What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2009 NFL Preview and Predictions Part 1: The NFC (1 Viewer)

JGalligan

Footballguy
As I was sitting back earlier yesterday evening and filtering out whatever it was that my girlfriend was yelling at me for, I had a random change of heart about how I was going to approach my 2009 NFL Predictions/Preview article. As I was looking at and also picking winners from Super John's simply supeeeerb NFL season schedule (Click here to get it.. Seriously, it's A+ stuff!) , I realized that while we can have a pretty firm and grounded grasp on say – the first half of the season – there are just WAY too many outside factors that come into play such as injuries, player suspensions, Cinderella stories, etc. to ever really allow us to make any kind of educated and realistic end-of-season type prediction.

Traveling further upon this train of thought, not only did I actually try to convince myself that predicting the first ten weeks of the season would be fun – but I actually thought it would be just as satisfying and intellectually filling as a full season preview. Don't bother asking me why I thought this was a good idea. It was probably a mix of being yelled at for not washing the entire house with a toothbrush and being hypnotized by the whole NFL schedule on one sheet of paper.

Yeah, but ANYWAY, after I went through and picked every game for the first ten weeks and mapped out the standings I was left with… well, I was left with some predicted Week 10 standings.

Thankfully though, common sense prevailed and I realized that I was heading down a rocky and spike-stripped trail that would probably only succeed in leading me to waste countless hours of my time predicting perhaps the most obscure point throughout an entire NFL football season. That's right. I have returned ladies and gentleman!

As with all my write-ups, please feel free to shower me with praise or disagree vehemently while questioning how I've managed to even figure out how to get on a computer and use the Internet. Unfortunately, there is no in between…

First up in Part 1? The National Football Conference (also known as the NFC).

Cue the predictions!

- - - - - - - -

NFC North:

1. Bears (12-4)

2. Packers (8-8)

3. Vikings (7-9)

4. Lions (4-12)

- - - - - - - -

Off-season occurrence that could shake up all of 2009:

The Bears acquisition of former Broncos QB Jay Cutler.

Wild card/Sleeper team of the division: Minnesota Vikings.

A lot of people might think that I'm taking the Cutler deal as a sure-sign that the Bears will turn things around. If that's what you were thinking, than you sir, are correct!

- - - - - - - -

Cutler is a GREAT quarterback with an absolute CANNON for an arm and he also now has one of the best all-around backs in the league behind him in Matt Forte. If not THE best all-around back – but we'll wait a bit longer to anoint him with that title.Either the Bears are going run away with it or it is going to be an absolute, drag-em-out brawl, reminiscent of the AFC and NFC South over the past few years or so, with everyone in the seven to nine win margin range.

The Packers can really go either way. They had a solid draft and have some playmakers and potential stars on either side of the ball. Also, they now know that Aaron Rodgers is no bum, so that's always a good thing of course.

The Vikings quarterback situation is still pretty wide open as I highly doubt Sage Rosenfels will end up leading this team to the promised playoff land. Tarvaris Jackson on the other hand, could go balls to the wall this off-season and forcefully take over the reins while being the QB everyone thought he could be. He showed flashes of brilliance at the end of last year but let's not get ahead of ourselves shall we? Or we could. IT'S ONLY JUNE FOR GOODNESS SAKE! AHHHHH!

Still though, with a stellar offensive line and arguably the best running back in the league in Adrian Peterson, all the Vikings would really need would be to not lose games on the defensive side of the ball and also hope the receiving corps of Berrian, Harvin and Rice can help carry a passing game that will be led by one of two quarterbacks – both of which are questionable signal callers in their own right.

As for the basement team, surprise, surprise! It's the Lions! At least they're heading in the right direction after throwing off an ill-intentioned team strategist and GM Matt Millen. Hopefully he's not on Football Night in America again this year as that would not make ANY sense at all and probably cause half of Detroit to throw their televisions out their windows. We can't be having that NBC!

Unless of course you ask him questions each week that center on how he'd run certain team into the ground. That would definitely have some good time potential!

- - - - - - - -

NFC South:

1. Falcons (11-5)

2. Panthers (10-6)

3. Saints (7-9)

4. Buccaneers (5-11)

- - - - - - - -

The Buccaneers are to quarterbacks as chocolate is to…?

Uhmm… what?!

Wild card/Sleeper team of the division:

New Orleans Saints

- - - - - - - -

This is pretty much the same thing as last year with the Falcons and Panthers running away with the season's race while the other two teams sulk deeper into the depths of despair and losing. You could practically flip-flop the Falcons and Panthers for that #1 spot that will probably take at LEAST 11 wins in order to be able to wear the crown.Also, I said last August that Deangelo Williams would break out during the season, much to the chagrin of some very loyal Jonathan Stewart owners. Well, they both had great seasons so I'm not trying to suggest who won the argument, but I AM suggesting that Deangelo Williams is going to have another stellar year, if not a better one, and NOT just because he's one year away from his contract year with a pretty tasty incentive bonus to work towards.

If you didn't notice it last season, Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart have learned to feed off each other. They've both realized that they're too good to be replaced by the other and have accepted this fact while at the same time trying to playfully outdo each other each and every game. Don't get me wrong, I think Stewart will have another solid year, but I think Williams will come out on top stat-wise at the end of the year thanks to more experience, more wisdom, and a career and attitude changing experience in which he realized he had to work his tail off to succeed in the NFL and could not just rely on pure talent.

As for the Stewart vs. Williams' argument, I'm personally against debating anymore. They're two unique talents who're both going to have good games that are better than the other, and any time spent trying to argue who is better than the other could be better spent on looking forward to when you next get to watch them again. I was 100% pro Deangelo Williams last year, I'm not going to lie, but after many a game spent trying to root against him I eventually just stopped and wondered what tine the world was wrong with me. If you're a football fan than you can delight in watching both of these guys play – regardless of which is on your fantasy team. I'm aware that fantasy loyalties can complicate matters, but unless one of them gets injured, I think it's been made pretty clear that they're both going to get their fair share of pigskin touches.

All they really need is for Delhomme to continue on and stay injury-free and what we've got is a Panthers team who's fully ready to take any and all comes for the NFC South title. Not to mention just THINKING about the Panthers vs. Falcons divisional race (at least from the outset of the season) already has me giggling like a little schoolgirl.

As for the other two teams, the Saints definitely have the talent and could explode at JUST the right time. If Reggie Bush's surgery went well than they may be that dark horse candidate that everyone loves to pick come pre-season. They're certainly an INTERESTING pick, that's for sure. By interesting, I don't mean that I'd bet money on them mind you. Just… interesting – like -- bet your buddy $20 they'll win at least 8 games interesting. I just got the shivers.

Last and probably… deservedly… least… the Tampa Bay Buccaneers! I dunno, I just don't see them doing ANYTHING unless they somehow nab a veteran QB like Brett Favre or Michael Vick. Rookie Josh Freeman has some potential for sure, but he's no Joe Flacco and he's no Matt Ryan. Although he does have a fairly strong offensive line to help with protection and joining him on any credit card commercial deals he decides to film. It's up in the air if he'll even be starting though, and I just don't see Byron Leftwich leading this team ANYWHERE but downtown-Charlie-Brown-into-the-ground. This looks like it may be shaping up to be one of those classic, "Start the veteran until the season's practically gone and hopeless, then just throw in the rookie signal caller to learn the ropes, get roughed up for the rest of the season, and throw Peyton Manning early in his career type interception totals." Then again, you never know. Freeman COULD be the next Joe Flacco or Matt Ryan – but I just don't think so. Kellen Winslow Jr. would certainly help matters, though… if he doesn't break both his legs trying to jump in front of and wave down a taxi or something. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if I heard that story break on Sportscenter in a few minutes. Would you?

- - - - - - - -

NFC East:

1. Redskins (11-5)

2. Cowboys (10-6)

3. Giants (9-7)

4. Eagles (7-9)

- - - - - - - -

Best chances to be the "least in the NFC Beast"?

Eagles by a mile.

Wild card/Sleeper team of the division:

WHAT?! There is NO such thing as a sleeper team in the NFC Beast!! RAWWRG SMASHH!

- - - - - - - -

Out of all of the divisions for each of my annual NFL previews, I ALWAYS completely whiff on the NFC East predictions and they end up being the exact opposite of what I predict they'll be. You may all now commence your future divisional bets on the Eagles if you wish.Now to explain the method behind my madness:

While Jason Campbell hasn't certainly been the ideal starting QB, especially for a franchise like the Redskins who have no problem with spending the equivalent of the gross national capita of a small country on an injury prone role player, I for one have seen him show flashes of brilliance over the past few years. And even more so last season! He's certain not to take the Redskins courtship of Jay Cutler lightly and with his contract up at the end of the season, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if he had a monstrous, breakout year.

He has the weapons on offense to put up plenty of points on the board on a good day and now has some defensive playmakers to step it up on the defensive side of the ball. If all goes well (although judging from my previous NFC Beast predictions it will instead go horribly wrong) then I can honestly see the Redskins taking the NFC East crown. I really can. Seriously, I'm not trying to talk myself into this pick at all. No way!

The Cowboys on the other hand just remain an enigma per the usual. While Terrell Owens departure will surely be felt, it probably isn't going to make THAT much of a difference considering how old he was getting and how often he dropped passes that hit him square in the hands. I'm not saying the guy wasn't a game breaker and an occasional game changer or anything, but I AM saying that he's a diva who whines like a little ##### when things don't go his way. And how quickly we've all forgotten about Roy Williams! His skills were overshadowed a bit with the arrival of Calvin "The Freak" Johnson, but from what I remember of him, he used to be pretty good.

All the Cowboys doom and gloom can stop. They're going to be fine. And even if they DON'T turn out okay this season, all that really means is that we can all rejoice and dance around because who DOESN'T love to see the Cowboys lose and then subsequently make fun of Cowboys fans right after? Seriously! Who's with me! Anybody? No?

The Giants are still the Giant, sans Plaxico Burress, which to ME is a pretty big sans. He was there best receiver and played a HUGE role in their Super Bowl win. So there's that. It's up in the air as to how it's really going to affect them. I personally can't wait to see Brandon Jacobs pound the rock though – it's truly a joy to see him run the football and also run full grown men flat over. Good times!

As for the Eagles, I just get the feeling that they're on the decline rather than on the up-and-up. Brian Westbrook is going to lose his magical powers sometime soon and I'm projecting that it least starts this season.

