It's only Week 3, and the injuries are piling up, particularly at quarterback.

Five teams -- the Cincinnati Bengals, Washington Commanders, Minnesota Vikings, New York Jets and San Francisco 49ers -- expect to be without their starters on Sunday. Two of those teams -- the Bengals and Vikings -- actually meet during Sunday's early window of games.

The injuries don't overshadow other early-season litmus tests on tap for the rest of Week 3, though, including a rematch of last year's NFL divisional clash between the Los Angeles Rams and Philadelphia Eagles (sans the snow) and the Detroit Lions on the road against the Baltimore Ravens.

The Athletic's NFL writers Mike Sando, Jeff Howe and Zak Keefer discuss.

Sando: The Bengals are toast without Burrow, even if they're able to beat an injured Vikings team in this particular matchup. I do think everyone wins from McCarthy getting a break. He did not look ready in the first two games. Now, he gets to step back. And then the rest of us get to see what Kevin O'Connell can do with Wentz. This should be a good time to learn more about Minnesota.

Howe: Browning did a nice job of filling in for Burrow in 2023, so I'm reasonably confident in his ability to help the offense tread water for three months. But the Bengals have to pick him up. If a superhuman Burrow couldn't mask all their issues in 2024, let's not lose our minds and think Browning can. This better be a different Bengals team than the 2024 version, or they're going to sink fast. As for the Vikings, I'm not sure I'd say they'd be better off with a veteran. McCarthy needs to play, but he also needs an offensive line that won't yield a constant beating. If the line doesn't improve, it won't matter who is under center.

Keefer: As a survivor of the Carson Wentz Experience in Indianapolis in 2021, I am excited to see how this plays out in Minnesota with a proven quarterback whisperer in O'Connell. One hesitancy I have is how late Wentz signed with the team -- he didn't get to Minnesota until the end of August -- and he could have used all that time in OTAs, minicamp and training camp to get comfortable in the offense. No matter. This is now the life of a backup quarterback: We'll see how Wentz handles the fire Sunday against a 2-0 Bengals team missing its starter.

Sando: The 49ers' 3-0 start would be more impressive with that road victory over the Seattle Seahawks, who are a pretty good team. But much will be determined by how the Week 3 matchup plays out. If Arizona wins by a wide margin, the case for the Cardinals' 3-0 start being more impressive becomes compelling.

Howe: The Cardinals are good enough to compete for a playoff spot, but we've seen them tail off in the second half too many times to get worked up over a strong start. Though I'd be surprised if the 49ers were good enough to contend for an NFC title, they at least have enough veterans with winning track records to push the right buttons when it matters later in the season. I'd be more impressed with the 49ers' 3-0 start.

Keefer: I'm with Jeff. Until the Cardinals can win pivotal games late in the season -- and really compete for an NFC West title -- I'll remain skeptical. The 49ers' 2-0 start is more impressive simply because no team seems to have worse injury luck, year after year, than San Francisco. It's undefeated two weeks in despite missing Purdy for one game and George Kittle for the better part of two.

Sando: The NFL's oldest offense (Rams) against the NFL's youngest defense (Eagles) is a really fun part of this matchup -- so fun that I'm going to dive into it more closely soon.

Howe: I'm impressed by the Eagles' start, and I'll concede it's been far from perfect. They don't appear to be opening the same lanes for Saquon Barkley, so that's the first thing that must improve to set up a deep playoff run. The Rams should be back in the playoffs and remain on an upward trajectory, but they haven't played a high-end team yet. So, I'm most intrigued by the Rams' place among the NFC's elite. If the Rams win, they deserve to be viewed as true contenders to get to the Super Bowl. I'd expect this to be a close game either way.

Keefer: It's Chris Shula's young Rams defense against the veteran Eagles, a unit that hasn't looked nearly as sharp as it did in late January and February. As Philly coach Nick Sirianni pointed out early this week, that's sort of the expectation this time of year: find ways to win games and keep improving so the team can peak when it matters most. Can the Eagles find some explosion on offense? The Kansas City Chiefs made them work for it Sunday at Arrowhead. If they can't, I wouldn't be stunned if the Rams hand the Eagles their first loss since before Christmas.

Sando: Wilson has averaged 175 yards passing per game with an 83.3 rating and 25 sacks in his past five games against the Steve Spagnuolo-coordinated Chiefs. He finished every one of those games with negative EPA per pass play, thanks mostly to those sacks and five interceptions. I'm not banking on "vintage Russ" to return in this matchup. I expect the Chiefs to win but am not sure if this will be a "get-right game" (blowout) with so many pieces missing from the Kansas City receiving corps.

Howe: I'm with Mike. I wouldn't expect Wilson and the Giants offense to be overly problematic for the Chiefs defense. But there's also little evidence over the past two years to assume Patrick Mahomes can roll out of bed and drop 30 points on anyone. And since you asked, if vintage Wilson returns, it's because the Chiefs allowed him to do so, which, yes, would be a monumental cause for concern.

Keefer: Call it whatever you want, but the Chiefs need this one. It doesn't have to be pretty or all that convincing, but 0-3 feels like a much different hole than 0-2, especially in the division they're in. The Los Angeles Chargers look quite good, and the Denver Broncos were a playoff team last year and have an excellent defense. Not that the Chiefs always follow the script, but since the NFL restructured the playoffs to have seven teams in each conference qualify, no 0-3 squad has ever recovered to make the postseason.

Sando: Lamar Jackson makes the difference. He'll be the most dynamic force on the field for either team, especially with Detroit having to respect Derrick Henry.

Howe: We're about to find out if the Lions are still the Lions. They ran into the Green Bay Packers buzzsaw in Week 1, so let's give them a temporary pass for that one. And I don't care what the Chicago Bears' record has been of late -- mopping the floor with a division opponent is always impressive, especially since the Lions made it personal. If they play with the same edge against the Ravens, they'll be just fine. Jared Goff makes the difference, though. This will be his first test without Ben Johnson of having to go score-for-score with an elite QB in a hostile environment. If Goff answers the bell, maybe it's time to shrug aside the concerns about the turnover at coordinator and give the Lions more respect than they've gotten at this early juncture. I can't wait for this game.

Keefer: This is a spicy one because both teams looked like Super Bowl contenders last week after Week 1 losses. As much as I'd like to say Kyle Hamilton, the Ravens' excellent safety, the answer is always Jackson. No player outside of Josh Allen, the one who broke the Ravens' hearts in Week 1, single-handedly tilts a game's outcome more frequently than Jackson. I'm not sold on the Lions' secondary being able to stop him in the second half, so give the advantage to Baltimore.

Week 3 NFL roundtable: QB injuries, Rams-Eagles, Chiefs meet Giants in winless clash