Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

12 Oct 2006

Week 6 Rundown: Is This the Week?

As in, is this the week the Steelers finally turn it around? Or will they be stopped by the 2-2 Kansas City Chiefs, led by the second-highest rated passer in the league (seriously) and an improved defense? Also in the latest Rundown: the Eagles vs. Little Tuna, Baltimore's media overreaction, and the new (now old) Atlanta offense.

Posted by: Mike Tanier on 12 Oct 2006

24 comments, Last at 14 Oct 2006, 3:04am by Kal


by Travis (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:11pm

Great as always, but the Redskins are also completing their T 'n' T series this week (they played the Texans in Week 3).

by NewsToTom (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:31pm

Hey, the Cowboys finally get a chance for revenge in the regular season after the Texans became the first(?) true expansion team to win their first regular season game. Let's see if the Texans can better their 19-10 victory, or if they've regressed since their first game!

by Methdeez (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:39pm

They have like what, 13 wins in the four seasons since then?
I think they started regressing as soon as they walked off the field. Although it would be hi-larious if they beat Dallas again.

by Mshray (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:56pm

Great article, as always. The first of several LOL moments was Mike Mularkey: Double Agent.

Loved the J. Geils reference, by the way.

by Travis (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 8:09pm

[A]fter the Texans became the first(?) true expansion team to win their first regular season game.

According to Pro Football Reference, the 1953 Baltimore Colts and 1961 Vikings won their first games too.

by NewsToTom (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 8:13pm

Re #3
They're actually 18-49, since they did go 7-9 in 2004. Still, I wonder when they'll put up a highlight better than "beat instate rival in first game ever."

by NewsToTom (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 8:19pm

Re #5
Thanks for saving me from my sloth. They're the only true expansion team since the AFL-NFL merger to win their first game ("true" necessary thanks to Ravens' victory in first game).

by pcs (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 8:46pm

#5: the NFL has always referred to the 1953 Colts as an expansion team (mostly because doing so allowed them to squeeze a franchise fee out of a new set of owners), but those Colts were essentially the 1952 Dallas Texans in a new coat of paint. Just as the Texans were the 1951 New York Yanks in a new coat of paint. Most of the players were the same (Art Donovan, Gino Marchetti, George Taliaferro, etc). I don't know if that means they're not a true expansion team, but it's some fun trivia regardless.

by Fantasy Stooge (not verified) :: Thu, 10/12/2006 - 11:18pm

Re: #4 - Me too.

by Bobman (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 2:38am

Parcells must have one freakin' big foot, to have it wedged in the whole team's collective ass. (well, most likely two, or he'd limp a lot.) Maybe he borrowed it from ROBO-you-know-who.

by centrifuge (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 3:52am

ROBO-PARCELLS would be a fearsome sight indeed.

by Israel (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 7:28am

They are both playing hurt, but there is an angle in the PIT-KC game regarding Troy Polamalu and Larry Johnson. The teams traded number one picks in 2003 and these two are the result.

And as opposed to Manning vs Manning, Ben vs Rivers etc, Johnson and Polamalu will actually go against each other, if healthy enough to play.

by Jim Haug (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 8:49am

Nice allusion to Kane, but it's Jed as in Jedediah Leland.

by King Kaufman (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:16am

Jim Leyland is the real Motor City Maestro after turning a moribund franchise around in just one year.

Leyland's done a good job, but he didn't turn a moribund franchise around in just one year. He came aboard just as the franchise that G.M. Dave Dombrowski -- the real real Motor City Maestro -- had turned around over the course of the previous two years was ready to show results on the field at the major league level, thanks to the emergence of a staff of young pitchers and a couple of savvy veteran signings.

by calig23 (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:54am

If Lions fans really want to complete the conversion of Marinelli into Leyland, they can't forget to give him a rocking chair to put on the sidelines.

by Zzyzx (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 11:25am

Fingers crossed that that Hawks/Rams prediction is accurate. I'd feel much better without those two late fumbles so we'd have a division lead.

by Kal (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 11:38am

#11: I prefer the idea of ROBO-TUNA myself.