All in all though, this could be McNabb's last hurrah in an Eagles uniform and while I picked them to finish last, I'm not going to be double-taking if McNabb starts slinging balls left and right and sixty yards downfield. No matter what happens, we can be sure that the NFC Beast will live up to its billing as one of the most tough, exciting , and action packed divisions throughout all of the league. Plus, you can call it the NFC Beast which is just hilarity in its purest form.

- - - - - - - -

NFC West:

1. Cardinals (10-6)

2. 49ers (8-8)

3. Seahawks (7-9)

4. Rams (4-12)

- - - - - - - -

The only certainty in the NFC West this coming season:

It will, in fact, RAIN in Seattle. Write it down!

Wild card/Sleeper team of the division:

Do I have to? Uhmm… well… if I HAD to pick a sleeper team – like if you had a gun to my head and I HAD to pick a sleeper team – I guess I'd take the Niners. Cause Mike Singletary is the man and will have them playing their hearts out each and every week. Too bad they don't have a steady QB option though -- unless of course, you consider Damon Huard a steady QB. HAHAHA!

- - - - - - - -

Now that the Seahawk's marathon streak of winning the NFC West – which lasted what… 42 straight years in a row or something – has been broken, the NFC West is at least worth following now. Well, maybe not the Rams but we can still hope can't we? Hey, I wonder If Marc Bulger will be out of the concussion section of the St. Louis Hospital in time to start the season. What? Have the Marc Bulger has a horrible offensive line jokes and gets concussions and breaks his ribs all of the time jokes been done to death? LIES! Some jokes just never get old!The Cardinals look to be the juggernaut that will take the divisional crown this year, but as we all know, this is the NFL and in the NFL, we're always a split second away from someone's MCL, ACL, TCL, ZCL or ABCDEFG getting torn apart or severed. One of those injuries to Fitzgerald and bam – we might start thinking someone else has a chance in the division. Maybe…

But for now, it's looking like the Cardinals got it on lockdown unless Matt Hasselbeck bounces back and greedily snatches the crown back once again for the Seahawks. Knowing Matt Hasselbeck though, I wouldn't put that past him at all. He seems like a very greedy person.

The 49ers are definitely a wild card and a promising prospect for a deep sleeper pick if ONLY because Mike Singletary is the MAN! They need to fix the QB situation though because no matter how much heart and ferocity everyone else is playing with, that same heart and ferocity can't complete passes and throw for touchdowns. Surprising, I know, but trust me -- it's true!

The Rams could potentially come out of nowhere and surprise everyone but I'm convinced that Marc Bulger cannot and will not drop back to pass anymore WITHOUT preparing himself for broken ribs, a broken hand, or just a good old concusson. Good job offensive line! Way to fail your job in such a RIDICULOUSLY pathetic way that you may have mentally scarred your poor QB for life.

Definitely a good two years at the office for you guys though, and by good, I mean absolutely, positively, horrifically, disgustingly bad. Good thing they brought in some new blood that hopefully understands that they're job is to PROTECT the QB – not let him become a weekly staple at the local emergency room every Sunday night.

I understand that sacks are unfortunately a part of the game, but the poor guy went through TWO years in a row where he wasn't just sacked often, but he was sacked by people who were very often no longer being held back by the lineman. AKA he got hit HARD when he got sacked.

I hope the offensive line is successfully patched up at long last and we can finally see the Marc Bulger of old. But I just highly, highly doubt it. I don't know why.

Translation: He's not coming anywhere NEAR my fantasy squad. Sorry, Marc. You burn me once? Shame's on your offensive line. You burn me twice? Shame's on your offensive line. You burn me THRICE? Nice try offensive line but I'm going to make fun of your torrid performances until the day that I no longer want to anymore.

Revenge at its finest!

Stay tuned for the AFC focused Part 2… sometime in the next few days. So stay tuned!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mine differ alittleGreat WriteupGBChicagoMinnDetN OCarATLTBArizonaSTLSeattleSFPhillyDallasWashNYG
Thank you!Can't really argue with anything there, although I really do hope you're correct about the Giants finishing in last place. That would be nice. I'd take that! :lmao:
 
I think your way off on the NFC east.

NYG

Philly

Dallas

Skins

I think the Giants change their offense to fit the guys they have rather than run the same offense and try to force guys into a Plax role. And the running game is a beast.

Philly, has beefed up their OL. While Westbrook is getting older the talent on the line should open holes for a strong running game.

Dallas will struggle as they find out this season that Roy Williams is not a game breaker and doesn't force defenses to double cover him. I don't buy that TO was the cause of the collapse last season. TO was disruptive but the team tanking over it is pretty lame excuse or the teams focus is weak. Just seems to me like a bunch of guys trying to save their jobs by tossing it all on TO.

I think people are overvaluing the impact Hanyesworth will have. I don't think he'll flop, but he is only one guy. With the talent around him Haynesworth won't be as disruptive to offenses. 2 years ago Aikman commented that Campbell's deep ball is too flat which doesn't allow the wr to run under it. I had Campbell that season and Moss in a league the next year so I looked for it. Moss gets wide open streaking down the sideline 2-3 times a game and like Aikman said the ball comes out too flat for Moss to get to it. It didn't get corrected for last season, so I'm not all that confident it will this year either. I think the skins go 7-9.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think your way off on the NFC east.NYGPhillyDallasSkinsI think the Giants change their offense to fit the guys they have rather than run the same offense and try to force guys into a Plax role. And the running game is a beast.
Good point. I'm not saying the Giants are gonna be bums without Burress or anything -- note that they did go 9-7 in my whole season simulation. The NFC East is just so tough to pick in that way I guess cause there's so much rivalry and so much on the line during any divisional game.
Philly, has beefed up their OL. While Westbrook is getting older the talent on the line should open holes for a strong running game.Dallas will struggle as they find out this season that Roy Williams is not a game breaker and doesn't force defenses to double cover him.
Fair point about Philly. I guess I just can't shake the fact that both McNabb and Westbrook are going to both start on a decline this year. Definitely wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't happen and they end up winning 1st place -- they're both prolific enough to keep producing for a few more years. But it's got to come sometime.I think the Cowboys have too many weapons to create mismatches in Roy William's favor. I'm not saying he's a stud #1 or anything, but with Witten, Felix Jones, Barber III and even to a lesser extent Patrick Crayton. You make a fair point though and I need to go back and look at some Roy Williams game tape to try and get a feel for the things he used to do. I might be over-exaggerating the memories but maybe he just needed some new scenery.Can you really blame him for being a bit glum or under the weather in Detroit? That organization was run like #### by Millen and Company and I wouldn't be surprised at all if Williams, with T.O. now gone, blossoms into a star. He has Romo throwing to him remember. Not Jon Kitna, Dan Orlovski, etc etc.
I think people are overvaluing the impact Hanyesworth will have. I don't think he'll flop, but he is only one guy. With the talent around him Haynesworth won't be as disruptive to offenses. 2 years ago Aikman commented that Campbell's deep ball is too flat which doesn't allow the wr to run under it. I had Campbell that season and Moss in a league the next year so I looked for it. Moss gets wide open streaking down the sideline 2-3 times a game and like Aikman said the ball comes out too flat for Moss to get to it. It didn't get corrected for last season, so I'm not all that confident it will this year either. I think the skins go 7-9.
I didn't pick the Redskins to win first because of Haynesworth alone. Sure, he was a large part of it, but I just have a feeling that Jason Campbell might bust out this year. A chip on your shoulder and a crazy-###, no holds barred off-season workout can do wonders. In a contract year, with the recent insult dealt to him by the Redskins pursuing Cutler, and the constant media attention about how he'll never be a bona-fide starter? I dunno. I'd be frigging bull#### if I were him and would want to light up the league.But again, I'm definitely wrong a LOT more than I've been right. Those are just my hunches though. Thanks for your feedback!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dallas having put so much of the blame on TO, I just don't think they'll do enough to correct their real issues.

Should be a close division, so it is hard to sort them out.

 
Dallas having put so much of the blame on TO, I just don't think they'll do enough to correct their real issues.Should be a close division, so it is hard to sort them out.
Yeah, I can't wait.. still so far away :thumbdown:As for the Cowboys, I think they would solve a lot of their team's problems by firing a one Wade Phillips/ I wouldn't follow that guy into a candy store nevermind doing do on a football field. Nothing against him -- he seems like a great guy. But the Cowboys need some discipline and they aren't going to get any at all as long as he's still there.
 
nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.

 
nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
Hm.. your'e right actually. I guess I just got so sidetracked with being so ecstatic about the Panthers vs. Falcons rivalry for next year, I completely forgot to give them their own little set of blurbs. Might have been for the better since we would probably have an extra 10-15 paragraphs to wade through.Since I forgot though.. where to start.. where to start.. Well, I think it goes without saying that I like them a lot. I think the only real competition they have in the division is Carolina and to a lesser extent New Orleans but.. I dunno, I just think the Panthers and the Falcons are on a slightly higher tier than the Saints and the Buccaneers. Again, I could definitely be wrong and some stuff could happen -- and Atlanta's defense is relatively young, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's not going to do well or even flourish.Barring injuries of course and even if the Falcons defense takes a bit longer to mature than they would have hoped, I still think Michael Turner, Jerrious Norwood, Matt Ryan and Roddy White would have been enough by themselves to carry the team. But then they went and got Tony Gonzalez who, although perhaps approaching the twilight of his career, is still going to draw opposing defenses attention and perhaps even cause us to see the Falcons offense of last year, but in a slightly higher gear. Who were their tight ends last year? Justin Peelle? He might have been a capable blocker, but from the best of my knowledge, he wasn't much the focus of the opposing defenses gameplan very often -- if at all.
 


nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
Staying on the subject of the Falcons, I was actually curious as to what some of you other SP'ers felt about the following snippet of information -- especially those who're from Georgia and have watched more of this kid than anyone.Michael Jenkins.

He's shown flashes of brilliance over his 6 years (he saw barely any playing time in his rookie year back in 2004).

