Rhodri's 2009 NFL Predictions
Just for fun, and because I think I'm more able to research than some of the so-called professional prognosticators, here is my projection of the 2009 season. The record projections use the following format Overall (In the team's 6 games in their division, record in the 4 games against the first outside division, record in the four games against the second outside division, and then a projection of the remaining 2 games).
AFC West (Division Rank 7): This is the easiest division to guess, which means it will probably see the most turmoil. Still, unless the Chargers are absolutely ravaged by injuries, I just don't see them losing it.
San Diego 10-6 (Div 5-1, NFC East 2-2, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): This is one of the clearest favorites in the NFL, but not because this team is without flaws. What's up with Merriman? How healthy can LT be? However, their division is wretched and they'll feast on their rivals. Last year, they finished 8-8 with a goodly amount of injuries and problems, and yet that 8-8 record seems to have been unlucky given the 27.4 points per game scored and the 21.7 ppg allowed. I see regression to the mean even with the questions and at least 10 wins.
Denver 7-9 (Div 3-3, NFC East 1-3, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): The SportsNation Broncos blog has a post that asks the question: Is this a 3-13 team or a 13-3 team? I have to say I think the former is more likely, though I do think this will be a middle of the road team. Orton is not a bad QB, but he's not great and is probably a slight downgrade to Cutler. Their most explosive player, Marshall, is busily exploding at management. Their defense was 30th last year allowing 28.0 ppg. They've tried to strengthen the defense, but I don't think we'll see them allowing any less than 23 ppg in 2009 and that won't be enough to carry an offense that I think will score a point less per game than last year and end up around 22 per game. In terms of record, I think this is the most volatile team in the division, but I think the 7-9 is a very optimistic projection.
Oakland 6-10 (Div 2-4, NFC East 1-3, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): This is a mediocre team, there's no doubt about it. The weaknesses on the offensive line and in the linebacking corps prevent the top-flight talent at RB and CB from reaching their potential. I do think there are some signs of improvement, notably in JaMarcus Russell at QB, but I just can't see this team improve their record significantly. I do see this team making a few big plays and catching lightning in a bottle in a couple of games to beat some vastly better opponents, but they'll lose a lot of games they could win.
Kansas City 5-11 (Div 2-4, NFC East 0-4, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1) This team went 2-14 last year, and 5 wins is a major upgrade. I see some positives here, as I think Todd Haley is great fit for this team. They have some talent at QB now, and they've got some other offensive talent, though they may very well have the worst offensive line in the NFL. They will struggle on defense to learn the 3-4, but I do think we'll see some improvement and I predict they will win 4 of their last 5 games. However, the 5 wins reflect the fact that they're in a bad division and while this team is headed for better days, they won't be all that much better in 2009.
AFC South (Division Rank 4): I really struggle with this division, but I see four teams with major questions and I do not see an elite team.
Tennessee 10-6 (Div 4-2, NFC West 3-1, AFC East 2-2, Other 1-1): The Titans went 13-3 last year and their +141 point differential suggests this was not a fluke. However, I do think there will be some regression to the mean and I think the loss of Albert Haynesworth will hurt them. I see them averaging around 23-24 ppg, just like last year, but I see a significant increase to the 14.6 ppg allowed from last year and that will bring them down.
Indianapolis 9-7 (Div 3-3, NFC West 3-1, AFC East 2-2, Other 1-1): Peyton Manning is probably the best QB in the game right now, especially given Brady's injury questions. However, the Colts only averaged a middle of the road 23.6 ppg last year. I think they'll actually improve here, as I think they'll be deeper in their skill positions than most expect, but I don't see much more than 1 ppg improvement to put them around 10th in the league. However, I think they'll fall back a goodly amount on defense some from 18.6 ppg. Last year they had a +79 point differential suggesting that 12-4 was a moderately lucky record. I think they'll be a +40 or so team, suggesting the new record will be about right.
Houston 9-7 (Div 3-3, NFC West 2-2, AFC East 2-2, Other 2-0): This team was 8-8 last year with -28 point differential, suggesting they were a bit lucky. Still, I think they've got talent on both sides of the ball with Ryan, Williams, and Johnson and I see some improvement, especially since they got one of the easiest set of 2 random opponents in the Oakland Raiders and the Cincinnati Bengals.
Jacksonville 6-10 (Div 1-5, NFC West 2-2, AFC East 1-3, Other 1-1): Jacksonville was probably an unlucky 5-11 given the -65 point differential in 2008. However, any team whose fans are excited trading for Luke McCown at QB has problems. I think Jack del Rio is a great coach, but the Jaguars offensive line, while it has a lot of upside, is very young. I think they've made some improvements on defense, but not enough.
