Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I really wouldn't be surprised if Califan won this bet, especially with the preseason being a wildcard. If we go 3-1 or 4-0 in the preseason, he stands a very good chance.It's very reasonable to say the Giants and Cowboys might have gotten worse and the Eagles might have some trouble if McNabb is knocked out. A couple lucky bounces here and there, a better Redskins defense.. 10-6? 11-5? Maybe. 17 points per game when campbell starts. find me an nfl team in history that averaged 17 points per game and went 11-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 17 points per game when campbell starts. find me an nfl team in history that averaged 17 points per game and went 11-5. 2000 Ravens Why is it always completely out of the realm of possibility for you that players and the team can improve from one season to the next? It happens all the time. Did anyone think the Patriots would be going to the Superbowl in '01? Anyone think the Cardinals would be in the Superbowl this past season? Oh man, if I had said that at the start of the season I would have been laughed off this site. Teams surprise every season, so can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 If we were taking bets on JC's score on another Wondelric, I'd take the under.What happens if we win 13 of those 20 and win a playoff game? You still lose correct? Also, how is it even betting when whoever takes the under gets a sig determined by you, but if you lose you suffer no more if 1 or 1000 members bet. You should encourage others who think over to participate as well to balance the stakes. Agreed. Also there should be a polling system to determine one sig that the losers will have to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Why is it always completely out of the realm of possibility for you that players and the team can improve from one season to the next? It happens all the time. :shhh: no optimistic talk allowed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't understand why you're using the preseason Califan. The preseason will have no bearing on the success of our season anyway. Why don't you use postseason wins instead. That's potentially 19 or 20 games excluding the preseason and if we don't make it to the post season you were screwed in your 14 win wager anyway. Plus it would make the bet significantly more interesting if we did make the playoffs and started to make a run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 2000 RavensWhy is it always completely out of the realm of possibility for you that players and the team can improve from one season to the next? It happens all the time. Did anyone think the Patriots would be going to the Superbowl in '01? Anyone think the Cardinals would be in the Superbowl this past season? Oh man, if I had said that at the start of the season I would have been laughed off this site. Teams surprise every season, so can we. the 2000 ravens actually averaged 20.8 points per game, and had arguably the best defense of all time. next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 2000 Ravens They actually averaged 21 points a game if you round it up, another TD or two FG's on from BLC's question. Although far from a prolific scoring team, they still put up over 34 points on 4 occasions, with another 3 of 24 or more points, and another 34 point game in the SB. It was the mid-season blip of 4 or 5 games that really brings the average down. Undoubtably they were defense led, but they could also put up points when they had to. (And the Ravens D had only one INT return for a TD that year, as regards scoring.). When was the last time we could say that about our offense as it currently is put together? Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 the 2000 ravens actually averaged 20.8 points per game, and had arguably the best defense of all time.next. The Team averaged that, Defense def. added to the scores. There were games where their D had more points than the O. We are trying to position our D to become that dominant. We may not be able to get THAT good, but w/ the new additions I don't see why our D can't become elite. And that still doesn't detract from the fact that our team very well could improve on scoring this season. But you conveniently left that part of my quote out. Next (see, I can be an arrogant ass instead of actually discussing something w/ someone who didn't attack me at all too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 They actually averaged 21 points a game if you round it up, another TD or two FG's on from BLC's question.Although far from a prolific scoring team, they still put up over 34 points on 4 occasions, with another 3 of 24 or more points, and another 34 point game in the SB. It was the mid-season blip of 4 or 5 games that really brings the average down. Undoubtably they were defense led, but they could also put up points when they had to. (And the Ravens D had only one INT return for a TD that year, as regards scoring.). When was the last time we could say that about our offense as it currently is put together? Hail. The D led in INTs and turnovers and gave the O short fields time and time again. The Ravens O was awful in offensive rankings going by yards (though their rushing game was good). Our defense was not good in terms of turnovers and giving the O a short field last season. Hopefully with the new additions that changes this