Bware's Upset Scenarios: Week 3

[BwareDWare94 723]

Had some success last week. This week is a lot harder. Plenty of good matchups.

 

Week 3 Upset #1: Ravens over Texans

 

Why it might happen:

Baltimore is a significantly different team at home, and though Ray Rice's injury has me concerned, Bernard Pierce is no slouch. I like how Smith matches up against Houston's secondary, and think that Marlon Brown could have another nice game, and if Brown scores another TD this week, he's on a TD streak to start the season, as an undrafted rookie. With a nasty defensive front, Baltimore should be able to contain Foster and Tate, forcing Schaub to beat them with his arm. I don't like Schaub's chances against Flacco, but for Flacco to beat him, Webb and and the rest of that Baltimore secondary has to, at the very least, not allow Andre and Hopkins to go off. I'm also intrigued by the ascension of Elam, allowing Huff to not feel so much pressure on every snap.

 

Is it actually an upset?

At this point, yes. Baltimore's offense is struggling without a go-to receiver, which Smith has never proven to be on a consistent basis. I like what I've seen from Brown so far, but for Baltimore's offense to take the next step, it needs a third receiving option to break out. The Ravens either need to wait for Jacoby to get back, or Doss has to magically become what some seem to think he can be. At his size, there's no excuse at this point. They already cut him once; this is his last chance.

 

I picked Baltimore, but I'm very concerned. At the same time, the Ravens are the best team Houston will have played yet, and the Texans sure tried to lose to San Diego and Tennessee.

 

Week 3 Upset #2: Bengals over Packers

 

Why it might happen:

Cincinnati doesn't have the necessary firepower, the can-score-on-nearly-every-possession-in-every-game firepower, to compete with Rodgers and his weaponry. What they'll have to do, to balance it out, is force some turnovers without committing any of their own. The Bengals will not win this game if the turnover ratio is even or in favor of the Pack. They simply won't. Their DL can terrorize Rodgers all day, but their secondary is not good enough to contain 4-5 excellent weapons like Green Bay has. This is certainly possible, but Dalton has to play extremely well, and their defense has to force some TOs.

 

Is it actually an upset?

Without question, in my opinion. The Bengals are good, but they're not explosive enough to realistically compete with teams like Green Bay.

 

I don't think this one is likely, but it's possible.

 

Week 3 Upset #3: Buccaneers over Patriots

 

Why it could happen:

Tom Brady and New England are really struggling on offense, and without any real proven weapons, and with their best receiver being yet another Welker clone who Revis could shut down fairly easily, I'm really not concerned about New England pulling away in this game. Matter of fact, Josh Freeman has to shit the bed in order for that to happen, and I know he'll try hard to do just that. The Bucs defense is absolutely capable of giving New England some fits, and I think they could very easily win in Foxborough this weekend. It all comes down to Freeman. Scary thought for Bucs fans.

 

Is it actually an upset?

An 0-2 beating New England is always an upset, and I just have a feeling about this game. New England almost always has one or two surprise losses on their schedule, like losing to Arizona, or to Seattle last year. It just seems to happen every season, and this is a week that looks dangerous.

 

I really think this could happen.

 

Week 3 Upset #4: Cardinals over Saints

 

Why it will happen:

The Saints have yet to explode on offense, and they've yet to play a defense as good as Arizona's. Yes, Tampa's may be better at some point, but they're still gelling with new pieces. Arizona, on the other hand, has some real solidarity from front to back on their defense. On offense, I'm not sure that New Orleans has what's necessary to deal with Arizona's weapons or Bruce Arians' creativity. While the Saints defense has been impressive thus far, there will be games when their lack of necessary pieces will fall apart. This week is where we'll see it the first time.

 

Is it actually an upset?

In the eyes of the general fan, it's a massive upset as the game is in New Orleans. To us? I'm not so sure. Some of us have mentioned the Cardinals as a surprise team since the Palmer trade, and I think more have taken notice.

 

I really believe this game will be won by the Cardinals.

(Note: I bypassed Dolphins over Falcons, mostly because of how depleted Atlanta's become. It's no longer an upset, considering the Dolphins are at home)

Week 3 Upset #5: Steelers over Bears

 

Why it might happen:

The Bears have yet to see the bad Jay Cutler. His two interceptions last Sunday were the result of awful playcalling and one sick read by the ascending Harrison Smith. Against a tough, seasoned defense like Pittsburgh, and in Pittsburgh, we may very well see Mr. Hide Cutler's first appearance. Big Ben and that offense will need some turnovers to help them out, especially against a fairly solid, if not the same as past years, Bears defense. I think Ben doesn't let his team slip to 0-3. Tomlin was obviously embarrassed after Monday's loss, and perhaps this is where the tide turns.

 

Is it actually an upset?

I don't think so. The Bears could very easily be 0-2, and while that doesn't necessarily matter, the Steelers have now had time to adjust to Pouncey's absence, so hopefully their running game won't be so atrocious this week. What it'll come down to is Pittsburgh's young receivers not allowing Chicago's ball hawking secondary to get too many good looks at Big Ben's passes.

 

I don't think this one happens, but it's definitely possible at Heinz field.