AFC North (Division Rank 2): This division will have a heck of a fight at the top, and a lot of bleah at the bottom.
Baltimore 13-3 (Div 5-1, NFC North 3-1, AFC West 4-0, Other 1-1): I really like the Ravens. They went 11-5 last year but that might have been unlucky given the huge +141 point differential. I think they'll see a bit of a drop-off defensively with age, injuries, and the loss of DC Rex Ryan, but not much. Their offense will improve and offset that however, given that I think Flacco will get better so I think the Ravens will be in the +135 point differential range again and that will at least give them 12 wins.
Pittsburgh 12-4 (Div 4-2, NFC North 3-1, AFC West 4-0, Other 1-1): The Steelers were a great team last year with a +124 point differential, but they were a bit lucky at times. Their defense will again be really good, but I do see a bit of a smaller offense. I think they'll have a great year, and I think they'd win most other divisions, but the Ravens will be a great team.
Cleveland 5-11 (Div 2-4, NFC North 1-3, AFC West 1-3, Other 1-1): I like Eric Mangini, and think the Jets pulled the plug there a bit soon, but neither Brady Quinn nor Derek Anderson fill me with confidence at QB. They scored 14.5 ppg last year, and I see nothing on this team to make me really think they'll do much better than that in 2009. They've got the makings of a decent offensive line, but their skill position players are either old (Lewis), disgruntled (Edwards), or mediocre (Royal). They've got some players on defense such as D'Qwell Jackson, and I think they'll again be middle of the pack on defense. Yes, Joshua Cribbs will create 20-25 points with good returns, but he about did that last year. I give them one extra win this year, but nothing more. I think their victory on 10 December against the Steelers in one of the games greatest grudge matches will give Baltimore the division.
Cincinnati 4-12 (Div 1-5, NFC North 1-3, AFC West 2-2, Other 0-2): Carson Palmer is a great QB, but he may very well be the Archie Manning of the early 21st century. I do think Mike Zimmer will improve this team, but they are a year away from seeing results. They were 30th in point differential at -160 suggesting their 4-11-1 2008 record might have been a little lucky. Dallas fans know Zimmer's a good 4-3 defensive mind, and their defense was in the middle of the pack so this should stay about the same, Their offensive line is still pretty bad, which in a division with Baltimore and Pittsburgh is a bad sign for Palmer. Nevertheless, they should score more than the amazingly bad 12.8 ppg like 2008, but I can't see them beating any of the good teams they'll face in 2009.
AFC East (Division Rank 6): I think the Patriots will run away here, and then there's not much.
New England 13-3 (Div 5-1, NFC South 3-1, AFC South 3-1, Other 2-0): This team went 11-5 without Tom Brady last year and their +101 point differential suggests that wasn't a fluke. They get Brady back, and they add Galloway and other talent around him. I suspect their offense will start a bit slowly as all the pieces start working together, but 30 ppg is not out of the question, 5 ppg more than last year. I do think the transition on their defense will hurt them some, losing Vrabel, Bruschi, and Seymour in the same year, but I do not see much of a drop-off overall. I suspect that the Patriots will lose a game they shouldn't early on, but I see a juggernaut at the end of the year.
New York 8-8 (Div 3-3, NFC South 2-2, AFC South 2-2, Other 1-1):The Jets went 9-7 last year, though they were a little lucky to get that. Last year they scored 25.3 ppg and I just cannot see them duplicating that with Mark Sanchez at QB. Their defense was slightly below average in 2008. This defense will get better as Rex Ryan is really really good, but it will take some time so I don't see any major change overall in their results. I do think they'll win a game or two at some point that they shouldn't, most notably I think they'll beat the Patriots once, but they just won't improve enough in 2009 to have a winning record.
Miami 7-9 (Div 3-3, NFC South 1-3, AFC South 2-2, Other 1-1): The Dolphins were one of the worst division winner in 2009 with only a +28 point differential. I really think Sparano is a fantastic coach, but 11-5 in 2008 was regression to the norm from the 1-15 in 2007 and I think we'll see another correction here. There's a lot to like in a Parcells-run organization, but the Wildcat won't surprise anyone and they won't get all the bounces in 2009.