But anyway, it's VERY interesting to note -- and I'm about to bust out a statistical analysis article over this because it's caught my attention so much -- that Jenkins hasn't really been able to get comfortable with a consistent QB. He had Michael Vick throwing to him from 2005-06 and then had to endure being under thrown by Joey Harrington in 2007. Matt Ryan's arrival in 2008 saw Jenkins numbers raised to pretty respectable levels. Before we get to my point, let's take a look at the stats first:

Michael Jenkins Stats since 2005:

2005: 36 receptions, 508 yards, 3 TD’s

2006: 39 receptions, 436 yards, 7 TD’s

2007: 53 receptions, 532 yards, 4 TD’s

2008: 50 receptions, 777 yards, 3 TD’s

Okay, now here's the point I want to discuss. Can Jenkins reach the 60 receptions for 1,000 yards and 5 TD plateau with his second year with the skillful Ryan ALONG with the presence of a still-dangerous Tony Gonzalez? Defenses are going to have to account for Michael Turner, Roddy White, Jerrious Norwood AND Tony Gonzalez..
Is this too much of a stretch or might I beyond to a little something, something here?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.

 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...

 


Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
Aaaand this is why I love this board! There's nothing like sharpening your knowledge of the league as a whole then hearing an in-depth account of a team from one of it's fans. Good stuff though man -- let me see if I can try and save some dignity though! :thumbup: I'm not even going to try and counter what you said about the defense because it's 100% true. I honestly wasn't aware their defense was #3 overall last year -- I knew they were good but -- yeah, so that's interesting. The ONLY thing I can even think of to counter that is that the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins defenses aren't no slouches either. I see what you're saying, and you've definitely changed my opinion a bit about how things may go, but I'll still try to bring up one point that I think has been overlooked.

Okay, so a revamped offensive line. Obviously a good thing. A solid backup for Westbrook -- also true. However, while the following stats will not prove my point in the yards, TD's and INT's thrown, I think there may be a little something worth looking at in a little category called the "Games started" statistic:

Donovan McNabb's Games Started, TD's and INT's from 2001 - 2008

2001: 16 games started, 25 TD's and 12 INT's

2002: 10 games started, 17 TD's and 6 INT's

2003: 16 games started, 16 TD's and 11 INT's

2004: 15 games started, 31 TD’s and 8 INT’s

2005: 9 games started, 16 TD’s and 9 INT’s

2006: 10 games started, 18 TD’s and 6 INT’s

2007: 14 games started, 19 TD’s and 7 INT’s

2008: 16 games started, 23 TD’s and 11 INT’s

Now, I haven't been playing with this data for long enough to make any kind of statistical conclusion or whatever, but I do want to just say that if McNabb goes down -- and he's DUE for an injury -- how is the Eagles fans confidence in Kevin Kolb and A.J. Feeley? I've seen a bit of both of them but obviously don't know as much as you probably do. I'm not trying to say that the Eagles would be screwed if McNabb goes down, but IF he does -- do you think Kolb or Feeley would be able to lead the Eagles march through the uber-competitive NFC East?

Trying to predict injuries is obviously like trying to predict the next time you're going to trip or what not -- it's impossible. BUT, he does have an injury history, he IS getting old and that spike in INT's caught my eye for a moment but then I saw that he threw 11 INT's on 571 attempts which is actually pretty good.

But how much longer does he have before he starts to tail off? The offensive line will be able to protect him, but they're not going to stop the boos from the stadium. From what I remember, and I'm not saying that you personally did this, but don't Eagles fans opinions and approval level with McNabb change with the wind? Again, I'm not saying it's ABSOLUTELY going to be this year, but if he does start to decline this year and get offs to a bad start...

I dunno, I'm just trying to back up why I chose them where I did. But you did sway my opinion some for sure. The defensive stats in particular... can't believe I overlooked that. But anyway, for the record I wasn't tryin to necessarily prove anything with those stats -- just present something to study and maybe talk about if he's finally managed to change his injury plagued ways.

 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Rosenfels started 12 games for his whole career? Certainly that's not something we'd want to base a statement like "Rosenfels is better than Frerotte" on is it?Please enlighten me though on how someone who's started 12 games and had one of the most epic collapses EVER in a REGULAR SEASON game last year is better than Gus Frerotte?It's like comparing bruised apples to bruised bananas. They both suck, so there's no point.
 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Just a quick point - in the NFL a team doesn't have to get worse to lose more games than they did the previous year. If they stayed the same, but other teams in the division got better and/or the schedule this year is harder, they will have more losses. I beleive part of the OPs pointis based on that fact.
 


nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
Staying on the subject of the Falcons, I was actually curious as to what some of you other SP'ers felt about the following snippet of information -- especially those who're from Georgia and have watched more of this kid than anyone.Michael Jenkins.

He's shown flashes of brilliance over his 6 years (he saw barely any playing time in his rookie year back in 2004).

But anyway, it's VERY interesting to note -- and I'm about to bust out a statistical analysis article over this because it's caught my attention so much -- that Jenkins hasn't really been able to get comfortable with a consistent QB. He had Michael Vick throwing to him from 2005-06 and then had to endure being under thrown by Joey Harrington in 2007. Matt Ryan's arrival in 2008 saw Jenkins numbers raised to pretty respectable levels. Before we get to my point, let's take a look at the stats first:

Michael Jenkins Stats since 2005:

2005: 36 receptions, 508 yards, 3 TD’s

2006: 39 receptions, 436 yards, 7 TD’s

2007: 53 receptions, 532 yards, 4 TD’s

2008: 50 receptions, 777 yards, 3 TD’s

Okay, now here's the point I want to discuss. Can Jenkins reach the 60 receptions for 1,000 yards and 5 TD plateau with his second year with the skillful Ryan ALONG with the presence of a still-dangerous Tony Gonzalez? Defenses are going to have to account for Michael Turner, Roddy White, Jerrious Norwood AND Tony Gonzalez..
Is this too much of a stretch or might I beyond to a little something, something here?
I am very high on Jenkins and with the addition of a finally legitimate receivers coach last year, Jenkins improved in the areas he needed. Coach Robinski's son went to Ohio State as well so there is a connection to Jenkins as well. Former 1st round pick, he just needed the ball his way and now White and Gonzo will get all the coverage so Jenkins and Finneran to a lesser extent will clean up. It is just a matter of how much run game Mularky calls if the D improves this year it could be a lot of on the ground stuff.
 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Rosenfels started 12 games for his whole career? Certainly that's not something we'd want to base a statement like "Rosenfels is better than Frerotte" on is it?Please enlighten me though on how someone who's started 12 games and had one of the most epic collapses EVER in a REGULAR SEASON game last year is better than Gus Frerotte?It's like comparing bruised apples to bruised bananas. They both suck, so there's no point.
He's certainly not worse than Gus...if you know anything about football you can tell that...but hey, he did have that HUGE collapse that no one will ever forget, but hey, at least he never hurt himself on a wall...?
 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Just a quick point - in the NFL a team doesn't have to get worse to lose more games than they did the previous year. If they stayed the same, but other teams in the division got better and/or the schedule this year is harder, they will have more losses. I beleive part of the OPs pointis based on that fact.
But the schedule didnt get worse...it got alot easier...Im a homer, but no way this team doesnt win 10 games unless they have a huge diaster...and no way Chicago wins 12...JMO...
 


nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
Staying on the subject of the Falcons, I was actually curious as to what some of you other SP'ers felt about the following snippet of information -- especially those who're from Georgia and have watched more of this kid than anyone.Michael Jenkins.

He's shown flashes of brilliance over his 6 years (he saw barely any playing time in his rookie year back in 2004).

But anyway, it's VERY interesting to note -- and I'm about to bust out a statistical analysis article over this because it's caught my attention so much -- that Jenkins hasn't really been able to get comfortable with a consistent QB. He had Michael Vick throwing to him from 2005-06 and then had to endure being under thrown by Joey Harrington in 2007. Matt Ryan's arrival in 2008 saw Jenkins numbers raised to pretty respectable levels. Before we get to my point, let's take a look at the stats first:

Michael Jenkins Stats since 2005:

2005: 36 receptions, 508 yards, 3 TD’s

2006: 39 receptions, 436 yards, 7 TD’s

2007: 53 receptions, 532 yards, 4 TD’s

2008: 50 receptions, 777 yards, 3 TD’s

Okay, now here's the point I want to discuss. Can Jenkins reach the 60 receptions for 1,000 yards and 5 TD plateau with his second year with the skillful Ryan ALONG with the presence of a still-dangerous Tony Gonzalez? Defenses are going to have to account for Michael Turner, Roddy White, Jerrious Norwood AND Tony Gonzalez..
Is this too much of a stretch or might I beyond to a little something, something here?
Falcons are going to be tough to defend...Harry Douglas is a cheap version of Wes Welker, and it's his second year(hence they traded away L. Robinson)...whom I was high on taking over Jenkins spot.

Douglas is now firmly implanted as the slot WR...Robinson was always injured, and not a draft pick of the current regime(to the Rams he went). Jenkins is a team player and great blocker...I can't see his numbers going down, but I don't have clue how much they will go up?

I think the whole offense is going to improve...Who get's what is tough to predict. They will be able to light up the scoreboard...at will.

They were tenth last year for most points scored...With a new coaching staff, GM, and rookie QB.

Wouldn't surprise me, if they moved into the top three.

my .02 cents worth

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/10414653

edited to add the above link concerning the company H.Douglas was keeping....Fantasy wise probably not much here...Team wise, that's a different story.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Rosenfels started 12 games for his whole career? Certainly that's not something we'd want to base a statement like "Rosenfels is better than Frerotte" on is it?Please enlighten me though on how someone who's started 12 games and had one of the most epic collapses EVER in a REGULAR SEASON game last year is better than Gus Frerotte?It's like comparing bruised apples to bruised bananas. They both suck, so there's no point.
He's certainly not worse than Gus...if you know anything about football you can tell that...but hey, he did have that HUGE collapse that no one will ever forget, but hey, at least he never hurt himself on a wall...?
But we don't KNOW this! He's only started 12 games! That's not NEARLY enough of a sample size to get a realistic average sampling of his abilities. Just take a step back and think about who you're defending here. I get what you're saying, and it MIGHT be true, but acquiring Rosenfels didn't do anything to ensure that they'll get any better. I'll actually bet you $20 right here and now that Rosenfels will NOT be the Vikings starter on opening day.Gentleman's bet. I'll pay you with Paypal should you win. What'ya say?
 
