<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: From the gut: My thoughts on AFC teams	</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.footballperspective.com/from-the-gut-my-thoughts-on-afc-teams/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/from-the-gut-my-thoughts-on-afc-teams/</link>
	<description>NFL History and Stats</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:10:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ed in ON		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/from-the-gut-my-thoughts-on-afc-teams/#comment-17284</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ed in ON]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=9279#comment-17284</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I am not sure why you and everyone else thinks Denver, New England, and Cincy are better than Baltimore?

Denver and NE played pansy schedules last year, a guaranteed 10 wins easy. Cincy has beaten 1 playoff team (Was) in the past 2 years (not incl 2012 week 17 when Bal. rested the starters).

Yes, they are more likely to make the playoffs based on their easier divisions. But once they get there, that doesn&#039;t make them more likely to win out. NE has downgraded their receiving corp, and barely improved their defense. Denver has gained some small pieces, but lost Dumervil. Champ and Peyton are a year older. They beat up on easy competition in their 10 game winning streak, and both SD and KC should be improved. Baltimore would have finished 1 game behind them if they had played their starters in week 17. As it was, their backups almost beat Cincy&#039;s starters.

And why is everyone so fast to annoint Cincy as the best team in the AFCN? They are a good RB and improved secondary away from being a legit playoff contender. Although they had the best defense in the division statistically last year, remember how many player games the Ravens lost last year in the regular season. There may have been a changing of the guard in Baltimore, with alot of changes on defense, but they still have 4 players on defense who are better than any Bengal&#039;s defender not named Geno Atkins: Suggs, Ngata, Webb and Dumervil. And their offense has more weapons. Even if you think Flacco and Dalton are equal, outside of AJ Green&#062; Torrey Smith,  the Ravens win all the matchups.  Rice &#062;BJGE, Pierce &#062; ?,  Pitta &#062; Gresham, and Jacoby&#062; Cincy WR #2.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not sure why you and everyone else thinks Denver, New England, and Cincy are better than Baltimore?</p>
<p>Denver and NE played pansy schedules last year, a guaranteed 10 wins easy. Cincy has beaten 1 playoff team (Was) in the past 2 years (not incl 2012 week 17 when Bal. rested the starters).</p>
<p>Yes, they are more likely to make the playoffs based on their easier divisions. But once they get there, that doesn&#8217;t make them more likely to win out. NE has downgraded their receiving corp, and barely improved their defense. Denver has gained some small pieces, but lost Dumervil. Champ and Peyton are a year older. They beat up on easy competition in their 10 game winning streak, and both SD and KC should be improved. Baltimore would have finished 1 game behind them if they had played their starters in week 17. As it was, their backups almost beat Cincy&#8217;s starters.</p>
<p>And why is everyone so fast to annoint Cincy as the best team in the AFCN? They are a good RB and improved secondary away from being a legit playoff contender. Although they had the best defense in the division statistically last year, remember how many player games the Ravens lost last year in the regular season. There may have been a changing of the guard in Baltimore, with alot of changes on defense, but they still have 4 players on defense who are better than any Bengal&#8217;s defender not named Geno Atkins: Suggs, Ngata, Webb and Dumervil. And their offense has more weapons. Even if you think Flacco and Dalton are equal, outside of AJ Green&gt; Torrey Smith,  the Ravens win all the matchups.  Rice &gt;BJGE, Pierce &gt; ?,  Pitta &gt; Gresham, and Jacoby&gt; Cincy WR #2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: George		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/from-the-gut-my-thoughts-on-afc-teams/#comment-17216</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[George]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=9279#comment-17216</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I think that you are spot on with Houston for the reasons you touched on in the Foster post the other night. I&#039;m sure it&#039;s something that can be worked up, but against average teams last year it seems like they either looked great or did just about enough but against good teams they seemed to struggle. The way the team faded after around week 10 in terms of SRS (or whatever rating system you follow) suggested something wasn&#039;t quite right (in the way that San Fransisco and particularly Seattle edged up from around week 10 - in other words we are here to do business when the play-offs come around). I think you have a number of issues, and even though it looks like they have more depth on defense possibly  (is this the year time starts to catch up with Ed Reed?), the offense appears to have issues. Schaub seemed to regress a touch last year (the two rookie WR&#039;s from last year may start to come on though), the run blocking wasn&#039;t as good (still good but not great) and I&#039;m sticking with my thought from the other night teams probably started to key in on Foster as a result (still good but not great again). If the WR&#039;s don&#039;t step up to take some of the weight off Johnson and Foster I can&#039;t see where this goes. Given the general weakness in the AFC though I still see them in the mix to get a Wild Card though.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that you are spot on with Houston for the reasons you touched on in the Foster post the other night. I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s something that can be worked up, but against average teams last year it seems like they either looked great or did just about enough but against good teams they seemed to struggle. The way the team faded after around week 10 in terms of SRS (or whatever rating system you follow) suggested something wasn&#8217;t quite right (in the way that San Fransisco and particularly Seattle edged up from around week 10 &#8211; in other words we are here to do business when the play-offs come around). I think you have a number of issues, and even though it looks like they have more depth on defense possibly  (is this the year time starts to catch up with Ed Reed?), the offense appears to have issues. Schaub seemed to regress a touch last year (the two rookie WR&#8217;s from last year may start to come on though), the run blocking wasn&#8217;t as good (still good but not great) and I&#8217;m sticking with my thought from the other night teams probably started to key in on Foster as a result (still good but not great again). If the WR&#8217;s don&#8217;t step up to take some of the weight off Johnson and Foster I can&#8217;t see where this goes. Given the general weakness in the AFC though I still see them in the mix to get a Wild Card though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