Buffalo 7-9 (Div 2-4, NFC South 2-2, AFC South 2-2, Other 1-1): Did you hear that Terrell Owens signed with the Bills in the off-season? They were a 7-9 team last year with maybe a bounce taking this team to 8-8. Yet, this is a team going downhill. I think their offense will go downhill in 2009 because while Edwards is serviceable at QB and Evans and TO are nice outside, Lynch is essentially a league average RB that gets the ball a bunch and their offensive line will be mediocre at best. On defense, their 21.4 ppg will stay about the same. I see them winning a game they shouldn't where TO goes ballistic, but they'll lose a game or two because their strength will be in the vertical passing game, which may have some issues with Buffalo's weather late in the season.
AFC Overall: The AFC is filled with haves and have-nots. The Patriots, Ravens and Steelers are all great teams, and the Titans, Colts and Chargers could also go to the Super Bowl, but their overall division rankings are low because aside from these teams there is a lot of nothing. I'm not completely happy with my assessments here because I'm not seeing enough change from previous years, though I do have 2 new division winners. Nevertheless, I just do not see where any of the other teams have closed the gap enough on the cream of the crop.
AFC Playoffs Round 1: Pittsburgh def. Tennessee, San Diego def. Indianapolis
AFC Playoffs Round 2: New England def. San Diego, Baltimore def. Pittsburgh
AFC Title Game: Baltimore def. New England
NFC West (Division Rank 8): This division is definitely rank, and I see a lot of turmoil here, but not a lot of quality.
San Francisco 9-7 (Div 4-2, NFC North 2-2, AFC South 2-2, Other 1-1): San Francisco? What the hell am I thinking? Well, I'm thinking they have a QB in Hill good enough to win a few games in ugly fashion, some other talent on offense, and a defense that is getting better. They were 7-9 last year. I think Hill brings the offense up to about 23 ppg and I think Singletary glares at his defense enough to bring them down to 21.5 ppg allowed. That should be enough to win the worst division in football by far.
Seattle 8-8 (Div 4-2, NFC North 1-3, AFC South 1-3, Other 1-1): I think the Seahawks will rebound from a justifiable 4-12 record last year. I think they'll have a better offense than the 18.4 ppg from last year, probably around 21-22 ppg. I also think they will improve on defense. Certainly there seems to be more excitement about the defense from Seahawks fans, but I don't see them going from 24.5 ppg to dominating. I think they might get to 22ppg allowed, and if they do, they'll go 8-8.
Phoenix 7-9 (Div 3-3, NFC North 1-3, AFC South 2-2, Other 1-1): Super Bowl losers have recently struggled to get to the playoffs and 2009 will be no different. The team had a +1 point differential and won their division. +1! They were the epitome of 8-8 team who scratched out a few extra victories. Fitzgerald is an incredible WR, but they have to have a lot go lucky in 2009 to have a good record, and frankly a lot went lucky last year.
St. Louis 4-12 (Div 1-5, NFC North 0-4, AFC South 1-3, Other 1-1): Umm, they have to get better because of regression to the mean, right? But the OLine won't give the skill positions any time to work, the defense won't be any better with all the changes there, and I think this is one of Detroit's few victories.
NFC South (Division Rank 3): This was the only division in 2008 where every team had a positive point differential, but Tampa Bay's demise brings this division down.
New Orleans 11-5 (Div 4-2, NFC East 2-2, AFC South 3-1, Other 2-0): New Orleans will not lead the NFL in scoring this year, but I think that's because New England will be so good. On the other hand, I think their mediocre defense from 2008 will only improve a little bit. I suspect that New Orleans will again be around the +70 point differential like in 2008, but that's not enough to be the dominant team some people are predicting. They did get a break playing Detroit and St. Louis as the other opponents, and I think that will give them the division.
Atlanta 10-6 (Div 4-2, NFC East 2-2, AFC East 3-1, Other 1-1): I think Atlanta will actually be better than New Orleans with Ryan getting more experience and more targets. However, I don't think they'll be that much better and they don't have as favorable schedule as New Orleans, so I think they'll lose the division by virtue of having to play Chicago and San Francisco as opposed to St. Louis and Detroit for New Orleans.
Carolina 8-8 (Div 4-2, NFC East 1-3, AFC East 2-2, Other 1-1): They won the NFC South in 2008 with a 12-4 record but with a fairly pedestrian +84 point differential. I cannot point to anything in particular where they will be worse, except this year they play the Easts, and both will cause the Panthers some problems. I see them splitting with the other contenders in the South, but not doing as well outside of the division.
Tampa Bay 2-14 (Div 0-6, NFC East 0-4, AFC East 1-3, Other 1-1): Wow, how the middle of the road have fallen. Tampa and Detroit will be playing for the first pick, and I have no clue who will, um... win, that pick. Tampa Bay will struggle to score 14 ppg this year, and their defense will regress from 20 ppg allowed to something around 24 ppg. That, my friends, is a -160 point differential and that is a bad team in an otherwise good division.
