Whao!! Jets may release santonio holmes wednesday!!

[Vaark]

At 11-2 the Ravens were the far superior team at home and on the road. Cinci was a joke by the time the 16th game and beyond rolled around. All they could beat were losing teams. To compare the 09 version to the mighty 08 Ravens would be like comparing Sanchez to Aaron Rodgers. Sorry, doesn't resonate. :idk:

And, ahh, so all the sudden an 11-5 team without Brady is better than the next year's 10-6 team with him, eh? Especially that a gun shy Brady started the season on shaky legs.. and oh isn't that when the jest beat him, and just barely before he pummelled you later in the season?

Oh and if the presence of the almighty Brady is so relevent, then you've gotta admit Eli is elite considering he's beaten him the last 3 times they faced off, right?

 

[nyjunc]

At 11-2 the Ravens were the far superior team at home and on the road. Cinci was a joke by the time the 16th game and beyond rolled around. All they could beat were losing teams. To compare the 09 version to the mighty 08 Ravens would be like comparing Sanchez to Aaron Rodgers. Sorry, doesn't resonate. :idk:

And, ahh, so all the sudden an 11-5 team without Brady is better than the next year's 10-6 team with him, eh? Especially that a gun shy Brady started the season on shaky legs.. and oh isn't that when the jest beat him, and just barely before he pummelled you later in the season?

Oh and if the presence of the almighty Brady is so relevent, then you've gotta admit Eli is elite considering he's beaten him the last 3 times they faced off, right?

When were the Ravens 11-2?

Bal finished up the season winning 9 of their last 11.

They beat:
11-5 Miami
5-11 oak
4-12 Cle
8-8 Hou
9-6-1 Philly
4-11-1 Cincy
8-8 Wash
9-7 Dal
5-11 Jax

ONE legit playoff team on that list(Philly and Philly was 0-2-1 in that stretch)

2009 Cincy swept div rd bound Baltimore, beat playoff bound GB and kept the defending SB champs out of the playoffs by sweeping Pitt.

Eli wasn't great in any of the meetings against Brady's Pats, his D is what carried the day in all 3 games. Eli is really good, if he keeps it up maybe he can enter the elite category but he's not there yet.

 

[Vaark]

When were the Ravens 11-2?

Bal finished up the season winning 9 of their last 11.

They beat:
11-5 Miami
5-11 oak
4-12 Cle
8-8 Hou
9-6-1 Philly
4-11-1 Cincy
8-8 Wash
9-7 Dal
5-11 Jax

ONE legit playoff team on that list(Philly and Philly was 0-2-1 in that stretch)

2009 Cincy swept div rd bound Baltimore, beat playoff bound GB and kept the defending SB champs out of the playoffs by sweeping Pitt.

Eli wasn't great in any of the meetings against Brady's Pats, his D is what carried the day in all 3 games. Eli is really good, if he keeps it up maybe he can enter the elite category but he's not there yet.

I stand corrected, it was 9-2 but otherwise stand by my assertions completely. The Ravens were an offensive and defensive force to be reckoned with for most of the season and they kept their mojo going well into the playoffs until they met the ultimate SB champion. Cinci was a below average offensive team that peaked well too early and limped into the home stretch not beating any teams that they should have. As teams go through cycles, a case can be made that at their end cycle they were not even as good as Denver was to start the year off 6-0 including wins over NE, those same Bengals, the Cowboys and Chargers before the roof fell in on them. Neither team, nor the jest, were good enough that year to sustain a season, but at least Cinci and Denver did peak at one time. The Ravens were one of the top teams in most stats led by a rookie QB and they would have kicked the **** out of either the 09 Bengals or the 09 Jets hands-down.

Eli beat Brady 3 times. Either he gets the kind of credit you're trying to give his defense while refusing to acknowledge that same reality for the last 3 seasons of Sanchez, or if not, then beating an 11-5 team without Brady is just as damn impressive. Can't have it both ways.. or in this case 3ways since you try to give Sanchez credit he's clearly never been due.

 

[jared81]

this thread is exactly why i hate the offseason.

 

[The New Guy]

When were the Ravens 11-2?

Bal finished up the season winning 9 of their last 11.

They beat:
11-5 Miami
5-11 oak
4-12 Cle
8-8 Hou
9-6-1 Philly
4-11-1 Cincy
8-8 Wash
9-7 Dal
5-11 Jax

ONE legit playoff team on that list(Philly and Philly was 0-2-1 in that stretch)

2009 Cincy swept div rd bound Baltimore, beat playoff bound GB and kept the defending SB champs out of the playoffs by sweeping Pitt.