season. But the Ravens offense overall (their run game was stout, Jamal Lewis broke 2000 that season) was often-times stagnant. I've gotten the feeling tho that we are going this route, much like the Steelers have done also, where you establish an elite D, and they set-up good field position for the O. Hopefully we have similar success. I thought the 2000 Ravens had a scoring average around 17, didn't realize it was almost 21. The way that offense is talked about you'd never guess it was that high unless you looked it up. Still, I believe my point about our team being able to improve still stands. Our offense, as it is currently pout together, has only been around for 1 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 The Team averaged that, Defense def. added to the scores. There were games where their D had more points than the O. We are trying to position our D to become that dominant. We may not be able to get THAT good, but w/ the new additions I don't see why our D can't become elite. And that still doesn't detract from the fact that our team very well could improve on scoring this season. But you conveniently left that part of my quote out. Next (see, I can be an arrogant ass instead of actually discussing something w/ someone who didn't attack me at all too). my bad, i shouldnt have been a D, no need for that. but i asked, has a team that averaged 17 points per game ever gone 11-5. you listed the ravens, and proceeded to tell me the usual "stop being negative". i countered with the fact that the ravens scored more than that, making your claim false. youre a smart guy no doubt, i figured you could have easily taken the two seconds to go to pro-football-reference.com and look at the numbers before hastily typing the 2000 ravens. and as gibbs hog heaven stated after me, that team defense only scored 1 TD that entire year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 my bad, i shouldnt have been a D, no need for that. but i asked, has a team that averaged 17 points per game ever gone 11-5. you listed the ravens, and proceeded to tell me the usual "stop being negative". i countered with the fact that the ravens scored more than that, making your claim false.youre a smart guy no doubt, i figured you could have easily taken the two seconds to go to pro-football-reference.com and look at the numbers before hastily typing the 2000 ravens. and as gibbs hog heaven stated after me, that team defense only scored 1 TD that entire year. Nah, it's cool then. My bad it came off as me saying "stop being negative" because you pointed out the 17.5 ppg avg. I was stating the "stop being negative" stuff because you were acting like we are going to repeat 17 ppg, that there was no way we could improve. That's why I brought up the '01 Pats and Cards from last season. In all honesty, I don't know if any team, recently anyways, has gone 11-5 or better ith only 17 ppg avg. Ravens were the only ones off the top of my head which could have met that. And yeah, I def. did assume the Ravens were at 17, or close to it. Obviously I was wrong. But as I stated after gibbs hog heaven, the impact of the D is measured in more than just TDs (though admittedly that was at the root of my argument, and it wasn't exactly the case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Our offense, as it is currently pout together, has only been around for 1 season. I was alluding to the personnel that make up the D, that haven't been able to score big in successive schemes, not so much the current scheme. Having a short field to play with isn't so much our problem as being able to utilize it once we get it. Hopefully this D will carry us a long way, but the 2000 Ravens come around once in a life time, and too many previously on here put way too much stock in a repeat of that. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Quarterback that should have been drafted higher?:hysterical: More like a qb who should have been drafted in the 4th round. Is this bet serious? Were you drunk when you typed this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Nah, it's cool then. My bad it came off as me saying "stop being negative" because you pointed out the 17.5 ppg avg. I was stating the "stop being negative" stuff because you were acting like we are going to repeat 17 ppg, that there was no way we could improve. That's why I brought up the '01 Pats and Cards from last season.In all honesty, I don't know if any team, recently anyways, has gone 11-5 or better ith only 17 ppg avg. Ravens were the only ones off the top of my head which could have met that. And yeah, I def. did assume the Ravens were at 17, or close to it. Obviously I was wrong. But as I stated after gibbs hog heaven, the impact of the D is measured in more than just TDs (though admittedly that was at the root of my argument, and it wasn't exactly the case). well you know its my opinion i think were going to repeat the 17-18 points per game deal. but thats just like, my opinion man. my point was you gotta score more points if you wanna go 11-5. so anyone in here thinking were doing that well is thinking were gonna be scoring a lot of points. i just have a feeling its gonna be 2004 all over again, all D and no O. i dont think we'll go 6-10, but im leaning towards 7-9 or 8-8, and no telling what injuries will do when they set in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreciating Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 sorry mnb, didnt see that. i was too busy laughing at the notion we could go 12-4. I see 10-6, but let's not act like 12-4 is a laughable notion. It's not. I assume you agree it's possible we could go 4-2 in the division? If so, then we need to go 8 and 2 outside. Sweep the Cowboys, split the Eagles, split the Giants. Beat the Rams, Lions, Bucs, Broncos, Chiefs, and Raiders. Beat two out of the Panthers, Saints, Chargers, and Falcons. 