The Vikings Oline BLOWS, as there are two back ups in it and one former Tackle, playing horrible at Guard.The Vikings are still a more complete team on paper to me.
But, as the title of your thread implies, there is a lot more to it that a paper depth chart.
Cleveland is a couple of plays from being 3-0.
Tampa Bay is a few plays from being 0-3.
Full potential? I don't even know what that means.
Like in boxing it's all about match ups.
The Vikings are a tough match up for the Rams.
Which is not back up players as you said every team playing to their potential.The Vikings Oline BLOWS, as there are two back ups in it and one former Tackle, playing horrible at Guard.
Playing at full potential means to me, the best version of individual players and also as a team.
You know you can't say that without having to defend it. Where's one of those "Explain yourself" gifs?I'm gonna say Chargers. Bears in the NFC.
*I assumed that you all could read my thoughts...I meant with the way things are now and players playing to their potential.Which is not back up players as you said every team playing to their potential.
Their D is built to give us grief.
Although missing people certainly make a difference.
This is not a must win for the Rams.
If injured players can go Thursday and take the extra time off following that game to get better, so be it.
If playing risks a meaningful set up I would test them all.
You know you can't say that without having to defend it. Where's one of those "Explain yourself" gifs?
That's fair. I just thought they were weird picks. The Vikings are a popular choice. I assumed the saints might be as well. The bears threw me off completely.Chargers because they got really good players on both O and D. Vet QB, top RB, etc. They constantly underachieve, and I thought this was if everyone played up to the their potential that team could be best in the NFL.
Bears same thing...if Mitch plays up to his potential da Bears are also better all around. And I thought this was teams after the Rams.