ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs The Stat matchup for Ravens vs. Chiefs (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=239516)

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gif Horse (Post 7315828)
You're missing the point.

The Ravens played and beat several good teams this year. Without question, they had a harder schedule than the Jets.

And they won more games.

End of discussion.

Whatever you need to tell yourself.

FringeNC 01-02-2011 07:14 PM

Baltimore is -2.5 (Exactly the line I predicted a few weeks ago).

So Baltimore is a favorite, but winning as a 2.5 point underdog barely even classifies as an upset. GoChiefs should drop some serious coin on Baltimore, given his outlook.

OldTownChief 01-02-2011 07:16 PM

Being in Arrowhead is our only chance in hell but after today it just depends on who shows up to play.

Hammock Parties 01-02-2011 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 7315831)
And if you want to get down to it, the Jets played NEx2 and won 1, Min, GB, PIT (who they beat), Mia x 2and Chi.

The Jets had the harder schedule.

*sigh*

Pete, I know you are a reerun but please, please try to understand.

Games against teams with winning records:

Jets - 6
Ravens - 7

Wins against teams with winning records:

Jets - 2
Ravens - 4

Also, the Ravens beat the Jets.

WITHOUT QUESTION...they are a better football team.

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gif Horse (Post 7315848)
*sigh*

Pete, I know you are a reerun but please, please try to understand.

Games against teams with winning records:

Jets - 6
Ravens - 7

Wins against teams with winning records:

Jets - 2
Ravens - 4

Also, the Ravens beat the Jets.

WITHOUT QUESTION...they are a better football team.


And the Jets had a harder schedule, dumbass.

Hammock Parties 01-02-2011 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 7315852)
And the Jets had a harder schedule, dumbass.

No, they didn't.

The played fewer games against teams with winning records.

And they had a losing record against teams with winning records.

Mr. Laz 01-02-2011 07:22 PM

matchups are a big key ... Ravens are probably the better team but i think the Jets are a harder matchup for us.

1. Jets have a more physical Oline
2. Jets have more speed at WR
3. Jets have a better secondary

it's going to be tough but i think our defense will do better against the Ravens.

our offense?? who the hells knows ... if our Oline turns all pussy like today then it won't matter regardless of who we play.

keg in kc 01-02-2011 07:23 PM

It's kind of a six of one/half dozen of the other question when you're comparing the Jets to Baltimore. They're both defensive teams that run the ball behind unproven quarterbacks, although I think Flacco is much more dangerous (to us) than Sanchez (who can be dangerous to the Jets).

Honestly half the reason I wanted the Jets is so that we could watch Cassel beat Sanchez. It would have been poetic. But Baltimore is who we got.

I think we'll actually win the game. Today was an aberration, and I think people are jumping off the boat too quickly, including the national media.

RustShack 01-02-2011 07:29 PM

I like Hali and our defense against the Ravens OL more than I do the Jets. I like Bowe and our receivers against the Ravens DB's than I do the Jets, and I like Charles more against the Ravens old slow D than I do the Jets.

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustShack (Post 7315902)
I like Hali and our defense against the Ravens OL more than I do the Jets. I like Bowe and our receivers against the Ravens DB's than I do the Jets, and I like Charles more against the Ravens old slow D than I do the Jets.

Ravens have allowed 40 sacks and 78 QB hits. Jets have only allowed 28

by the same token the Chiefs have 38 sacks and Ravens only 27

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:34 PM

We have faced teams who are better at QB sacks than the Ravens. I think the passing game will be there.

Hammock Parties 01-02-2011 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 7315909)
Ravens have allowed 40 sacks and 78 QB hits. Jets have only allowed 28

by the same token the Chiefs have 38 sacks and Ravens only 27

This is a good point, I just hope the Chiefs can get a lead to take advantage.

RedThat 01-02-2011 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 7315925)
We have faced teams who are better at QB sacks than the Ravens. I think the passing game will be there.

What worries me though is our Oline.

I honestly think Brandon Albert is "soft". Richardson has been a revolving door lately.

And I hope they don't match up Wiegman power for power against Ngata. I'd much rather take my chances with Waters but I'd still consider that a mismatch.

*they're gonna have to find a way to gameplan around that physical DL the Ravens have.

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gif Horse (Post 7315940)
This is a good point, I just hope the Chiefs can get a lead to take advantage.

Well, we have the #2 rusher in the league on our home field against an o-line that lets people get to the QB. I would guess a lot of that has to do with Flaco being a pocket passer. It would be nice though if Pioli sent the league some videos of the non-called holding penalties against Hali this week though.

petegz28 01-02-2011 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedThat (Post 7315960)
What worries me though is our Oline.

I honestly think Brandon Albert is "soft". Richardson has been a revolving door lately.

And I hope they don't match up Wiegman power for power against Ngata. I'd much rather take my chances with Waters but I'd still consider that a mismatch.

*they're gonna have to find a way to gameplan around that physical DL the Ravens have.

We handled the Titans D which is no slouch. And we handled them pretty easily. So hopefully we won't see much of a problem.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.