Please enlighten me though on how someone who's started 12 games and had one of the most epic collapses EVER in a REGULAR SEASON game last year is better than Gus Frerotte?
He tried to do too much and had a very bad game but make no mistake it was only one game. Don't forget that he put them into position to win that game in the first place. When was the last time Matt Schaub as a Texan beat Indy? Here is a hint - it hasn't happen yet. Did you give up on Tony Romo after he collapsed in the playoffs vs Seattle? Have you written off Jake Delhomme and Chad Pennington after their horrible performances in the playoffs? If Frerotte was better than Sage someone in this league would have picked him up after he was cut by the Vikings.
 
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Just a quick point - in the NFL a team doesn't have to get worse to lose more games than they did the previous year. If they stayed the same, but other teams in the division got better and/or the schedule this year is harder, they will have more losses. I beleive part of the OPs pointis based on that fact.
But the schedule didnt get worse...it got alot easier...Im a homer, but no way this team doesnt win 10 games unless they have a huge diaster...and no way Chicago wins 12...JMO...
I'll bet you another $20 that the Vikings will in NO WAY win 10 games this season. I wish there were a bet on the sportsbooks...
 


Please enlighten me though on how someone who's started 12 games and had one of the most epic collapses EVER in a REGULAR SEASON game last year is better than Gus Frerotte?
He tried to do too much and had a very bad game but make no mistake it was only one game. Don't forget that he put them into position to win that game in the first place. When was the last time Matt Schaub as a Texan beat Indy? Here is a hint - it hasn't happen yet. Did you give up on Tony Romo after he collapsed in the playoffs vs Seattle? Have you written off Jake Delhomme and Chad Pennington after their horrible performances in the playoffs?

If Frerotte was better than Sage someone in this league would have picked him up after he was cut by the Vikings.
I'm not really trying to say that one is better than the other. I'm just saying that Rosenfels has started 12 career games! He's also been in the league since 2002. If he was that good, why has he been a sideline cheerleader for most of his career?

Sage's career stat line:

351/562 (62.5% completion) for 4,156 yards, 30 TD’s and 29 INT’s

Now, I'm not going to try and say that line is HORRIBLE or anything. His completion percentage is pretty decent, I'll give him that. But 30 TD's vs 29 INT's? The dude is 31 years old! He's not some young buck who's gonna suddenly turn it around.All I'm trying to say is that this guy is entirely too mediocre to be bragging about as the possible new QB and team savior. Again, anything can happen, but I doubt it. I'm not buying it.

 
Barring a significant injury to McNabb, there is about a 0.5% chance of the Eagles coming last in the division imo.

 
nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
I believe I heard two years ago or so that Atlanta has never had back to back winning seasons.I guess we should just assume, for some reason, that is this year will buck that trend.
 


nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
Staying on the subject of the Falcons, I was actually curious as to what some of you other SP'ers felt about the following snippet of information -- especially those who're from Georgia and have watched more of this kid than anyone.Michael Jenkins.

He's shown flashes of brilliance over his 6 years (he saw barely any playing time in his rookie year back in 2004).

But anyway, it's VERY interesting to note -- and I'm about to bust out a statistical analysis article over this because it's caught my attention so much -- that Jenkins hasn't really been able to get comfortable with a consistent QB. He had Michael Vick throwing to him from 2005-06 and then had to endure being under thrown by Joey Harrington in 2007. Matt Ryan's arrival in 2008 saw Jenkins numbers raised to pretty respectable levels. Before we get to my point, let's take a look at the stats first:

Michael Jenkins Stats since 2005:

2005: 36 receptions, 508 yards, 3 TD's

2006: 39 receptions, 436 yards, 7 TD's

2007: 53 receptions, 532 yards, 4 TD's

2008: 50 receptions, 777 yards, 3 TD's

Okay, now here's the point I want to discuss. Can Jenkins reach the 60 receptions for 1,000 yards and 5 TD plateau with his second year with the skillful Ryan ALONG with the presence of a still-dangerous Tony Gonzalez? Defenses are going to have to account for Michael Turner, Roddy White, Jerrious Norwood AND Tony Gonzalez..
Is this too much of a stretch or might I beyond to a little something, something here?
Falcons are going to be tough to defend...Harry Douglas is a cheap version of Wes Welker, and it's his second year(hence they traded away L. Robinson)...whom I was high on taking over Jenkins spot.

Douglas is now firmly implanted as the slot WR...Robinson was always injured, and not a draft pick of the current regime(to the Rams he went). Jenkins is a team player and great blocker...I can't see his numbers going down, but I don't have clue how much they will go up?

I think the whole offense is going to improve...Who get's what is tough to predict. They will be able to light up the scoreboard...at will.

They were tenth last year for most points scored...With a new coaching staff, GM, and rookie QB.

Wouldn't surprise me, if they moved into the top three.

my .02 cents worth
Good stuff! I hadn't really thought much about Douglas but now that I'm looking some stuff up he was being talked about as a very promising young slot receiver. From when I used to watch Ryan when he played at Boston College, he wasn't really one of those QB's who was obsessed with their TE's. But then again, he really didn't have any elite TE's to throw to at Boston College now that I think about it...

He survived all of last year as a rookie QB without really having a dump-off TE to throw it to (unless you count Peelle, who off the top of my head had somewhere around 150ish receiving yards?).

That would actually make an interesting little research endeavor. What the correlation would be between QB's who started out their rookie seasons with a big-target TE and those who didn't.

 
If he was that good, why has he been a sideline cheerleader for most of his career?
Why was Kurt Warner bagging groceries in the middle of his career? Probably because he was a low draft and no coach was willing to put his career on the line by giving him a chance. If Trent Green doesn't get injured do we ever get to see Warner play.Sage has done pretty well with limited chances. He may or may not be the answer but he definitely deserves a shot IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If he was that good, why has he been a sideline cheerleader for most of his career?
Why was Kurt Warner bagging groceries in the middle of his career? Probably because he was a low draft and no coach was willing to put his career on the line by giving him a chance. If Trent Green doesn't get injured do we ever get to see Warner play.Sage has done pretty well with limited chances. He may or may not be the answer but he definitely deserves a shot IMO.
I'll definitely agree with you that he deserves a shot. I smell a triple-headed QB controversy in the making... :rolleyes:

 
The only glaring issue is obviously the NFC East. Not sure if you were :thumbup: or maybe you have some biased. But the Eagles have the best QB in the division, arguably the best defense and they are the only team that you can say improved themselves on both sides of the ball. The Redskins will once again find themselves at the bottom of the divsion and rightfully so. While getting AH was nice, they still will have serious issues putting pressure on the QB and thus they will lack in splat plays.

 
The only glaring issue is obviously the NFC East. Not sure if you were :thumbup: or maybe you have some biased. But the Eagles have the best QB in the division, arguably the best defense and they are the only team that you can say improved themselves on both sides of the ball. The Redskins will once again find themselves at the bottom of the divsion and rightfully so. While getting AH was nice, they still will have serious issues putting pressure on the QB and thus they will lack in splat plays.
I don't know, I just have a hunch about the Redskins that I can't seem to shake no matter what. And if we can't base our predictions on our hunches, what CAN we base them on?I'll be the first one to admit that it's probably going to end up the exact opposite that I predicted. In fact, I even stated that in the OP. It happens EVERY year! Whichever order I predict the NFC East to end up in, it's usually the complete opposite. If it happens this year, I'm definitely gonna throw some money on the enigma next year to see what happens. :banned:
 


Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
Aaaand this is why I love this board! There's nothing like sharpening your knowledge of the league as a whole then hearing an in-depth account of a team from one of it's fans. Good stuff though man -- let me see if I can try and save some dignity though! ;) I'm not even going to try and counter what you said about the defense because it's 100% true. I honestly wasn't aware their defense was #3 overall last year -- I knew they were good but -- yeah, so that's interesting. The ONLY thing I can even think of to counter that is that the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins defenses aren't no slouches either. I see what you're saying, and you've definitely changed my opinion a bit about how things may go, but I'll still try to bring up one point that I think has been overlooked.

Okay, so a revamped offensive line. Obviously a good thing. A solid backup for Westbrook -- also true. However, while the following stats will not prove my point in the yards, TD's and INT's thrown, I think there may be a little something worth looking at in a little category called the "Games started" statistic:

Donovan McNabb's Games Started, TD's and INT's from 2001 - 2008

2001: 16 games started, 25 TD's and 12 INT's

2002: 10 games started, 17 TD's and 6 INT's

2003: 16 games started, 16 TD's and 11 INT's

2004: 15 games started, 31 TD’s and 8 INT’s

2005: 9 games started, 16 TD’s and 9 INT’s

2006: 10 games started, 18 TD’s and 6 INT’s

2007: 14 games started, 19 TD’s and 7 INT’s

2008: 16 games started, 23 TD’s and 11 INT’s

Now, I haven't been playing with this data for long enough to make any kind of statistical conclusion or whatever, but I do want to just say that if McNabb goes down -- and he's DUE for an injury -- how is the Eagles fans confidence in Kevin Kolb and A.J. Feeley? I've seen a bit of both of them but obviously don't know as much as you probably do. I'm not trying to say that the Eagles would be screwed if McNabb goes down, but IF he does -- do you think Kolb or Feeley would be able to lead the Eagles march through the uber-competitive NFC East?

Trying to predict injuries is obviously like trying to predict the next time you're going to trip or what not -- it's impossible. BUT, he does have an injury history, he IS getting old and that spike in INT's caught my eye for a moment but then I saw that he threw 11 INT's on 571 attempts which is actually pretty good.

But how much longer does he have before he starts to tail off? The offensive line will be able to protect him, but they're not going to stop the boos from the stadium. From what I remember, and I'm not saying that you personally did this, but don't Eagles fans opinions and approval level with McNabb change with the wind? Again, I'm not saying it's ABSOLUTELY going to be this year, but if he does start to decline this year and get offs to a bad start...

I dunno, I'm just trying to back up why I chose them where I did. But you did sway my opinion some for sure. The defensive stats in particular... can't believe I overlooked that. But anyway, for the record I wasn't tryin to necessarily prove anything with those stats -- just present something to study and maybe talk about if he's finally managed to change his injury plagued ways.
Ah...the old "McNabb is injury prone argument!!!!" OK...let's examine that. First of all, much like at RB, if he's gone 14 games...we need to count that as a season. Minor things happen. That leaves 02, 05, and 06....not exactly an extensive list after 9 years in the NFL, but OK. Now...let's look at those injuries closer.......Any soft tissue injuries which commonly recur? ....no....

