Probably one of the guys that didn't vote for Revis. Sounds like someone who needs to be taken down a notch on Sunday
No. He really doesn't. WRONG. The Colts offense scored 9 points in the first half, and 15 when Peyton Manning left with 5 minutes remaining in the 3rd. Peyton Manning had 120 yards passing through the half, on pace for roughly 250 yards, NOT 350. Apparently this guy has a tough time with things like "multiplying by 2" and "ratios". The Patriots scored 7 of their 31 on a pick 6. It was one of FIVE turnovers by the offense in that game. As we've said, not giving up the football is a key to our success in this game. As far as their offensive drives? A whopping ONE drive that started inside their own 40, and that one had to be kept alive by a BS penalty when it stalled. Other than that, we broke down against Welker. What he fails to mention about those stops is that we ALSO stopped the New Orleans PASSING GAME. We also have 5 games against Top 10 rated QBs. They threw for a whopping ONE passing TD combined. I'm impressed by that. Again, like I've said before, that offense has been your defense's best friend. Take the Tennessee game, since you're so adamant that they're a running team akin to ours. They only had the ball 4 times in the first half. They took away points on 2 drives. The other 2? Vince Young ended one with a terrible pass and another with a needless fumble. I don't recall either being a particularly solid defensive play. Your offense will need to dominate TOP, and you're obviously capable of doing so. However, we won't put the ball in our QB's hands nearly as often as Tennessee did early and inexplicably in that game. There won't be a need to. I love it. The Bengals aren't legitimate, and yet they rolled up 24 points on the Chargers by going away from their strengths and running a suspect gameplan. It's funny, too. He's talking about points, but I only see 3 Top 10 scoring defenses on the San Diego schedule. Which of these 3 games was played mostly by backups? Baltimore Dallas Cincinnati Obviously, I have a lot of respect for the 20+ points you rang up on those 3 teams, but couldn't we also argue that your scoring has been inflated by your SEVEN games against bottom third scoring defenses? Seems like just as easy of an argument as our seven games against bottom third scoring defenses. Of course, we took that to finish first in scoring defense, while your offense took the same advantage...only to number 4. The whole thing just seems silly to me, making hypothetical arguments based on perception rather than looking at facts. However, apparently they're good points to you.
He didn't vote for Revis because you must be a real journalist/writer to do so. This jerk-off is nothing but a fan on that so called football site writing "articles"
Yeah...why even play the game? Just forfeit to the all mighty Chargers. They talk a lot of sh*t for a team that has never won jack squat and embarrased in every super bowl they have ever played in.
Like someone said, it's just like something you would see on a SD message board. I've been reading the polar opposite of that article all week on this site.
They were lucky to be there. Miami and Pittsburgh laid huge turds to get them there in the first place, then the 49ers and Steve Young blasted them. They will be exposed again.
how many of you here are gonna miss the hate next year,when everyone's on our jocks and picking us to win the east?
You guys only want stats that puff you up.... In your list of winning % is Indy & NO who are a combined 37-5. Otherwise, you faced average: NE, Houston, Jacksonville and Cincy (who'd collapsed by the time you faced em) Being kind, include Miami and Tenn (who opened the season like crap) or not good: Buff, Oakland, Carolina, TB, ATL 'strength of opponents' is a BS stat to hang your hat on... much softer schedule? ha. That's a joke. This guy's article had flaws, yes. But there's a heck of a lot of truth in it.
Dude, good job on this one, you are my favorite poster here. Great job shedding light on the outright lies. You said everything that needs to be said about that insipid 'article'. One thing to add, that piece was not written well and I'm sure the hack author is a nobody.
Exactly. The onus is on the Chargers, they lose, goodbye Norv Turner, and it will be a disaster of a season. The Jets lose...well, they were supposed to lose to this juggernaut. It's the playoffs, all the pressure is on San Diego and the Colts.
This years Chargers remind me of last years Jets, except their QB isn't a bitch and they've gotten past losing their dominant NT. They're rightfully the favorites, but they're not unbeatable. That said, it's right about the right time for Phillip Rivers to get recognized for the QB he is/can be.
...except the Jets didn't lose Kris Jenkins last season, so that comparison makes little sense. Also, this year's Chargers team has won 13 straight games (?) and the Jets couldn't figure out how to win at the end of 2008. They also have one of the best possession wideouts and the most dangerous receiving tight end in the NFL. The Chargers have one of the worst run defenses in the league, so I don't think they've "gotten past" losing Jamal Williams. I think they're the best team in the AFC, but it's not because of their defense - they can just score at will. Philip Rivers is one of the best in the league.
Rivers is an excellent QB. But that does not mean he still cannot have the occasional off game. If he struggles this week, the Chargers may lose.
I wish people would stop calling that crap on Bleacher Report 'articles'. It is a site where mostly ill-informed and completely biased football fans write terrible blogs. I can't remember reading a single good blog on that turd of a site.
How 'bout 27-5? And even if we take them out the Jets opp winning % is STILL higher. And how can you talk about not good when you have 4 automatic wins on your schedule? Please explain how that schedule is not softer.