NFC North (Division Rank 5): This is much like the NFC South, with 3 good teams and 1 wretched one. However, I think this division is just a little less powerful than the South. The records may not show it, however, as their outside divisions are the AFC North and the NFC West.
Chicago 11-5 (Div 4-2, NFC West 3-1, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): I think the Bears are almost as a good as Chicago fans think they will be. Cutler will be an improvement at QB, though the offense was very respectable at 23.4 ppg last year. 25 ppg is probably what they'll average in 2009. I think their defense will improve to about 18 ppg from 21.9 ppg because their healthier than they have been recently. That's about +100 point differential, which makes them a very good team.
Minnesota 11-5 (Div 4-2, NFC West 3-1, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): Losing on tiebreakers to the Bears will be the Vikings, who I think are definitely more talented overall, but just filled with issues. This is the team that has the most volatility I think. They could end up at 13-3, but I could see them imploding and going 7-9. Favre has to be a dramatic upgrade over Jackson at QB, and by dramatic I'm emphasizing the turnovers here. Jackson and Frerotte combined for a 3.8% interception rate with 4 fumbles. Favre had a 4.2% interception rate with 5 fumbles. Favre brings more big plays, but he brings them to both sides of the field. If he plays well and takes advantage of possibly the third best WR corps in the NFL, this team will score a lot. However, he will give up some points, and I think the defense will give up more overall in part because of Favre. Could they be great? Yes. But I'm not ready to think the Vikings will pillage the North in 2009.
Green Bay 10-6 (Div 4-2, NFC West 3-1, AFC North 2-2, Other 1-1): I think we have another good team here, but not enough better to beat the two favorites. However, they will be the beneficiaries if the Favre experiment dies a hideous death. The Packers were very good offensively with 26.2 ppg in 2008, and I see no reason why Rodgers will not continue to lead them to points, The defense should improve some from 23.8 ppg, but it will be later in the year when you see that happen because they're transitioning to the 3-4 and they have some square pegs in round holes. Again, I see some incremental improvement, but nothing earth-shaking, though if the Vikings and Bears allow the Packers to stick around while they learn the defense, they could rue the last part of the season.
Detroit 2-14 (Div 0-6, NFC West 1-3, AFC North 1-3, Other 0-2): When winning 2 games constitutes a good season, you know you have a bad franchise. I'm not a big Stafford fan, but they play the Rams, Browns, and Bengals, and I think they take two victories out of these three. They're 0 for their last 17, though, and don't play a team I'm predicting to have a losing season until their 7th game, meaning they will probably be 0-23 when the Rams come to town. Get your tickets now.
NFC East (Division Rank 1): Top to bottom this is the toughest division in football, and I don't think it's close. This is the only division that could have any of the 4 teams win it, and not because the main favorite implodes, like I'm predicting of the Cardinals in the West. Nope, each team would be at least a contender in every other division, though I believe the Ravens and Patriots are the best teams.
Dallas 11-5 (Div 3-3, NFC South 3-1, AFC West 3-1, Other 2-0): OK, I admit it, I'm a Cowboys fan, so this is possibly a homer pick, but I don't think so. People are asking about picking up TO's production, and I see that getting picked up by Williams, Bennett, and Jones. People are asking about depth. Well, there's no doubt that injuries could hurt the Cowboys, but injuries could hurt every team. Last year's Cowboy team scored 22.6 ppg, but I think they'll be up in the 28 range in 2009. Why the difference? Well, last year prior to Romo's injury the Cowboys were averaging 29 ppg and I think this is a better offense overall. We'll see the Cowboys dominate time of possession, and they'll score a lot. I would not be surprised if they end up the 3rd most prolific offense in 2009 behind the New England and New Orleans. Defensively, they averaged a mediocre 22.8 ppg against despite leading the NFL in sacks. I think that will improve dramatically as well. First, the Cowboys have a better secondary than they have ever had and I think Phillips is just waiting to unleash this defense. Last year they had 59 sacks, I think they'll get another .5 sacks per game and have around 67 or slightly more than 4 per game. I also think that in 2009 that will translate into more turnovers. Finally, with the offense controlling the ball more, their opponents will have fewer opportunities to score. Last year, the prognosticators said that the only thing that could stop Dallas was their own mistakes, and indeed the mistakes the Cowboys made contributed to a mediocre season. Last year, the Cowboys not only played poorly, the bounces that had gone their way in 2007 didn't. I think, however, some of those bounces will even out in 2009 and I think they will play more disciplined and at least break even on special teams.