Any repetitve injuries at all?.....NO!.....

Any chronic conditions which could rear their ugly head? ...........umm...NO!!!!!!!!......

You're much better then this. The injury prone label is grossly over-used as it is, but there is no good reason to use it on McNabb. (Westbrook is a different story)

And the backups....Feely was the one who took over for McNabb in 2005. Philly had a good defense, and a good line. Surrounded by solid talent, Feely has shown he can get the job done. He's also shown that he can't carry a squad on his own...he needs a good supporting cast. So, if McNabb were the only significant injury, yes...Feely can get it done.

Kolb is a bigger ?????? His brief appearance at Baltimore really means little. The whole team struggled that day, and oddly enough, the drive he ended with the hideous RZ interception was the only good looking Philly drive that day. He came from a wierd college system, and it was well-known he'd need a couple years to develope. The jury is still out.

If their is any reason to doubt Philly this year, it's Westbrook. The offense for the last 5 years has really flowed through him. While I love what they've done to prepare for life with a declined/missing Westbrook..those pieces have yet to step up and get it done. But when I look at the team, and this is the ONLY significant question left....yeah...predicting a last place finish makes no sense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:


Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
Aaaand this is why I love this board! There's nothing like sharpening your knowledge of the league as a whole then hearing an in-depth account of a team from one of it's fans. Good stuff though man -- let me see if I can try and save some dignity though! :lmao: I'm not even going to try and counter what you said about the defense because it's 100% true. I honestly wasn't aware their defense was #3 overall last year -- I knew they were good but -- yeah, so that's interesting. The ONLY thing I can even think of to counter that is that the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins defenses aren't no slouches either. I see what you're saying, and you've definitely changed my opinion a bit about how things may go, but I'll still try to bring up one point that I think has been overlooked.

Okay, so a revamped offensive line. Obviously a good thing. A solid backup for Westbrook -- also true. However, while the following stats will not prove my point in the yards, TD's and INT's thrown, I think there may be a little something worth looking at in a little category called the "Games started" statistic:

Donovan McNabb's Games Started, TD's and INT's from 2001 - 2008

2001: 16 games started, 25 TD's and 12 INT's

2002: 10 games started, 17 TD's and 6 INT's

2003: 16 games started, 16 TD's and 11 INT's

2004: 15 games started, 31 TD's and 8 INT's

2005: 9 games started, 16 TD's and 9 INT's

2006: 10 games started, 18 TD's and 6 INT's

2007: 14 games started, 19 TD's and 7 INT's

2008: 16 games started, 23 TD's and 11 INT's

Now, I haven't been playing with this data for long enough to make any kind of statistical conclusion or whatever, but I do want to just say that if McNabb goes down -- and he's DUE for an injury -- how is the Eagles fans confidence in Kevin Kolb and A.J. Feeley? I've seen a bit of both of them but obviously don't know as much as you probably do. I'm not trying to say that the Eagles would be screwed if McNabb goes down, but IF he does -- do you think Kolb or Feeley would be able to lead the Eagles march through the uber-competitive NFC East?

Trying to predict injuries is obviously like trying to predict the next time you're going to trip or what not -- it's impossible. BUT, he does have an injury history, he IS getting old and that spike in INT's caught my eye for a moment but then I saw that he threw 11 INT's on 571 attempts which is actually pretty good.

But how much longer does he have before he starts to tail off? The offensive line will be able to protect him, but they're not going to stop the boos from the stadium. From what I remember, and I'm not saying that you personally did this, but don't Eagles fans opinions and approval level with McNabb change with the wind? Again, I'm not saying it's ABSOLUTELY going to be this year, but if he does start to decline this year and get offs to a bad start...

I dunno, I'm just trying to back up why I chose them where I did. But you did sway my opinion some for sure. The defensive stats in particular... can't believe I overlooked that. But anyway, for the record I wasn't tryin to necessarily prove anything with those stats -- just present something to study and maybe talk about if he's finally managed to change his injury plagued ways.
Ah...the old "McNabb is injury prone argument!!!!" OK...let's examine that. First of all, much like at RB, if he's gone 14 games...we need to count that as a season. Minor things happen. That leaves 02, 05, and 06....not exactly an extensive list after 9 years in the NFL, but OK. Now...let's look at those injuries closer.......Any soft tissue injuries which commonly recur? ....no....

Any repetitve injuries at all?.....NO!.....

Any chronic conditions which could rear their ugly head? ...........umm...NO!!!!!!!!......

You're much better then this. The injury prone label is grossly over-used as it is, but there is no good reason to use it on McNabb. (Westbrook is a different story)

And the backups....Feely was the one who took over for McNabb in 2005. Philly had a good defense, and a good line. Surrounded by solid talent, Feely has shown he can get the job done. He's also shown that he can't carry a squad on his own...he needs a good supporting cast. So, if McNabb were the only significant injury, yes...Feely can get it done.

Kolb is a bigger ?????? His brief appearance at Baltimore really means little. The whole team struggled that day, and oddly enough, the drive he ended with the hideous RZ interception was the only good looking Philly drive that day. He came from a wierd college system, and it was well-known he'd need a couple years to develope. The jury is still out.

If their is any reason to doubt Philly this year, it's Westbrook. The offense for the last 5 years has really flowed through him. While I love what they've done to prepare for life with a declined/missing Westbrook..those pieces have yet to step up and get it done. But when I look at the team, and this is the ONLY significant question left....yeah...predicting a last place finish makes no sense.
Yeah the whole stat thing with that was a classic case of thinking I was going to find something more substantial, didn't, but tried to do my best with I had anyway. Basically, the MAIN reason I have the Eagles in last place is because I have a gut feeling that's what will happen. As stated before, the exact OPPOSITE of what I predict happens usually happens. Regardless though, it's less about the Eagles having a weak team and more with me thinking the rest of the teams in their division have just as many weapons and personnel to stand right with them. That's it.

I have no problem eating my words when it comes to predictions, in fact, I actually enjoy making fun of myself in a weirdly warped way.

Every single point that you brought up was valid, legit, and gave me more knowledge about the Eagles than I already had which I do appreciate. But still, I think over the course of the season the other three teams in the division are going to have a better go at it than the Eagles.

Could I be wrong? No doubt.

Will I probably be wrong? Yes, yes I'm having a feeling that I will... :P

Am I going to go back on the picks after I went through each game and picked the majority of the Eagles losses to all come against powerful squads both within the division and without? Absolutely not.

Actually, here's the teams I had them losing to:

@ Carolina, @ Washington, vs New York Giants, @ San Diego, @ Chicago, vs Washington, @ Atlanta, @ New York Giants, @Dallas

Is it a reach perhaps to have them get swept by the Giants and the Redskins? Sure, I'll admit that. But I honestly think that Washington is going to surprise a lot of people this year en route to the division title. Again, I could be wrong, but what fun would it be if everyone who made these seasonal prediction write-ups just had the default standings as dictated by last years results and an eye towards being part of the norm?

I could see if I picked like, the Redskins, Rams, Buccaneers and Browns all to win their divisions, but I stayed fairly conservative which happened to go according with I thought will happen. The NFC East? Not so much. They call it the NFC Beast for a reason! :kicksrock:

 
Thanks for the props. Sorry I caused you to get yelled at by your wife, but glad I could help you avoid household chores. :kicksrock:

 


Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
Aaaand this is why I love this board! There's nothing like sharpening your knowledge of the league as a whole then hearing an in-depth account of a team from one of it's fans. Good stuff though man -- let me see if I can try and save some dignity though! :excited: I'm not even going to try and counter what you said about the defense because it's 100% true. I honestly wasn't aware their defense was #3 overall last year -- I knew they were good but -- yeah, so that's interesting. The ONLY thing I can even think of to counter that is that the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins defenses aren't no slouches either. I see what you're saying, and you've definitely changed my opinion a bit about how things may go, but I'll still try to bring up one point that I think has been overlooked.

Okay, so a revamped offensive line. Obviously a good thing. A solid backup for Westbrook -- also true. However, while the following stats will not prove my point in the yards, TD's and INT's thrown, I think there may be a little something worth looking at in a little category called the "Games started" statistic:

Donovan McNabb's Games Started, TD's and INT's from 2001 - 2008

2001: 16 games started, 25 TD's and 12 INT's

2002: 10 games started, 17 TD's and 6 INT's

2003: 16 games started, 16 TD's and 11 INT's

2004: 15 games started, 31 TD's and 8 INT's

2005: 9 games started, 16 TD's and 9 INT's

2006: 10 games started, 18 TD's and 6 INT's

2007: 14 games started, 19 TD's and 7 INT's

2008: 16 games started, 23 TD's and 11 INT's

Now, I haven't been playing with this data for long enough to make any kind of statistical conclusion or whatever, but I do want to just say that if McNabb goes down -- and he's DUE for an injury -- how is the Eagles fans confidence in Kevin Kolb and A.J. Feeley? I've seen a bit of both of them but obviously don't know as much as you probably do. I'm not trying to say that the Eagles would be screwed if McNabb goes down, but IF he does -- do you think Kolb or Feeley would be able to lead the Eagles march through the uber-competitive NFC East?

Trying to predict injuries is obviously like trying to predict the next time you're going to trip or what not -- it's impossible. BUT, he does have an injury history, he IS getting old and that spike in INT's caught my eye for a moment but then I saw that he threw 11 INT's on 571 attempts which is actually pretty good.

But how much longer does he have before he starts to tail off? The offensive line will be able to protect him, but they're not going to stop the boos from the stadium. From what I remember, and I'm not saying that you personally did this, but don't Eagles fans opinions and approval level with McNabb change with the wind? Again, I'm not saying it's ABSOLUTELY going to be this year, but if he does start to decline this year and get offs to a bad start...

I dunno, I'm just trying to back up why I chose them where I did. But you did sway my opinion some for sure. The defensive stats in particular... can't believe I overlooked that. But anyway, for the record I wasn't tryin to necessarily prove anything with those stats -- just present something to study and maybe talk about if he's finally managed to change his injury plagued ways.
Ah...the old "McNabb is injury prone argument!!!!" OK...let's examine that. First of all, much like at RB, if he's gone 14 games...we need to count that as a season. Minor things happen. That leaves 02, 05, and 06....not exactly an extensive list after 9 years in the NFL, but OK. Now...let's look at those injuries closer.......Any soft tissue injuries which commonly recur? ....no....

