PDA

View Full Version : Steelers with "29th hardest" schedule next year



SanAntonioSteelerFan
05-26-2009, 12:02 AM
I didn't see this posted already, sorry if I missed it ...

I'd be all excited except I agree with the writer, it's probably only meaningful at the end of the season.

Looking at the numbers a bit more, the spread between the hardest and the weakest schedule is less than 2 games out of 10. I wonder if that is about the same as usual. Doesn't seem like a big number to me!

Cleveland, Cincinatti, and Baltimore are right there with us. Whichever conference the AFC North plays this year must be pretty pitiful (just guessing here - AFC West?).


*****************************************
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009 ... overrated/ (http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/2009-nfl-strength-of-schedule-its-overrated/)
NY Times online 5-25-09 at 2252hrs
2009 N.F.L. Strength of Schedule (Itís Overrated)
By Toni Monkovic
Iím not sure I should have bothered typing/coding this chart.
Itís the 2009 strength of schedule based on records in the 2008 season.

Except the N.F.L. doesnít work that way. Coaching staffs are fired and hired; rosters are overhauled via free agency and the draft; systems are scrapped and redesigned; motivations wax and wane; and major injuries occur in camp, preseason and the regular season. The Dolphins went from 1-15 to 11-5. Would anyone be shocked if they finished third or last in the A.F.C. East this season?

Nevertheless, itís a starting point for looking at next season (do you want a Brett Favre post instead?).
Among those teams having the toughest schedules, strictly based on 2008, are the Jets (No. 7) and the Giants (No. 10).

Team Opponentsí 2008 Win Pct.
1. Miami Dolphins .594
2. Carolina Panthers .592
3. New England Patriots .590
4. Atlanta Falcons .588
5. Tampa Bay Buccaneers .580
6. Buffalo Bills .570
7. New York Jets .568
8. New Orleans Saints .557
9. Philadelphia Eagles .535
10. New York Giants .527
11. Jacksonville Jaguars .516
11. Dallas Cowboys .516
13. Indianapolis Colts .512
14. Tennessee Titans .508
15. Houston Texans .506
16. Washington Redskins .492
17. San Diego Chargers .484
17. Kansas City Chiefs .484
19. Oakland Raiders .480
19. Denver Broncos .480
21. Detroit Lions .467
22. St. Louis Rams .465
22. Cincinnati Bengals .465
24. Seattle Seahawks .457
25. Cleveland Browns .449
26. San Francisco 49ers .443
27. Arizona Cardinals .441
28. Baltimore Ravens .438
29. Pittsburgh Steelers .434
30. Green Bay Packers .428
31. Minnesota Vikings .420
32. Chicago Bears .414


Extra point: Carolina has the most games against teams .500 or better in 2008, with 15. The Giants and the Falcons are tied for second with 14.

Oviedo
05-26-2009, 08:00 AM
These pre-season rankings never hold up for the actual season because things change, teams get better, teams get worse, key injuries, etc.

If like last season having the toughest schedule results in a 12-4 record and a Super Bowl win I wish we had the toughest schedule every year.

RuthlessBurgher
05-26-2009, 10:00 AM
It is a huge difference going from the AFC South, NFC East, plus New England and San Diego last year to the AFC West, NFC North, plus Miami and Tennessee this year. I fully expect our regular season record to be an improvement over last season. The only thing that I worry about is that we will not be as battle tested as we were when we entered the playoffs last year. Our playoff experiences over the past few seasons should help, though.

Oviedo
05-26-2009, 10:37 AM
It is a huge difference going from the AFC South, NFC East, plus New England and San Diego last year to the AFC West, NFC North, plus Miami and Tennessee this year. I fully expect our regular season record to be an improvement over last season. The only thing that I worry about is that we will not be as battle tested as we were when we entered the playoffs last year. Our playoff experiences over the past few seasons should help, though.

I understand the logic and I hope you are right but I don't see us getting two last second wins like we did against Dallas and the Ravens plus everyone is gunning for us. It is unlikely we go 6-0 in the AFC North again. The way I see it:

Steelers: 11-5
Bumgals: 9-7
Ravens: 8-8
Stains: 7-9

That said if we get lucky and have no injuries 13-3 is a best I could see.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
05-26-2009, 10:42 AM
At the bottom of the article the writer makes a quick point about Carolina having the most games against .500 opponents. To me that is more important than overall records.

We play Detroit this year, and they account for zero wins, but we only get to beat them once.

Djfan
05-26-2009, 11:54 AM
The way I see it:

Steelers: 11-5
Bumgals: 9-7
Ravens: 8-8
Stains: 7-9



Oviedo,

What is it that makes you think that the Bungles out perform the Ratbirds? I don't see the Rats as good as they were last year, but even drunk they are better than the Bungles, IMO.

(Sorry Jom. Just my take on it - chime in if you want. Your perspective might be good here.)

RuthlessBurgher
05-26-2009, 03:39 PM
The way I see it:

Steelers: 11-5
Bumgals: 9-7
Ravens: 8-8
Stains: 7-9



Oviedo,

What is it that makes you think that the Bungles out perform the Ratbirds? I don't see the Rats as good as they were last year, but even drunk they are better than the Bungles, IMO.

(Sorry Jom. Just my take on it - chime in if you want. Your perspective might be good here.)

The Bengals actually have a respectable defense with a good young secondary. They were the 12th ranked defense in the NFL last year, so they were actually above average when facing a difficult schedule, so they may improve with a weaker schedule plus the addition of Michael Johnson as a situation pass rusher as well as a healthy Keith Rivers and Rey Maualuga at linebacker.

The jump from Ryan Fitzpatrick to Carson Palmer is beyond significant, plus they still have weapons at WR in spite of the loss of Houshmangina (Lav Coles, Chad Ochenta Cinco, Chris Henry...plus Simpson and Caldwell in their 2nd year, since rookie WR's make their greatest progress from year one to year two, just like we expect from Sweed).

I expect the Browns, however, to be putrid. I think they will contend for the #1 overall pick next year. Oviedo was more than generous with the 7-9 record for them, in my opinion.

Oviedo
05-26-2009, 04:46 PM
The way I see it:

Steelers: 11-5
Bumgals: 9-7
Ravens: 8-8
Stains: 7-9



Oviedo,

What is it that makes you think that the Bungles out perform the Ratbirds? I don't see the Rats as good as they were last year, but even drunk they are better than the Bungles, IMO.

(Sorry Jom. Just my take on it - chime in if you want. Your perspective might be good here.)

I think the Bumgals added more talent than they lost for the first time except at WR. Coles is no slouch though. The Bumgals defense was not the problem last year. The inability to do anything on offense killed them. Even though I think Palmer is way overrated he is the second best QB in the AFC North. The offense and the defense will both be better in 2009.

I really think with Flacco in 2009 we see Derek Anderson in 2008. I also think the Ravens secondary isn't as good. Expect a drop off IMO.

ramblinjim
05-26-2009, 04:49 PM
outside of the Steelers and all the interesting goings on with them, i'm most interested in watching the Ratbirds. Will that defense slow down? Will Flacco mature into an even more impressive quarterback? Why are they moving McLain back to a blocking back? etc...