Are you seriously trying to say that 09 Cincy was better than 08 Bal? Cincy only won 5 games against teams that were 8-8 or better and 4 of those wins came from the 9-7 Pitt and Bal. Sweeping Pitt after a Super Bowl win is not as impressive as it might seem.

For whatever reason Pitt always has a down year after a Super Bowl win. They have missed the playoffs after a Super Bowl win 3 straight times now. In 1980 the 6-10 Bengals swept the 9-7 Steelers who had won the Super Bowl the year before. In 2006 the 8-8 Bengals almost swept the 8-8 Steelers, but lost in overtime in the last game of the season making them split the series. You already know what happened in 09. The point is, just because Cincy swept Pitt and Bal in 09 does not mean that they were a good team. Since Pitt and Bal were just 9-7 (one game from .500) You have to look at what they did outside of those games to determine what kind of team they really were. They went 1-4 against teams with a winning record.

 

[nyjunc]

You make excuses about the Jets easy sched when Baltimore beat one tough team in that 9-2 stretch- how is it ok for them and not for the Jets?

You don't think that ballhawking D that was scoring almost every week and setting Bal up every week had anything to do w/ their O looking good as far as the rankings? That O was certainly not impressive in 3 postseason games that year.

The '09 Bengals swept a similar Baltimore team except this one had a 2nd year QB instead of a rookie and Ray Rice.

Eli deserves a ton of credit for his postseason and for helping his tam win 2 SBs, that doesn't make him elite but he's really good and has elevated his game. Can we not forget that just one year ago he threw 25 INTs and led chokes to end both '09 and '10 to help keep his team out of the playoffs?

 

[nyjunc]

Are you seriously trying to say that 09 Cincy was better than 08 Bal? Cincy only won 5 games against teams that were 8-8 or better and 4 of those wins came from the 9-7 Pitt and Bal. Sweeping Pitt after a Super Bowl win is not as impressive as it might seem.

For whatever reason Pitt always has a down year after a Super Bowl win. They have missed the playoffs after a Super Bowl win 3 straight times now. In 1980 the 6-10 Bengals swept the 9-7 Steelers who had won the Super Bowl the year before. In 2006 the 8-8 Bengals almost swept the 8-8 Steelers, but lost in overtime in the last game of the season making them split the series. You already know what happened in 09. The point is, just because Cincy swept Pitt and Bal in 09 does not mean that they were a good team. Since Pitt and Bal were just 9-7 (one game from .500) You have to look at what they did outside of those games to determine what kind of team they really were. They went 1-4 against teams with a winning record.

Those 4 wins were pretty big, right? if Bal sweeps Cincy they are 11-5 again, if Pitt sweeps Cincy they are 11-5 and in postseason. those were big wins, '08 Bal's biggest win was against Philly. other than that they didn't beat anyone of note and were swept by Pitt and got crsuhed by NYG.

What does 1980 have to do w/ 2009? totally different eras and teams, in '2006 they had the ben motorcycle thing and not knowing how to react after winning. In 2009 they had that experience of being defending champs, they lost b/c Cincy was better than they were.

Do I think '09 Cincy was better than '08 Bal? No but I don't think Bal was much better and we got Cincy on the road, you got Bal at home. No matter what way you slice it we got the job done the first 2 rds on the road and Miami couldn't get it done in the WC rd at home.

 

[The New Guy]

Those 4 wins were pretty big, right? if Bal sweeps Cincy they are 11-5 again, if Pitt sweeps Cincy they are 11-5 and in postseason. those were big wins, '08 Bal's biggest win was against Philly. other than that they didn't beat anyone of note and were swept by Pitt and got crsuhed by NYG.

What does 1980 have to do w/ 2009? totally different eras and teams, in '2006 they had the ben motorcycle thing and not knowing how to react after winning. In 2009 they had that experience of being defending champs, they lost b/c Cincy was better than they were.

Do I think '09 Cincy was better than '08 Bal? No but I don't think Bal was much better and we got Cincy on the road, you got Bal at home. No matter what way you slice it we got the job done the first 2 rds on the road and Miami couldn't get it done in the WC rd at home.

Just pointing out that a bad Cincy team has swept Pitt multiple times the past. That doesn't make them a good team. It also shows that Pitt has historically had down years after winning the Super Bowl. You can think Cincy beating Pitt twice was big, but 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle also beat Pitt that year. Outside of Pitt and Bal (who were 9-7 each) Cincy went 1-4 against teams with a winning record.