Any repetitve injuries at all?.....NO!.....

Any chronic conditions which could rear their ugly head? ...........umm...NO!!!!!!!!......

You're much better then this. The injury prone label is grossly over-used as it is, but there is no good reason to use it on McNabb. (Westbrook is a different story)

And the backups....Feely was the one who took over for McNabb in 2005. Philly had a good defense, and a good line. Surrounded by solid talent, Feely has shown he can get the job done. He's also shown that he can't carry a squad on his own...he needs a good supporting cast. So, if McNabb were the only significant injury, yes...Feely can get it done.

Kolb is a bigger ?????? His brief appearance at Baltimore really means little. The whole team struggled that day, and oddly enough, the drive he ended with the hideous RZ interception was the only good looking Philly drive that day. He came from a wierd college system, and it was well-known he'd need a couple years to develope. The jury is still out.

If their is any reason to doubt Philly this year, it's Westbrook. The offense for the last 5 years has really flowed through him. While I love what they've done to prepare for life with a declined/missing Westbrook..those pieces have yet to step up and get it done. But when I look at the team, and this is the ONLY significant question left....yeah...predicting a last place finish makes no sense.
Basically, the MAIN reason I have the Eagles in last place is because I have a gut feeling that's what will happen. As stated before, the exact OPPOSITE of what I predict happens usually happens. Regardless though, it's less about the Eagles having a weak team and more with me thinking the rest of the teams in their division have just as many weapons and personnel to stand right with them. That's it.
:goodposting: The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense

 
Last edited by a moderator:


Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
Aaaand this is why I love this board! There's nothing like sharpening your knowledge of the league as a whole then hearing an in-depth account of a team from one of it's fans. Good stuff though man -- let me see if I can try and save some dignity though! :popcorn: I'm not even going to try and counter what you said about the defense because it's 100% true. I honestly wasn't aware their defense was #3 overall last year -- I knew they were good but -- yeah, so that's interesting. The ONLY thing I can even think of to counter that is that the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins defenses aren't no slouches either. I see what you're saying, and you've definitely changed my opinion a bit about how things may go, but I'll still try to bring up one point that I think has been overlooked.

Okay, so a revamped offensive line. Obviously a good thing. A solid backup for Westbrook -- also true. However, while the following stats will not prove my point in the yards, TD's and INT's thrown, I think there may be a little something worth looking at in a little category called the "Games started" statistic:

Donovan McNabb's Games Started, TD's and INT's from 2001 - 2008

2001: 16 games started, 25 TD's and 12 INT's

2002: 10 games started, 17 TD's and 6 INT's

2003: 16 games started, 16 TD's and 11 INT's

2004: 15 games started, 31 TD's and 8 INT's

2005: 9 games started, 16 TD's and 9 INT's

2006: 10 games started, 18 TD's and 6 INT's

2007: 14 games started, 19 TD's and 7 INT's

2008: 16 games started, 23 TD's and 11 INT's

Now, I haven't been playing with this data for long enough to make any kind of statistical conclusion or whatever, but I do want to just say that if McNabb goes down -- and he's DUE for an injury -- how is the Eagles fans confidence in Kevin Kolb and A.J. Feeley? I've seen a bit of both of them but obviously don't know as much as you probably do. I'm not trying to say that the Eagles would be screwed if McNabb goes down, but IF he does -- do you think Kolb or Feeley would be able to lead the Eagles march through the uber-competitive NFC East?

Trying to predict injuries is obviously like trying to predict the next time you're going to trip or what not -- it's impossible. BUT, he does have an injury history, he IS getting old and that spike in INT's caught my eye for a moment but then I saw that he threw 11 INT's on 571 attempts which is actually pretty good.

But how much longer does he have before he starts to tail off? The offensive line will be able to protect him, but they're not going to stop the boos from the stadium. From what I remember, and I'm not saying that you personally did this, but don't Eagles fans opinions and approval level with McNabb change with the wind? Again, I'm not saying it's ABSOLUTELY going to be this year, but if he does start to decline this year and get offs to a bad start...

I dunno, I'm just trying to back up why I chose them where I did. But you did sway my opinion some for sure. The defensive stats in particular... can't believe I overlooked that. But anyway, for the record I wasn't tryin to necessarily prove anything with those stats -- just present something to study and maybe talk about if he's finally managed to change his injury plagued ways.
Ah...the old "McNabb is injury prone argument!!!!" OK...let's examine that. First of all, much like at RB, if he's gone 14 games...we need to count that as a season. Minor things happen. That leaves 02, 05, and 06....not exactly an extensive list after 9 years in the NFL, but OK. Now...let's look at those injuries closer.......Any soft tissue injuries which commonly recur? ....no....

Any repetitve injuries at all?.....NO!.....

Any chronic conditions which could rear their ugly head? ...........umm...NO!!!!!!!!......

You're much better then this. The injury prone label is grossly over-used as it is, but there is no good reason to use it on McNabb. (Westbrook is a different story)

And the backups....Feely was the one who took over for McNabb in 2005. Philly had a good defense, and a good line. Surrounded by solid talent, Feely has shown he can get the job done. He's also shown that he can't carry a squad on his own...he needs a good supporting cast. So, if McNabb were the only significant injury, yes...Feely can get it done.

Kolb is a bigger ?????? His brief appearance at Baltimore really means little. The whole team struggled that day, and oddly enough, the drive he ended with the hideous RZ interception was the only good looking Philly drive that day. He came from a wierd college system, and it was well-known he'd need a couple years to develope. The jury is still out.

If their is any reason to doubt Philly this year, it's Westbrook. The offense for the last 5 years has really flowed through him. While I love what they've done to prepare for life with a declined/missing Westbrook..those pieces have yet to step up and get it done. But when I look at the team, and this is the ONLY significant question left....yeah...predicting a last place finish makes no sense.
Basically, the MAIN reason I have the Eagles in last place is because I have a gut feeling that's what will happen. As stated before, the exact OPPOSITE of what I predict happens usually happens. Regardless though, it's less about the Eagles having a weak team and more with me thinking the rest of the teams in their division have just as many weapons and personnel to stand right with them. That's it.
:confused: The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense
Last time I checked, the Giants still had the majority of their 5th ranked defense overall in 2008 as well as Ahmad Bradshaw, who was just as punishing and effective as Ward was. Ward got 182 carries en route to his 1,000 yard year (5.6 avg) while Bradshaw was only given the ball 67 times en route to 355 rushing yards (5.3 avg). Certainly not GOOD to lose a RB like that, but hey, they DO still have Brandon Jacobs who ran for 178 yards and 2 TD's against your vaunted Philadelphia rush defense in the team's two meetings last year.

The WR corps is up in the air with nothing really to say in defense of it, but I'm fairly certain that many an NFL team has gotten by just fine in the NFL with a hard-nosed, run it down your throat on the ground on offense and then shut it down on defense.

The Cowboys lost one of the best WR's in the history of the game who's in the TWILIGHT of his career and is pushing 36 years old. He also dropped MULTIPLE crucial passes, some other routine ones, and had an incredibly inconsistent season. Either he was on or he was off. Trust me, I had him on my team -- he wasn't very fun to deal with at all and is certainly not the Terrel Owens of yore.

As for the Redskins, you mean they did littlle to improve a poor PASS offense? Their rushing game was ranked eighth in the league and featured a Clinton Portis that ALSO romped over your vaunted rushing defense en route to 215 rushing yards and 2 TD's in the teams two meet ups.

Add to that the fact that I think Jason Campbell is going to be a completely different QB this year than he was in the past, and that should answer all of your questions. Hopefully you're befuddled no longer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice, fun write-up.

I am a Redskins fan and a believer that Campbell is a very good QB waiting to emerge. However, very good QBs seldom emerge when their offensive line stinks. The Redskins biggest problem last year was their offensive line. Their second biggest problem was their defensive line. 3rd biggest problem is the WRs.

The o-line they really need everything to go right and have no injuries to have a chance there. That is very unlikely to happen so they are going to have all kinds of trouble there.

The d-line they made huge improvements with Haynesworth and Orakpo - so contrary to what some have said - they will get more pressure on the QB and get some more turnovers and that will help.

WRs - Moss is good. Randel El is a good slot receiver but not a good #2 guy - especially if your #1 guy is small and mostly a deep threat or WR screen guy. Redskins will need Thomas or Kelly to step up and make some plays as a big guy who can catch slants and other balls over the middle. Also could see some 2 TE sets with Fred Davis both a good blocker and receiving threat across from Cooley.

So - to me they fixed their #2 problem, there's some hope (but not a lot) on their 3rd problem, but there's little hope on problem #1. So that will continue to make things tough on Campbell.

I think it will be: Eagles 1, Giants 2, Redskins/Cowboys tied for 3rd. It's a tough division so it's easy to be wrong every year. I truly hope you are right this year, but I doubt it.

 
JGalligan said:
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
:(

The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense
#1 - Last time I checked, the Giants still had the majority of their 5th ranked defense overall in 2008 as well as Ahmad Bradshaw, who was just as punishing and effective as Ward was. Ward got 182 carries en route to his 1,000 yard year (5.6 avg) while Bradshaw was only given the ball 67 times en route to 355 rushing yards (5.3 avg). #2 - Certainly not GOOD to lose a RB like that, but hey, they DO still have Brandon Jacobs who ran for 178 yards and 2 TD's against your vaunted Philadelphia rush defense in the team's two meetings last year.

The WR corps is up in the air with nothing really to say in defense of it, but I'm fairly certain that many an NFL team has gotten by just fine in the NFL with a hard-nosed, run it down your throat on the ground on offense and then shut it down on defense.

The Cowboys lost one of the best WR's in the history of the game who's in the TWILIGHT of his career and is pushing 36 years old. He also dropped MULTIPLE crucial passes, some other routine ones, and had an incredibly inconsistent season. Either he was on or he was off. Trust me, I had him on my team -- he wasn't very fun to deal with at all and is certainly not the Terrel Owens of yore.

#3 - As for the Redskins, you mean they did littlle to improve a poor PASS offense? Their rushing game was ranked eighth in the league and featured a Clinton Portis that ALSO romped over your vaunted rushing defense en route to 215 rushing yards and 2 TD's in the teams two meet ups.

