Scooby's Hubby Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Washington D.C. is the new Philly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Washington..........Oakland Al Davis..............Dan Snyder Seams interchangeable to me. Whats the difference? Might as well have retired......... Dan Snyder = Al Davis Mike Shanny > Tom Cable Santana Moss/Devin Thomas/Malcolm Kelly > Chaz Schillens/Louis Murphy/Darius Heyward-Bey Portis/LJ/FWP > or = DMC/Bush depending on health Chris Cooley = Zach Miller WAS OL > OAK OL Lesser of two evils imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz1 Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Dan Snyder = Al DavisMike Shanny > Tom Cable Santana Moss/Devin Thomas/Malcolm Kelly > Chaz Schillens/Louis Murphy/Darius Heyward-Bey Portis/LJ/FWP > or = DMC/Bush depending on health Chris Cooley = Zach Miller WAS OL > OAK OL Lesser of two evils imo. Exactly my point. Two Maverick owners. Inacurate back up QB's, No running backs, no recievers, above average TE's and no discipline. Switch the spamshirts and you wouldn't know the difference. Well at least I don't see the Rat throwing shots at an assitant coach..............I think he could take Snyder though...........maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 can a player be brought up on tampering charges? Cuz he made it pretty well known that he wasn't going to certain teams. Obvioiusly, McNabb doesn't want to leave the best division in football. Noone wants to go from a super football town with major endorsements to another team like say, any team outside of the NFC East That would be hell for McNabb and he would want to retire... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliaz Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Washington..........Oakland Al Davis..............Dan Snyder Seams interchangeable to me. Whats the difference? Might as well have retired......... Dan Davis Al Snyder It's all the same thing. Once I see Danny boy in some wind pants with the Elvis hair and gold necklaces, you wont be able to tell the difference....well...expect that Danny boy is only 4 foot 1 inch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Yes, the NFC East is so great. They reign supreme and prove it year in and year out. I mean they are so much better than any other division. All you have to do is look at the list of recent Super Bowl Champions. When all is said and done, it is always proven that the NFC East is supreme, as the cream always rises to the top and when they meet the other divisions, the proof is in the pudding: Saints Steelers Giants Colts Steelers Patriots Patriots Bucs Patriots Ravens Rams Broncos Packers When you break it down, it really is amazing. The list is completely dominated with NFC East teams, so, I really can't see one good reason why the NFL wouldn't re-align this division, which is clearly too dominant. just because a superbowl winner doesn't come from the NFC east doesn't mean that the division isn't stacked.... how many divisions have a last place team as good as the Redskins:unsure:...or a 3rd place team that recently won a superbowl? (Giants) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 your stinks he needs new bait... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 (edited) just because a superbowl winner doesn't come from the NFC east doesn't mean that the division isn't stacked.... how many divisions have a last place team as good as the Redskins:unsure:...or a 3rd place team that recently won a superbowl? (Giants) The NFC South 2 years ago (had a 4th place 8-8 team that just won the superbowl).... Link Shows how much things can change, even in just one year in the NFL. NFC East is no different. Edited April 5, 2010 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 5, 2010 Author Share Posted April 5, 2010 just because a superbowl winner doesn't come from the NFC east doesn't mean that the division isn't stacked.... how many divisions have a last place team as good as the Redskins:unsure:...or a 3rd place team that recently won a superbowl? (Giants) The Steelers won the Super Bowl more recently than the Giants and finished 3rd in the AFC North. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 5, 2010 Author Share Posted April 5, 2010 (edited) just because a superbowl winner doesn't come from the NFC east doesn't mean that the division isn't stacked.... how many divisions have a last place team as good as the Redskins:unsure:...or a 3rd place team that recently won a superbowl? (Giants) If I have to, I'll run some numbers, but, the NFC East is certainly not a better division than all others, if they were, they would definitely fair better in the playoffs and would also win more Super Bowls. Fans of NFC East teams have been telling themselves this for years, that there division is the best, but, reality doesn't match the claims. I'm not saying it isn't a solid division, as some time it is, but, all divisions have their ups and downs. E.T.A. I'm talking about recent history, as, if I had to pick one division that has been the best historically, it would likely be the NFC East. I'll see if I can find some numbers. Edited April 5, 2010 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 The Steelers won the Super Bowl more recently than the Giants and finished 3rd in the AFC North. I would not feel proud about finishing behind the Bengals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 5, 2010 Author Share Posted April 5, 2010 I would not feel proud about finishing behind the Bengals. I'm not......I've been throwing up on a daily basis since January. