Quote:
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho
You’re placing a lot of pride and credit on beating a lot of teams with winning records and DVOA. I get it. Those accomplishments point to consistency, good coaching and a strong roster.
But despite all that, the Ravens haven’t faced down and dominated an elite QB. The best thing they faced was an already-injured Joe Burrow.
If the Ravens win and win in convincing fashion against KC, that’s strong support for them being as good as the numbers suggest.
Re: the 21 Bengals, they had an elite scoring defense, elite QB, and the best trip of WR weapons in the NFL. That 19 Titans team had Derrick Henry at his peak, all sorts of “hot momentum” and a really strong OL. And good coaching all around on both, with no major or fatal flaws.
|
Can’t deny anything you’ve said here. The Ravens can only play the schedule in front of them. They beat Burrow, Herbert, Lawrence, Tua, Purdy, and Goff. Was it Mahomes and Allen? No, but they weren’t on the schedule.
The 21 Bengals and 19 Titans were good teams, but they weren’t great teams. They don’t have the infrastructure and across-the-board quality the Ravens have. They didn’t dominate the regular season. And they didn’t win it all.
Of course, this Ravens team has to actually do the damn thing if they want to be considered great. I’m just trying to frame the context in a reality where they do beat the Chiefs/NFC rep. Not a prediction as much as it’s a hypothetical. If that happens, this isn’t a team that you can wave away as lucky or simply good; eviscerating the regular season and then going through the dynasty of this era is historically good. You’re right that this game will be a good litmus test for either validating or invalidating a metric like DVOA in terms of its ability to predict postseason success.