the 16 games once you include the 6 division games. So if you're good, you will play good teams the following year (At least 4 games against playoff teams from previous year)

Now granted, the schedule was easy for Pats these first 6 or 7 games, but the Jets were expected to be better, the Giants were supposed to have healthy Saquan, Steelers were supposed to be a lot better.

But the Pats are definitely not invincible. A blocked punt for a TD and a fumble return TD won't bail them out every week like it did last night against a BAD Giants team.

Tyreek Hill will be a game time decision. Wylie and Watkins are listed as doubtful.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:52 pm Weak division doesn’t mean weak schedule. See my post above. They have a rough stretch in November and December. Brady has been awful the last few weeks.

Worst 3 game stretch of his career according to QBR have been these last 3 games. Avg of 32.1. Previous worst average was 42.6

NFL fans every October: "Pats are barely winning their games and Brady looks too old!"

Oh I know. Just saw that he's been struggling more than any time in his career.

Granted, January Brady is different than September October and November Brady. But it is something worth noting.

He's on pace for 4528 yards, 27 TDs, 8 INTs ( and 8 rushing TDs!!! ).
Almost every franchise in the NFL would kill for that.

I think it's true that he's no longer the guy that can do everything to where he is bringing a team back from a 2nd half 3 TD deficit. I don't think he'll have to worry about that, either.

I think he was awful against Buffalo. But to say awful the last few weeks (especially before last night's game) is operating on the Mahomes sliding scale.

Comparing QB play to Mahomes right now is like comparing Big 12 coaches to Bill Self.

So who is the equivalent to Chris Beard then? Watson, Wilson, Brady?

Because while Self is clearly 1, Beard is not far behind in 2nd.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 2:46 pm I think it's true that he's no longer the guy that can do everything to where he is bringing a team back from a 2nd half 3 TD deficit. I don't think he'll have to worry about that, either.

I think he was awful against Buffalo. But to say awful the last few weeks (especially before last night's game) is operating on the Mahomes sliding scale.

Comparing QB play to Mahomes right now is like comparing Big 12 coaches to Bill Self.

But to your point. He can't lead a comeback. He doesn't have that in him anymore.

But he's also been gifted a ton by a really good defense and a great ST unit as both defense and ST have scored multiple TDs.

But if those units are neutralized, I don't think Brady is a top 10 QB you want in a game where you have to come back. I think there are a few teams that can make that scenario happen. KC, Philly, Houston and Buffalo to an extent.

You get Brady down a couple of scores, make him play from behind and he has to throw it 40+ times I'll take my chances on that.

AFC: Pats, Chiefs, Texans, Colts, and everyone else.

Even though I am a Chiefs homer I don't believe you can completely grade the Chiefs until they have a full team with Watkins, Hill and Fisher. Injuries are a part of the game and not meant to be an excuse but all three of those guys will be back at some point and when they are that completely changes everything.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:02 pm So who is the equivalent to Chris Beard then? Watson, Wilson, Brady?

Because while Self is clearly 1, Beard is not far behind in 2nd.

Well I was talking about more over the history of the Big 12, where everyone else's accomplishments laughably pale in comparison, even Roy's.


But right now today, I'm not sure Russell Wilson isn't the 2nd best player in the NFL behind Mahomes.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:06 pm

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 2:46 pm I think it's true that he's no longer the guy that can do everything to where he is bringing a team back from a 2nd half 3 TD deficit. I don't think he'll have to worry about that, either.

I think he was awful against Buffalo. But to say awful the last few weeks (especially before last night's game) is operating on the Mahomes sliding scale.

Comparing QB play to Mahomes right now is like comparing Big 12 coaches to Bill Self.

But to your point. He can't lead a comeback. He doesn't have that in him anymore.

But he's also been gifted a ton by a really good defense and a great ST unit as both defense and ST have scored multiple TDs.

But if those units are neutralized, I don't think Brady is a top 10 QB you want in a game where you have to come back. I think there are a few teams that can make that scenario happen. KC, Philly, Houston and Buffalo to an extent.

I'd still take Brady if you need a drive or two. That's something he can still do very effectively. He can't come back in a shootout, though if you're needing 3 or 4 scoring drives and fast.

Russell might be better than Mahomes right now because Russell is closer to 100% healthy.

If Mahomes is healthy the Chiefs are 4-0 right now.

holidaysmore wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:20 pm You get Brady down a couple of scores, make him play from behind and he has to throw it 40+ times I'll take my chances on that.

AFC: Pats, Chiefs, Texans, Colts, and everyone else.

Even though I am a Chiefs homer I don't believe you can completely grade the Chiefs until they have a full team with Watkins, Hill and Fisher. Injuries are a part of the game and not meant to be an excuse but all three of those guys will be back at some point and when they are that completely changes everything.

I'm not sure why we can't properly grade the teams. It's pretty clear if you take what we've seen this year and what we know from previous seasons:

The Pats are the best team in the league, the Chiefs are the second best team, and no one else is on their level in the AFC.

Agreed - which I will have to remind myself at 2 pm on Sunday if the Chiefs happen to lose. (I have feeling they will)

If I have to choose a QB for the playoffs, i.e. three games, I'd take Brady over everyone but Mahomes.
Mental game - been there done that.
And I'd really have a tough time actually between Brady and Mahomes.

And of course he can still lead a comeback.
Brady led a comeback 2 minute drill less than a year ago against the Chiefs in Arrowhead.

All that said, I think a fully healthy Chiefs team still is only a 3 point dog in Foxboro.

pdub wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:36 pm All that said, I think a fully healthy Chiefs team still is only a 3 point dog in Foxboro.

I would say that's accurate. I think a fully healthy Chiefs team is the best team in the NFL.

They really need to get healthy in a few weeks once Vikings, Packers, @ Titans and Chargers in Mexico games come around. Then get truly healthy on bye for games against Pats, Chargers, Bears and to a lesser extent Broncos.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 2:13 pm NFL fans every October: "Pats are barely winning their games and Brady looks too old!"

No doubt bro, I’ve been saying that ‘every’ October. You know, like October 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.

You know, like, ‘every’ October........