Second Thoughts on the Sked

[HoosierCat]

When the '04 schedule was released a few months back, we heard a lot about how tough the Bengals schedule was. That we were going up against a bunch of 10+ win teams. That they had a total winning percentage last year of something like .540. I think it was the third-toughest in the NFL, or somewhere around there.

Well, our camp broke today, everyone else's has/is/will soon, and we're halfway through the preseason. We've gone through FA, the draft, injuries and various other surprises here and around the league, final rosters are starting to take shape...and the bottom line for me is, the schedule doesn't look nearly as unfriendly as it did a few months ago.

Our own division doesn't phase me. We split with everyone last year, we can do at least that good again. I think we have to go at least 4-2 -- we have to sweep someone -- to have a shot at the playoffs. I don't think that's asking for something beyond the pale.

And is anyone really afraid of the AFC & NFC Easts? Once you get past the class of the two division (the Patriots and the Eagles), I don't see any game that isn't at least in the "winnable" category. The Jets and Redskins are trying to do the rebuilding on the run thing. It took the Bills five quarters and some help from the weather to beat us last year. Miami is a phuqueing wreck -- no Rickey, no O-gun, no Boston, and the Giants are in a rebuilding year. Washington is a chic playoff pick these days, and they have a lot of underperforming talent that could finally show up, but they have question marks too, and the Cowboys don't have a QB.

And then there's Denver and Tennessee. Denver will probably beat us but Tenn is winnable. George is gone and McNair's time is running out. I think they're very vulnerable this year.

Can the Bengals win 10 games? Yes. And if they don't, it won't be the fault of the schedule. :player:

[The Brew Man]

When the '04 schedule was released a few months back, we heard a lot about how tough the Bengals schedule was. That we were going up against a bunch of 10+ win teams. That they had a total winning percentage last year of something like .540. I think it was the third-toughest in the NFL, or somewhere around there.

Well, our camp broke today, everyone else's has/is/will soon, and we're halfway through the preseason. We've gone through FA, the draft, injuries and various other surprises here and around the league, final rosters are starting to take shape...and the bottom line for me is, the schedule doesn't look nearly as unfriendly as it did a few months ago.

Our own division doesn't phase me. We split with everyone last year, we can do at least that good again. I think we have to go at least 4-2 -- we have to sweep someone -- to have a shot at the playoffs. I don't think that's asking for something beyond the pale.

And is anyone really afraid of the AFC & NFC Easts? Once you get past the class of the two division (the Patriots and the Eagles), I don't see any game that isn't at least in the "winnable" category. The Jets and Redskins are trying to do the rebuilding on the run thing. It took the Bills five quarters and some help from the weather to beat us last year. Miami is a phuqueing wreck -- no Rickey, no O-gun, no Boston, and the Giants are in a rebuilding year. Washington is a chic playoff pick these days, and they have a lot of underperforming talent that could finally show up, but they have question marks too, and the Cowboys don't have a QB.

And then there's Denver and Tennessee. Denver will probably beat us but Tenn is winnable. George is gone and McNair's time is running out. I think they're very vulnerable this year.

Can the Bengals win 10 games? Yes. And if they don't, it won't be the fault of the schedule. :player:

Great post. I agree that the schedule looks less daunting than it did a couple months ago. Mostly due to the issues Miami and Dallas have had. But thats what the NFL is all about, keeping parity! They seem to do a great job at it. Its similar to the Raiders last year, they looked damn impressive on paper, and ended up doing nothing.

[wookie]

I agree, I'm less concerned about the the schedule now than I was when it came out. On one hand I never saw the Bengals going 8-8 last year with the schedule they had. But, we beat the Chiefs, 'Niners, and played well enough in our own division to make it. I'm still upset about the meltdown that kept them from going over .500 last year, but it was a pleasant surprise with how much they improved.

This year, yes we still have to worry about the AFC/NFC East. The Skins have some issues with offense, but the D seems to be stepping up and they will have home-field advantage. The Giants and Cowboys should not be able to win in Cincy...shouldn't...

