Thursday results are all skewed and you can't take much stock in it either way That's a pretty universal rule to follow. Crazy stuff happens Thursday night, regardless of the matchup. (especially for road teams).
By your criteria, the Chiefs game was basically an "upset". Also, they've only had 3 other games that they've been the underdog in. Sure, they should/could have played better in Minnesota... but "should have beaten"? I'm starting to realize that you may not necessarily have the baseline FOK to be taken seriously around here. Never discredited them... and certainly finding some fault with their losses, especially at home. You're the one discrediting every single Texan win.
When you drop barely and beat in the same sentence you've gone and criticized their victories. This whole time you've talked about them beating the teams their suppose to beat and now throw out underdogs in the three wins. So which one is it? Not sure which games they where underdogs in but I expected them to beat the Bears, Chiefs, Titans, Colts and Lions at the start off the season. Also felt since the Viking lost their starting QB the Texans could win but then Peterson was placed on IR and knew the Texans would win. Sure it was going to be ugly and hard fought win because the Viking defense but they would come out with a win but that did not happen. The Texans just got embarrassed. As for the Chiefs they have been a surprise to me since they are playing so well without their best offensive player. I really though they were a bottom dweller but when NBC last night showed the AFC west standings I was completely surprised.
I'm not discounting any of their wins or dwelling on any of their losses. The only thing I said that started this all was that I'm willing to bet we get blown out in Green Bay come 12/4. I'm more than willing to have a friendly sig bet for anyone who thinks otherwise. It's a bet that I would be happy to lose, depending on what I was required to put in my sig, of course....
I could have played QB for the patriots that game.. they started most of their drives inside our 20 thanks to kickoff fumbles...
They were underdogs in their 3 losses. Favorites (and covered) in all their wins. That is it. Its also why I expect them to go 10-6 or possibly 11-5, as at least Vegas has a firm grasp on the games they should be winning and the ones they probably won't. Most people were also penciling the Raiders as a win too. And were not expecting the Lions to compete for the division. This is the problem with basing expectations before you watch any of these teams actually play a single down, and you don't constantly re-evaluate these teams after each and every game. Yes, see how fast things can change? Hell, just look at how far the Vikings have now fallen since starting 5-0 and were universally being declared the best team in football. Also, you seem to be hung up on style points... in a league where every team can literally beat every team on any given Sunday (minus the Pats w/Brady, of course). The basketball/NBA mentality here is unsurprisingly permeating... but yeah, these teams are usually more than just their best player. And if they are truly contingent on their best player, why doesn't the loss of JJ Watt mean absolutely anything in your "overly complex" evaluation process?
Who knows? It is possible. I will be interested to see what the team looks like after they bye. Maybe I will make the bet after the Mexico City game.
Wanna bring up bad losses. The Steelers got blown out against the Eagles and a rookie QB. The Chiefs got blown out by the Steelers. The Patriots got shut out by the Bills. The raiders lost by double digits to the Chiefs. The Broncos lost to the chargers. Teams are going to have bad losses. I could argue that the Steelers to the Eagles is worse than any of the Texans losses. Houston hasn't lost to any bad teams and they have beat good teams. If you want to grade losses, do it to the rest of the league and realize how little it means.
They lost him last year and promptly won 11 in a row (including playoffs); they were 11-3 overall without JC; now 17-5 since he got hurt. Why in the world would their success without him this year be a surprise to you? Did you just start paying attention to the NFL last week? And BTW... why do the Chiefs get a pass for being without their best player - but not the Texans?
It's all about the schedule. The AFC West and AFC North teams are beating up on each other. Texans have a good shot at #2 seed if they can somehow beat Oakland in two weeks.
I've had a running dialogue with my brother and some friends. The Steelers have lost to the Eagles, Patriots, Ravens, and Dolphins. The Texans have lost to the Patriots, Vikings, and Broncos. If you asked football fans who the better team was, 95% would say the Steelers. Are they though? Is there even a way to tell? Is there a point to even debate it? The answer to all of those questions is "No."
Really? He's been out that long? I thought he tore his ACL on week 12 or something but not that early into the season. To answer your condescending trollish question I follow only two teams the 49ers, the Texans and whatever player is on my fantasy team, so 19 some odd years. Well not the 9ers so much since the Texans came to be. Tend not to care about the opposing team once the Texans are done with them. Don't follow the NFL as a whole. Only care about all the teams/players preseason time for fantasy purposes of course. And before you bring up the Texans playing the chiefs in the playoffs i stop watching after kniles Davis ran back that kick return since that just proved my thoughts on the Texans. Does JJ Watt solve the Brock's turnover problem? The red zone problems? Is he going to make Brock a respectable QB? Last I look the defense has looked good but just how have I given the Chiefs as pass? Injuries happen and all teams lose key players so it's a pointless debate. Same, 11-5 , with loses to Patriots, Broncos, Colts (away), Packers and a let down game somewhere in there. And that was with my belief that JJ would not rushed back and miss four weeks. With what I thought would be better QB play, not worse, and that defense along with the added speed I really thought the Texans would look better. Things I take that Vegas got wrong and the latter part is true but nothing indicted to me that Minny was better If Vegas is not wrong then how can every team literally beat any team on Sunday? If you want to look at as style points fine then but everything has show that the Texans are average and nothing more. I've only brought up the injuries because you have done so about the Texans.
If noise is such an issue on the road, why hasnt anyone invented a rumble pack for the offensive players helmet that the qb can control.
I'm not buying the noise either. It just happens that those three teams we lost two, played press and were extremely physical with the receivers even beyond 5 yards. Not going to complain about that since I beg the nfl to allow that. But what that does is completely destroy timing that is already shaky to begin with. Lack of continuity with a makeshift line, Then everything snowballs, Oz starts seeing dead people on the field creating pressure in his head. The offense has to play in unison. with so many new starters, the main guy in a new system, It's going to take more than 6 months. It's not EA sports. You have your rare and special occasions like the 99 Rams. We're definitely going to lose to the packers. Capers the only smart D coordinator we have left. 6-2 to close out.
New ESPN power rankings disrespects us again. We dropped 2 spots off of a bye week and are now 19th, yet the Bengals (who have a losing record) GAIN 5 spots off of a bye week and are at #8. WTF
Just find another power ranking that you like. NFL.com has the Texans at 14, Bengas at 21 (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...kings-week-10-redhot-raiders-hit-the-top-five)