Week 3 Upset #6: Jaguars over Seahawks

 

Why it might happen:

I'm just fucking with you. The Seahawks will probably shut the Jags out .

Edited September 19, 2013 by BwareDWare94

[The Burfict Storm 39]

So you think Seahawks will cover -19.5?

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I will be shocked if the Packers hold AJ to under 200 yards.

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

If Gronk doesn't play, I honestly think the Bucs have a decent shot at beating the Patriots, especially now that Goldson is not suspended.

[badgers 380]

Is it actually an upset?

Without question, in my opinion. The Bengals are good, but they're not explosive enough to realistically compete with teams like Green Bay.

 

You keep using that word.. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

But in all seriousness, I don't think either GB or CIN winning would be an upset. Feel like we're pretty equally talented so I'm not sure who will win. I'm actually expecting Cincy to win because they're at home and we usually play bad against em.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

 

Is it actually an upset?

Without question, in my opinion. The Bengals are good, but they're not explosive enough to realistically compete with teams like Green Bay.

 

You keep using that word.. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Bware gives the worst fucking logic/thought process when doing these ''upsets''. Makes no sense when you follow it up with ''Is it an upset? No, not really'', or ''only in the eyes of the casual fan''. Fucking stupid lol.

 

Hey Bware, how about you just do ONE true upset per week? Pick a significant underdog and roll with that.

[badgers 380]

 

 

Is it actually an upset?

Without question, in my opinion. The Bengals are good, but they're not explosive enough to realistically compete with teams like Green Bay.

 

You keep using that word.. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Bware gives the worst fucking logic/thought process when doing these ''upsets''. Makes no sense when you follow it up with ''Is it an upset? No, not really'', or ''only in the eyes of the casual fan''. Fucking stupid lol.

 

Hey Bware, how about you just do ONE true upset per week? Pick a significant underdog and roll with that.

 

 

That's a good point. BWare, if you have to include "Is it really an upset" you might as well say "Does it really belong in this post?".

 

In which case 2 of these (PIT/CHI and ARI/NO) should just be thrown out. You already said that Pittsburgh beating Chicago wouldn't be an upset so why did you post it in your thread about Upset Scenarios?

[Jayrus 51]

Don't forget the Jags head coach was our DC. He helped build our defense, and so is uniquely equipped to game plan against it. That said even the greatest artist can't paint a masterpiece with a bucket full of shit. They just don't have the personell to stop us regardless of the game plan they come up with.

[Cherry 1,302]

I will be shocked if the Packers hold AJ to under 200 yards.

I wouldn't. AJ may be good, even great, but if you hurt Dalton's confidence there is no way AJ puts up more than 100. It all depends on how the Packers force Dalton to make mistakes.

[Attyla the Hawk 197]

So you think Seahawks will cover -19.5?

 

I think it's a strong possibility.

 

This defense is just playing lights out. Like sharks in bloodied water type frenzy. If Jacksonville scores more than 7 I'd be genuinely surprised. Holding both Newton and Kaepernick under 150 yards passing each is quite impressive. Jacksonville might not hit the century mark.

 

The offense hasn't really put together a good game yet. They've managed some long scoring drives but I think Seattle understands they need to get whole on that side of the ball yet. They need to start resolving some of these issues or they will struggle in the next 3-4 weeks. We have 4 of the next 5 on the road, all of the teams looking like quality opponents. Thus far it's been chalked up to just playing really good defenses. Jacksonville doesn't pose that problem. If Seattle doesn't break out in this game, I think it's something that could linger for weeks and that could make for a handful of losses in 7 games.

 

Where it might not happen is that it's an underwhelming matchup after a highly emotional win. It's hard to get up for a game after that kind of effort. Also, Seattle isn't a team that is going to put up a lot of points on the board after they get up on an opponent. The wins against Carolina and SF both saw Seattle grinding clock until victory formation time. They could have scored pretty easily to finish out both games, but instead were content to just run out time with long sustained drives inside the opponents end of the field.

[BwareDWare94 723]

I've said before that some of these are only definite upsets in the eyes of general fans. I enjoy putting these threads together, so I have no idea why the criticism is necessary. If they suck, just tell me. I'll stop writing these up every week.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

I've said before that some of these are only definite upsets in the eyes of general fans. I enjoy putting these threads together, so I have no idea why the criticism is necessary. If they suck, just tell me. I'll stop writing these up every week.

Like I mentioned before, your logic in these threads is so silly and fucked. Really don't see how you wouldn't get criticized lol.

 

And I already gave you a suggestion...

 

Hey Bware, how about you just do ONE true upset per week? Pick a significant underdog and roll with that.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Or how about I do whatever the hell I want? I think this idea is interesting, and I'm rolling with it. My logic isn't fucked. Most of the games I list usually end up being good games.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

Or how about I do whatever the hell I want? I think this idea is interesting, and I'm rolling with it. My logic isn't fucked. Most of the games I list usually end up being good games.

Do whatever fuck you want to do. Your logic IS fucked. You don't see anything wrong with listing a game as an upset and then saying ''Is it an upset? I don't think so''. And if a certain game is only an upset in the eyes of the casual fan, why bother including it?