#4 Add to that the fact that I think Jason Campbell is going to be a completely different QB this year than he was in the past, and that should answer all of your questions. Hopefully you will befuddled no longer.
#1 - The Eagles Defense was ranked #3 and they added a very talented CB that would be a starter on the Giants. And like it or not they are better safety this year. Not to mention the last time I checked 3>5#2 - Is this the same Giants that the Eagles went 2-1 against and doubled them up in the playoffs in their house? I guess the Giants offense lacked just enough to lose two games to our vaunted defense.

#3 - As soon as Team Offense only counts rushing you will have a point. They had a below average offense for the past 4 years.

#4 - What have you seen from JC in the past 3 season to lead you to believe he will be a "completely different QB this year"? To say you expect to him to improve is fine. But there is nothing to base your comment off.

So color me befuddled even more! :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JGalligan said:
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
:confused:

The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense
#1 - Last time I checked, the Giants still had the majority of their 5th ranked defense overall in 2008 as well as Ahmad Bradshaw, who was just as punishing and effective as Ward was. Ward got 182 carries en route to his 1,000 yard year (5.6 avg) while Bradshaw was only given the ball 67 times en route to 355 rushing yards (5.3 avg). #2 - Certainly not GOOD to lose a RB like that, but hey, they DO still have Brandon Jacobs who ran for 178 yards and 2 TD's against your vaunted Philadelphia rush defense in the team's two meetings last year.

The WR corps is up in the air with nothing really to say in defense of it, but I'm fairly certain that many an NFL team has gotten by just fine in the NFL with a hard-nosed, run it down your throat on the ground on offense and then shut it down on defense.

The Cowboys lost one of the best WR's in the history of the game who's in the TWILIGHT of his career and is pushing 36 years old. He also dropped MULTIPLE crucial passes, some other routine ones, and had an incredibly inconsistent season. Either he was on or he was off. Trust me, I had him on my team -- he wasn't very fun to deal with at all and is certainly not the Terrel Owens of yore.

#3 - As for the Redskins, you mean they did littlle to improve a poor PASS offense? Their rushing game was ranked eighth in the league and featured a Clinton Portis that ALSO romped over your vaunted rushing defense en route to 215 rushing yards and 2 TD's in the teams two meet ups.

#4 Add to that the fact that I think Jason Campbell is going to be a completely different QB this year than he was in the past, and that should answer all of your questions. Hopefully you will befuddled no longer.
#1 - The Eagles Defense was ranked #3 and they added a very talented CB that would be a starter on the Giants. And like it or not they are better safety this year. Not to mention the last time I checked 3>5#2 - Is this the same Giants that the Eagles went 2-1 against and doubled them up in the playoffs in their house? I guess the Giants offense lacked just enough to lose two games to our vaunted defense.

#3 - As soon as Team Offense only counts rushing you will have a point. They had a below average offense for the past 4 years.

#4 - What have you seen from JC in the past 3 season to lead you to believe he will be a "completely different QB this year"? To say you expect to him to improve is fine. But there is nothing to base your comment off.

So color me befuddled even more! :)
I: You're correct in saying that 3 > 5, but since when do two defenses square off against one another?II: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't games that are played in the present based on... well, the there and not what happened a year ago?

III and IV: I guess we can call it Deangelo Williams syndrome. One of the things I based my prediction that Deangelo Williams would break out in August of last year was that he might have finally gotten the kick in the ### he needed when the Panthers drafted Jonathan Stewart.

Now, I'm aware it's not the exact same situation, but the whole Redskins pursuing QB's (most notably Jay Cutler of course!) thing is either going to put the flashes of brilliance that I saw in him a year ago into overdrive, or he's going to go into shutdown type mode and not really care how he performs.

Honestly, I think he's going to come storming out of the gates in 2009 with a vengeance and try to prove everyone wrong. The kid has talent for sure, but he's just had so many different coaches and offensive systems throughout his whole career that it's taken him longer to evolve.

Either he'll prove them wrong or he'll prove them right. I think he'll prove them wrong and you think he'll prove them right.

Here have one of these you'll probably stop feeling woozy: :banned:

I'll be ready for your next batch of questions whenever you are. :excited:

 
renesauz said:
Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
That sounds good and all but they also lost their unquestioned leader in B.Dawkins. The Eagles D is going to miss his emotion, energy and leadership and I wouldn't discount that like its no big deal.
 
JGalligan said:
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
:hey:

The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense
#1 - Last time I checked, the Giants still had the majority of their 5th ranked defense overall in 2008 as well as Ahmad Bradshaw, who was just as punishing and effective as Ward was. Ward got 182 carries en route to his 1,000 yard year (5.6 avg) while Bradshaw was only given the ball 67 times en route to 355 rushing yards (5.3 avg). #2 - Certainly not GOOD to lose a RB like that, but hey, they DO still have Brandon Jacobs who ran for 178 yards and 2 TD's against your vaunted Philadelphia rush defense in the team's two meetings last year.

The WR corps is up in the air with nothing really to say in defense of it, but I'm fairly certain that many an NFL team has gotten by just fine in the NFL with a hard-nosed, run it down your throat on the ground on offense and then shut it down on defense.

The Cowboys lost one of the best WR's in the history of the game who's in the TWILIGHT of his career and is pushing 36 years old. He also dropped MULTIPLE crucial passes, some other routine ones, and had an incredibly inconsistent season. Either he was on or he was off. Trust me, I had him on my team -- he wasn't very fun to deal with at all and is certainly not the Terrel Owens of yore.

#3 - As for the Redskins, you mean they did littlle to improve a poor PASS offense? Their rushing game was ranked eighth in the league and featured a Clinton Portis that ALSO romped over your vaunted rushing defense en route to 215 rushing yards and 2 TD's in the teams two meet ups.

#4 Add to that the fact that I think Jason Campbell is going to be a completely different QB this year than he was in the past, and that should answer all of your questions. Hopefully you will befuddled no longer.
#1 - The Eagles Defense was ranked #3 and they added a very talented CB that would be a starter on the Giants. And like it or not they are better safety this year. Not to mention the last time I checked 3>5#2 - Is this the same Giants that the Eagles went 2-1 against and doubled them up in the playoffs in their house? I guess the Giants offense lacked just enough to lose two games to our vaunted defense.

#3 - As soon as Team Offense only counts rushing you will have a point. They had a below average offense for the past 4 years.

#4 - What have you seen from JC in the past 3 season to lead you to believe he will be a "completely different QB this year"? To say you expect to him to improve is fine. But there is nothing to base your comment off.

So color me befuddled even more! :)
I: You're correct in saying that 3 > 5, but since when do two defenses square off against one another?II: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't games that are played in the present based on... well, the there and not what happened a year ago?

III and IV: I guess we can call it Deangelo Williams syndrome. One of the things I based my prediction that Deangelo Williams would break out in August of last year was that he might have finally gotten the kick in the ### he needed when the Panthers drafted Jonathan Stewart.

Now, I'm aware it's not the exact same situation, but the whole Redskins pursuing QB's (most notably Jay Cutler of course!) thing is either going to put the flashes of brilliance that I saw in him a year ago into overdrive, or he's going to go into shutdown type mode and not really care how he performs.

Honestly, I think he's going to come storming out of the gates in 2009 with a vengeance and try to prove everyone wrong. The kid has talent for sure, but he's just had so many different coaches and offensive systems throughout his whole career that it's taken him longer to evolve.

Either he'll prove them wrong or he'll prove them right. I think he'll prove them wrong and you think he'll prove them right.

Here have one of these you'll probably stop feeling woozy: :lmao:

I'll be ready for your next batch of questions whenever you are. ;)
Sadly your reply pretty much cemented my point. Your rankings of the NFC are based on little more than throwing stuff on a wall and hoping it sticks. Either way it was a good read and sparked some conversation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
renesauz said:
Was well on board with all your predictions EXCEPT the NFC East....it was almost like you simply reversed the order or something.

People love to talk about Philly's offense, and look for McNabb/WEstbrook to fall off a cliff...but what about Philly's DEFENSE? you know...that defense that ranked #3 last year and returns ELEVEN STARTERS? That the vast majority of those eleven are STILL ENTERING THE UPSWING OF THEIR CAREERS?????

My point is that even if you're 100% correct on Westy and McNabb (which you obviously aren't since you neglected to account for a seemingly improved O-line, the most promising RB2 in recent memory, the best WR crew ever under Reid, and the first true FB on the roster in at least five years), you'd still be waaaaaaaay off because that defense is poised to be one of the best in the NFL. And that "one of the best in the NFL" should be enough to stonewall an anemic Redskin offense and one dimensional Giants squad.

I can't fault how anyone would want to rank the Cowboys though.....they certainly have the talent, just never seem to find a way to make it all work together. Nothing from 6-10 to 12-4 would surprise me with them.
That sounds good and all but they also lost their unquestioned leader in B.Dawkins. The Eagles D is going to miss his emotion, energy and leadership and I wouldn't discount that like its no big deal.
IMO this is the biggest load of bunk. No one is a bigger fan of BDawk than I am. But the guy just lost it. His leader ship and "emotion" while great for the fans and its nice to talk about it does not effect that much on the field. BDawk much like a certain former Green Bay QB has seen his better days. Will he be missed? Absolutely, but more so by the fans than the team on the field.
 
Is this the thread where we agree with your predictions but whine that our home team is ranked too low? :own3d:

Nice work on this - looking forward to following it through the season.

 
JGalligan said:
Buddy Ball 2K3 said:
:shrug:

The Giants Offense lose their #1, #2 WR's & a very good RB

The Cowboys Offense lose one of the best WR's in the history of the game

The Redskins do absolutely nothing to improve a poor offense
#1 - Last time I checked, the Giants still had the majority of their 5th ranked defense overall in 2008 as well as Ahmad Bradshaw, who was just as punishing and effective as Ward was. Ward got 182 carries en route to his 1,000 yard year (5.6 avg) while Bradshaw was only given the ball 67 times en route to 355 rushing yards (5.3 avg). #2 - Certainly not GOOD to lose a RB like that, but hey, they DO still have Brandon Jacobs who ran for 178 yards and 2 TD's against your vaunted Philadelphia rush defense in the team's two meetings last year.

The WR corps is up in the air with nothing really to say in defense of it, but I'm fairly certain that many an NFL team has gotten by just fine in the NFL with a hard-nosed, run it down your throat on the ground on offense and then shut it down on defense.

