Godsbrother
Footballguy
Now that the Cardinals have made it to the Super Bowl there are five teams remaining that have not. Which of these teams is most likely to make it next?
FWIW, the Lions and Browns played in many NFL Championship games in their histories - just none in the Super Bowl era. Its funny - its as if the coining of the term "Super Bowl" wiped out fifty years of NFL history. We still remember and recognize the dominant players - Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, etc - but not the dominant teams they played for, like the great Browns and Lions teams of the 50's.Anyway, I voted Saints for the question above.
These Browns never played in any of them. It's funny - as if the NFL saying that the team records etc being left behind makes it so and wipes out the continuity of an organization that won a Super Bowl with a number of the same players that came with them from Cleveland.Anyhow, up until probably last year, I would've said J-ville. While the Cardinals have proven anything's possible, I still think the Lions have too much bad karma going right now. The Saints aren't a bad choice and I'm not surprised they are leading the pole, but I went with the Texans since that seems to have the right combo of improbability yet competence.-QGFWIW, the Lions and Browns played in many NFL Championship games in their histories - just none in the Super Bowl era. Its funny - its as if the coining of the term "Super Bowl" wiped out fifty years of NFL history. We still remember and recognize the dominant players - Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, etc - but not the dominant teams they played for, like the great Browns and Lions teams of the 50's.Anyway, I voted Saints for the question above.
Oh, and I guess the point is I think the Saints are the NFC Super Bowl team next year.4th in NFC South 2002-2008CAR:2002: 7-9; 4th in NFC South2003: 11-5; 1st in NFC South; lost Super Bowl 32-29 to NEPATL:2003: 5-11; 4th in NFC South2004: 11-5; 1st in NFC South; lost NFC Championship 27-10 to PHICAR:2004: 5-11; 4th in NFC South2005: 11-5; 1st in NFC South; lost Wild Card game 17-10 to WASNOS:2005: 3-10; 4th in NFC South2006: 10-6; 1st in NFC South; lost NFC Championship 39-14 to CHITBB:2006: 4-12; 4th in NFC South2007: 9-7; 1st in NFC South; lost Wild Card game 24-14 to NYGATL:2007: 4-12; 4th in NFC South2008: 11-5; 2nd in NFC South; lost Wild Card game 30-24 to ARINOS:2008: 8-8; 4th in NFC South2009: TBDNot an easy schedule, as the division is tough, the NFC East is tough, and the AFC East is tough.Only two easy games are Lions/Rams.
Still, if they can draft D-heavy, and with the addition of Gregg Williams as the DC, I look for the Saints to continue the SIX year trend of the 4th place NFC South team making the playoffs the following year. And of all those teams that rebounded, there was only one (CAR @ 7-9) with more than 5 wins, and the Saints had eight in 2008.
2009 Home Opponents
Atlanta Falcons
Carolina Panthers
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
New England Patriots
New York Jets
Detroit Lions
2009 Away Opponents
Atlanta Falcons
Carolina Panthers
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
St. Louis Rams
the cardinals made it this year. Anything is possible. anythingAlright, who are the 2 jokers who voted for Detroit?
The Browns should get credit for Baltimores SuperBowl.
Yup. This is why I picked Detroit. The bottom line is that all of these teams have significant hurdles to overcome to make the title game, so it's genuinely a crapshoot. After the Saints made it to the NFCCG in '06, they would have run away in a poll between them and Arizona as who makes the SB first. Oops.the cardinals made it this year. Anything is possible. anythingAlright, who are the 2 jokers who voted for Detroit?
and Baltimore for Indy's?and the correct answer here is Jacksonvilleyou don't lose the 3 starting C/OG's in August and recoup from that very easily...there defense can begood enough while the offense gets untracked again (which it will)New Orleans just can't stop anyone...Az HC Wiz came from Pitts, where defense has historically been the best in the league, so I'm not suprised to see the Cards advanceThe Browns should get credit for Baltimores SuperBowl.