 

This thread is also silly because you're bound to get at least 1 ''upset'' right if you're posting 5-7 potential ''upsets''. Not exactly going out on a limb like I was when I was doing my upset of the week (and picking big underdogs too).

[BLUE 1,026]

Eh, I don't mind these threads, even if I disagree with some of the selections.

 

Bware isn't the type to say "BOOM, I DUN TOLD YOU SO!!!!".

Edited September 20, 2013 by BLUE
Typo

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

ITT: People are dicks to someone trying to generate conversation. Who cares if he lists a bunch of shit and you don't agree with it? Look at the dialogue that sprouts from it. Plenty of the games were mentioned in the posts following, so take value in that.

[Turry 755]

Monsters upset pick of the week

 

Oakland Beats Denver on MNF BOOK IT.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Like I mentioned before, your logic in these threads is so silly and fucked. Really don't see how you wouldn't get criticized lol.

 

And I already gave you a suggestion...

 

 

I don't understand what's wrong with discussing whether or not something is an upset. There's nothing wrong with thinking about how something will look in the eyes of a general fan.

 

Picking one a week, one that's got a massive chance of failure, seems like just randomly selecting the most lopsided game and predicting that the underdog wins. How about I continue to do what I'm doing and outline upsets that might actually happen, such as TB over New England, or Arizona over New Orleans in New Orleans?

 

It's fun to discuss because it changes the dynamic of power, even if it only lasts for a week.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Bware, maybe it'd make more sense to rate how big of an upset it'd be. Not just "is it an upset."

[Thanatos 2,847]

 

Or how about I do whatever the hell I want? I think this idea is interesting, and I'm rolling with it. My logic isn't fucked. Most of the games I list usually end up being good games.

Do whatever fuck you want to do. Your logic IS fucked. You don't see anything wrong with listing a game as an upset and then saying ''Is it an upset? I don't think so''. And if a certain game is only an upset in the eyes of the casual fan, why bother including it?

 

This thread is also silly because you're bound to get at least 1 ''upset'' right if you're posting 5-7 potential ''upsets''. Not exactly going out on a limb like I was when I was doing my upset of the week (and picking big underdogs too).

 

He's not doing it to say "I picked an upset." He's just talking about potential upsets and why.

 

Get off your high horse, jeez.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Monsters upset pick of the week

 

Oakland Beats Denver on MNF BOOK IT.

 

[Eefluxx 113]

I've said before that some of these are only definite upsets in the eyes of general fans. I enjoy putting these threads together, so I have no idea why the criticism is necessary. If they suck, just tell me. I'll stop writing these up every week.

 

 

I get the idea of picking upsets and trying to maybe generate conversations out of them. But in your upsets you say in the Arizona over New Orleans Why it WILL happen (the only one you say it will happen btw) yet in the pick'em you picked New Orleans over Arizona.

 

Any reason why you did that? Just curious is all.

[BwareDWare94 723]

 

I've said before that some of these are only definite upsets in the eyes of general fans. I enjoy putting these threads together, so I have no idea why the criticism is necessary. If they suck, just tell me. I'll stop writing these up every week.

 

 

I get the idea of picking upsets and trying to maybe generate conversations out of them. But in your upsets you say in the Arizona over New Orleans Why it WILL happen (the only one you say it will happen btw) yet in the pick'em you picked New Orleans over Arizona.

 

Any reason why you did that? Just curious is all.

 

 

I like to throw one "will" in place of "might" out there per week. I know I had one for week two, and I believe I had one or two for week one. I went safe route in pick 'em, but I've had my eyes on this game as soon as Arizona got their first win last Sunday. I think I had Arizona over Detroit as my "will" last week, too. They're my NFC Dark Horse team, so I'm hoping they continue to surprise.

 

Kenny Vaccaro is awesome, by the way.

[Bay 2,003]

 

 

I've said before that some of these are only definite upsets in the eyes of general fans. I enjoy putting these threads together, so I have no idea why the criticism is necessary. If they suck, just tell me. I'll stop writing these up every week.

 

 

I get the idea of picking upsets and trying to maybe generate conversations out of them. But in your upsets you say in the Arizona over New Orleans Why it WILL happen (the only one you say it will happen btw) yet in the pick'em you picked New Orleans over Arizona.

 

Any reason why you did that? Just curious is all.

 

 

I like to throw one "will" in place of "might" out there per week. I know I had one for week two, and I believe I had one or two for week one. I went safe route in pick 'em, but I've had my eyes on this game as soon as Arizona got their first win last Sunday. I think I had Arizona over Detroit as my "will" last week, too. They're my NFC Dark Horse team, so I'm hoping they continue to surprise.

 

Kenny Vaccaro is awesome, by the way.

 

I picked Kenny for D ROY just to be different. Is it possible he could actually win it?

 

Also Colts over 49ers.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Bay

[BwareDWare94 723]

I guess I don't know of any other defensive rookies who are as versatile as he is, so I don't know why he couldn't.

 

And if the Colts drop the 9ers in San Fran, I'm going to have some words to eat. I think the Colts are barely a .500 team.