The Cowboys lost one of the best WR's in the history of the game who's in the TWILIGHT of his career and is pushing 36 years old. He also dropped MULTIPLE crucial passes, some other routine ones, and had an incredibly inconsistent season. Either he was on or he was off. Trust me, I had him on my team -- he wasn't very fun to deal with at all and is certainly not the Terrel Owens of yore.

#3 - As for the Redskins, you mean they did littlle to improve a poor PASS offense? Their rushing game was ranked eighth in the league and featured a Clinton Portis that ALSO romped over your vaunted rushing defense en route to 215 rushing yards and 2 TD's in the teams two meet ups.

#4 Add to that the fact that I think Jason Campbell is going to be a completely different QB this year than he was in the past, and that should answer all of your questions. Hopefully you will befuddled no longer.
#1 - The Eagles Defense was ranked #3 and they added a very talented CB that would be a starter on the Giants. And like it or not they are better safety this year. Not to mention the last time I checked 3>5#2 - Is this the same Giants that the Eagles went 2-1 against and doubled them up in the playoffs in their house? I guess the Giants offense lacked just enough to lose two games to our vaunted defense.

#3 - As soon as Team Offense only counts rushing you will have a point. They had a below average offense for the past 4 years.

#4 - What have you seen from JC in the past 3 season to lead you to believe he will be a "completely different QB this year"? To say you expect to him to improve is fine. But there is nothing to base your comment off.

So color me befuddled even more! :bye:
I: You're correct in saying that 3 > 5, but since when do two defenses square off against one another?II: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't games that are played in the present based on... well, the there and not what happened a year ago?

III and IV: I guess we can call it Deangelo Williams syndrome. One of the things I based my prediction that Deangelo Williams would break out in August of last year was that he might have finally gotten the kick in the ### he needed when the Panthers drafted Jonathan Stewart.

Now, I'm aware it's not the exact same situation, but the whole Redskins pursuing QB's (most notably Jay Cutler of course!) thing is either going to put the flashes of brilliance that I saw in him a year ago into overdrive, or he's going to go into shutdown type mode and not really care how he performs.

Honestly, I think he's going to come storming out of the gates in 2009 with a vengeance and try to prove everyone wrong. The kid has talent for sure, but he's just had so many different coaches and offensive systems throughout his whole career that it's taken him longer to evolve.

Either he'll prove them wrong or he'll prove them right. I think he'll prove them wrong and you think he'll prove them right.

Here have one of these you'll probably stop feeling woozy: :D

I'll be ready for your next batch of questions whenever you are. ;)
Sadly your reply pretty much cemented my point. Your rankings of the NFC are based on little more than throwing stuff on a wall and hoping it sticks. Either way it was a good read and sparked some conversation.
I must say, you baffle the shiz out of me. Whether you like it or not, sometimes stuff doesn't go as planned in the NFL. I shall reference you to the Arizona Cardinals appearance in the Super Bowl just one year ago.

Are you telling me someone couldn't have taken a look at the Cardinals at the beginning of last year, liked what they saw, and then went ahead and picked them to win the Super Bowl because.. I dunno, I guess I just don't get your logic.

Either you're too stubborn to admit that I actually countered your "baffle" worries with actual and factual answers, or you just take the favorite without thinking about it every single time.

Any Given Sunday, my friend. It happens.

 
vikingdave said:
So Minnesota loses basically nothing of importance, Birk could hurt a little but he was on the decline and it was obvious, they get back their best stud Linebacker, add a QB who is better than Gus Frerotte who started almost all of last year, add a playmaker in the draft, have a cake easy schedule, and they lose 3 games more than last year because of it...hmmm, yep, makes tons of sense...
Unless you project Detroit to go oh-fer again you have to have them winning against somebody. They were within a score against Minn in both games last year so it's not a stretch that Minn could get 1 more loss this year from an improved Detroit team. That's 1 of the 3 anyway.You don't think the D will take a step back this year with the looming suspension of both Williams'?
Blackjacks said:
texasbirdfan said:
nice article. typical Atlanta treatment: no mention of anything or why- even though you have the team rated top 3 NFC. But after 43 years, we are used to it, always under the radar.
I believe I heard two years ago or so that Atlanta has never had back to back winning seasons.I guess we should just assume, for some reason, that is this year will buck that trend.
You are right on that, but a trend of past events has no future predictive power. Barring significant injuries I don't see any reason they won't win more than lose this year.
 
I must say, you baffle the shiz out of me. Whether you like it or not, sometimes stuff doesn't go as planned in the NFL. I shall reference you to the Arizona Cardinals appearance in the Super Bowl just one year ago. Are you telling me someone couldn't have taken a look at the Cardinals at the beginning of last year, liked what they saw, and then went ahead and picked them to win the Super Bowl because.. I dunno, I guess I just don't get your logic.Either you're too stubborn to admit that I actually countered your "baffle" worries with actual and factual answers, or you just take the favorite without thinking about it every single time.Any Given Sunday, my friend. It happens.
I: You're correct in saying that 3 > 5, but since when do two defenses square off against one another?
I have absolutely no idea what your point is here. My point is simply that the Eagles defense was better than the Giants last year. The Eagles beat the Giants twice last season. They had a better defense and a better offense. The Eagles also added to both sides of the ball this year to make their teams better while the Giants lost their best two WR's and lost their very good defensive coordinator.
II: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't games that are played in the present based on... well, the there and not what happened a year ago?
What have the Giants done to improve themselves more than the Eagles?
I shall reference you to the Arizona Cardinals appearance in the Super Bowl just one year ago. Are you telling me someone couldn't have taken a look at the Cardinals at the beginning of last year, liked what they saw, and then went ahead and picked them to win the Super Bowl because.. I dunno, I guess I just don't get your logic.
Let me get this straight. You want to compare someone picking the Cards to do well vs someone picking the Redskins. One team has a QB that has a very good chance of going to the Hall of Fame, while the other team plays in arguably the toughest division in football... one team has all world wr's, while the other team has a putrid offensive line... etc etc. Either way it still comes down to throwing stuff at all.
Either you're too stubborn to admit that I actually countered your "baffle" worries with actual and factual answers, or you just take the favorite without thinking about it every single time.
Not sure you countered anything at all. You have a gut feeling that is your only counter. Hey that's great and you there's a chance you could be right. However while I will use facts, numbers, and trends to back my position and you can fall back on the big mac you had at lunch today. I have a hard time believing that if it came down to it, you would bet your last few dollars on the Redskins to win the division and the Eagles to finish last.
 
I have absolutely no idea what your point is here. My point is simply that the Eagles defense was better than the Giants last year. The Eagles beat the Giants twice last season. They had a better defense and a better offense. The Eagles also added to both sides of the ball this year to make their teams better while the Giants lost their best two WR's and lost their very good defensive coordinator.
I suppose I could have said it in a different way as that is a bit cryptic, but basically I was trying to point out basically and bare-boned that the better defense in a match up won't necessarily win. Like it's not like the defense was squaring off against the defense and the offense against the offense.
What have the Giants done to improve themselves more than the Eagles?
How we can really say for sure? I for one liked Hakeem Nicks going into the draft as a physical receiver with good hands. He's no Plaxico and will probably won't even be a Jeremy Maclin, but we seen a TON of rookie WR's do VERY well last year. Who's to say that Hakeem Nicks won't be the answer for Plaxico's departure? Not in the sense that he'll be immediately just as good, but will at least fill the cog that was left and that could have done some major damage if no one stepped in and started performing. The Eagles may have made themselves better, but besides the Plaxico departure I really don't see a huge difference in the grand scheme of things.What I was trying to say here was that even though the Eagles got better on paper doesn't necessarily mean they're going to easily conquer the Giants when they play. These are NFC Beast games we're talking about here! :PIt's not like the Giants were cored and gutted and have a duntz at QB and no more Brandon Jacobs.
Let me get this straight. You want to compare someone picking the Cards to do well vs someone picking the Redskins. One team has a QB that has a very good chance of going to the Hall of Fame, while the other team plays in arguably the toughest division in football... one team has all world wr's, while the other team has a putrid offensive line... etc etc. Either way it still comes down to throwing stuff at all.
I'm not picking the Redskins for the Super Bowl though, just to win the division. I know it's a tough division but I mean, it's not like I'm predicting they're going to go 15-1 and march straight into the Super Bowl then straight out as victors. I suppose I just took offense with the throwing stuff at a wall comment. I put some thought into every single selection and didn't just go eenie-meenie minee-mo that ####.I dunno what it is but apparently me and the NFC East are cursed. I can't think clearly in regards to them. So as long as it wasn't referring to the ENTIRE NFC write-up as a whole than I do apologize and I took it out of context.
Not sure you countered anything at all. You have a gut feeling that is your only counter. Hey that's great and you there's a chance you could be right. However while I will use facts, numbers, and trends to back my position and you can fall back on the big mac you had at lunch today. I have a hard time believing that if it came down to it, you would bet your last few dollars on the Redskins to win the division and the Eagles to finish last.
A gut feeling that was based on watching him last year and what happened with Cutler. But I will leave the door open that I may have took my gut feeling too far. I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong and will mercilessly make fun of myself should the Eagles destroy the Redskins and send them hurtling to like a 3-13 record.All I was trying to get across was that there was a method to my madness, no matter how potentially and questionably stupid it may turn out being. Also, I hate Big Macs. Only because they look like the grossest most depressing burger when you get it from Mickey D's but it looks like a filet minon nectar sandwich on TV.You're right, I would bet my last few dollars on anything. But I will make a small gentleman's bet the Redskins will end up with a better record than the Eagles this year. It's up to you -- we could do $20 or even a $50 bet if you want. I won't get into it too much here, but I'm a pretty successful NFL bettor. But this won't include lines or anything -- just a straight up, whoever has a better record.In conclusion though, I apologize if I started to get a bit too pissed off. You know your stuff for sure and I see many future debates in our future -- just hopefully nothing about the NFC East for a while. :shrug: Good posting, bro. :lmao:
 
Is this the thread where we agree with your predictions but whine that our home team is ranked too low? :popcorn: Nice work on this - looking forward to following it through the season.
:) It would be far differant if the Eagles weren't generally considered a favorite in the division, let alone the NFC, or even if JGALL's arguments on his ranking made a lick of sense, but hey...thanks for playing! :thumbup:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top