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Go Vick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 5, 2010 Author Share Posted April 5, 2010 I'll try to run some more numbers, but, here are last year's out of conference records per division: AFC South: 29-13 NFC South: 23-19 NFC East: 22-19 AFC North: 21-21 NFC North: 20-22 AFC East: 20-22 AFC West: 18-23 NFC West: 12-29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 I have been absolutely furious with the selection of Shannahan as the new coach. This guy, outside of the team he inherited, Elway, and the two SB trips from the inherited team, has done crap. I believe (again outside of the 2 SB trips from the team he inherited where someone else set everything up) he has won 1 playoff game? umm, you don't know what the f*ck you are talking about here. shanahan "inherited" a 7-9 team that really was not good. yeah, elway was there, but as his OC and quarterback coach elway's first several years in the league, he deserves more coaching credit for elway's career than anyone else. rod smith, terrell davis, tom nalen, gary zimmerman (and that whole dominating o-line), ed mccaffrey, trevor pryce, ray crockett, john mobley, romanowski, neil smith, alfred williams....all the best players on either side of the ball, except for elway, atwater, and sharpe were brought in under the shanahan regime. to say the success he brought to denver was "inherited" is beyond ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 The Steelers won the Super Bowl more recently than the Giants and finished 3rd in the AFC North. so the NFC North is a stronger division?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 If I have to, I'll run some numbers, but, the NFC East is certainly not a better division than all others, if they were, they would definitely fair better in the playoffs and would also win more Super Bowls. Fans of NFC East teams have been telling themselves this for years, that there division is the best, but, reality doesn't match the claims. I'm not saying it isn't a solid division, as some time it is, but, all divisions have their ups and downs. E.T.A. I'm talking about recent history, as, if I had to pick one division that has been the best historically, it would likely be the NFC East. I'll see if I can find some numbers. I'm not talking about records....you already broke down the records, but a record doesn't make the team - it's the schedule...and a lot of factors go into that... I'm still wondering if any division has a 4th place team better than the Washington Redskins?....the NFC East might have the most depth and that doesn't have to result in a Superbowl win...it's just that any of the following teams I'm about to list are not (imo) better than the Skins.... Lions Buccaneers Rams Bills Browns Chiefs the Jaguars are better than the Skins....and the AFC South might be the toughest division in Football....with the NFC East right behind them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 5, 2010 Author Share Posted April 5, 2010 I'm not talking about records....you already broke down the records, but a record doesn't make the team - it's the schedule...and a lot of factors go into that... I'm still wondering if any division has a 4th place team better than the Washington Redskins?....the NFC East might have the most depth and that doesn't have to result in a Superbowl win...it's just that any of the following teams I'm about to list are not (imo) better than the Skins.... Lions Buccaneers Rams Bills Browns Chiefs the Jaguars are better than the Skins....and the AFC South might be the toughest division in Football....with the NFC East right behind them... Sorry, I'm just not seeing how you can use the Redskins to prove a point. The Redskins were a terrible football team last year. They went 4-12. Included in those were a 9-7 win at home against the Rams and losses at Detroit and at home to the Chiefs. I just don't see where they help your case. Any time someone who is a fan of the NFC East argues their case, they just continue to state their opinions, which are rarely backed up by any facts. The fact is that the NFC East has only produced one Super Bowl champion in the last several years, and I'll run the numbers, but, I'm guessing their depth won't be