You can also think the Jets were better because they advanced in the playoffs, but those who are not homers consider the opponents. You overrate the Jets playoff opponents and underrate the 08 Dolphins and 08 Ravens. The bottom line is very different when the Dolphins have to face a very good team and the Jets get to face one of the weakest WC teams that the NFL has seen in a while.

Like Vaark said:

The Ravens were one of the top teams in most stats led by a rookie QB and they would have kicked the **** out of either the 09 Bengals or the 09 Jets hands-down.

Having to face them instead of Cincy, or a banged up Indy team in 10 is very, very different.

 

[nyjunc]

Just pointing out that a bad Cincy team has swept Pitt multiple times the past. That doesn't make them a good team. It also shows that Pitt has historically had down years after winning the Super Bowl. You can think Cincy beating Pitt twice was big, but 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle also beat Pitt that year.

You can also think the Jets were better because they advanced in the playoffs, but those who are not homers consider the opponents. You overrate the Jets playoff opponents and underrate the 08 Dolphins and 08 Ravens. The bottom line is very different when the Dolphins have to face a very good team and the Jets get to face one of the weakest WC teams that the NFL has seen in a while.

1980 has nothing to do w/ today, in 1981 the Bengals made the SB so clearly they were headed in the right direction and the Pitt dynasty was ending.

The '09 Jets were MUCH better than the '08 Phins, not even comparable. The Jets didn't face one of the weakest teams to play in the WC rd in a while- the 2008 Miami Dolphins.

 

[The New Guy]

1980 has nothing to do w/ today, in 1981 the Bengals made the SB so clearly they were headed in the right direction and the Pitt dynasty was ending.

The '09 Jets were MUCH better than the '08 Phins, not even comparable. The Jets didn't face one of the weakest teams to play in the WC rd in a while- the 2008 Miami Dolphins.

It just shows a pattern that Pitt has down years after Super Bowl wins and that a bad Cincy team has swept Pitt before. Sweeping a division opponent (especially when that division opponent has a down year) does not make you a good team. You keep trying to prove that Cincy was a good team because they swept Pitt, but Pitt wasn't very good that year. Pitt also lost to: 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle.


The 08 Dolphins aren't comparable to the 09 Jets? Is it because the 09 Jets won 9 whole games and lost to 6 teams that didn't make the playoffs? Is it because they faced 2 teams to end the season that had absolutely no reason to win and allowed them to get to 9-7 instead of 7-9? Maybe it is because they faced Cincy and an overrated SD (that missed 3 FGs in a 3 point loss) to make it to the AFCC game? You can think what you want, but it is just as crazy to me as you thinking that the Jets are an Elite team and that Sanchez is a franchise QB.

 

[nyjunc]

It just shows a pattern that Pitt has down years after Super Bowl wins and that a bad Cincy team has swept Pitt before. Sweeping a division opponent (especially when that division opponent has a down year) does not make you a good team. You keep trying to prove that Cincy was a good team because they swept Pitt, but Pitt wasn't very good that year. Pitt also lost to: 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle.


The 08 Dolphins aren't comparable to the 09 Jets? Is it because the 09 Jets won 9 whole games and lost to 6 teams that didn't make the playoffs? Is it because they faced 2 teams to end the season that had absolutely no reason to win and allowed them to get to 9-7 instead of 7-9? Maybe it is because they faced Cincy and an overrated SD (that missed 3 FGs in a 3 point loss) to make it to the AFCC game? You can think what you want, but it is just as crazy to me as you thinking that the Jets are an Elite team and that Sanchez is a franchise QB.

1980 has nothing to do w/ the Steelers just like 1975 or 1979 when they won the SB a year after winning it.

That division opponent wouldn't have had a down year if not for Cincy, if they sweep Cincy they win 11 games and easily win the division, even if they split they win the division.

It's b/c they got into the playoffs and won 2 road playoff games vs. a team getting humiliated at home in the WC round. One team was overmatched in the WC rd, the other held a lead int he 2nd half of the title game and backed that season up w/ another trip to the title game in 2010.

 

[The New Guy]

1980 has nothing to do w/ the Steelers just like 1975 or 1979 when they won the SB a year after winning it.

That division opponent wouldn't have had a down year if not for Cincy, if they sweep Cincy they win 11 games and easily win the division, even if they split they win the division.

It's b/c they got into the playoffs and won 2 road playoff games vs. a team getting humiliated at home in the WC round. One team was overmatched in the WC rd, the other held a lead int he 2nd half of the title game and backed that season up w/ another trip to the title game in 2010.