New York 11-5 (Div 3-3, NFC South 3-1, AFC West 4-0, Other 1-1): New York has a great team. They're great in the trenches, they have, if not a great QB, a very good one in Manning, good RBs, and a very good pass rush. However, I don't think they'll score 26.7 ppg like in 2008 because their WRs don't scare anyone and their RB depth isn't as good without Ward. I think their defense will get a little better (from 18.4 to 17 ppg) because of Umenyiora to offset the offense meaning they'll again be a +120 point differential team. I think they fall back a game because I think they will go 3-3 in the division and I think they will have a few more injuries in 2009. The injuries, by the way, seem to have already kicked in here.
Washington 10-6 (Div 3-3, NFC South 3-1, AFC West 3-1, Other 1-1): I think that the Redskins will have a similar improvement in defense with the addition of Albert Haynesworth. I also think they'll improve some on the 16.6 ppg they put up in 2008, however, this depends on keeping Jason Campbell's confidence up and that may be challenging given that they always seem to be ready to push him out the door. Campbell's underrated because he doesn't put up huge TD numbers, but 6 interceptions and 0 fumbles in over 500 pass attempts mean he is exceptional at protecting the ball.
Philadelphia 8-8 (Div 3-3, NFC South 1-3, AFC West 3-1, Other 1-1): This is probably even more surprising than the Cowboys pick, but I'm not drinking the Eagles kool-aid in 2009. The death of Jim Johnson, one of the greatest defensive minds ever, will hurt their defense. Even worse from an on the field perspective is the loss of Bradley at MLB and Dawkins in the back. I think they will give up around 23 ppg, which is a huge drop-off from the 18.1 of last year. Essentially, I think Dallas and Philly trade points given up from 2008 to 2009 and I also see a decline on the Eagles offense. Their offensive line, despite the addition of Peters, is not quite as good in my opinion, and I don't think Westbrook will be near as explosive. Maclin and Jackson are nice WRs, and they'll make some big plays, but I think the lack of a running game will make McNabb a target. Plus, if McNabb starts slow, what will happen with Michael Vick? The Eagles play 3 easier games in weeks 3-5, but if they stumble against KC, Tampa, or Oakland this could deteriorate. Frankly, in the 2009 Eagles I see all of the turmoil that surrounded the 2008 Cowboys, and I don't know as the Eagles have the talent to overcome it any better than the Cowboys did, especially with the injuries.
NFC Playoffs Round 1: New York def. San Francisco, New Orleans def. Minnesota
NFC Playoffs Round 2: New York def. Chicago, Dallas def. New Orleans
NFC Title Game: Dallas def. New York
NFC Overall: This is a much harder conference to predict. I'm predicting 4 new division winners, which might seem unlikely until you realize that change is much more common than consistency. None of the 2007 NFC division winners and only 2 of the AFC division winners won in 2008. This is also the conference that my predictions will go out the window quickest with injuries, which will happen. If Manning, Rodgers, or Brees goes down, those teams are sunk. If you see a Ware, Peterson, Urlacher, or Willis get hurt, those teams will struggle. And that's not even talking about the mid-level players who we only know if they're on our team, such as Kyle Kosier's loss for the Cowboys last year. I cannot, however, predict those injuries well, so I'm going to just have to go on the other evidence. Oh, and the Cowboys over New York because I think the New York offense will be good, but I think the Cowboys will be great and while the Giants are touted to have a great pass rush, they only had 42 sacks compared to 59 last year, and while the return of Umenyiora will cut that gap, I think the Cowboys will be even better at that in 2009.
That being said, however, I'm not sure I can predict the Cowboys over the Ravens in the Super Bowl. I'll be rooting for it, but I think that the Ravens are better than Dallas. I will say this, though, if it does end up a Cowboys-Ravens Super Bowl, the Cowboys do have a puncher's chance because of their pass rush.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
1 recs |
35 comments
Comments
This is probably even more surprising than the Cowboys pick, but I’m not drinking the Eagles kool-aid in 2009.
Let’s see….Cowboys 11-5, Eagles 8-8?
Nope, not drinking the Eagles koolaid. Sure are drinking a different flavor though.
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
by southjersey89 on Sep 8, 2009 3:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Eagles were an unlucky 9-6-1 team last year, no doubt about it. Focusing on the +127 point differential one would think that if nothing had changed, they would go 11-5. I totally see your point of view. However, we all know that a lot has changed. R.I.P. to Johnson, a loss greater than I think you might expect, and we know that Bradley was a stud. I don’t see a real replacement for Dawkins.