proven anywhere either. The only proof is the fans of NFC East teams telling each other that they have the best division. Reality doesn't play out that way, at least not recently. I've already admitted that career wise, the NFC East probably has had the most success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 5, 2010 Share Posted April 5, 2010 Sorry, I'm just not seeing how you can use the Redskins to prove a point. The Redskins were a terrible football team last year. They went 4-12. Included in those were a 9-7 win at home against the Rams and losses at Detroit and at home to the Chiefs. I just don't see where they help your case. Any time someone who is a fan of the NFC East argues their case, they just continue to state their opinions, which are rarely backed up by any facts. The fact is that the NFC East has only produced one Super Bowl champion in the last several years, and I'll run the numbers, but, I'm guessing their depth won't be proven anywhere either. The only proof is the fans of NFC East teams telling each other that they have the best division. Reality doesn't play out that way, at least not recently. I've already admitted that career wise, the NFC East probably has had the most success. so the Skins aren't better than the Lions, Rams, Chiefs, Browns, Bucs and Bills? and since we're bringing up recent history....."recent" isn't limited to a year ago...."recent is probably 2-3 years.... but whatever supports your argument Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 6, 2010 Author Share Posted April 6, 2010 (edited) so the Skins aren't better than the Lions, Rams, Chiefs, Browns, Bucs and Bills? and since we're bringing up recent history....."recent" isn't limited to a year ago...."recent is probably 2-3 years.... but whatever supports your argument Whatever supports my argument ? The Redskins lost at home to the Chiefs and on the road to the Lions, two teams on your list, so, no, I can't say without any question that the 4-12 Redskins are clearly better than ALL of those teams on your list, which by the placement of your face, you clearly think is a no-brainer. So, what makes them better than the Chiefs, who were also 4-12 and beat the Redskins IN Washington ? I've only had time to look up one season, but, plan on doing more. While were at it, what, other than telling me that it is that way, supports the argument that the NFC East is the best division in football ? Edited April 6, 2010 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 6, 2010 Author Share Posted April 6, 2010 just because a superbowl winner doesn't come from the NFC east doesn't mean that the division isn't stacked.... how many divisions have a last place team as good as the Redskins:unsure:...or a 3rd place team that recently won a superbowl? (Giants) The Steelers won the Super Bowl more recently than the Giants and finished 3rd in the AFC North. so the NFC North is a stronger division?... So, did you not want me to answer your question, unless it supported your argument ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 I thought McNabb got traded...not Big Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 6, 2010 Author Share Posted April 6, 2010 I thought McNabb got traded...not Big Ben I haven't mentioned a Steeler player once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 6, 2010 Author Share Posted April 6, 2010 (edited) Over the last 4 years here is an out of conference comparison between the NFC East & AFC South: AFC South = 111-62-0 NFC East = 104-68-1 So, since the original argument was that the NFC East was the dominant division in the NFL, I feel that has been disputed with facts. First, they've only had teams win one Super Bowl win in the last 14 years. That should take care of the individual team dominance. As to the depth dominance, the AFC South has been better over the last 4 years, so, before the NFC East is re-aligned due to their depth and dominance, the AFC South needs to be re-aligned first. Edited April 6, 2010 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 So, did you not want me to answer your question, unless it supported your argument ? exactly...and if the browns were not in the same division, then the AFC North might be considered the toughest division... and Bengals were terrible the past 4 years or so up until last year - so the AFC North had 2 very good teams and 2 crappy teams 2 years ago (which is still recent history)... the Cowboys, Giants and Eagles have all been in the hunt the past 4 years or so and the Skins have occasionally been considered as a favorite to win the division based on the "talent" they have... the Browns and Bengals haven't been considered any better than 3rd or 4th place in their division until now probably headed into the 2010 division... and even still, the Browns are terrible and not even as good as the redskins - with or without McNabb at QB... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.