The Jets and Patriots will be good games. A win in NJ is a definite possibility, but a win in Foxboro in December will be tougher, likewise the last game in Philly. Both tough places to play late in the season.

I say, that if all goes well the Bengals come away from those games with a 5-3 record...6-2 if the 'Skins aren't for real.

Say a split within the division gives you 3-3, Denver and Tenn. are very doable for Cincy victories. Could put them at 10-6, or even a phenomenal 11-5 if they play their best football every game this year.

I'm always optimistic at the start of the year.

[Kirkendall]

As with all NFL games, the schedule can go either way per game just like a 4-5 Bengals against the 9-0 Cheifs.

[schweinhart]

This past post by Kevnz is a good summary of the 2004 sked.

The schedule isn't tough until it plays itself out. Injuries, team collapses all play a part. Teams fluctuate so badly from one year to the next trying to say that a schedule is hard before the first kickoff is crazy.

LEt's look at the teams shall we?

Jet's....Rebuilding their defense, who knows how their offense could be? They can't control the clock on offense.

Miami, no running game, not much passing, an aged defense.

Baltimore, still have no WR threat. A top D, but does anybody know if C mac will be playing this year?

Denver, the fact that it's on Monday hurts us, but their D isn't all that, and Plummer can get rattled easy and still have questions at RB (but should have sorted itself out by game time)

Cleveland? Puh-Leaze

Tennessee, Lost a lot in their interior D line, no running game and lost a top reciever during the offseason, plus who knows, by then McNair could be fighting the injury bug.

Dallas, No QB, by this point Henson is probably starting and that only helps, a good D though so it should be competative.

Washington. Why the hell people expect this team to be so much better with Gibbs is beyond me. They will be better, but they have a suspect D, lost their shutdown corner and Portis hasn't proved himself outside of Denver and the team lacks real depth so an injury or two at any key position will hurt them even more than the average team.

Pittsburgh don't have corners that can match up with our WR's, they may or may not be starting a rookie QB, and even if they don't turnover Tommy won't exactly scare many d's, and they don't have a running game anymore.

New England is obviously a tough test, but being that they are the defending champs every team plays them that much harder so they could be beat up, but still this should be the toughest game of the year (sorry Baltimore fans)

Buffalo, who knows? Top D but are they gonna be fighting for a playoff spot? Will Bledsoe have been replaced by this game? Can anyone step up as the #2 WR?

Giants, Come on, they don't have an offensive line, they don't have a defensive line and can't play special teams, and will either have a rookie throwing, or a QB that creates turnovers....Vince Lombardi couldn't win with that team, this should be the easiest game of the year.

Philadelphia, probably the second or third toughest game of the year, and it's hard to say who will win cause they could have locked up a playoff spot, homefield advantage and have nothing to play for, or they could be fighting for those things.

[HoosierCat]

The Jets and Patriots will be good games. A win in NJ is a definite possibility, but a win in Foxboro in December will be tougher, likewise the last game in Philly. Both tough places to play late in the season.

I say, that if all goes well the Bengals come away from those games with a 5-3 record...6-2 if the 'Skins aren't for real.

Say a split within the division gives you 3-3, Denver and Tenn. are very doable for Cincy victories. Could put them at 10-6, or even a phenomenal 11-5 if they play their best football every game this year.

I'm always optimistic at the start of the year.

Me, too and I was thinking along exactly the same lines. At this point, the only place I'd pencil in "L"'s is Baltimore (2), Philly, N.E., and Denver. The other 11 are all, IMHO, winnable.

Figure they catch one of the 5 "L"'s on a bad day and/or happen to play killer ball that day, and they steal one. Conversely, figure the "any given Sunday" rule Kirk alludes to bites them 2-3 times among those 11 games. That still puts them at 9-10 wins.

Of course, lots can happen, most notably injuries, but right now I like their chances.

[kevnz]

This past post by Kevnz is a good summary of the 2004 sked.

Damn, thanks for that. Some memory to remember me posting that ages ago....