ManningBradyRiversCutlerBig BenAdd in the fact that Balt and Tenn are ususally competitive and the AFC is a tough route to the BowlGiven the overall dominance at the top of the AFC, it stands to reason it will be harder for the AFC teams on this list to get past the Colts, Patriots, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Ravens for the foreseeable future.I think the contender needs to come from the NFC...I'll take the Saints.
Meh. The old Browns were playing terrible when they were moved to Baltimore. No credit for Cleveland!!!The Browns should get credit for Baltimores SuperBowl.
Tell me, how many teams were in the NFL back then?FWIW, the Lions and Browns played in many NFL Championship games in their histories - just none in the Super Bowl era. Its funny - its as if the coining of the term "Super Bowl" wiped out fifty years of NFL history. We still remember and recognize the dominant players - Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, etc - but not the dominant teams they played for, like the great Browns and Lions teams of the 50's.Anyway, I voted Saints for the question above.
But historically, the pendulum swings from conference to conference every 15 years or so. If that holds, we are in the final years of the AFC-dominant phase, and I think that was partially borne out by a significant narrowing of the interconference record this year compared to the past several seasons.Barry Jive and The Uptown Five said:Given the overall dominance at the top of the AFC, it stands to reason it will be harder for the AFC teams on this list to get past the Colts, Patriots, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Ravens for the foreseeable future.I think the contender needs to come from the NFC...I'll take the Saints.
The answer to your question is 12 as of 1957, which was the fourth year out of six that featured matchups between the Lions and Browns in the NFL championship game. The more important number is six, as that was the number of teams in each division. To play in the NFL championship in the 1950s, you just needed to win your division. Granted, six teams is more than today's four, but beating five other teams is certainly not as difficult as beating out 15 others to reach the Super Bowl as it is today.Winning the NFL championship -- not playing in it -- would be the comparison, and even that usually involved only one playoff victory, unlike today. Two of the three Browns NFL championships each involved winning a single playoff game. In fact, the Browns have not won multiple playoff games in the same season since 1950. Of course, that's a better showing than the Lions, who have won only one playoff game since 1957.Tell me, how many teams were in the NFL back then?FWIW, the Lions and Browns played in many NFL Championship games in their histories - just none in the Super Bowl era. Its funny - its as if the coining of the term "Super Bowl" wiped out fifty years of NFL history. We still remember and recognize the dominant players - Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, etc - but not the dominant teams they played for, like the great Browns and Lions teams of the 50's.Anyway, I voted Saints for the question above.
I couldn't agree more about the Browns. Yes, the city kept the team name and colors, but they were still an expansion team in 1999. They started over.These Browns never played in any of them. It's funny - as if the NFL saying that the team records etc being left behind makes it so and wipes out the continuity of an organization that won a Super Bowl with a number of the same players that came with them from Cleveland.Anyhow, up until probably last year, I would've said J-ville. While the Cardinals have proven anything's possible, I still think the Lions have too much bad karma going right now. The Saints aren't a bad choice and I'm not surprised they are leading the pole, but I went with the Texans since that seems to have the right combo of improbability yet competence.-QGFWIW, the Lions and Browns played in many NFL Championship games in their histories - just none in the Super Bowl era. Its funny - its as if the coining of the term "Super Bowl" wiped out fifty years of NFL history. We still remember and recognize the dominant players - Jim Brown, Gale Sayers, etc - but not the dominant teams they played for, like the great Browns and Lions teams of the 50's.Anyway, I voted Saints for the question above.
The "city" of Baltimore has been there 3 times, winning twice. Lost to the Jets in 3, beat Dallas in 5, beat the Giants in 35.The Browns should get credit for Baltimores SuperBowl.
The amusing part of this post is that it's unclear if this is meant as praise or ridicule for Detroit. Or it could be neither, just information.1957PlayoffsHome team in capitals Western Conference Playoff GameDetroit 31, SAN FRANCISCO 27 NFL Championship GameDETROIT 59, Cleveland 14