RolStoppable said:
MTZehvor said:
Well, the Broncos did lose their starting QB for a good portion of the season, along with DeMarcus Ware, Chris Harris Jr, and Brandon Marshall, among others. I'm not super up to date on the Bengals' injury report, but outside of Andy Dalton, Terrence Newman is the only significant player I'm aware of that missed extended time. At the very least, Denver suffered worse.
The Patriots is a more difficult argument to make, but I think it's one that can be made, considering that they lost their top three wide receivers for multiple games, lost top two RBs to IR, lost three fourths of their secondary for at least one game (and half for two or more), as well as Donta Hightower, Rob Ninkovich, and basically every single starting offensive lineman was missing for at least three games. Brady and Gronk were consistent throughout, but the sheer decimiation of depth at every other position makes it a close call.
|
Are you seriously trying to say that losing Peyton Manning was detrimental to the Broncos? Remember, that's the guy you mocked for having a noodlearm. Manning also finished the season as the QB with the most interceptions despite missing a good amount of games.
And trust me, you would gladly accept two injured WRs and an injured RB if it meant that Brady is healthy.
|
When the alternative is Brock Osweiller? Yeah, probably.
And yes, I would accept three injured WRs and two injured RBs if it means keeping Brady healthy, but that's because the Patriots are so reliant on the QB. If I had to bet on a Bengals team, I would much sooner bet on a team without Andy Dalton than one without AJ Green, Marvin Jones, Greg Little, Giovanni Bernard, and Jeremy Hill.