[wookie]

Me, too and I was thinking along exactly the same lines. At this point, the only place I'd pencil in "L"'s is Baltimore (2), Philly, N.E., and Denver. The other 11 are all, IMHO, winnable.

Figure they catch one of the 5 "L"'s on a bad day and/or happen to play killer ball that day, and they steal one. Conversely, figure the "any given Sunday" rule Kirk alludes to bites them 2-3 times among those 11 games. That still puts them at 9-10 wins.

Of course, lots can happen, most notably injuries, but right now I like their chances.

Glad to see someone else is thinking along the same lines.

However, I'm curious as to why you think that Baltimore will be a loss in both games?? I figured that they would probably split the series again this year.

[HoosierCat]

However, I'm curious as to why you think that Baltimore will be a loss in both games?? I figured that they would probably split the series again this year.

If they do, I'll be thrilled. But we've never had a great deal of luck in Baltimore, and the PBS game vs. the Ravens comes in week 3...which means Palmer will be facing one of the league's top D's in just his third game. I wish the home/away scenarios were switched & Palmer could face them at PBS in December, I'd feel much better about getting that split.

[schweinhart]

This past post by Kevnz is a good summary of the 2004 sked.

Baltimore, still have no WR threat. A top D, but does anybody know if C mac will be playing this year?

A bullseye is easy to remember, Kevnz.

Your Ratbird take brings up a key why it looks better to face them early. All this talk now about Deon does seem to lend credence to Chris Mc not coming back any time soon. Even if C Mc does come back, he'd have at least missed all of camp and the pre-season, which might take some edge off his game by week 3.

Boulware might not be full speed either coming off injury. Of course, the birds D has the personnell to just reload but any crack in it is a chance for points.

If we contain Jamal, I like our chances for a W in week 3.

[kingwilly]

I would not get too worried about Baltimore. I predict a drop-off. Plus, Wright had an amazing run of QB starts (dumbfounded look on my face).

Boller will start and struggle again and the D does have some injury/holdout ? marks.

By Dec, Jamal L. will be worrying about his "legal" problems. and they will feature either Kordell or Wright at QB. One thing to consider is the Bal home record, they were 7-1 at home.

Overall, my guess is about the same, hoping for 11-5, worst case 9-7, likely 10-6.

Our biggest concerns. Carson staying ahead of the curve (as he is now), our run D getting the stops, and consistent special teams coverages, ie field position.

[ckj414]

When the '04 schedule was released a few months back, we heard a lot about how tough the Bengals schedule was. That we were going up against a bunch of 10+ win teams. That they had a total winning percentage last year of something like .540. I think it was the third-toughest in the NFL, or somewhere around there.

Well, our camp broke today, everyone else's has/is/will soon, and we're halfway through the preseason. We've gone through FA, the draft, injuries and various other surprises here and around the league, final rosters are starting to take shape...and the bottom line for me is, the schedule doesn't look nearly as unfriendly as it did a few months ago...

JoiseyCat, great post, I think you're absolutely right. When the schedule first came out I also thought this schedule would be much tougher, but the offseason hasn't shaped up that way. Several teams on their schedule didn't improve as much this offseason as was originally thought. Earily this year I thought a much improved and steadily improving Bengals team would still only finish 8-8 due to the tough schedule, and, lets face it, last season's 8-8 was against a pretty weak scehdule. But now I see 9-7 as the minimum, most likely 10-6.

[ckj414]

Giants, Come on, they don't have an offensive line, they don't have a defensive line and can't play special teams, and will either have a rookie throwing, or a QB that creates turnovers....Vince Lombardi couldn't win with that team, this should be the easiest game of the year.

Hey! Those are my boys you're talking about! ;-)

Seriously, I hope other teams are underestimating the Giants as much as the fans and media are. At many positions its the same team that looked so good in 2002, and nobody is that old yet! What happened in 2003? Lots of bad stuff, but mostly injuries were to blame. Poor depth at oft-injured positions didn't help either. Besides, any team with Michael Strahan most certainly has a DL!...I can't argue too much with the OL comment though, although I'm optimistic about some of the new faces.