Welcome to goTitans.com! Log in or sign up to be a part of the best Tennessee Titans fan site available.

Which is a better team - 2004 Titans or 2005 Titans?

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by Carpy, Dec 23, 2005.

?

Better Team - 2004 or 2005 Titans

2004 Titans 15 vote(s) 45.5%
2005 Titans 12 vote(s) 36.4%
It's a wash. 6 vote(s) 18.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
    • Tip Jar Donor

    Gunny Lord and Master

    Wright
    Messages:
    46,119
    Moolah:
    $4,383
    they were all injured last year.
    #11
  1. SEC 330 BIPOLAR jive turkey

    Verner
    Messages:
    16,087
    Moolah:
    $327
    The poll should be which team is worse.
    Sorry. Bipolar gets in a "glass half empty" kinda mood after consecutive losses...Last week we were pecked by sea foul and today Flipper and friends buried us in the sand. About the poll though...2004 vs. 2005 ... each team is worse in it's own way. Sorgi and his 2nd string stinkers could own either squad...

    I'm still here, I still love these Titans even if they can only win 9 out of 32 regular season games. Forget about next week. Houston went down 38-20... Tennesseee will not pull the spoiler action again...I don't care if Texans/Jags was close early. What I saw today was BAD FOOTBALL.

    That is what I expect next week.

    So anyways, I guess despite everything, you are what your record says you are. Assuming the Titans LOSE again...which they will...by virtue of being 4-12, just like all the sportswriters said they would be, the 2005 team is worse.
    HOWEVER>>>>
    If we get Cutler or Young or possibly AJ Hawk....
    The 2006 team will be better than both teams combined....
    5+4=9 ??? Nine wins? Is that too lofty of a goal?
    That is my off season hope.

    ps-Brad Kassel is a warrior.
  2. ezeblazin Starter

    Messages:
    258
    Moolah:
    $0
    This years team is much worse. Our defense has been pretty healthy all season, and can stop nobody. Our offense was better last season also, not to mention Chris Brown actually looked like a star.

    We've had an easy schedule this year, and yet we've lost to crap teams like Oakland, Cleveland, Arizona, Miami, and St. Louis. We can't stop the run, and we can't stop any team with a good O-line.

    We beat Houston twice, San Francisco, and Baltimore. At least we beat a playoff team last year.
  3. DeutschTitan Camp Fodder

    Messages:
    727
    Moolah:
    $0
    Well, last year we beat an underachieving Bengals team, a lousy Green Bay team that were lucky to be playing in a divison that was a joke, barely beat a Detroit team that is nothing to write home about, another underachieving team in Jacksonville, and a bad Miami team. We beat two teams that were at .500 and three that were below. This year we havn't beaten a team with a winning record or won a game we shouldn't have. We could do it next week, but it's unlikely. This season, like I stated somewhere else on here, is a tale of two teams. One where the Offense shows up to play at one point, but gets no help from the Defense or one where the Defense helps out the Offense enough to put them in position to win. An example of the first would be the Seattle game and an example of the latter would be the St. Louis and today's Miami game.

    Maybe I should retract my statement. This year we can't stop anyone from rushing above 100 yards on us, not even second or third string scrubs. At least last year when we set out to stop someone we could atleast do it, but because we kept loosing personnel throughout the season it got harder and harder to do so. Also, we could get turnovers last year; this year those are few and far between. Btw, Brad Kassell may be a warrior, but he sure as hell isn't starting material. He and Sirmon are contributors to this porous run defense.
  4. pking34 Guest

    Messages:
    0
    The 2004 Titans may have been the most-injured team in NFL history (Titan starters missed an aggregate total of around 160 games due to injuries, meaning in an average 2004 game, we were playing without 10 starters). With normal injury levels, there's a decent chance the 2004 team would have been a playoff team.
  5. thnom Camp Fodder

    Messages:
    501
    Moolah:
    $0
  6. Nine Starter

    Messages:
    943
    Moolah:
    $20
    I don't even know that you can compare the two...they're almost exact opposites.

    The 2004 squad was obviously decimated by injuries on both sides of the ball, and the overall quality of play wasn't much, but they somehow stayed competitive by reeling off one big play after another for most of the season. A defense that was porous, but that typically generated one or two takeaways per game. The offense was generally mired in mediocrity, but Volek and Bennett combined to present opponents with a constant home-run threat.

    This year, we've seen a defense that has been rock solid much of the time, but have allowed far too many big plays by opponents, but rarely generating any of their own. And our offense has often moved the ball effectively, but big plays have been few and far between, and we've been absolutely awful in clutch situations and the red zone....when the time comes to make a play, the offense has failed miserably time and time again.

    This year, I think we've got much better talent than we had at the end of last year. Unfortunately, we've seen far too many players playing below their potential, and I'm not sure which is worse: a team that is utterly devoid of talent, or a team that has plenty of talented players, but who simply don't use it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page