12-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I see 10-6, but let's not act like 12-4 is a laughable notion. It's not.I assume you agree it's possible we could go 4-2 in the division? If so, then we need to go 8 and 2 outside. Sweep the Cowboys, split the Eagles, split the Giants. Beat the Rams, Lions, Bucs, Broncos, Chiefs, and Raiders. Beat two out of the Panthers, Saints, Chargers, and Falcons. 12-4. we averaged 17 points per game last season and the only hope we have on offense is "our guys are in their 2nd year in it" we play in a crazy division were very inconsistent. we havent won 11 games since 1991. we havent had back to back winning seasons since 91/92. sure it "could" happen, but i think its pretty unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 well you know its my opinion i think were going to repeat the 17-18 points per game deal. but thats just like, my opinion man.my point was you gotta score more points if you wanna go 11-5. so anyone in here thinking were doing that well is thinking were gonna be scoring a lot of points. i just have a feeling its gonna be 2004 all over again, all D and no O. i dont think we'll go 6-10, but im leaning towards 7-9 or 8-8, and no telling what injuries will do when they set in. Man I hope not. I think it depends on factors outside of Campbell as well tho (obviously it depends on Campbell too). For instance, if Thomas or Kelly or someone doesn't supplant Randle El from the #2 WR spot I don't think our O will be as productive as it could be. However, if our D does wind up improving in sacks and turnovers, then I believe our O will score more as a result. Right now I believe we have the potential to improve on 8-8, going 10-6 or 11-5. That will of course change as training camp and preseason progresses. Will we realize that potewntial? Who knows right now, but I'm hopeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderMustGo Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I'm not going to bet, primarily because don't do that. But in this instance, I think the use of pre-season is such a cop-out. It should not be included. It's a BS variable. If you think the team is going to go 12-4, then make that your bet. 11.5. But the way you are betting it, the team could sweep the meaningless stupid preseason 4-0 and then go 10-6 and you'd still win. What's the point of that bet? I'd be more inclined if you bet what counts. 16 games. What's the record And if you pegged it at 11.5, I'd take the under. But I'm not going to bet because I'm not going to bet against my team. But as a matter of gentlemen's predictions, I'd absolutely take the under of 11.5. Of course, 11 wins would be great in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I'll take the over. I dont really think it will happen (9-7 or 10-6 is more likely) but dammit, we are due! We have struggled for as long as I can remember. Its time for our "dream season"!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I look at a totally proven coach, a QB who should have been drafted higher, /url] Over or under......those are easily the two craziest statements I have EVER seen on this site. And that is saying a lot. Totally proven coach?:hysterical: Please elaborate. A QB who "should have been drafted higher?" 90% believe we gave up way too much to get him. 10% believe he was worth it. 0% believe we underpaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 23, 2009 Author Share Posted July 23, 2009 Over or under......those are easily the two craziest statements I have EVER seen on this site.And that is saying a lot. Totally proven coach?:hysterical: Please elaborate. A QB who "should have been drafted higher?" 90% believe we gave up way too much to get him. 10% believe he was worth it. 0% believe we underpaid. Very simply, I think Jason Campbell can hack it. I think he's going to hang strong like a sheet of metal this year and I don't see Collins needing to ride to the rescue again, for one of a couple potential reasons....contract year and more experience in the system being two of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Very simply, I think Jason Campbell can hack it. I think he's going to hang strong like a sheet of metal this year and I don't see Collins needing to ride to the rescue again, for one of a couple potential reasons....contract year and more experience in the system being two of them. didnt see if you answered my questions earlier, but im in for taking the UNDER as long as theres no stipulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 12-4 with JC leading the team? Oh boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Double post, but since I'm here I wanna laugh again at JC going 12-4 :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 23, 2009 Author Share Posted July 23, 2009 didnt see if you answered my questions earlier, but im in for taking the UNDER as long as theres no stipulations. You're on the list :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.