Yes, it was only Cincy that caused Pitt to have a down year. Just forget the fact that Pitt also lost to 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle. I'm sure if Pitt had faced any other 2 teams other than the mighty Bengals twice, they would have won them for sure.

Like I said before, people who are not homers consider the opponents when comparing playoff success. The Dolphins won 11 games to get a division title and only lost to 2 non playoff teams (9-7 Jets and 11-5 NE) Yes, the schedule wasn't that hard, but they beat the teams they had to. The 09 Jets were a joke in the regular season losing to 6 non playoff teams. Without the charity of the Colts, they wouldn't have even made the playoffs. Had they faced the 08 Ravens (even in NY) they would have gotten their but kicked even worse than Miami did.

 

[nyjunc]

Yes, it was only Cincy that caused Pitt to have a down year. Just forget the fact that Pitt also lost to 7-9 CHi, 4-12 KC, 5-11 Oak, and 5-11 Cle. I'm sure if Pitt had faced any other 2 teams other than the mighty Bengals twice, they would have won them for sure.

Like I said before, people who are not homers consider the opponents when comparing playoff success. The Dolphins won 11 games to get a division title and only lost to 2 non playoff teams (9-7 Jets and 11-5 NE) Yes, the schedule wasn't that hard, but they beat the teams they had to. The 09 Jets were a joke in the regular season losing to 6 non playoff teams. Without the charity of the Colts, they wouldn't have even made the playoffs. Had they faced the 08 Ravens (even in NY) they would have gotten their but kicked even worse than Miami did.

It wasn't only Cincy but if it wasn't for Cincy they win 11 games.

If it was so easy to beat Pitt why couldn't Miami do it at home? Pitt did beat the Vikings, GB and Baltimore.

I consider the opponents, Miami had a cupcake schedule and didn't have to deal w/ Tom Brady. The Jets lost to 4 non playoff teams(5 games as they lost to Miami twice). Miami lost to 3 non playoff teams unless you think Houston made the playoffs in 2008.

Miami beat ONE playoff bound team and that was 8-8 SD in the midst of starting 3-5, that's more impressive than beating NE? NE was only 10-6 but they "layed down" in week 17, if that applies against the Jets it has to work for them too, right? So using your logic NE really won 11 games and we gave them their first loss of the season and one of two during the first half of the season.

We may have lost to Bal '08 b/c Rex is spooked by the Ravens but the game would have been close, we would not have been humiliated. We lost to 2 much better teams than the '08 Ravens in the '09 and '10 title games and we played very competitive games aginst both teams, we had chances in the 4th qtr against both unlike Miami in the WC rd vs. Baltimore.

 

[The New Guy]

It wasn't only Cincy but if it wasn't for Cincy they win 11 games.

If it was so easy to beat Pitt why couldn't Miami do it at home? Pitt did beat the Vikings, GB and Baltimore.

I consider the opponents, Miami had a cupcake schedule and didn't have to deal w/ Tom Brady. The Jets lost to 4 non playoff teams(5 games as they lost to Miami twice). Miami lost to 3 non playoff teams unless you think Houston made the playoffs in 2008.

Miami beat ONE playoff bound team and that was 8-8 SD in the midst of starting 3-5, that's more impressive than beating NE? NE was only 10-6 but they "layed down" in week 17, if that applies against the Jets it has to work for them too, right? So using your logic NE really won 11 games and we gave them their first loss of the season and one of two during the first half of the season.

We may have lost to Bal '08 b/c Rex is spooked by the Ravens but the game would have been close, we would not have been humiliated. We lost to 2 much better teams than the '08 Ravens in the '09 and '10 title games and we played very competitive games aginst both teams, we had chances in the 4th qtr against both unlike Miami in the WC rd vs. Baltimore.

Miami probably would have beat Pitt if Henne played in the whole game. We got Pat White in the 3rd and then after he went out with injury Tyler Thigpen. Thigpen played well, but killed us in the end.

Quit trying to spin. Who cares about playoff bound. Just because one team makes the playoffs doesn't make them better than a team that missed the playoffs. Do you think that the 2010 Seahawks (7-9) were better than the Giants (10-6), or the Buccaneers (10-6)?