In other words, I see a reduction of talent, not to mention you guys are the media circus this year. That does not help.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have 8 too many wins.
Your numbers add up to 264 wins and 248 losses, so you need to knock a few losses off some teams.
I think take 2 from WAS, 2 from MIA, 2 from NE, 1 froim GB, and 1 from KC.
by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 8, 2009 3:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I figured I’d do something like that. I didn’t want to go to all the trouble of back-checking all the inter-divisional matchups. :)
I can’t see taking 2 from any team, but I can see taking 1 from the teams you mentioned, and then maybe 1 from Carolina, Arizona, and Jacksonville.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you over value the Ravens
They lost Scott and simply aren’t good enough offensively. Losing Ryan will hurt as well.
I think they will struggle to make the playoffs this year.
GB will be much better than Chicago, I think Cutler struggles in the Windy City.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Sep 8, 2009 3:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought about that too, but I think 25.1 ppg (+1 there, 10th or so in the league) is not unreasonable on offense with Flacco’s experience and I don’t see them losing too much off of the 15.3 from last year. If they go down to 17.3 (-2 there, 3rd or 4th) and I’m right on the offense, that’s still a +125 team, which is damn good.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus they play the AFC West, and I don’t see the Chargers beating them, even in San Diego
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The NFL as a whole will go 264-248?
Wow… It’s gonna be a crazy season!
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 3:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL, as I said I took each team individually, I didn’t go back and add them all up.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
SF win the division?, I think Seattle rolls over everyone out there.
but thats not saying much.
by bad knees on Sep 8, 2009 3:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That could happen, but I have to say I was impressed with the 49ers when I saw them against the Cowboys. Oh, and I don’t want to have pick against Mike Singletary ;)
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, I think the Bengals will be better than 4-12 this season, probably 6-10 and maybe even better.
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
by southjersey89 on Sep 8, 2009 3:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
By point differential, the Bengals were the 3rd worst team in the NFL last year. Yeah, I think Zim’s a good coach, but I don’t think they added a ton. They were a bit lucky last year, they’ll have to work to have essentially the same record in 2009, IMHO.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It takes a rare gift...
to turn a blind eye to all the holes on the Cowboys squad but also be able to put the high beams on the Birds downfalls. I just dont see how anyone can predict an 11 win season for the Boys this year. Im an optomistic Birds fan and I wouldnt even go that far. Too much homer not enough logic in this break down man. The writes up were nice I can tell you put a lot of thought into each team… but then you put on the blinders when it came to your team and it got a lot less credible.
by IgglesFanDeployd on Sep 8, 2009 4:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see all these holes you are talking about, I see we are dangerously thin when it comes to back-ups in some positions, but I think we challenge any team in the division at any position as long as we are healthy. Health is the biggest variable in any team’s season, but if you want to point out “all the holes on the Cowboys squad” I would love to see them.
by sduncan24 on Sep 8, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depth is scary bad. Obviously, they're stacked at RB and TE... and then it gets really, really ugly.
As for the starters, WR core and DE’s are weak, the entire secondary (excluding the fragile Newman) is shaky, and the OL is older than dirt.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was just answering your question, by the way… Didn’t mean to poke you guys with a stick – Haha, OK, maybe a little.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 4:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, feel free to poke, but I see bigger holes in the Eagles.
How much does Westbrook have, because Buckhalter is a nice backup but not really the answer, right? Will the OLine work well together despite the injuries? How much depth is there on the OLine? How much production can you expect out of Celek? Will the loss of Johnson hurt the defense? Who’s going to step up to fill Bradley’s shoes? I’m not convinced about your secondary either.
And that’s not even bringing up the Vick thing, which I think was a mistake given the way that McNabb has responded to other QBs previously.
Last year, many of the answers came up positive for the Eagles, especially towards the end of the year. Last year, the answers came up negative for the Cowboys, especially towards the end of the year. Regression to the mean suggests this will like change.
In the end, I think the Eagles got a little worse over the offseason, and I think the Cowboys got a little better, hence the prediction.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much does Westbrook have, because Buckhalter is a nice backup but not really the answer, right?
Huh? Buckhalter is now in Broncos orange, our backup is LeSean McCoy.
Will the OLine work well together despite the injuries? How much depth is there on the OLine?
That isn’t really a hole per say, more of an unanswered question going into the season that will be answered as the weeks progress. Our depth is not as bad as it would seem, we have several O-lineman that can play multiple positions, so that will alleviate some stress with regards to depth.