Hoping the Hawks can carve up the Rams too, if only because I followed FO's advice and drafted Hass earlier than some said I should. And...it hasn't been the most helpful thing ever in a few weeks. The good news is that I also drafted Atlanta's D late, and that has been obliterating people.

by James (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 12:17pm

Which is creepier, Zwinky girl or CMG?

by centrifuge (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 12:32pm

#17: A fellow Hasselbeck owner! Woo! Let's hear it for the PFP2k6 plan!

by Tom Kelso (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 12:38pm

Here's what bothers me as a Ravens fan about this week's game, more than the short week, the upsetting flight home, McNair's poor play in the second half, and Jamal's inability to recover any of his old form:

Julius Peppers will be lining up most of Sunday afternoon against Tony Pashos, who was not a starter until this season because he had to be taught footwork. This does not bode well for anything the Ravens might try on offense.

As a fan, I hope the lessons took. As an amateur analyst, I see a domino effect that cripples the rest of the offense, even with Morgan out.

by MCS (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 1:27pm

From Simmons today:

"On the flip side, everyone wrote off the 2006 Eagles as an NFC contender and they've channeled that negativity into a rallying cry. McNabb needed to prove that he can thrive without Owens. The defense needed to prove they were just as good as the other NFC "juggernauts." Westbrook needed to prove he was a big-time back. The receivers needed to prove that they could replace T.O. Andy Reid needed to prove he hasn't been mildly overrated this whole time. Now they're 4-1 and everyone's still raving about the Bears, leading us to the semi-inevitable scenario of Philly winning the NFC in Chicago in January, followed by every Eagle whining about how nobody believed in them all season. I can't wait."

by Andrew (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 1:36pm

No sane person is calling for a quarterback change just yet.

Every Pittsburgh fan I know (and I know quite a few having married into a Pittsburgh family) is wondering why Rothelisberger was rushed back at less then 100% given how well Batch played in Week 1. This wondering started right away with the terrible preseason, then the even worse performance in Week 2 where he tossed picks and shied away from contact one week after internal surgery. Most fans weren't expecting him to play until after the Week 4 Bye given that Batch had gotten a win. What's the worst that Batch could have done in the next two games? Lose like Rothelisberger did?

by Andrew (not verified) :: Fri, 10/13/2006 - 2:11pm

Let’s hear it for the PFP2k6 plan!

You have to add your own judgement into what Kubiak/PFP2k6 spits out from the computer.

For example, it projected McNabb with 16 INT's. He's never thrown that many in his career. No reason he'd start now when he is one of the least intercepted QB's ever, and his INT ratio has been trending down his whole career. It also projected him with just 26 TD's, which would contradict his trend of an increasing TD/game ratio (1.14 in 99, 1.33 in 00, 1.76 in 01, 1.50 in 02, 1.00 in 03, 2.11 in 04, 1.78 in 05, 2.20 in 06). Lastly, it obviously underprojected his rushing TD total by only giving him 1, when his pace since 2003 had been around 3 per year. He already has 3 in 5 games.

OTOH, Hasselbeck was projected with just 7 INT's (he's never thrown fewer than 9, and in most years was up close to 1 per game), 30 TD's (never had more than 26) and 4200 yards (never hit more than 3800).

So I drafted McNabb. Obvioiusly, Kubiak still needs some work, although using it as a guide along with commonsense (such as I relate above) and what was seen in the preseason in drafting, I currently lead my league by about 50 points and have most of the top scoring players in each category (my team includes McNabb, Larry Johnson, Gore, Maroney, Heap, plus some wideouts snatched off waivers at the beginning of the season - Jennings, Williams, and Berrian - I'm still kicking myself for not taking Colston and Jones-Drew when I had the chance). For example, I took Heap because Kubiak put him as a top 3 Tight End. But I didn't buy the Cooley hype based on what I saw in the preseason, and didn't go for Gates because McNair loves the Tight End more than Rivers probably will (not a coincidence that all Baltimore passing TD's have been to Tight Ends).

Don't just drink the Kool-Aid!

by Kal (not verified) :: Sat, 10/14/2006 - 3:04am

Well, I didn't take Hass that early (long after McNabb was taken) but he's still not been the best QB aside from one monstrous game. That's more of the problem; all the Seahawks offense has been performing subpar, and if they'd been performing at par they would've been very good.

The biggest thing that has hurt has been the poor performance of Ronnie Brown, who has been a real hit. That's been made up by people like Heap, Atlanta's D, silly kickers (Gould has been great), Reggie Williams and Gabriel in certain weeks, and pulling off an evil trade (getting Westbrook and Randy Moss for Chris Chambers).

Hass has hurt a bit only because he's underperformed when I expected him to do decently, but he's not been nearly as bad as other picks. The real disappointment has been Brown.