Just making a distinction between teams that have established themselves in prior years as being solid teams and those that have somehow risen to contender status by pundits (Miami, Arizona). I love that everyone is picking gainst the Steelers, a team that if their QB remained healthy all last year finishes 13-3 at worst and the year before went 15-1. Yup, a real flash in the pan. Not like those mighty Dolphins who won six straight games against the 5 worst teams in the league and squeaked out a win (more like it was handed to thenm) against the Pats JV squad.
Does no one see the eerily similar situations of the 2005 Bills and the 2006 Dolphins? The Bill's went 8-2 to close out the 2004 season and everyone was lauding them as contenders. But none of those 8 wins came against teams above .500 and one of the two losses came against the Steelers backups.
Coming into 2005 season the Bills were said to have a stifling defense, promising running game and a new gunsligner at the helm. The only weak spot was their OL.
Sound familiar?
Now there are certainly some key differences, namely a veteran QB albeit one that turns balls over more than Andy ****, but you guys gotta stop reading your own predictions. It's an awful shame to fall so far when you have't even begun the ascent.