How much production can you expect out of Celek?
Our previous starting tight end was the venerable LJ Smith, and I say that with total sarcasm. Seriously, anything will be a nice step up from his woeful blocking and catching. Not to mention we just acquired backup TE Alex Smith today, so that helps.
Will the loss of Johnson hurt the defense?
Again, not a hole. A hole is something that can be filled, and that cannot be said for the loss of Jim Johnson. We can only hope McDermott has learned enough to give us a great season on defense.
Who’s going to step up to fill Bradley’s shoes? I’m not convinced about your secondary either.
These are legitimate concerns, I’ll give you that. Bradley will be missed – especially on running downs. As for our secondary, the only true toss-up is the FS position – hardly enough to bring our entire secondary into question.
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
by southjersey89 on Sep 8, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I meant McCoy. I had looked him up when I did the research but I was just so used to thinking of Buckhalter as your backup, I messed up on the reply.
I agree that Celek and Smith are an upgrade on LJ, but I would guess that the Williams, Crayton, Bennett, and Witten group are much more productive in 2009 than the Jackson, Maclin, Curtis, Celek group. I was trying, in a not very effective way, to point out the disparity at TE between the Cowboys and the Eagles.
You are absolutely right on Johnson. You have my deepest condolences on his passing. I was merely pointing out that where Johnson was a stone-cold certainty, McDermott still has some questions until we see his defense in action. I realize it’s essentially the same one, but Johnson had an amazing ability to know when to blitz and from where.
As to the one position bringing the secondary down, I and all Dallas fans who watched Roy Williams the safety regress have to disagree.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was trying, in a not very effective way, to point out the disparity at TE between the Cowboys and the Eagles.
I agree. There has always been a disparity between our TEs and the rest of the NFC East TEs for that matter. However, as I just pointed out, that disparity shrank a little this offseason with the changes we made. Again, the disparity is still considerable, just not as much as before. Fact is we still improved at the TE position.
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
by southjersey89 on Sep 8, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much does Westbrook have, because Buckhalter is a nice backup but not really the answer, right? Will the OLine work well together despite the injuries? How much depth is there on the OLine? How much production can you expect out of Celek? Will the loss of Johnson hurt the defense? Who’s going to step up to fill Bradley’s shoes? I’m not convinced about your secondary either.
See, there’s the difference between a “hole” and a “question.” These are questions… not holes, and actually, some of the questions aren’t really even concerns at all (OL depth, Celek, and definitely not the secondary).
Last year, many of the answers came up positive for the Eagles, especially towards the end of the year. Last year, the answers came up negative for the Cowboys, especially towards the end of the year. Regression to the mean suggests this will like change.
I read that 3 times, I still don’t see what you’re getting at here. The Eagles played better at the end of last year, so that’s likely to change? Why?
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember that our wr core isn't as important with runing two TE sets a lot
Entire secondary is shaky? sorry that shows your eagles bias. Jenkins and Scandrick both looked really good last season. Clearly much better than henry – once they saw significant time and newman got healthy, we were a top passing D for the next 6 weeks. Sensabaugh is a question, but we’ve been TERRIBLE at that position for years and he looks decent. Do you really think he’ll be worse?
OL has 4 guys that are 31 or so, 3 of whom have not been hurt in the last 2 years. Older than dirt is an exaggeration. Your OL is just as big a question as ours, my friend. You may have younger players, but they come with a TON of baggage.
I think there are MAJOR depth question marks with OL and LB….but our starters at those positions are really good. The fact that you didn’t even mention lb (our biggest area of concern dpeth wise) makes me wonder how much you know about this team.
by foyesboys on Sep 8, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jenkins absolutely did not look “really good” last season. Scandrick definitely played well enough for a rookie (especially a 5th rounder), but “really good?” As for Sensabaugh, I’m not going to lie and say I saw a bunch of Jacksonville games, but when a 26 year old free agent can only find a 1-year, $1.75 million contract, how good can he be? And Hamlin evidently completely forgot how to tackle.
As for your O Line, yes, by the end of the season (and think you for setting me up nicely on this one), your O Line starters will be the following ages…
Adams – 34
Kosier – 31
Gurode – 31
Davis – 31
Colombo – 31
(Side note – That’s now the 1,000th time I’ve posted that. Everyone gets a free beer!)
And actually I did mention the LB’s (sort of). I said there was depth at TE and RB, and that everywhere else it was scary bad (that would include the LB’s).
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tell you what, Dawk. We can argue this until we’re blue in the face but we’ll only see once the games get played. We both have cogent points on each other’s side and only how the chips fall will tell us who is right.