The 08 Dolphins beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. (11-5 NE, 9-7 NYJ, 8-8 SD, 8-8 Den) I don't care that NE missed the playoffs at 11-5. They made it a year later at 10-6. NE was not a much better team in 09. Especially early in the year with Brady coming off the knee injury. The Bills nearly beat them in week 1 and then they lost to the Jets in week 2. NE only won 10 games that year and only beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. Exactly the same amount as the 08 Dolphins. How did NE lay down in week 17? Hoyer came in for 1 series before the half. Brady played the rest of the game. According to you, NE proved what a crappy team they were by losing to the Ravens in the WC round by a larger margin than what the 08 Dolphins did.

Just look at that ^. You are really trying to convince me that 9-7 team (with losses to 7-9 Miami (twice), 6-10 Buff, 7-9 Jax, and 9-7 Atl) was better than an 11-5 team whose only losses were against the Cardinals ( 9-7 NFC Champs) Jets, (9-7), Texans (8-8) Ravens (11-5) and NE (11-5)

I know the next point is they advanced in the playoffs and the Dolphins didn't, but that is only because the Jets didn't have to face the Ravens. I disagree that it would have been a close game, but who cares? You don't advance in the playoffs with close losses.

 

[nyjunc]

Miami probably would have beat Pitt if Henne played in the whole game. We got Pat White in the 3rd and then after he went out with injury Tyler Thigpen. Thigpen played well, but killed us in the end.

Quit trying to spin. Who cares about playoff bound. Just because one team makes the playoffs doesn't make them better than a team that missed the playoffs. Do you think that the 2010 Seahawks (7-9) were better than the Giants (10-6), or the Buccaneers (10-6)?

The 08 Dolphins beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. (11-5 NE, 9-7 NYJ, 8-8 SD, 8-8 Den) I don't care that NE missed the playoffs at 11-5. They made it a year later at 10-6. NE was not a much better team in 09. Especially early in the year with Brady coming off the knee injury. The Bills nearly beat them in week 1 and then they lost to the Jets in week 2. NE only won 10 games that year and only beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. Exactly the same amount as the 08 Dolphins. How did NE lay down in week 17? Hoyer came in for 1 series before the half. Brady played the rest of the game. According to you, NE proved what a crappy team they were by losing to the Ravens in the WC round by a larger margin than what the 08 Dolphins did.




Just look at that ^. You are really trying to convince me that 9-7 team (with losses to 7-9 Miami (twice), 6-10 Buff, 7-9 Jax, and 9-7 Atl) was better than an 11-5 team whose only losses were against the Cardinals ( 9-7 NFC Champs) Jets, (9-7), Texans (8-8) Ravens (11-5) and NE (11-5)

I know the next point is they advanced in the playoffs and the Dolphins didn't, but that is only because the Jets didn't have to face the Ravens. I disagree that it would have been a close game, but who cares? You don't advance in the playoffs with close losses.

Yes, they couldn't beat ten or Hou w/ Henne playing a complete game but they lost to Pitt b/c henne went down They were alrady down a TD when henne went out and Miami's D couldn't stop Ben all game.

Yes I think the 2010 Seahawks were as good as the '10 Giants and Bucs, it didn't imopress me that thegiants won a couple of late games after choking away their season and that TB beat bad teams all year w/ zero pressure to win.

The '08 Dolphins beat 4 .500 or better teams? Wow! they beat the choking Jets, the choking Broncos and Cassell's Pats early in the year along w/ SD when they were struggling. They beat ONE playoff bound team and that team was 8-8.

10-6 in 2009 was better than 11-5 in 2008, the '09 Pats were much better than the '08 version b/c they had Brady for 16 games.

We count near wins and losses now? NE started 6-2, one of those losses was to the Jets. You can whine about that any way you want but those are facts.

NE treated that week 17 game like an exhibition game. Would they take Brady out in a regular game? they may not have emptied the bench but they didn't treat it seriously kind of like the week 17 games a few years earlier when belichick had Flutie drop kick a PAT against Miami.


The Cardinals were not a good reg season team, they got hot that year at the right time. This is a team that lost 56-35 to the Jets and 47-7 to NE.

You lost to the Jets when we lost 4 of 5 to end the season.

Houston was 0-4 before facing Miami

The Ravens were good and crushed you on both the reg and postseason

The NE game was Cassell's 2nd ever start

You are right, it's about postseason success. There wasn't a playoff team in 2008 in the AFC that you would have beaten so it didn't matter that it was Baltimore. We had to go on the road and win 2 games including beating the hottest team in the league- a team better than the 2009 Ravens. You guys made the playoffs b/c:

A) Tom Brady didn't play
B) the Jets choked
c) you had one of the easiest scheds I have ever seen(so did we and we choked so Miami still gets credit for winning the division but they weren't anywhere near as good as the '09 or '10 Jets).