But I believe the Cowboys will outscore the Eagles in 2009 and I’m willing to bet a case of Erie Brewing Company’s Mad Anthony Ale on it. Heck, I’m even going to be in Pennsylvania next July/August (near Pittsburgh and willing to meet you in the middle of the state to deliver it. That’s assuming you’re in the Philly area, I actually have no clue where you live of course. I live in Columbia, MO and go to Mizzou, which is why I got to see Maclin so much, BTW. :)
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A case it is… seriously.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 8, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also like their Misery Bay, but the Railbender is a bit sweet for me.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
id send em a case of yuengling out of respect
no man, no matter who they root for, deserves not to down a yueng in their life
(i am assuming yuengling isnt around in columbia)
RIP JJ & HK
Let the future judge Michael Vick
by BadCo'09 on Sep 8, 2009 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve had Yuengling quite a bit actually, and their porter’s OK, but there are a lot of other breweries in the area that are better.
I actually go to Pennsylvania every year in the first part of August and drink more than my fair share of beers of the region :)
In western PA, I have to say that Erie BrewCo is my favorite.
by rhodri2112 on Sep 8, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you watch Jenkins last season?
or are you going off the 1. eagles game and the highlights of the giants game? Same with Scandrick.
This would be like us cowboy fans saying Quintin Mikell isn’t good – jsut cause you don’t hear his name much and don’t see highlights does not mean hes not a really good player.
Jenkins and Scandrick looked much better than the cbs we’ve had for the last few years.
Again, 31 isn’t that old for olineman.
by foyesboys on Sep 8, 2009 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'd like to add an adendum
Scandrick and Jenkins aren’t as good as Mikell, whose an all pro. But I do believe its a similar situation.
by foyesboys on Sep 8, 2009 11:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Saw plenty of Jenkins last year...
I saw way more Cowboys games than I would have preferred, actually, and Jenkins was definitely a disappointment (although not to me). Personally, I think that Scandrick is the far better player, and the “Taking turns starting each week” thing is Wade (or perhaps Jerry) at his dumbest (or best, depending on who your team is). I guess when one guy is a 1st round pick and is making $9.725 mil per year over 5 years and the other is a 5th rounder making $1.89 mil over 4 years, Jerry isn’t quite ready to give the job to Scandrick, and the “taking turns” nonsense is ridiculous.
That of course doesn’t mean that Jenkins can’t become a good player… but I didn’t see it last year. And you did note the Giants game “lowlight,” which yeah, is just one play, but spoke volumes about his toughness.
But this isn’t a “Mikell situation.” Jenkins is high profile – He’s a 1… and the Jenkins/Scandrick battle was a hot topic as the season progressed last year, and was obviously the major position battle this preseason. Mikell was an undrafted FA that played special teams his first 3 years, who became a starter and quietly goes out every week and simply doesn’t make mistakes – This is very much not the same.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
by Bye, Dawk :( on Sep 9, 2009 7:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe a cowboy fan can clarify..
But from what ive read so far this season it reall seems like Scandrick is earning his spot and Jenkins is losing his. I could be wrong so let me know about that one. Also Newman is a beast, but he gets hurt every year. In fact I will one up it… he gets hurt more consistently and for longer durations than Westbrook. If you are “concerned” about Westbrook you have to be down right scared about Newman. In any case I dont think you can look at the Cowboys secondary right now and say that your corners are better because quiet frankly Brown+ Asante > Newman + Jenkins/Scandrik. Mikell is better than anything you guys can line up at SS and even if Macho Harris is a complete bust that still gives 3 out of 4 positions in the secondary as an edge.
by IgglesFanDeployd on Sep 9, 2009 7:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dawk, you're clueless as usual
Scandrick is one of the best young CBs in the league and Hamlin and Sensabaugh are much better than you’re giving them credit for.
Olshansky and Spears are very solid, good 3-4 DEs and our OL you think are old stayed healthier than your OL this preseason, so I guess being “old” really doesn’t matter much does it.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Sep 10, 2009 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t like Jason Campbell, I don’t believe in his potential, and don’t think he has what it takes to lead the Redskins close to 10-6, this is why they’ll finish last. He looked awful in the preseason, I know it’s only the preseason, but I remember how horrible some of the things he did were. He couldn’t scramble out of the pocket, and instead was pounded by the Patriots on one play. Chris Cooley is still a stud.
You underrate the Eagles, I think they’ll go 3rd at 9-7
by Why on Sep 8, 2009 10:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















